General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[Nessie]

He obviously didn't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling#Numbers_of_people_considered_Mischlinge

That deals with one part of the Wikipedia article on Mischlinge and how people could challenge their classification. What about the part that discusses Hitler's role in exemptions?

 

[Tomtomkent]

I guess it's time to remind the Holocaustics that the reason Jewish people were being sent to concentration camps was their Communist affiliations. Jewish people were large and in charge in the USSR Germany's most hated enemy. It was no different than the gathering up of the Japanese in the USA.

I doubt if there were courts in the USA where exemptions to the gathering were granted.

The Japanese residents of the US were not rounded up for "their affiliations". They were rounded up because of the inability to establish and verify political affiliations and a percieved risk of espionage or Xth columnists.

The affiliations of the jews rounded up for this "same" reason were known. In the cases where even viable. Odd that those with conservative right wing affiliations were rounded up too. Or those with no affiliations. Or those with no connections to the USSR or any other nation.

Amazingly, as wrong as the round-up in the US was, 3 million citizens were not lost in the US. Or used as slave labour. Etc

I am guessing you have evidence of the political affiliations of Anne Frank?

 

[LemmyCaution]

I would not call them "imaginary Jews" per se. But my answer to "where did they go?" is the same answer Team holocaust gives when I ask where did the 2.9 million victims go when Auschwitz lowered the death toll from 4 million to 1.1 million or so?

That you think there is parallelism here is staggering. Did you pass the 4th grade, then?

 

[000063]

I would not call them "imaginary Jews" per se. But my answer to "where did they go?" is the same answer Team holocaust gives when I ask where did the 2.9 million victims go when Auschwitz lowered the death toll from 4 million to 1.1 million or so?

1. Not actually an answer.
2. You're not positing "major historical error", you're positing that 6 million people never existed.
3. Tu quoque.
4. So you do, in fact, believe those 6 million never existed?

And don't try the "no scholar ever accepted that number" gambit.

Has anyone in this thread tried such? Please link to such claims.

Maybe no scholar in the West accepted that number but those on the other side of the Iron Curtain didn't reject it.

Actually, Soviet authorities explicitly claimed such. Authorities, I'd like to point out, not historians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz#Death_toll

Communist Polish and Soviet authorities maintained a figure "between 2.5 and 4 million",[78] and the Auschwitz State Museum itself displayed a figure of 4 million killed, but "[f]ew (if any) historians ever believed the Museum's four million figure".[79]

http://www.nizkor.org/features/denial-of-science/four-million-01.html
Just keep clicking next.

You guys have no problem accepting the reliability of Eastern bloc forensic reports when they say what you want so you can't reject what they said when it doesn't.

Wouldn't it make sense for Team Holocaust to use the higher number?
The USSR disagreed with the West on quite a lot of things, and was in agreement in other aspects. Have you ever heard of the Cold War? You didn't notice that the claim was revised when the USSR collapsed?

Besides, any time the mass media in the West published a death toll for Auschwitz, that death toll was 4 million up until 1989.

Every time? Every single example? Can you prove this claim?

How much of historical understanding among actual historians is shaped by "the mass media"? The general public, as Nessie rightly pointed out, and I and others concurred, often believes a lot of "historical facts" that are completely wrong.

If holocaust scholars didn't believe that number then I guess that means holocaust scholars don't have much impact on our understanding of the holocaust.

That doesn't follow. You're equivocating Western scholars, Soviet authorities, and Soviet historians, and post-Soviet historians. Soviet authorities lied about quite a lot of things; look up their space program.

In the case of Auschwitz, there was outright contradiction from those historians not behind the curtain. This also refutes Clayton's claim of Team Holocaust being able to threaten folks into the party line with 95% effectiveness.

 

[Dcdrac]

I guess it's time to remind the Holocaustics that the reason Jewish people were being sent to concentration camps was their Communist affiliations. Jewish people were large and in charge in the USSR Germany's most hated enemy. It was no different than the gathering up of the Japanese in the USA.

I doubt if there were courts in the USA where exemptions to the gathering were granted.

Absoulute absurd fantasy where did you dig this rubbish up from?

 

[Dogzilla]

You seem frustrated. I guess it is self-evident to you that missing Jews must've been killed and you can't understand why somebody can't understand that. Your frustration is certainly justifiable if it is true that after the war we would know where every Jew who survived could be located and if they could not be located (i.e., they were "missing"), they must've been murdered by the Nazis as part of the Final Solution. So do you believe that the only two possible fates for the Jews of Europe are 1) survive the war and able to be located or 2) murdered by the Nazis as part of their plan to exterminate all the Jews? Yes or No?

 

[TSR]

He didn't. The link I provided clearly states that.

From you link -- the part you quoted even:

Requests for reclassification (e.g., Jew as Mischling of 1st degree, 1st degree as 2nd degree) or Aryanization (see German Blood Certificate) were personally reviewed by Adolf Hitler

Thank you for demonstrating once again that not only do you read citations by others, you don't even read your own.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Dogzilla wrote - but doesn't want to discuss - the following about the Jaeger report:

1) "[The Jaeger Report uses] the type of language we see when the overall Jewish policy of the German government is an ethnic cleansing"; "all that documentation clearly shows a policy of ethnic cleansing. Intending to make regions free of Jews does not prove an intent to kill the Jews."

2) "The Jaeger Report is evidence of anti-partisan actions. Some might say the anti-partisan actions were sometimes excessive but unfortunately excesses have always been a part of war."

3) "At best you might have something to support the David Irving notion of murdering innocent Jews being the result of local actions by a few Kraut Lynndie Englands and Charles Graners out in the field."

These are the three arguments he made about the Jaeger report and the mass murder of Jews in Lithuania in 1941.

Why doesn't Dogzilla find his claims relevant or worth discussing?

 

[000063]

...So do you believe that the only two possible fates for the Jews of Europe are 1) survive the war and able to be located or 2) murdered by the Nazis as part of their plan to exterminate all the Jews? Yes or No?

Nice try. We can see you've modified your false dichotomy from "survive and keep in contact with everyone they knew" to "survive and were able to be located" (vs being killed by Nazis).

Would you care to address the fact that you consistently "simplify" people's points, yet constantly complain about the fact that they don't agree with your straw men?

 

[LemmyCaution]

The affiliations of the jews rounded up for this "same" reason were known. In the cases where even viable. Odd that those with conservative right wing affiliations were rounded up too. Or those with no affiliations. Or those with no connections to the USSR or any other nation.

Of course, this was explained at the Einsatzgruppen trial by defendant Adolf Ott (EK 7b) who, testifying in his own defense, tripped himslef up trying to argue that his Kommando shot only Jews who were proven to be engaged in partisan actions or sabotage, when he acknowledged under questioning that "every Jew who was apprehended had to be shot. Never mind whether he was a perpetrator or not."

 

[LemmyCaution]

And by defendant Werner Braune, who headed EK11b, and jumped around, testifying at the same trial that there was a Fuhrer Order to murder Jews because "the vast majority [of Jews] supported Bolshevism" - but, uh, true, if the majority of Jews supported Bolshevism, a minority didn't - well, in his opinion the minority of Jews not supporting Bolshevism was "ten, twenty, or thirty percent" - and these Jewish non-supporters of Bolshevism were killed along with the supporters of Bolshevism because, when it came to saving them, "the possibility did not exist." The best he could argue with regard to Jews in the occupied USSR. And which estimates and self-serving statements, as tomtomkent says, are of no relevance whatsoever concerning the Jews of western Europe, the Reich, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria . . .

 

[TSR]

I guess it's time to remind the Holocaustics that the reason Jewish people were being sent to concentration camps was their Communist affiliations.

Really? What evidence do you have that the little guy to my left had "Communist affiliations"?

Jewish people were large and in charge in the USSR Germany's most hated enemy.

Ummmm. No.

It was no different than the gathering up of the Japanese in the USA.

You mean other than the whole "none of them were killed in internment camps" thing?

Or the whole "no Japanese American in Hawaii was interned" thing?

Or the whole "no one had to lie about their ancestry in order to serve in the military" thing?

I doubt if there were courts in the USA where exemptions to the gathering were granted.

No, it didn't take a court. Just two questions on the draft form:

27) “Are you willing to serve in the armed forces of the United States on combat duty, wherever ordered?”

28) “Will you swear unqualified allegiance to the United States of America and faithfully defend the United States from any or all attack by foreign or domestic forces, and forswear any form of allegiance or obedience to the Japanese emperor, or any other foreign government, power or organization?"

I refer you to the 442nd Infantry Regiment.

 

[TSR]

He obviously didn't.

Once again: "reclassification" != "exemption".

But do keep running from this little fact while vomiting up Nazi-era lies about the Jews.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Really? What evidence do you have that the little guy to my left had "Communist affiliations"?

I do appreciate it a bit when those with certain proclivities start channeling their heroes' lies . . .

 

[TSR]

I would not call them "imaginary Jews" per se. But my answer to "where did they go?" is the same answer Team holocaust gives when I ask where did the 2.9 million victims go when Auschwitz lowered the death toll from 4 million to 1.1 million or so?

And don't try the "no scholar ever accepted that number" gambit. Maybe no scholar in the West accepted that number but those on the other side of the Iron Curtain didn't reject it.

Couldn't reject it.

You guys have no problem accepting the reliability of Eastern bloc forensic reports when they say what you want so you can't reject what they said when it doesn't.

On what forensic report was the four million based?

Besides, any time the mass media in the West published a death toll for Auschwitz, that death toll was 4 million up until 1989.

Only if once excludes actual history books as not being "media" -- you know, the ones that are supposed to be authoritative on such matters rather than the ones which are supposed to sell advertising space?

If holocaust scholars didn't believe that number then I guess that means holocaust scholars don't have much impact on our understanding of the holocaust.

*Your* understanding, perhaps.

Someone that actually cares about the truth you choose to distort for reasons you cannot be honest about, not so much.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Of course, this was explained at the Einsatzgruppen trial by defendant Adolf Ott (EK 7b) who, testifying in his own defense, tripped himslef up trying to argue that his Kommando shot only Jews who were proven to be engaged in partisan actions or sabotage, when he acknowledged under questioning that "every Jew who was apprehended had to be shot. Never mind whether he was a perpetrator or not."

Commuted to life sentence; released 9 May 1958

 

[LemmyCaution]

I guess it's time to remind the Holocaustics that the reason Jewish people were being sent to concentration camps was their Communist affiliations.

There was no mass extermination of Europe's Jews, and the by-and-large Communist-affiliated Jews deserved it.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Commuted to life sentence; released 9 May 1958

Sort of (according to Hilary Earl, Ott was sentenced to death, this sentence was commuted to life, and the defendant was released on parole in 1958) and I've written about that, too, before. Ott was one of 22 defendants convicted of mass murder in the Einsatzgruppen trial. The convictions of these 22 men were for 1 million unlawful killings. Of these victims, 95% were Jews. Between 1951 and 1958, under a policy of leniency and a mistaken notion of reconciliation, the Americans released 17 of these convicted mass murderers through clemency or by parole.

The postwar clemency and parole actions took place during the Cold War and had much to do with public opinion in Germany and nothing to do with the facts of the case itself. In fact, the rules around the clemency proceedings specifically said that the facts of the case were not to be reassessed in deciding on leniency. The point is that the releases were not based on anyone's doubting the killings or the roles of the convicted murderers but were based in other reasons.

Your point was?

 

[Dogzilla]

You have failed to follow that my doubts about certain aspects of the Holocaust have been ended since joining this forum. You cannot really cite me as being part of Team Holocaust as I have no influence over Holocaust history.

I am not making any assumption about there being one piece of evidence.

Your last paragraph does not make sense.

Please answer the question you repeatedly dodge about why Hitler had to authorise exemptions.

Nick doesn't seem to hold that book in very high regard. I thought the premise was intriguing but I haven't read it. I'm not going to comment on something I haven't read. I'm not going to assume that a one sentence summary of an idea that might be in the book is an accurate summary and respond to that. I'm not going to avoid answering a question by demanding ridiculous levels of proof that cannot be met nor am I going to simply disagree with whatever you're saying.

That said, why do I think Hitler had to authorize exemptions? Probably because Hitler's Zionist overlords told him that if he didn't, they would kill Eva Braun and her little dog, Toto. That's about as serious an answer you're going to get out of me.

Your turn: how is any of this evidence that there were hundreds of thousands of bodies buried at the AR camps?

 

[Cyrix686]

'Zilla

Please tell me that Karl Jaeger isn't a person who is known to us only through an entry in diary that was written by a dead guy who buried it right before he was shot.

Why would anyone here apart from "Revisionists" be putting forward that as any kind of answer to Jaeger?

Clearly, the dimmest (and some) stuff can be left every time to the wild and febrile thoughts that power Holocaust denial.