Himmler's so called "Extermination of Jews" speech

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
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Lamprecht » 1 decade 2 months ago (Tue Sep 22, 2009 5:38 pm)

Wahrheit:
Lamprecht, so is the speech authentic Himmler, or not?
That's the million dollar question in my opinion.
I am not entirely sure if this transcript was from Himmler's Posen speech, but I think it's most likely that it is not authentic.

If not, what is the positive evidence that we have to suggest the tape/speech was forged?
Please see my above post and Hannover's post in this thread as well.

You are throwing things in very different directions (another Himmler speech other than Posen 4.10.43, transcript for non-Himmler speech, forgery, etc.).
I'm giving possibilities, the allies were notorious for covering up some things they rather not be publicized, exterminationists are notorious for not proving things they claim (Voice authentication software anyone?), the tape itself has a questionable history, and the only witness to the voice we have heard is not even sure it's Himmler speaking! He said Himmler "did not speak about the Ausrottung of the Jews" in the meeting!
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

Wahrheit
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:42 pm

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Wahrheit » 1 decade 2 months ago (Tue Sep 22, 2009 6:25 pm)

Lamprecht wrote:Wahrheit:
Lamprecht, so is the speech authentic Himmler, or not?
That's the million dollar question in my opinion.
I am not entirely sure if this transcript was from Himmler's Posen speech, but I think it's most likely that it is not authentic.


I disagree that it could be declared "the million dollar question", perhaps one for $64,000 instead.

:D

Again, "mainstream" revisionists seem to have no problem accepting the authenticity of the speech. I don't think this is a reasonable argument until proof is offered to support it.

If not, what is the positive evidence that we have to suggest the tape/speech was forged?
Please see my above post and Hannover's post in this thread as well.


I still see no evidence. I see insinuations (Yivo forged documents because it possibly was around said files), arguments of personal incredulity towards the speech and the recording ("secret" speech in front of large audience, and low-grade recorder technology), but no EVIDENCE.

I think the tape should be tested by voice identification software, but I think as it sits now, the evidence from this speech and around it's date strongly suggest that the speech did occur, and that something nasty about the 'Judenevakuiereng' was said. The strongest thing fraud-allegers can rely on is a post-war testimony by a defendant, on trial for his life (every reason to deny), and whose thoughts differed within minutes (not Himmler >>> maybe Himmler, but different speech). Keep in mind that Himmler was giving many speeches during the war to various audiences. Another case of problematic witness memory?

Goethe
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 3:41 am

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Goethe » 1 decade 2 months ago (Tue Sep 22, 2009 6:40 pm)

Wahrheit bizarrely said:
... but no EVIDENCE.
And he, nor anyone else, can show a single mass grave as alleged in the profitable tall tale called the 'Holocaust'. I also doubt he'll dare discuss the operation of the goofy 'gas chambers' of Auschwitz. How about some threads on those, Warheit.
"The coward threatens when he is safe".
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Lamprecht » 1 decade 2 months ago (Tue Sep 22, 2009 6:50 pm)

Wahrheit:
Again, "mainstream" revisionists seem to have no problem accepting the authenticity of the speech. I don't think this is a reasonable argument until proof is offered to support it.
Butz does not (Hoax of the 20th cent.). Mattogno thinks the authenticity is "Doubtful" ("My Banned Holocaust Interview").
That hardly matters.
Proof needs to be offered for you to believe it isn't authentic? Honestly? What makes you think it is? This:
Judge Powers: Well, I think that there is enough evidence here, prima facie, that the voice is the voice of Himmler to justify receiving the document in evidence. There is no evidence, however, that it was delivered at Poznan or any other particular place. The discs will be received in evidence as an indication of Himmler's general attitude.


Where is the evidence that it is Himmler's voice? The claim by Berger that it "Might be" his?
Hmmmm...
Do you know of any voice authentication procedures? No?
Hmmmm...

I still see no evidence. I see insinuations (Yivo forged documents because it possibly was around said files), arguments of personal incredulity towards the speech and the recording ("secret" speech in front of large audience, and low-grade recorder technology), but no EVIDENCE.
That's not the point. It was never proven that it was, indeed, Himmler's voice. The "Evidence" given by Powers is, at best, a statement that it MIGHT be Himmler's voice, and that it MIGHT have been at Posen and that the transcript MIGHT be accurate.
That's too many 'Might's for me, sorry.

I think the tape should be tested by voice identification software, but I think as it sits now, the evidence from this speech and around it's date strongly suggest that the speech did occur, and that something nasty about the 'Judenevakuiereng' was said.
Do you have anything around this date where Himmler or another Nazi official claimed an "Extermination of Jews" or something similar?


The strongest thing fraud-allegers can rely on is a post-war testimony by a defendant, on trial for his life (every reason to deny), and whose thoughts differed within minutes (not Himmler >>> maybe Himmler, but different speech). Keep in mind that Himmler was giving many speeches during the war to various audiences. Another case of problematic witness memory?
Oh of course, it's so believable when we have such evidence as:
an unsigned transcript of
an unauthenticated voice recording
in primitive "Nadeltontechnologie"(Read the quote portion of Hannovers post)
that was magically 'found' in Rosenberg's files.

Rosenberg was not questioned about this specific transcript's authenticity, but when questioned about 3428-PS he denied connection to it.


I still can't see a reason why I should believe it to be authentic. Because some revisionists do? Because a judge said it?
Come on...
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1665
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Moderator » 1 decade 2 months ago (Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:35 pm)

Wahrheit:
Your deleted post is not specific to the topic in question. We've saved it and can send it to you if you want it.
M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Lamprecht » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:59 am)

Wahrheit attempted to PM me but I cannot read PM's.

So Wahrheit, just fix your post and repost it.
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

Wahrheit
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:42 pm

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Wahrheit » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 24, 2009 12:20 pm)

Lamprecht wrote:Wahrheit attempted to PM me but I cannot read PM's.

So Wahrheit, just fix your post and repost it.


Lamprecht, I am in contact with the Moderator about the post.

I also sent an email to your address, which came up as Lamprecht @ hushi.au, put together of course (don't want to unintentionally send you spam).

User avatar
Webmaster
Administration
Administration
Posts: 409
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Webmaster » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 24, 2009 7:59 pm)

Lamprecht wrote:Wahrheit attempted to PM me but I cannot read PM's.

So Wahrheit, just fix your post and repost it.


Your permissions were screwed up. You can read and send PM's now. Sorry about that.
Webmaster

User avatar
Pappy Yokum
Member
Member
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 10:03 pm

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Pappy Yokum » 1 decade 2 weeks ago (Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:17 pm)

I agree with Hanover's points too. He wrote most of what I was going to write.

Saying something is not the same as doing something. A speech is a speech. The question is can what Himmler says in the speech be verified by the actions in the real world.

The date of the speech is supposed to be October 04, 1943.

What do we know was happening at that time with regard to the Jews?

Seven months before, in March, Himmler was given Korherr's report which stated 1.8 million Jews had been evacuated to the East. The numbers in the report were the statistics for the deportation of Jews to the East to the end of 1942. Korherr's report indicates the evacuated Jews were still alive and had simply been resettled.

It is interesting that the translation provided in the video of the Himmler speech audio puts "evacuation" in ironic quotes, but doesn't put "extermination" in any quotes. I wonder how they knew to do that from just listening to the speech.

Let us assume for argument sake that the speech is authentic and that Himmler gave the speech when and where alleged and this is a recording of it. Otherwise there is not point in discussing it. We will not, however, assume Judenevakuierung had ironic quotes around it.

If this is true, then the extermination word should have had the quotes instead.

Himmler references the Nazi myth of the Jewish stab in the back of World War I when he states, that given the bombing of Germany, if Jews were still present, they would be agitating in opposition to the German war effort. He states the deportation of Jews was difficult, but necessary.

The two phrases Himmler uses which are questionable are "to kill this people who would kill us" [diese Volke, das uns umbringen wollte umzubringen] and "the extermination of the Jewish people" [die Ausrottung die juedischen Volkes]

If one is to hang the Holocaust on these two phrases, then we are really talking about grasping at straws to tread water.

The Nazis often used this sort of rhetoric, but it was not understood to mean the physical murder of Jews, but the destruction of Jewish influence and political power.

Himmler didn't survive British custody to testify at the IMT, but Alfred Rosenberg did. While on the stand, he was confronted by the prosecution about things he had written about the Jews, including his use of the word "Ausrottung".
Here is the testimony. Note that some of phraseology used by Himmler is used here.

MR. DODD: Well then, perhaps we can help you on that. I will ask you be
shown Document 1517-PS. It becomes Exhibit USA-82.

[Document 1517-PS was submitted to the defendant.]

Now this is also a memorandum of yours written by you about a
discussion you had with Hitler on 12/14/1941, and it is quite clear
from the first paragraph that you and Hitler were discussing a speech
which you were to deliver in the Sportpalast in Berlin, and if you will
look at the second paragraph, you will find these words:

"I remarked on the Jewish question that the comments about the New York
Jews must perhaps be changed somewhat after the conclusion (of matters
in the East). I took the standpoint not to speak of the extermination
(Ausrottung) of Jewry.
The Fuehrer affirmed this view and said that
they had laid the burden of war on us and that they had brought the
destruction; it is no wonder if the results would strike them first."

Now, you have indicated that you have some difficulty with the meaning
of that word, and I am going to ask you about the word "Ausrottung." I
am going to ask that you be show you are familiar with the standard
German-English dictionary, Cassell's I suppose, are you? Do you know
this word, ever heard of it?

ROSENBERG: No.

MR. DODD: This is something you will be interested in. Will you look up
and read out to the Tribunal what the definition of "Ausrottung" is?

ROSENBERG: I do not need a foreign dictionary in order to explain the
various meanings "Ausrottung" may have in the German language. One can
exterminate an idea, an economic system a social order, and as a final
consequence, also a group of human beings, certainly.
Those are the
many possibilities which are contained in that word. For that I do not
need an English-German dictionary. Translations from German into
English are so often wrong-and just as in that last document you have
submitted to me, I heard again the translation of "Herrenrasse." In the
document itself "Herrenrasse" is not even mentioned; however, there is
the term "en fallacious Herrenmenschentum" (a false master mankind).
Apparently everything is translated here in another sense.


Personally, I think Himmler was being rhetorical when he talked of the extermination of the Jews and killing the people who would kill us. This is only evidence of an extermination program if the evidence for it is very difficult to find. Pulling two sentences out of a two hour speech smacks of desperation. If we are to believe Himmler here, why not believe him elsewhere when he said the Jews weren't being murdered?

Ilikerealhistory
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:50 pm

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Ilikerealhistory » 1 decade 2 weeks ago (Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:32 pm)

Pappy Yokum wrote:
Himmler references the Nazi myth of the Jewish stab in the back of World War I when he states, that given the bombing of Germany, if Jews were still present, they would be agitating in opposition to the German war effort. He states the deportation of Jews was difficult, but necessary.




Does Himmler say "myth," or are you injecting your opinion?

Have you read Benjamin Freedman's speech? http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/freedman.htm
Last edited by Ilikerealhistory on Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

disillusioned
Member
Member
Posts: 64
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 7:19 am

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby disillusioned » 1 decade 2 weeks ago (Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:38 pm)

It is most certainly rhetorical in nature. Hitler used the word in public speeches, I think as early as 1939. Public speeches! I said somewhere here before, and I'll say it again. It doesn't matter what the word means, either way it actually helps revisionism. If it means exterminate (literally), then why was it used publicly by leading Nazi figures in speeches? Clearly it was used figuratively. Which means it can be used figuratively even in a "secret" meeting where someone records the conversations and takes notes... Then does a horrible job keeping them secret.

User avatar
Pappy Yokum
Member
Member
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 10:03 pm

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Pappy Yokum » 1 decade 2 weeks ago (Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:16 pm)

Ilikerealhistory wrote:
Pappy Yokum wrote:
Himmler references the Nazi myth of the Jewish stab in the back of World War I when he states, that given the bombing of Germany, if Jews were still present, they would be agitating in opposition to the German war effort. He states the deportation of Jews was difficult, but necessary.




Does Himmler say "myth," or are you injecting your opinion?

Have you read Benjamin Freedman's speech? http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/freedman.htm


HImmler doesn't talk about the "stab in the back" directly in this speech, as far as I know, he only makes reference to it. I am sure his audience understands what he means. I don't believe that people who aren't that familiar with Nazi politics would understand that.
As far as my use of the term "myth," what I mean is a story used as a political or religious cultural focus. A myth can be literally true or it can merely be allegorical. The idea is the myth teaches a deeper lesson. An example of what I mean when I use the term "myth" is how Alfred Rosenberg used it in the title of his book "The Myth of the 20th Century." This derived from Spengler's idea that civilizations derive their spirits from a central myth that members of the culture share. The Nazis had myths they shared just like the Communists and just about every political and religious group. I don't mean the term here in the way you seem to think I mean it. A myth is not necessarily something void of truth. As an aside, it took me a long time to figure out Arthur Butz was playing on the title of Rosenberg's book when he called his work "The Hoax of the 20th Century." That is probably because I read "The Hoax" years before I read "The Myth."
And, yes, I am familiar with Benjamin Freedman's speech.

User avatar
Pappy Yokum
Member
Member
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 10:03 pm

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby Pappy Yokum » 1 decade 2 weeks ago (Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:39 pm)

disillusioned wrote:It is most certainly rhetorical in nature. Hitler used the word in public speeches, I think as early as 1939. Public speeches! I said somewhere here before, and I'll say it again. It doesn't matter what the word means, either way it actually helps revisionism. If it means exterminate (literally), then why was it used publicly by leading Nazi figures in speeches? Clearly it was used figuratively. Which means it can be used figuratively even in a "secret" meeting where someone records the conversations and takes notes... Then does a horrible job keeping them secret.


I totally agree. The Nazis used this sort of phraseology the whole time. The story is Himmler's Posnen speech was secret, as far as the Jews are concerned, there is nothing new there. At one time I thought the Nazis used the terms "Final Solution" and "Jewish Evacuation" and "Ausrottung"/extermination all interchangeably, but I am not sure that is the case anymore. I now understand the Nazis meant something different by the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question". The evacuation to the East/Ausrottung was a step taken to remove the Jews during the war, strip them of assets, and eliminate their political influence. It was mostly a wartime measure. The Final Solution /Die Endlösung was something else. That would explain why there are documents that say Hitler wanted to postpone it until after the war even while Jews were being deported to the East. Julius Streicher testified at IMT the Final Solution was to be the establishment of a Jewish state and that the world's Jews would be put there under international supervision and that this supervision would continue after the resettlement of the Jews into this state was completed. What he describes is something of a Jewish tribal reservation or ghetto country.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3389
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re:

Postby Hektor » 9 years 2 months ago (Fri Sep 17, 2010 10:10 am)

Hannover wrote:Another yawner long since demolished by research.

This alleged (recorded) speech, as German judge Staeglich has adroitly pointed out, is a hodgepodge of non-sequitors, nonsense, and re-worked text.
see: http://www.codoh.com/trials/tristagch2.html

- There are missing pages, retyped pages by different hands, even repaginated.
...
Exactly which pages would that be? It would be interesting to see in what way the "critical part" is affected by this.
Also, as for the sound recording, is there one for the whole speech or are there only recordings for the "critical parts" that get's repeated over and over again?

gbrecht
Member
Member
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Himmler's "Extermination of the Jews" speech

Postby gbrecht » 9 years 2 months ago (Wed Sep 22, 2010 12:32 am)

I find it odd if the speech is real how he would say Evacuation, then extermination. Either the parts about extermination were cut into his speech, or he was saying extermination ironically, or as in the extermination of Judaism in Germany.

Either way it makes no sense, why they would record some ultra secret speech if he was going to talk about Exterminating Jews.
He also uses the word evacuation in his notes and not extermination, but then says extermination in the speech. It almost seems like his mention of extermination is just cut into the speech.

The promoters say that the nazis destroyed the records of the holocaust, but then they leave this gem out there, that isn't noticed until 1970?


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests