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

[Chugger]

@mrolonzo : "The leningrad issue was fascinating. You tried to claim anudda shoah on the basis of divisional tactics in a conventional war and were thus refuted."

Actually I never made this explicit, but you bring up a good point

Why would the Nazis host millions of non-employable Jews in Russia , but not extend the same courtesy to the citizens of Leningrad (thus condemning a large of portion of them to death) ?

see mrolonzo's leningrad saga

 

[mgc]

Goebbels writes in the 27 March diary entry regarding the measures being applied to the Jews "The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews."

In the bolded portion Goebbels is saying he does not want to get into the gruesome details. Though he also says (quoting Dalton's translation) "On the whole it can be said that about 60 percent of them will have to be liquidated (liquidiert) whereas only about 40 percent can be used for forced labor."

The fact that sometimes he talks about Jews being deported East, and other times he talks about Jews being killed and the Jewish race being wiped out from Europe and perhaps the world, is not a contradiction. They were deported East to be killed, and many were not killed right away having been deported East (some were established temporarily in ghettos, etc).

 

[Lemmingwise]

Sorry if that post might not fit properly this thread but the Youtube clip from the Montel Williams Show aired around 1992 where a black man talked of Holocaust and slavery was removed from Youtube but however the whole show about the Holocaust is on Bitchute.

vasili

David Cole and Mark Weber on Montel Williams debate the Holohoax 1992

www.bitchute.com

And if you want to see only where the black man mentioned that detail, skip it to 33:05.

I always get a chuckle at how quickly Montel goes into shutitdown mode when the black redneck mentions how holocaust is big business and people receive monthly cheques for being "holocaust survivors".




As far as I know, these cheques were never sent to gypsies, gay or other non-jewish survivors, because who the fuck cares about them, right?

 

[Stan]

@mrolonzo : "The leningrad issue was fascinating. You tried to claim anudda shoah on the basis of divisional tactics in a conventional war and were thus refuted."

Actually I never made this explicit, but you bring up a good point

Why would the Nazis host millions of non-employable Jews in Russia , but not extend the same courtesy to the citizens of Leningrad (thus condemning a large of portion of them to death) ?

see mrolonzo's leningrad saga

I think Zo is trying use moral relativism to justify one Nazi war crime with a different, also pretty terrible Nazi war crime.

Goebbels writes in the 27 March diary entry regarding the measures being applied to the Jews "The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews."

In the bolded portion Goebbels is saying he does not want to get into the gruesome details. Though he also says (quoting Dalton's translation) "On the whole it can be said that about 60 percent of them will have to be liquidated (liquidiert) whereas only about 40 percent can be used for forced labor."

The fact that sometimes he talks about Jews being deported East, and other times he talks about Jews being killed and the Jewish race being wiped out from Europe and perhaps the world, is not a contradiction. They were deported East to be killed, and many were not killed right away having been deported East (some were established temporarily in ghettos, etc).

I’m going to remind the thread again that “liquidate” as applied to living things is equivalent to “slaughter” or “kill”. You find that word used a lot in the meat industry.

 

[Fapcop]

"Fascinating that you want me to provide you context on top of all the points I've provided when it's in your own source;"

Do you realize that it's not impressive when I ask you a simple question and your only answer is to show me documents that I'm already familiar with? It's good to use documents, but these should back up a claim, otherwise I have no idea what your position is. Here, I'll show you, answering the question I just asked you, which you evaded yet again



I believe they did this because they didn't want the responsibility of having to relocate and feed the people inside.

Documentary evidence: This is the exact reason Hitler gave for denying surrender requests from the city

The Führers Decision on Leningrad (Entschluß der Führers über Leningrad), transmitted by the Naval Warfare Command (Seekriegsleitung) to Army Group North on 29.09.1941

This is of course purely hypothetical, since no formal nor informal surrender request was ever received.

What would have happened in the very unlikely even that communist fanatics in Leningrad had surrendered?

We don’t know.

But it’s a matter of fact that the German army had no problems feeding and utilizing Soviet manpower in many cases.

Between 600.000 and 1.500.000 Soviets served in the ostheer as Hiwi’s.

 

[mgc]

Blacks were recruited to serve on behalf of the rebels in the revolutionary war. That does not mean that the Founders saw African Americans as racially equal (indeed, they protected slavery through the Fugitive Slave Clause of the Constitution).

Similarly, the Nazi desperation for cannon fodder in the later stages of the war does not prove they saw the Russians as racial equals or were committed to treating them huanely.

 

[Chugger]

This is of course purely hypothetical, since no formal nor informal surrender request was ever received.

What would have happened in the very unlikely even that communist fanatics in Leningrad had surrendered?

We don’t know.

But it’s a matter of fact that the German army had no problems feeding and utilizing Soviet manpower in many cases.

Hitler's order to deny surrender is not hypothetical at all

The Führers Decision on Leningrad (Entschluß der Führers über Leningrad), transmitted by the Naval Warfare Command (Seekriegsleitung) to Army Group North on 29.09.1941

Requests for surrender resulting from the city’s encirclement will be denied, since the problem of relocating and feeding the population cannot and should not be solved by us. In this war for our very existence, there can be no interest on our part in maintaining even a part of this large urban population.

and yeah they had enormous problems with feeding the population, see here

Notes of the Head of the General Staff of the 18th Army, Colonel Hasse, from the high level meeting at Orsha on 13.11.1941 (State Archive Nuremberg, NOKW-1535)

Report on Wagners statements (excerpt):

[...]The feeding of the great cities can however not be solved. There can be no doubt that especially Leningrad
must starve to death, because it is impossible to feed this city. The task of the leadership can thus only be to keep the troops away from this and from the phenomena related hereto.[...]

as well as pre-Barbarossa plans by Backe, who ran their food supply (translated here by Mattogno - umpteen means 'countless' , 'untold')

there is also the case of the millions of "communist fanatics" that surrendered to them and died en masse , which no revisionist denies because German records show 3.3 out of 5.7 million dying

and yet revisionists assume that millions of "unable to work" Jews were held and maintained somewhere in this area. There's no evidence for it, but it doesn't even make sense, given how the Nazis treated people who were higher on their racial hierarchy (not their mortal enemies) and more useful as labor.

 

[mrolonzo]

@mrolonzo : "The leningrad issue was fascinating. You tried to claim anudda shoah on the basis of divisional tactics in a conventional war and were thus refuted."

Actually I never made this explicit, but you bring up a good point

Why would the Nazis host millions of non-employable Jews in Russia , but not extend the same courtesy to the citizens of Leningrad (thus condemning a large of portion of them to death) ?

see mrolonzo's leningrad saga

Yes, but clearly you thought I didn't know what you're getting at. Now you see that I do.

Anyway, to your question - because Russians, just like Jews, were not to be part of the Reich.

Goebbels writes in the 27 March diary entry regarding the measures being applied to the Jews "The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews."

In the bolded portion Goebbels is saying he does not want to get into the gruesome details. Though he also says (quoting Dalton's translation) "On the whole it can be said that about 60 percent of them will have to be liquidated (liquidiert) whereas only about 40 percent can be used for forced labor."

The fact that sometimes he talks about Jews being deported East, and other times he talks about Jews being killed and the Jewish race being wiped out from Europe and perhaps the world, is not a contradiction. They were deported East to be killed, and many were not killed right away having been deported East (some were established temporarily in ghettos, etc).

They were not deported east to be killed. This is evidenced textually in a later entry already posted and of course ignored by the holocaust peddlers here, showing as fact that even when he's talking about Jewish dead from a drowning accident, he describes this as grotesque and prefers evacuated Jews to dead Jews. Thus refuting any notion in this post that Goebbels didn't want to describe details because it meant murder most foul. Another accusation sunk.

I think Zo is trying use moral relativism to justify one Nazi war crime with a different, also pretty terrible Nazi war crime.

I’m going to remind the thread again that “liquidate” as applied to living things is equivalent to “slaughter” or “kill”. You find that word used a lot in the meat industry.

I think you're trying establish every act of war as a war crime.

Remind all you want. The underlying accusation is refuted.

Blacks were recruited to serve on behalf of the rebels in the revolutionary war. That does not mean that the Founders saw African Americans as racially equal (indeed, they protected slavery through the Fugitive Slave Clause of the Constitution).

Similarly, the Nazi desperation for cannon fodder in the later stages of the war does not prove they saw the Russians as racial equals or were committed to treating them huanely.

Indeed and they're not equal anyway so what? Did the founders also plan to kill African American slaves?

They were committed to treating them appropriately in the circumstances.

Hitler's order to deny surrender is not hypothetical at all

The Führers Decision on Leningrad (Entschluß der Führers über Leningrad), transmitted by the Naval Warfare Command (Seekriegsleitung) to Army Group North on 29.09.1941


and yeah they had enormous problems with feeding the population, see here

Notes of the Head of the General Staff of the 18th Army, Colonel Hasse, from the high level meeting at Orsha on 13.11.1941 (State Archive Nuremberg, NOKW-1535)


as well as pre-Barbarossa plans by Backe, who ran their food supply (translated here by Mattogno - umpteen means 'countless' , 'untold')

View attachment 3581395

there is also the case of the millions of "communist fanatics" that surrendered to them and died en masse , which no revisionist denies because German records show 3.3 out of 5.7 million dying

and yet revisionists assume that millions of "unable to work" Jews were held and maintained somewhere in this area. There's no evidence for it, but it doesn't even make sense, given how the Nazis treated people who were higher on their racial hierarchy (not their mortal enemies) and more useful as labor.

In fact the army moved too far too fast to cope with the results. Then at Leningrad it had already determined this city to be a long term Russian threat anyway and refused to take on the burden of the population.

This was all explained in the other thread. Chuggers brings this up now, as usual out of desperation.

As for eastern resettlement. The nazis did ship Jews east and made some attempt at a permanent Jewish reserve. But alas the front breaking in 42 put paid to that. There was no subsequent drive to wipe out Jews in the east, thus no millions of bodies are to be found. So jews were allowed in the chaos of war to go where they pleased. Which they did. To this date, no gassed jews were ever found in Auschwitz or any other camp, nor are millions of shot to death Jews lying at Babi yar etc. There's no denying this simple fact. This debate is already won.

 

[mgc]

Zo,

Where does Goebbels say he prefers evacuated Jews to dead Jews?

 

[mrolonzo]

Zo,

Where does Goebbels say he prefers evacuated Jews to dead Jews?

Read the posts I write and stop wasting everyone's time and effort.

 

[Chugger]

Zo,

Where does Goebbels say he prefers evacuated Jews to dead Jews?

he's just parroting Dalton. Goebbels would surely have a good laugh at this interpretation

Also this entry refutes his nonsensical statement about the "front breaking in 42" putting an end to such deportations

 

[mgc]

View attachment 3581449

he's just parroting Dalton. Goebbels would surely have a good laugh at this interpretation

Also this entry refutes his nonsensical statement about the "front breaking in 42" putting an end to such deportations

Okay so, as I assumed, Goebbels never said that and this is Dalton's interpretation of a passage that says nothing of the sort. Right.

One can considered a gory scene of dead Jews "grotesque" without morally objecting to their death. Himmler also considered the the Einsatzgruppen mass shootings of civilians a grotesque practice, but he favored them.

Dalton btw is the same guy who says liquidiating human beings does not mean to kill them, but not make them fluid.

 

[Fapcop]

Hitler's order to deny surrender is not hypothetical at all

The Führers Decision on Leningrad (Entschluß der Führers über Leningrad), transmitted by the Naval Warfare Command (Seekriegsleitung) to Army Group North on 29.09.1941

It’s absolutely hypothetical, since no offer of surrender ever came.

Are you going to suggest that Seelion happened next?

and yeah they had enormous problems with feeding the population, see here

Yes, there was a food shortage across the continent.

This wasn’t because of some nefarious German scheme, but among other factors because of… the Allied (Well for all practical reasons UK) blockade of shipping. Other lesser reasons were the general disruption of war and Soviet mismanagement.

Notes of the Head of the General Staff of the

there is also the case of the millions of "communist fanatics" that surrendered to them and died en masse , which no revisionist denies because German records show 3.3 out of 5.7 million dying

Yes, the Eastern front was a brutal war that’s hardly news. Aside from the general food shortage, the Wehrmacht didn’t have the logistics and ressources in place to deal with millions of POWs.

What you don’t mention however, is that the death rates of German and Soviet POWs were roughly comparable.

sense, given how the Nazis treated people who were higher on their racial hierarchy (not their mortal enemies) and more useful as labor.

Meaningless. How “Nazis” treated people and “racial hierarchies” rarely had a consistent implementation, but depended on the conditions on the ground and especially local leaders.

See for example how the Jewish question was solved in Denmark and Italy compared with France or how Poles were treated in the Gau Warthegau Vs. Gau Danzig West Prussia.

 

[Stabmaster Arson]

Isn't it strange that the only camps that were death camps were 100% the ones liberated by the Russians?

All the camps liberated by Western powers were classed as work camps, not death camps.

Hrrrrrrrrrrrrrm

 

[mrolonzo]

View attachment 3581449

he's just parroting Dalton. Goebbels would surely have a good laugh at this interpretation

Also this entry refutes his nonsensical statement about the "front breaking in 42" putting an end to such deportations

It's just the logical reading from the entries. Don't get butthurt about it. Since when do you know Goebbels anyway? Dalton did a book on the entire 29 volume 22 years history of the diaries. So yeeeaahh.

It puts an end to the Jewish reserve idea. You can still kick Jews out though. But even that broke down as war needs became more desperate. Of course we all accept now that there was no killing of Jews. Which would be silly. But I know you'll still fight, so please give us another stupid accusation.

Okay so, as I assumed, Goebbels never said that and this is Dalton's interpretation of a passage that says nothing of the sort. Right.

One can considered a gory scene of dead Jews "grotesque" without morally objecting to their death. Himmler also considered the the Einsatzgruppen mass shootings of civilians a grotesque practice, but he favored them.

Dalton btw is the same guy who says liquidiating human beings does not mean to kill them, but not make them fluid.

That's literally what the passage means, if you describe a scene of drowning Jews as grotesque then in the next few sentences re iterate the need to evacuate as a solution. Then the meaning is clear.

The Himmler interjection is rejected outright.

Dalton as above is also the guy who did a book on the entire 29 volume, 22 years history of the diaries. So again yeeeaahh.

Isn't it strange that the only camps that were death camps were 100% the ones liberated by the Russians?

All the camps liberated by Western powers were classed as work camps, not death camps.

Hrrrrrrrrrrrrrm

Ask these peddlers about Majdanek. Watch the gymnastic display.

 

[mgc]

The starvation of Soviet POWs was obviously a conscious policy. This is proven by the fact that once the Nazis decided to use them for slave labor in early 1942, the POWs stopped starving in such absurd numbers.

The Nazis razed various villages and cities in Eastern Europe, including Warsaw, without any kind of military justification. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_Warsaw

Himmler described well Nazi indifference to the suffering and death of "other races," including Russians (translation by CODOH of all places).

"Whether other races live well or die of hunger is only of interest to me insofar as we need them as slaves for our culture; otherwise that doesn't interest me. Whether 10,000 Russian women fall down from exhaustion in building a tank ditch is of interest to me only insofar as the tank ditches are finished for Germany.

We will never be hard and heartless when it is not necessary; that is clear. We Germans, the only ones in the world with a decent attitude towards animals, will also adopt a decent attitude with regards to these human animals; but it is a sin against our own blood to worry about them and give them ideals, so that our sons and grandchildren will have a harder time with them. When somebody comes to me and says, "I can't build tank ditches with children or women. That's inhumane, they'll die doing it." Then I must say: "You are a murderer of your own blood, since, if the tank ditches are not built, then German soldiers will die, and they are the sons of German mothers. That is our blood."

https://codoh.com/library/document/heinrich-himmlers-posen-speech-from-04101943/en/

That passage by Himmler indicates a lack of interest in the well-being of Russians, the unapologietc willingness to work Russian civilians (women) to death to serve the German war effort, and the characterization of Russians as "slaves" for Germany.


Regarding the location of the main death camps - they were in Poland, because that is where the vast majority of the Jews killed in the camps were from. Poland made obvious logistical sense in a way the Netherlands would not have.

Nevertheless, there was a camp with homicidal gassings liberated by the Western Allies - Natzweiler.

 

[Stabmaster Arson]

Ask these peddlers about Majdanek. Watch the gymnastic display.

I don't know about that, and wiki isn't giving me a full picture. What makes them seethe?

 

[Stan]

I always get a chuckle at how quickly Montel goes into shutitdown mode when the black redneck mentions how holocaust is big business and people receive monthly cheques for being "holocaust survivors".


View attachment 3580854

As far as I know, these cheques were never sent to gypsies, gay or other non-jewish survivors, because who the fuck cares about them, right?

You just contradicted yourself; “Holocaust survivors” covers Romani, homos, political prisoners, Jesuit objectors etc.

I read these three articles about Holocaust Restitution:

https://www.state.gov/reports/just-act-report-to-congress/netherlands/#report-toc__exec-summary

Holocaust Restitution Payments

Holocaust restitution payments is money paid by Germany, Austria, and other countries to partly compensate victims persecuted by Nazi Germany or its allies.

www.investopedia.com

A guide to compensation and eligibility for Holocaust survivors

Where to apply for the main rights and benefits that survivors are entitled to.

www.washingtonjewishweek.com

Each restitution program for Holocaust survivors is explicit in defining Holocaust survivors as anybody who was in the ghettos/camps, irrespective of ethnicity. But what is more interesting is the politics behind it.

For example, in 2019 the Netherlands started making a substantial one time payment to survivors who were transported on Dutch railways and trains (15k euros) with a fraction of that available to widows and children. But the money for this program in part came from Nazi gold that was looted by the US and then given to the Netherlands. Banks and insurance companies have also turned over the assets of Jews who died in the Holocaust to the Dutch government and that funds this program as well. Tbh it seems like there are not many survivors to claim this benefit in full; much of the money is being used to restore Jewish stuff (synagogues, art objects, fancy Torah scrolls etc.) or “promote Jewish culture”.

So a substantial portion of these payments isn’t coming from the tax euros of Dutch workers but from assets that can never be restored to their owners because every potential heir is dead.

ETA: the programs are not outrageously generous. Most are one time payments in the amount of 2,500 euros or less. The only recurrent-tugboat type program (Article 2 fund) is 1700 euros every financial quarter.

And at the risk of being pedantic; there are not many survivors still alive to claim these benefits. Someone who was 5 years old in 1945 would be 82 years old today.

 

[mrolonzo]

The starvation of Soviet POWs was obviously a conscious policy. This is proven by the fact that once the Nazis decided to use them for slave labor in early 1942, the POWs stopped starving in such absurd numbers.

The Nazis razed various villages and cities in Eastern Europe, including Warsaw, without any kind of military justification. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_Warsaw

Himmler described well Nazi indifference to the suffering and death of "other races," including Russians (translation by CODOH of all places).

"Whether other races live well or die of hunger is only of interest to me insofar as we need them as slaves for our culture; otherwise that doesn't interest me. Whether 10,000 Russian women fall down from exhaustion in building a tank ditch is of interest to me only insofar as the tank ditches are finished for Germany.

We will never be hard and heartless when it is not necessary; that is clear. We Germans, the only ones in the world with a decent attitude towards animals, will also adopt a decent attitude with regards to these human animals; but it is a sin against our own blood to worry about them and give them ideals, so that our sons and grandchildren will have a harder time with them. When somebody comes to me and says, "I can't build tank ditches with children or women. That's inhumane, they'll die doing it." Then I must say: "You are a murderer of your own blood, since, if the tank ditches are not built, then German soldiers will die, and they are the sons of German mothers. That is our blood."

https://codoh.com/library/document/heinrich-himmlers-posen-speech-from-04101943/en/

Regarding the location of the main death camps - they were in Poland, because that is where the vast majority of the Jews killed in the camps were from. Poland made obvious logistical sense in a way the Netherlands would not have.

Nevertheless, there was a camp with homicidal gassings liberated by the Western Allies - Natzweiler.

They later had an organisational reason to organize them and place them in their supply system. Point refuted.

In fact many western camps were supposed to be death camps. Dachau is a great example. The lack of evidence didn't stop them trying though. But of course in the Soviet empire such forced propaganda was easier to create and maintain.

You just contradicted yourself; “Holocaust survivors” covers Romani, homos, political prisoners, Jesuit objectors etc.

I read these three articles about Holocaust Restitution:

https://www.state.gov/reports/just-act-report-to-congress/netherlands/#report-toc__exec-summary

Holocaust Restitution Payments

Holocaust restitution payments is money paid by Germany, Austria, and other countries to partly compensate victims persecuted by Nazi Germany or its allies.

www.investopedia.com

A guide to compensation and eligibility for Holocaust survivors

Where to apply for the main rights and benefits that survivors are entitled to.

www.washingtonjewishweek.com

Each of them are explicit in defining Holocaust survivors as anybody who was in the ghettos/camps, irrespective of ethnicity. But what is more interesting is the politics behind it.

For example, in 2019 the Netherlands started making a substantial one time payment to survivors who were transported on Dutch railways and trains (15k euros) with a fraction of that available to widows and children. But the money for this program in part came from Nazi gold that was looted by the US and then given to the Netherlands. Banks and insurance companies have also turned over the assets of Jews who died in the Holocaust to the Dutch government and that funds this program as well. Tbh it seems like there are not many survivors to claim this benefit in full; much of the money is being used to restore Jewish stuff (synagogues, art objects, fancy Torah scrolls etc.) or “promote Jewish culture”.

So a substantial portion of these payments isn’t coming from the tax euros of Dutch workers but from assets that can never be restored to their owners because every potential heir is dead.

The Romani and homocaust is all a hoax too of course.

 

[mgc]

Point refuted.

When you say this, nobody believes you except those who agree with you based on a predetermined, emotionally-based conclusion. No sane person could read the excerpt and conclude that Himmler had respect for the human rights of Russians. Much less that he was a "white nationalist" who believed Europeans were one race or people.

Here is another passage -

"The Slav is never able to build anything himself. In the long run, he's not capable of it. I'll come back to this later. With the exception of a few phenomena produced by Asia every couple of centuries, through that mixture of two heredities which may be fortunate for Asia but is unfortunate for us Europeans — with the exception, therefore, of an Attilla, a Ghenghis Khan, a Tamerlaine, a Lenin, a Stalin — the mixed race of the Slavs is based on a sub-race with a few drops of blood of our blood, blood of a leading race; the Slav is unable to control himself and create order. He is able to argue, able to debate, able to disintegrate, able to offer resistance against every authority and to revolt. But these human shoddy goods are just as incapable of maintaining order today as they were 700 or 800 years ago, when they called in the Varangians, when they called in the Ruriks."

https://codoh.com/library/document/heinrich-himmlers-posen-speech-from-04101943/en/

Himmler clearly thinks Slavs are a different race than Germans, some kind of "mixed-race" between Asians and Aryans. He also believes that they are incapable of building anything for themselves, and fit for slavery. This racist attitude against Slavs (especially Poles and Russians) helps explain why they were so brutally mistreated by the Nazis, who murdered so many millions of Slavic gentile civilians.