• 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 is also ignoring:

- French investigations
- Dutch investigations
- Belgian investigations
- Hungarian investigations
- Czechoslovak investigations
- investigations in Romania

all of which looked directly at Auschwitz after the war.


Ah, but you see, Nick, all of those "investigations" were concocted by the vast global Jewish conspiracy which controls the media, academia, and everything else. They don't prove anything at all! [/Saggy]
 
Ms

Jaeger’s Einsatzkommando had duties additional to executing Jews and other presumed dangerous persons (Jaeger described the main operations as “the Jewish operations,” again ignoring the other victim categories in favor of the main target, Jews). Jaeger described one of these other duties, as inspecting overcrowded prisons and resolving cases of false imprisonment. He went into some detail about conditions in prisons and cited a case in Jonava where, in a crowded cellar, along with sixteen men, a number of teenaged girls were incarcerated “because they, in order to get work, had applied for admission to the Communist youth.” In this case, the EK had taken “drastic measures” to instill a proper attitude among the local population: “The inhabitants of the prison were assembled in the prison courtyard and checked on the basis of lists and documentation. Those who as a result of harmless offences had been locked up for no reason were assembled in a special group. Those whom we sentenced to 1-3 and 6 months because of their offences were also specially set off, as were those who were to be liquidated, such as criminals, Communist functionaries, politruks and other such riffraff. In addition to the announced punishment, some, according to the offence, especially Communist functionaries, received 10 to 40 lashes with the whip, which were meted out immediately. After completion of the examination, the prisoners were led back to their cells. Those who were to be let free were led in a platoon to the marketplace and there, after a short speech in the presence of many inhabitants, let go. The speech had the following content (it was immediately translated sentence by sentence by an interpreter into Lithuanian and Russian): ‘If we were Bolshevists, we would have shot you, but because we are Germans, we give you your freedom.’ Then followed a severe admonition to abstain from all political activity, to report to the German authorities any hostile activities that came to their attention and to intensively and immediately busy themselves in reconstruction, especially in agriculture. Should one of them again be found guilty of an offence, he would be shot. Then they were released. One cannot imagine the joy, gratitude and enthusiasm that our measures triggered in those who were freed and in the population. We often had to deflate the enthusiasm with sharp words, when women, children and men with tear-filled eyes sought to kiss our hands and feet.” I quote at length from this section because it occupies a significant portion of Jaeger’s report, representing a self-congratulatory moment in which German power and the occupation are celebrated, almost sentimentally, as both an example of educational uplift of the conquered savages of Lithuanian and a kind of German cultural triumph in the expansion of its power in the east. In the two Jonava actions listed in the report, only Jews are given as victims, with over 2,000 Jews killed, among them 244 Jewish children. In the case which Jaeger describes in depth, some of the local non-Jews were led back to their cells, whilst others, deemed less dangerous, were set free, after a stern lecture and serious warning (shooting for not adhering to the guidelines in the lecture. In the main, then, Jaeger was willing to allow moments of mercy for non-Jewish elements, even those duped or potentially dangerous, whilst continuing "systematically" to do away with the region's Jewish population, men, women, and children.

-


No. This is exactly what was said.

He went into some detail about conditions in prisons and cited a case in Jonava where, in a crowded cellar, along with sixteen men, a number of teenaged girls were incarcerated


That was Jaeger saying Look everyone teeny boopers locked up in a cellar with SIXTEEN MEN

and

this whole thing is a lie.
 
A question for Clayton Moore.A simple one.Would it be fair to call you a Neo Nazi.?If not ,why not?
 
No. If you read the original German
In Jonava - und das ist ein Beispiel für viele - sassen in einem düsteren Kellerraum von 3 m Länge, 3 m Breite und 1,65 m Höhe, 5 Wochen lang 16 Männer ein, die alle entlassen werden konnten weil gegen sie nichts vorzubringen war. Mädchen im Alter von 13 bis 16 Jahren sind eingesperrt worden, weil sie sich, um Arbeit zu be- kommen, um die Aufnahme in die kommunistische Jugend beworben hatten.
it is not even clear that those girls were in Jonava. It doesn't specify "a number of girls", that is "girls" as "Girls between the ages of 13 and 16 were imprisoned because to get work they became members of the Communist party."
Jäger lists a number of things that were wrong in general. That does not imply they all happened at the same time at the same location.
I have no idea why you repeatedly imagine some sort of steamy scenario there.
 
Last edited:
No. If you read the original German
it is not even clear that those girls were in Jonava. It doesn't specify "a number of girls", that is "girls" as "Girls between the ages of 13 and 16 were imprisoned because to get work they became members of the Communist party."
Jäger lists a number of things that were wrong in general. That does not imply they all happened at the same time at the same location.
I have no idea why you repeatedly imagine some sort of steamy scenario there.

Ask Lemmy why his translation is lacking.

Here is the google translation of the German you posted.

In Jonava - and this is one example of many - were sitting in a dark basement room of 3 m length, a 3 m width and 1.65 m height, 5 weeks, 16 men, all of which could be dismissed against them because nothing was put forward. Girls aged 13 to 16 years have been imprisoned because they were to be-come work for had applied to join the Communist Youth.
 
Ok, so what here indicates that they were imprisoned together as you alleged?
 
Ask Lemmy why his translation is lacking.

Here is the google translation of the German you posted.
The English version of this is available at THHP. That translation has it:
In Jonava - and this is one example of many - 16 men, all of whom could have been set free since there was nothing to bring against them, sat for 5 weeks in a dreary cellar room 3 meters long, 3 meters wide and 1.65 meters high. Girls aged 13 to 16 were locked up because they, in order to get work, had applied for admission to the Communist youth.
My translation isn't a translation, that's why it's lacking. The only part of the sentence about the prison "translated" from the Jaeger Report is set in quotation marks ("because they, in order to get work, had applied for admission to the Communist youth."), the rest being my gloss on what the passage contained. My sentence was sloppy as hell and confusing as to that detail. But, from what I wrote, there certainly could have been multiple cells or rooms in the cellar, so even my sloppy gloss doesn't have the implication you're reading into it. And the best way to discuss minor details isn't in a summary of the report but by looking at the words in the actual report. In the report itself, the men are said to be in a tiny "cellar room" with no indication of their sharing it with anyone, let alone the teenaged girls. In any event, sorry about that. I should have written "in a crowded jail." My mistake. I try my best to be clear and accurate, but I wasn't clear in that sentence.

But you have to admit, I've urged you guys to read the Jaeger Report: "This pair should read the actual document and then sound off." Obviously you haven't, or you wouldn't make the silly error of concluding the men and girls were Jewish and held together. Moss, for example, told you the people being discussed probably weren't Jewish - maybe he read the report?

If you look at the original or the translation, you will see again that there is absolutely no ground from what Jaeger wrote to think the girls were held together with the men. And if you read the whole document, you will see that there is no reason to think either the men or girls were Jewish; in fact, the document indicates that both groups were Lithuanians. As I told you - and, again, you can read it for yourself - Jaeger is using Jonava as an example of a part of his duties not involving "the Jewish operations" and he describes the prisons he investigated as containing Lithuanians, not Jews, the Jonava prison being an example.

So there is nothing in the report that is odd or out of place or contradictory. What is odd is that, concerning the long summary I posted of the Jaeger Report, which involved the execution of 130,000+ Jews for the express purpose of making Lithuania free of Jews, you have focused on just two points - the issue of "Work Jews," which is well documented elsewhere, and this one minor detail - were men and girls held in the same cell, does that contradict Jaeger's concern for Jews reproducing? You imagine that these somehow contradict the mass executions. Nutso, I think that's the word.
 
Last edited:
Everytime I read the Jäger report I am a bit astonished by his use of informal phrases such as "umlegen" for killing. It's nearly gangster language for that time.
 
In my big long post above, an error crept in - Vasily Grossman wrote an essay on Treblinka, not Ilya Ehrenburg. Ehrenburg visited Sobibor in the autumn of 1944.
 
The other point is that the Jaeger Report is more than common knowledge and more than worked over.

So I could have linked to the THHP site or linked to (or even copy-pasted from) any number of other summaries (most, Headland being an exception, don't even mention the prison inspection duty) instead of writing my own summary. These other summaries rely on hours of research, involve rounds of editing and critical readers, and the like.

But I summarized it for myself, partly because I wanted to state in my own words what the report said, partly because the deniers clearly have shown they won't bother clicking on links to read what is in the report, and partly because I have a slightly different take on a few things in the report than some of what I've read.

What is truly astonishing is to find ourselves in discussion with those for whom this is apparently a first encounter with a core piece of evidence for the Holocaust and who are willing to make up any negationist malarkey they feel like in order not to have to deal with it.
 
Everytime I read the Jäger report I am a bit astonished by his use of informal phrases such as "umlegen" for killing. It's nearly gangster language for that time.
The more skilled deniers understand what the Jaeger Report says - its contents, the tone, its extremely damning nature - and thus play the forgery card when it comes to this report.

I am not really sure what our crew makes of it all. Dogzilla cannot sustain his groundless arguments that the operations were directed against partisans or that the operations were aimed at population removals or that the unit went rogue. Clayton Moore seems like he's just stumbling around blind.
 
What is truly astonishing is to find ourselves in discussion with those for whom this is apparently a first encounter with a core piece of evidence for the Holocaust and who are willing to make up any negationist malarkey they feel like in order not to have to deal with it.

Indeed, based on his track record here, I doubt that Dogzilla could even begin to identify more than a handful of the most important documents of the Holocaust. When he first arrived, he appeared to be completely clueless about the existence of a series of documents relating to gas vans.
 
Indeed, based on his track record here, I doubt that Dogzilla could even begin to identify more than a handful of the most important documents of the Holocaust. When he first arrived, he appeared to be completely clueless about the existence of a series of documents relating to gas vans.
The fact that Dogzilla followed Clayton Moore down the rabbit hole of misunderstanding about the Jovana prison shows that he isn't familiar with the Jaeger Report.

Where, then, it needs to be asked, does he pick up his other erroneous conclusions about the document?

His persistent refusal to discuss the contents of the Jaeger Report, and how it relates to other evidence for the executions in Lithuania, raises the suspicion that he's picked up some denier waffle somewhere on the Web - instead of trying properly to understand what Jaeger wrote, its context, and its relevance.
 
Pages and Sheeets

1. The sentence on PAGE 8 of the report about girls of the age of 13 and 16 being imprisoned only for having asked for membership in the communist party is a general remark and is not related to the sentence before, describing the circumstances of imprisonment of 16 men. In no way it can be concluded from the sentence that those girls were imprisoned together with those men.
2. SEITE in German is "page". "Blatt" means "sheet". If a page is headed "Blatt" it is to say that there is also text on the reverse side. A text with 8 pages on 4 sheets then would be headed: Blatt 4, Page 8. In no way anywhere consecutive pages are headed as "Blatt....". This would have as a consequence that a text written on both sides of a paper sheet on one side would have another sheet number. That is impossible or an incredible stupid mistake I never saw before.
3. On all pages people being shot are given as "Lituanian Communists" or "Russian Communists", suddenly on page 1 it changes into "Communist Lituanians" which is quite uncommon.
4. "Partisans" were called "Bandits" by the Germans. The reason was not their dislike but because the word "Partisan" was created by Marshall Tito in Yugosavia and became a common term after WWII. In 1944 the Wehrmacht still published the "Handbuch für Bandenbekämpfung", (Handbook for fighting Gangs; Gangster = Bandit) . In the report not only "Partisan" but also "Terrorist" is used which makes it rather unique, "Terrorist" at this time being called "Attentäter".
5. On page 1 "1 deutsch.K", on page 2: "One German female citizen who was married to a Jew" are listed as being shot. I don't think that "being married to a Jew was an acceptable reason or shooting a German citizen. For the German on page 1 no reason at all is mentioned.What would Patton have received as reply, if he had written: "During the invasion of Germany we shot 150 Germans and 5 US citizens?"

http://www.holocaust-history.org/works/jaeger-report/gif/img001.gif?size=1
 
I think you are wrong with your comment about "Partisan" being created by Tito. From what I faintly remember Himmler ordered the word "Bande" to used instead of "partisans" from autumn 1942 on because it had a positive connotation in Russian.
 
1. The sentence on PAGE 8 of the report about girls of the age of 13 and 16 being imprisoned only for having asked for membership in the communist party is a general remark and is not related to the sentence before, describing the circumstances of imprisonment of 16 men. In no way it can be concluded from the sentence that those girls were imprisoned together with those men.
.
So far, so good...
.
2. SEITE in German is "page". "Blatt" means "sheet". If a page is headed "Blatt" it is to say that there is also text on the reverse side. A text with 8 pages on 4 sheets then would be headed: Blatt 4, Page 8. In no way anywhere consecutive pages are headed as "Blatt....". This would have as a consequence that a text written on both sides of a paper sheet on one side would have another sheet number. That is impossible or an incredible stupid mistake I never saw before.
.
You can, of course, cite other contemporaneous documents which show this usage?
.
3. On all pages people being shot are given as "Lituanian Communists" or "Russian Communists", suddenly on page 1 it changes into "Communist Lituanians" which is quite uncommon.
.
Because you say so? Are you a native speaker (rhetorical)?
.
4. "Partisans" were called "Bandits" by the Germans. The reason was not their dislike but because the word "Partisan" was created by Marshall Tito in Yugosavia and became a common term after WWII. In 1944 the Wehrmacht still published the "Handbuch für Bandenbekämpfung", (Handbook for fighting Gangs; Gangster = Bandit) . In the report not only "Partisan" but also "Terrorist" is used which makes it rather unique, "Terrorist" at this time being called "Attentäter".
.
The first usage of the term "partisan" with this meaning dates to roughly the 1500s, and directly translates into German. While "attentäter" more closely translates to "assassin", "gangster" to "verbrecher", and "bandit" translates directly to "bandit" (with the implication of "räuber", literally "robber"). Meanwhile "bandenbekämpfung" is "band against" -- which is to say, partisan.

Free hint: versuchen Sie nicht, Großmutter zu lehren, Eier saugen.
.
5. On page 1 "1 deutsch.K", on page 2: "One German female citizen who was married to a Jew" are listed as being shot. I don't think that "being married to a Jew was an acceptable reason or shooting a German citizen.
.
No one her really cares what you 'think". Research the case against Oswald Rothaug and its outcome, and get back to us, m'kay?
.
For the German on page 1 no reason at all is mentioned. What would Patton have received as reply, if he had written: "During the invasion of Germany we shot 150 Germans and 5 US citizens?"

http://www.holocaust-history.org/works/jaeger-report/gif/img001.gif?size=1
.
If those US citizens were guilty of crimes for which the penalty was death (to bring your comparison more into line with the reality of the situation), probably an "attaboy".
.
 
Last edited:
.
So far, so good...
.

.
You can, of course, cite other contemporaneous documents which show this usage?
.

It seems a bit off but not that off. I think it would be quite funny to allege a forger gets page wrong but manages to get "Übertrag" (=carry over/transfer) correct.

.
Because you say so? Are you a native speaker (rhetorical)?
.

Actually both combinations seem equally valid to me as a native speaker. The only difference would be the emphasis. The combination Lithuanian + communist only happens on Blatt 1 and 2, later it is only communists.
Bit of a red hering that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom