ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags general discussion , holocaust , holocaust denial , World War II history

Reply
Old 16th March 2017, 04:49 PM   #2281
LemmyCaution
Master Poster
 
LemmyCaution's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,389
Originally Posted by EtienneSC View Post
Fleming

That assumes that revisionists have not discussed these reports. They have.
No, it doesn't assume that at all. It simply informs you that there is voluminous documentary evidence where you keep acting like there's almost none. Also, Fleming goes well beyond what Evans has written on the reports from Poland and their reception in Britain.
__________________
. . . all this would be absurd if it weren't happening, now let's go and eat.
- Jose Saramago, The Stone Raft

Last edited by LemmyCaution; 16th March 2017 at 04:59 PM.
LemmyCaution is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2017, 04:54 PM   #2282
LemmyCaution
Master Poster
 
LemmyCaution's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,389
Originally Posted by EtienneSC View Post
Siegmund Rothstein

It does not surprise me that there would be several people of the same name born in the same place. I have come across this myself with old birth/death records. Rudolf offers a weak argument for how the supposed same Rothstein would have had to travel from Treblinka to Minsk. It seems to be wishful thinking rather than a lie. I have nothing to add myself.
A correction, in the interest of accuracy. Rudolf's "weak argument" - and it is worse than weak, it is false - isn't on account of multiple individuals with the same name. Rather, as I posted above,
Originally Posted by LemmyCaution View Post
... there are 4 records at YV for Siegmund (Zigmund) Rothstein from Kitzingen (Mainfranken), born there in 1867. It would be beyond strange indeed if there were 4 people with that name born in 1867 in the same place. (One of Siegmund's nephews was named Siegfried Rothstein and was deported from Mainfranken but to Izbica, probably perishing in Bełzec or Sobibór, not to Theresienstadt or Minsk.)
Rudolf dishonestly linked the 4 records with conflicting information for this man, Siegmund (Zigmund) Rothstein, to create a false itinerary in service of his dishonest "thesis" about resettlement. He knew what he was doing, and he did it to falsify the history. You may not call that a lie; but it is a lie.
__________________
. . . all this would be absurd if it weren't happening, now let's go and eat.
- Jose Saramago, The Stone Raft

Last edited by LemmyCaution; 16th March 2017 at 04:59 PM.
LemmyCaution is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2017, 05:53 PM   #2283
Ivanesca
Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by LemmyCaution View Post
Originally Posted by EtienneSC
Fleming

That assumes that revisionists have not discussed these reports. They have.
No, it doesn't assume that at all. It simply informs you that there is voluminous documentary evidence where you keep acting like there's almost none. Also, Fleming goes well beyond what Evans has written on the reports from Poland and their reception in Britain.
[/quote]

Both the authors of EtienneSC's nonsense missed the point of Cavendish's statements, much like EtienneSC himself did months ago. As he had been told before, Cavendish cast doubt on the claim that Poles were being systematically put to death in gas chambers. He is quoted as saying such in the spam, and much more besides.

Quote:
I do not believe that there is any evidence which would be
accepted in a Law Court that Polish children have been killed on the
spot by Germans when their parents were being deported to work in
9 Roger Allen to Victor Cavendish-Bentinck, 27th August 1943, FO 371/34551
Page 5 of 18
Germany, nor that Polish children have been sold to German settlers.
As regards putting Poles to death in gas chambers, I do not believe
that there is any evidence that this has been done. There have been
many stories to this effect, and we have played them up in PWE
rumours without believing that they had any foundation. At any rate
there is far less evidence than exists for the mass murder of Polish
officers by the Russians at Katyn. On the other hand we do know that
the Germans are out to destroy Jews of any age unless they are fit for
manual labour.
The Spam And Cavendish's statements and actions really don't lend credence to the claim that the British "Fabricated" the evidence for the Holocaust. It actually shows the opposite

Quote:
The words “where they are now being systematically put to death in gas
chambers” were removed from the statement before it was published
simultaneously in London and Washington.1
Far from fabricating "atrocity stories" as the authors claim, it now seems as if the Allied Governments avoided using "atrocity stories" because of the Antisemitism within their own intelligence agencies. The spam wastes a lot of time talking about and trying to prove an imaginary "hoax", but instead, what it actually does is disprove the "hoax" by showing how intelligence agencies doubted the reports coming from occupied Europe and acted on these doubts by editing their propaganda accordingly. Fail.
Ivanesca is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2017, 05:56 PM   #2284
LemmyCaution
Master Poster
 
LemmyCaution's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,389
Ivanesca, your patience exceeds mine great detail - I will add that Fleming's argument is very much in line with what you say about the doubt and suppression of reports coming from Poland, for a variety of reasons within the British government - but the reports remain sources to be dealt with and explained . . .
__________________
. . . all this would be absurd if it weren't happening, now let's go and eat.
- Jose Saramago, The Stone Raft

Last edited by LemmyCaution; 16th March 2017 at 07:34 PM.
LemmyCaution is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th March 2017, 04:40 AM   #2285
LemmyCaution
Master Poster
 
LemmyCaution's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,389
Originally Posted by EtienneSC View Post
Siegmund Rothstein

It does not surprise me that there would be several people of the same name born in the same place. I have come across this myself with old birth/death records. . . .
To make this clearer to you than I did before, I searched for population data for Kitzingen, where Rothstein was born. The Jewish population of Kitzingen in 1880 was 337. Yet you imagine, to help Rudolf wriggle out of his lie, that he made an honest mistake, leavened with wishful thinking, that 4 males with the same name were born there in 1867. Seriously?
__________________
. . . all this would be absurd if it weren't happening, now let's go and eat.
- Jose Saramago, The Stone Raft
LemmyCaution is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2017, 03:14 PM   #2286
Ivanesca
Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 134
Moreon EtienneSC's painful ignorance and assumptions vis a vis British wartime intelligence on the Holocaust.

Dr. Jonathan Harrison of Holocaust Controversies was kind enough to share the interrogation protocol of one Robert Barth, an SS officer captured by the British in 1943.

Quote:
Barth described the formation of the Einsatzgruppen in May 1941 and their tasks—fighting partisans and Communism and carrying out general intelligence duties. He admitted that commissars and leading Communists were arrested and shot but misleadingly claimed that the Order Police (“Schupos”) and Waffen-SS did the shooting. (They did, but the Einsatzgruppen did even more.) Barth revealed that Jews were almost invariably shot and in later stages gassed. He then discussed the 1943 activities of Einsatzgruppe E [sic] in Serbia and Croatia [see note 60].
The sequence and emphasis of Barth's testimony is noteworthy. He describes and moreover defends or justifies the Einsatzgruppen's policies by saying that their main task was "fighting partisans, communists, and carrying out intelligence duties". He acknowledges that they killed and gassed Jews, but his recollection almost downplays these atrocities by describing them as an afterthought. Such self justifying testimony hardly corresponds to what EtienneSC calls "fabrication" or "propaganda", or telling EtienneSC's fantasy British forgers "what they wanted to hear". Based on his statements, particularly the self justifications, it sounded more like Barth was telling his interrogators what he knew, and he was trying to defend the Einsatzgruppen by downplaying their atrocities against Jews and instead showing how useful they were against communists. This was a man putting his own spin on events that actually happened, and neither "coached" nor "fabricates" in the interests of "Propaganda". The British "hoax" never happened. The authors of EtienneSC's spam are liars, just like the one who shared the spam in the first place.
Ivanesca is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2017, 03:12 PM   #2287
Ivanesca
Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by Ivanesca View Post
Moreon EtienneSC's painful ignorance and assumptions vis a vis British wartime intelligence on the Holocaust.

Dr. Jonathan Harrison of Holocaust Controversies was kind enough to share the interrogation protocol of one Robert Barth, an SS officer captured by the British in 1943.



The sequence and emphasis of Barth's testimony is noteworthy. He describes and moreover defends or justifies the Einsatzgruppen's policies by saying that their main task was "fighting partisans, communists, and carrying out intelligence duties". He acknowledges that they killed and gassed Jews, but his recollection almost downplays these atrocities by describing them as an afterthought. Such self justifying testimony hardly corresponds to what EtienneSC calls "fabrication" or "propaganda", or telling EtienneSC's fantasy British forgers "what they wanted to hear". Based on his statements, particularly the self justifications, it sounded more like Barth was telling his interrogators what he knew, and he was trying to defend the Einsatzgruppen by downplaying their atrocities against Jews and instead showing how useful they were against communists. This was a man putting his own spin on events that actually happened, and neither "coached" nor "fabricates" in the interests of "Propaganda". The British "hoax" never happened. The authors of EtienneSC's spam are liars, just like the one who shared the spam in the first place.
I recant this post, as my interpretation of Barth's testimony was incorrect. The Black Rabbit of Inle (a self admitted ex denier) pointed out to me that Barth was a known anti-nazi.

That said, Barth's statement and his questioning at British hands still.don't support the notion of a "British Hoax". The Black Rabbit shared some of the directives/guidelines followed by the British interrogators. These guidelines did not contain any directive to ask about Gas vans, and the interrogators actually mentioned that Barth volunteered his information before any such questions were asked, or questionnaires provided. The information in the interrogation summary shows us exactly what the British needed and expected from such interrogations: Military intelligence. Thus, the interrogation summary emphasizes the limited intelligence contacts the Einsatzgruppen had with the Abwehr.

fotos.fotoflexer.com/794d2e7bec1ce6cb537335673eada11e.jpg

ETA: Barth was a self admitted Anti Nazi who willingly surrendered and, the actual interrogation transcripts may indicate that he had a lot to say about gassings and other atrocities. But, it's worth noting that the summary prepared by the British instead focuses on the bits of Barth's statements relating to military intelligence, while relegating his statements about the killings of the Jews to an afterthought. The significance of this was not that Barth downplayed the Einsatzgruppen's atrocities and played up their counter-insurgency functions, as I previously thought. It was that the British Did Not Care about such atrocities and were more interested in military intelligence. No "coaxing", "fabrication" or "fishing".

Close, but no cigar. The British did not need to "prod" or "coax" anyone into providing information about atrocities against Jews. Their interrogation practices make it clear that was not their aim or agenda. No British "hoax"

Last edited by Ivanesca; 24th March 2017 at 03:35 PM.
Ivanesca is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:36 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.