The Holocaust Thread - The Great Debate Between Affirmers, Revisionists and Deniers

[Lemmingwiser]

You can start here and here

Going by that first link of 20 points... the first four already are by "gas vans". Does this mean just a 5 second look has already reduced your 20-30 documents to 16-26?

 

[Chugger]

According to the historical records, there were allied mass rapes by soldiers once Berlin was taken. Most of this was pinned on the Soviets. However, the Americans and others were exposed to the same wartime propaganda. So I expect it happened on the same scale on the Western side. Just hushed up because the West needed the moral highground for Nuremburg.

Mass rapes by the Red Army occurred due to lack of discipline in that army + a sense of revenge for the very real war crimes committed by Germany in the East. so the situation was very different for the Western Allies

Going by that first link of 20 points... the first four already are by "gas vans". Does this mean just a 5 second look has already reduced your 20-30 documents to 16-26?

No I'd say the number has increased. I was underestimating the amount of documents that exist pertaining to gas vans (gas vans do have to do with 'mass gassings', which was your question)

 

[870EVO]

Mass rapes by the Red Army occurred due to lack of discipline in that army + a sense of revenge for the very real war crimes committed by Germany in the East. so the situation was very different for the Western Allies


No I'd say the number has increased. I was underestimating the amount of documents that exist pertaining to gas vans (gas vans do have to do with 'mass gassings', which was your question)

I noticed you didn't address my other point.

 

[Chugger]

I noticed you didn't address my other point.

I'm not sure what the relevance there is to the Holocaust. If anything it has more to do with whitewashing crimes than inventing them. Denazification ended quickly due to the Allies recognizing USSR was an enormous threat and they needed West Germany staunchly on their side.

Operation Paperclip was justified for similar reasons

 

[Lemmingwiser]

No I'd say the number has increased. I was underestimating the amount of documents that exist pertaining to gas vans (gas vans do have to do with 'mass gassings', which was your question)

Very sensible. You say 20-30 documents. I ask which you refer to. You post a link to 20 documents. I question the validity of relevance. And that means the amount of documents increased beyond 20-30. Very reasonable math.

And much like most gas chambers the evidence falls apart under scrutiny as not a single gas van has been found and the one picture that is paraded was later admitted to not have been a gas van at all.

I've been watching you guys fight for pages about the details. I tend to take a step back and view things from a wider perspective.

According to the historical records, there were allied mass rapes by soldiers once Berlin was taken. Most of this was pinned on the Soviets. However, the Americans and others were exposed to the same wartime propaganda. So I expect it happened on the same scale on the Western side. Just hushed up because the West needed the moral highground for Nuremburg.

Secondly. What happened to a good number of high level Nazis after the war?

View attachment 4495473

If that can happen, if they are capable of that. Then I certainly believe the West can be capable of manufacturing a Holocaust narrative. But you'll really never able to put any doubt into the wider population. The Holocaust is virtually an industry now.

I agree with the general tenor of your message. The image is less convincing. Walter Halstein was just a young leuitenant, not someone with political power in nazi germany. Von Braun was never head of NASA. Heusinger and Waldheim have some merit.

 

[Chugger]

Very sensible. You say 20-30 documents. I ask which you refer to. You post a link to 20 documents. I question the validity of relevance. And that means the amount of documents increased beyond 20-30. Very reasonable math.

I said it was a "start", not that I was posting every document related to mass gassing. My 20-30 guess was simply an underestimate, which I'll correct to 30-40. I may correct that number higher or lower in the future.

The relevance is homicidal gas vans have something to do with 'mass gassing', you disagree?

And much like most gas chambers the evidence falls apart under scrutiny as not a single gas van has been found and the one picture that is paraded was later admitted to not have been a gas van at all.

Not really. There weren't that many gas vans and once there was no need for them anymore (because all the Jews they wanted to kill were dead) it wouldn't make sense for them to keep them around, and instead convert them into something more immediately useful. Your specific evidentiary requirements strike me as hypocritical, given you have no requirements whatsoever concerning resettlement of Polish Jews in occupied USSR.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

I may correct that number higher or lower in the future.

We may correct the number who died at auschwitz, the amount that immigrated to the US, the amount that lived there during the war, the amount that fled before or during the war, the amount that were buried here or there, but know that regardless of any such changes, the amount of jews died is 6000000 and that any reduction of that is holocaust denial and extraditable and prosecutable. (unless done so by someone authorised to do so to keep the propaganda believable for the plebs).

The claims about gas vans is that they were only briefly in use and a such, never a large part of the genocide. Auschwitz still claims a 1000000 dead jews by gassing despite their numerous obvious flaws throughout the years. The scale of numbers we are talking about show that no gas vans are not part of "mass gassing" in the sense that there was never a large mass of people gassed that way assuming every part of your claim is correct.
If it's not, perhaps there never were such vans at all.

Which is quite a stretch, as you'll change your numbers up or down in the future as you wish.

 

[870EVO]

I agree with the general tenor of your message. The image is less convincing. Walter Halstein was just a young leuitenant, not someone with political power in nazi germany. Von Braun was never head of NASA. Heusinger and Waldheim have some merit.

I suppose you're right if you want to get into semantics. Von Braun wasn't head of NASA, he was just Head of the Largest NASA Space center.

Wernher von Braun - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I'm not sure what the relevance there is to the Holocaust. If anything it has more to do with whitewashing crimes than inventing them. Denazification ended quickly due to the Allies recognizing USSR was an enormous threat and they needed West Germany staunchly on their side.

Operation Paperclip was justified for similar reasons

I'm not looking at the Holocaust specifically. I'm looking around the Holocaust. Countries motivations. The Jewish lobby for the implementation of Israel in the 50 years leading up the war. etc... So in my mind. Theres a probability there.

 

[Chugger]

We may correct the number who died at auschwitz, the amount that immigrated to the US, the amount that lived there during the war, the amount that fled before or during the war, the amount that were buried here or there, but know that regardless of any such changes, the amount of jews died is 6000000 and that any reduction of that is holocaust denial and extraditable and prosecutable. (unless done so by someone authorised to do so to keep the propaganda believable for the plebs).

you should sue Yad Vashem

Von Braun wasn't head of NASA, he was just Head of the Largest NASA Space center.

Von Braun had nothing to do with the Holocaust, rather slave labor, and yeah his involvement there and maybe the entire program to a certain extent was whitewashed because he was politically useful

Denazification would be the topic to read about regarding the number of Nazis present in GDR government and judiciary. I have no idea what this has to do with inventing a genocide.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

you should sue Yad Vashem

Good example of those authorised to modify numbers to keep propaganda believable by the plebs.

Thank you for supporting my thesis.

 

[mrolonzo]

They were still cremating bodies from the Typhus epidemic in 1942 in 1944? For the entire summer of 1944 pretty much (that's when the crema workforce hits 1000 per day). I don't think this explanation is going to convince people.


I don't think so. Why don't you link to a post in the thread that answers the fundamental question?



I think you know exactly why I think this (I'm giving you some credit here)



You can start here and here

1/ Chugger, are you telling us that there is a discrepancy in the correlation between krema labor force and average death numbers as yet unaddressed here on this thread indicating that there was a conspiracy to kill innocent Jews in Auschwitz ?

2/ Ok, https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=14847&p=107598#p107598. First response by poster Lamprecht.

3/ Ok perhaps I do but I want to be exact. Are you implying that there was a conspiracy of some sort kill and then hide the evidence in areas other than that controlled by Romania such that the nazis were able to disappear all the evidence?

4/ Right, Gas Vans obviously is an interesting area but we were focusing on Auschwitz weren't we?

Do you have something on that or would you prefer to talk about Gas Van's?

you should sue Yad Vashem
View attachment 4497969

Von Braun had nothing to do with the Holocaust, rather slave labor, and yeah his involvement there and maybe the entire program to a certain extent was whitewashed because he was politically useful

Denazification would be the topic to read about regarding the number of Nazis present in GDR government and judiciary. I have no idea what this has to do with inventing a genocide.

On what grounds would Yad Vashem be sued?

 

[Chugger]

Good example of those authorised to modify numbers to keep propaganda believable by the plebs.

Thank you for supporting my thesis.

What's your thesis exactly? What do you make of the initial estimates by historians, in the 50s and 60s? Well before the Holocaust had the global recognition it does today.

1/ Chugger, are you telling us that there is a discrepancy in the correlation between krema labor force and average death numbers as yet unaddressed here on this thread indicating that there was a conspiracy to kill innocent Jews in Auschwitz ?

yes, unaddressed on this thread and by revisionists

2/ Ok, https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=14847&p=107598#p107598. First response by poster Lamprecht.

He asked Bombsaway to catalog every witness who had ever spoken about Transnistria. "At least how many of them "spoke profusely" about it? Provide a number" Bombsaway had previously given him a handful of names, but Lamprecht refused to engage and demanded every name,

To this Lamprecht replied

So it seems he wasn't too interested in the topic.

No answer given to the fundamental question 'why is there so much evidence for the Transnistrian resettlement but nothing for the much larger resettlement of Polish Jews in 42/43?'

3/ Ok perhaps I do but I want to be exact. Are you implying that there was a conspiracy of some sort kill and then hide the evidence in areas other than that controlled by Romania such that the nazis were able to disappear all the evidence?

Huh? No that's not my answer to the fundamental question.

 

[870EVO]

Von Braun had nothing to do with the Holocaust, rather slave labor, and yeah his involvement there and maybe the entire program to a certain extent was whitewashed because he was politically useful

Exactly. What else was politically useful then?

 

[AgendaPoster]

According to the historical records, there were allied mass rapes by soldiers once Berlin was taken. Most of this was pinned on the Soviets.

Oh no, the poor Soviets.
All they did was rape&pillage "davai ceas" all across the East Europe, the same place that was able to cohabit with the scary German Natzees just fine for years.
And then the fucking Russian scourge happened.
For those in the West blessed with never meeting the Monghouloid Scourge:

 

[870EVO]

Oh no, the poor Soviets.
All they did was rape&pillage "davai ceas" all across the East Europe, the same place that was able to cohabit with the scary German Natzees just fine for years.
And then the fucking Russian scourge happened.

This isn't about simping for soviets. It's just pointing out everyone is capable of anything.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

According to the historical records, there were allied mass rapes by soldiers once Berlin was taken. Most of this was pinned on the Soviets. However, the Americans and others were exposed to the same wartime propaganda. So I expect it happened on the same scale on the Western side. Just hushed up because the West needed the moral highground for Nuremburg.

I don't think it happened on the same scale, but it probably happened quite a bit. I thought the STD developments in Japan were interesting, where at first there was a problem with rape around american military bases in occupied japan. Then the Japanese opened a brothel next to the american base and asked of Japanese prostitutes to work there to keep other women safe. Rape virtually disappeared. But STDs started to spread among the americans in the base. So they forced the brothel to close. And rapes went back up.

I'll admit that I haven't looked at this too closely so if someone knows more, feel free to correct me. There isn't yearly transfers of millions/billions of dollars, so it isn't as relevant.

What's your thesis exactly? What do you make of the initial estimates by historians, in the 50s and 60s?

Isn't that the same estimates as the one I showed had already been made before the war even ended?

And in fact comparable to the ones made before the war even started.

---

My thesis is that it's official revisionism when done by the Good Guys authorised source and it's hysterical paranoid denial when done by the Bad Guys unautherised source.

Also the latter category will expand to include anyone that says anything that the Good Guys don't like.

 

[870EVO]

I don't think it happened on the same scale, but it probably happened quite a bit.

After the fighting moved on to German soil, there was a good deal of rape by combat troops and those immediately following them. The incidence varied between unit and unit according to the attitude of the commanding officer. In some cases offenders were identified, tried by court martial, and punished. The army legal branch was reticent, but admitted that for brutal or perverted sexual offences against German women, some soldiers had been shot – particularly if they happened to be Negroes. Yet I know for a fact that many women were raped by white Americans. No action was taken against the culprits. In one sector a report went round that a certain very distinguished army commander made the wisecrack, 'Copulation without conversation does not constitute fraternisation.'[74]

Clive Emsley quotes a senior British Army chaplain as reporting that there was "a good deal of rape going on, those who suffer [rape] have probably deserved it".

And afterward.

The food situation in occupied Germany was initially very dire. By the spring of 1946 the official ration in the American zone was no more than 1,275 calories (5,330 kJ) per day, with some areas probably receiving as little as 700 calories (2,900 kJ) per day.

Carol Huntington wrote that the American soldiers who raped German women and then left gifts of food for them may have permitted themselves to view the act as prostitution rather than rape. Citing the work of a Japanese historian alongside that suggestion, Huntington writes that Japanese women who begged for food "were raped and soldiers sometimes left food for those they raped."[72]

Some occupation soldiers took advantage of the desperate food situation by exploiting their ample supply of food and cigarettes (the currency of the black market) to get to the local German girls as what became known as frau bait (The New York Times, 25 June 1945). Some soldiers still felt the girls were the enemy, but used them for sex nevertheless.[16]

The often destitute mothers of the resulting children usually received no child support. In the earliest stages of the occupation, U.S. soldiers were not allowed to pay maintenance for a child they admitted having fathered, since to do so was considered "aiding the enemy". Marriages between white U.S. soldiers and Austrian women were not permitted until January 1946, and with German women until December 1946.[16]

It has been frequently repeated that the wartime rapes were surrounded by decades of silence[2][4][5] or, until relatively recently, ignored by academics, with the prevailing attitude being that the Germans were the perpetrators of war crimes, Soviet writings speaking only of Russian liberators and German guilt and Western historians focusing on specific elements of the Holocaust.[86]

 

[Chugger]

My thesis is that it's official revisionism when done by the Good Guys authorised source and it's hysterical paranoid denial when done by the Bad Guys unautherised source.

I don't think there was any revisionism re the 6 million figure. You could argue that there has been a revision upwards from the first serious estimates which were 4.5- 5 million.

Isn't that the same estimates as the one I showed had already been made before the war even ended?

And in fact comparable to the ones made before the war even started.

I think there were claims of 4, 5, 6 million. Most of these were total guesstimates or based on single source witness testimony, eg some guy saying Eichmann told him 6 million were killed. Even the Nazis put some estimates into print, but something like this is an obvious guesstimate

The evidence based estimates which came later, as well as any hypothetical estimate, would necessarily be similar to these numbers, yes.

As far as I know, no detailed evidence based estimates were made until Reitlinger's "Final Solution" in the mid 50s. Reitlingers estimate was 4.5 million, which would be anticipated by both claims of 4 million and 5 million. Double suspicious? I hope you can see how ridiculous this view is. Reitlinger justified his estimate by referencing docs like the Korherr report as well as transport logs, SS police shooting reports, etc, not uncorroborated estimates like the ones made previously.

Exactly. What else was politically useful then?

The Holohoax is more than just writing a few articles in the paper or making a few newsreels . According to revisionists, we are looking at a coordinated campaign of mass document destruction and forgery, as well as mass witness suppression (all witnesses to resettlement) and coercion of hundreds of witnesses into giving false testimony, without anyone reneging. Oh and as the story goes in most of the camps cremains are still in the ground and have been identified by archeologists so any physical investigation would quickly blow the story up.

Given the risk of this conspiracy being discovered, absolutely no I don't think it would be worth trying to carry it out. If something like this became public it would reify every anti semitic conspiracy theory, and probably lead to a massive upswing in Nazi sympathies, which wouldn't be ideal for occupying forces.

And the Nazis did enough bad things that truthfully it wasn't necessary to manufacture a genocide as a cherry on top.

Revisionists currently agree the Nazis did the following, which were all tried at Nuremberg and various post-war trials

Euthanized hundreds of thousands of people secretly and against the will of their families
Lebensborn program ("kidnapping" racially hygienic children)
Subjecting millions of civilians to forced labor
Colonization and deportation plans for 50+ million people
Wartime hunger planning which lead to millions of POWS and Soviet civilians starving to death
Mass shootings of civilians at a level totally unprecedented in European history

Revisionists will try to justify most of these things, but they admit they happened, and to your average non-nazi person all of these things will seem really bad

It also should be noted that the Holocaust was never really publicized and was something of a footnote to WW2 until the 60s and 70s. By then the bad guy was the USSR, so the political usefulness of manufacturing a genocide at that time was probably close to zero.

 

[870EVO]

Given the risk of this conspiracy being discovered, absolutely no I don't think it would be worth trying to carry it out.

Discovered by whom? The media? The same media that was utilized by the government to spread WW2 propaganda? Everyone was being exposed to this stuff. And even if you resisted and had first hand knowledge, theres no way a civilian journalist will be willing to cover that, it would likely be blocked by their editors, who from orders from higher up, as you said, found all this narrative politically convenient.

I'm not saying it definitely happened. I'm just saying all the circumstances make it possible.

 

[Chugger]

Discovered by whom? The media? The same media that was utilized by the government to spread WW2 propaganda?

Sure the media can be fed government talking points, but both in the US and West Germany are allowed to conduct investigations into government activity. Within the capitalist framework, this can be very lucrative ' a big story'

Hence Watergate or MKULTRA journalistic reveals.

In the 60s West German government conducted trials of Germans working at the camps. At the trials for the major extermination centers (places where hundreds of thousands of people were brought to be killed), without exception, every single witness backed the extermination camp story. Unlike Nuremberg, these trials were conducted fairly. Judicial notice was not given, people were allowed to deny and this strategy was effective in the Majdanek trial

It was only on 26 November 1975 that the trial finally started. It was originally expected to last one year. Billed as the last of the great Nazi trials, the prosecutors believed the evidence to be incontrovertible. Over one thousand survivors had been interviewed. Of those, 260 had been selected as having actually seen one of the defendants commit murder. The German courts insist that there must be an eyewitness to the act of murder. Hearsay or supposition is insufficient. Yet at the end of the first year only sixteen of the 260 witnesses had been heard. Judge Bogen was confronted by the obstructive tactics of the government-paid defence lawyers, intent on using the trial for their own purposes. He consistently refused to limit their attempts to disprove the existence of the Final Solution.

Exploiting the procedural rules which were drafted to prevent a repetition of the shotgun trials of the Third Reich, the defence lawyers embarked on a daily ritual, submitting endless challenges against the prosecution's introduction of evidence and introducing evidence designed not to clarify the issues or bolster their client's defence but to rewrite the history of the Nazi era.

Hans Mundorf, defending Braunsteiner, seized every possible opportunity during the first eighteen months to challenge the evidence that human corpses had been burnt in the crematoria. Every witness was asked whether he knew the difference between the smell of burning human and animal flesh. Veterinary doctors were called to testify that those outside the crematoria would not know the difference.
Ludwig Bock, the thirty-eight-year-old lawyer defending Lachert, went even further and called witnesses - all of them neo-Nazi historians - to disprove that there had ever been a planned Final Solution. With a conviction that goes beyond purely professional duty to a client, he insisted that no one, including animals, was gassed at Majdanek. `Even if there were gas chambers at Majdanek,' he told the author, `it doesn't mean that they were the reason for the death of a lot of people, because it is possible that the gas chambers were used to clean clothes.' Bock, who claimed that Lachert went to Majdanek as if it was just another job, `like being a cook in a kitchen,' insisted that she had no idea that anyone was being gassed or killed in the camp. That defence did not prevent him demanding, when a former inmate explained how she had been forced by a defendant to carry Zyklon B gas to the gas chambers, that the witness be charged as an accomplice to murder.

Hermann Stolting, who defended another of the accused, Hermine Bottcher, has a Nazi record of his own to explain. As a wartime prosecutor in a special court in Bromberg, Poland, he `persuaded' the court to give a series of death sentences for trivial offences like a farmer's illegal killing of six pigs. Today he unrepentantly justifies those sentences: `If both the circumstances and the law were the same today, I would do the same again." He points to his chairmanship of the German Animal Welfare Society as proof of his humanitarianism.

When the lawyers were not rewriting history, they were cruelly denigrating the survivors and their testimony. Credibility is hard to establish at the best of times, but thirty-five years after the event it is often impossible to remember the exact details which the defence lawyers always demanded. Time, date, place, the exact words, the precise movements of every person in the drama, the position of the lorry in relation to the hut - or was it a cart? - the final curse of the girl who was hanged by Lachert. `How can you be sure that the girl did not push the stool away herself?' `Did you see Lachert throw the children into the crematoria?'

So no journalistic investigation was even necessary. People brought to the stand could just deny shit if they wanted, and this would become public record.

There is no evidence of torture or foul play by prosecutors in these trials.

What do you make of this? Does this sound like how the government would keep probably the greatest secret in modern times under wraps?