BROI, you said:
Well, it might, when you produce some evidence that Brack's family received the treatment the Hoess family did. Until then, it remains only theoretically possible.
Let me see, what about multiple arrests is hard to understand?
'Soap and steam' doesn't prove Brack was lying, and no, I don't "trust" "the sham that was Nuremberg".
It proves that there were severe pressures to follow what he 'Allies' required. And they required absoute obediance to 'planned extermination' canard.
That is apparently "new info" for you.
Do you think Brack or his family were threatened? If not what was his motivation for lying about this "fake letter"?
No, because as you admitted there were multiple arrests
, not threats.
Please read what I post.
Why do you think those arrests in 1946 would make Brack lie about a "fake" letter in 1947?
To prevent further arrests. Pretty basic stuff really.
He pulled it out of thin air....or....he based it on the 11m figure originating from the "Wannsee conference" minutes. No one can know for sure what his thoughts were at that particular moment. Although he was clearly hopeless at estimating Jewish populations; he made a howler during his trial
Well whoever created the 'letter" certainly pulled it out of thin air. And again, you shoot yourself in the foot with the acknowledgement of the "howler" that Brack had no clue about the impossible 10M,and the claimed 2-3M.
- Brack says he heard about the "extermination policy" from Bouhler [who heard it from Globocnik]
- Brack then writes to Himmler asking 'hey, why not sterilise some of them instead'?
- For which there is no proof whatsoever thereby debunking 'realness' of the letter.
- And in Himmler's alleged return letter, which you waffle on, see previous posts, we read a truly illogicial, bizarre response thereby exposing the "letter's" fraudulence.
On X-rays, please show me where I said they were never used. Stop the Mathis-like strawmen.
Werner Blankenburg reported to Himmer 29 April 1944 that Brack's x-ray method was a waste of time.
Bingo! So much for the authenticity of a "letter" which speaks of X-raying "2-3,000,000" Jews.
Brack said [23 Jun 42] that some x-ray sterilisation experiments had been conducted over a year previously, Himmler replied [11 Aug 42] that he wanted more experiments conducted in a concentration camp. Auschiwtz was informed [26 Oct 42] that experts would be coming to conduct x-ray sterilisation experiments.
Except that is not
what Himmler's alleged return "letter" says. It says:
It is only today that I have the opportunity of acknowledging the receipt of your letter of 23 June. I am positively interested in seeing that sterilization by X-rays is tried out at least once in one camp in a series of experiments. I will be very much obliged to Reichsleiter Bouhler if, to begin with, he would place the expert physicians for the series of experiments at our disposal.
It says nothing of "more" experiments, it's fraudulence is determined by the fact that Bracks 1st "letter" says the experiments were already done / "completed", and no it doesn't say "some" experiments were done. Howlers galore, as expected in fake letters.
Who wasn't correctly following "official procedures", Brack or Himmler? Prolly Himmler based on Blankenburg's letter above. But we know from indisputable evidence [Bletchley decrypt cited by Irving] that experiments did occur at Auschwitz shortly after Himmler gave the go ahead in another letter you think is a fake.
So, the office of the head of the SS
curiously failed to follow official procedures, it wouldn't happen. Howling again.
And you continue with your Mathis-like strawmen, no one said that X-ray experiments never
occurred. But the 'document' states "2-3,000,000 Jews". Your Irvingisms aside.
I've never "brushed off" defence strategies, whether at Nuremberg, post-war "war criminal trials", or any trial. I wonder why you felt the need to inaccurately state that I have.
And, no, I don't believe Brack's defence plea that this letter was purely a result of his and Bouhler's altruism for Jews.
So far, no one's been able to provide anything even approaching tangible proof that Brack's letter is fake.
- Yes you did, please read what you posted.
- You can dodge the fact if you wish, that's you're problem', but I have demolished the authenticity of this "letter" by simply shooting down it's bizarre contents.
Hannover, putting aside the genuine vs. fake argument for a moment, the letter doesn't even say they had killed [10m minus 3m =] 7m.
Well not exactly, but knowing about the marketed propaganda / mandate of 'planned extermination' and the 'letter's" laughable claim of '10M Jews' and that '2-3 are to be left alive' leaves little to the imagination. As was intended by the duplicitous document creators.
Fakes happen, just a few more examples:
'Murderers Among Us: Movie documentary 'piece of evidence'viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10386
'The Franke-Gricksch "Resettlement Action Report"
Anatomy of a Fabrication"
By Brian A. Renk http://codoh.com/library/document/2347/
'phoney gas vans / J. McCarthy & 'holocaust' Hist. Proj.'viewtopic.php?t=73
'Not Guilty at Nuremberg'http://www.cwporter.com/innocent.htm
- HannoverThe 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that denies free speech and the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.
The tide is turning.