Dresden, 1945

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3635
Joined: 13 Jul 2002 03:51
Location: Malaysia

Post by Panzermahn » 10 Jun 2005 12:42

But even if that were Irving's view in 1995 it took him over thirty years, in the face of an enormous quantity of contrary evidence, to come off his initially incredibly inflated figures.


Isn't that what is known as revisionism? What is better courage and honesty than to constantly revise historical facts in the light of new evidences? Unlike, leftist historians, Allied apologists, self-proclaimed Nazi hunters who had the static mentality of

"6 million is and shall always be the figure! Anything less than that is nothing more than, holocaust denial Nazi apologia and falsification of history. Even if it is 5,999,999"

Just an example..

Anyhow, i have download David Irving newest Destruction at Dresden (2005) and compare his notes and references with his 1995 Apocalypse 1945 edition.

Voigt disbanded the dead persons department of Dresden’s Missing Persons Bureau on June 11, 1945. True to their insistence that the Allied air forces were not an effective weapon of war the Soviet authorities refused to accept his estimate of the death roll—he put it at 135000—and, according to him,‘simply struck off the first digit’ to arrive at their figure of thirty-five thousand dead.
Page 242


Irving took the estimate from Hans Voight and this prove that he took several sources instead of one

The post-war communist mayor of Dresden, Walter Weidauer, adopted the lower figure in his own otherwise authoritative book on the raids.32 In the manner at which the communists were adept, he polemicized against Hanns Voigt, who was by then living as a teacher in western Germany. Voigt bitterly rued the day he was drawn into the controversy.33 Weidauer’s figure was adopted by the west German government too, in place of the 60,000 estimated by its own Federal Statistical Office, and
they have used it consistently after reunification in 1990.34

Page 242


Again this shows Irving took the figure from West German government and this proves Irving did not simply make up or inflated figures as those claimed by Allied apologists

Immediately after the raids there was the usual tendency—encouraged on this occasion, we suspect, by Dr Goebbels—to exaggerate the number of casualties. While official sources in Berlin put the death roll in Dresden between 180,000 and 200,000, and propaganda ministry officials spoke of a figure between two and three hundred thousand, a few days later the figure was more modestly estimated by the authority responsible for relief measures in blitzed cities as ‘between 120,000 and 150,000 people lost.’35 This figure, reached only very shortly after the raids, was close to the assessment by Hanns Voigt of the dead person’s section, perhaps the Dresden official best placed to know.

The first edition of this work published in 1963 accepted Voigt’s estimate of 135,000 dead as ‘the best estimate’, with the limits sets by the Berlin authority as the degree of doubt in the figure.

Page 243


Again, Irving took Voight's figure of the Dresden victims

The subsequent discovery of the Dresden police chief ’s report, with its substantially lower figures, must inevitably cast doubt on these estimates: in April 1966, three years after THE DESTRUCTION OF DRESDEN was published, the director of the Dresden city archives wrote to me from other Soviet zone of Germany to reveal that the ‘original order’ of Lieutenant-Colonel Wolfgang Thierig, who was in 1945 the police commandant of Dresden, had turned up; and that this eleven-page document mentioned an interim death roll of 28,000 identified victims. The Thierig report was relatively early however—though dated March 15 it reported only the state of affairs up to eight a.m. on March 10, 1945).36

It is an important document nonetheless. Headed “Höherer S.S. und Polizeiführer in the Gau Halle-Merseburg and Gau Saxony and Wehrmacht District IV, and subheaded “Commander of the Regular Police” (Ordnungspolizei), this is the only known final report on the four air raids on Dresden on February 13, 14, and 15.

Page 243


It shows Irving intellectual honesty by stating in his book that there are several sources that gave a lower figure of Dresden's victims

That this east German document was authentic was confirmed beyond doubt by the virtually simultaneous discovery in the West German government archives, among twenty-five thousand newlyaccessioned files of the Reich ministry of finance, of the ‘Situation Reports on Air Raids on Reich Territory’ dated between February 23 and April 10 1945.37 Situation Report No 1404, dated March 22 1945, contained as a supplement the police report already quoted, repeating precisely the same data
including the then (March 10) current death roll of 18,375, the estimated final total of twenty-five thousand, and reference to the thirty-five thousand persons still missing.38 Despite the reproaches of the publisher of THE DESTRUCTION OF DRESDEN, William Kimber, the author felt bound to publish in The Times an immediate letter drawing attention to these new documents, notwithstanding that the figures they contained were at variance with those in his book.

Page 243


So how many did die in Dresden? The key element is probably, over and above the identified death roll, the large number of missing people which even the Dresden police chief put at thirty-five thousand.The police president of Darmstadt, in his report on the raids of September 1944, stressed that in catastrophes of this scale very often whole families were wiped out, leaving nobody to report anybody as missing; the same would go for the refugees. It is unlikely that given the magnitude of the Dresden catastrophe the police authorities could have conducted a realistic estimate in the short space between the raids and the reporting date, March 10, when much of the city was still under rubble and ruins that have, indeed, not been excavated to this day. Sixty thousand or more; perhaps a hundred thousand—certainly the largest single air raid massacre of the War in Europe.

Page 244-245


The final figure given by Irving in this newest edition (2005) of Apocalypse 1945: Destruction of Dresden is actually a correlation between the figures of the West German government and Voight's estimate.

Readers must be cautioned in reading several accounts of Allied apologia concerning the inhumane devastation unleashed on Dresden by the Anglo-American air force. Those Allied apologists only look at one dogmatic perspective which is the number of victims can only be counted through number of dead bodies recovered, registered inhabitants of Dresden and official Allied "commissions", "official studies" while discounting the fact that there are several factors that lead to the complications of counting the exact of number of victims. Namely

a) Incinerated bodies that there are nothing more than ashes, or liquidified particles
b)The number of victims who died AFTERMATH the bombing at Dresden from the result of wound complications, trauma, lack of medical resources or even suicide
c) Number of forced labour, refugees, soldiers there were at the Dresden and were not listed as the inhabitants of Dresden
d) Bodyparts such as heads, hands or legs that was recovered. It must be remembered, if those Allied apologists forgets, that a human body consisted of a head, 2 hands and 2 legs (unless there were Extraterrestrial beings at Dresden at that time), which sometimes only a certain body part that was recovered and might not be counted as a victim.
e) The number of the casualties sustained by the search and rescue forces during the initial part of recovery
Last edited by Panzermahn on 10 Jun 2005 17:40, edited 1 time in total.

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3635
Joined: 13 Jul 2002 03:51
Location: Malaysia

Post by Panzermahn » 10 Jun 2005 12:52

Also another thing,

most of the Allied apologists accused Irving of distorting facts such as the American fighters conducted low-level straffing at the surviving victims at Dresden.

In fact, Irving pointed out in his book, that IT IS FAIR to state that USAF historians did not found any reports or documents on the alleged straffing by American fighters but what is in Irving's book was only the testimonies from eyewitnesses at Dresden (from survivors, Allied POWs) that accounts for the straffing of American fighters

Andreas
Member
Posts: 6938
Joined: 10 Nov 2002 14:12
Location: Europe

Post by Andreas » 10 Jun 2005 13:11

Panzermahn wrote: Those Allied apologists only look at one dogmatic perspective which is the number of victims can only be counted through number of dead bodies recovered, registered inhabitants of Dresden and official Allied "commissions", "official studies" while discounting the fact that there are several factors that lead to the complications of counting the exact of number of victims. Namely

a) Incinerated bodies that there are nothing more than ashes, or liquidified particles
b)The number of victims who died AFTER the bombing at Dresden from the result of wound complications, trauma, lack of medical resources or even suicide
c) Number of forced labour, refugees, soldiers there were at the Dresden and were not listed as the inhabitants of Dresden
d) Bodyparts such as heads, hands or legs that was recovered. It must be remembered, if those Allied apologists forgets, that a human body consisted of a head, 2 hands and 2 legs (unless there were Extraterrestrial beings at Dresden at that time), which sometimes only a certain body part that was recovered and might not be counted as a victim.
e) The number of the casualties sustained by the search and rescue forces during the initial part of recovery


I suggest to start writing to the commission so that they can take into account points a)-e), just in case they have not thought about it yet, for which there is zero evidence.

In the meantime, I fear I have to repeat this:

Die Historikerkommission kommt zu dem Zwischenergebnis, dass alle diese Quellen in der Größenordnung die bisher angegebenen Zahlen von mindestens 25.000 Toten der Luftangriffe auf Dresden vom 13. bis 15. Februar 1945 belegen. Dokumentarische Belege und schlüssige Argumentationen, die darauf hindeuten, dass diese Zahl um ein Vielfaches überschritten wird, sind bisher nicht bekannt.
Die Historikerkommission wird in ihrer weiteren Arbeit dennoch allen Hinweisen nachgehen, sie sorgfältig analysieren und bewerten – vor allem auch solchen, die zu deutlich anderen Einschätzungen als bisher kommen.


Translation:

"The Commission of Historians reaches the interim conclusion that all these sources document the numbers so far quoted, of at least 25,000 dead from the air attacks on Dresden from 13th to 15th February 1945. Documentary evidence and convincing arguments indicating that this number will be exceeded by multiples of it, are not known thus far.

The Commission of Historians will in its future work still follow up all pointers, analyse them carefully, and judge them - especially those which reach very different estimations than have been reached thus far."

Linked in a previous post. If someone can make a better job of the translation, have a go. The commission is NOT an allied commission. It is an official attempt to get the numbers right. I wonder why some have such trouble accepting these probably different results, and instead have to rely on a single, already discredited writer?

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23231
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 10 Jun 2005 16:34

Panzermahn -- You said:
Readers must be cautioned in reading several accounts of Allied apologia concerning the inhumane devastation unleashed on Dresden by the Anglo-American air force. Those Allied apologists only look at one dogmatic perspective which is the number of victims can only be counted through number of dead bodies recovered, registered inhabitants of Dresden and official Allied "commissions", "official studies" while discounting the fact that there are several factors that lead to the complications of counting the exact of number of victims.

Specifically, which "Allied apologists" are you talking about? I have already asked you to source this claim, at: viewtopic.php?p=712571#712571
For statements like this, the section rules require that you name the "Allied apologists" and source your claim.

You are simply repeating this unsourced claim (originally characterized as a "straw man" argument) without proving it. What "official Allied 'commission'" counted the bodies at Dresden? What publications had the "dognmatic perspective" that "the number of victims can only be counted through number of dead bodies recovered"? From what pattern of behavior do you conclude that these are "Allied apologists" rather than someone merely writing about the bombing of Dresden? What other Allied acts did they apologize for? I will tell you plainly, and again, that we are not interested in promoting fact-free contentions here:
This is a research section of the forum, not a "blog" or a place to rehearse advertising slogans. If you can't prove an assertion is factual when you write the post, don't bother to send it. Noncomplying posts will be deleted without further warning.

Here is an example of the problem. You also said:
Also another thing, most of the Allied apologists accused Irving of distorting facts such as the American fighters conducted low-level straffing at the surviving victims at Dresden.

In fact, Irving pointed out in his book, that IT IS FAIR to state that USAF historians did not found any reports or documents on the alleged straffing by American fighters but what is in Irving's book was only the testimonies from eyewitnesses at Dresden (from survivors, Allied POWs) that accounts for the straffing of American fighters

I suggest you actually read Irving's book before you characterize its contents. Your statement is false. Here is what Irving had to say in the 1963 version of The Destruction of Dresden, at pp. 196-197:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3635
Joined: 13 Jul 2002 03:51
Location: Malaysia

Post by Panzermahn » 10 Jun 2005 17:19

Specifically, which "Allied apologists" are you talking about? I have already asked you to source this claim, at: viewtopic.php?p=712571#712571


David, i don't have to name names, Allied apologists whom i referred were those forum members who keep using Frederick Taylor's source (Dresden, Harper Collins 2004) as a rebuttal to Irving's brilliant and meticulous research. Every single quote which I used from Irving is brushed off as "Nazi apologia", "moral equivalencer" by these forum members..What i am trying show that Irving did not specifically assign a figure to the number of victims or made a figure out of himself. In his early 1963edition (please refer to the post where i mentioned his book were published 3 years before the discovery of the Dresden police chief's reports), he took the figure of 135,000, which was the estimate from Hans Voight, the person who was in charge of the bureau specifically created by the Germans to trace, to indentify, to count the victims of Dresden's fire-bombing

What "official Allied 'commission'" counted the bodies at Dresden?

My point is is not that any "official Allied commission" that counted the bodies at Dresden LITERALLY but those Allied commissions or whatever that attempted to investigate the number of victims for the official volumes published by the Allied governments specifically US and UK, in the Strategic Bombing of Germany Survey, or something else which was the official history of the Allied air operations against Germany during WW2. You, I and everyone else knew that the only people or specific government bodies who counted the victims' bodies at Dresden were the Germans themselves and not any Allied commissions

Your statement is false. Here is what Irving had to say in the 1963 version of The Destruction of Dresden, at pp. 196-197:

Nop it is not. I am using David Irving's newest edition which can be downloaded from his FPP website (Apocalypse 1945: Destruction of Dresden, 2005 edition) to compare his revision in the 2nd edition of the Destruction of Dresden 1995. This is exactly what i called as revisionism. Revise in the light of new evidences instead of believing blindly of a particular historical fact even when new evidences appear.

Here is the capture from page 200 of Irving's 2005 edition of Apocalypse 1945: Destruction of Dresden (copyrighted by FPP Inc.) referring to the earlier statement I posted on Irving's opinion on the American fighters' low-level straffing at Dresden
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Panzermahn on 10 Jun 2005 17:36, edited 1 time in total.

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3635
Joined: 13 Jul 2002 03:51
Location: Malaysia

Post by Panzermahn » 10 Jun 2005 17:34

Bottomline is, the undisputed facts of the savage bombing of Dresden in 1945 by Anglo-American air forces are;

a) German civilians and refugees died in the bombing and the resultant fire-storm.

b) Men, women, children, old people and even animals died in the bombing

c) Nobody, not even Irving nor Taylor, can give an exact figure of the number of victims killed in the bombing of Dresden. However, they give their own estimate based of historical and contemporary documents, eyewitnesses testimonies and other primary as well as secondary sources.

c) It is unreliable, conflicting, to based the number of victims of the bombing of Dresden just on bodycounts or missing people count

d) Whether the bombing of Dresden was a violation or not of international laws where Britain and Germany were signatories, the undisputed fact it is an atrocity that killed thousands of innocent civilians where most of them had nothing to do with the war.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23231
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 10 Jun 2005 18:04

Bottom line is, Panzermahn, you posted misinformation and disinformation in the course of this discussion, which undercuts the purpose of a research forum. Furthermore, when asked twice to provide sources for your agitprop contention, you failed to do so. Because you have been continuously warned, and continuously failed to comply, you are looking at a "zero-tolerance" policy for such posts in the future.

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3635
Joined: 13 Jul 2002 03:51
Location: Malaysia

Post by Panzermahn » 10 Jun 2005 18:22

David Thompson wrote:Bottom line is, Panzermahn, you posted misinformation and disinformation in the course of this discussion, which undercuts the purpose of a research forum. Furthermore, when asked twice to provide sources for your agitprop contention, you failed to do so. Because you have been continuously warned, and continuously failed to comply, you are looking at a "zero-tolerance" policy for such posts in the future.


I had taken time to download the e-book on Irving's website and stated my contention with sources and page number as you had required so what disinformation could I had posted? But for being misinformation, I had to agree on that sometimes and I apologized for it as you know, English is not the mother tongue of Malaysians unlike for Americans. And sometimes, i could not state properly the contextual essence which made some of the readers and the moderators misunderstood what I had posted and it is not on purpose :oops:

Now that I had posted the variable of figures on Dresden's victims from Irving's revision of his book, I am awaiting your further contentions and arguments

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23231
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 10 Jun 2005 18:36

Panzermahn -- You said:
I had taken time to download the e-book on Irving's website and stated my contention with sources and page number as you had required so what disinformation could I had posted?

The disinformation is described in my post above, as clearly as the English language permits, at viewtopic.php?p=713148#713148 The disinformation appears in bold-faced italics here:
Also another thing, most of the Allied apologists accused Irving of distorting facts such as the American fighters conducted low-level straffing at the surviving victims at Dresden.

In fact, Irving pointed out in his book, that IT IS FAIR to state that USAF historians did not found any reports or documents on the alleged straffing by American fighters but what is in Irving's book was only the testimonies from eyewitnesses at Dresden (from survivors, Allied POWs) that accounts for the straffing of American fighters

It's clear from the excerpt from Irving's 1963 book which I posted that Irving went beyond "the testimonies from eyewitnesses at Dresden (from survivors, Allied POWs) that accounts for the straffing of American fighters", and directly representing the strafings as fact. From previous discussions of this point it is also clear that this claim is a distortion, and consequently one need not be an "Allied apologist" to make that accusation about Irving's work.
You also said:
But for being misinformation, I had to agree on that sometimes and I apologized for it as you know, English is not the mother tongue of Malaysians unlike for Americans. And sometimes, i could not state properly the contextual essence which made some of the readers and the moderators misunderstood what I had posted and it is not on purpose :oops:

These "mistakes" always appear in support of a propaganda claim, and always have the same result -- to make the propaganda point look more credible. They do not appear to be the result of misunderstanding the language, particularly since the mistakes all have the same functional outcome -- to bolster an agitprop point. Furthermore, there are enough examples of them so that it's starting to look more like a consistent pattern of misconduct than isolated and unrelated minor mistakes of fact.

viewtopic.php?p=651725#651725
viewtopic.php?p=640265#640265
viewtopic.php?p=640518#640518
viewtopic.php?p=711289#711289
viewtopic.php?p=711505#711505
viewtopic.php?p=612829#612829
viewtopic.php?p=613160#613160

The search engine reveals about 4 pages listing the posts, at about 15 posts per page, in which I have warned you about compliance with the section rules. If you're getting the impression that I'm losing patience with you, you're correct.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23231
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 10 Jun 2005 19:18

A post from Michael Kenny on David Irving and the death of Heinrich Himmler now has a thread of its own in the SS & Polizei section of the forum, where there is an ongoing discussion of Himmler's death in another thread. The new thread can be found at: viewtopic.php?t=79461

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3635
Joined: 13 Jul 2002 03:51
Location: Malaysia

Post by Panzermahn » 10 Jun 2005 19:19

It's clear from the excerpt from Irving's 1963 book which I posted that Irving went beyond "the testimonies from eyewitnesses at Dresden (from survivors, Allied POWs) that accounts for the straffing of American fighters", and directly representing the strafings as fact.


Which he revised again of his 1963 book in 1995 and 2005 as part of the process known as revisionism in the light of new evidences which in the captured jpeg i posted earlier

User avatar
redcoat
Member
Posts: 1359
Joined: 03 Mar 2003 21:54
Location: Stockport, England

Post by redcoat » 10 Jun 2005 19:24

Panzermahn wrote:
d) Whether the bombing of Dresden was a violation or not of international laws where Britain and Germany were signatories, the undisputed fact it is an atrocity that killed thousands of innocent civilians where most of them had nothing to do with the war.

If its not a war crime it isn't an atrocity, and the bombing of Dresden has been proved time and time again on this forum to have not been a war crime.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


An atrocity (from the Latin atrox, "atrocious", from Latin ater = "matte black" (as distinct from niger = "shiny black")) is a term used to describe crimes ranging from an act committed against a single person to one committed against a population or ethnic group.

In general use, an atrocity or massacre designates a politically or ethnically motivated killing of civilians. In international law, more precise terms are war crime and crime against humanity.

So yet another of your undisputed 'facts' proves to be nothing of the sort

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3635
Joined: 13 Jul 2002 03:51
Location: Malaysia

Post by Panzermahn » 10 Jun 2005 19:45

redcoat wrote:
Panzermahn wrote:
d) Whether the bombing of Dresden was a violation or not of international laws where Britain and Germany were signatories, the undisputed fact it is an atrocity that killed thousands of innocent civilians where most of them had nothing to do with the war.

If its not a war crime it isn't an atrocity, and the bombing of Dresden has been proved time and time again on this forum to have not been a war crime.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


An atrocity (from the Latin atrox, "atrocious", from Latin ater = "matte black" (as distinct from niger = "shiny black")) is a term used to describe crimes ranging from an act committed against a single person to one committed against a population or ethnic group.

In general use, an atrocity or massacre designates a politically or ethnically motivated killing of civilians. In international law, more precise terms are war crime and crime against humanity.

So yet another of your undisputed 'facts' proves to be nothing of the sort


If according to the logic the definition of atrocity = war crimes and crimes against humanity as you had posted above, then those atrocities dated back even to the time of Chinghis Khan before the Hague Convention was drafted in the 19th century and the Geneva Convention 20th century were all war crimes and crimes against humanity, right? Are you implying that the notion that there always crimes without law (sorry i forgotten the latin description of "there is no crime without law")

User avatar
redcoat
Member
Posts: 1359
Joined: 03 Mar 2003 21:54
Location: Stockport, England

Post by redcoat » 10 Jun 2005 21:07

Panzermahn wrote:If according to the logic the definition of atrocity = war crimes and crimes against humanity as you had posted above, then those atrocities dated back even to the time of Chinghis Khan before the Hague Convention was drafted in the 19th century and the Geneva Convention 20th century were all war crimes and crimes against humanity, right? Are you implying that the notion that there always crimes without law (sorry i forgotten the latin description of "there is no crime without law")

Just pointing out that you cannot call these acts 'atrocities' They need to be recognised war crimes before you can use the word.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23231
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 10 Jun 2005 23:16

redcoat -- You said:
Just pointing out that you cannot call these acts 'atrocities' They need to be recognised war crimes before you can use the word.
The word "atrocity" or "atrocious" was used in the English language well before the concept of war crimes developed, in the sense of extreme or shocking brutality, wickedness or cruelty -- I have it in Nineteenth and early Twentieth Century dictionaries. The word "atrocity" itself has a Latin root, and its use in Latin predates modern English. For those reasons, I think the Wikipedia definition is somewhat hypertechnical, and ought not to be applied here.

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”