David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
friedrich braun
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:40 am

David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby friedrich braun » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:03 pm)

Does anyone know if this statement is accurate ?:

After Griffin’s “accident” his parents saved him from financial ruin by selling their house. For a while he was a security man at the meetings of David Irving, the Holocaust-denying historian – “I looked quite good in a black leather jacket and an eye patch”. Griffin later reproached Irving for conceding that 4m Jews may [or maybe not] have been killed by the Nazis.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... itted=true
"The dead came back from Jerusalem, where they did not find what they were seeking."

"The Seven Sermons to the Dead"

C.G. Jung

Thesaint
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: England

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby Thesaint » 1 decade 2 years ago (Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:35 pm)

Going by his appearance on an Irish T.V program not too long ago from memory,his estimate was 1-2 million killed "on the Eastern front" by mass shootings,and 2-3 million in the "Reinhard" camps.So it is probably an accurate statement.
"We didn't call survivors," says Lipstadt, "because first of all we didn't want to subject them to cross-examination by this guy. He (Irving) would have destroyed them."
- Jerusalem Post 6/16/00

friedrich braun
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:40 am

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby friedrich braun » 1 decade 2 years ago (Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:56 pm)

A million here and a million there and soon you're talking real numbers. Can someone say why he's called a revisionist?
"The dead came back from Jerusalem, where they did not find what they were seeking."



"The Seven Sermons to the Dead"



C.G. Jung

KostasL
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:27 am

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby KostasL » 1 decade 2 years ago (Wed Jun 17, 2009 2:55 am)

friedrich braun wrote:A million here and a million there and soon you're talking real numbers.


Yeah, yeah...keep adding millions and soon we are talking REAL numbers. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Now, seriously talking....did you use the word "real" meaning "real" or...what ? :?

friedrich braun wrote:Can someone say why he's called a revisionist?


Because it is not all about the numbers.

It is also about other details such as : Hitler knew all about it, he personally gave the orders to exterminate the jews and he also used, in his free time, weekends, etc., to kill jews with his bare hands.. 8)
Last edited by KostasL on Wed Jun 17, 2009 3:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
When you realize that the Holocaust is a LIE, then all of a sudden, ALL your questions, ALL bizarre and strange things, disappear, and ALL things make sense, at last.

PatrickSMcNally
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:47 am

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby PatrickSMcNally » 1 decade 2 years ago (Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:29 am)

friedrich braun wrote:Can someone say why he's called a revisionist?

A better query might be: Can someone say why the Anti-Defamation League

http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/irving. ... tem=irving

promotes Irving as "one of the world's most effective purveyors of Holocaust denial"?

I ran across HITLER'S WAR some years before I had encountered any substantive revisionist arguments. I picked it up thinking that it might be interesting to read a different perspective, since I had heard of him as supposedly the dangerous Holocaust denier. Very little in the book actually seemed to touch on the matter, however, and what did came across as deceitful. At one point I recall he made a comment about wild rumors circulating about the camps. But he never attempted to go back and really address the issue of what precisely was or was not true about the camps, so his whole approach came as an evasion. It made me think of how someone could probably insert a passage in a book claiming that "wild rumors were circulating that Dresden had been destroyed." Well now, there probably were a lot of rumors flying around after the bombing. That's what usually happens after such a devastating occurrence. But the event still happened. The way that irving's treatment of the camps, and the issue of rumors circulating about the camps, came across was that he was probably just trying to avoid admitting to what really happened in the camps without specifically denying anything but giving readers a certain impression that gas chambers were a rumor when he knew they were real. That, at least, is the way that Irving's writing comes across to anyone who is not familiar with more serious revisionist work by Carlo Mattogno and a few others. I cannot imagine how any honest person would regard Irving as "one of the world's most effective purveyors of Holocaust denial." Then again, is the ADL honest?

User avatar
ginger
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 11:52 am

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby ginger » 1 decade 2 years ago (Wed Jun 17, 2009 10:12 am)

I read parts of "Hitler's War" for the same reason - to get a different perspective, to read about the Holocaust without the hyperbole and aggressive need for it all to be true.

Anyway, David Irving did imply that the lurid stories at the end of the war about gas chambers were media hype; that according to one of Himmler's aides, Himmler did not know about gas chambers.

PatrickSMcNally
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:47 am

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby PatrickSMcNally » 1 decade 2 years ago (Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:01 pm)

ginger wrote:David Irving did imply that the lurid stories at the end of the war about gas chambers were media hype;

Yes, he implied it. But he offered absolutely no substantive argument such as the issue calls for. For that alone he came across as much worse than he would have had he simply avoided the issue entirely. It would be just as easy for an author discussing rumors racing through Japan after August 6, 1945, to imply that the stories about an atomic bomb being dropped on Hiroshima were just hype. But if a serious historian were to really make such a claim then their task would be to address the allegations about an atomic bombing of Hiroshima having taken place on August 6, 1945, directly head-on. The fact that Irving didn't do any such thing in regards to the stories about gas chambers, even after he had implied in a snarky sort of way that it might be media hype, was what convinced me right away that he was not a serious revisionist historian. I've seen nothing to change that judgment since. When it was brought to my attention that Carlo Mattogno had written some work where he attempted to argue in detail that the claims made about the operating capacity of the crematoria at Auschwitz were untenable, I was right away open to taking a look at his work. But that is what is expected of anyone who wishes to claim to be any sort of historical revisionist, confront specific claims head-on and don't depend upon snide implications to suggest something without pinning down any details. The latter is all that Irving has ever done.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10363
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 2 years ago (Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:51 pm)

Irving had previously claimed that '500,000 Jews died of all causes'. He is now playing 'holocaust' lite with embarrassing & easily demolished claims, see:

'Irving attempts 'rehabilitation' via the Hoefle Telegram'
viewtopic.php?t=4558

'Irving's 'holocaust' lite / but what '2.4 million document'?
viewtopic.php?t=4548

'David Irving regarding mass murders in "Reinhardt"'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=548

Irving is a manipulating charlatan.

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

themind
Member
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:49 am

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby themind » 1 decade 2 years ago (Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:07 pm)

friedrich braun wrote:Can someone say why he's called a revisionist?


maybe because of this speech :wink:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmRh7FiFsNM
Every great movement must experience three stages: ridicule, discussion, adoption.
- John Stuart Mill

PatrickSMcNally
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:47 am

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby PatrickSMcNally » 1 decade 2 years ago (Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:32 am)

themind wrote:maybe because of this speech

The opening said that was from 1995. Maybe the question should be whether anyone can find a reason in the last 5 years to call him a revisionist.

friedrich braun
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:40 am

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby friedrich braun » 1 decade 2 years ago (Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:34 pm)

Jürgen Graf demolishes Irving here [not that it's a particularly arduous task]:



A young and brilliant historian

The Englishman David Irving has several admirable qualities:

1) He is a tireless researcher who has spent thousands of hours in the archives.

2) He is an excellent historian of the Second World War. Some of his books, such as Hitler’s War and Churchill’s War, will be read as long as there will be people who are interested in this dark and dramatic period of history.

3) He is a master of the English language, both as a writer and as an orator.

In the sixties and the early seventies, Irving’s brilliancy was widely recognized. While many establishment historians disliked the young maverick, few of them denied his talent. He was so good that the media grudgingly forgave him his barely concealed sympathies for Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich. Even in Germany, he was repeatedly invited to TV discussions where he impressed the public with his historical knowledge and his very fluent German.

As to the “Final Solution of the Jewish Question”, Irving accepted the official version as a matter of course; however he never wrote a book, or even an article about this subject, but tried to steer clear of it.

http://www.juergen-graf.sled.name/artic ... camps.html
"The dead came back from Jerusalem, where they did not find what they were seeking."



"The Seven Sermons to the Dead"



C.G. Jung

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

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby Reinhard » 1 decade 1 year ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 5:42 am)

From David Irving's Website:

The Conformists finally catch up. → Rethinking the Holocaust - as we have always argued: It happened in the Reinhardt camps, not at Auschwitz

http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/index.html


As Jürgen Graf has said in his excellent essay quoted by Friedrich Braun above:

During his work on Hitler’s War, David Irving studied a huge amount of German war-time documents. With growing amazement he realized that none of these countless documents proved that Hitler had ordered the extermination of the Jews – or, indeed, known that the Jews were being exterminated.

At that time, Irving must have been aware that there were researchers who disputed the official version of Jews' fate during World War Two. Arthur Butz’s The Hoax of the Twentieth Century had come out in 1976, a year before Hitler’s War, and I find it very hard to believe that Irving did not learn of the existence of this book, or that he did not have the intellectual curiosity to read it. At any rate, he failed to draw the only logical conclusion from the total lack of documentary evidence for the “Holocaust,” but concluded instead that the extermination of the Jews had been ordered and organized by the Reichsführer SS Heinrich Himmler without Hitler’s knowing.

In Hitler’s War, Irving wrote:

“By 1942, the massacre machinery was gathering momentum – of such refinement and devilish ingenuity that from Himmler down to the ex-lawyers who ran the extermination camps perhaps only seventy men were aware of the truth.“ [1]

To this wildly implausible thesis, Robert Faurisson raised the following, entirely logical objection:

“Borrowing a comparison from David Irving, I can certainly believe that Menachem Begin could have been unaware of the massacre of the Sabra and Shatila camps in Lebanon at the time it was taking place. Over a period of several hours, several hundred civilians were massacred. I do not know when Begin learned of the massacre, but I do know that, like everybody else in the world, he learned about it very quickly. If, however, instead of several hundred men, women and children being massacred in a few hours, we are considering the massacre of millions of men, women and children over a period of three or four years in the very heart of Europe, by which miracle could that heinous crime have been hidden from Hitler, Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt, as well as Germany and all of Europe, except for perhaps only seventy men!”
[2]

Today, in 2009, this argument is as sound as it was in 1983!

The Leuchter report

In April 1988, during the second Zundel trial in Toronto, David Irving learned that an American execution technologist, Fred Leuchter, who had been contacted by Ernst Zundel’s advisor Robert Faurisson, had flown to Poland with a small group of helpers in order to examine the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz I, Auschwitz-Birkenau and Majdanek. Upon his return, Leuchter had written a report in which he concluded that these rooms could not have been used as gas chambers for technical reasons. More importantly, Leuchter and his team had taken samples from the walls inside the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz I and Birkenau where, according to official historiography, huge numbers of Jews had been killed with prussic acid. The samples were subsequently analysed in an American laboratory. The tests revealed either no detection of traces of cyanide or extremely low levels, while a control sample taken from Delousing Facility Nr. 1 at Birkenau contained an exceedingly high percentage of cyanide.[3]

The Leuchter report confirmed what David Irving must have suspected, or indeed known, before: The Auschwitz gas chamber story was but a monstruous hoax. Irving now believed that the “Holocaust” story would collapse in the near future, and he decided to jump on the bandwagon. He, David Irving, whose genius the narrow-minded court historians stubbornly refused to acknowledge, would put them all to shame; he would be the first prominent historian to pillory the Auschwitz fraud. Towards the end of the Zundel trial, Irving appeared at a witness for the defense. He endorsed the Leuchter report, which he called a “shattering document.” In 1988 and 1989, he made several speeches disputing the existence of homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz: one of these speeches, which he delivered on Austrian soil in 1989, would lead to his arrest and incarceration in Austria sixteen years later.

Irving’s hope that the Leuchter report would lead to the immediate collapse of the Auschwitz lie did not materialize: The Jews fought for their gas chambers like a lioness for her cubs, and David Irving was branded a “Holocaust denier.” In Jewish-dominated Western society this label is the mark of Cain. Irving was viciously smeared by the media, his books disappeared from the bookshops, and he sustained huge financial losses.


[...]

David Irving’s death toll for the Reinhardt camps

In his standard work about the “Holocaust,” Raul Hilberg claims that 750,000 Jews were murdered at Treblinka, 550,000 at Belzec, and 200.000 at Sobibor[18], which means that according to Hilberg, the total death toll for the three Reinhardt camps was 1.5 million. This figure is lower by 900,000 than the one peddled by David Irving (1.274 million for 1942 plus more than a million for 1943 = about 2.4 million).

But the absurdities do not end here. Consider the following:

-Hilberg’s figure of 550,000 Belzec victims is impossible because according to the Höfle document (which was not yet known in 1985 when Hilberg published the second and “definitive” edition of his book) 434,508 Jews were deported to Belzec until December 31, 1942. Since everybody agrees Belzec was closed at the end of 1942, no deportations to this camp can have occurred in 1943.

- In view of this fact, the total death toll for this camp can not possibly have exceeded 434,508, even if every single Jew deported to Belzec was killed there (as both Hilberg and Irving assume).

- If Irving is right, and if 2.4 million Jews were indeed exterminated at the three Reinhardt camps, but “only” 434,508 of them at Belzec, the remaining 1,965,492 victims must have been murdered at Treblinka and Sobibor. This would mean that Hilberg’s combined figure for these two camps (750,000 + 200,000 = 950,000) is too low by more than one million!

Difficile est satiram non scribere – It is difficult not to write a satire!

[...]

David Irving is an extremely intelligent man, but unfortunately he is totally amoral. For him, truth is negotiable. He is prepared to say anything if he thinks it might enhance his carreer.

Irving is longing for the good old times when he was invited to TV discussions, when his books were favourably reviewed and sold well. He wants these good old times to return. On the other hand, he knows that Western society is controlled by the Jews, and that he will be treated as an outcast as long as the Jews call him a “Holocaust denier”, so he wants to get rid of this label at any cost. Rather than waiting for the collapse of Jewish power (which may or may not occur in his lifetime), he tries to offer the Jews a bargain.

His only real problem is Auschwitz.
He has never contested any of the other aspects of the “Holocaust” story. He has always maintained that the Germans shot a huge number of Jews on the Eastern front (in the eighth chapter of Treblinka – Extermination Camp or Transit camp? he could find compelling evidence that the reports of the Einsatzgruppen, which allegedly prove such a gargantuan slaughter and which Irving seems to accept unquestioningly, are highly suspect because they are contradicted by other German documents and not corroborated by forensic evidence). He has never disputed the alleged mass murders at the Reinhardt camps, or Majdanek. He has explicitly admitted the existence of the “gas vans” allegedly used at Chelmno and in the occupied Soviet territories. But he has so often and so vociferously defended the revisionist position on Auschwitz that his pride forbids him to back down in this one question; he is at best willing to concede the possibility that some gassings took place at Auschwitz on a limited scale.

According to Raul Hilberg, one million Jews perished at Auschwitz [56]. As the number of Jews who died at Auschwitz from so-called “natural causes” (disease, exhaustion etc.) cannot possibly have exceeded 100.000, this implies that about 900.000 Jews must have died in the “gas chambers” of that camp).
So what does David Irving do? He claims that 2.4 million Jews, rather than Hilberg’s 1.5 million, were murdered at the three Reinhardt camps Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka, thus offering the Jews full compensation for the roughly 900.000 “Auschwitz gas chamber victims” he has robbed them of.

But David Irving has reckoned without his host. Apparently he is still unable to understand the mindset of his tormentors. By questioning the Auschwitz story, he has, from the Jewish point of view, committed the worst of all sacrileges, because Auschwitz is the heart of the “Holocaust” story, although, according to Hilberg, it accounts for less than one fifth of the “Holocaust victims”. The Jews will never forgive David Irving this sacrilege. Even if he suddenly claimed that the Germans gassed one million Jews at Majdanek, plus two million at Chelmno, plus three million at Sobibor, plus five million at Belzec, plus ten million at Treblinka, and that they shot twenty million Jews on the Russian front, this would be of no avail: The Jews and their stooges would continue branding him as a “Holocaust denier”. This label he will never get rid of as long as the Western World is ruled by Jews.

A warning to David Irving

I do not know when David Irving’s long-announced book about Heinrich Himmler will be published, but I fear that I already know the gist of it: Yes, the Holocaust did indeed happen; millions of Jews were indeed exterminated, but only an insignificant part of them were gassed at Auschwitz. 2.4 million Jews were killed by some unknown means at Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec; between one and two million were shot, or murdered in gas vans, on the killing fields of Russia. For this crime Adolf Hitler bears no responsibility whatsoever. It was ordered and organized by the Reichsführer SS Heinrich Himmler, who somehow managed to hide this gigantic massacre from his Führer.

As Heinrich Himmler has few admirers even among avowed National Socialists, Irving obviously regards him as the ideal scapegoat. I warn David Irving that the only effect of such statements will be to ruin what little credibility he still has. But the worst is that they will constitute a formidable slander. Heinrich Himmler may be guilty of many things, but nobody, not even David Irving, has the right to accuse him of ordering and organizing a monstruous slaughter he cannot possibly have ordered and organized for the simple reason that it did not take place.

http://www.juergen-graf.sled.name/articles/david-irving-and-the-aktion-reinhardt-camps.html
And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed, if all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became truth. »Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.«
Orwell 1984

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1837
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: David Irving's Holocaust Figure

Postby Moderator » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Jul 06, 2009 11:55 am)

Reinhard,
Do not copy and paste without specific comments and/or views.
M.
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests