For the Benda quote our in the middle of the MGK blah-blah our silly bugger could have obtained a better translation in my "first round" blog:
If I missed it, fine. But Roberto also 'missed' quoting and responding to the part of my post where I explicitly talked about what the hateblogwatch crew has on the holocaustcontroversies crew in terms of their attempted takeover and attacks on the HEART website. Hypocrit extraordinaire as the HBW crew says. Roberto is splitting hairs because at the end of the day, the translation I got from the internet is roughly the same and the main spirit and intent is still conveyed.
In the afternoon of 15.10.1943 [should be 14.10] some 300 prisoners of Sonderlager Sobibór attempted a breakout, having disarmed a number of guard units and killed one SS-Führer as well as 10 SS Unterführers. The attempt was partially successful.
"Lager" can mean camp or warehouse in German, depending on the context. As one doesn’t talk so much about camps in day-to-day communication nowadays, the automatic translator gave the term "warehouse" for lager.
So Sonder still means special. Okay, fine. Lager can mean camp or warehouse. I was never not fine with that. Moving on, remember how I used that rough internet translation to get those three German paragraphs that showed up in the German book by MGK into English for the benefit of the reader and of myself? Now...
That’s not what I’m saying,
Now imagine this back in German in the MGk book. Roberto says they took this and turned it to this for the English edition of their Sobibor book. Five months after these events, on 17 March 1944, SS-Untersturmführer Benda wrote an account of the Sobibór uprising – which he wrongly dated 15 October 1943 – and of the ensuing search for the fugitives, stating that the rebels had “shot an SS officer as well as 10 SS NCOs.”17
but what they all too obviously did.
Um, yes it is Roberto. I said you said they reduced three paragraphs to one paragraph.
Now you deny you accused them of doing so? Let's check your words again.
it is also difficult to understand how this passage (on page 10 of the VHO version of Die Akte Sobibór):
Fünf Monate nach diesen Ereignissen, am 17. März 1944, verfasste der SS-Untersturmführer Benda einen Bericht über den (von ihm fälschlicherweise auf den 15. 10.43 datierten) Aufstand in Sobibor sowie die anschliessende Verfolgung der Flüchtigen, in dem es hiess:
„In den Nachmittagstunden des 15. 10. 43 unternahmen etwa 300 Häftlinge des Sonderlagers Sobibor, nachdem sie einen Teil der Wachmannschaften entwaffnet und einen SS-Führer sowie 10 SS-Unterführer ermordet hatten, einen Ausbruchsversuch, der zum Teil gelang […]“32.
In diesem Bericht wurde Sobibor also als „Sonderlager“ bezeichnet. Was dieses Wort bedeutete, lässt sich dem Dokument selbst nicht entnehmen.
could have been reduced to this passage on page 22 of a much larger publication:
Five months after these events, on 17 March 1944, SS-Untersturmführer Benda wrote an account of the Sobibór uprising – which he wrongly dated 15 October 1943 – and of the ensuing search for the fugitives, stating that the rebels had “shot an SS officer as well as 10 SS NCOs.”17
through a mere "editorial error".
Sounds like you did accuse them of a conspiratorial, sneaky paragraph reduction. Something you said you never said about them.
"Roberto says they took this and turned it to this for the English edition of their Sobibor book."
"That’s not what I’m saying"
Who's really telling the truth here, readers? Maybe it's because Roberto thinks were stupid (since we're revisionists) that he can slip one like this past us.
If they are trying to cover things up to make revisionism look good, it makes no sense to leave it in the German and take it out in English. A true cover up artist would leave something out in BOTH languages) that in the end Roberto is getting mad that they left out in the English edition something in the German which stated that Sonder in and of itself proves nothing.
RobertoBlah, blah, blah.
Not an unexpected response. But there's more. He continues...
What happened here was that MGK thought they could safely mention the Sonderlager quote in their Akte Sobibór pamphlet for German-speaking nutzis, but when they wrote their Sobibór book in English addressing a larger audience (including readers they hope to win over for "Revisionism"), they changed their mind about the safety of that quote from a "Revisionist" point of view and decided to leave it out. As simple as that.
Hmmm. Sounds to me like you're again accusing them of paragraph reduction. Yet when I say you said they engaged in paragraph reduction you denied it and said, "That's not what I'm saying."
MGK thought they could safely mention the Sonderlager quote in their Akte Sobibór pamphlet for German-speaking nutzis, but when they wrote their Sobibór book in English addressing a larger audience, they changed their mind about the safety of that quote.
In other words, Roberto is repeating the conspiracy theory I have accused him of perpetuating (meaning I was correct). That MGK put in something incriminating in German and leave it out in English. In Roberto's world, winning converts to revisionism in Germany isn't as important as winning them over in English speaking countries, and there are no non revisionists to tackle them and expose them who can speak German. In other words, Roberto Muehlenkamp and other guys like him who can speak German apparently don't exist.
He merely repeats his argument and thus never actually refutes my claim that it is ridiculous for an alleged cover up artist to cover up something in one place and then reveal it in another. Essentially, since he repeated himself and showed he argued what I said he did, the only different thing in his response was a blah blah blah typefest. Not really a refutation of my claim that this conspiracy theory about German readers versus English readers makes little sense. For there are German non revisionists who could bust the German book if this conspiracy theory of Roberto's was to hold. Clearly, this conspiracy theory makes no sense and Roberto never bothered to argue why it makes sense. Let's continue.
The Wehrmacht and the Schutzpolizei were also summoned. In view of the nature of the Sonderlager and its inmates, it was decided that the Wehrmacht should take immediate responsibility for pursuing the fugitives, and the Schutzpolizei for securing the camp from the outside.
is missing from the quote. Kues seems to be so uncomfortable with it that he doesn’t even mention it in the blog commented in my "second round" blog, and Werd seems to have also decide that it’s safer not to talk about it.
Not missing from the German one apparently. Secondly how can he be uncomfortable with it if he already showed how Sonderlager isn't necessarily signifying something harmful? And that's another thing Roberto. You are doing something that I accuse you of and then you deny out of one side of your mouth yet again. You say you are not making an issue of Sonderlager, and yet here you are again. You are saying, "If sonderlager isn't meaning anything harmful, then why leave it out Kues?" To which I say, "Since you admit Sonderlager in and of itself is harmless, you can't then complain about it being left out since it's already moot." To which I add a modification. "What it boils down to is the pursuit by the wermacht of these men due to the nature of the camp." This COULD mean extermination assembly line but doesn't PROVE it. Hannover's explanation for the wermacht pursuits also COULD be the case. And how does Roberto respond to that? HE IGNORES IT. He also has nothing to say about the eyewitnesses who were clearly making things up that didn't happen. Peopld do tend to ingore embarrassing things. Kind of like how Roberto ignored the parts of my post where I let him know what HBW apparently knows and has on him and his crew that is so daming that they don't want to be confronted with such evidence.
Roberto flip flops on arguments he makes, ignores Hannover's alternative explanation, and ignores inconvenient so called eyewitnesses.