The Holocaust Thread - The Great Debate Between Affirmers, Revisionists and Deniers

[mgc]

Its cool. I know you don't actually read my stuff:

In the March 19 entry we find the first occurrence of another troublesome word, ‘liquidation’. It proves to be rather popular, appearing in eight different entries. The troublesome part is that, in many cases, it means something other than killing. Goebbels speaks of liquidating the “Jewish danger” (30 May 1942) and of liquidating Jewish marriages (6 December 1942). The word ‘liquidation’ means, primarily, ‘to make fluid.’ And this in fact is a fairly apt description of the deportation process: a large, entrenched Jewish community who had to be uprooted, made liquid, and then to flow out across the borders. Nothing in this entails killing. Nor at the time, in the 1940s, did the word necessarily mean murder. An article in the London Times had this to say: “The rest of the Jews in the General Government…would be liquidated, which means either transported eastward in cattle trucks to an unknown destination, or killed where they stood” (4 December 1942; p. 3). Holocaust survivor Thomas Buergenthal (2009: 49) writes of his experience in the Kielce ghetto: “The ghetto was being liquidated or, in the words bellowing out of the loudspeakers, Ausseidlung! Ausseidlung! (‘Evacuation! Evacuation!’).” And later he comments, “After the liquidation of the labor camp…” (p. 56). Clearly the word means, and meant, something other than killing.

That is a completely laughable and cultish analysis. The sort of thing I would expect from religious apologetics attempting to square Holy Scripture with scientific fact.

As the British press well knew (and was reporting at that time), transportation eastward in cattle cars to death camps meant "killing." So sure, you could say the Jews were being "liquidated" via transportation to the Reinhardt camps. That proves absolutely nothing.

I mean this is just pathetic man. Grow up. When you speak about liquidating human beings (as opposed to liquidating a business, or liquidating a danger, or liquidating a marriage) that means to kill, and also meant this in the 1940s. The Nazis and Soviets frequently spoke of "liquidiating" their enemies.

Goebbels spoke about the "liquidation" of the Poles by the Soviets in Katyn. Would you seriously have me believe that Goebbels meant the Soviets were "making the Poles fluid"?

 

[mrolonzo]

That is a completely laughable and cultish analysis. As the British press well knew (and was reporting at that time), transportation eastward in cattle cars to death camps meant "killing."

I mean this is just pathetic man. Grow up. Liquidating human beings means to kill, and also meant this in the 1940s. The Nazis and Soviets frequently spoke of "liquidiating" their enemies.

Literally disproved by the actual entries in the private diaries. Some 29 volumes.

 

[mgc]

Literally disproved by the actual entries in the private diaries. Some 29 volumes.

And L. Ron Hubbard disproved the medical community's claim that depression is caused by chemical imbalance. It is actually caused by thetans.

In a propaganda film about Katyn see attached, the Nazi Propaganda Ministry refers to the "liquidation" of Polish officers by the Soviets. Clearly liquidate as applies to human beings (in the German verb form liquidieren, and the noun Liquidierung) means kill, and meant kill to Germans such as Goebbels. https://archive.org/details/1943-Im-Wald-von-Katyn

Grow up. Your "interpretations" are entirely emotionally based and no one without your perverse political tastes will find them persuasive.

 

[Stan]

That is a completely laughable and cultish analysis. The sort of thing I would expect from religious apologetics attempting to square Holy Scripture with scientific fact.

As the British press well knew (and was reporting at that time), transportation eastward in cattle cars to death camps meant "killing." So sure, you could say the Jews were being "liquidated" via transportation to the Reinhardt camps. That proves absolutely nothing.

I mean this is just pathetic man. Grow up. When you speak about liquidating human beings (as opposed to liquidating a business, or liquidating a danger, or liquidating a marriage) that means to kill, and also meant this in the 1940s. The Nazis and Soviets frequently spoke of "liquidiating" their enemies.

Goebbels spoke about the "liquidation" of the Poles by the Soviets in Katyn. Would you seriously have me believe that Goebbels meant the Soviets were "making the Poles fluid"?

Literally disproved by the actual entries in the private diaries. Some 29 volumes.

I think the truth is always the most telling. This article and several others in several different livestock trade publications regularly use the verb 'to liquidate' in the context of killing commodity levels of pigs in the pork industry.

Gee, what does that seem to imply in the context of being said by Nazis, of the Jews for whom they held physical custody, given what we already know about their disposition towards Jews as a bacillus upon humanity?

 

[mrolonzo]

And L. Ron Hubbard disproved the medical community's claim that depression is caused by chemical imbalance. It is actually caused by thetans.

In a propaganda film about Katyn see attached, the Nazi Propaganda Ministry refers to the "liquidation" of Polish officers by the Soviets. Clearly liquidate as applies to human beings (in the German verb form liquidieren, and the noun Liquidierung) means kill, and meant kill to Germans such as Goebbels. https://archive.org/details/1943-Im-Wald-von-Katyn

Grow up. Your "interpretations" are entirely emotionally based and no one without your perverse political tastes will find them persuasive.

This is addressed already in the last few pages.

Anyway, does in your view Liquidation mean murder of humans in ;

A. Every instance
B. Some instances
C. No instances

?

I think the truth is always the most telling. This article and several others in several different livestock trade publications regularly use the verb 'to liquidate' in the context of killing commodity levels of pigs in the pork industry.

Gee, what does that seem to imply in the context of being said by Nazis, of the Jews for whom they held physical custody?

Already addressed and refuted in the last post. Jews were not thought of as actual animals.

 

[Chugger]

1. No indication they would be housed in the crema?

What was it that the krema had that other places didn't that would make them want to use it?

pipes can carry hot water you know. the water supply could go anywhere, eg a nearby hygienic bathing installation. you think I'm out of line for thinking the Nazis weren't dumb enough to put a hygienic bathing installation in morgue where tens of thousands typhus victims would have been stored

Anyway, does in your view Liquidation mean murder of humans in ;

A. Every instance
B. Some instances
C. No instances

When referring to human beings, in every instance, unless the author was speaking ironically or something

Dalton wrote:

There is no doubt that concentrating and deporting thousands or millions of people in wartime would lead to many deaths. But this is not genocide.

and his translation here shows Goebbels defining liquidation as something other than this

and this passage is explicit, in a way Goebbels never is when talking about Jews being resettled in Russia

btw, in late 42 -- mass extermination was reported world wide "under the guise of resettlement in the east"

eg

how did Goebbels react in his diaries to the Juden making an accusation 100x worse than any propaganda spread during ww1?

https://dagobertobellucci.wordpress.com/2012/10/19/goebbels-on-the-jews-part-2-by-thomas-dalton/

 

[Stan]

Can I kvetsch a bit to the thread: what gives, deniers? If I give you a really long or considerable document it's too long, and I'm overgeneralizing, but if I give you something straight and to the point, you say it's too momentary and proves nothing?
Oy vey, I can never get it just right with you, can I?

 

[mgc]

When the term is applied to humans, Liquidiation means killing in every instance , yes. (Leaving aside usage of the term that is not intended to be taken literally, such as sarcasm, or jokes, etc. But one can also use "kill" in this kind of way.)

If you are applying it to a concept, like "jewishness," it need not literally mean killing. If you are applying it to a company, or a marriage, etc, of course it does not mean killing.

But if you are saying "The Einsatzgruppen liquidated the Jews across the occupied USSR" it means they killed them.

 

[mrolonzo]

pipes can carry hot water you know. the water supply could go anywhere, eg a nearby hygienic bathing installation. you think I'm out of line for thinking the Nazis weren't dumb enough to put a hygienic bathing installation in morgue where tens of thousands typhus victims would have been stored

What nearby bathing installation?

The water supply could go anywhere?

The typhus victims were being cremated. Thus a krema.

When referring to human beings, in every instance, unless the author was speaking ironically or something

Dalton wrote:


and his translation here shows Goebbels defining liquidation as something other than this

View attachment 3578333

and this passage is explicit, in a way Goebbels never is when talking about Jews being resettled in Russia

View attachment 3578446



btw, in late 42 -- mass extermination was reported world wide "under the guise of resettlement in the east"

eg

View attachment 3577974

how did Goebbels react in his diaries to the Juden making an accusation 100x worse than any propaganda spread during ww1?

https://dagobertobellucci.wordpress.com/2012/10/19/goebbels-on-the-jews-part-2-by-thomas-dalton/

Lol. See attached.

 

[mgc]

The 30 May 1942 diary entry (with apparently non-euphemistic references to immigration) specifically refers to Western-European Jews. Dalton deemphasizes this in his translation but even he notes it. So the passage is irrelevant to the vast majority of Jews in the Nazi sphere of influence, but relevant only to a small minority of them.

Even so, the apparently non-euphemistic references to the immigration of Western-European Jews in this diary entry are striking. So what is going on here?

Western European Jewry (as opposed to Central Europe, i.e. Germany, and Eastern Europe) was not systematically exterminated until summer of 1942. Deportations from France occurred in early 1942 but these were of non-French refugees living in France. The Jews from the Netherlands, Norway, etc had not yet been deported. Mainstream historians such as Peter Longerich (In The Unwritten Order) have in view of this passage suggested that a policy to exterminate Western-European Jewry may not have been finalized until summer 1942, although of course other Jews were being killed in the Reinhardt camps and by the Einsatzgruppen at this time.

The 30 May 1942 entry is also the last in the Goebbels diaries to refer to immigration in a non-euphemistic way.

None of this has anything to do with your absurd attempt to make passages referring to the "liquidation" of Jews benign in meaning.

 

[mrolonzo]

The 30 May 1942 diary entry (with apparently non-euphemistic references to immigration) specifically refers to Western-European Jews. Dalton deemphasizes this in his translation but even he notes it. So the passage is irrelevant to the vast majority of Jews in the Nazi sphere of influence, but relevant only to a small minority of them.

Even so, the apparently non-euphemistic references to the immigration of Western-European Jews in this diary entry are striking. So what is going on here?

Western European Jewry (as opposed to Central Europe, i.e. Germany, and Eastern Europe) was not systematically exterminated until summer of 1942. Deportations from France occurred in early 1942 but these were of non-French refugees living in France. The Jews from the Netherlands, Norway, etc had not yet been deported. Mainstream historians such as Peter Longerich (In The Unwritten Order) have in view of this passage suggested that a policy to exterminate Western-European Jewry may not have been finalized until summer 1942, although of course other Jews were being killed in the Reinhardt camps and by the Einsatzgruppen at this time.

The 30 May 1942 entry is also the last in the Goebbels diaries to refer to immigration in a non-euphemistic way.

None of this has anything to do with your absurd attempt to make passages referring to the "liquidation" of Jews benign in meaning.

The Jews were generally considered to have come from the pale of settlement into western Europe of which Germany was a part.

The May 30th entry again destroys the notion of extermination. Thus peter longerich can only make suggestion.

What did you make of the May 29th 42 entry?

Oh right, and now liquidation can only mean murder when referring to people or groups of people or institutions embodied by people.... except when it's about something else involving people like marriage.

 

[mgc]

Germany was not considered part of "Western Europe" during World War II, the way it often (but not always) is today. That is a modern anachronism.

See https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westeuropa, which explains this much better than the English version. In short, the term was used in the 19th and 20th century to exclude Germany, and other nations that did not develop democratic and modernist institutions until very late, from nations such as Britain and France and Spain and Italy. Use your google translate.

The passage (including Dalton's translation) specifically refers to Western European Jews. Interpret it how you want, but do not lie and omit the Western European qualifier. My own position (following Longerich) is that the extermination of Western European Jewry was decided upon last, in the summer of 1942. That also corresponds to the dates of deportation from Western European countries to death camps, which did not begin with rare exception (the deportation of Eastern refugee Jews from France, e.g., in early 1942) until summer 1942.

Liquidation means murder when applied to people. When applied to an institution it means the termination of that institution. Your interpretation of this obviously incriminating passage (which convinced Mark Weber and David Cole to abandon hardcore denial) is pathetic.

 

[mrolonzo]

Germany was not considered part of "Western Europe" during World War II, the way it often (but not always) is today. That is a modern anachronism.

See https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westeuropa, which explains this much better than the English version. In short, the term was used in the 19th and 20th century to exclude Germany, and other nations that did not develop democratic and modernist institutions until very late, from nations such as Britain and France and Spain and Italy. Use your google translate.

The passage (including Dalton's translation) specifically refers to Western European Jews. Interpret it how you want, but do not lie and omit the Western European qualifier. My own position (following Longerich) is that the extermination of Western European Jewry was decided upon last, in the summer of 1942. That also corresponds to the dates of deportation from Western European countries to death camps, which did not begin with rare exception (the deportation of Eastern refugee Jews from France, e.g., in early 1942) until summer 1942.

Liquidation means murder when applied to people. When applied to an institution it means the termination of that institution. Your interpretation of this obviously incriminating passage (which convinced Mark Weber and David Cole to abandon hardcore denial) is pathetic.

And surely one has to invade east before one can deport western Jews east?

Is liquidation of a ghetto an automatic death knell for every jew or just when and where you want to apply it?

Also what do you make of the entry for 21st August 1942? Was this establishing western European Jews only? Does it say that?

 

[mgc]

And surely one has to invade east before one can deport western Jews east?

Is liquidation of a ghetto an automatic death knell for every jew or just when and where you want to apply it?

Also what do you make of the entry for 21st August 1942? Was this establishing western European Jews only? Does it say that?

No it is not about Jews from Western Europe. It is about all manner of deportations of Jews to the East, for example Jews from Western Poland being deported to the Warsaw Ghetto and "established" there before later being deported to death camps.

That Jews were deported to ghettos and "established" there (without being killed in the ghettos) does not contradict the mainstream Holocaust story in the slightest. Instead, mainstream historians hold that, after being deported to ghettos and (if they could survive through the black market despite the starvation rations of 200 calories a day) establishing a kind of life for themselves in the ghettos, the Jews were later deported to death camps.

While I take the "too generous" thing as more of a cruel jape rather than a literal statement, if we interpret the passage literally, that is not so shocking either. Goebbels would think that temporarily establishing Jews in ghettos was "too generous" to them.

 

[Stan]

Is liquidation of a ghetto an automatic death knell for every jew or just when and where you want to apply it?

when considering Nazi correspondence it is helpful to remember the Nazis view Jews as subhuman animals, so "liquidation" here is probably about the same meaning as "liquidating a barn of sows".

 

[mgc]

Zo, what is your "non-homicidal" interpretation of Goebbels' 14 March 1945 diary entry where he said that when one has the power, once must kill Jews like rats, and we in Germany have thoroughly attended to this?

 

[mrolonzo]

No it is not about Jews from Western Europe. It is about Jews from (for example) Western Poland being deported to the Warsaw Ghetto and "established" there before later being deported to death camps.
That Jews were deported to ghettos and "established" there (without being killed in the ghettos) does not contradict the mainstream Holocaust story in the slightest. Instead, mainstream historians hold that, after being deported to ghettos and (if they could survive through the black market despite the starvation rations of 200 calories a day) establishing a kind of life for themselves in the ghettos, the Jews were later deported to death camps.

Ah right. So this time it's not about western Jews. It's about eastern Jews only while this was a generous settlement for them.

So what do you make of the entry for May 29th and wanting to put Berlin Jews (eastern Germany) in prison?

 

[mgc]

With regard to the May 30 1942 entry I said it was specifically about Western European Jews because Goebbels is specifically talking about Western Europe and Western European Jews in that passage.

The imprison them thing is obviously about German Jews who had not already been deported. The deported Jews had already been imprisoned or killed in the camps (even you would not deny imprisoned, though you would deny killed), so it makes no sense to refer to imprisoning them.

Now your turn. What did Goebbels mean on 14 March 1945 when he talked of the need to kill Jews like rats and how, thank god, we have done this thoroughly in Germany?

 

[mrolonzo]

when considering Nazi correspondence it is helpful to remember the Nazis view Jews as subhuman animals, so "liquidation" here is probably about the same meaning as "liquidating a barn of sows".

So when Auschwitz released Jews did they release them to local kennels?

Zo, what is your "non-homicidal" interpretation of Goebbels' 14 March 1945 diary entry where he said that when one has the power, once must kill Jews like rats, and we in Germany have thoroughly attended to this?

It's one of the few actual violent references. Reflective of the times, I think Dresden had recently been fire bombed.

The imprison them thing is obviously about German Jews who had not already been deported. The deported Jews had already been imprisoned or killed in the camps (you would say only imprisoned and not killed), so it makes no sense to refer to imprisoning them.

Why should they be imprisoned? Shouldn't they be made dead?

Anyway what do you make of the entry for 15th September 42? Were those the eastern Jews or the western Jews?

 

[mgc]

So when Auschwitz released Jews did they release them to local kennels?



It's one of the few actual violent references. Reflective of the times, I think Dresden had recently been fire bombed.



Why should they be imprisoned? Shouldn't they be made dead?

Anyway what do you make of the entry for 15th September 42? Were those the eastern Jews or the western Jews?

You are obsessed with "releases," whose rate you radically overestimate. Release from the camp system was insanely uncommon (well below 0.1% of Jewish deportees after the Holocaust began) and occurred for compelling political reasons (e.g. to ransom Jews for foreign currency or munitions or vehicles, or because the Jews in question did not fall under the Nazi definition of a "racial Jew," or because Germany feared reprisals against Germans in a foreign country if release of that country's Jewish national did not occur).

E.G. I have attached a document from the foreign office which argued that Jews of Iranian descent in France were not racial Jews.

The Nazis did not want to massacre German-Jewish civilians (women, children, etc) in the open because that would demoralize the more humane German citizens and also serve the interests of allied propaganda against German barbarism.

I honestly have no idea what you think is inconsistent about 15 September 42. Again historians recognize that Jews were often deported to ghettos before being sent to death camps. This contradicts the mainstream story in no way. The death camps were technically limited in how many Jews they could "process" in a period of time.

You have not offered your interrpetation of the 14 March 1945 diary entry. Why did Goebbels say we have (i.e. he was not referring to something Germany should do, but something it has done) killed Jews like Rats? Was he lying to his diary?