chim-pa wrote:Actually I made comments on the basis of his work Origins of the Final Solution, not on his interview, which does not include enough details for proper discussion. Interview was one example of main stream historians dealing with the case of the German Jews as an exception.
But you presented here his interview dealing with murdering, not with deportations, please, stick with it. If interview does not include enough details, then you cannot use it I think, but anyway, the part in question is wrong and fictional.
chim-pa wrote:They are from one single phone conversation, so assuming they are not connected, is something I think needs verified, not the other way around. Himmler's message sent next day to Jeckeln could of course be related to this, in it H. forbids any unauthorized actions and asks Jeckeln to meet him.
This is not assumption, this is clear from the document. Is up to you to show connections to demonstrate that they are connected.
chim-pa wrote:I'm sorry, but I do not see that ruling out liquidations during the war.
I am not sure if I can explain it even more simpler, but i am going to try it.
If 11 milion Jews still presented in Europe must be concentrated and after some time after the war they will receive some island, maybe Madagascar, then is obvious that the possibility or intention to exterminate them during the war is ruled out otherwise there would not have been 11 milion Jews after the war. If they wanted to exterminate them after the war, this passage would not have been there at all.
If defeat of Allies in the war will result in personal liquidation of Jews as opposed to their victory, then is clear that their victory will not result in their personal liquidation, but if they wanted to exterminate them during the war or if they already exterminated them during the war, then the Jews will be liquidated no matter if they are going to win the war or not, thus this part is nonsense from the point of holocaust logic. Secondly, why he mentioned that Jews are determined to bring victory in this war otherwise they will be personally liquidated if he already knew that there is only one best possibility - liquidation during the war - thus their victory or success is clearly not possible, only defeat, thus again nonsensical. Thirdly, if they will be exterminated during the war, then victory for the Germany will not result in personal liquidation of Jews, they will be already liquidated.
So as I said, these passages don´t have anything with alleged extermination, they perfectly fit evacuation and complete removal from Europe as stated by him. Thus obviously - not physically liquidated/murdered, not during the war, not after the war.
chim-pa wrote:I just took one example. Tell me your opinion of that, if you disagree.
But I expect to refute the whole point if you disagree, not only one example related only to Jews from France which does not change the validity of my point. You are claiming, that alleged extermination policy was not implemented and you based i on a few transports of Jews from France in Auschwitz. But my point is of course based on completely different and much larger evidence from official historiography. Now your case of Auschwitz.
-Firstly, Danuta Czech reports gassings in alleged Bunker 1, and gassings in Krematorium I, already provided. Is also claimed that in this period Auschwitz was chosen as an extermination site because of a new planned Krematorium II which served as a catalyst.
As pointed out by Mattogno, according to Rudolf Höss, this took place already in the summer of 1941, and for this task, he requested new Krematoria, they were adapted for genocidal purposes and for the final solution of the Jewish question and after approval from Himmler they began construction, before the completion, they erected provisional gas chambers, this took place in 1941 or in early 1942 since new Krematoria were according to him planned to be completed in 1942.
Thus he refutes you completely.
-Secondly, your claim about start of selection for Jews from France dated "only" in or from August is refuted by Danuta Czech, for example, on July 21 1942, 375 Jews from Drancy are killed in the gas chambers after selection.
i.e. 17 days after the official start of selection on the unloading ramp 
and till this date the peoples were allegedly gassed without the selection on the ramp or they were registered in the camp, thus gassing without selection is even worse, right? If the Jews from France were not allegedly gassed before this official start has nothing to do with implementation as the other Jews were allegedly gassed upon arrival according to Czech. And how many transports from France came to the Auschwitz during these 17 days between July 4 and July 21? Only one single transport with Jews from France on July 19, 1942, 809 men and 119 women.
Thus after the selection officially started on July 4, only one transport with Jews from France was registered in the camp, the next transport was immediately affected by selections and people were gassed. Your point is thus flawed and you based it on one single transport accepted to camp without alleged gassing or selection.
In the first six months of 1942 I counted only five transports (correct me if i am wrong) which reached Auschwitz from France (March 26, June 7, June 24, June 27, June 30), thus only one single transport again reached Auschwitz in the period in question and you based conclusions on it, i.e. - transport was not selected or gassed = alleged policy of extermination not implemented - while ignoring that allegedly thousands of Jews from other places were gassed upon arrival and while ignoring alleged ongoing extermination in alleged pure extermination camps.
-Thirdly, your case of Jews from France is somehow irrelevant as alleged gassings took place without selection (or with selection in hospital) in the case of others so you only picked up Jews from France while you ignored the others.
- Fourthly, is really necessary to provide you with countless examples when prisoners were not allegedly selected or gassed at all even during the most alleged frenetic gassing activity in summer of 1944 when the alleged policy was implemented (even according to you I guess) to prove that when some prisoner was registered in Auschwitz - this does not mean that alleged extermination policy was not implemented according to historiography?
Official historiography about this myth is against you, according to it, alleged extermination was almost in full swing in the period in question, i.e. period related to passages from diary.
Thus my question again:Can you tell me what means full implementation if not construction of 4 out of 4 alleged pure extermination camps, ongoing extermination in 3 out of 4 alleged pure extermination camps + alleged ongoing extermination and preparations in Auschwitz?
Jean-Claude Pressac, Les crématoires d’Auschwitz. La machinerie du meurtre de masse
, CNRS Editions, Paris, 1993, p. 53f.; Jean-Claude Pressac Die Krematorien von Auschwitz. Die Technik des Massenmordes
, R. Piper GmbH & Co. KG, Munchen 1994, second edition 1995, p. 67.
Testimony of Rudolf Höss, April 1, 1946, 1430 to 1730 by Mr. Sender Jaari and Lt. Whitney Harris, p. 26. In: John Mendelsohn, Donald S. Detwiler, eds. The Holocaust: Selected Documents in Eighteen Volumes. Garland, New York and London, 1982, vol. 12.
Danuta Czech, Auschwitz Chronicle 1939-1945
, Henry Holt and Company, New York, 1990, p. 201.Ibid.,
p. 200.; Another transport is reported on July 8, but this transport is consisted from Jews and non-Jews, numbers for these groups are not specified by Czech, thus irrelevant as we are dealing only with Jews.