General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[Natan]

The Simon Wiesenthal Center has a history of producing fake witnesses. Lying scum is an appropriate thread title.

 

[newyorkguy]

Kind of weird to have witnesses to a deportation in 1941 seeing a guy that was not even there in Kassa at the time. But no worry, they found another "witness" for another deportation.

From your own link-

"In his statement of defense, Csizsik-Csatary admitted to some involvement in the ghettoization of Jews, to handing over at least two Jews to the Germans and to attending the last mass deportation of Jews out of Kassa (Hungary)," the Star said

 

[Nick Terry]

Sounds like legal harassment. Hey, we have no new evidence nor witnesses, let's avoid double jeopardy and change the charge.

Lipschis has never been prosecuted for war crimes so there's no double jeopardy. He was previously simply kicked out of the US for being a lying Nazi who violated immigration law.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Yes.

First because I know that it's not just the Wiesenthal Center that wants them charged.

Second, I understand the logic in comments I've heard such as, "It was impossible for these men to have refused," "They were very young, many of them were poorly educated boys and they didn't understand the enormity of what they were doing," or "Now they're just old men, leave them in peace."

I understand those feelings, the logic in it. I just don't happen to agree with it.

I agree instead, that the crimes they were involved with are so monstrous, that they can never be let off the hook. I feel convinced having listened to the stories of people who were in those camps, seen the photos, and especially, heard the first-person accounts of the first American troops who went into some of those camps. It's so beyond comprehension that a government was doing this. There's no statute of limitations on this. Nor should there be.

This 93-year-old man, yes I feel some empathy for his plight. Life dealt him a bad hand. But not nearly as bad a hand as the people who died in those camps were dealt.

How do you explain that the 50 guards have never been accused or tried long before now? Are you saying previous investigations missed these octogenarians and nonagenarians?

 

[newyorkguy]

The Simon Wiesenthal Center has a history of producing fake witnesses. Lying scum is an appropriate thread title.

Fine. And what feelings do you have towards the Nazis? How do you characterize them?

 

[A'isha]

How do you explain that the 50 guards have never been accused or tried long before now? Are you saying previous investigations missed these octogenarians and nonagenarians?

Did you even read the article you posted in the OP?

 

[Nick Terry]

Do you believe that yourself? "Witnesses" will be produced and he will be convicted. Release is not an option.

Since the Demjanjuk ruling resulted in a suspended sentence for accessory to murder, do you honestly think that Lipschis will ever actually see the inside of a jail, aged 93? That's assuming the case actually gets to court, assuming he doesn't become verhandlungsunfaehig during the case, and assuming he doesn't simply die of old age. Never mind the appeals process...

 

[Natan]

From your own link-

Doesn't matter, the witnesses produced for the first deportation couldn't have been right. Do you think those ended up in jail for lying? I don't think so. It does show you witnesses will be found, one way or another. "The Star reported" further doesn't mean that is the gospel truth, why would they need a witness if he admitted it himself?

 

[Clayton Moore]

Fine. And what feelings do you have towards the Nazis? How do you characterize them?

They were the enemy of my country. If Eisenhower, Churchill, and de Gaulle didn't accuse the German Nazis of killing millions of Jewish children, women, and men in gas chambers I can't and I won't.

 

[Natan]

Fine. And what feelings do you have towards the Nazis? How do you characterize them?

Heroes of the free world for all I care.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Since the Demjanjuk ruling resulted in a suspended sentence for accessory to murder, do you honestly think that Lipschis will ever actually see the inside of a jail, aged 93? That's assuming the case actually gets to court, assuming he doesn't become verhandlungsunfaehig during the case, and assuming he doesn't simply die of old age. Never mind the appeals process...

Certainly the Simon Wiesenthal Center realizes that. Do you think they are doing this to keep the Holocaust in the news?

 

[newyorkguy]

They were the enemy of my country. If Eisenhower, Churchill, and de Gaulle didn't accuse the German Nazis of killing millions of Jewish children, women, and men in gas chambers I can't and I won't.

And if they did know about it?

Yes, Churchill knew about the Holocaust; and contrary to popular belief, he tried to do something about it.....Mr. vanden Heuvel points out correctly that Churchill was a champion of the Jewish cause, but it is inaccurate to state that the only way Churchill could have helped was by winning the war. Certainly in magnitude and significance this was obviously the most important thing to do, but Churchill did not let it rest there. He made multiple and varied attempts, both on a small and large scale, to try to mitigate the effects of the Holocaust.

From London's Churchill Centre.

 

[Nick Terry]

Certainly the Simon Wiesenthal Center realizes that. Do you think they are doing this to keep the Holocaust in the news?

It's prosecutors in Germany who have actually indicted Lipschis so your 'point' is as usual, totally wide of the mark.

 

[newyorkguy]

They were the enemy of my country. If Eisenhower, Churchill, and de Gaulle didn't accuse the German Nazis of killing millions of Jewish children, women, and men in gas chambers I can't and I won't.

Eisenhower:

“Eisenhower ordered all available American troops to go and witness the horrors he’d just seen. He also forced German citizens and officials from nearby towns to do the same,” Mr. Boehner said in the letter. He understood that there must be a record, first-hand evidence and incontrovertible answers to those who would deny the Holocaust.”

Link

Mr. Moore, please, you think what you want. That's your right. In the name of basic decency, however, don't slander men like Winston Churchill and Dwight Eisenhower. Please!

 

[CaptainHowdy]

Have any Nazi's who were involved and later prosecuted ever used holocaust denial (as opposed to "I didn't know about it") as a defense?

Ranb

There are a few problems with this question. One is that nobody has ever been prosecuted or convicted of committing "The Holocaust." People have been prosecuted for participating in various war crimes or crimes against humanity that are part of the Holocaust. But nobody has been accused of playing a role in everything--from boycotting Jewish business to the Nuremberg laws to Kristalnacht to ghettoization to slave labour to gas chambers. So nobody would have any reason to deny all the crimes against the Jewish people.

Another problem is that court/tribunals charge defendants with specific crimes. Defendants are expected to mount a defense against those specific charges. A general defense against every crime a defendant could potentially be charged with wouldn't be allowed by the court. So no defendant would take that route

Lastyly, to expect a former Nazi to defend himself by saying there was no Holocaust, you would need to believe that former Nazis were omniscient. For only if a Nazi knew everything that happened everywhere during the years of extermination would it be possible for that Nazi to know that there was no Holocaust. Such omniscience isn't possible which is why nobody can possibly be expected to claim that they knew nothing happened. The only thing they can claim is that they didn't know about it.

 

[uke2se]

There are a few problems with this question. One is that nobody has ever been prosecuted or convicted of committing "The Holocaust." People have been prosecuted for participating in various war crimes or crimes against humanity that are part of the Holocaust. But nobody has been accused of playing a role in everything--from boycotting Jewish business to the Nuremberg laws to Kristalnacht to ghettoization to slave labour to gas chambers. So nobody would have any reason to deny all the crimes against the Jewish people.

Who has denied that the part of the holocaust they stood accused of happened?

Another problem is that court/tribunals charge defendants with specific crimes. Defendants are expected to mount a defense against those specific charges. A general defense against every crime a defendant could potentially be charged with wouldn't be allowed by the court. So no defendant would take that route

So, who has denied that the crime they were accused of happened?

Lastyly, to expect a former Nazi to defend himself by saying there was no Holocaust, you would need to believe that former Nazis were omniscient. For only if a Nazi knew everything that happened everywhere during the years of extermination would it be possible for that Nazi to know that there was no Holocaust. Such omniscience isn't possible which is why nobody can possibly be expected to claim that they knew nothing happened. The only thing they can claim is that they didn't know about it.

By that argument, a historian is required to be omniscient.

 

[MinnesotaBrant]

So it takes Holocaust scholars 5 years to decide Kuraem's testimony was inconsistent?




Can you imagine Doctors Resnick and Fitzpatrick doing quality control on an assembly line.


I would have named that liar in one read(note). Guaranteed.

I may have read it two three times thinking my eyes were deceiving me.

I don't know if he lied and quite frankly I don't care. WW2 in general is not the most important thing to me. People were less than excited by my experiences in the US military in the 80's when I posted them here. What sickens me is that Jews are concerned that he is drawing a pension in Israel when they think he shouldn't have. I guess the total sum is 50k. I kind of suspect for the opposite reason why you care you are sympathetic with this cook. Personally I don't care if he was the orphan kid of a SS officer or the orphan kid of a Jewish family that was killd. I wonder why they are hounding him for evidence when they are not requiring this of anybody else.

 

[Nick Terry]

There are a few problems with this question. One is that nobody has ever been prosecuted or convicted of committing "The Holocaust." People have been prosecuted for participating in various war crimes or crimes against humanity that are part of the Holocaust. But nobody has been accused of playing a role in everything--from boycotting Jewish business to the Nuremberg laws to Kristalnacht to ghettoization to slave labour to gas chambers. So nobody would have any reason to deny all the crimes against the Jewish people.

Another problem is that court/tribunals charge defendants with specific crimes. Defendants are expected to mount a defense against those specific charges. A general defense against every crime a defendant could potentially be charged with wouldn't be allowed by the court. So no defendant would take that route

Lastyly, to expect a former Nazi to defend himself by saying there was no Holocaust, you would need to believe that former Nazis were omniscient. For only if a Nazi knew everything that happened everywhere during the years of extermination would it be possible for that Nazi to know that there was no Holocaust. Such omniscience isn't possible which is why nobody can possibly be expected to claim that they knew nothing happened. The only thing they can claim is that they didn't know about it.

Ranb asked if any defendant "had used Holocaust denial" in their defense. That means did any defendants use the techniques of Holocaust deniers or do things like deny the existence of gas chambers. The answer is mostly no.

A war crimes trial defendant can deny they were there, deny knowledge, deny personal involvement, deny responsibility (plead superior orders), but can also try to minimise the crime. Which many did over the years - "yes there were some shootings but no they were just legitimate small-scale reprisals not full-blooded genocidal massacres".

These techniques are not really Holocaust denial, just typical defense strategies. Thus there was little call for denial in most trials. The only exception I know is where defense lawyers brought in an actual Holocaust denier into a shootings trial. That certainly counts as "using Holocaust denial", and was a failed desperation move that did not work, much as the defense lawyer who tried claiming that the killing of Jews was legal because Hitler said so and thus there was no legal basis for a prosecution of a legitimate act, failed to get his clients acquitted.

Defendants serving in extermination camps could do most of the above if they wanted, but also had the option to deny there were gas chambers at all. That would meet most people's definitions of Holocaust denial, which has really been gas chamber denial for more than 50 years But essentially none ever have.

 

[Nick Terry]

Doesn't matter, the witnesses produced for the first deportation couldn't have been right. Do you think those ended up in jail for lying? I don't think so. It does show you witnesses will be found, one way or another. "The Star reported" further doesn't mean that is the gospel truth, why would they need a witness if he admitted it himself?

How many witnesses were produced in 1982 and what precisely did they say?

You don't know what you're talking about, do you? You have absolutely no idea what evidence was presented back then, or what evidence might have come to light since, and have absolutely no clue about the charges and requirements to prove the different charges. Do you?

 

[Natan]

How many witnesses were produced in 1982 and what precisely did they say?

You don't know what you're talking about, do you? You have absolutely no idea what evidence was presented back then, or what evidence might have come to light since, and have absolutely no clue about the charges and requirements to prove the different charges. Do you?

I know enough and that is that people can and will be found willing to testify tear jerking stories of whipping with a belt or digging trenches with bare hands in frozen grounds. German engineering hasn't heard of a shovel you know. Guilty until proven innocent.