Absurd Holocaust Photographs

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10034
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sat Jan 14, 2006 5:02 pm)

Vallon:
Jews were told to wear a yellow STAR, not a rectangle.

Then you quoted Hilberg:
Testimony by Reinhard Wiener (in the German navy at the time), December 15, 1969, in the case against Erhard Grauel (Einsatzkommando 2) before a Hannover Court, 2 Js 261/60.
Wiener, who made a short clandestine film of these shootings, saw about two hundred spectators at the site.

TWO HUNDRED SPECTATORS! And we're to believe it that the Germans would allow these 200 to witness to their alleged war crime, and then allow some guy to walk around filming it. There's nothing to indicate this was "clandestine". Why would the man with a camera risk court martial anyway? What's to hide if 200 spectators are hanging out? This dog don't hunt.

Again, where's the alleged Liepaja thousands, Vallon?

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

Vallon
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 3:55 pm

Postby Vallon » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sat Jan 14, 2006 5:41 pm)

Hannover wrote:Vallon:
Jews were told to wear a yellow STAR, not a rectangle.

That is a matter of translation, it seems. Ezergailis translates the decree as follows:
As previously noted, on July 5, Brückner issued the first comprehensive anti-Jewish edict, consisting of numerous provisions:
1. All Jews to wear an easily recognizable yellow marking on the back and the chest [a marking] that is not smaller than ten cm. by ten cm.
http://www.liepajajews.org/EZERG.PDF

As Claudia Rothenbach translated, the German holocaust movie database describes these rectangles as white. But in a black-and-white movie, one cannot really see the difference with yellow.

These men were marked the way Jews in Liepaja had to be marked according to Brückner's decree. They must have been Jews.

Then you quoted Hilberg:
Testimony by Reinhard Wiener (in the German navy at the time), December 15, 1969, in the case against Erhard Grauel (Einsatzkommando 2) before a Hannover Court, 2 Js 261/60.
Wiener, who made a short clandestine film of these shootings, saw about two hundred spectators at the site.

TWO HUNDRED SPECTATORS! And we're to believe it that the Germans would allow these 200 to witness to their alleged war crime, and then allow some guy to walk around filming it. There's nothing to indicate this was "clandestine". Why would the man with a camera risk court martial anyway? What's to hide if 200 spectators are hanging out? This dog don't hunt.

Indeed, Wiener was filming openly, standing in the crowd, with people nearby looking into the lens. It was only later on that this film became "clandestine". Wiener said that he showed this film to six comrades at the submarine school in sworn secrecy.
Again, where's the alleged Liepaja thousands, Vallon?
Ezergailis also writes about that. It was in a different place, and several months after the event that Wiener filmed.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10034
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sat Jan 14, 2006 7:59 pm)

Vallon says:
That is a matter of translation, it seems. Ezergailis translates the decree as follows:
Quote:
As previously noted, on July 5, Brückner issued the first comprehensive anti-Jewish edict, consisting of numerous provisions:
1. All Jews to wear an easily recognizable yellow marking on the back and the chest [a marking] that is not smaller than ten cm. by ten cm.

Well, not hardly. That is just his spin.

As was posted:
On 5 July 1941, in the pages of the Latvian newspaper Kurzemes Vards, the local military governor published a list of restrictions in effect for the Jews of Libau:

(1) All Jewish men, women and children are required to wear a yellow star on their chest and back. The minimal size of the star is ten centimeters by ten centimeters.

http://www.jewishgen.org/yizkor/Pinkas_ ... 00170.html

No mention of Jews and rectangles except from the 'holocau$t' Industry's Ezergailis. We're seeing another problem of keeping the stories straight for the liars.

And as we can read, the German archives quote from ClaudiaRothenbach does NOT describe these men with rectangles as being Jews. And as I said, that doesn't mean Jews weren't shot for terrorism. They were, they dominated the illegal partisans/terrorists ranks.

Then Vallon says:
Indeed, Wiener was filming openly, standing in the crowd, with people nearby looking into the lens. It was only later on that this film became "clandestine". Wiener said that he showed this film to six comrades at the submarine school in sworn secrecy.

Later it became "clandestine" Huh? And what about the TWO HUNDRED people in attendance who were allowed to witness an alleged 'war crime'?
And what would have happened to Wiener if he hadn't told his masters whay they wanted to hear? Shall we talk about how torture and 'methods of persuassion' were used on Germans after war in order to get certain desired statements?

And when I asked "where's the alleged Liepaja thousands?" He replies:
Ezergailis also writes about that. It was in a different place, and several months after the event that Wiener filmed.

Ezergailis may make assertions, but just like the other aspects of the 'holocaust' storyline, cannot show evidence for it. Why should we believe this Ezergailis? And now, since this alleged Liepjada incident is admittedly not the one depicted in this film, we can only have a few executions of what is most likely terrorists and there was obviously no attempt to conceal the execution action by the Germans.

TWO HUNDRED people in attendance and a guy running around with a camera, yet it's called "clandestine". Laughable. That's the absurd 'holocau$t'.

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

grenadier
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 9:07 am

Postby grenadier » 1 decade 4 years ago (Mon Jan 16, 2006 11:12 am)

PLAYWRIGHT wrote:
Most likely these are local communists and communist collaboraters being shot, something that, if true, I applaud.

Vallon replied:
Also that would be a war crime.


That really depends on the context. For instance,
reprisal shootings were only forbidden in the
Geneva convention of August of 1949. It is good
to remember that even after that some still
used reprisals as a tactic
such as the french in the 50s in Indochina and in
the 60's in Algeria.

Playright:
Liepaja, being a naval base, was under Kriegsmarine command, and from it's perimeter gate nothing could happen there without navy authority. I can't imagine the SS using it for summary executions. First, because they'd need navy permission and cooperation, which they would never get, Grandadmiral Erich Raeder would never have let them on his turf for an instant;


It seems like a fair objection but I am not so
sure. The only agency which was admitted to
forward areas on the eastern front was precisely
the RSHA, which set up the Einsatzgruppen.
Plus, the uniforms of the officers and soldiers
conducting the executions are not those of the navy.
It is also possible to see local auxiliaries
wearing their armbands. I think this could be
a kommando of Einsatzgruppe A.


Vallon:
These men were marked the way Jews in Liepaja had to be marked according to Brückner's decree.
They must have been Jews.


I suppose there is a good chance they are jews.
Revisionist researchers dont deny jews were shot
as hostages or in reprisals, probably more often than
non-jews. It is possible as well, that the patches may
have a different significance as other posters have mentioned.

Hannover wrote:
Then we must look at the number alleged in the bizarre Liepaja stories; thousands at time are alleged, not the few shown in this film.

Vallon replied:
The thousands (including women and children) were killed later, in the winter.


Not really Vallon. According to Einsatzgruppe A' reports,
dozens of thousands of jews had already been killed
by October 1941. Hilberg claims the first
killing sweep began in August 41 and lasted until
December. Personally, I have no faith in those strange
Einsatzgruppen reports.


Playright:
The execution of Jews, if they were Jews, on the beach of Liepaja, is no proof of a state policy of extermination, any more than the mass hanging of Lakota Indians in Minnesota (VERY well documented with photographs) was proof of a policy of extermination there. Repression, yes. Extermination, no.


That is the way I feel about this too. The footage
reminded me of Paget's objections that the
einsatzgruppen could have killed the gigantic
numbers claimed in the reports. We see how the
trucks transport only a few people
each time. I believe the shootings conducted
by the germans in the east were
like the ones shown in this film, and that is the
reason why the soviets failed to find any
impressive mass graves.
I think it is important to remember that the minister
of the Reich for the occupied eastern territories,
A.Rosenberg, mentioned in the Brown portfolio
of June 1941, the need for different measures
for different classes of jews.
He says that communist jews, those that had moved
to the baltic countries and others places, after soviet
invasions, should be removed by severe measures.
The vast majority of the soviet jews, were to be registered.

One last comment about the film;
Has anyone ever seen condemned men so eager
to be executed? These guys actually
run towards the execution trench. No hesitation,
anxiety, nothing, just lets get it over with. I am
not suggesting the movie is not authentic or that
the prisoners should have tried to escape(they are
heavily outnumbered) but their eagerness to be shot
struck me as peculiar.

User avatar
ASMarques
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:47 pm

Postby ASMarques » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:08 am)

The one fact that everybody seems to be leaving out of the discussion (*) is the use that has been made of the Libau/Liepaja images, together with those from a couple of equally true mass killings by the Germans and/or their allies in Ukraine.

Those photos (or film stills) have been put to intensive use by falsely locating them in dozens of different places, various concentration camps, etc. Each time, they are cropped or falsified in ways that make it difficult for ordinary people with no great information to link them to others in the same series. Same for source attributions. In French publications, for instance, specially from the 60s to the 80s, the documental sources were usually designated as, say, "Photo X" or some such unknown unverifiable origin (actually I'm taking this "Photo X" thing from a well-known popular history magazine of the period). The level of falsification has always been breathtaking.

And to all that, one still has to add the photos of Soviet atrocities passed as German, etc. Germans are no more angelic in war than others, but no people on earth has ever been more vilified by war propaganda, that's for sure.

It seems quite clear to me, from the uses those image have been put to, that their dissemination and the constant care not to disclose their true dates & locations, point to a well concerted and long standing effort from well hidden disinformation centers.
___________

(*) Sorry if I'm wrong. I've been rather busy lately and I've been doing only some fast reading of the new posts.

User avatar
Markion
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:53 pm

Postby Markion » 1 decade 4 years ago (Wed Feb 15, 2006 9:31 am)

Image

From www.remember.org/image/400.gif
Reads: A mother and children on their way to the gas chambers. Source: Dachau Memorial Museum.

Let me add: Probably on the way to Dachau's Gas chamber...

I wonder why they did not take their shoes off. I mean, where are all those shoes in ausschwitz supposed to come from, if not they givetheir share?
Here I stand. I can do nothing else. God help me! Amen. - Martin Luther

Freeman
Member
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 3:47 pm

Postby Freeman » 1 decade 4 years ago (Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:06 pm)

With regard to retouched photos, you should look for the book:

Photo Fakery: The History and Techniques of Photographic Deception and Manipulation by Dino A. Brugioni.

Brugioni was a founder of the CIA's National Photographic Interpretation Center. Brugioni cites many photo fakery techniques and provides numerous examples.

Interestingly Brugioni was also one of the two gentlemen who "discovered" World War II aerial photos of Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1978.

Brugioni shows some of these photos which he claims are not fakes. His book however will provide you with a good understanding of how fakes are done and even provide enough understanding to evaluate the Auschwitz pics for yourself.

Laurentz Dahl
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 981
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Somewhere in Europe

Postby Laurentz Dahl » 1 decade 4 years ago (Fri Feb 17, 2006 4:50 am)

Freeman wrote:Brugioni shows some of these photos which he claims are not fakes. His book however will provide you with a good understanding of how fakes are done and even provide enough understanding to evaluate the Auschwitz pics for yourself.


I have yet to read Brugioni's book, but isn't it correct that the Auschwitz air photos are the only ones in the book that are not presented as fakes? One may speculate as to why Mr Brugioni would choose exactly those photos, when he could have chosen any non-fake photographs. :roll:


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests