• 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.
German Academic Freedom

Corsair’s argument seemed clear and categorical. Germans have nationalistic motives to deny the Holocaust; they have academic feedom to deny the Holocaust; and yet they do not deny the Holocaust. He thus combined the argument from silence with the argument from authority, and he is confident that fear plays no part in the silence. Against this I say that German academics are not free to deny the Holocaust – and are most especially unfree if they display nationalistic motives. Was Germar Rudolf locked up or was he not? On this page NickTerry suggests or hints that under present law nobody need fear being locked up for “genuine research.” They need be afraid only if they are making “propaganda”. That’s all right then. They need have no fear - as long as their judgement of what is propaganda and what is “genuine research” concurs with that of the German state and that of Nickterry. If any young German academics happen to think that Germar Rudolf’ has conducted genuine researches, I think they would do well to keep such thoughts to themselves. For the expression of these thoughts could be construed by those who know better as propaganda. In truth the only way to measure the influence of these laws and taboos is to get rid of them.


All that said, I agree that mere laws could not hold back any powerful current of nationalist historiography if it existed. My own speculative impression, based nothing more solid than conversations with German graduates, is that todays Germans have no time of anything which seems to suggest that the Nazis were not quite so black as they were painted. This revulsion against the Third Reich is not a product of Jewish brainwashing. The original cause, I speculate, was the catastrophe of 1945. I am not talking about the formal “re-education programme” which was no more than an irritation. I am talking about the defeat itself. Germany was much more wronged by postwar settlements in 1945 than in 1919, yet the year zero seems to have left behind it almost zero resentment. The catastrophe was so profound, the experience of the Third Reich so traumatic and so ugly, that all leanings toward militarism or nationalism or were dislodged from of the national culture. I myself am happy about this result, if not its cause. Perhaps only a catastrophic defeat for Israel will shake the chauvinist arrogance out the Zionist psyche.
 
Gwynpaine said:
Corsair’s argument seemed clear and categorical. Germans have nationalistic motives to deny the Holocaust; they have academic feedom to deny the Holocaust; and yet they do not deny the Holocaust. He thus combined the argument from silence with the argument from authority, and he is confident that fear plays no part in the silence. Against this I say that German academics are not free to deny the Holocaust – and are most especially unfree if they display nationalistic motives. Was Germar Rudolf locked up or was he not? On this page NickTerry suggests or hints that under present law nobody need fear being locked up for “genuine research.” They need be afraid only if they are making “propaganda”. That’s all right then. They need have no fear - as long as their judgement of what is propaganda and what is “genuine research” concurs with that of the German state and that of Nickterry. If any young German academics happen to think that Germar Rudolf’ has conducted genuine researches, I think they would do well to keep such thoughts to themselves. For the expression of these thoughts could be construed by those who know better as propaganda. In truth the only way to measure the influence of these laws and taboos is to get rid of them.
Click to expand...

What is propaganda and what is proper research should be crystal clear to anyone who makes it to their Magisterarbeit in Germany or to a similar level elsewhere in the world.

Germar Rudolf very clearly went on a revisionist propaganda spree while working on his doctorate in chemistry, using a wide variety of pseudonyms, interviewing himself under different names, one pseudonym citing another nym, and editing his report to include inflammatory introductions and conclusions along with a large section dealing with documents, not chemistry, despite the fact that he was entirely unqualified on a formal or informal level to comment on the documents in detail, never having visited an archive nor earned any qualifications in history.

The smart, scientific thing to have done, as any fule kno, would have been to have submitted the chemical portions of his report to a peer-reviewed journal, doesn't matter where, and got it stamped with the proper seal of approval. Heck, an entirely abstract article on Prussian Blue without mentioning Auschwitz would have been better than what Rudolf did. The repetition of Zundel's strategy of trying to submit an 'expert report' in trials on charges of incitement to racial hatred was a bust, because the reports did not get accepted, and they entered the public arena without the endorsement of proper peer review. The few professional chemists who are aware of the Rudolf report have largely pointed and gone 'bwahahaha'.

The overwhelming majority of what Rudolf wrote as himself, or as 'Ernst Gauss', or 'Manfred Koehler', to name but the most prolific nyms, from 1992-1995 had nothing to do with chemistry whatsoever. He weighed in about German law, politics, history, and many other topics without having any training in those subjects and, as time has shown, without even a layman's grasp of them, so numerous are the mistakes.

As for this remark in one of Rudolf's thinkpieces when he was brainstorming his "strategy"

"We have no problem with calling belief in the Holocaust or the gas chambers the central crux of all German and even international politics. All dogmas of postwar politics are based on it liberalism, tolerance, parliamentary democracy, equality of men, multi-culture etc. With it the anti-fascist club becomes a deadly weapon, all bigger problems are declared taboos and factored out (democracy, national identity, culture, policies regarding women, foreigner issues etc.). He who destroys 'Auschwitz' destroys this order of the world (at least in the heads of people). This fact is recognized only by few, and of these in turn only few favor the destruction of the myth, even if they consider it justified (Golo Mann: Auschwitz is desirable under popular-educational aspects)."
Click to expand...

one has to question the sanity of someone as stupid as Rudolf who thinks that liberalism, democracy, equality and tolerance somehow postdate Auschwitz, whether in Germany or anywhere else in the world.



Please, stop trying to lionise this a-hole as some kind of modern day Galileo.
 
Gwynpaine said:
Against this I say that German academics are not free to deny the Holocaust – and are most especially unfree if they display nationalistic motives.
Click to expand...


Now you just need evidence to support this thesis. Feel free to cite examples where irrefutable proof that the Holocaust did not occur has been denied by German historians and researchers. (Do pay careful attention to the "irrefutable proof" part of my comment. Allegations and suppositions are not proof.)


Gwynpaine said:
Germany was much more wronged by postwar settlements in 1945 than in 1919...
Click to expand...


Please expand upon this thesis. In what ways specifically were the latter settlements more egregious than the former?

(Also, I will note again that by the autumn of 1944, with the Russians pushing hard from the east and the Western allies firmly ashore and pushing in from France and Italy, it was clear to anyone with even a shred of rationality that Germany had lost the war. It was only a matter of time before it was made official. The Nazi leadership instead put Germany through another seven months of needless suffering, a pointless attempt to forestall an outcome that was already obvious. If Germany suffered a cruel fate, it was one entirely of its own making.)
 
Last edited:
To be fair, I don't think the German electorate truly knew what they were in for. Also, don't forget that the Nazis never won more than a plurality, even in the '33 election.
 
Loss Leader said:
And here I thought the German military was entirely composed of German people.
Click to expand...

About 400,000 (-) foreigners joined the Waffen SS that is compared to the 18-19 million Germans who were in service. Doesn't count German allies like Roumania too
 
Wroclaw said:
To be fair, I don't think the German electorate truly knew what they were in for. Also, don't forget that the Nazis never won more than a plurality, even in the '33 election.
Click to expand...


Well, at least some had an inkling. Weren't there something like 20 plans/attempts to assassinate hitler, and a lot more that were never given voice or written down. Hell, hitler is long dead, and my dad STILL wants to shoot him in the face.
 
Wroclaw said:
To be fair, I don't think the German electorate truly knew what they were in for. Also, don't forget that the Nazis never won more than a plurality, even in the '33 election.
Click to expand...
And, after that, the elections were not exactly models of open and fair voting, what with parties outlawed, leaders of non-Nazi parties and labor unions in prison, and the press stifled.
 
Matthew Ellard said:
You are now pretending to forget all the surrounding evidence as that is your denial technique. Why would SS be able to take 259,000 "good reusable" overcoats off people who were sent to Treblinka II in winter? The answer is because they were dead.

Please explain "in depth" your alternative explanation that matches all the existing evidence.
Click to expand...

Well my alternative explanation would be that in a blockade situation where raw stuffs were limited, the Germans tried to get the most use of all old clothing they could.

Overcoats were probably the most valuable for the Germans - especially considering the Winterhilfe program. So they took as many overcoats as they could, underwear was not, so they left most of it.

I have already given an example of the Wehrmacht taking the overcoats of POWs. Here is another one, an affidavit of the German consul at Kassa Hungary in 1944 (NG-2440)

Approximately in the end of July/August, deportation by freight trains of the camp inmates to unknown places outside of Hungary. At that time it was only known that the trains left Kaschau in a Northernly direction, crossing the Slovak frontier. Later on, I heard that some deportees had send postcards to acquaintances in Kaschau stating "that they were well". The transports as such are said to have been carried out in the most appalling conditions. The camp inmates - men, women and children - are said to have been crowded into the cattle trucks in much too large numbers, often but scantily clad, because overcoats, partly even coats and out garments had been taken away from them beforehand.
Click to expand...

However even the most rabid of Hoaxster will sotto voce admit that at least a third of the transports were taken for labour.

Taking an overcoat does not equal death.
 
Wroclaw said:
It would be so unlike neo-Nazis to lie about Jews.

Actually, come to think of it, George Dietz was just a plain old Nazi...
Click to expand...

It would be so unlike Jews to be guilty of any antisocial behavior that would alienate them in their home community.
 
Clayton Moore said:
It would be so unlike Jews to be guilty of any antisocial behavior that would alienate them in their home community.
Click to expand...
.
Ca. 10,000 French children were deported by your beloved Nazis because they were perceived to also be Jewish.

Can you tell us what "anti-social behaviour" each of these children engaged in to deserve this fate?

No?

Half of them plus one?

No?

*Any* of them?




Please speak up -- we didn't quite catch that.






Oh, you cannot cite a single instance of anti-social behaviour in any of these children?

What, then, do you suppose they had done to deserve being deported from their homes like that?


Can you tell us what evidence you have that each of these children were, or even just felt that they were alienated?

No?

Half of them plus one?

No?

*Any* of them?




Please speak up -- we didn't quite catch that.






Oh, you cannot cite a single bit of evidence to support this lie. either?


How completely expected.





Karl Jäger details the killing of ~1500 Jewish children in just one day.

Can you tell us what "anti-social behaviour" each of these children engaged in to deserve this fate?

No?

Half of them plus one?

No?

*Any* of them?




Please speak up -- we didn't quite catch that.






Oh, you cannot cite a single instance of anti-social behaviour in any of these children?

What, then, do you suppose they had done to deserve being deprived of life itself like that?






I could keep going, you know -- but these examples and your running away from them will tell everyone everything they need to know about your views -- as if it weren't already obvious...

.
 
little grey rabbit said:
Well my alternative explanation would be that in a blockade situation where raw stuffs were limited, the Germans tried to get the most use of all old clothing they could.
Click to expand...
How is it "old clothing" if people are still wearing it in winter? Are you agreeing the owners were executed so it became available?

little grey rabbit said:
Overcoats were probably the most valuable for the Germans - especially considering the Winterhilfe program.
Click to expand...
I see....so it wasn't tungsten or petrol that were most valuable commodities but "civilian overcoats". So you agree that in winter the overcoats were removed from Jewish prisoners and given to living Germans. Just out of interest, what year was the German army uniform and boots modified in light of cloth and production shortages? ( Field Blouse Model 1944)

little grey rabbit said:
I have already given an example of the Wehrmacht taking the overcoats of POWs. Here is another one, an affidavit of the German consul at Kassa Hungary in 1944 (NG-2440)
Click to expand...
I see....so the Germans had prior "form" of taking overcoats from prisoners. Thanks for the confirmation.


little grey rabbit said:
Taking an overcoat does not equal death.
Click to expand...
That's right. Taking the overcoat of a jewish prisoner in winter doesn't mean death as the prisoners were already dead.

Please let me know why the Germans didn't take the overcoats off the jewish prisoners before they arrived at Trebinka? Why the train car loads of clothes coming "out of" Treblinka? If your fellow cult member, Clayton, says the German rail transport were already overloaded why did the Germans make two trips?


Slave worker "sorting" at Treblinka (Oscar Strawczynski) "“The group to which I belonged, consisting of several hundred people, reaches the yard and begins working. On the blankets and tablecloths that are spread on the ground are piled all kinds of articles, from imported material and expensive suits to plain rags......From the suitcases we remove notions, cosmetics, soaps, matches, medicines. It seems that there is nothing that we do not remove here in quantities- all sorts, from the most expensive tins to the few potatoes that the poor Jews brought with them.
 
Matthew Ellard said:
How is it "old clothing" if people are still wearing it in winter? Are you agreeing the owners were executed so it became available?

I see....so it wasn't tungsten or petrol that were most valuable commodities but "civilian overcoats". So you agree that in winter the overcoats were removed from Jewish prisoners and given to living Germans. Just out of interest, what year was the German army uniform and boots modified in light of cloth and production shortages? ( Field Blouse Model 1944)

I see....so the Germans had prior "form" of taking overcoats from prisoners. Thanks for the confirmation.


That's right. Taking the overcoat of a jewish prisoner in winter doesn't mean death as the prisoners were already dead.

Please let me know why the Germans didn't take the overcoats off the jewish prisoners before they arrived at Trebinka? Why the train car loads of clothes coming "out of" Treblinka? If your fellow cult member, Clayton, says the German rail transport were already overloaded why did the Germans make two trips?


Slave worker "sorting" at Treblinka (Oscar Strawczynski) "“The group to which I belonged, consisting of several hundred people, reaches the yard and begins working. On the blankets and tablecloths that are spread on the ground are piled all kinds of articles, from imported material and expensive suits to plain rags......From the suitcases we remove notions, cosmetics, soaps, matches, medicines. It seems that there is nothing that we do not remove here in quantities- all sorts, from the most expensive tins to the few potatoes that the poor Jews brought with them.
Click to expand...

Yes, well lets just say that if you could combine your 290 000 overcoats with 9 100 by 50 by 10 meter mass graves at Treblinka, then that would be powerful evidence.

However in the absence of such evidence then it is pretty worthless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom