Irving's 'death toll for Jews' in W.W. II: 1,274,116.

[friedrich braun]

I'm really at a loss. Until recently I thought it was about 4 million. It's hard to keep up with his changing figures.

What about the Holocaust? Having gone through, in painstaking detail, numerous intercepts he has dug up in the British archives, numerous examples of why you believe some things and not others, why secretly-recorded confessions are more reliable than courtroom statements, he read out an estimate of the number of Jews killed by Himmler's 'special program', by Germany's leading statitician of the time. It was 1,274,116. I don't know about you, but for me, murdering this number of civilians puts the Nazis beyond the pale. I certainly won't be voting for them! For me, the difference between this number and the official estimate of 5 to 6 million is effectively zero. Irving put forward his latest theory, that Himmler hid the Holocaust from Hitler, with a few telegrams which appeared to back it up. I think this is rather unlikely, to put it mildly. But remember that president Carter didn't know what the CIA were doing in Central America. Carter was responsible for crimes committed on his watch, and so was Hitler. Irving agreed with me when I asked him about this. So he's not trying to exonerate Hitler. Several times, he cited Himmler and other Nazis writing about "Endlösung der Judenfrage" (Final Solution of the Jewish Question). Apparently, this isn't enough for his critics; just because you say something happened, doesn't mean you aren't denying it. Don't believe me? Read the next paragraph.

https://pacificaforum.org/posts/28

[PatrickSMcNally]

I'm really at a loss. Until recently I thought it was about 4 million. It's hard to keep up with his changing figures.

My recollection was that after his arrest a few years ago he changed it to 4 million, and I don't think he's changed it back since. This is probably someone repeating the result from an older report. I'm fairly certain that for at least the last 2 years Irving has held to the 4 million number. Anything lower comes from before then. As for the fellow's comment that 1.25 million is no diferent than 6 million, obviously some important people with legal power disagree enough for that point of difference to be a basis of prosecution.

[allgood]

In one sense, it matters little what figure David Irving comes up with at present. Who cares? He's like an intimidated witness in a court trial. Without adequate protection, his word is not reliable, for very understandable reasons

Scholarship and genuine opinions have been sullied by the Jewish-supremacist push to render criminal views of history that conflict with whatever the self-ordained censors happen to believe at the time.

Had their efforts been ineffective, this would be a footnote to history, But they have been highly effective. Therefore their essentially criminal attempt to pervert free debate taints everyone who participates - at an influential level - in the debate about World War Two. In a sense, there isn't really a debate about World War Two anymore. There's ongoing tactical and strategic warfare.

The control freaks think they're winning, because they have so many strings to pull. But they forget that rationality itself was born of equally fierce battles to assert freedom from superstition.

Liberation from superstition came through open debate and a concern for truth. Having discovered the basis for rational discourse and modern civilization, it's hard to imagine human beings will de-invent it. Anyhow, I don't believe we shall.

In the long run all attempts to censor and control opinion must fail.

[Thesaint]

https://pacificaforum.org/posts/28

Quote:
"he read out an estimate of the number of Jews killed by Himmler's 'special program', by Germany's leading statitician of the time. It was 1,274,116."

Just for laughs,I entered "Germany's leading statistician during world war two" into the increasingly-rubbish Google search engine.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&cl ... arch&meta=


Does anyone know who Irving is talking about?

[friedrich braun]

I'm really at a loss. Until recently I thought it was about 4 million. It's hard to keep up with his changing figures.

My recollection was that after his arrest a few years ago he changed it to 4 million, and I don't think he's changed it back since. This is probably someone repeating the result from an older report. I'm fairly certain that for at least the last 2 years Irving has held to the 4 million number. Anything lower comes from before then. As for the fellow's comment that 1.25 million is no diferent than 6 million, obviously some important people with legal power disagree enough for that point of difference to be a basis of prosecution.

No, that conversation occurred only a few weeks ago and doesn't pre-date his arrest. Click on the link and you'll read the entire report from his recent talk.

[Hannover]

Irving has become a puffed up clown. He has zero proof for his claim, zero.

He 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 in over his head and the claim that he is the 'leading holocaust denier' is a strawman that attempts to deflect attention from the likes of Germar Rudolf

- Hannover

[Hannover]

Irving relies largely upon Korherr's number of transported Jews. Read on for this and other info.:
- Hannover

Not only is there no physical evidence...pits which cannot be obliterated, no techically possible 'gas chambers' as alleged, but the so called 'eyewitnesses' have been shown to be liars, every single one. There are no documents that corroborate the allegations. Take note that Witte's silly 'document' has been utterly undressed, as was posted:
http://www.vho.org/tr/2002/4/tr12razor.html

Naturally the duplicitous article initially cited doesn't even show the real document, and for good reason.

No, Revisionists do not have anything to 'prove', we've shot down all the assertions without fail and the Believers are at a loss (short of lying, which is the norm for them) to produce evidence for their lies. The onus is upon the accusers to support their accusations; they have not, they cannot.

As for Korherr, he himself refutes the absurd assertions about his statistics.

Korherr letter to Der Spiegel, n.28, 7/1977, p72-74:

The well-known, racially persecuted writer H.G. Adler, previously resident in Prague, now in London, wrote in the foreword to the second edition to his extraordinary book Theresienstadt 1941-1945 in 1960:
"It has definitely been determined that the designation of Dr. Korherr as SS-statistician...is not true, because he never belonged to the SS and has been rehabilitated insofar as his behaviour in the National Socialist years is concerned."

Unfortunately, Der Spiegel is publishing the claim of the English historian Irving that in the spring of 1942, at Himmler's order, I calculated the number of Jewish victims. In fact, these figures along with the text were delivered to me in completed form by the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA) with the order that not one word or figure was to be changed.

The statement that I had claimed in this regard that more than a million Jews had died as a result of special treatment in the camps in German-occupied Poland and in the Warthegau is also incorrect. I have to protest against the word "died" in this context.

It was precisely the term "special treatment" (sonderbehandlung) that motivated me to inquire of the RSHA by telephone what this term meant. I received the answer that it referred to Jews who would be settled in the District of Lublin.
Dr. Richard Korherr
Braunschweig

Nr. 28, July 1977, p. 72-74, Der SPIEGEL, an article commenting on the controversy surrounding David Irving's book "Hitler's War" under the title : HITLER -- Kecke Revision.
Korherr's letter appears among a series of reactions ("Hitler gegen Irving") by people like Robert M. W. Kempner or the historians John Toland and Hans-Heinrich Wilhelm An English translation of the letter was presented during Udo Walendy's testimony at the Zündel trial 1988.

- Hannover

[allgood]

Irving has become a puffed up clown. He has zero proof for his claim, zero.

There is certainly an element of the clown in Irving. But he is also a prolific and brilliant historian.

I agree that Irving has been making increasingly wild and deceptive claims that allow him to 'deny' he's a ''Holocaust denier'. When interviewed, he increasingly comes through to me like a politician. When he was interviewed recently on Norwegian TV, he was invited to affirm the 6 million Jewish deaths figure, but just brushed the question aside. This is the behaviour of someone who feels intimidated. And guess what - he's been intimidated... over two decades.

Do you expect him to act like Jesus Christ?

Irving is in over his head and the claim that he is the 'leading holocaust denier' is a strawman that attempts to deflect attention from the likes of Germar Rudolf

Perhaps the truth is that we are all in 'over our head'. Germar Rudolf is certainly a superb scholar of enormous integrity - but anyone expecting him to play a prominent leadership role in the revisionist movement now he's released may be disappointed. I find it hard to believe he was let go without some kind of arm-twisting and agreement to back off.

The vile intimidation that's meted out to all high-profile opponents of certain accepted (yet inaccurate) 'truths' is the real evil. We should not lose sight of that.

[Thesaint]

I find it hard to believe he was let go without some kind of arm-twisting and agreement to back off.

The vile intimidation that's meted out to all high-profile opponents of certain accepted (yet inaccurate) 'truths' is the real evil. We should not lose sight of that.

Let`s say you`re right about Irving being arm-twisted into "holocaust-lite"-mode against his own sense of fair-play and need for historical accuracy.Surely he would want us pure revisionist scholars to call him out on such outright "weasel-speak" as the 4 million/500,000/1.274 million?
I do agree that Irving has done some good work for the cause,but he`s tarnished it all with his unsubstantiated "wishy-washy-ness" in regard to the big H.If he really is still one of us despite the intimidation and kowtowing,surely he`d want us to condemn him in the strongest possible terms?
As many on this forum have said before,tales of dead Jews(and highly dodgy "document" analysis "proving" the reality of said dead Jews) is just not enough,we want grave co-ordinates and exhumations.Anything less is history channel B.S.

[allgood]

Whether or not Irving would want his inaccuracies / wild claims to be exposed, he would scarcely expect anything less from this forum?

I agree with you really - I guess I'm just more willing to cut someone a little slack if they're obviously being intimidated.

That's not to give them - or anyone - a free pass to tell lies. But we shouldn't expend disproportionate time and energy fighting fellow-victims of intimidation - to the detriment of putting our main focus on the perpetrators of intimidation.

[PatrickSMcNally]

I'm just more willing to cut someone a little slack if they're obviously being intimidated.

But it must be stated that Irving wasted real opportunities in an outrageous way. I'm sure that if Germar Rudolf had been given an open public trial similar to what Irving had with Lipstadt he would have raked Evans, Browning et al across the coals with a clear coherent focus on how the alleged gas chambers and crematoria are supposed to have performed. With Irving all of this got sidetracked and I can't honestly blame a British court for not finding anything he presented very compelling. I'm sure that Rudolf was pressured to make some agreement to stay clear of anything like VHO in the future and I don't expect him to do anything in the future nor do I hold this against him. But Irving's performance in that trial was atrocious and this is the only reason that Evans didn't have his head handed to him.

[Hannover]

[

I'm just more willing to cut someone a little slack if they're obviously being intimidated. But it must be stated that Irving wasted real opportunities in an outrageous way. I'm sure that if Germar Rudolf had been given an open public trial similar to what Irving had with Lipstadt he would have raked Evans, Browning et al across the coals with a clear coherent focus on how the alleged gas chambers and crematoria are supposed to have performed. With Irving all of this got sidetracked and I can't honestly blame a British court for not finding anything he presented very compelling. I'm sure that Rudolf was pressured to make some agreement to stay clear of anything like VHO in the future and I don't expect him to do anything in the future nor do I hold this against him. But Irving's performance in that trial was atrocious and this is the only reason that Evans didn't have his head handed to him.

Perhaps the truth is that we are all in 'over our head'. Germar Rudolf is certainly a superb scholar of enormous integrity - but anyone expecting him to play a prominent leadership role in the revisionist movement now he's released may be disappointed. I find it hard to believe he was let go without some kind of arm-twisting and agreement to back off.

Not quite correct.

Fact: Irving, during the trial, had at his disposal a team of some of the most informed Revisionists, including Rudolf. On a daily basis he received rebuttals to the absurd Jewish supremacist claims. For some curious reason Irving generally refused to lay on the hammer.

- Hannover

[allgood]

Thanks Patrick McNally and Hannover. I wasn't really aware of what you're describing and I'm interested in learning more about it.

Apologies for my ignorance - is there reference you can suggest for more details?

It seems to me an important issue, because Irving's failure on that occasion is used repeatedly to discredit revisionism and affirm the official H-story, as I'm sure you are aware.

[PatrickSMcNally]

is there reference you can suggest for more details?

If you mean details of the trial, there are transcripts posted courtesy of Ms. Lipstadt:

http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/e ... ranscripts

Irving has his own page which probably isn't as convenient as the day-by-day format of the Lipstadt's page:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/

But I certainly find it clear that Irving did not go into this case with a coherent strategy of bringing the issue down to a basic format about essentail questions on how the gas chambers or crematoria in a few major camps such as Auschwitz or Treblinka are said to have functioned and flushing the real issues out there. This is precisely the kind of topic where someone like Germar Rudolf should have been acting as the principal advisor for Irving in questioning someone like van Pelt. But Irving treated the matter rather frivolously.

[allgood]

Thanks Patrick. I was aware of those references.

What piqued my interest was the suggestion (perhaps I misunderstood) that Irving might have been deliberately incompetent in his approach to the trial. Did he throw it? Or is the accusation simply that he was headstrong and misguided?

There is, of course, an argument that he was most unwise to take on the case in the first place. When it led to defeat, it was possible for the spin-doctors to say (a) a prominent 'Holocaust denier' had lost a major court case in an Enbglish-speaking country (wiping out in a stoke the Zundel and IHR legacy of court victories) - and (b) the case itself was brought by the 'Holocaust denier' to try to silence his critics (the reverse of the norm, which is that people are persecuted for 'Holocaust denial').

I appreciate that both of those assertions are questionable, but that's the way it has been spun. Very damaging indeed.

I can therefore understand other revisionists being cross with irving. I wondered how far the accusations go. I don't have a view on this, inceidentallt. I'm trying to figure it all out...