General Holocaust denial discussion Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mondial said:
US Supreme Court Justice Harlan Fiske Stone referred to the Nuremberg tribunal as a "sanctimonious fraud" and a "lynching party". Why would such a prominent person make such comments if they were not warranted ? -
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11053
Click to expand...

Argument from authority. Unless you or Stone can cite examples of the IMT violating legal norms or fabricating evidence to convict the defendants, then this is irrelevant.

Also, Stone was a political opponent of the Cheif US prosecutor Robert Jackson. In other words, he was mudslinging. So? American politicians do that to this day, it doesn't make it true.
 
Ivanesca said:
Argument from authority. Unless you or Stone can cite examples of the IMT violating legal norms or fabricating evidence to convict the defendants, then this is irrelevant.

Also, Stone was a political opponent of the Cheif US prosecutor Robert Jackson. In other words, he was mudslinging. So? American politicians do that to this day, it doesn't make it true.
Click to expand...

The great architect of the holohoax was Rudolf Hoess, who was tried at Nuremberg. No, wait a minute, he wasn't tried, he did 'testify' however, that is he read an affidavit into the record and testified briefly. He testified as a defense witness. Kafka couldn't have imagined anything this absurd. Gogol, maybe. In his affidavit he admitted to gassing 2.5 million Jews at Auschwitz plus killing an additional .5 million by other means. Here is what he wrote in his book written after the trial ...

" I was treated terribly by the [British] Field Security Police. I was dragged to Heide and, of all places, to the same military barracks from which I had been released eight months before by the British. I do not know what was in the transcript, or what I said, even though I signed it, because they gave me liquor and beat me with a whip. It was too much even for me to bear. The whip was my own. By chance it had found its way into my wife's luggage. My horse had hardly ever been touched by it, much less the prisoners. Somehow one of the interrogators probably thought that I had constantly used it to whip the prisoners."

Visit holohoax101.org for more on Hoess's testimony and other hoax absurdities.
 
Last edited:
Saggy said:
The great architect of the holohoax was Rudolf Hoess, who was tried at Nuremberg. No, wait a minute, he wasn't tried, he did 'testify' however, that is he read an affidavit into the record and testified briefly. He testified as a defense witness. Kafka couldn't have imagined anything this absurd. Gogol, maybe. In his affidavit he admitted to gassing 2.5 million Jews at Auschwitz plus killing an additional .5 million by other means. Here is what he wrote in his book written after the trial ...

" I was treated terribly by the [British] Field Security Police. I was dragged to Heide and, of all places, to the same military barracks from which I had been released eight months before by the British. I do not know what was in the transcript, or what I said, even though I signed it, because they gave me liquor and beat me with a whip. It was too much even for me to bear. The whip was my own. By chance it had found its way into my wife's luggage. My horse had hardly ever been touched by it, much less the prisoners. Somehow one of the interrogators probably thought that I had constantly used it to whip the prisoners."

Visit holohoax101.org for more on Hoess's testimony and other hoax absurdities.
Click to expand...

Please don't lie about Hoess to someone who has actually Read and owns Hoess's memoirs. That was about his initial British captivity. Here's what he says about his experience when he was transferred to the IMT for the trial

Rudolf Hoess said:
On the Next Day I was taken by Lorry to Nuremberg, together with a prisoner of war who was brought over from London as a witness in Fritsche's defense. My Imprisonment by the International Military Tribunal was a rest cure compared to what I had been through before
Click to expand...

While Hoess did get beaten in British captivity (and he completely deserved it), there's really no indication that it was done with the intent to make him give false testimony at the IMT (he was beaten because he was a mass murderer) simply because there's no indication that his testimony was false and intended to serve the IMT's agenda. Most obviously, the IMT indictment prepared by the Soviets mentioned an Auschwitz Death toll of 4 Million (calculated based on exaggerated assumptions of the Crematoria, rather than the actual number of people sent to Auschwitz). If Hoess was coerced, his testimony would've aligned with this indictment and helped validate it, similar to the Moscow show trials and other cases of actual legal coercion. Instead, Hoess testified that "only" 3 Million had died, based on his own memory and knowledge, rather than going with the Allied indictment. Ergo, no coercion. He also placed the date of the planning of the final solution to 1941 rather than 1942, which had the side effect of shifting the responsibility from Kaltenbrunner to his predecessor, Heydrich. Speaking of Kaltenbrunner, Hoess actually did his job and played along with the former's strategy of downplaying his role in the final solution during his IMT testimony. e.g. He stated that he only met Kaltenbrunner a few times (therefore minimizing Kaltenbrunner's complicity in Hoess' role in Auschwitz) and insisted that most of the orders he got came from Mueller (shifting the criminal responsibility from Kaltenbrunner to Mueller). If Hoess was coerced, then he would've implicated Kaltenbrunner at every opportunity, like in the Moscow Show trials and actual cases of legal coercion. Instead, he was openly able to give testimony that helped defend Kaltenbrunner, like any free defense witness in any free and fair trial around the world. No Banana for Saggy.

The great architect of the holohoax was Rudolf Hoess
Click to expand...

Said no one ever. And his testimony was not the only piece of evidence reviewed by the IMT regarding the final solution. IIRC the Stroop Report, Hans Frank's diary, documents from the German foreign ministry and statements from various Einsatzgruppen personnel were submitted as well. No one was convicted based solely on Hoess's testimony. Saggy is repeating Ernst Zundel's old strawman that Hoess was the "only" piece of evidence for the Holocaust at the IMT (Not true), which doesn't help his credibility.

Hoess was not tortured, as his testimony at and after the IMT make clear. All Saggy did was prove my point. He lied about the Majdanek Gas chamber having a "window", and now he lies about Rudolf Hoess. No banana for him or Mondial, I'm afraid.
 
Last edited:
CaptainHowdy said:
"They did it too" isn't a valid defense. "YOU did it too" is.
Click to expand...

This was actually accepted at the Nuremberg Doctor's trial, showing that it (like most Allied postwar trials) was very fair and defendant friendly. One of the defendants, Kurt Blome, justified his medical experiments by saying that the Anglo Americans did it too, and that his experiments were necessary in wartime. Since Blome was able to give this type of testimony, we can rule out torture or coercion in the Nuremberg Doctor's trial, BTW. He was acquitted, along with several other defendants in that very same trial. Most Deniers talk nonsense about postwar trials without actually reviewing them or what they were about.

Except maybe in Blome and a few others' examples, "You did it too" doesn't really apply. Nothing the Allies did approached the scale of genocide/mass murder perpetrated by the Nazis.
 
Ivanesca said:
Please don't lie about Hoess to someone who has actually Read and owns Hoess's memoirs. That was about his initial British captivity. Here's what he says about his experience when he was transferred to the IMT for the trial



While Hoess did get beaten in British captivity (and he completely deserved it), there's really no indication that it was done with the intent to make him give false testimony at the IMT (he was beaten because he was a mass murderer) simply because there's no indication that his testimony was false and intended to serve the IMT's agenda. Most obviously, the IMT indictment prepared by the Soviets mentioned an Auschwitz Death toll of 4 Million (calculated based on exaggerated assumptions of the Crematoria, rather than the actual number of people sent to Auschwitz). If Hoess was coerced, his testimony would've aligned with this indictment and helped validate it, similar to the Moscow show trials and other cases of actual legal coercion. Instead, Hoess testified that "only" 3 Million had died, based on his own memory and knowledge, rather than going with the Allied indictment. Ergo, no coercion. He also placed the date of the planning of the final solution to 1941 rather than 1942, which had the side effect of shifting the responsibility from Kaltenbrunner to his predecessor, Heydrich. Speaking of Kaltenbrunner, Hoess actually did his job and played along with the former's strategy of downplaying his role in the final solution during his IMT testimony. e.g. He stated that he only met Kaltenbrunner a few times (therefore minimizing Kaltenbrunner's complicity in Hoess' role in Auschwitz) and insisted that most of the orders he got came from Mueller (shifting the criminal responsibility from Kaltenbrunner to Mueller). If Hoess was coerced, then he would've implicated Kaltenbrunner at every opportunity, like in the Moscow Show trials and actual cases of legal coercion. Instead, he was openly able to give testimony that helped defend Kaltenbrunner, like any free defense witness in any free and fair trial around the world. No Banana for Saggy.



Said no one ever. And his testimony was not the only piece of evidence reviewed by the IMT regarding the final solution. IIRC the Stroop Report, Hans Frank's diary, documents from the German foreign ministry and statements from various Einsatzgruppen personnel were submitted as well. No one was convicted based solely on Hoess's testimony. Saggy is repeating Ernst Zundel's old strawman that Hoess was the "only" piece of evidence for the Holocaust at the IMT (Not true), which doesn't help his credibility.

Hoess was not tortured, as his testimony at and after the IMT make clear. All Saggy did was prove my point. He lied about the Majdanek Gas chamber having a "window", and now he lies about Rudolf Hoess. No banana for him or Mondial, I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

I'll just pick one from your pack of idiotic lies ....

"Hoess was the architect of the hoax ...

Said no one ever."

Said Hoess himself in his book. I thought you read it. He says he was directed by Himmler personally to direct the killing the Jews, starting with selection of the method of killing, he sent Eichmann out to scour the countryside looking for the best ways of killing ... (yes this is just pure idiocy) .. and he and Eichmann experimented at Auschwitz before arriving at the gas chamber solution, using the same commercial insecticide they were using for delousing, in the same form from the same cans. Incidentally, Himmler told Hoess to ... 'keep this between the two of us', as Hoess reports.

The holohoax is the biggest, most destructive, most degenerate hoax in history, I don't think Judaism will survive it. I guess the real question is, will any of us survive it?
 
Last edited:
Saggy said:
I'll just pick one from your pack of idiotic lies ....

"Hoess was the architect of the hoax ...

Said no one ever."

Said Hoess himself in his book. I thought you read it. He says he was directed by Himmler personally to direct the killing the Jews
Click to expand...

In Auschwitz only. All his years of Holocaust Denial, and poor Saggy still cannot grasp that the Holocaust was more than Auschwitz and its Homicidal Gas Chambers, and that Hoess and his command was only a part of it. Yawn

The holohoax is the biggest, most destructive, most degenerate hoax in history, I don't think Judaism will survive it.
Click to expand...

The biggest, most destructive, degenerate hoax in history is Saggy's rubbish. As for who will allegedly survive, Holocaust research is consistently breaking new strides, while Saggy is stuck repeating the rubbish he spammed six years ago in 2011, or even before that, judging by his repetition of Ernst Zundel's spam. It's pitiful, really.
 
Saggy said:
The holohoax is the biggest, most destructive, most degenerate hoax in history, I don't think Judaism will survive it.
Click to expand...

Who do you think perpetuated this "hoax" and for what purpose?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
 
Mycroft said:
Who do you think perpetuated this "hoax" and for what purpose?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It wasn't the Western Allies, that's for sure. Their main priority at the time was opposing the USSR, and to this end, they needed a strong and stable Germany to serve as a bulwark against communism. For this purpose, they loosened the requirements for Denazification and allowed several prominent ex Nazis to serve in the West German government, and also the CIA and NASA (Instead of torturing them to fabricate false evidence to shame Germany). The malmedy trial defendants, Nuremberg Law architect Hans Globke, several German rocket scientists involved in slave labor were examples of this, and Hitler's former chief of staff (who later served as the secretary General of NATO) were examples of this. The Western Allies spent a lot off effort to protect them (instead of torturing or coercing them), i.e. Churchill personally intervened on behalf of Von Manstein, the US and West Germany blackmailed Israel to prevent them from exposing Hans Globke and other Ex Nazis in the Eichmann Trial. No American, British, or French Hoax there, that's for sure.

And it wasn't the USSR either. They were no "friend" of the Jews, and their post-war policy was "Do not Divide the dead", which was to downplay the fact that Jews were singled out by the Nazis for killing in Soviet territory. In all official reports of massacres on Russian soil, references to "Jewish Victims" were all edited to "Peaceful Soviet Citizens", changing the narrative from being a genocide specifically against Jews to Capitalist Fascists killing Communists. This was why the Soviet Indictment refers to the victims of Auschwitz as "Citizens of Various countries" instead of as Jews. Later on, the Soviets would crack down on Jewish attempts to commemorate the Babi Yar massacre as a massacre against Jews, and even forced local Jews to sign a document formally blaming "Zionism" for the Massacre. No Soviet Hoax either.

Both these policies rule out any form of Jewish "influence" or control over either the Western Allies or the USSR, meaning that Saggy's conspiracy theories about US policies are nothing but garbage.

I have told Mondial and EtienneSC about these well known policies several times but never got an answer. The truth must be too painful, since the truth is that there was never a hoax to begin with and the Actual, documented policies of the WWII victors rule out any hoax.
 
Saggy said:
The holohoax is the biggest, most destructive, most degenerate hoax in history, I don't think Judaism will survive it. I guess the real question is, will any of us survive it?
Click to expand...

Hyperbole much?

So far Billions have survived so much so over population is our greatest threat to the planet - most people alive today are little affected by the holocaust, perhaps you could tell us how its effects a farmer in southern India? A shop keeper in Bali? A policeman in Angola or a rancher in Brazil?
 
Saggy said:
I'll just pick one from your pack of idiotic lies ....

"Hoess was the architect of the hoax ...

Said no one ever."

Said Hoess himself in his book. I thought you read it. He says he was directed by Himmler personally to direct the killing the Jews, starting with selection of the method of killing, he sent Eichmann out to scour the countryside looking for the best ways of killing ... (yes this is just pure idiocy) .. and he and Eichmann experimented at Auschwitz before arriving at the gas chamber solution, using the same commercial insecticide they were using for delousing, in the same form from the same cans. Incidentally, Himmler told Hoess to ... 'keep this between the two of us', as Hoess reports.

The holohoax is the biggest, most destructive, most degenerate hoax in history, I don't think Judaism will survive it. I guess the real question is, will any of us survive it?
Click to expand...
You statement - Höss was the architect of the, er, Holocaust - is not supported by your examples, which are all to do with Auschwitz and gas chambers that utilized Zyklon B, by which not even 20% of the Jews murdered by the Nazis perished.

Not quite 30% of the victims were shot to death in open-air executions. Nearly another 30% were asphyxiated in fixed CO chambers. The remainder died in gas vans, in ghetto shootings, by forced starvation and other consequences of privation, and by miscellaneous beatings, hackings, executions, etc.

Time to read up on the Holocaust and leave the hoax behind.
 
CaptainHowdy said:
Argument from authority.
Click to expand...

Not really. Reiver is citing his experience as an expert in the legal system and is using that to explain his point. Mondial's appeal to Fisk Stone on the other hand, doesn't do that. Stone was simply scoring points and attacking his political rival Jackson, and was not citing any legal precedent or procedures that were violated by the IMT, thus his position as a judge was irrelevant. Just like Republicans saying stupid things about ACA are not automatically true because they're senators or whatever. Nice try though.
 
CaptainHowdy said:
Argument from authority.
Click to expand...



Not quite.

Let me give you a quick CV:

Enrolled in CAF Primary Reserves in 1987, still serving. Currently the RSM of 30 Fd Regt RCA.
Graduated Carleton University 1991 BA (horns) Law with a concentration in Criminology (thesis on Canadian war crimes legislation)
Became a paralegal with the Public Service (specifically the Dept of National Defence) in 1996 where I still work.

Not enough to have me declared an expert for trial purposes, but enough to hopefully allow people to accept that I'm not talking through my hat.

Under no legal system I am aware of (and an online search confirmed) is "but you did it too" acceptable as a legal defence.
 
Ivanesca said:
In Auschwitz only. All his years of Holocaust Denial, and poor Saggy still cannot grasp that the Holocaust was more than Auschwitz and its Homicidal Gas Chambers, and that Hoess and his command was only a part of it. Yawn



The biggest, most destructive, degenerate hoax in history is Saggy's rubbish. As for who will allegedly survive, Holocaust research is consistently breaking new strides, while Saggy is stuck repeating the rubbish he spammed six years ago in 2011, or even before that, judging by his repetition of Ernst Zundel's spam. It's pitiful, really.
Click to expand...


Just noticed this:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7644173&postcount=6321

By the time he is finished, Eric Hunt will destroy the phony holohoax.

Anyone who watches his movie 'The Last Days of the Big Lie' will know that the holohoax is a collection of degenerate lies.
Click to expand...

Where's that laughing dog gif when you need it?!
 
Hans said:
Hyperbole much?

So far Billions have survived so much so over population is our greatest threat to the planet - most people alive today are little affected by the holocaust, perhaps you could tell us how its effects a farmer in southern India? A shop keeper in Bali? A policeman in Angola or a rancher in Brazil?
Click to expand...
When the "truth" finally gets out, people everywhere will become insanely enraged and just start attacking each other.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
 
Jeffk 1970 said:
No denier knows. They have no answers and don't have a clue.
Click to expand...
Back in the day they used to say the Jews did it somehow. I'd like to hear what the current theory is from the this generation of deniers.

Captain Howdy? Mondial? Anyone?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
 
Mycroft said:
When the "truth" finally gets out, people everywhere will become insanely enraged and just start attacking each other.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Ah I thought it would trigger cannibalism and using soap & deodorants in inappropriate ways.
 
Ivanesca said:
Not really. Reiver is citing his experience as an expert in the legal system and is using that to explain his point. Mondial's appeal to Fisk Stone on the other hand, doesn't do that. Stone was simply scoring points and attacking his political rival Jackson, and was not citing any legal precedent or procedures that were violated by the IMT, thus his position as a judge was irrelevant. Just like Republicans saying stupid things about ACA are not automatically true because they're senators or whatever. Nice try though.
Click to expand...
Yes really. "As a practicing attorney for 25 years, I can tell you that I am most definitely correct." I claim to be more experienced and therefore have more expertise. Border cited no evidence of his expertise nor did he support his argument.

See below for some examples of how stupid Border's argument:
 
Hans said:
Hyperbole much?

So far Billions have survived so much so over population is our greatest threat to the planet - most people alive today are little affected by the holocaust, perhaps you could tell us how its effects a farmer in southern India? A shop keeper in Bali? A policeman in Angola or a rancher in Brazil?
Click to expand...
Having worked in the legal system for 21 years I can state that you are incorrect in that regard.
 
LemmyCaution said:
You statement - Höss was the architect of the, er, Holocaust - is not supported by your examples, which are all to do with Auschwitz and gas chambers that utilized Zyklon B, by which not even 20% of the Jews murdered by the Nazis perished.

Not quite 30% of the victims were shot to death in open-air executions. Nearly another 30% were asphyxiated in fixed CO chambers. The remainder died in gas vans, in ghetto shootings, by forced starvation and other consequences of privation, and by miscellaneous beatings, hackings, executions, etc.

Time to read up on the Holocaust and leave the hoax behind.
Click to expand...

Having worked in the legal system for 21 years I can state that you are incorrect in that regard.
 
CaptainHowdy said:
Yes really. "As a practicing attorney for 25 years, I can tell you that I am most definitely correct." I claim to be more experienced and therefore have more expertise. Border cited no evidence of his expertise nor did he support his argument.



See below for some examples of how stupid Border's argument:
Click to expand...


Perhaps you missed post #2458 where I gave an abbreviated CV.

In case you missed it:

"Enrolled in CAF Primary Reserves in 1987, still serving. Currently the RSM of 30 Fd Regt RCA.
Graduated Carleton University 1991 BA (hons) Law with a concentration in Criminology (thesis on Canadian war crimes legislation)
Became a paralegal with the Public Service (specifically the Dept of National Defence) in 1996 where I still work.

Not enough to have me declared an expert for trial purposes, but enough to hopefully allow people to accept that I'm not talking through my hat."

As for your "examples" of my argument being silly, when I made it, it was related to the example.
 
Ivanesca said:
.
And it wasn't the USSR either. They were no "friend" of the Jews, and their post-war policy was "Do not Divide the dead", which was to downplay the fact that Jews were singled out by the Nazis for killing in Soviet territory. In all official reports of massacres on Russian soil, references to "Jewish Victims" were all edited to "Peaceful Soviet Citizens", changing the narrative from being a genocide specifically against Jews to Capitalist Fascists killing Communists. This was why the Soviet Indictment refers to the victims of Auschwitz as "Citizens of Various countries" instead of as Jews. Later on, the Soviets would crack down on Jewish attempts to commemorate the Babi Yar massacre as a massacre against Jews, and even forced local Jews to sign a document formally blaming "Zionism" for the Massacre. No Soviet Hoax either.
.
Click to expand...

Since CaptainHowdy's not interested in having a discussion about the topic, I'll try to move the discussion forward.

The Auschwitz museum was kind enough to share the following article recently

http://lekcja.auschwitz.org/en_22_muzeum/

The article talks about the first years the Auschwitz memorial was in operation. Naturally, the policy I mentioned ("Do not divide the dead") was in effect and affected the initial operation and policy of the museum and memorial. Initially, the CKZP (Central committee of Polish Jews) participated in planning the museum and requested that two blocks (4 and 10) be made available for them for the purpose of setting up a memorial specifically for the Jewish victims (the largest group of Victims). However, when the museum first opened in 1947, only a fragment of the intended exhibits opened, and the fact that the Jews were singled out for killing was downplayed. For example, Block 4 did have a Jewish Khalat (along with symbols belonging to other Polish denominations), but the centerpiece of the exhibit was a Christian cross. Later in 1947, the Polish government formally issued an act/law explicitly stating that the Museum was intended for "Commemorating the Polish Martyrdom and Other Nations (Not Jews)". "Do Not divide the dead" really got rolling in the late 40s and the early 50s, when the Polish Communist government officially started following the Stalinist party line. In accordance with this policy, the already small Jewish exhibits in the museum were shut down and the exhibits made it clear that Jews were not singled out and suffered the same fate as other groups. More importantly, there were also "anti war" protests staged in the museum that depicted the Anglo Americans as the Successors of the Nazis.

The Article also mentions that while the Soviet Government allocated funds for maintaining the exhibits (that were not about the Jews), they allocated nothing else, resulting in the rest of Auschwitz (including Birkenau) suffering wear and tear due to limited maintenance.

So, in summary

1) There was No Hoax. In the first few years of the Memorial's operation, the Polish Government - as the law said - emphasized Polish suffering, and the Genocide against the Jews took a backseat to the Martyrdom of Poland, as depicted in the exhibits.
2) There was No Hoax. The Soviet Authorities shut down the exhibits talking about the Jews and made Auschwitz into a memorial of "communist" resistance against "capitalist" Fascists, and that these Capitalist Fascists were no longer Germans, but the "Anglo Americans"
3) The USSR didn't give a damn about the Jews or about Auschwitz; aside from allocating some funds for the exhibits they wanted, they didn't allocate any for the rest of the site, resulting in most of it falling into disrepair.
4) The "4 Million" Canard is based on a false assumption. Based on these acts and policies, it's obvious that the "4 Million" Number was never intended to refer to Jewish victims, and the alleged "reduction" has no bearing on the total Jewish death toll.

The Hoax never happened. Saggy was talking crap, and so was Mondial.
 
Tu quoque was allowed as a defense for Karl Dönitz on the charge that he committed war crimes by engaging in unrestricted submarine warfare. His attorneys introduced an affidavit from Admiral Nimitz, commander in chief of the US Pacific Fleet, stating that the US had engaged in unrestricted submarine warfare against Japan for the duration of the war.
 
CaptainHowdy said:
I'm arguing that "you did it too" is a defense. Please keep up.
Click to expand...

Okay could you point us to that 'law' being effect, in what country in what year?

Yes your statement is not evidence for it and no it is not our responsibility to prove its wrong. Its your claim so howzabout a link showing such a law exists and has been used in previous cases?
 
SpitfireIX said:
Tu quoque was allowed as a defense for Karl Dönitz on the charge that he committed war crimes by engaging in unrestricted submarine warfare. His attorneys introduced an affidavit from Admiral Nimitz, commander in chief of the US Pacific Fleet, stating that the US had engaged in unrestricted submarine warfare against Japan for the duration of the war.
Click to expand...



It was also unsuccessful. Dönitz was still found guilty of waging unrestricted submarine warfare against neutral shipping - no additional time was added to his sentence for it based on Nimitz's affidavit and other evidence, but it did not get him found "not guilty."
 
Border Reiver said:
It was also unsuccessful. Dönitz was still found guilty of waging unrestricted submarine warfare against neutral shipping - no additional time was added to his sentence for it based on Nimitz's affidavit and other evidence, but it did not get him found "not guilty."
Click to expand...


I don't read the judgement that way.

From the judgement:

In view of all the facts proved and in particular of an order of the British Admiralty announced on the 8th May, 1940, according to which all vessels should be sunk at sight in the Skagerrak, and the answers to interrogatories by Admiral Nimitz stating that unrestricted submarine warfare was carried on in the Pacific Ocean by the United States from the first day that nation entered the war, the sentence of Doenitz is not assessed on the ground of his breaches of the international law of submarine warfare.​

He was convicted of waging crimes against peace, and other war crimes not connected with submarines. Additionally, of all the defendants convicted, Dönitz received the lightest sentence.
 
I wrote,
Originally Posted by LemmyCaution View Post
You statement - Höss was the architect of the, er, Holocaust - is not supported by your examples, which are all to do with Auschwitz and gas chambers that utilized Zyklon B, by which not even 20% of the Jews murdered by the Nazis perished.

Not quite 30% of the victims were shot to death in open-air executions. Nearly another 30% were asphyxiated in fixed CO chambers. The remainder died in gas vans, in ghetto shootings, by forced starvation and other consequences of privation, and by miscellaneous beatings, hackings, executions, etc.

Time to read up on the Holocaust and leave the hoax behind.
Click to expand...
And Captain Howdy replied:
CaptainHowdy said:
Having worked in the legal system for 21 years I can state that you are incorrect in that regard.
Click to expand...
I don't know how to reply or even to make sense of this. I can only assume that Captain Howdy doesn't have anything to say about Saggy's false claim.
 
Ivanesca said:
. . . So, in summary

1) There was No Hoax. . . . 3) The USSR didn't give a damn about the Jews . . .The Hoax never happened. Saggy was talking crap, and so was Mondial.
Click to expand...
I am reading a biography of Sasha Pechersky, leader of the Soibór revolt in fall 1943. The biography, Sasah Pechersky: Holocaust Hero, Sobibor Resistance Leader, and Hostage of History by Selma Leydesdroff, is not that good (it contains a number of errors, sections are almost garbled, etc)

BUT the narrative raises an interesting question about Soviet memorialization and "official stories" about the Holocaust: if, after the war, the Soviets were busy hoaxing the Holocaust, why didn't they use Pechersky, hero of the Sobibór uprising? Why wasn't he put on the lecture circuit, sent to international trials and forums, and made an icon of the Jewish tragedy and resistance?

Far from using Pechersky to hoax the world, after the war the Soviet authorities hemmed him in: his testimonies were in fact censored and otherwise restricted. To take one example, the 1945 Russian edition of his earliest memoir, based on letters he'd written and a 1944 edition, substituted the term "Soviet citizens" for "Jews." Some of Pechersky's later testimonies were edited by Soviet authorities into conformity with the view that peaceful Soviet citizens suffered under the Nazis, with the Jewish aspect downplayed or outright suppressed. All this reflected the imposition of a Sovietized viewpoint of the history onto Pechersky's actual experience, which in the USSR became virtually impossible for him to tell as he experienced it.

Pechersky was never honored by Soviet authorities as a hero, nor was his story used by them in celebrating war-time resistance or promoting a narrative of the Holocaust. Following WWII, Pechersky in fact he lived and died in obscurity. He had long stretches of unemployment. As a former POW, Pechersky suffered the usual punishment and life-long discrimination given to Red Army soldiers who'd surrendered to the enemy and been taken prisoner. Jewish themes in his story, when he did testify, were consistently downplayed - and he was not even permitted to testify at the IMT or at EIchmann's trial in 1961. A major testimony he gave in 1962 in the USSR was, according to the author, "stage-managed by the authorities."

Indeed, one must use care with such testimonies - but for reasons exactly opposite to those given by Saggy and Holocaust deniers: the pressures and alterations imposed by Soviet authorities were generally to hide and deny the Jewish aspect of the tragedy, not to promote (or "hoax") it.
 
LemmyCaution said:
I wrote,
And Captain Howdy replied:
I don't know how to reply or even to make sense of this. I can only assume that Captain Howdy doesn't have anything to say about Saggy's false claim.
Click to expand...
False claims are false. What more is there to say? I said that "you did it too" is a defense. Not "Saggy is right"
 
CaptainHowdy said:
False claims are false. What more is there to say? I said that "you did it too" is a defense. Not "Saggy is right"
Click to expand...

Having worked in the legal system for 21 years I can state that you are incorrect in that regard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom