[Moderated]The Holocaust never happened!

[Loss Leader]

It's an understandable sentiment. I think the reality is that the Nazis had to be defeated before their victims could be helped substantially.

I don't think there's much doubt that the US could have done more to disrupt the workings of the camps than they did (or "than we did" depending on how my sentiments shift as I write).

I do think that it's not easy to tease apart why we didn't expend some resources on that aspect.

At least one reason is that the US military was focussed on a military war. They were trained to fight another army - spearhead to spearhead. Flying way back behind the lines to bomb a militarily worthless target just wasn't part of the way soldiers thought back then. Today, when wars have no front line, it's much easier to imagine that kind of mission.

But I do think an overall not caring about the types of people in the camps played a part.

Weighing how much of a part it played is probably impossible.

Still, it all reminds me of the Dudley Moore/Peter Cooke sketch:

"Terrible business, World War II. I was against it."
- "Yes. Well, I believe we all were."
"Ah, but I wrote a letter."

 

[gumboot]

One thing that has always bothered me, is why the Allies didnt do more to prevent it. Information about Auschwitz was out as early as 1943-44, thanks to some brave prisoners that escaped from there...
By that time, it wasnt a logistical impossibility to precision bomb the gaschambers, SS-guards quarters, or even just the railroad tracks leading there.

This is pretty weak thinking. To begin with, precision bombing of any description in WW2 was impossible. And even today bombing a specific building in a camp without killing prisoners in the camp is beyond the capabilities of air power.

Secondly, bombing internment camps (regardless of what is happening there) is a warcrime. Thirdly, the camps were almost exclusively in Eastern Germany and Poland, which was either at the very limit, or outside the range of American aircraft.

Thirdly, losses from allied bombing were horrific, thus only the most vital targets could be selected. As tragic as the Holocaust was, stopping it would have not affected the German war effort in any way whatsoever.

Fourthly, the only practical way to stop the holocaust was to defeat the Germans and liberate the camps (lets not forget those killed in the Holocaust were brought in from all over Europe). To this end the allied powers planned and executed a massed invasion of Europe. Leading up to D-Day, every single resource available to the allies had to be dedicated to preparations for the invasion.

To suggest the allied powers should have done more to prevent the Holocaust completely fails to appreciate how dire the situation was for the allied powers in WW2, and seems grossly disrespectful to the millions of allied soldiers who fought and died to liberate Europe.

-Gumboot

 

[MG1962]

The Allies did not expend the effort because they believed diverting the war resources would slow the winning of the war, thus saving the Jews. Sadly they had no concept of how many Jews were dying on a daily basis.

For the record Aschwitz was bombed once by accident - Allies were after the nearby chemical plant - Aschwitz was back in action within a week.

It is easy to be judgemental when all the facts are known - But to judge fact from over reaction during the fog of war asks of man, something we are simplynot capable off.

 

[ktesibios]

Actually, the Auschwitz complex was bombed several times from August to December 1944. The purpose was to hit the I. G. Farben synthetic oil and buna rubber plants at Monowitz (Auschwitz III).

This photo, found here, shows a stick of American bombs poised directly over Krema II, on a trajectory aimed at the Farben plant.

Krema II can be identified on this map

found here

However, would aerial bombing have accomplished much in saving the lives of the prisoners? In this I have to agree with some of the previous posts in this thread. Bombing the rail lines leading to Auschwitz would probably have caused only a minor delay in transporting victims to the camp; by late 1944 the Allies had learned that the Germans were very good at repairing bombed tracks.

As gumboot has pointed out, to hit the Kremas without killing large numbers of prisoners in the camp around them was beyond the capacity of the level-bombing technology of the time; while it's been speculated that it could have been done with low-level bombing by Mosquitoes, this is speculative and doesn't take into account how organizing such a mission would have affected the ongoing, all-out campaign to destroy the German fuel industry- the reason that Monowitz was bombed.

Finally, even if the Kremas had been destroyed, the Nazi Einsatzgruppen had, in the early part of the war in the East, murdered nearly as many victims as were gassed at Birkenau, using the low-tech method of shooting. If they were determined to continue carrying out the Final Solution, the Nazis could have simply reverted to that more primitive method. The only definitive way to end the genocide was to destroy Nazi power; to detract from the effort to accomplish that would only have given the Nazis more time in which to commit more crimes.

here are some extracts from the postwar United States Stregic bombing Survey describing the attacks on the Monowitz complex, and here is the text of a letter from Assistant Secretary of War John McCloy to the director of the War Refugee Board, explaining the reasons that the War Department had decided not to undertake bombing against the extermination camp at Birkenau.

 

[Gravy]

Very interesting post, as always, ktesibios.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

The linguistic construction of the OP is upside down and backwards.

The holocaust was a conspiracy. The Nazi government conspired to systematically murder Jews and others. They conspired to keep it a secret. The original holocaust deniers were the German people, who could not believe that "their" government could possibly do such a thing, regardless of the evidence.

So the holocaust deniers are denying there was a conspiracy. Those who accept the holocaust accept that there was a conspiracy.

Once the semantics are corrected, we can see the parallel between the holocaust and 9/11. Both involve the mass murder of domestic citizens by government, with the willing cooperation in the cover up by a lap dog news media.

Many Americans simply cannot believe "their" government could possibly do such a thing as 9/11. They are much like the original holocaust deniers.

 

[MG1962]

Once the semantics are corrected, we can see the parallel between the holocaust and 9/11. Both involve the mass murder of domestic citizens by government, with the willing cooperation in the cover up by a lap dog news media.

No you need to try a lot harder - The Holocaust was the end of a long line of bastardry acts undertaken by the NAZI who were in power for 12 years. To believe a connection to 911 expects one act, within 8 months of office - and nothing further for the next 6 years

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

No you need to try a lot harder - The Holocaust was the end of a long line of bastardry acts undertaken by the NAZI who were in power for 12 years. To believe a connection to 911 expects one act, within 8 months of office - and nothing further for the next 6 years

You're saying the Holocaust was not a conspiracy?

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

No you need to try a lot harder - The Holocaust was the end of a long line of bastardry acts undertaken by the NAZI who were in power for 12 years. To believe a connection to 911 expects one act, within 8 months of office - and nothing further for the next 6 years

Nothing further??

Have you not heard of Afghanistan?
Iraq?
7/7?
The Patriot Act?
DHS?
Takeover of the airports?

 

[gtc]

Once the semantics are corrected, we can see the parallel between the holocaust and 9/11. Both involve the mass murder of domestic citizens by government, with the willing cooperation in the cover up by a lap dog news media.

Prove it.

Prove that the government committed 9/11.

Prove that the media knows it but is covering it up.

 

[gtc]

Nothing further??

Have you not heard of Afghanistan?
Iraq?
7/7?
The Patriot Act?
DHS?
Takeover of the airports?

OK. Now you have shifted the goal posts as you were talking about the murder of domestic citizens by the US and now you are talking about a whole bunch of stuff.

Afghanistan - what is your point?
Iraq - what is your point?
7/7 - prove government involvement.
The Patriot Act - what is your point?
DHS - what is your point?
Takeover of the airports - what do you mean?

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

The Nazi holocaust was a conspiracy. Holocaust deniers are denying a conspiracy. Those who accept the holocaust are accepting a conspiracy.

The OP constructs the story using opposite semantics, characterizing holocaust denial as a conspiracy. Whatever your views on the holocaust and whatever your views on 9/11, it is much more semantically consistent to do as I have done, and that is call the holocaust what it was - a conspiracy.

 

[gtc]

The Nazi holocaust was a conspiracy. Holocaust deniers are denying a conspiracy. Those who accept the holocaust are accepting a conspiracy.

True.

The OP constructs the story using opposite semantics, characterizing holocaust denial as a conspiracy. Whatever your views on the holocaust and whatever your views on 9/11, it is much more semantically consistent to do as I have done, and that is call the holocaust what it was - a conspiracy.

I think the opening post was suggesting that some people believe that a conspiracy exists to "invent" the holocaust.

This means that we have two rival conspiracy theories:

1) Nazi Germany conspired to kill Jews and others or
2) The Jews and others conspired to invent the holocaust.

Of course, all the evidence points to the first conspiracy being correct.

This is similar to the 911 conspiracy theories:

1) A group of Muslim extremists conspired to attack multiple targets in the US.
2) The government and/or others conspired to attack multiple targets in the US and blame it on a group of Muslim extremists.

Of course, all the evidence points to the first conspiracy being correct.

The major difference that the people who adhere to holocaust theory 2 question the extent to which it occurred while people who adhere to 911 theory 2 question who was responsible.

 

[Belz...]

A-Train is part of the anti-semite chorus. He's danced around the issue with directly admitting it on these forums just like MaGZ.

The typical twoofer modus operandi.

 

[Belz...]

The holocaust was a conspiracy. The Nazi government conspired to systematically murder Jews and others. They conspired to keep it a secret.

Secret ? Really ?

The original holocaust deniers were the German people, who could not believe that "their" government could possibly do such a thing, regardless of the evidence.

Yes, regardless of the EVIDENCE.

Once the semantics are corrected, we can see the parallel between the holocaust and 9/11.

The only parallel is that some people disagree on whether or not there is something suspicious going on. It says NOTHING about who's correct, does it ?

Both involve the mass murder of domestic citizens by government, with the willing cooperation in the cover up by a lap dog news media.

Only if you assume this regardless of the evidence.

Many Americans simply cannot believe "their" government could possibly do such a thing as 9/11.

Actually, it's pretty easy. The government couldn't. Physically.

 

[westprog]

This is pretty weak thinking. To begin with, precision bombing of any description in WW2 was impossible. And even today bombing a specific building in a camp without killing prisoners in the camp is beyond the capabilities of air power.

Secondly, bombing internment camps (regardless of what is happening there) is a warcrime. Thirdly, the camps were almost exclusively in Eastern Germany and Poland, which was either at the very limit, or outside the range of American aircraft.

Thirdly, losses from allied bombing were horrific, thus only the most vital targets could be selected. As tragic as the Holocaust was, stopping it would have not affected the German war effort in any way whatsoever.

Fourthly, the only practical way to stop the holocaust was to defeat the Germans and liberate the camps (lets not forget those killed in the Holocaust were brought in from all over Europe). To this end the allied powers planned and executed a massed invasion of Europe. Leading up to D-Day, every single resource available to the allies had to be dedicated to preparations for the invasion.

To suggest the allied powers should have done more to prevent the Holocaust completely fails to appreciate how dire the situation was for the allied powers in WW2, and seems grossly disrespectful to the millions of allied soldiers who fought and died to liberate Europe.

-Gumboot

It wasn't clear at the time that Jews delivered to the camps were in more danger than while they were being rounded up. There wasn't any great overhead in shooting Jews by the side of the road, and if the trains to Auschwitz had been stopped from running, that's probably what would have happened.

 

[westprog]

Physical impossibility

Actually, it's pretty easy. The government couldn't. Physically.

That's not actually the case. The idea that the government planted bombs in the WTC is physically impossible. The idea that they manipulated Arab terrorists into attacking the USA is not impossible, merely wrong.

 

[Belz...]

Yeah, well I was going for the former.

 

[Liszt]

that is an excellent post from ktesibios - nice one sir (or madam)


Now, I think that Holocaust deniers are manipulators and selective in their evidence. However, look at things like this...

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion...,0,3594067.story?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

Here´s the tagline "D.C. museum getting data from Germany won't allow Internet searches, infuriating survivors who want to trace relatives"

This was from July 10 edition of Newsday.

Why on earth are they stopping this information flow? There is already plenty of evidence of the Holocaust. By stopping more info, all they are doing is helping the deniers. It is things like this that fan the flames.

 

[Loss Leader]

The Nazi government conspired to systematically murder Jews and others. They conspired to keep it a secret.

Well, they didn't do a very good job of it:

On November 24 of that year [1942], Rabbi Stephen Wise disclosed in a press conference that the State Department had investigated and confirmed reports about the Nazis' extermination campaign against European Jews. A few weeks later, on December 17, the United States, Britain, and ten Allied governments released a formal declaration confirming and condemning Hitler's extermination policy toward the Jews.

source

Once the semantics are corrected, we can see the parallel between the holocaust and 9/11.

The parallel kind of disappears once you figure in the fact that the Holocaust wasn't a secret. The allied governments confirmed the reports and shared the information with the public by December 1942. Before then, violence against Jews and the Neuremburg Laws were widely reported by credible sources such as the New York Times.

Let's review the parallels:

Oh, wait, there aren't any.

Unless a national government has investigated 9/11 and called it an inside job. Has that happened? No? Well, certainly major newspapers are breaking the story of the 9/11 conspiracy. No major papers? Surely actual eyewitnesses have come forward with information about Bush's plan to destroy the towers. Oh, that hasn't happened, either?

But all those things did happen with the Holocaust.

Perhaps ... perhaps ... you have no idea what you're talking about.