Himmler's note infers Hitler knew of liquidation ?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Himmler's note infers Hitler knew of liquidation ?

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 7:14 pm)

Would like to pose this question to the group: I'm still reading Zimmerman and he states:

Two in-depth and devastating critiques were written by German historian Martin Broszat11 and historian of the Third Reich Charles Sydnor.12

Irving's primary evidence that Hitler did not order the extermination of the Jews, and indeed sought to prevent it, was a handwritten entry in Himmler's telephone log. The version of the entry that Irving presents is: "Transport of Jews from Berlin, No Liquidation."13 Commentators have observed the obvious: that this order only refers to one particular transport, and not a general order against liquidation. However, read in

its full context the reason Hitler did not want this particular transport liquidated is because he believed that the Soviet Foreign Minister's son was on the train. The full notation reads: "Arrest Dr. Jekelius. Presumably Molotov's son. Transport of Jews from Berlin. No Liquidation."14

The major problem, as noted by a number of critics, was that Irving had disproved his own thesis. How could Hitler not have known of the extermination of the Jews if he gave an order not to liquidate this particular transport? To give such an order, he would have had to know that such a transport was scheduled for liquidation in the first place.15

-

Any thoughts?

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2359
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 8:16 pm)

Hi Semblance7. Please give sources. What book is that? What are the numbers 12-15 referring to? It wouldn't even be too much to give Zimmerman's first name.

I'm not the best to answer this, but it looks like a strawman argument. To any rational person the phrase ""Transport of Jews from Berlin, No Liquidation." Points to liquidation. It says "we're killing the occupants of all the transports, but not this one." Anyone can see that. So I don't know why anyone would use that phrase to support revisionism.

The other point is that had there been 6 million Jews killed, there would have been a mountain of paper evidence. The "clincher" wouldn't be a handwritten note written into a telephone log.

Wherever you live, figure out how many is 6 million people in your surrounding area. What amount of resources would it take to kill all those people. In other words, codewords, snippets of paper, a comment made by Eichman in the late 50's in South America. It's all ridiculous as evidence considering the mountain of paper evidence that would exist. Had their been code-words like sonderbehandlung (special handling) the allies would have been able to find 10,000 documents containing that word. Let me guess? They can produce about 5.

At Auschwitz they whoops! left a giant pile of human hair, a big pile of shoes (kids shoes and babie's shoes included), and a pile of glasses. Yet we're supposed to believe that they covered the paper trail so excellently that we have to find a little note in a telephone log?

Take a normal business with 35 employees, and how many emails come and go within the course of a week. Meanwhile for something as big as the extermination of 6 million we have to look at a handwritten note which just might cryptically imply something?
Last edited by Carto's Cutlass Supreme on Wed May 18, 2005 8:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Juan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 11:11 am
Location: Chile

Postby Juan » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 8:23 pm)

Is the translation OK?

Is the document legitimit?

They were supposed to use "code language", didn't they? like "transport from Berlin, no 'Sonderbehandlung'..."

Irving, more a system "agent-provocateur" than a true Revisionist.

semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 8:34 pm)

Thanks CCS and my apologies - the link is http://www.mossadist.by.ru/

It is the book that our board member Comrade Seinfeld and Hannover seem to be familiar with.

The quote is from chapter 8 (about Irving) and Zimmerman seems to be quoting Irving himself. Numbers 12 through 15 ought to be referenced in the sourcenotes (link at the bottom right of that page)

As to the rest of your post, I respectfully suggest it doesn't speak to the issue / question I've raised - that is does Irving inadvertently suggest Hitler knew of liquidations?

Regards

User avatar
comrade seinfeld
Member
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:27 pm

Postby comrade seinfeld » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 9:21 pm)

semblance7 wrote:Thanks CCS and my apologies - the link is http://www.mossadist.by.ru/

It is the book that our board member Comrade Seinfeld and Hannover seem to be familiar with.

The quote is from chapter 8 (about Irving) and Zimmerman seems to be quoting Irving himself. Numbers 12 through 15 ought to be referenced in the sourcenotes (link at the bottom right of that page)

As to the rest of your post, I respectfully suggest it doesn't speak to the issue / question I've raised - that is does Irving inadvertently suggest Hitler knew of liquidations?

Regards


At least part of the answer is at the link below, but you will have to thoroughly search Irving's website to find all references concerning the infamous Himmler memo (?). Look for Irving's asides to an interview of Richard Evans by a Phillip Adams of the Australian Broadcasting Commission.

http://fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Vicksell.html

semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 9:37 pm)

Thanks Comrade!

Haven't looked at Adams / Evans yet but what does Irving's seeming acknowlegement of liquidations infer?

I know that Irving's bent is toward Hitler's being kept in the dark by Himmler, Goebbels, etc. but what about liquidations that Himmler refers to? Does that suggest Jews were extirminated (gas or no)?

User avatar
comrade seinfeld
Member
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:27 pm

Postby comrade seinfeld » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 9:54 pm)

semblance7 wrote:Thanks Comrade!

Haven't looked at Adams / Evans yet but what does Irving's seeming acknowlegement of liquidations infer?

I know that Irving's bent is toward Hitler's being kept in the dark by Himmler, Goebbels, etc. but what about liquidations that Himmler refers to? Does that suggest Jews were extirminated (gas or no)?


There is no valid reason to believe that there was a Jewish extermination scheme, although, as Irving seems to believe, that were possibly rogue Nazi elements in the East who found it convenient to liquidate train transports of Jews, because they could not accommodate them, until, presumbably, this was stopped by Hitler and/or Himmler. There are no absolute answers to these historical questions, so you will have to study to try to reach definitive answers.

Subsequent to what I said there is the below link:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/book ... dams1.html

http://snipurl.com/ezu5


The relevant quote by Irving is the below:

'THE statement that I tried during the trial to suggest that there was an "e" at the end of Himmler's word Judentransport is an untruth by Professor Evans (or perhaps a lapse of memory), as study of the trial transcripts clearly shows. Consequently I did not have to "retract" it when "shown the original document". He and his team had the original document from me (no other historian had bothered to read let alone transcribe Himmler's telephone log) and the whole page was reproduced in every edition of my Hitler biography as a facsimile illustration, which is where he had it from. What I did point out was that in the absence of collateral evidence about this one episode, the German word Transport can equally well refer to both a transport of Jews, or transportation of Jews.'

semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 10:14 pm)

Comrade,

Surely we musn't consider Himmler & Heydrich 'rogue elements' and I pose the question still - does liquidation (per Himmler) equate with extermination?

Regards

Bergmann
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:29 pm

Postby Bergmann » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 10:35 pm)

Why would a handwritten entry in Himmler's telephone log infer that Hitler knew of liquidations?

Iggy
Member
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Illinois

Postby Iggy » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 10:43 pm)

Bergmann, we could just as easily ask, "Why wouldn't it?"

Bergmann
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:29 pm

Postby Bergmann » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 10:47 pm)

Iggy wrote:Bergmann, we could just as easily ask, "Why wouldn't it?"

True. On the other hand, the log entry did not mention anything about Hitler.

Seinfeld wrote: There is no valid reason to believe that there was a Jewish extermination scheme, although, as Irving seems to believe, that were possibly rogue Nazi elements in the East who found it convenient to liquidate train transports of Jews, because they could not accommodate them, until, presumbably, this was stopped by Hitler and/or Himmler. There are no absolute answers to these historical questions, so you will have to study to try to reach definitive answers.

There were also numerous pogroms in the Baltic states by the locals, who were quite upset about the Soviet occupation and who blamed the Jews for it.
Himmler’s note may have referred to this.
Last edited by Bergmann on Wed May 18, 2005 10:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
comrade seinfeld
Member
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:27 pm

Postby comrade seinfeld » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 10:49 pm)

semblance7 wrote:Comrade,

Surely we musn't consider Himmler & Heydrich 'rogue elements' and I pose the question still - does liquidation (per Himmler) equate with extermination?

Regards


I don't wish to be rude to you, but you obviously know very little about the "Holocaust". Rather then expect everyone else to do your research for you, you should do more serious study of what both the exterminationists and revisionists have to say, both in terms of print and on the internet. Others in TRF will disagree with me but a rational revisionist perspective is enunciated by David Irving at his website. A good start would be to study the complete libel trial transcript at http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/index.html , which concerns Irving's defence against the charge of being a "Holocaust denier" by the Jewish lobby.

As regards your specific question, the absence of an official Jewish extermination program is not inconsistent with the liquidation of specific groups of Jews, which is mostly relevant to the Einsatzgruppen counter-insurgency against the Soviet partisans, as, in accordance with the Nazi anti-Semitic ideology, it was assumed that the Jews were inherently pro-Communist, and it was also more feasible to use Jews as hostages, rather than the Russian Slavs, who the Nazis courted as anti-Semitic allies. It must be remembered that the Nazis were ruthless totalitarians, as were the Stalinist Communists, who did not hesitate to kill anyone, whether Jewish or Slavic, who objectively helped the Nazis, whether they were forced to or not.

Iggy
Member
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Illinois

Postby Iggy » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 11:06 pm)

The Einsatzgruppen cannot fairly be said to be a "counter-insurgency" force, as they were sent in behind the Wehrmacht. Thus they were, at best, a preventive force.

kk
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 451
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 11:24 pm

Postby kk » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 11:15 pm)

For once Comrade , I'm in total agreement with you.

Most people outside the german occupied territories, have only the faintest
about the "Besatzung" years.

Try to explain this to the english, american, or australian people.

They think only the jews got the hammer, other people lived in harmony.
Just try to explain to them , that the Stalinist regime had almost more victims than
the whole WW2 alltogether.

Myths die hard.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9839
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed May 18, 2005 11:44 pm)

We've been over this note before. We do not know exactly who was aboard this train. Criminals? Those caught in sabotage activities? Communist agents? Without that knowledge we have nothing but the usual stretches of the imagination.

I see we're embarking on discussion on the Einsatzgruppen, there are plenty of threads already. Anybody wishing to discuss them should start new threads or post to existing ones. Fair warning, specifics and evidence will be demanded for politically correct claims.

Then I see comrade seinfeld falls for the standard demonization of the National Socialists, he presents nothing to substantiate it, never has.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests