David Irving is a Holocaust Denier because he writes in his books that Hitler didn't ORDER the Holocaust but it happened.
Like for example he uses the message that Hitler sent to the Baltics that a train of Jews NOT be killed as an example of how Hitler didn't order it to happen.
So saying that Hitler did not have Perfect Control over everything makes you a Holocaust Denier.
===
Also for the record I think 9/11 Trutherism was done by the USA to make people believe that the Government is Powerful.
You know, using paranoia about the Government to make people believe the Government is Powerful enough to mastermind 9/11. You're prolly see more about it as Baby Formula is out of stock and gas gets into the 10's of dollars.
Start here, pic related;
As for David Irving, posted directly from a short codoh thread to save repitition,
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=14291&p=103655&hilit=David+irving#p103655 :
--------------------------------------------------------
“I have never held myself out to be a Holocaust expert, nor have I written books about what is now called the Holocaust.”
It was painfully obvious during the trial and particularly Irving's cross examination of Van Pelt that Irving missed all research on Auschwitz from
Pressac onward. The Irving v. Lipstadt trial was a lost opportunity See.
https://codoh.com/library/document/irvi ... art-ii/en/ et seq.
Even so Irving played an important role.
The Hitler Order
From the time of the Nuremberg Tribunal, most interpretations of the Holocaust claimed that Hitler had given an order for the mass murder of all Jews, and he directly planned and organized a secret program of mass murder. This is the now-defunct Intentionalist Theory. David Irving’s cardinal role in sinking this theory emerged during his cross-examination of defense expert witness, Christopher Browning.
Trial Transcript-[Professor Christopher Robert Browning]
“I would say that there had been substantial study of the Holocaust; the Trunk book, in terms of the Jewish Council’s, Hilberg in terms of the apparatus, Schloenus in terms of the pre-Holocaust bureaucratic process. What had not been studied before you published was a particular focus on decision-making process and Hitler’s role. That is one part and, in so far as we can confine ourselves to that, indeed, your publication of Hitler’s War was the impetus for the research in that area.”
Even Holocaust doyen Raul Hilberg has been forced to change his view.
Q. [Mr Irving] Do you know what his [Hilberg’s] opinion is on whether Adolf Hitler actually issued an order or not?
A. [Professor Christopher Robert Browning] I think his feeling is if you are looking for an order in a formal sense, that such a thing probably was not given.”
It was not acknowledged during the trial that Irving had made one of the most-notable breakthroughs in Holocaust research.
--------------------------------------------------------
Strangest reasoning I have seen.
If you take the premise of 6.000.000 holocaust happened, but without hitler's knowledge, that doesn't say anything about nazi control, only about hitler control. The killing may still have been motivated by antipartisanship, racial hatred, revenge, scapegoating, preventing coups, preventing violent revolution or any of a 100 different motivations.
If your entire view of world war 2 requires a perfect control by hitler to make sense, you have a very flat view of history. In the end he was just a man, that took shits on toilets like everyone else.
A crucial element that average people here neglect is not only the non existent Hitler order, but the direct counter orders.
Think about it this way, normally an army has to be repeatedly ordered and reminded and re trained again and again about its orders, it's duties and responsibilities. That's actually how order is maintained. They're called standing orders, I.e. daily instructions on what do to do. Hitler's SS was literally ordered never to harm any jew and to maintain and improve their health.
