Ah... so resettlement was the new word for mass murder eh?
The third Reich actually had a number of movies made, thrillers, rom coms and such...... did they replace the word murder with resettlement there too?
[...]
1. Why isn't that good enough?
2. Who is supposed to certify holocaust research? Why isn't accuracy and logical , clear writing good enough?
3. You clearly haven't read Mattogno then.
4. Go ahead, explain an example of how his method is 'shoddy'. Why isn't this just projecting?
5. If you're talking about some website, it's of limited value because it can changed and warped. Only hard copy writing is truly legitimate. Therefore, we generally take seriously the actual authors in orthodox history.
Are you being deliberately dense? Are you seriously suggesting the Nazis did not have a substantial propaganda arm within the party used to 'spin' all kinds of issues to the public?
The Nazis use of euphemism during the Holocaust was a direct result of opposition to Aktion T4. When Aktion T4 was implemented, the Nazis did not use euphemism, and openly spoke of providing "Gnadentod", or 'mercy death' to the disabled; or in their words, "Lebensunwertig", 'those unworthy of life'. The protestant Church in Germany and some German judges reacted badly to Aktion T4 and opposed euthanasia on humanitarian or legal grounds. The idea of putting down disabled children was unpopular, and it taught Hitler and Co. that a propaganda campaign and a secrecy campaign would be necessary to hide the purpose of Aktion Reinhard from the general public, even though party propaganda had persuaded Germans to see Jews as 'untermenschen'; subhuman.
I'm surprised I have to tell you that works of historical fiction about the Third Reich are not public policy documents. FWIW works of fiction
about the Third Reich and the Holocaust (example linked) will sometimes use these euphemisms in context as it's historically accurate to do so. Sometimes they do not, and this is in an effort to make the topic accessible for people who haven't given it much thought since high school or college. Some movies are more accurate than others, some movies are meant to be emotionally moving whereas others are meant to be factual documentaries.
You've said Mattogno is a "foremost" scholar on the Holocaust. According to whom, other Holocaust deniers?
Mattogno publishes to the Holocaust-denying fandom and only within that fandom are his views afforded esteem. He
never sends his work in for peer review or publishes in actual academic journals. Mattogno claims on his website to have completed
"university work in philosophy as well as Oriental and religious studies," but not even his own CV lists any preliminary or training work in that field. The plug on Mattogno's own website continues:
"Today he has become an accomplished linguist, researcher, and is a specialist in textual analysis." No published work about anything like that is attributable to Carlo Mattogno.
You are not automatically a "foremost" scholar just because you publish a lot of books about it, you could be a
lolcow who self-publishes poorly contrived 'handbooks', which Mattogno is. He deliberately stays out of any forum where his views would be subject to fact-checking or logical reasoning prior by an editor or peer reviewers prior to publication.
Mattogno occasionally writes with other authors in the Holocaust denial fandom, and then those writings are crosspublished to Nazi-fanboy newsites with names like "the Vangaurd".
At least, that is what a search of Google Scholar returns for Mattogno's full name. He is a lolcow who makes up his degrees and accreditations to chip away at the facts of the Holocaust to reaffirm his pro-Nazi audience that the Holocaust was overblown in scope or never happened; and those who remember the Holocaust, especially Jews who talk about the Holocaust, are over-reacting or malingering for sympathy somehow. Mattogno is an author, and a prolific one at that, but he is not a scholar. He's more like a romance novel writer, churning out these "handbooks" that make cringe assertions like
"In March 1942 - this report reads - the Germans began the construction of the new camp of Treblinka B - on the edge of Treblinka A - which was finished at the end of April 1942. Toward the first half of September it comprised two "death houses." The "house of death No. 2" was of masonry, about 40 meters long and 15 meters wide. According to the story of one eyewitness, it contained ten rooms arranged along the two sides of a corridor that traversed the whole building. Pipes through which the steam passed were installed in these rooms. The "house of death No. 1" consisted of three rooms and one boiler. The report continues:
Inside the furnace-room is a large boiler for the production of steam, and with the help of pipes that run through the death rooms, which are provided with an appropriate number of holes, the superheated steam is injected into the interior of the rooms.
The "victims" were put into the rooms mentioned above, and killed by the steam:
In that manner the execution rooms are filled completely, then the doors are closed hermetically, and the long asphyxiation of the victims, by the steam coming out of the numerous holes in the pipes, begins. At the start, screams come from inside; they die down slowly, after 15 minutes the execution is completed.
[16]"
This story was taken up and raised to the rank of official truth by the Central Commission for Investigation of German crimes in Poland, which accused the former governor, Hans Frank, of having ordered the installation of an "extermination camp" at Treblinka for the massive elimination of the Jews "in steam-filled rooms."
[17]
The Holocaust is not somehow better if the Nazis boiled the Jews with steam versus gassing them to death with hydrogen cyanide versus shooting them vs hanging vs neglect + disease. The horror of the Holocaust is that the Nazis used all of those methods together and developed a smooth, calm, factory-like process where millions were led to their deaths.
@mrolonzo Here's a Mattogno chestnut that the revisionists/deniers in this thread are aping; he says that because the calculated, estimated output of the crematories is lower than the reported death toll, it was impossible for that many people to have died there. That doesn't make logical sense; killing Jews is one step before disposing of their bodies. It's as if Mattogno couldn't allow for possibilities such as bodies piling up in the winter, or being cremated after a delay of a week or more, executing new arrivals after a delay of up to a few days, reducing crematory downtime below recommended limits, or hastily burning and burning the overflow dead in mass cremation pits. There are photographs, eyewitness accounts, and documentation that the Nazis were doing all of those things to cope with insufficient crematory space. Topf and Sohne furiously drew up plans for better crematory ovens adapted to use in extermination camps throughout the war. So although Mattogno's calculations may be fine, his inferences put the cart before the horse. The causal direction of events here is basically the opposite of Mattogno's claim. Increasing crematory capacity throughout WW2 just establishes the increasing rate of prisoner death at the camps; that would
tend to support the eyewitness accounts of the Holocaust, few as they are.
Mattogno's amazement that not many eyewitnesses survived a death camp is him playing stupid, like a lot of you shitposters here do. Mattogno won't allow that the Holocaust was a process of charnel innovation. The first gas chambers were just transport vans with the exhaust pipe rerouted into the back. The first mass executions occurred in Aktion T4, and the same protocols were refined for Aktion Reinhard. The Reich was building new gassing facilities and crematories basically up until they had to tear them down in retreat. That would seem to support a theory of high crematory demand; almost as if the Germans were killing the Jews a little bit faster than they could get rid of their bodies, and in response German industry was refining the process of killing people and expanding facilities to do so.
Also, I don't think Mattogno knows Latin, Greek, or Hebrew very well, despite his claims to be a master of all that as well. Sounds like another claim he makes to burnish his own CV.
