Irving's 'holocaust' lite / but what '2.4 million document'?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Barrington James
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:26 pm

Postby Barrington James » 1 decade 2 years ago (Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:38 am)

What is a "Rudolph Hess"? Hess never changed his mind about Nazism nor the war with England. No Nazi wanted a war with England. Why would they? It made no sense that they would want to take on the strongest navy in the world and a country they greatly admired. They wanted to crush communism and expand German borders East.

Hess went went to England because he knew there was a large movement in England to stop the war. However he, like Hitler, greatly underestimated the power of Churchill and his Focus group to have their war. Churchill, as we all know, immediately threw him in jail in order that his war continue and that was the end of Hess. Irving, on the other hand, is suffering some sort of a Stockholm breakdown. Both stories are tragic.
You can fool too many of the people most of the time.

User avatar
Agrarian Reformer
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 11:16 pm

Postby Agrarian Reformer » 1 decade 2 years ago (Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:21 pm)

Yes, I know the story. I was alluding more to the amnesia he had pre-trial. David Irving seems to have forgotten that he has already rejected the gas chamber story on a number of occasions, and I wanna know if he's faking his amnesia, for tactical purposes.
"Anybody can make an atrocity film if they take corpses out of their graves and then show a tractor shoving them back in again." - Hermann Göring

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 2 years ago (Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:15 am)

This is how Irving as well as exterminationist propaganda "proves" to the average media consumer that the telegram is evidence of mass murder:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtOmQbBGWTg

(Clip from some British documentary)

I call it illusionism or fraud.

Jonathan Harrison
Member
Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:23 pm

Postby Jonathan Harrison » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 8:37 am)

Irving's meaning, as I understand it, is that there's no evidence that the Jews transported to the camps went anywhere else. We would expect to see evidence of onward transports or testimony that the Reinhard Jews were seen in other locations if they survived the camps. The Nazis claimed they were transit camps to the USSR yet there are no settlement records in the USSR. None of the hundreds of thousands of Jews who have migrated from the USSR to Israel since 1945 has been shown to have been in those camps.

Irving also knows that there are also numerous other documents showing
Several perpetrators admitted in the West German trials of the 1960's that Reinhard Camps were used to kill Jews.

Eichmann gave an interview to a friendly journalist in Argentina in 1957: no mention that the Reinhard camps were transit or labour camps. Surely that would have been his opportunity to expose a 'hoax'?

Irving's a historian so he puts this together and reaches the same logical deduction as other historians. Revisionists need to debunk all of the above, not just resort to ad hominems and a 'falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus' fallacy, if they wish to prove that he's wrong.

Jonathan Harrison
Member
Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:23 pm

Postby Jonathan Harrison » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:21 am)

To answer the other questions in the thread header:

1. Mass graves at Belzec were found by Kola. Revisionists have attacked Kola on false premises.

If there were mass graves at Belzec, they support the 1946 finding of graves at Treblinka.

Moreover, they show that the Nazis lied about Belzec being a transit camp.

2. A large number of witnesses (see above) mention vehicle exhaust. The witnesses who had closest access to the engine (e.g. Fuchs) say it was a benzine (petrol) engine.

3. The proof is the convergence of perpetrator testimony and the fact that there are Nazi documents showing that gassing technology was being developed, and the fact that the Nazis lied about 'transit camps' (see above) and the fact that there's no evidence that the Jews were transported elsewhere. The camps were also too small to hold all the Jews transported to them. Remember that Eichmann did not deny, even when a free man in 1957, that Jews were killed in these camps.

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1706
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Postby Moderator » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:27 am)

Jonathan Harrison,
Please do not put up outside links and say 'here it is'. We want the specifics as articulated by you. If you refer to documents then please show them. Support your assertions.
M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

Lupa
Member
Member
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:41 am

Postby Lupa » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 11:39 am)

Jonathan Harrison wrote:To answer the other questions in the thread header:

1. Mass graves at Belzec were found by Kola. Revisionists have attacked Kola on false premises.

If there were mass graves at Belzec, they support the 1946 finding of graves at Treblinka.


Did you see the series about the Reinhardt Camps at http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/
??

The arguments showed there for me are sound
Jonathan Harrison wrote:Moreover, they show that the Nazis lied about Belzec being a transit camp.

2. A large number of witnesses (see above) mention vehicle exhaust. The witnesses who had closest access to the engine (e.g. Fuchs) say it was a benzine (petrol) engine.


The main difference for an non expert witness between an petrol engine and a diesel engine is the sound. I am sure even you are able to hear the difference without searching for sparkplugs.

Jonathan Harrison wrote:3. The proof is the convergence of perpetrator testimony and the fact that there are Nazi documents showing that gassing technology was being developed, and the fact that the Nazis lied about 'transit camps' (see above) and the fact that there's no evidence that the Jews were transported elsewhere. The camps were also too small to hold all the Jews transported to them. Remember that Eichmann did not deny, even when a free man in 1957, that Jews were killed in these camps.


You are right , the nazis developed gassing technology for an efficient fight against Typhus .

Jonathan Harrison
Member
Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:23 pm

Postby Jonathan Harrison » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 11:52 am)

Did you see the series about the Reinhardt Camps at http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/


Will the moderator be warning this poster for posting a link instead of putting the contents in his own words?

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1706
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Postby Moderator » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:04 pm)

Jonathan Harrison wrote:
Did you see the series about the Reinhardt Camps at http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/


Will the moderator be warning this poster for posting a link instead of putting the contents in his own words?

Yes.
Lupa, tell us why you find http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com compelling.

Posting links to outside sources must be accompanied by text explaining the specific significance and reasons.

M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

Lupa
Member
Member
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:41 am

Postby Lupa » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:17 pm)

Moderator wrote:
Jonathan Harrison wrote:
Did you see the series about the Reinhardt Camps at http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/


Will the moderator be warning this poster for posting a link instead of putting the contents in his own words?

Yes.
Lupa, tell us why you find http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com compelling.

Posting links to outside sources must be accompanied by text explaining the specific significance and reasons.

M1


OK , on that page you have a series of films with an exhaustive study about the Reinhardt Camps.
A strong part of the film is about the size of mass graves , the specific conditions, as is the freatic water level, and about the possible capacity to contain the alleged numbers of victims. The result is that the size of the places considered as "mass Graves" is not fit for the burial of the alleged numbers of victims.

8)

Lupa
Member
Member
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:41 am

Postby Lupa » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:40 pm)

For special interest are

episode 2

http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/v ... r_well.wmv

"On the map we see a water well surrounded by burial pits. The water well would have been contaminated. The storytellers didn't think of that."

In Treblinka we have for example a water well in close vecinity of the alleged mass graves , remember that the story tells that the victims where first buried and years later incinerated on improvised grills , not in crematoria. The vecinity of the water well makes the story nonsense.

episode 11

http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/v ... _space.wmv

"We use 3-D modeling to show that the burial space at Treblinka is too small. Way too small. The storytellers figured a few large pits would suffice for 700,000 bodies." (Treblinka)

episode 12

http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/v ... _space.wmv

"It's too small also, and we use the Rose Bowl Stadium during the Rose Bowl Game to show that. Watch episode 11 first or this chapter won't make sense." (Belzec)

episode 13

http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/v ... _space.wmv

"Let's put it this way, you can't bury the equivalent to the stadium spectators of the Rose Bowl Game in two pits not much bigger than the chicken coop, and then sentence someone to life imprisonment based on "the evidence." Something just isn't right."(Sobibor)

episode 16

http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/v ... g_deep.wmv

"At Sobibor they tried to dig an escape tunnel. They could only dig down 5 feet because they said there was a danger of striking water past that. One problem the storytellers forgot about: the burial pits are described as 23 feet deep." (Sobibor freatic water level)

8)

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10066
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:57 pm)

Jonathan Harrison wrote:Irving's meaning, as I understand it, is that there's no evidence that the Jews transported to the camps went anywhere else. We would expect to see evidence of onward transports or testimony that the Reinhard Jews were seen in other locations if they survived the camps. The Nazis claimed they were transit camps to the USSR yet there are no settlement records in the USSR. None of the hundreds of thousands of Jews who have migrated from the USSR to Israel since 1945 has been shown to have been in those camps.

Irving also knows that there are also numerous other documents showing
Several perpetrators admitted in the West German trials of the 1960's that Reinhard Camps were used to kill Jews.

Eichmann gave an interview to a friendly journalist in Argentina in 1957: no mention that the Reinhard camps were transit or labour camps. Surely that would have been his opportunity to expose a 'hoax'?

Irving's a historian so he puts this together and reaches the same logical deduction as other historians. Revisionists need to debunk all of the above, not just resort to ad hominems and a 'falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus' fallacy, if they wish to prove that he's wrong.

Oh please, Harrison has been refuted here:

'Harrison's Hoopla: Fallacies of a Believer'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=4566

Harrison cannot show us a single mass grave excavation which supports his assertions. Show us, not make claims of.

Harison cannot produce complete cross examination records of these show trials he refers to, nor can he produce the complete trials transcripts. Remember, there were German 'confessions' to the Katyn massacre perpetrated by the Soviets.

- 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 2 years ago (Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:20 pm)

Wahrheit shreds Harrison pretty good in the thread Hannover links to.
A while ago he demolished Roberto as well. Keep up the good work Wahrheit!
Just a few additional remarks on Harrison's point 1.

To say the least, JH seems to have a big problem with basic logic.
The issue is not whether Kola found graves at Belzec. No Revisionist scholar I know
of denies people died at Belzec or Treblinka. Of course they did and so there must
be graves.
The issue is to quantify this thing.
It makes a lot of difference if there are, say, a few hundred or even a few
thousand bodies buried in an "extermination" camp or hundreds of thousands.
Iow, Kola needed to find human remains and graves of an order of magnitude of around
600.000 at Belzec to shore up the extermination Myth. The little he claims to have
found supports the Revisionist position that there was no extermination at Belzec,
but that some people died of disease and exhaustion.

Kola's expedition can hardly be considered to be a serious study anyway.
It was at best a joke, at worst a complete fraud.
I seem to remember Harrison trying to justify Kola not exhuming the graves on
religious grounds in another thread.
That's really a lame excuse, as AsMarques noted in another thread, re the
"investigations" of father Desbois in the Ukraine:

"How interesting that allegedly Jewish skeletons in an intact state can be dug up with no big problem if they are in the single digit figure, but can under no circumstance, allegedly for religious reasons, suffer the slightest archeological
disturbance if they are in the tens (or, in the so-called extermination camps, hundreds) of thousands figure and reduced to smaller burnt bits in all those jumbo-sized
dumping grounds with precise locations.
Should be feasible in the treblink of an eye, so to speak, but no, it's much better to go about looking for spent bullet cartridges all over a continent-sized battlefield... "


As for Treblinka, from August 1944 to late 1945 the Soviets and Communist Poles found
very little there as well.

Reinhard
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:30 pm

Postby Reinhard » 1 decade 2 years ago (Mon Jan 07, 2008 12:26 pm)

It seems that David Irving has found a new friend:

David Irving wrote:Documents on the Death of Adolf Hitler

Posted Saturday, December 22, 2007
Here's a quick translation of a news item from a Russian news site. To mark the 90th anniversary of the Security Service (called NKVD, KGB, FSS at different times of its existence), the Service revealed several documents detailing the ultimate fate of Hitler's remains. Translation by Sergei Romanov [...]

Source: http://fpp.co.uk/Hitler/death/FSS_release_211207.html



For this gentleman see e.g.:
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/07/learn-english-claudia.html

This old story had been presented by the Soviet-Jewish liar, communist disinformant, looter and thief Lew Besymenski 15 ½ years ago to the German news magazine Der Spiegel (No. 30/1992 from 20.07.1992, pp. 110 - 116).

German historian and Hitler-expert Anton Joachimsthaler has refuted this nonsense in his book Hitlers Ende. Legenden und Dokumente [Hitler's End. Legends and Documents], Augsburg 1998 [see e.g. pages 260/261, 270/271, 312/313, 356 - 359].

theTRUTH
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 9:50 pm

Postby theTRUTH » 1 decade 2 years ago (Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:13 am)

To say he's "80% sure" the document's genuine, Irving's either suffering from early dimentia or he's talking in code to his followers and to revisionists telling them he doesn't believe what he's saying about 2.4 million killed in the 3 camps, but is adopting this theory to attract media attention and thereby increase donations?

Historians including Irving sometimes say they're "99% sure" a document's genuine, meaning they are almost positive but there's a very small chance it may be forged, but I've never heard Irving or any other historian say they're "80% sure" as if they would like to believe the document's genuine, but are moderately suspicious it's a fake because of clues they've uncovered. How do we determine if Irving's had massive brain cell loss, or is talking in code like the WW2 spies he sometimes included in his writings?
"Israel must invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the methods of provocation..." Moshe Sharett, Israeli's Foreign Minister ('48-'54), & Prime Minister ('54-'56).


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests