Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[little grey rabbit]

Its a long list, but to satisfy you I will take one section and give my views

Mass shootings 

1945 - British CSDIC - induced Bruns to discuss Riga massacre in private and be bugged (Hannover, effectively)[/.quote]

Likely I think. I don't think he was telling the truth. He very soon gave a statement to war crimes prosecutors and then gave testimony at Nuremberg. His bugged discussions are pretty much verbatim what he told prosecutors a week or so later. The reasons he did so and who induced him to do so, I can't say.


1945 - Latvian NKVD - tortured Jeckeln over Riga massacre etc

Well the NKVD do have a certain reputation...


1947 - US NMT - forged Ereignismeldungen 


We know that the EMs were found in September 1945, so sometime between 1945 and 1947 genuine originals were "tarted up". All supporting documentation, unit reports, war diaries, raw transmissions were destroyed.

1947 - 'the Soviets' - forged Ereignismeldungen (Hoggan, Butz, Graf) 


No, see above.

1947 - US NMT - forged Meldung Nr 51 (implied by some, incl. HM) 


Yes, certainly. There is nothing remotely similar in the rest of the file.

1940s - Soviet Osobyi archive - faked Jaeger report and buried it until 1960s (Graf, others)

Certainly it is faked, but I don't know the basis for you or Dr Terry alleging it had to take place in 1940s. I think this is just more dishonesty on your part.

Additionally – Jewish wartime diaries (the bunny), OSR 24 doctored to align Western and Soviet War Crimes positions (the bunny), Sakowicz’s Ponar diary

OSR 24 has to wait until you stop bombing Libya. Jewish wartime diaries I suspect are almost universally tarted up, probably genuine underlying diaries in most cases. Ponar diary definitely not genuine.

(the bunny), Rademacher's note that "Eichmann suggests shooting" in margin of Benzler telegram, September 1941 (the bunny)

Eichmann very plausibly demonstrated why it could not have represented reality. The easiest explanation is the marginalia is not genuine. Given Rademacher worked for Sefton Delmar and then spied for a country, most likely Israel, it is not impossible Rademacher added it in Nuremberg himself.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Its a long list, but to satisfy you I will take one section and give my views

Mass shootings 

1945 - British CSDIC - induced Bruns to discuss Riga massacre in private and be bugged (Hannover, effectively)

Likely I think. I don't think he was telling the truth. He very soon gave a statement to war crimes prosecutors and then gave testimony at Nuremberg. His bugged discussions are pretty much verbatim what he told prosecutors a week or so later. The reasons he did so and who induced him to do so, I can't say.


Well the NKVD do have a certain reputation...

We know that the EMs were found in September 1945, so sometime between 1945 and 1947 genuine originals were "tarted up". All supporting documentation, unit reports, war diaries, raw transmissions were destroyed.

No, see above.

Yes, certainly. There is nothing remotely similar in the rest of the file.

Certainly it is faked, but I don't know the basis for you or Dr Terry alleging it had to take place in 1940s. I think this is just more dishonesty on your part.


OSR 24 has to wait until you stop bombing Libya. Jewish wartime diaries I suspect are almost universally tarted up, probably genuine underlying diaries in most cases. Ponar diary definitely not genuine.


Eichmann very plausibly demonstrated why it could not have represented reality. The easiest explanation is the marginalia is not genuine. Given Rademacher worked for Sefton Delmar and then spied for a country, most likely Israel, it is not impossible Rademacher added it in Nuremberg himself.

"Not impossible" isn't proof. Nor is " Ponar diary definitely not genuine." Proof, bunny, proof. The people want to see proof. Let's just hear the proof on Sakowicz's journal to begin with.

(And 2 points of clarification: From you -- Who tarted up the EG reports, and destroyed all supporting documentation, unit reports, war diaries, raw transmissions? And, allow me, I am no longer waiting for your explanation of OSR 24. You have stated clearly that your grief overwhelms you. My goodness, you can scarcely move yourself to post about the Holocaust in your state. So, relative to OSR 24, no worries.)

I missed where you apologized for calling me a liar on this. Oh well. The bottle is half full: Saggy has been set straight.

 

[Wroclaw]

Proof, bunny, proof.

Blood, stone, blood.

 

[little grey rabbit]

Here is another bunch.

1997-1999 - Torun University - "fraudulent" archaeological dig at Belzec 

Auschwitz 


I guess they did some investigations. They certainly failed to professionally record and document their claims, their claims seem likely dishonest in key aspects.

1943 - authors of Black Book of Polish Jewry - faked newspaper article (Butz)

I have seen and read many silly newspapers articles from 1943. I don't understand why forgery needs to be used as explanation.

1944 - US War Refugee Board - faked Vrba-Wetzler report (Butz) 


I don't understand this claim, the report is clearly genuine.

1944 - Auschwitz underground resistance - faked Sonderkommando photo 


Photos can be clearly shown to be falsified. The date of falsification is almost certainly post war

1945 - Soviet 1st Ukrainian Front - faked Birkenau and Auschwitz gas chambers (Krema deniers)

The Soviets filmed themselves altering Krema V, the only structures need to be added were the underground wings of the two bakeries - no footage of this appears on the news reels of liberation.

1945 - Soviet 1st Ukrainian Front - forgot to take down formwork (PG) 


That is indisputable. We have photos of it

1945 - Soviet 1st Ukrainian Front - took pictures of newly constructed Birkenau crematoria (Krema deniers) 


Already dealt with.

1945 - Soviet 1st Ukrainian Front - faked '4756' cremation document then suppressed it (Rudolf) 


Document is fake, I don't know if it needed to be faked in 1945.

1945 - Krakow Forensics Institute - faked cyanide residues found in crema ruins 


They could have tested anything from a legitimate gas chamber

1945 - British 2nd Army - coerced Josef Kramer, Franz Hoessler and others 


Yes, that is well documented

1945 - British Army in Norway - coerced Hans Aumeier

Very plausible in that his testimony changed dramatically in a short space of time.


1945 - US 3rd Army - coerced Erich Muhsfeldt 


Quite likely

1946 - British WCIU - coerced Kremer into corroborating diary 


I am not aware of any records of the British WCIU and Kremer. However I believe I have adequately explained Kremer by pointing out he was likely an ideological foe of Nazism.

1946 - British WCIU - tortured Hoess (every denier) 


Well documented

1946 - US IMT Interrogation Division - tortured Hoess some more (implied) 


No, I don't believe torture took place in Nuremberg.

1946 - GM Gilbert - hypnotised Hoess (implied) 


Childish suggestion

1946 - Leon Goldensohn - hypnotised Hoess (implied)

ditto



1946-7 - Polish NTN - coerced Hoess into writing memoirs (Staeglich) 


I am not convinced he actually wrote memoirs, I think I whole lot of statements were collected together after his death. For example you can find almost word for word identical statements in his memoirs as he allegedly gave CS Mckay at Minden.

1947 - Polish NTN - coerced 40 Auschwitz SS officers and NCOs into lying 


To some extent, but we have already seen how Aumeier and others did deny gas chamber on the witness stand.

1947 - Polish NTN - coerced Kremer to corroborate diary 


Not coerced, see above.

1947 - US NMT - forged Veesenmeyer telegrams (Butz, but not Mattogno) 

1947 - US NMT - coerced witnesses to corroborate Veesenmeyer telegrams (Butz) 


Not sure personally.

1940s - Soviet Osobyi archive - altered Gaspruefer memo and buried it until 1993 (Mattogno) 


Definitely fake, but it is a straw man to insist it had to have happened in 1940s

1958-1963 - Staatsanwaltschaft Frankfurt am Main - coerced 22 Auschwitz SS staff (implied) 


Not necessarily the Staatsanwaltschaft. Much of the testimony was of the type of Faurrison's devil worshipping testimony: "Oh yes, the devil exists, but I didn't see it personally"

1959 - BRD - forced Kremer to recorroborate his diary for the 3rd time 


Not forced, see above.

1964 - Polish firm Hydrokop - faked bore samples on Auschwitz grounds 


Doubtlessly gilded the lily, but I could do a bore sample in my backyard and say I found 4 metres deep of ashes. It is not properly documented.

1979 - CIA - altered air photos (Ball, others, Krema Deniers) 


Definitely

1990s - RAF - released more fake air photos

Any photos with marks on the gas chamber roof have been altered. Who has done I can not say.

Also – Sonderkommando writings left in Birkenau (the bunny)

You would have to be an idiot to believe in them

 

[Nick Terry]

So are the books that you and your cohorts cite by Raul Hillberg etc...In historical terms, 1997 isn't exactly ancient. Um, what's your point? The post I responded to intimated that the material I cited was written by an anonymous source.

Crowell was already wrong in 1997 as it happens, but his essay is now completely obsolete because there has been a lot more research on the subject in the past 14 years.

There would have been a lot more research anyway because 14 years is a long time in academia, and because of the technological changes in that time. 14 years ago there were barely any e-journal databases, you did not have newspapers archived online, and digital cameras were very expensive. Heck, laptops had only just become laptops back then. Today many archives have microfilm readers hooked up to scanners, or you can take your copies to a decent scanner and digitise the material. Today you can search library catalogues worldwide on the internet, which you could not do back then. All of these changes have had an effect on what can be achieved in historical research, and will go on having an impact for many decades to come.

The other reason why 1997 is dated for Holocaust research is because 22 years ago, the Cold War ended. Access to materials from Eastern Europe, and in this case especially Poland, suddenly became much easier. In 1997 that process was only a few years old, today it is a well established process. A new generation of Polish historians has appeared who are taking much more of an interest in the Holocaust than was the case under communism. They live and work right next to the archives and can get an awful lot done. In turn, western historians can visit Poland, or read the results of Polish research, or see copies of documents whose originals are in Poland, on microfilm in western archives and research centres. So this has massively stimulated the amount written on the subject.

Frankly, 14 years is also a large chunk of the time elapsed since the Holocaust began in earnest - it's 20% of the time. The Holocaust happened within what is still living memory, and it is no surprise that we should be still finding out lots about events in 20th Century history, since this also happens for WWI, WWII, the Soviet Union, imperialism, the Cold War etc.

 

[Nick Terry]

Here is another bunch.



I guess they did some investigations. They certainly failed to professionally record and document their claims, their claims seem likely dishonest in key aspects.


I have seen and read many silly newspapers articles from 1943. I don't understand why forgery needs to be used as explanation.

I don't understand this claim, the report is clearly genuine.


Photos can be clearly shown to be falsified. The date of falsification is almost certainly post war


The Soviets filmed themselves altering Krema V, the only structures need to be added were the underground wings of the two bakeries - no footage of this appears on the news reels of liberation.


That is indisputable. We have photos of it

Already dealt with.

Document is fake, I don't know if it needed to be faked in 1945.

They could have tested anything from a legitimate gas chamber

Yes, that is well documented

Very plausible in that his testimony changed dramatically in a short space of time.

Quite likely

I am not aware of any records of the British WCIU and Kremer. However I believe I have adequately explained Kremer by pointing out he was likely an ideological foe of Nazism.

Well documented

No, I don't believe torture took place in Nuremberg.

Childish suggestion

ditto

I am not convinced he actually wrote memoirs, I think I whole lot of statements were collected together after his death. For example you can find almost word for word identical statements in his memoirs as he allegedly gave CS Mckay at Minden.

To some extent, but we have already seen how Aumeier and others did deny gas chamber on the witness stand.

Not coerced, see above.

Not sure personally.

Definitely fake, but it is a straw man to insist it had to have happened in 1940s

Not necessarily the Staatsanwaltschaft. Much of the testimony was of the type of Faurrison's devil worshipping testimony: "Oh yes, the devil exists, but I didn't see it personally"

Not forced, see above.

Doubtlessly gilded the lily, but I could do a bore sample in my backyard and say I found 4 metres deep of ashes. It is not properly documented.

Definitely

Any photos with marks on the gas chamber roof have been altered. Who has done I can not say.


You would have to be an idiot to believe in them

fisking a list doesn't actually produce a coherent narrative, bunny. Nor does bare assertion produce a substantiated narrative.

 

[Gwynpaine]

Confessions of Belsen staff

Grey Rabbit wrote:

Quote:
1945 - British 2nd Army - coerced Josef Kramer, Franz Hoessler and others 


Yes, that is well documented

Can anyone tell me where exactly this has been well-documented?

 

[LemmyCaution]

fisking a list doesn't actually produce a coherent narrative, bunny. Nor does bare assertion produce a substantiated narrative.

No, it doesn't. This episode has been instructive, I think. I made a simple and reasonable request that deniers pull together a summary statement of one of their core beliefs. We have gotten pages of dancing and obfuscating. Their response makes me wonder whether the deniers posting in here have even given their core belief any thought. They certainly don't want to share their summary supporting it. The response also makes me doubt that deniers here have read much of the scholarship they reject and dubious that these deniers even grasp how history is developed.

It does seem that after leading me astray, with comments like

Look, its easy to get caught up in the whole forgery thing,

bunny's gotten back into the whole forgery thing. No one ever said, of course, that every denier agreed with every other denier about the items on the list which bunny's fisking. Dogzilla's take looks more and more forlorn the more bunny posts on this. And at least we have a temporary halt to bunny's calling me a liar on this complex topic and his implying my support for Obama's action in Libya. Baby steps.

Edit: Twice upthread I misnamed the denier who argued that the hoax thesis did without the forgery claim, citing Saggy; of course, the claim was made by Dogzilla. Apologies to Saggy for my memory lapse.

 

[Nick Terry]

Grey Rabbit wrote:

Can anyone tell me where exactly this has been well-documented?

Well, if you're asking where coercion has been well-documented, the answer is that it hasn't, because bunny lies like most people breathe.

But if you're asking where are the interrogations of these men while in British captivity - they are from the Belsen trial, which is available in the Public Record Office in Kew (now "The National Archive") in its full version, in addition to the excerpts published in Trial of Josef Kramer and available online at mazal.org

 

[little grey rabbit]

Well, if you're asking where coercion has been well-documented, the answer is that it hasn't, because bunny lies like most people breathe.

But if you're asking where are the interrogations of these men while in British captivity - they are from the Belsen trial, which is available in the Public Record Office in Kew (now "The National Archive") in its full version, in addition to the excerpts published in Trial of Josef Kramer and available online at mazal.org

Have you seen the site www.belsenbergen.co.uk - does this contain most of the interrogations available at Kew, or are there more.

As for signs of coercion - leaving aside the fact that Kramer initially denied any homicidal gas chambers, then provided an affidavit that suggested there was one crematorium and one gas chamber and finally on the stand said there were four crematoria and four gas chambers - we have the testimony of British journalist Alan Moorehead

As we approached the cells of the SS guards, the [British] sergeant's language become ferocious. "We had had an interrogation this morning," the captain said. 'I'm afraid they are not a pretty sight.' ... The sergeant unbolted the first door and ... strode into the cell, jabbing a metal spike in front of him. "Get up," he shouted. "Get up. Get up, you dirty bastards." There were half a dozen men lying or half lying on the floor. One or two were able to pull themselves erect at once. The man nearest me, his shirt and face spattered with blood, made two attempts before he got on to his knees and then gradually on to his feet. He stood with his arms stretched out in front of him, trembling violently.

"Come on. Get up," the sergeant shouted [in the next cell]. The man was lying in his blood on the floor, a massive figure with a heavy head and bedraggled beard ... "Why don't you kill me?" he whispered. "Why don't you kill me? I can't stand it any more." The same phrases dribbled out of his lips over and over again. "He's been saying that all morning, the dirty bastard," the sergeant said.

Sounds like coercion to me.

 

[SanityGap]

Have you seen the site www.belsenbergen.co.uk - does this contain most of the interrogations available at Kew, or are there more.

As for signs of coercion - leaving aside the fact that Kramer initially denied any homicidal gas chambers, then provided an affidavit that suggested there was one crematorium and one gas chamber and finally on the stand said there were four crematoria and four gas chambers - we have the testimony of British journalist Alan Moorehead

As we approached the cells of the SS guards, the [British] sergeant's language become ferocious. "We had had an interrogation this morning," the captain said. 'I'm afraid they are not a pretty sight.' ... The sergeant unbolted the first door and ... strode into the cell, jabbing a metal spike in front of him. "Get up," he shouted. "Get up. Get up, you dirty bastards." There were half a dozen men lying or half lying on the floor. One or two were able to pull themselves erect at once. The man nearest me, his shirt and face spattered with blood, made two attempts before he got on to his knees and then gradually on to his feet. He stood with his arms stretched out in front of him, trembling violently.

"Come on. Get up," the sergeant shouted [in the next cell]. The man was lying in his blood on the floor, a massive figure with a heavy head and bedraggled beard ... "Why don't you kill me?" he whispered. "Why don't you kill me? I can't stand it any more." The same phrases dribbled out of his lips over and over again. "He's been saying that all morning, the dirty bastard," the sergeant said.

Sounds like coercion to me.

The above "quote" only appears on Nazi web sites and appears to be the product of Mark Webber. He provides a citation that leads nowhere except a handfull of, surprise, nazi sites.
Care to give a primary source?

 

[Gene Alley]

Have you seen the site www.belsenbergen.co.uk - does this contain most of the interrogations available at Kew, or are there more.

As for signs of coercion - leaving aside the fact that Kramer initially denied any homicidal gas chambers, then provided an affidavit that suggested there was one crematorium and one gas chamber and finally on the stand said there were four crematoria and four gas chambers - we have the testimony of British journalist Alan Moorehead

As we approached the cells of the SS guards, the [British] sergeant's language become ferocious. "We had had an interrogation this morning," the captain said. 'I'm afraid they are not a pretty sight.' ... The sergeant unbolted the first door and ... strode into the cell, jabbing a metal spike in front of him. "Get up," he shouted. "Get up. Get up, you dirty bastards." There were half a dozen men lying or half lying on the floor. One or two were able to pull themselves erect at once. The man nearest me, his shirt and face spattered with blood, made two attempts before he got on to his knees and then gradually on to his feet. He stood with his arms stretched out in front of him, trembling violently.

"Come on. Get up," the sergeant shouted [in the next cell]. The man was lying in his blood on the floor, a massive figure with a heavy head and bedraggled beard ... "Why don't you kill me?" he whispered. "Why don't you kill me? I can't stand it any more." The same phrases dribbled out of his lips over and over again. "He's been saying that all morning, the dirty bastard," the sergeant said.

Sounds like coercion to me.

Alan Moorehead must have been a terrible anti-semite!! Those who were allegedly beaten and coerced actually were feindish evil "Holocaust Deniers". In those days this was how holocaust deniers were dealt with. Ahhh, those were the days.

 

[Clayton Moore]

The above "quote" only appears on Nazi web sites and appears to be the product of Mark Webber. He provides a citation that leads nowhere except a handfull of, surprise, nazi sites.
Care to give a primary source?

Care to provide an established site, other than what you've labeled Nazi sites, that would dare be associated with contesting the Holocaust?

Zionists and their dupes tag any contesting of the Shoah Business is Nazi driven.
http://www.salon.com/books/int/2000/08/30/finkelstein

Shoah business
The son of an Auschwitz survivor accuses the "Holocaust industry," Elie Wiesel and Jewish leaders worldwide of a vast shakedown.
By Viktor Frvlke


With his clever, explosive and sometimes even wryly funny little book, "The Holocaust Industry," Norman G. Finkelstein, the 47-year-old enfant terrible of Holocaust studies from Brooklyn, N.Y., hit a nerve. Such a big nerve, in fact, that it caused a blackout of virtually all intellectual circuits -- at least in this country.

Finkelstein's main and most devastating charge is that "American Jewish elites" and organizations are extorting billions of dollars from European countries and corporations in the name of "needy Holocaust survivors" in order to fund Holocaust programs, Holocaust memorials, Holocaust studies, Holocaust literature and, in general, "the Jewish community." Together they form not just a cottage industry but a full-fledged "Holocaust industry" sustained by a persistent ideology of "Holocaust correctness" that serves "certain class and political interests." Instead of helping the Jewish cause, Finkelstein goes on to argue, the Holocaust industry has become "the main fomenter of anti-Semitism in Europe" by spreading an image of greedy Jews.

While the book created a firestorm all over Europe, notably in England and Germany, in the U.S. a deafening silence has descended on it. Nobody wants to touch it. Whereas Finkelstein first got mostly negative and later mostly positive reviews in major European newspapers and magazines, and was given various opportunities to debate his adversaries, here he hardly got any reviews (in spite of the 250 review copies he helped his small publisher mail out to critics).

Well, the New York Times did one. It reserved a full page in its Sunday Book Review to compare the book to "The Protocol of the Elders of Zion," a notorious anti-Semitic work, and called its author "indecent," "juvenile," "self-righteous," "arrogant" and "stupid."

"I've looked it up; this review is worse than the one of 'Mein Kampf,'" says Finkelstein, in his high-pitched voice, full of moral indignation.

 

[Tolls]

But, if it's a report made by Alan Moorehead, then it shouldn't be difficult to actually tell us which of his reports it comes from. When did this occur? Where?

 

[Wroclaw]

Well, there's this:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/c...termination-of-the-jewish-people-1660201.html

Not to mention the article by Fritjof Meyer here:

http://www.osteuropa.dgo-online.org/issues/issue.2002.1020204000000

It's a matter of tone, for the most part.

 

[Gene Alley]

The above "quote" only appears on Nazi web sites and appears to be the product of Mark Webber. He provides a citation that leads nowhere except a handfull of, surprise, nazi sites.
Care to give a primary source?

Sources noted in this essay.

Thanks

http://www.patriot.dk/nurnberg2.html


The Nuremberg Trials and the Holocaust
(continued from part 1)

Torture

Allied prosecutors used torture to help prove their case at Nuremberg and other postwar trials. (note 72)

Former Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höss was tortured by British officials into signing a false and self-incriminating "confession" that has been widely cited as a key document of Holocaust extermination. His testimony before the Nuremberg Tribunal, a high point of the proceeding, was perhaps the most striking and memorable evidence presented there of a German extermination program. (note 73) Höss maintained that two and half million people had been killed in Auschwitz gas chambers, and that another 500,000 inmates had died there of other causes. No serious or reputable historian now accepts either of these fantastic figures, and other key portions of Höss' "confession" are now generally acknowledged to be untrue. (note 74)

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has cited the case of Jupp Aschenbrenner, a Bavarian who was tortured into signing a statement that he had worked on mobile gas chambers ("gas vans") during the war. It wasn't until several years later that he was finally able to prove that he had actually spent that time in Munich studying to become an electric welder. (note 75)

Fritz Sauckel, head of the German wartime labor mobilization program, was sentenced to death at the main Nuremberg trial. An important piece of evidence presented to the Tribunal by the US prosecution was an affidavit signed by the defendant. (Nuremberg document 3057-PS.) It turned out that Sauckel had put his signature to this self-incriminating statement, which had been presented to him by his captors in finished form, only after he was bluntly told that if he hesitated, his wife and children would be turned over to the Soviets. "I did not stop to consider, and thinking of my family, I signed the document," Sauckel later declared. (note 76)

Hans Fritzsche, another defendant in the main Nuremberg trial, was similarly forced to sign a self-damning confession while he was a prisoner of the Soviet secret police in Moscow. (Nuremberg document USSR-474.) (note 77)

Nuremberg defendant Julius Streicher, who was eventually hanged because he published a sometimes sensational anti-Jewish weekly paper, was brutally mistreated following his arrest. He was badly beaten, kicked, whipped, spat at, forced to drink saliva and burned with cigarettes. His genitals were beaten. Eyebrow and chest hair was pulled out. He was stripped and photographed. Fellow defendant Hans Frank was savagely beaten by two black GIs shortly after his arrest. August Eigruber, former Gauleiter of Upper Austria, was mutilated and castrated at the end of the war. (note 78)

Josef Kramer, former commandant of both the BergenBelsen and Auschwitz-Birkenau camps, and other defendants in the British-run "Belsen" trial, were reportedly also tortured, some of them so brutally that they begged to be put to death. (note 79)

Although most of the defendants at the main Nuremberg trial were not tortured, many other Germans were forced to sign affidavits and give testimony against their former colleagues and superiors. A simple threat to turn the subject over to the Soviets was often enough to persuade him to sign an affidavit or provide testimony needed in court. Threats against the subject's wife and children, including withdrawal of ration cards, delivery to the Soviets or imprisonment, often quickly produced the desired results. If all else failed, the subject could be placed in solitary confinement, beaten, kicked, whipped or burned until he broke down. (note 80)

The testimony of the prosecution's chief witness in the Nuremberg "Wilhelmstrasse" trial was obtained by threat of death. The American defense attorney, Warren Magee, had somehow obtained the transcript of the first pretrial interrogation of Friedrich Gaus, a former senior official in the German Foreign Office. Despite frantic protests by prosecuting attorney Robert Kempner, the judge decided to permit Magee to read from the document. During the pretrial interrogation session, Kempner told Gaus that he would be turned over to the Soviets for hanging. Tearfully pleading for mercy, Gaus begged Kempner to think of his wife and children. Kempner replied that he could save himself only by testifying in court against his former colleagues. A desperate Gaus, who had already endured four weeks in solitary confinement, agreed. When Magee finished reading from the damning transcript, Gaus sat with both hands to his face, totally devastated. (note 81)

American soldiers repeatedly beat former SS captain Konrad Morgen in an unsuccessful effort to force him to sign a perjured affidavit against Ilse Koch, a defendant in the US military's 1947 "Buchenwald" case. American officials also threatened to turn Morgen over to the Soviets if he did not sign the false statement. (note 82)

Luftwaffe General Field Marshal Erhard Milch was warned by a US Army Major to stop testifying on behalf of Hermann Göring in the main Nuremberg trial. The American officer told Milch that if he persisted, he would be charged as a war criminal himself, regardless of whether or not he was guilty. (note 83) Milch did not back down and was indeed charged. In 1947 a US Nuremberg court sentenced him to life imprisonment as a war criminal. Four years later, though, the US High Commissioner commuted his sentence to fifteen years, and a short time after that Milch was amnestied and released. (note 84)

Reports of widespread torture at the postwar American-run "war crimes" trials at Dachau leaked out, resulting in so many protests that a formal investigation was eventually carried out. A US Army Commission of inquiry consisting of Pennsylvania Judge Edward van Roden and Texas Supreme Court Judge Gordon Simpson officially confirmed the charges of gross abuse. German defendants, they found, were routinely tortured at Dachau with savage beatings, burning matches under fingernails, kicking of testicles, months of solitary confinement, and threats of family reprisals. Low ranking prisoners were assured that their "confessions" would be used only against their former superiors in the dock. Later, though, these hapless men found their own "confessions" used against them when they were tried in turn. High ranking defendants were cynically assured that by "voluntarily" accepting all responsibility themselves they would thereby protect their former subordinates from prosecution.85

One Dachau trial court reporter was so outraged at what was happening there in the name of justice that he quit his job. He testified to a US Senate subcommittee that the "most brutal" interrogators had been three German-born Jews. Although operating procedures at the Dachau trials were significantly worse than those used at Nuremberg, they give some idea of the spirit of the "justice" imposed on the vanquished Germans.

Virtually all of the US investigators who brought cases before American military courts at Dachau were "Jewish refugees from Germany" who "hated the Germans," recalled Joseph Halow, a US Army court reporter at the Dachau trials in 1947. "Many of the investigators gave vent to their hated by attempting to force confessions from the Germans by treating them brutally," including "severe beatings."86

The case of Gustav Petrat, a German who had served as a guard at the Mauthausen, was not unusual. After repeated brutal beatings by US authorities, he broke down and signed a perjured statement. He was also whipped and threatened with immediate shooting. Petrat was prevented from securing exonerating evidence, and even potential defense witnesses were beaten and threatened to keep them from testifying. After a farcical trial by a US military court at Dachau, Petrat was sentenced to death and hanged in late 1948. He was 24 years old.87

 

[TSR]

Care to provide an established site, other than what you've labeled Nazi sites, that would dare be associated with contesting the Holocaust?

.
Care to tell us what *you* mean by "contesting"? Since you use common words such as Zionist when you obviously mean Jew (see your article re: Finkelstein, which doesn't mention the former once but which you offer as proof of Zionist tagging) one cannot be sure what exactly you mean.

And speaking of Finkelstein -- does *he* agree with you that the Holocaust did not happen?

No?

Then what, exactly, is he contesting?
.

Zionists and their dupes tag any contesting of the Shoah Business is Nazi driven.
http://www.salon.com/books/int/2000/08/30/finkelstein

 

[VonKleist]

It's hard to imagine a worse provenance for any quote than that it originates with Mark Weber via littlegreyrabbi. I would guess that the Alan Moorehead essay 'Belsen' which appears in 'Golden Horizon' is taken from his book 'Eclipse'. The relevant passage appears there, on page 266.

I doubt that Gene Alley is correct in surmising that Moorehead was an anti-Semite. He certainly shows little glee here:

We drove through the filth in cars and, presently emerging on to an open space of yellow clayey soil, we came on a group of German guards flinging bodies into a pit about a hundred feet square. They brought the bodies up in hand-carts, and as they were flung into the grave a British soldier kept a tally of the numbers. When the total reached five hundred a bulldozer driven by another soldier came up and started nudging the earth Into the grave. There was a curious pearly color about the piled-up bodies, and they were small like the bodies of children. The withered skin was sagging over the bones, and all the normal features by which you know a human being had practically disappeared. Having no stomach for this sort of thing I was only able to look for a second or two, but the SS guards and even the British soldiers there appeared to have grown used to the presence of death and to be able to work in it without being sick.

Anyway, and hopefully this isn't breaking any copyrights, you can download 'Eclipse' here.

 

[TSR]

Sources noted in this essay.

.
No, claims made by the author about what someone else said someone else (who offers no source) said are noted.

For example, the statements by van Roden, far from being "confirmation" by an Army commission of inquiry have as their source an article in the Progressive Magazine of which Van Roden was not even the author.

Try again.
.

 

[Gene Alley]

.
No, claims made by the author about what someone else said someone else (who offers no source) said are noted.

For example, the statements by van Roden, far from being "confirmation" by an Army commission of inquiry have as their source an article in the Progressive Magazine of which Van Roden was not even the author.

Try again.
.

Are you suggesting that all of the cited incidences of torture and coercion by British, US and Soviet officials are false? If any of them are true, it blows the hell out of your mass gassing theory, doesn't it?