This is an apolitical forum for discussions on the Axis nations, as well as the First and Second World Wars in general hosted by Marcus Wendel's Axis History Factbook in cooperation with Michael Miller's Axis Biographical Research and Christoph Awender's WW2 day by day.
I don't really understand why some folks who hate jews want to do deny the holocaust. If I hated jews I'd be jumping for joy that it occurred. Just a thought.
The only people I really hate are idiots, and those come in all colours and nationalities. 8)
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Holocaust/himmler.html...we must be honest, decent, loyal, and comradely to members of our own blood and to no one else. What happens to the Russians, what happens to the Czechs, is a matter of utter indifference to me. Such good blood of our own kind as there may be among the nations we shall acquire for ourselves, if necessary by taking away the children and bringing them up among us. Whether the other peoples live in comfort or perish of hunger interests me only in so far as we need them as slaves for our Kultur. Whether or not 10,000 Russian women collapse from exhaustion while digging a tank ditch interests me only in so far as the tank ditch is completed for Germany. We shall never be rough or heartless where it is not necessary; that is clear. We Germans, who are the only people in the world who have a decent attitude to animals, will also adopt a decent attitude to these human animals, but it is a crime against our own blood to worry about them and to bring them ideals. I shall speak to you here with all frankness of a very grave matter. Among ourselves it should be mentioned quite frankly, and yet we will never speak of it publicly. I mean the evacuation of the Jews, the extermination of the Jewish people.. . . Most of you know what it means to see a hundred corpses lying together, five hundred, or a thousand. To have stuck it out and at the same time--apart from exceptions caused by human weakness--to have remained decent fellows, that is what has made us hard. This is a page of glory in our history which has never been written and shall never be written.
"While I watched the film I could not help but be touched by Bomba's sincere distress. His tears brought tears to my own eyes. At the same time I was aware of what a laugh I thought his story is. A nice irony for the psychotherapists."
Scott Smith wrote:"While I watched the film I could not help but be touched by Bomba's sincere distress. His tears brought tears to my own eyes. At the same time I was aware of what a laugh I thought his story is. A nice irony for the psychotherapists."
Enjoy! Abraham Bomba: Barber of Treblinka, by Bradley R. Smith.
The image of Abraham Bomba is forever seared into my my mind, the place where when I am idle, he will be one of the first faces I see. The scene is set up in a barber shop where we see Mr. Bomba cutting hair. It is no wonder Lanzmann does this because the questions he asks are concerning Abraham's occupation as a prisoner of the Germans. It should be remembered that Lanzmann knows the answers to the questions he is asking, the staging is only to further the response of the individual being interviewed.
Abraham was selected by the Germans to make those about to enter the death cambers less wary of their impending death. He cut the hair of woman just before they were killed in the chambers. This served two purposes, the hair was used by the Germans, and the woman were comforted and not suspicious.
While he is talking he never looks at the camera, his comments are given as if he is talking to the individual he is giving the haircut to. He has built a wall around him and it is this wall Lanzmann is trying to take down. He questions him precisely, almost irritatingly, Bomba appears to answer bitterly at times and dodges certain questions. For example, when asked how he felt to have these naked women coming into the room to have a haircut, he replies, "I felt that accordingly I got to do what they told me, to cut their hair in a way that it looked like the barber was doing his job for a woman . . . " This can not be his first reaction, but more of a secondary response. Who can tell what the first would be? I guess it to be one of shame and then a cascade of rapidly shot emotions I assume he has packed tightly away on his side of the wall.
At the end of the interview Abraham cracks, and the scene becomes bitterly emotional. I found myself telling Lanzmann to get the damn camera out of the guy's face. I feel the pressure and the tension that carries on for minutes, wanting to put my arm around him and take him out of the room. I found myself hating Lanzmann. My wife asked why I was irritated, and I found it next to impossible to share his story second hand. It must have ripped him inside to witness a man with his wife and family hours before they were to cease existence in a heartless and pitiless manner and not be able to do anything.
So the article recommended by our Reverend is a really enjoyable demonstration of what a lowly anti-Semitic skunk Mr. Bradley Smith is. Trying to draw political capital from the emotional distress of a confused survivor. Looking forward to spit in the eye of that filthy swine some day. Did the creep also write something about Suchomel's deposition, by the way? Or did that leave him mute?
Scott Smith wrote:Medorjurgen impugned:So the article recommended by our Reverend is a really enjoyable demonstration of what a lowly anti-Semitic skunk Mr. Bradley Smith is. Trying to draw political capital from the emotional distress of a confused survivor. Looking forward to spit in the eye of that filthy swine some day. Did the creep also write something about Suchomel's deposition, by the way? Or did that leave him mute?
Medojurgen really makes no point other than to play the "anti-Semitism" card, ad nauseam. The last refuge of a scamp!
If you had bothered to read Bradley Smith's article then you would know that he censures Shoah Boat director Claude Lanzmann for NOT asking any relevant questions. It is Cannes mogul Claude, therefore, who is milking the sad eyes, one onion at a time. The tragedy is that the suffering is genuine, even if the stories are not.
Medorjurgen wrote:“Revisionists” usually have a rather twisted idea of which questions are relevant and which are not. Why, some of them make a big bloody fuss out of the perfectly unimportant issue whether or not the Treblinka gassing engine was a diesel engine.
I consider it characteristic of the “Revisionist” approach that BS should have focused on the confused account of a confused fellow like Bomba. The sober matter-of-fact account of Suchomel, former member of the SS staff of Treblinka and defendant at the first West German Treblinka trial, the grand dragon conveniently avoided addressing.
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 4 guests