Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Thunder]

I can't be bothered to trawl through the thread. Does anyone know if our Hitler huggers answered my question about their opinion as to the right number of Jews that the Nazis murdered?

I think their answer is "not enough".

 

[dafydd]

Does anyone here notice that Saggy is practitioner of serial non sequituirs?
He hops from assertion to assertion like a Kangaroo on crystal meth, and
abandons more statements than a mosquito lays eggs. I'm waiting on some
sort of explanation for Saggy's contention that Kaltenbrunner's IMT testimony
wasn't merely self serving and of no value in assessing his actual role in
the "Final Solution." Oh yes, and he promised to point out the parts of the
Soviet report on Treblinka written in Nov of 1945 that disavows mass graves.

<snip>

Edited by Locknar: 

Moderated content removed.

Saggy is totally incapable of putting together a coherent argument. None of the deniers can.

 

[dafydd]

I think their answer is "not enough".

Yes, but they'd cut their tongues out before they admitted it. Odd that,they all hate Jews,but won't admit it. At least you knew where you were with the old Nazis,they were very upfront about their anti Semitism.

 

[kageki]

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/truth-history-and-integrity-by-gilad-atzmon.html

It Doesn’t make sense

It took me years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense. Here is just one little anecdote to elaborate on:

If, for instance, the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich (Judenrein - free of Jews), or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the war? I have been concerned with this simple question for more than a while. I eventually launched into an historical research of the topic and happened to learn from Israeli holocaust historian professor Israel Gutman that Jewish prisoners actually joined the march voluntarily. Here is a testimony taken from Gutman’s book

"One of my friends and relatives in the camp came to me on the night of the evacuation and offered a common hiding place somewhere on the way from the camp to the factory. …The intention was to leave the camp with one of the convoys and to escape near the gate, using the darkness we thought to go a little far from the camp. The temptation was very strong. And yet, after I considered it all I then decided to join (the march) with all the other inmates and to share their fate " (Israel Gutman [editor], People and Ashes: Book Auschwitz - Birkenau, Merhavia 1957).

I am left puzzled here, if the Nazis ran a death factory in Auschwitz-Birkenau, why would the Jewish prisoners join them at the end of the war? Why didn’t the Jews wait for their Red liberators?

 

[TSR]

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/truth-history-and-integrity-by-gilad-atzmon.html

.
You can, of course, cite who it was that said this, on which page, and with the preceding and following paras?

No, because you've never read the book in question, and are just taking the word of someone who it appears shares your prejudices about what it says.

But let's run with this: if the whole point of the persecution of the Jews is that they were Communist b*stards, why *would* they run from the Soviet army?

When did the killing at Auschwitz end? Is it maybe possible that this person arrived *after* that point in time, and disbelieved the monstrosity that the Nazis perpetrated? Is it maybe possible that the Nazis had convinced him that remaining in territory controlled by the Soviets would be fatal to them -- which brings us back to the Jewish Communism lie. Perhaps this person chose to stay with a loved one rather than strike out on their own, in a country where chances are they did *not* speak the language?

Once again, you have no idea because you have *not* read the book in question, and are mindlessly parroting crap fed you by someone who appears to be more clever than you.

And BTW: What Happened To Henio?
.

 

[kageki]

.
You can, of course, cite who it was that said this, on which page, and with the preceding and following paras?

No, because you've never read the book in question, and are just taking the word of someone who it appears shares your prejudices about what it says.

But let's run with this: if the whole point of the persecution of the Jews is that they were Communist b*stards, why *would* they run from the Soviet army?

When did the killing at Auschwitz end? Is it maybe possible that this person arrived *after* that point in time, and disbelieved the monstrosity that the Nazis perpetrated? Is it maybe possible that the Nazis had convinced him that remaining in territory controlled by the Soviets would be fatal to them -- which brings us back to the Jewish Communism lie. Perhaps this person chose to stay with a loved one rather than strike out on their own, in a country where chances are they did *not* speak the language?

Once again, you have no idea because you have *not* read the book in question, and are mindlessly parroting crap fed you by someone who appears to be more clever than you.

And BTW: What Happened To Henio?
.

Why don't you offer something from the book then if you think the quote is out of context.

Possible? Maybe? Perhaps? So now the Holocaust had ended prior to the war? Is that what you are suggesting? You don't make any sense. They could've killed them, but they didn't.

What did happen to Henio?

 

[Matthew Ellard]

Would you be able to point out the rough location of this gigantic 25 meter wide crater and this 2 hectares of ash from this September 1944 photo?

http://www.holocaust-history.org/Treblinka/images/IndexPic.jpg

This is a photo of a railway and not a mass grave near the gas chamber..

Kurt Franz the last C.O at Treblinka shot the last 30 worker/prisoners and departed on 17NOV1943. He had planted lupines (grass) over the ash resulting from burning the bodies that were in mass graves during Sonder-aktion 1005 "hiding of evidence".

The polish peasants treasure hunted for gold and valuables using soviet artilley duds, spades and explosives from January 1944 starting the treblinka gold-rush. The 2 hectares of human ash was distributed during this period. Eyewitnesses who burned the bodies, including Strawczynski, state that the ash was redeposited in empty mass graves as a general rule.

Here is Justice Lukaszkiewicz's investigation of one of the 7.5 metre mass graves.November 11, 1945, A series of test excavations were performed at the place where the [gas] chambers had to have been located, in order to find their foundation walls if possible.....The largest of the craters produced by explosions (numerous fragments attest to the fact that these explosions were set off by bombs), which is at maximum 6 meters deep and has a diameter of about 25 meters – its walls give recognizable evidence of the presence of a large quantity of ashes as well as human remains – was further excavated in order to discover the depth of the pit in this part of the camp. Numerous human remains were found by these excavations, partially still in a state of decomposition. The soil consists of ashes interspersed with sand, is of a dark gray color and granulous in form. During the excavations, the soil gave off an intense odor of burning and decay. At a depth of 7.5 meters the bottom was reached, which consisted of layers of unmixed sand. At this point the digging was stopped here.

Łukaszkiewicz Zdzisław. "Obóz straceń w Treblince"
http://www.deathcamps.org/treblinka/books.html

Here is a photo of the Polish peasants digging for valuables after the Germans left in November 1943.
http://www.holocaustresearchproject...f those killed at Treblinka after the war.jpg


Here is a photo of what the Russian front line troops encountered in 1944.
http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/ar/images/traces of the treblinka camp.jpg

Here are photos of what Łukaszkiewicz encountered for his investigation for the District Court in 1945. .......

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/survivor/images/Treblinka_1945.jpg

http://www.vilnaghetto.com/gallery2/v/shoah/A_heap_of_ashes_in_the_Treblinka_camp.jpg.html

 

[TSR]

Why don't you offer something from the book then if you think the quote is out of context.

.
Since that's not my claim, I feel no need to support it.
.

Possible? Maybe? Perhaps?
.
That's all you have offered...
.

So now the Holocaust had ended prior to the war? Is that what you are suggesting? You don't make any sense.

.
No, the *Holocaust* didn't -- the use of the gas chambers did.
.

They could've killed them, but they didn't.

.
... but not without leaving behind evidence that they had done so, which have been even more damning than the evidence that they did. The were *abondoning* the camp -- why didn't they just abandon the Jews as well? After all they just wanted them out of their sphere of influence, right?
.
What did happen to Henio?

.
You tell us -- it's your claim that the Nazis didn't mean to kill them.

Okay, I'll spoon feed you part of the answer: He was sent to Madjanek, and was never heard from again.

Now, it's your turn: what happened at Madjanek such that he was never heard from again? Follow up: what had he done to deserve such treatment?
.

 

[kageki]

.
Since that's not my claim, I feel no need to support it.
.

.
You tell us -- it's your claim that the Nazis didn't mean to kill them.

Okay, I'll spoon feed you part of the answer: He was sent to Madjanek, and was never heard from again.

Now, it's your turn: what happened at Madjanek such that he was never heard from again? Follow up: what had he done to deserve such treatment?
.

Atzmon was asking the same thing. Why didn't they just abandon them?

This episode doesn't make sense in the Holocaust narrative. Doesn't necessarily mean the Germans were "good" guys since they were still using forced labor, but it doesn't make sense if you believe Auschwitz was a death factory.

 

[TSR]

Atzmon was asking the same thing. Why didn't they just abandon them?

This episode doesn't make sense in the Holocaust narrative. Doesn't necessarily mean the Germans were "good" guys since they were still using forced labor, but it doesn't make sense if you believe Auschwitz was a death factory.

.
But since Auschwitz was never *only* a death factory and you don't know in which of the subcamps they were, nor were those portions which *were* in operation all the way to liberation...

But being ignorant to the bone of the history you really really want to able to deny, you don't know either of these facts.

Try reading an actual history book by an actual historian and get back to us...
.

 

[dafydd]

As I've participated in the couple of active holocaust denial threads, I've run across all sorts of things with which I wasn't familiar, or of which I had at best a superficial knowledge. I've learned a lot in doing so, but I have run across one tidbit of information I hadn't known before, and which puzzles me.

According to accounts, as the Soviet army approached Auschwitz, the Germans decided to pull out. There were roughly 67,000 inmates, mostly Jews of course, in the camp at the time. The Germans gave those inmates a choice. They could stay at Auschwitz, or they could retreat with the Germans.

To me, that seems a rather easy choice. After some time in Auschwitz, you would think that life with the Nazis would be a very clearly bad idea, to be avoided if at all possible, regardless of the alternative. Obviously, though, the Jews didn't agree. Of the 67,000 inmates, 60,000 chose to march off through the snow toward trains that would take them westward with the Nazis.

The choice didn't work out so well, in a manner that seems rather predictable in hindsight. 10,000 died on the march, either of exhaustion/exposure, or murdered by guards as they fell behind, unable to keep up the pace. The rest were shipped westward, to Belsen and possibly some other places, where many died.
So, why did they make that choice? I can think of several plausible explanations, but I wonder if any survivors have addressed that in their published memoirs. Why did so many of them, given a chance to wave goodbye to the retreating Nazis, follow them, instead, on a path that led thousands to their death?

Jews going for a walk with Nazis? That's like asking virgins to go with a stroll with Dracula.

 

[kageki]

.
But since Auschwitz was never *only* a death factory and you don't know in which of the subcamps they were, nor were those portions which *were* in operation all the way to liberation...

But being ignorant to the bone of the history you really really want to able to deny, you don't know either of these facts.

Try reading an actual history book by an actual historian and get back to us...
.

I didn't say it was ONLY a death factory. We know it was a labor camp.

None of the points you bring up have any bearing on why the Nazis would even bother bringing Jews back into their territory to begin with. I don't see how this supports that it was even partly a death factory.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

STUNDIE NOMINATION, PLEAZE!!

If this doesn't win, the competition is rigged.

I don't know if it's a Stundie as much as it appears to be an admission that Dogzilla's goal in his Holocaust denial is not to prove his claims with evidence, but merely to get enough people to believe that the Jews are inherently evil. Perhaps, to himself, he admits everything about the Holocaust, but has this unquenchable desire to see Jews beaten into submission, thus his repetition of obvious falsehoods in an attempt to brainwash people.

Curious...

 

[Nick Terry]

I didn't say it was ONLY a death factory. We know it was a labor camp.

None of the points you bring up have any bearing on why the Nazis would even bother bringing Jews back into their territory to begin with. I don't see how this supports that it was even partly a death factory.

If you had any proper training in history then you'd know that state policies change over time almost as a matter of course. They react to events, to economic developments, to international developments and to domestic politics. U-turns and concessions to rigid ideological dogmas are hardly unknown. The Nazis were fighting a war and were quite capable of making some compromises.

Understanding why the Nazis decided in May 1944 to do a U-turn on the 1942 decision to remove Jewish labourers from the Reich requires grasping the overall context of foreign labour impressment and the fact that the foreign labour policy was producing fewer and fewer results by the spring of 1944. In 1942, the Nazis explicitly stated, we can replace these Jewish armaments workers with Poles and Russians, and they could and did replace them, because at that time they were able to round up enough Poles and Russians. By 1944, the main reservoir for foreign workers, Ukraine, was essentially lost, and recruitment was ever more difficult in France and elsewhere.

At the same time, the Nazis decided to relocate some of their war production underground to protect the factories from bombing. So Speer & co took Himmler up on the offer of concentration camp inmates, and Hitler signed off on the idea of bringing Jews back to Germany from Hungary.

By this time (spring 1944) the Holocaust was essentially over in the USSR and Poland where 80% of the victims came from. The Nazis had killed well over four and a half million Jews by that time. They accepted that they were not going to be able to get their hands on many Jewish communities, eg in Bulgaria. But they had essentially wiped out East European Jewry and congratulated themselves on eliminating the 'biological reservoirs' of "world Jewry".

The Nazis had always run a policy of forced labour and extermination towards Jews in parallel during 1942-44. The obvious example is selection on arrival at Auschwitz. Within the Nazi regime, Himmler and the SS operated a policy of taking over control of the remaining Jewish labourers so that more and more of them were to be found in SS-run camps, whereas earlier on Jews were often used in civilian-run forced labour camps. Himmler wanted also to expand the concentration camp system and harness it to the war effort.

By January 1944, there were at least 300,000 prisoners in the concentration camp system and probably 50% were Jews.

The Hungarian Jews were deported from May to July 1944, and 25% of them were selected for labour, the other 75% murdered at Auschwitz. This translated into 110,000 used as labour, 320,000 murdered. The labourers were largely shipped westwards starting in June 1944 to camps in the Reich. That was explicitly authorised by Hitler.

There was a cluster of camps in the Baltic states which held nearly 30,000 survivors of the massacres of Jews in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. In the summer of 1944 as the Soviets arrived in the Baltic states, the majority were evacuated westwards into the KZ system, some were killed on the spot because they could not be evacuated in time. That fits with the overall trend of policy.

There was also a cluster of forced labour camps surviving in Poland, mainly in the Radom and Cracow districts, which were evacuated in the summer of 1944 when the Soviets reached the Lublin area. They went via Auschwitz like the Hungarians to other concentration camps. They were the tiny surviving remnant of the 2 million Polish Jews killed in the Government-General.

In the summer and early autumn of 1944, the KZ system mushroomed and by August there were 520,000 prisoners in the concentration camps, up from 300,000 at the start of the year. A significant part of the increase came from the Hungarian Jews, but most actually from increased deportations of non-Jewish political prisoners from France, Italy, the Balkans and Poland. By the end of the year there were 700,000 inmates, again most of the newcomers were not Jews but came from, for example, the Warsaw uprising of the Polish Home Army. There were probably 300,000 Jews in the camp system as of January 1945. That compares with more than 5 million who had died by this time. The Jewish labourers had uniformly survived at least one selection or danger moment, and many had survived several.

Also in the summer and early autumn of 1944, the practice developed whereby Jewish inmates of concentration camps in the Reich were sent back to Auschwitz if they became exhausted from the slave labour they were performing. This is documented for several camps including Buchenwald and Dachau. Such return transports were also used against foreign labourers so that Russians and Ukrainians who became sick were deported back to the occupied Soviet Union and left to fend for themselves, with many dying. The Jewish return transports were simply gassed on their return to Auschwitz.

The last waves of 'proper' deportation transports arrived at Auschwitz in October 1944, from Slovakia and Theresienstadt. By this date the Nazis had lost the whole of France and Belgium, evacuated Greece, were kicked back far north of Rome in Italy, and were engaged in heavy fighting in the middle of Hungary and Poland. In the territories they did still control the Jews had overwhelmingly been deported. By this time also, Majdanek had been liberated and the horrors there exposed.

So, Himmler took the decision to call it quits and ordered the suspension of gassings at Auschwitz at the end of October 1944. The systematic part of the Final Solution was now over. This did not stop the deaths or individual killings in the camps, and didn't stop some concentration camps in Germany from operating gas chambers (often to kill both Jews and non-Jews, eg in Ravensbrueck) to eliminate weakened inmates. Instead of returning weakened Jews to Auschwitz, the camp SS designated sub-camps and whole camps as dumping grounds for exhausted, diseased and sick inmates. That is why Belsen became an inferno - because it was designated as a dumping ground.

In January 1945, the Soviets launched a new offensive and forced the SS to evacuate Auschwitz, Gross-Rosen and Stutthof, all located on the territory of present-day Poland. The evacuations were not a free choice for the inmates on a collective basis. In many cases sick inmates unable to march were killed before the SS left. The 'choice' faced by the inmates was whether to make an especial effort to hide, evade or escape with all the attendant risks, or whether it was less risky at the moment of evacuation to go along and hope that their strength did not give out. If they did become weakened on the march, then the SS were pretty trigger happy. In some cases there were wholesale massacres of Jewish inmates on marches, for example at Palmnicken in East Prussia. Later on, other massacres took place inside Germany, eg at Gardelegen.

Only in a few locations were inmates abandoned by the SS and 'left for the Russians'. There were more than 600 sub-camps by January 1945, the Auschwitz, Gross-Rosen and Stutthof complexes had well over 150 just by themselves. 'Sick inmates left at Monowitz' was a relative exception to the general patterns of behaviour.

There are now two encyclopediae in English and German detailing the known histories of the concentration camps and their sub-camps, in addition to studies of individual camps and sub-camps, not to mention studies of the death marches (Daniel Blatman just published one at the end of last year), and a wealth of overviews which summarise and explore the issues raised above. For example, the classic essay by Ulrich Herbert, 'Labour and Extermination', originally published in German in 1991 and in English in Past & Present, 1993.

Against this literature, the denier mode of argument by incomprehension is entirely futile. Sooner or later you and the other deniers here, or one of your gurus, are going to have to confront the evidence properly, rather than cherrypicking an example here or example there from one phase of a policy which manifestly underwent drastic changes over time.

 

[TSR]

None of the points you bring up have any bearing on why the Nazis would even bother bringing Jews back into their territory to begin with. I don't see how this supports that it was even partly a death factory.

.
And your personal incredulity, given your demonstrated and willful ignorance of (for example) What Happened To Henion At Majdanek, is relevant to this discussion ... how?

And I believe that my pointing out that they could not be killed and the evidence of that murder destroyed in time *does* have a bearing on why the marches occurred.

Are you now claiming that the Nazis did *not* want to rid their sphere of influence of Jews? This is well documented and no other denier of whom I am aware even attempts this line of argument. If the goal was emigration to the East, why not just leave them there?

I have offered an argument which you have not even tried to address, so here's another (from which, of course, you will run -- you are incapable, apparently, of giving a straight anwer to a straight question) : if the Nazis *weren't* trying to eliminate the Jews from the areas they controlled by whatever means you choose to believe, what was the purpose of the ghettos and camps in the first place?
.

 

[TSR]

Just because a statement of fact is mentioned in the indictment, testified to by witnesses, and reiterated in the verdict you can't prove it was believed by anybody.

.
And now all you have to do is quote me as saying any fact reiterated in any of the verdicts (note the plural) was, you know, not believed by the court, or be shown once again to be, you know, a degenerate liar.

We'll wait right here.
.

 

[kageki]

.
And your personal incredulity, given your demonstrated and willful ignorance of (for example) What Happened To Henion At Majdanek, is relevant to this discussion ... how?

And I believe that my pointing out that they could not be killed and the evidence of that murder destroyed in time *does* have a bearing on why the marches occurred.

Are you now claiming that the Nazis did *not* want to rid their sphere of influence of Jews? This is well documented and no other denier of whom I am aware even attempts this line of argument. If the goal was emigration to the East, why not just leave them there?

I have offered an argument which you have not even tried to address, so here's another (from which, of course, you will run -- you are incapable, apparently, of giving a straight anwer to a straight question) : if the Nazis *weren't* trying to eliminate the Jews from the areas they controlled by whatever means you choose to believe, what was the purpose of the ghettos and camps in the first place?
.

You have no proof to explain what exactly happened to Henio.

I was asking the question as well as Atman basically so why do you just repeat it? You haven't been able to explain it yourself. Nick Terry's explanation is that they needed the labor force that wasn't readily replaceable. Then you have this idea that they were given a choice to stay or not.

Are there any accounts from the Germans that talk about the Auschwitz liberation?

You know the purpose. You said earlier that death wasn't the only reason at least.

 

[kageki]

If you had any proper training in history then you'd know that state policies change over time almost as a matter of course. They react to events, to economic developments, to international developments and to domestic politics. U-turns and concessions to rigid ideological dogmas are hardly unknown. The Nazis were fighting a war and were quite capable of making some compromises.

Understanding why the Nazis decided in May 1944 to do a U-turn on the 1942 decision to remove Jewish labourers from the Reich requires grasping the overall context of foreign labour impressment and the fact that the foreign labour policy was producing fewer and fewer results by the spring of 1944. In 1942, the Nazis explicitly stated, we can replace these Jewish armaments workers with Poles and Russians, and they could and did replace them, because at that time they were able to round up enough Poles and Russians. By 1944, the main reservoir for foreign workers, Ukraine, was essentially lost, and recruitment was ever more difficult in France and elsewhere.

At the same time, the Nazis decided to relocate some of their war production underground to protect the factories from bombing. So Speer & co took Himmler up on the offer of concentration camp inmates, and Hitler signed off on the idea of bringing Jews back to Germany from Hungary.

By this time (spring 1944) the Holocaust was essentially over in the USSR and Poland where 80% of the victims came from. The Nazis had killed well over four and a half million Jews by that time. They accepted that they were not going to be able to get their hands on many Jewish communities, eg in Bulgaria. But they had essentially wiped out East European Jewry and congratulated themselves on eliminating the 'biological reservoirs' of "world Jewry".

The Nazis had always run a policy of forced labour and extermination towards Jews in parallel during 1942-44. The obvious example is selection on arrival at Auschwitz. Within the Nazi regime, Himmler and the SS operated a policy of taking over control of the remaining Jewish labourers so that more and more of them were to be found in SS-run camps, whereas earlier on Jews were often used in civilian-run forced labour camps. Himmler wanted also to expand the concentration camp system and harness it to the war effort.

By January 1944, there were at least 300,000 prisoners in the concentration camp system and probably 50% were Jews.

The Hungarian Jews were deported from May to July 1944, and 25% of them were selected for labour, the other 75% murdered at Auschwitz. This translated into 110,000 used as labour, 320,000 murdered. The labourers were largely shipped westwards starting in June 1944 to camps in the Reich. That was explicitly authorised by Hitler.

There was a cluster of camps in the Baltic states which held nearly 30,000 survivors of the massacres of Jews in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. In the summer of 1944 as the Soviets arrived in the Baltic states, the majority were evacuated westwards into the KZ system, some were killed on the spot because they could not be evacuated in time. That fits with the overall trend of policy.

There was also a cluster of forced labour camps surviving in Poland, mainly in the Radom and Cracow districts, which were evacuated in the summer of 1944 when the Soviets reached the Lublin area. They went via Auschwitz like the Hungarians to other concentration camps. They were the tiny surviving remnant of the 2 million Polish Jews killed in the Government-General.

In the summer and early autumn of 1944, the KZ system mushroomed and by August there were 520,000 prisoners in the concentration camps, up from 300,000 at the start of the year. A significant part of the increase came from the Hungarian Jews, but most actually from increased deportations of non-Jewish political prisoners from France, Italy, the Balkans and Poland. By the end of the year there were 700,000 inmates, again most of the newcomers were not Jews but came from, for example, the Warsaw uprising of the Polish Home Army. There were probably 300,000 Jews in the camp system as of January 1945. That compares with more than 5 million who had died by this time. The Jewish labourers had uniformly survived at least one selection or danger moment, and many had survived several.

Also in the summer and early autumn of 1944, the practice developed whereby Jewish inmates of concentration camps in the Reich were sent back to Auschwitz if they became exhausted from the slave labour they were performing. This is documented for several camps including Buchenwald and Dachau. Such return transports were also used against foreign labourers so that Russians and Ukrainians who became sick were deported back to the occupied Soviet Union and left to fend for themselves, with many dying. The Jewish return transports were simply gassed on their return to Auschwitz.

The last waves of 'proper' deportation transports arrived at Auschwitz in October 1944, from Slovakia and Theresienstadt. By this date the Nazis had lost the whole of France and Belgium, evacuated Greece, were kicked back far north of Rome in Italy, and were engaged in heavy fighting in the middle of Hungary and Poland. In the territories they did still control the Jews had overwhelmingly been deported. By this time also, Majdanek had been liberated and the horrors there exposed.

So, Himmler took the decision to call it quits and ordered the suspension of gassings at Auschwitz at the end of October 1944. The systematic part of the Final Solution was now over. This did not stop the deaths or individual killings in the camps, and didn't stop some concentration camps in Germany from operating gas chambers (often to kill both Jews and non-Jews, eg in Ravensbrueck) to eliminate weakened inmates. Instead of returning weakened Jews to Auschwitz, the camp SS designated sub-camps and whole camps as dumping grounds for exhausted, diseased and sick inmates. That is why Belsen became an inferno - because it was designated as a dumping ground.

In January 1945, the Soviets launched a new offensive and forced the SS to evacuate Auschwitz, Gross-Rosen and Stutthof, all located on the territory of present-day Poland. The evacuations were not a free choice for the inmates on a collective basis. In many cases sick inmates unable to march were killed before the SS left. The 'choice' faced by the inmates was whether to make an especial effort to hide, evade or escape with all the attendant risks, or whether it was less risky at the moment of evacuation to go along and hope that their strength did not give out. If they did become weakened on the march, then the SS were pretty trigger happy. In some cases there were wholesale massacres of Jewish inmates on marches, for example at Palmnicken in East Prussia. Later on, other massacres took place inside Germany, eg at Gardelegen.

Only in a few locations were inmates abandoned by the SS and 'left for the Russians'. There were more than 600 sub-camps by January 1945, the Auschwitz, Gross-Rosen and Stutthof complexes had well over 150 just by themselves. 'Sick inmates left at Monowitz' was a relative exception to the general patterns of behaviour.

There are now two encyclopediae in English and German detailing the known histories of the concentration camps and their sub-camps, in addition to studies of individual camps and sub-camps, not to mention studies of the death marches (Daniel Blatman just published one at the end of last year), and a wealth of overviews which summarise and explore the issues raised above. For example, the classic essay by Ulrich Herbert, 'Labour and Extermination', originally published in German in 1991 and in English in Past & Present, 1993.

Against this literature, the denier mode of argument by incomprehension is entirely futile. Sooner or later you and the other deniers here, or one of your gurus, are going to have to confront the evidence properly, rather than cherrypicking an example here or example there from one phase of a policy which manifestly underwent drastic changes over time.

It's really not necessary to be a jerk every time. I posted an article from Gilad Atzman asking the same question honestly. Would you care to email this response to him?

Why were some inmates abandoned? Or are you saying all the ones abandoned were sick?

You know where to go or are you banned from CODOH? What evidence needs to be confronted properly? I'll post it for you if you are banned or don't want to post there anymore. I can post this as is if you want. Kind of like Holocaust in a nutshell.

 

[TSR]

You have no proof to explain what exactly happened to Henio.

.
Wrong. He know he was sent to Majdanek, because letters from his father, also sent there, survive.

It is *you* that have no proof of what happened to Henio, other than death at the hands of the Nazis.

We'll take this slow: we know for a fact that he was born in Lublin, and forced into the ghetto there shortly after the Nazis invaded. What had he done to deserve this?

We know for a fact that the ghetto was liquidated starting 9 November, 1942 -- what had *any* of these Jews, let alone Henio, done to deserve being relocated to Majdanek?

And What Happened To Henio At Majdanek, such that this 9 year old was never heard from again?

Are you ever going to start answering questions put to you, coward?
.

 

[truethat]

Are you a complete freaking idiot? The site referenced shows the Florida Manual for holohoax education grades K-3. K, get it, KINDERGARTEN. Google it, it is available online.

Here is one of the questions from the K-3 manual to ask the students .... "What does prejudice smell like?" ..... one word for the people who created this manual ..... degenerates. Our children are being taught 'tolerance' by the worst racists in the world .... let's google the quote that tells the whole story .... "One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail", New York Rabbi Ya'acov Perin in his eulogy at the funeral of mass murderer Dr. Baruch Goldstein.

I'm going to take a break for a few days ... getting too worked up ..... LOL... and let Dog an Rabbit box your ears !

you contradict yourself so much it is startling. In addition you contradict other posters.

The quotes and comments you "google" have absolutely nothing to do with the holocaust.

But your comment that "you don't even need to know anything about the holocaust to know he is a pathological liar"

not true. But it does confirm that you don't know anything about the holocaust.