• 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.
MG1962 said:
In our local area we have 1 historian attached to our local college and an army of volunteers filtering through a 150 years of newspapers trying to piece the history of the area together.
Click to expand...
This is fascinating, I love it, thanks for sharing this - it reminds me of Emmanuel Ringelblum's approach
 
Dogzilla said:
Yeah, I expect AntPogo won't have an answer either.....again.
Click to expand...

As with Clayton Moore and his idiotic questions about Elie Wiesel's Night, the fact that you even ask the questions you do proves that you haven't actually read the books you purport to have read.

Because if you had, you'd already know the answer.
 
ANTPogo said:
As with Clayton Moore and his idiotic questions about Elie Wiesel's Night, the fact that you even ask the questions you do proves that you haven't actually read the books you purport to have read.

Because if you had, you'd already know the answer.
Click to expand...
Don't leave out Saggy with his Black Book of Russ-, no, Polish, uh, Black Book of . . . of . . . of Jewry in, uh, well, some country east of Germany . . . which is sitting open in front of him yet he is unable to cite it.
 
Clayton Moore said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7tHB8tD34s
Paul Parks was also a fabricator. About 35 and 41 minutes in.
Click to expand...

He could very well be lying about his war crimes but if he's still alive he should be prosecuted for them anyway. A confession is one of the most damning pieces of evidence in the American judicial system. True or not, he bragged about committing atrocities and he should pay for his crime.
 
LemmyCaution said:
What these guys fail to acknowledge is that - I am in a discussion about this in another context overnight - 10s of 1000s of testimonies, memoirs, interrogations, taped interviews, and other statements, not just one or five, exist in various archives and libraries. And that it is to be expected that some are, being charitable, just not right. Without doubt, some will be fraudulent, some will be all mixed up, some will be crankery.

These 10s of 1000s of retrospective statements of various types from different individuals exist along documents, diaries, press articles, appointment books, memos, reports, forensic evidence, etc.

The way to figure out which few are "not right," unfortunately, is do the hard work of reading many, many sources out of all this material; comparing them; thinking about them; and making decisions about how they fit together, if they do, and what they demonstrate. That is what historians, which Clayton admittedly is not good at being, do. For example, that is what Nick Terry does. Mostly, historians use all this material to work out the history - not to expose cranks and charlatans.

Clayton's hyperventilation on this topic is only somewhat amusing. It would be as though someone denounced every historian of the American war against Vietnam for not being on the TV talk shows and all over the Web deconstructing and exposing the fake veterans and their false stories. In the real world, the question would be, "And why should they do that, when they are busy with the '10s of 1000s' of documents, newspaper articles, statements, etc.?" But Clayton sees no value in spending effort to get the history right, so to speak, and as he says lacks the proper skills to do so.
Click to expand...

Yes, but somebody didn't randomly pick five survivor stories and just happened to have chosen the Zisblatts and Firestones. These people were presumably chosen because 1) they're good on camera and 2) everything they say is true.
 
Dogzilla said:
True or not, he bragged about committing atrocities and he should pay for his crime.
Click to expand...
True or not, he should be prosecuted for a crime he may or may not have committed?

Even if not true, darn it, he should pay for the crime he did not commit.

Like in the Soviet Union in the Stalinist glory years, you mean?

Do you read this nonsense before you post it or just go with the bilious flow of it all?
 
Dogzilla said:
Yes, but somebody didn't randomly pick five survivor stories and just happened to have chosen the Zisblatts and Firestones. These people were presumably chosen because 1) they're good on camera and 2) everything they say is true.
Click to expand...
So what? There are, just the same, 10s of 1000s of useful testimonies. if the creators of the material you object to chose whom to feature based on their ideas about emotive and dramatic effect, then shame on them. A flawed book or movie doesn't undermine the body of historical work, based on robust and voluminous evidence, in the case of the Holocaust any more than the problems with Roots (plagiarism, falsified genealogical data - so egregious that a judge involved in lawsuits concerning the book once declared the work a . . . hoax) undermined the good work done on slavery in the Americas.
 
Dogzilla said:
Yes, but somebody Spielberg didn't randomly pick five survivor stories and just happened to have chosen the Zisblatts and Firestones. These people were presumably chosen because 1) they're good on camera and 2) everything they say is true.
Click to expand...

ftfy.

Spielberg is a film-maker, not a historian. The Academy which dishes out Oscars is in Hollywood, and not part of the Ivy League.
 
Moss said:
As for historiography being selfanalytical and selfcorrecting:
http://www.amazon.com/Explaining-Hitler-Search-Origins-Evil/dp/006095339XExplaining Hitler is pretty interesting and clever. Another of the books I read last year.
I'm quite astonished that there seems to be no comprehensive German book about the Ahnenerbe. So I'll probably get your recommendation.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the recommendation. My trouble with books recommendations is first that I take the advice and buy the recommended books but, then, second, that these books accumulate and temporarily take their place in a massive clutter of unread books, my interest outpacing my time - and, as some know, one of my blessings is an understanding spouse who is all right with my mucking up the house with books I will read, reading two or three at a time to get there - and then my clicking away at this keyboard all hours "chatting," as she puts it, "with Nazis" about the material in these books . . .

I also find the Ahnenerbe of great interest. Have you read - a little sideways to that but related to Nazi intellectuals - Max Weinreich's Hitler's Professors? Although written in 1946, it holds up wonderfully and has a lot that isn't usually cited.
 
Last edited:
LemmyCaution said:
Thanks for the recommendation. My trouble with books recommendations is first that I take the advice and buy the recommended books but, then, second, that these books accumulate and temporarily take their place in a massive clutter of unread books, my interest outpacing my time - and, as some know, one of my blessings is an understanding spouse who is all right with my mucking up the house with books I will read, reading two or three at a time to get there - and then my clicking away at this keyboard all hours "chatting," as she puts it, "with Nazis" about the material in these books . . .

I also find the Ahnenerbe of great interest. Have you read - a little sideways to that but related to Nazi intellectuals - Max Weinreich's Hitler's Professors? Although written in 1946, it holds up wonderfully and has a lot that isn't usually cited.
Click to expand...

My unread book pile currently holds 23 books. Not counting those for work. I know the anguish of the huge book piles.
I haven't read Weinreich. I think I might get it from the local scientific/academic library. If I find the time.
But I read this article today. Humans are quite strange. (By the way sorry if I happen to quote German more often than not. I just assumed you were fluent.)
 
Moss said:
As for historiography being selfanalytical and selfcorrecting:
Explaining Hitler is pretty interesting and clever. Another of the books I read last year.
I'm quite astonished that there seems to be no comprehensive German book about the Ahnenerbe. So I'll probably get your recommendation.
Click to expand...

Michael Kater wrote a 500+pp book on the Ahnenerbe in the mid-2000s, but it's a bit pricey. There's a more recent and also fairly decent study of Wewelsburg by Jan Erik Schulte at a more affordable price. But the absolute must-buy for German-readers is Hans-Joachim Lang, Die Namen der Nummern, which is in the Fischer Schwarze Reihe, and is pretty much exhaustive on the Natzweiler skeleton collection episode.
 
Moss said:
(By the way sorry if I happen to quote German more often than not. I just assumed you were fluent.)
Click to expand...
Sadly no. I wish . . . My son, who lived in Cologne for awhile, can help with important stuff.
 
Last edited:
Ah, silly of me to discount Kater's book because the subtitle involved "Kulturpolitik". That'll teach me to make such assumptions.
Seems like a pilgrimage to the Landesbibliothek is in order for Kater and Schulte. I already read most of Lang's book a while ago, I borrowed it from my dad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom