Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Bob
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 5:49 am

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Bob » 7 years 1 month ago (Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:44 pm)

Balsamo wrote:It's a very tiny point in common. As far as i know, the six millions were broadly used in the west and concerned Jews only, it was kind of "confrimed" by a hearsay from Eichman which did not specify the number of victims for each camp.


No, this number is from Wilhelm Höttl´s affidavit[1] presented in Nuremberg, he allegedly hear it from Eichmann.

[1] Höttl affidavit of Nov. 26, 1945: 2738-PS (USA-296) in IMT, vol. 31, pp. 85-87;IMT Vol. III. p. 569

As far as I know, Eichmann himself denied such a statement about 4+2 million exterminated Jews.

Balsamo wrote:] It was said that 4 millions Jews died in camps and 2 millions other way. Of course, as it has been shown, this symbolic number was used all over the place in the press...there is iIRC even an american paper stating 6.000.000 victims of Stalin in Ukraine in the 30's...No further comment.


This number was used from 19th to 20th century before the second World War.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6915&hilit=six+million+reference&start=15#p52286

Don Heddesheimer, The First Holocaust—Jewish Fund Raising Campaigns With Holocaust Claims During And After World War One
http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=6

I am missing your response to the fact that Document USSR-008 was accepted as evidence thanks to Article 21 of Charter of the International Military Tribunal, and was taken "judicial notice" of, thus this refute your essential claim that this had not been taken seriously.

Balsamo wrote:Again, in the west only, and the fact that the Frankfurt court did not take it shows that the number was not taken into consideration.
And i am not aware of a soviet document emphasising the Jewish nature of the victims.


My point was about percentage and numbers of Jews among victims, and with using of west sources is proven that most of the victims of death toll figures were Jews according to western sources and is false to explain it in the way that 4 million figure from Soviets was for probably mainly for non-Jews = no need to lower 6 million figure. Thus again, your essential point is refuted, western source apparently always maintained that victims were mostly Jews, some of them even repeated false figure from Soviets.

Balsamo wrote:Which is only a short version of the famous list presented by Hannover above and that comes directly from Faurisson IIRC.
Everyone is free to judge if this list is honnest or not.


This is not short version, these are only numbers related to point of my response (similar or even higher figures).

Your allusion about possibly "dishonest" references aren´t honest, feel free to check references.

Balsamo wrote:In my opinion the list is misleading because it starts from the highest estimations ( which was never made) to the lower which is of course the one of Faurisson, and presented to be backed by a NY times article.


You opinion is wrong, as proven, they were made, check references please. In this list, I do not see even one single NY Times article used as a reference.

Balsamo wrote:Of course, if the list would have been presented chronologically, it would have lost its effect


This point is quite irrelevant as everybody can see that every reference is provided together with date explicitly stated by Faurisson along with every number. Anyway, here is list as you have requested and as I compiled it for my personal use, so not based only on Faurisson´s list:

4,000,000 - 1945
2,000,000 - 2,500,000 - 1945
8,000,000 - 1945
3,000,000 - 1946
2,500,000 - 3,000,000 - 1946
4,500,000 - 1946-1947
5,000,000 -5,500,000 - 1946-1947
6,000,000 - 1951
2,000,000 - 1951
800,000 - 900,000 - 1953
9,000,000 - 1955
4,000,000 - 1967
2,000,000 - 1973
4,000,000 - 1973
2,000,000 - 1975
5,000,000 - 1979
2,000,000 - 4,000,000 - 1982
1,471,595 - 1983
1,250,000 - 1985
4,000,000 - 1986
1,600,000 - 1989
4,000,000 - 1990 (plaque removed)
4,000,000 - 1991
1,000,000 - 1992
775,000 - 800,000 - 1993
1,100,000 - 1,500,000 - 1994
1,500,000 - 1995
510,000 - 2002
1,100,000 - 2005

*I used only years, not month/days, I used first editions, not later editions, I hope that there is no error, I summarized it quickly, feel free to point out any errors.

(edit - I added three more figures)
Balsamo wrote:it would have lost its effect


Contrary what you are saying, this new list based on chronology is much better. previous list could make an impression of historical research which is responsible for lower death toll. This new list is proof that numbers are simply not based on evidence and saying them is easy as a breathing. Thank you very much for this interesting idea.

Balsamo wrote:and appears as it is a "pile of silly numbers gathered randomly from all over the places".


All what is needed to see from which places they are gathered is to read references, places are mainly - trial records, government documents, known historical books, museum, documentary, witnesses. As you have said, "silly numbers from all over the places"

Balsamo wrote:If one limits on the 3 estimations your chose. the fisrt one is the more symbolic.
"Nuit et Brouillard" directed by Renais in 1955 is more a memorial movie than a historical documentory. If the background shows Birkenau, in a way of a dramatic final scene. The "landscape" (paysage) is not defined in the text. Never is it said that 9.000.000 persons died at Birkenau, because it was not the point of the narrative of this "memorial" movie.


Don´t you think that this damage control is absurd? Contrary to what you are saying, such a documentary have the greatest impact on public since they are more easily accepted and public generally do not read "scholar" books. I must say that is quite absurd when exterminationists always begin to claim that source is not serious, only symbolic and etc.as the way how to deal with false information, they do not realize that this undermine their own sources of information.
Balsamo wrote:And yes Henri Michel and Olga Worsmer were advisers for the movie, (the same way Ridley Scott's "Gladiator" had some. That does not mean that any of them would claim that emperor Commode was killed by Maximus !, but yes he was the son of Marc Aurèle!)


Here you are mixing apples and oranges, Apples - hollywood blockbuster where the things are changed for the purpose of the entertainment and for the purpose to make good movie and historian are presented there as a consultants to maintain basic storyline and background and not for the purpose to make historical documentary. Almost every such a movie has something like this showed at the end:

"All characters, places or events appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental."

Oranges - allegedly true history of holocaust presented as true via documentary - so basically you are saying that holocaust in documentary or books is some kind of hollywood bunch of false historical information or "poetic license"?

Can you provide me with some explicit notification in connection with Night and Fog where the peoples are warned about "symbolic/memorial/poetic" nature of this documentary movie which does not reflect true nature of provided information?

Balsamo wrote: Never is it said that 9.000.000 persons died at Birkenau


No, there is: "Nine million dead haunt this countryside" - when the camera is in Auschwitz-Birkenau, when narrator speaks about crematoria and Auschwitz. So if I understand you correctly, because there is not explicitly stated "nine million died in Birkenau", you claim that this statement was not clearly related to Auschwitz but to some different place where the Nazis exterminated nine million peoples?

Balsamo wrote:But it is true that by that time French Historians ( at a time where the Communist party scored about 25% in France) accepted the 4.000.000 numbers from (Soviet Polish sources)


With this statement you are probably claiming that Soviet or Polish and communist sources are probably not credible in effort to explain false nature of these french sources for the sake of the moment, thus you again shot official historiography in the foot since almost everything what we know about so-called extermination camps is from these soviet/polish/communist sources.

Balsamo wrote:And yes according movie the number of victims of "Nazi barbarism" was 9.000.000...but in TOTAL.


Not true as shown by the movie itself. Even in the case of you claim, you did not solve anything, since the number from Nuremberg is 6 million. In the case of Night and Fog, there is not included figure from alleged extermination in the east in 1941, according to sources, 1-2 million, so the total death toll in the case of Night and Fog will be some 11,000,000. Actually i do not know what you want to achieve, but you cannot solve this problem in any way, you must deal with the fact that information is completely false even from the view of orthodox sources, even in 50´s. There is no other way than to admit that information is false.

Balsamo wrote:Which only proves that Soviet sources does not lead to the 6.000.000


Not true as shown by Soviet sources.

The rest is in the same way, basically you began to undermine every inconvenient source to somehow avoid clear statement that information is false, not true, not based on evidence, and you do not realize that this strongly undermine exterminationist´s case. You "forgot" to adress one of the most famous and "authoritative" source, Deborah Lipstadt.

Off topic question - Do you believe in gassings of human being in Nazi homicidal gas chambers?

edit - I added responses to missed points from Balsamo.

User avatar
jimcp
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 6:06 am
Location: Rotterdam
Contact:

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby jimcp » 7 years 1 month ago (Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:00 am)

I understand that revisionist historians have a difficult case explaining the figures to the public, but considering the importance of the issue, I assume that revisionists are =absolutely sure= of their proposition. I am trying to understand the method of proof that was used, i.e.: "documentation" or calculations and assumptions used. Without them you ( we ) don't have a chance in explaining the facts to the mainstream population.

Maybe I have too much of a beta scientific attitude for practicing history, I don't know. My problem at the moment is that a number of 73,137 is thrown at me as reported by 'The New York Times'. I know from multiple occurrences that the NYT is not a reliable source at all, so I asked: "The number of 73,137 is very important, there must be more than a reference that the New York Times " reported about it "? Where can I learn more about this study?" - Can you help me finding out where this number comes from?

My ( no doubt wrong ) method of finding out how many Jews were killed in WW2 would be to establish number of Jews: 1) before WW2 and 2) after WW2. Then attribute causes of death to that figure. How were the number of Jews before and after WW2 established? How can an independent researcher access the source documents?

jimcp

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9914
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Hannover » 7 years 1 month ago (Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:41 pm)

I see no problem for Revisionists. It seems to me the numbers have been explained. Have you read this thread?
The main point is the ever changing numbers, which is just part of the ever changing storyline of the 'holocaust' itself. Not to mention the impossibility of the alleged 'gas chambers' and the absolute lack of mass graves that are alleged.

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

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Balsamo » 7 years 1 month ago (Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:08 pm)

So i will only address his [Bob's] last question, if you agree :
[Bob's] added by Moderator
Actually i do not know what you want to achieve


No big deal actually, only to answer jimcp's question which was :

According to Wikipedia ( topic: The Holocaust ) 6 million Jews were killed, of which about 3 million in extermination camps with Auschwitz attributing 1 million. My question is about the revision In 1989 of the number of deaths in alleged gas chambers from 4 million to 1.1 million.

What were the figures before 1989? Did the total deaths go down from 9 to 6 million? or did the number of 6 million remain constant and was it the cause of death that was changed? What was the reason to lower the figure of deaths in Auschwitz? What arguments were used?


that there used to be two visions, interpretations of Nazis murders : one is the Shoah, which was real, but was put as preimminent by the West, and the "Nazi barbarism" as defined by the eastern communist States. The first one became the Holocaust who tend to forget that many of the Nazis' victims were not jew, the second one proclaimed that 4.000.000 citizen, Soviets and from occupied countries were murdered there...that i insist they never said that 3.000.000 of them were Jews.
That there are two fundamental interpretations of the Nazi crimes : One from the West and One from the now defunct East. And that, the 6.000.000 Jews and the 4.000.000 citizens have nothing more in common.

This version fell out of affection after the collapse of the USSR and its satellites. That, of course, one can find some confusion between the two because of the political realities in Europe during that times. as an example, I guess that Cayrol was close to the PCF (French communist Party), but that in between the Historians behind this film aknowledged rectifications of death toll in other camps in the west, but still sticked with the 4.000.000 at Birkenau...but they estimated that 9.000.000 perished in German KL...
But again it only illustrates that at that time the 6.000.000 was not so sacred as it is today, though i would dare to say that it is only sacred for the board public, among them some silly legislators.

So Moderator, i thought Bob challenged me on that and i responded his arguments.

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Moderator » 7 years 1 month ago (Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:22 pm)

Balsamo:
So Moderator, i thought Bob challenged me on that and i responded his arguments.

I have sent the post to Bob via PM with my explanation for deleting it. IF he thinks there is enough substance to it and wants to respond to it, I will re-post it in this thread.
M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

User avatar
jimcp
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 6:06 am
Location: Rotterdam
Contact:

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby jimcp » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:56 am)

Hannover wrote:I see no problem for Revisionists. It seems to me the numbers have been explained. Have you read this thread?
The main point is the ever changing numbers, which is just part of the ever changing storyline of the 'holocaust' itself. Not to mention the impossibility of the alleged 'gas chambers' and the absolute lack of mass graves that are alleged.

- Hannover


I agree with "the impossibility of the alleged 'gas chambers' " its what brought me to this forum.

If you consider it to be your mission to convince the general public of the truth then answers like "Have you read this thread?" won't help. The topic is complicated, emotional ( in various degrees ) and outright illegal to discuss in some countries. If I read a book and the author says A, watch a movie that says B, read a forum that says C, that doesn't mean A,B and C are true. Even if it was written by " the highest authority in field X whatever ". And if I suspect they are true I might need to be reassured by proof. If you want to convince the general public ( do you ? ) then you have to prepare yourself for any question they might ask and have the answer ready. You might also find 99% of the questions trivial or plain stupid. But that's all in the game.

The 9/11 truth movement did a very good job in explaining the events on that day. Movie after ( low budget ) movie was distributed, and they were effective, because they were prepared. The question is do you want the general public behind you or do want to be considered an anti-Semite because you value the truth?

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Balsamo » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:55 am)

Moderator said
I have sent the post to Bob via PM with my explanation for deleting it. IF he thinks there is enough substance to it and wants to respond to it, I will re-post it in this thread.
M1


That is fine for me, thanks

jimcp asked
My problem at the moment is that a number of 73,137 is thrown at me as reported by 'The New York Times'. I know from multiple occurrences that the NYT is not a reliable source at all, so I asked: "The number of 73,137 is very important, there must be more than a reference that the New York Times " reported about it "? Where can I learn more about this study?" - Can you help me finding out where this number comes from?


I have not found the NY times from 1991, but given the number and the date, the number should come from the "Auschwitz Sterbebücher" or the Death registries, also called Death Books, which regroup the registred (official) deaths at Auschwitz.
It is mentioned in F. Faurisson "Combien de morts à Auschwitz?", in Ecrits Revisionnistes (1974-1998) Vol 4, page 300...in this internet version :
http://fr.scribd.com/ad_refresher.html# ... ed_300x600

Here is what Faurisson writes :
Les registres retrouvés sont, paraît-il, au nombre de 51 et relèveraient 68.864décès (et non pas 74.000 comme il a été dit par certains journalistes)

my translation
"The newly found Registries are, so it seems, 51 in number and are supposed to reveal 68.864 deaths (and not 74.000 as it has been said by some journalists)"

He gives this source :
Th. Grotum et J. Parcer, « Computer-aided Analysis of the Death BookEntries».

Mark Weber writes about those Registries :
The death registry volumes fell into Soviet hands in January 1945 when Red Army forces captured Auschwitz. They remained inaccessible in Soviet archives until 1989, when officials in Moscow announced that they held 46 of the volumes, recording the deaths of 69,000 Auschwitz inmates.
These 46 volumes partially cover the years 1941, 1942 and 1943. There are just two or three volumes for the year 1941, and none at all for the years 1944 or 1945. [2] It is not clear why so many volumes are still missing.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p265_Weber.html

Hope it helps

My ( no doubt wrong ) method of finding out how many Jews were killed in WW2 would be to establish number of Jews: 1) before WW2 and 2) after WW2


This has been done also. Don't have the time to find these studies right now...and anyway it would be opening another Pandora box...

User avatar
Creox
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 152
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:32 pm

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Creox » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:30 am)

I'm curious why the Red Cross death numbers are not the proverbial smoking gun with regards to Auschwitz? To me at least proves it was not a death camp or a very inefficient one. Is it or am I missing something?

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Moderator » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:44 am)

Here, in response to Bob, is Balsamo's previously discussed post.
M1.


No, this number is from Wilhelm Höttl´s affidavit[1] presented in Nuremberg, he allegedly hear it from Eichmann.

[1] Höttl affidavit of Nov. 26, 1945: 2738-PS (USA-296) in IMT, vol. 31, pp. 85-87;IMT Vol. III. p. 569

As far as I know, Eichmann himself denied such a statement about 4+2 million exterminated Jews.


Except for your "No", that is correct and that's what i meant. I should have said "attributed to Eichmann". You know that english is not my primary language.

This number was used from 19th to 20th century before the second World War.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6915&hilit=six+million+reference&start=15#p52286

Don Heddesheimer, The First Holocaust—Jewish Fund Raising Campaigns With Holocaust Claims During And After World War One
http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=6

I am missing your response to the fact that Document USSR-008 was accepted as evidence thanks to Article 21 of Charter of the International Military Tribunal, and was taken "judicial notice" of, thus this refute your essential claim that this had not been taken seriously.


I guess that we all are aware of that 6.000.000 issue...thus my "No further comment"...The only thing that i wanted to point out in regard with jimcp question was that it came from the western allies and mainly the western Jewish organizations. Whether it was accepted as a proof by the IMT is irrelevant to jimcp question. We are not discussing the validity of those estimations, aren't we ?
As for the consideration it recieved, yes the international court took "judicial notice" of that Document as the Soviets were part of it, there were no political reasons or even possibilities to refuse it. Quite the contrary, as the Russians were in the best political position to impose their way. There are a lot to say about the IMT and the political situation which was a prelude to the cold war. But that is not the subject here.
but i would like to remind you that no IMT tried the case of Auzschwitz specifically.
They let the Poles do it in Cracow; and the Poles used their own eastern estimations (Document USSR-008) that is 4.000.000 citizens murdered. You'll have noticed that the term "Jew" does not appear a single time in it !

My point was about percentage and numbers of Jews among victims, and with using of west sources is proven that most of the victims of death toll figures were Jews according to western sources and is false to explain it in the way that 4 million figure from Soviets was for probably mainly for non-Jews = no need to lower 6 million figure.


That is because you don't get the problem. The 6.000.000 figures existed before the 4.000.000 were issued by the Soviets. In the west, the Jewish organizations were focused on promoting the 6.000.000 jewish victims, in the East, the Soviets charged the Nazi with mass murder of Soviet citizens (prisonner of war) and citizens from all over occupied Europe. TWO different approaches. If one take the global Soviets estimations of Nazis' victims, the number is more about 12.000.000 for the camps only ! A number that won't recieved any historical recognition, you'll admit. So if you want to withdraw the 1989 correction about Auschwitz from a global estimation, you should do "12.000.000-3.000.000 = 9.000.000" in a Soviet logic.
Now regarding the porcentage of Jews, this will come later and outside the court, at least until 1962-63. But then, the number chosen by the Frankfurt court would be 2.500.000 (for whatever the reason, they chose this from the first Hoess confession).
The important thing is that there used to be "two vision of the Holocaust" a communist one and a western one, the later more concentrated on the Jews. Don't forget that the Communist Party was very important in post war western Europe (especially in France until the 80's), which explains the co-existance of both vision for a while. The term Holocaust will only come in the 1970's if IIRC...

This is not short version, these are only numbers related to point of my response (similar or even higher figures).

Your allusion about possibly "dishonest" references aren´t honest, feel free to check references.


So tell me, have you ever watch the indigest "Night and fog" ? Don't even know if it exists an english version or a subtitled one. If you do, skip the movie and go to the end.
Did you ever had the "French War Crime Research Office and the French War Crime Information Service, 1945, (Eugene Aroneanu 1945, pp. 7, 196)" in hand, or did you find a copy on the net ? If yes, please send a copy of page 196.
And if you could provide the context in which Bauer's number are cited, it would be great.

The important reference here is that this list comes from R. Faurisson "Combien de mort a Auschwitz ?" (1995)

4,000,000 - 1945
2,000,000 - 2,500,000 - 1945
8,000,000 - 1945
3,000,000 - 1946
2,500,000 - 3,000,000 - 1946
4,500,000 - 1946-1947
5,000,000 -5,500,000 - 1946-1947
6,000,000 - 1951
2,000,000 - 1951
800,000 - 900,000 - 1953
9,000,000 - 1955
4,000,000 - 1967
2,000,000 - 1973
4,000,000 - 1973
2,000,000 - 1975
5,000,000 - 1979
2,000,000 - 4,000,000 - 1982
1,471,595 - 1983
1,250,000 - 1985
4,000,000 - 1986
1,600,000 - 1989
4,000,000 - 1990 (plaque removed)
4,000,000 - 1991
1,000,000 - 1992
775,000 - 800,000 - 1993
1,100,000 - 1,500,000 - 1994
1,500,000 - 1995
510,000 - 2002
1,100,000 - 2005


Nope, i'll stick with my opinion. Now it seems a pathetic patchwork of numbers comming from various "sources". But no one would conclude from it that the "establishment" have diminish the number of victims from 9.000.000 to 73.000 (according to hannover list above)...which is the message Faurisson wanted to share.
The only patent i see is the survival of the 4.000.000 from the Soviets which is from logic B ( remember ?); the two extremes, 9.000.000 ( which has never been said and wrong ) and the 8.000.000 that only comes from one unknown witness cited among hundreds of other, are irrelevant.

There will never be an EXACT number on the death toll at Birkenau. Only estimation. The number is lower or higher wether you consider that all the people in convoys to Birkenau that were not registered where killed upon arrival or not. And this can be debated of course. All we have are convoys to Auschwitz that far exceed the camp capacity. But again that is for another thread.

Don´t you think that this damage control is absurd? Contrary to what you are saying, such a documentary have the greatest impact on public since they are more easily accepted and public generally do not read "scholar" books. I must say that is quite absurd when exterminationists always begin to claim that source is not serious, only symbolic and etc.as the way how to deal with false information, they do not realize that this undermine their own sources of information.


Damage control ? What do you mean ? do you think i am working for Some Holocaust research groups ?
It is just that - if you had seen this bloody movie - you would have noticed that
it had never stated that 9.000.000 died at Birkenau.
That is it!
And again, this movie was made at a time where the French Communist Party was powerfull and had great influence among intellectual ( Sartre, de Bauvoir, etc). English speakers could have been confused, but a Professor of French litterature couldn't have been. But it is true that it is based on the still alive Soviet version of 4.000.000 citizens murdered at Auschwitz...And again, the 9.000.000 does not equal 6.000.000...
And btw, i doubt very much on the impact of "Nuit et Brouillard" on our generation. The 1955 public did not need it as most have lived those terrible times "live"...And yes, "night and fog" is a memorial film not a historical documentory, you would know if you had seen it. Alain Resnais is not Claude Lanzmann!
And the only time i saw Night and Fog as a reference in a historical work is...in Faurisson's works.


Can you provide me with some explicit notification in connection with Night and Fog where the peoples are warned about "symbolic/memorial/poetic"


Again, just watch the movie and listen to the text, i should say the lyrics...the voice; this awful music...It was written (scipted) by Cayrol who was a French Poet...inmate at Mathausen.
Of course, it contains horrible images, but these are unfortunatly authentic...as i said a "Memorial" documentary on the concentration camps.

thus you again shot official historiography in the foot since almost everything what we know about so-called extermination camps is from these soviet/polish/communist sources.


One more time, the is no "ONE official historiography" but at least two : a western, divided in "intentionalist" and 'functionalist", and why not add it, "Revisionist", and a eastern communist one, as explained. And i am not ashamed to shoot in the foot of anybody, and as i said :

The problem with the Holocaust, and the WW2 in general, is that those subjects have been judged before it was studied by historians.



Bob said
No, there is: "Nine million dead haunt this countryside" - when the camera is in Auschwitz-Birkenau, when narrator speaks about crematoria and Auschwitz.


So did you only watch the last minutes. Anyway, please write down the whole text and explain how it is a scientific affirmation.
As you maybe only rely on the subtitles, i don't blame you or anyone but Faurisson.

you did not solve anything, since the number from Nuremberg is 6 million


Well show me a Soviet document claiming that.
The only one who pushed this number was Jackson, but i could be wrong.
And again, the Auschwitz case was not specifically tried at Nuremberg!

Actually i do not know what you want to achieve


No big deal actually, only to answer jimcp's question that there used to be two visions, interpretations of Nazis murders : one is the Shoah, which was real, but was put as preimminent by the West, and the "Nazi barbarism" as defined by the eastern communist States. The first one became the Holocaust who tend to forget that many of the Nazis' victims were not jew, the second one fell out of affection after the collapse of the USSR and its satellites. That, of course, one can find some confusion between the two because of the political realities in Europe during that times. as an example, I guess that Cayrol was close to the PCF (French communist Party), but that in between the Historians behind this film aknowledged rectifications of death toll in other camps in the west, but still sticked with the 4.000.000 at Birkenau...
But again it only illustrates that at that time the 6.000.000 was not so sacred as it is today, though i would dare to say that it is only sacred for the board public, among them some silly legislators.
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2533
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby borjastick » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:45 am)

I have been reading this thread with interest and some confusion. Maybe I am in one of my stupid phases but I am not certain what this discussion is all about. The death toll at Auschwitz is but one relatively small part in the total mix. I wonder why there is any doubt about the no show of the register of deaths for the years 1944-45. The Russians made up the claims of 4m plus deaths at Auschwitz and they have no interest in releasing documents that would show they are lying toe rags, like we needed proof anyway.

In my well read thread viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6811 it clearly shows the Red Cross report of 1977 the figure was 58,000 or a little more. Loads of speculation as the whether this figure is fake or real, whether it covers all deaths or just those recorded for those in the system. The hoaxters say it never covered those gassed and burnt, as they were outside the system. But given the theme park horror show that is the current auschwitz camp and the fake gas chambers, lack of combustible material with which to burn millions of cadavers, lies by all and sundry, attitude to genuine requests by us to provide proof, who can blame anyone for not believing 4m, 3m, 2m, or even 1m.

Two things spring to mind, firstly I think the death toll at Auschwitz was probably about 60-70,000.

Secondly, you can't polish a turd...
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

Bob
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 5:49 am

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Bob » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:24 pm)

Balsamo wrote:Whether it was accepted as a proof by the IMT is irrelevant to jimcp question. We are not discussing the validity of those estimations, aren't we ?


No, we are discussing your claim that four million figure from Soviets was not taken seriously by anybody and that in this figure Soviets did not specify number of Jews to make an impression that maybe most of them were non-Jews so no big deal when they lowered it to approx. 1 million of killed Jews and that 6 million figure cannot be affected by it. My summary:

Using sources, I proved that first point is wrong and second point as well. From the view of western sources, most of them were Jews, some western sources even repeated the same figure or even higher. Even cited Soviet sources (testimonies) explicitly stated that these peoples were exterminated in gas chambers, and as we know, almost all victims of alleged gas chambers were Jews and for them they allegedly established these facilities. Then there is now way to avoid whole issue with saying "there is not explicitly stated that they were Jews". And as I said, 6m-3m=6m can be wrong (you know how I mean it, of course from the view of math - this is wrong), but the best what you can achieve is some 6m-2m=6m for the reasons explained and backed up by sources.

In fact, in USSR-008 one can read - "Since the Germans also burnt a great number of bodies on pyres, the capacity of the installations for the extermination of human beings in Auschwitz must be considered to be much higher in fact than this figure (5,125,000) would suggest. But even when one considers that individual crematoria may not have worked to full capacity, or they might have been shut down for repairs part of the time, the technical commission established that the German hangmen killed not less than 4,000,000 citizens[...]" - thus what we have here is in fact really underestimated and not complete death toll and is in fact incorrect and very generous to you to speak only about four million figure which must be allegedly "much higher" according to the report. This makes the whole issue even more problematic for you.

What is now clear, testimonies were not sources for this number, but Soviets (and Poles) were the source for the number, and witnesses adopted this false figure and even the language (not Jews, but "peoples"). Only Tauber and Dragon gave this figure during their interviews before Soviet investigators as far as I know, the rest of the witnesses began to speak about four million in later depositions and adopted false figure as well. Thus, we have convergence on a falsehood since number is completely wrong and there is no other way how to explain that allegedly independent testimonies stated the same false figure.

What is the most revealing, Soviets possessed Death books, which cover approx. half period of the camp existence and list around 69,000 deaths.

Balsamo wrote:You'll have noticed that the term "Jew" does not appear a single time in it ! (USSR-008)


I have read that document, I said in my very first comment that there isn´t anything about Jews. (except for one occasion irrelevant to our topic)

Balsamo wrote:If one take the global Soviets estimations of Nazis' victims, the number is more about 12.000.000 for the camps only !


For what camps? Please, provide me with reference and details for the camps you are talking about.

Please, quote here Soviet official reports with figures for each of the "extermination" camp (Majdanek, Auschwitz, Treblinka, Belzec, Sobibor, Chelmno)

Balsamo wrote:Now regarding the porcentage of Jews...


Already provided, most of the victims - Jews.

Balsamo wrote:So tell me, have you ever watch the indigest "Night and fog" ? Don't even know if it exists an english version or a subtitled one.


Link already provided, full version on youtube as well, it exists. Yes, I watched it.

Balsamo wrote:Did you ever had the "French War Crime Research Office and the French War Crime Information Service, 1945, (Eugene Aroneanu 1945, pp. 7, 196)" in hand, or did you find a copy on the net ? If yes, please send a copy of page 196.


I do not have this book but I am trying to find some possibility to buy it, if you suggest some dishonesty, check provided reference and then report alleged dishonesty, burden of proof is on you. In fact, figure 8 million is on the page 7 and 196 and on the page 196, there is also figure 7 million. According to Faurisson´s reference.

Balsamo wrote:And if you could provide the context in which Bauer's number are cited, it would be great.


Faurisson provided you with direct quote:

It is likely that, for the historian Yehuda Bauer, the total of the dead of Auschwitz is of 2,000,000 to 4,000,000 given that he wrote, in 1982, about the sole gassed ones: "Between April 1942 and November 1944, in addition to the Soviet POWs, the gas extinguished the lives of probably up to 2,000 gypsies [in 1944], a few hundred more Soviet POWs, and between 1,500,000 and 3,500,000 Jews"


Balsamo wrote:Nope, i'll stick with my opinion. Now it seems a pathetic patchwork of numbers comming from various "sources".


I agree completely about these numbers and sources. What is really bad most of these sources are primary sources for what public know about holocaust.

Balsamo wrote:But no one would conclude from it that the "establishment" have diminish the number of victims from 9.000.000 to 73.000 (according to hannover list above)...which is the message Faurisson wanted to share.


This is again completely false statement, Faurisson stated: "Various numbers of victims of the Auschwitz concentration camp as claimed by official authorities and historians" nowhere is stated that numbers represent lowered death toll from original 9 million figure or that this is his message, he obviously did not state it since this would have been lie. In fact, you only blame him for the fact the he summarized them from the highest number to lowest together with date along with every number which is quite logical and you accuse him for some dishonest message which is completely fictional. I consider your whole approach as absurd and as a strawman.

As i stated, the list using chronological order is in my opinion much worse, and I must say, very messy.

Balsamo wrote:and the 8.000.000 that only comes from one unknown witness cited among hundreds of other, are irrelevant.


You admitted, that you do not have book which provided us with 8 million since you have requested to show you relevant page, can you tell me how is possible that you know that this figure comes from "one unknown witness cited among hundreds of other"?

Balsamo wrote:There will never be an EXACT number on the death toll at Birkenau. Only estimation.


False, there would be at least proven minimal death toll of Auschwitz, 46 volumes of Death books covers period of 1941-42-43, and death books are not completed and I cannot wait to see the rest which I believe are somewhere stored as were these 46 volumes stored for more than 40 years. Thus we have at least minimal number and thus very good starting point to estimate the rest. But exterminationists will never accept it as the victims of gassings were allegedly not registered, but validity and false nature of this popular claim is another story.

Balsamo wrote:Damage control ? What do you mean ?


That is absurd when in these cases of false information peoples on forums always begin to claim that source is "not serious, not authoritative, memorial, symbolic, witness was traumatized, mistake due to human memory and etc". to "explain" false and untrue information or to lower "authority" of source in effort to lower seriousness of provided false information, with this universal approach you can "explain" every, and even the most utter lies.

Balsamo wrote: it had never stated that 9.000.000 died at Birkenau.

That is it!


I never claimed the opposite, I clearly stated that this is not explicitly stated in the movie, I only said that is clearly related to Auschwitz. You do not agree then I must repeat question you have missed:

No, there is: "Nine million dead haunt this countryside" - when the camera is in Auschwitz-Birkenau, when narrator speaks about crematoria and Auschwitz. So if I understand you correctly, because there is not explicitly stated "nine million died in Birkenau", you claim that this statement was not clearly related to Auschwitz but to some different place where the Nazis exterminated nine million peoples?

Balsamo wrote:And again, this movie was made at a time where the French Communist Party was powerfull and had great influence among intellectual


Again this explanation? Than I must repeat:

With this statement you are probably claiming that Soviet or Polish and communist sources are probably not credible in effort to explain false nature of these french sources for the sake of the moment, thus you again shot official historiography in the foot since almost everything what we know about so-called extermination camps is from these soviet/polish/communist sources.


Balsamo wrote:And btw, i doubt very much on the impact of "Nuit et Brouillard" on our generation. The 1955 public did not need it as most have lived those terrible times "live"...And yes, "night and fog" is a memorial film not a historical documentory, you would know if you had seen it.

as i said a "Memorial" documentary on the concentration camps.


Not true, see responses on this film, your subjective view of impact on yourself is hardly relevant when we are speaking about impact on public. It is like - "I did not see any car accident so I doubt very much that something like car accident actually exists." That movies or TV have probably the largest impact on public is I must say - generally know.

"Memorial movie" genre do not exist as far as i know, Night and Fog is classified as historical documentary film or as documentary film, thus your claim is refuted again.

Balsamo wrote:]Alain Resnais is not Claude Lanzmann!


He did not pay witnesses (he might to use for his documentary, I do not know) like Lanzmann and he didn't have script for witnesses like Lanzmann had for Vrba? Good to know it.

Please, start own thread about "Shoa" film if you suggest that this movie is true historical film and provided us with true information as an opposite of Night and Fog. Then we will be able to verify if your suggestion you have just (probably) raised is true or not, my copy of complete transcript of Shoa is ready to verify your suggestion. One of the primary witnesses - Rudolf Vrba, "author" of false 2,5m figure.

Balsamo wrote:And the only time i saw Night and Fog as a reference in a historical work is...in Faurisson's works.


Nobody claims that Night and Fog is source used in historical works, Nigh and Fog is source for public which itself uses historians or historical works.

Balsamo wrote:Again, just watch the movie and listen to the text, i should say the lyrics...the voice; this awful music


This is again weird approach as almost every documentary film which i have ever saw on this theme uses exactly what you have described to better sell information provided = all these movies using these "lyrics, voice, music" are "memorial symbolic and not serious movies" according to your approach and criteria. Interesting admission, if you do not use double standard of course.

My question missed by you again:

Can you provide me with some explicit notification in connection with Night and Fog where the peoples are warned about "symbolic/memorial/poetic" nature of this documentary movie which does not reflect true nature of provided information?

Balsamo wrote:One more time, the is no "ONE official historiography" but at least two : a western, divided in "intentionalist" and 'functionalist", and why not add it, "Revisionist", and a eastern communist one, as explained.


Again irrelevant as the Soviet-Poles and communists sources were/are both the primary ones used for alleged "extermination camps" by all sides since these camps were under communist control and western sources couldn´t investigate these camps.
And i am not ashamed to shoot in the foot of anybody, and as i said :

The problem with the Holocaust, and the WW2 in general, is that those subjects have been judged before it was studied by historians.


I think that this speaks well about your approach, my version of your quote would have been this:

The problem with the Holocaust, and the WW2 in general, is that those subjects have been judged before it was studied by experts of various profession related to investigated subject, photographers or film makers, international teams from various countries, documents, and finally - with all the so called witnesses on the crime scene to exactly show everything what they have allegedly experienced since this is based on them.

I really cannot imagine situation when Tauber, Dragon and the others would have been forced to show locations of introduction holes for Zyklon B or locations of burning pits, alleged "Bunkers" and etc.

Balsamo wrote:So did you only watch the last minutes. Anyway, please write down the whole text and explain how it is a scientific affirmation.


No i quoted relevant passage since is presented at the end and you somehow deduced from this that I saw only the end, weird. I never claimed that this movie or the other sources are scientific, my opinion is the true opposite.

Balsamo wrote:Well show me a Soviet document claiming that.


I never claimed that this official number 6 million is from Soviets, but from Nuremberg: "since the number from Nuremberg is 6 million"

Anyway, you missed point of my comment when you quoted my sentence out of context:

"Not true as shown by the movie itself. Even in the case of you claim (9,000,000 as a Total figure), you did not solve anything, since the number from Nuremberg is 6 million. In the case of Night and Fog, there is not included figure from alleged extermination in the east in 1941, according to sources, 1-2 million, so the total death toll in the case of Night and Fog will be some 11,000,000. Actually i do not know what you want to achieve, but you cannot solve this problem in any way, you must deal with the fact that information is completely false even from the view of orthodox sources, even in 50´s. There is no other way than to admit that information is false."
- and your change from Auschwitz death toll to "total" death toll is false as well, false number will remain false no matter which math you are using and no matter if you speak about jews or non-jews.

Balsamo wrote:And again, the Auschwitz case was not specifically tried at Nuremberg!


False, document about Auschwitz USSR-008 was accepted as evidence thanks to article 21 - fact of common knowledge. Western sources couldn´t present own report obviously thanks to the fact that Auschwitz was under Soviet sphere of influence. The same situation as for why Soviets did not present own investigation of Dachau, Belsen and etc.

Balsamo wrote:i thought Bob challenged me on that and i responded his arguments.


Correct, but you missed lot of my points, leaving aside the points already mentioned, here are more:

You "forgot" to address one of the most famous and "authoritative" source, Deborah Lipstadt.

Off topic question - Do you believe in gassings of human being in Nazi homicidal gas chambers?


btw - please, for your next comments, bear in mind that here are guidelines, no dodging, repetitions, and etc.

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Balsamo » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:44 pm)

Hi Bob,

I think i can affirm that these kind of dialogues between you and me which could go on for while is not appreciated here on codoh. A dialogue like the one you had with Roberto on Rodoh would be deleted here quite quickely.

No, we are discussing your claim that four million figure from Soviets was not taken seriously by anybody and that in this figure Soviets did not specify number of Jews to make an impression that maybe most of them were non-Jews so no big deal when they lowered it to approx. 1 million of killed Jews and that 6 million figure cannot be affected by it.


Actually, the topic was created by jimcp who did ask question :

I am new to this forum, to revisionism and I am not a historian ( I am a programmer ), I hope that still qualifies me to ask questions on this forum. I watched Dean Irebodd's movie on the ( alleged ) Auschwitz gas chambers and I agree that proof by numbers alone should be sufficient to accept the revisionist's arguments. According to Wikipedia ( topic: The Holocaust ) 6 million Jews were killed, of which about 3 million in extermination camps with Auschwitz attributing 1 million. My question is about the revision In 1989 of the number of deaths in alleged gas chambers from 4 million to 1.1 million.

What were the figures before 1989? Did the total deaths go down from 9 to 6 million? or did the number of 6 million remain constant and was it the cause of death that was changed? What was the reason to lower the figure of deaths in Auschwitz? What arguments were used?

jimcp.


I think i have already adressed my opinion. All i could do is repeat it which is not appreciated by the Moderation.

Reading you lengthy last post, you seem to want to insist on Faurisson list that Hannover posted as an illustration. Commenting how he got this list, debating every sources he used, would be a topic and maybe more in itself. We will be dragged on Faurisson and the way he is working which is not the topic.

Now, as i fear that the moderation won't let us continue a 5 pages pingpong game like the one you had with Roberto, i would suggest that we continue this on an another forum you know.

Bob
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 5:49 am

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Bob » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 09, 2012 3:26 pm)

I think i can affirm that these kind of dialogues between you and me which could go on for while is not appreciated here on codoh. A dialogue like the one you had with Roberto on Rodoh would be deleted here quite quickely.


Yep, that is why I included content of "btw" section in my previous comment since my longer comment responded mostly to your repetition. Dialogue between me and this individual wouldn´t be even possible here and would have been finished after the first case of dodging and name calling/foul language from him, that is why I prefer this place with guidelines.

I think i have already adressed my opinion. All i could do is repeat it which is not appreciated by the Moderation.


But repetition will not be allowed precisely because you can repeat yourself ad infinitum, everybody can, important is to present counter-arguments and not repeat again what has been addressed, such a debate leads to nowhere.

Reading you lengthy last post, you seem to want to insist on Faurisson list that Hannover posted as an illustration. Commenting how he got this list, debating every sources he used, would be a topic and maybe more in itself. We will be dragged on Faurisson and the way he is working which is not the topic.


No, I want to insist of fact that Soviet report about Auschwitz was accepted as evidence, and most of the victims were Jews from the point of presented sources so total figure of allegedly exterminated Jews must be affected by lower death toll, that was the theme of this thread. You began to debate "honesty" of Faurisson´s list, feel free to start your thread about it.
Now, as i fear that the moderation won't let us continue a 5 pages pingpong game like the one you had with Roberto, i would suggest that we continue this on an another forum you know.


No more rodoh, no more discussions with tens of points in one comment with most of them only repeated and refuted, not interested in this. Feel free to send me PM, we can concentrate only on one point, then on second and etc. If you are not interested, please, answer at least the last question about your position related to homicidal gassings. Thank you.

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby Balsamo » 7 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:38 pm)

No more rodoh, no more discussions with tens of points in one comment with most of them only repeated and refuted, not interested in this.


Ok, as you whish, i'll answered your points on PM then.

User avatar
jimcp
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 6:06 am
Location: Rotterdam
Contact:

Re: Correction of Auschwitz deaths in 1989.

Postby jimcp » 7 years 1 month ago (Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:20 am)

Balsamo wrote:Moderator said
I have sent the post to Bob via PM with my explanation for deleting it. IF he thinks there is enough substance to it and wants to respond to it, I will re-post it in this thread.
M1


That is fine for me, thanks

jimcp asked
My problem at the moment is that a number of 73,137 is thrown at me as reported by 'The New York Times'. I know from multiple occurrences that the NYT is not a reliable source at all, so I asked: "The number of 73,137 is very important, there must be more than a reference that the New York Times " reported about it "? Where can I learn more about this study?" - Can you help me finding out where this number comes from?


I have not found the NY times from 1991, but given the number and the date, the number should come from the "Auschwitz Sterbebücher" or the Death registries, also called Death Books, which regroup the registred (official) deaths at Auschwitz.
It is mentioned in F. Faurisson "Combien de morts à Auschwitz?", in Ecrits Revisionnistes (1974-1998) Vol 4, page 300...in this internet version :
http://fr.scribd.com/ad_refresher.html# ... ed_300x600

Here is what Faurisson writes :
Les registres retrouvés sont, paraît-il, au nombre de 51 et relèveraient 68.864décès (et non pas 74.000 comme il a été dit par certains journalistes)

my translation
"The newly found Registries are, so it seems, 51 in number and are supposed to reveal 68.864 deaths (and not 74.000 as it has been said by some journalists)"

He gives this source :
Th. Grotum et J. Parcer, « Computer-aided Analysis of the Death BookEntries».

Mark Weber writes about those Registries :
The death registry volumes fell into Soviet hands in January 1945 when Red Army forces captured Auschwitz. They remained inaccessible in Soviet archives until 1989, when officials in Moscow announced that they held 46 of the volumes, recording the deaths of 69,000 Auschwitz inmates.
These 46 volumes partially cover the years 1941, 1942 and 1943. There are just two or three volumes for the year 1941, and none at all for the years 1944 or 1945. [2] It is not clear why so many volumes are still missing.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p265_Weber.html

Hope it helps

My ( no doubt wrong ) method of finding out how many Jews were killed in WW2 would be to establish number of Jews: 1) before WW2 and 2) after WW2


This has been done also. Don't have the time to find these studies right now...and anyway it would be opening another Pandora box...



Thank you, Balsamo. Yes. it helped. I'll try and dig it up. If I do I'll start documenting 'my own case' and help disseminating the revisionist message. It has to be done. - Dean Irebodd's arguments were so strong that I can't let the issue go, even if I wanted to.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: realitycheck and 5 guests