Claims of Forged, Altered or Missing Evidence

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

Post by Scott Smith » 18 Jan 2003 06:55

witness wrote:Sorry for all those numbers in the quotation boxes. I am not using my own PC now ( being at work )
Don't know where all these numbers are coming from :( 8O
The "chicken scratches" are coming from your wordprocessor, probably Microsoft Word. This is an annoying bug in the software of the new forum, but one that we've learned to live with. Just post your text in the message box and forget about using a WP. You can save the text by copy-pasting it and saving to Word if you want to file it, or to repost if the site crashes while posting or editing. Another option is to compose in Word and then copy the text of the document and then paste it into Windows Notepad, which will strip off the HTML codes embedded and leave only the text that you want. Then copy that and paste it into the box to send the Third Reich Forum message. Also, let me take this opportunity to point out, no disrespect intended, that your usual means of posting is rather annoying because of the formatting of the carriage returns. When I quote you in a block you may have noticed that I always clean it up myself because I am so peevishly meticulous and still see posts as inchoate after the third edit. I don't know what you are doing exactly, perhaps using Web-TV or something. Oh well. Don't feel bad--I once got after Roberto because none of his links ever worked. Now they all do because I insisted that he check them.
:)

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 18 Jan 2003 06:59

Thank you Scott ! :D

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 18 Jan 2003 08:01

Scott Smith in one of his posts when discussing credibility of the Becker's letter mentioned Ingrid Weckert.
I just want to bring up some example of this lady mind-set to illustrate her own credibility..
Under the pretext of "Hitler's antagonism to the Jews," the world was excited into war against Germany; because of "Hitler's antagonism to the Jews," Germany was destroyed; because of "Hitler's antagonism to the Jews," a policy of occupation that has just one purpose: the moral and spiritual destruction of its people, was put into effect in Germany.
And
A criminal upper crust, with widespread international family relationships danced on the bodies of the hungering German people, celebrated orgies, spent lavishly the money extracted by fraudulent manipulations from the impoverished people. The German people had to bow and stay silent.
(Ingrid Weckert - Flashpoint [Kristallnacht 1938 ] )
I guess on the background of such "ideological bubble " we can entirely trust this lady thoughtful analyses of this letter.. :roll:

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

Thoughtcrimes and Mercies...

Post by Scott Smith » 18 Jan 2003 09:54

witness wrote:I guess on the background of such "ideological bubble " we can entirely trust this lady thoughtful analyses of this letter..
But do you have any response to her analysis other than an ad-hominem attack? A pro-Zionist or a "reeducated German" would not think outside of the box in the first place, if s/he knew enough to dare. Plus, Weckert has been persecuted for her views. Does the truth need brass-knuckles to keep it warm?

F. P. Berg's wife, who merely translated some wartime German technical articles that I have referred to on the forum many times, lost her job at a New York travel agency.
"We had to dismiss her ... We do not tolerate anti-semitism," Kranefeld said. He added that Elke Berg had worked for the Board for 18 years, and that her role in the translation "was the first anyone here knew about her views."
Michael Kranefeld might have added:

Thoughtcrime Is Death!
:wink:

Here is that related link: Executive Fired for Translating Journal Articles.
Last edited by Scott Smith on 19 Jan 2003 13:53, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 19 Jan 2003 00:50

Scott - do you mean here the response to her analysis of the Becker's letter
( in this case you can turn to Zimmerman's critique of her "analysis " posted by Roberto)..
or the response to her "Kristallnacht 1938" masterpiece of historical science ?
If the latter I am giving up on responding by anything else then
"ad hominem " mocking , simply because it deserves nothing else.
To state that WW2 was started because of the Jewish conspiracy is
sheer nonsense.And it is riduculous even to try refuting it applying some intellectual ( not "ad hominem" ) faculties. It would be the same as to intellectually argue that there are no gnomes living in your basement.

I could not care less if she was prosecuted or not .
However what I do see in this particular piece of work("Kristallnacht 1938") is frank and dirty hate propaganda.

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

Thoughtcrime 101

Post by Scott Smith » 19 Jan 2003 08:58

witness wrote:However what I do see in this particular piece of work ("Kristallnacht 1938") is frank and dirty hate propaganda.
I submit that you know more about the argumentation of Weckert's hateful critics than you know of Weckert and her views, which is not a fair-minded assessment, AFAIC. She makes some good points and that frightens her critics. To say that unpopular views, or any views, should be squelched by the government or by organized Hate-groups like the ADL and Nizkor is more than dishonest, IMHO. It implies that they have the absolute-Truth. And that is not History but dogma and propaganda! Weckert worked as a German travel-agent for Israel, IIRC, and she speaks Hebrew, I think. If you think Weckert is a Hater then you'd better look at her directly and not at what her critics say. Form your own conclusions. I think she is right about PS-501. David Irving disagrees with her thesis on Reichskristallnacht and Goebbels' involvement. I tend to agree with Irving on this that Goebbels was indeed involved if not the Mastermind, but that it exploded in his face and Hitler nearly sacked him as a result. Goebbels didn't get his former prestige back until 1944.
:)

Librarian Ingrid Weckert...

Image
Last edited by Scott Smith on 19 Jan 2003 13:05, edited 1 time in total.

Erik
Member
Posts: 488
Joined: 03 May 2002 16:49
Location: Sweden

Post by Erik » 19 Jan 2003 09:02

Tarpon27 wrote:
Erik wrote:
I’m asked to ”challenge directly” and ”present evidence” of my ”conclusions”. Then I have to search archives and statistics for original documents and national registration records and European population census etc etc for half a century of world history, haven’t I?

But the alternative is then to simply assert that, for example, 700,000 didn't die at Treblinka because the documentation is forged or suspect? It seems remarkably easy to stop any and all discussion, and why bother with history if all it takes is a simple accusation of fraud to make it invalid? You don't have to present your reasons why you find the documentation fraudulent or forged, simply assert that since it can be forged, it is. End of discussion.
According to witness, I’m already doing what “seems remarkably easy” to Tarpon27:
What you are really interested in is the tactic - shoot some bull and run.
Which tells volumes about how you ''feel "( see above - ''not to teach how I feel ")
That is exactly what bring discussions to " an abrupt stop "


You both want to get rid of the question markings, it seems.
Erik wrote:
If my questions and comparisons disturb you, is that because you are not sure yourselves?

Oh, please, surely you are not serious?


Why not? And who isn’t “disturbed” by questions? That’s what questions do : disturb Knowledge!! That’s what they are for, even.
It seems remarkably easy to stop any and all discussion, and why bother with history if all it takes is a simple accusation of fraud to make it invalid?
That is a really disturbing question. “Why bother with history at all?” Why not just accuse it of fraud and so make it invalid and dismiss it? “Squeal” forgery and get done with it?

Maybe I’m hindered by my secret agenda?

Witness wrote:
Instead you are trying to push your own agenda ( to deny having it would be absolutely dishonest on your side which I hope you are not intend to do )resorting to genaralizations ,dubious comparisons and your own interpretation of Christianity.
The “remarkably easy” way to “stop any and all discussion” suggested by Tarpon27 would work at counter-purpose with my agenda, if the “fraud” I accuse CONTINUE to be valid after the accusation! I surely cannot hope for the law to pronounce and proceed against the “fraud” just because I – Erik – have accused it?

I’m not that hot, am I?

All I can do is to resort to “genaralizations ,dubious comparisons and your own interpretation of Christianity” (witness).
Mark wrote:
Quote:
The inference, to me at least, is that a claim of 700,000 dead at Treblinka is 1) certainly potentia and probable forgery, and 2) subjected to far less scrutiny: this would seem up to you to demostrate why I should be persuaded of it.

Not because it is possible, as it is; but how and why it is apparently so probable to you, and how you have reached that conclusion.
Erik replied:
Not possible, “as it is”; I agree. (Although we probably don’t mean the same thing.) You mean that the evidence is so conclusive, that forgery – potential or probable – can’t change the story.

Your example was of simple forger, adding zeroes to a check to inflate its value, and who would probably be caught as it would be under intense scrutiny.

My reply is that while certainly documentation about Treblinka can be forged, you fail to either explain why it has not been scrutinized closely, which it has by various historians and why you find it so probable that it is forged. Again, simply asserting forgery and then apparently being mystified when asked why you state that, is not an answer.
What mystifies me with the Holocaust history is that the scrutiny concerning the evidence to the worst crime in human history is less close than to your check balance, and that the law must be mustered to prevent such checking.(That’s what I hinted at in the parenthesis above, concerning what you thought “not possible”.)

The “why” of it can be “interest”, just as there is an “interest” to scrutinize my bills and checks.

Now is that also the “why” of questioning the Worst Story Ever Told? An “interest”, a “secret agenda”, as had the Devil and his vomit from the Hell of yore, to spread doubt concerning the opposite story (“The Greatest Ever Told”)?

Now THAT Truth prevails today, in spite of the Devil and his machinations, and accusations of frauds and forgery from the start “notwithstanding”.

Is there a “Gospel” here, too? A former member of TRF (“Hebden”)( banned?) uses a motto(or what you call it) on the Air Photo Evidence Forum : “If the Holocaust didn't exist, it would have to be invented.” That is what Voltaire said about God. We can’t do without (a) God.

Perhaps we can’t do without the story of the Holocaust? It brings Good Tidings to us all, if we believe and follow its teachings?

Now that’s religion, and since all religions except your own are frauds and forgeries by definition and doctrinal necessity, the lessons of history concerning the acts and proceedings of these forgeries provide us with means and techniques to investigate them, just like the techniques of investigating manuscripts and copies surviving from Roman and Greek antiquity provided (unwittingly) Bible scholars with means of detecting emendations to the Gospels.

Now that’s for scholars and scientists! We who are not, are left to less scholarly and scientific methods.

Accordingly, a “squeal of forgery” from (for example) Erik can be expected to carry little weight.

All that we (or at least Erik) can bring into the proceedings is a “reading”, and then posting it after being allowed to “log in” on the TRF.
Again, simply asserting forgery and then apparently being mystified when asked why you state that, is not an answer.
Agreed.

My first posting on side 1 introduced “population statistics” as a specimen of evidence that seems to be easy to forge. I expressed a hope that this introduction wasn’t a “red herring”, i.e., considered “off-topic” to the thread.

It seems to me that statistics are especially easy to forge, i.e., to give the appearance of “fact” and “authenticity”, hard to “give the lie”, except by professional statisticians who know what to ask for when confronted by its figures.

Statistics are meant to make relevant comparisons possible, “vital” or not. 100 mammoths is just as much as 100 mosquitos, on a certain level of “relevance”, and not at all on other levels of “weighing”.

Perhaps some will think that they can’t be compared at all, since mammoths do not exist anymore, except as fossils.

The comparison “looks” the same on paper, though, until you begin asking what a mammoth and a mosquito is.

The statistics of Gerstein on the number of victims of every gassing at Treblinka and Belzec have been verified by an anti-revisionist using children in his garage(?). In this way, Gerstein “makes sense”. His statistics wasn’t “forged”, accordingly.

You mention the sophistry of “revisionist scholars” (sneer quote) concerning the 6 millions Jews killed by Nazi Germany during the war, and the changed official (plaque at Auschwitz) number of victims of extermination at Auschwitz.

The former “official” number of 4 million victims at Auschwitz was based on theoretical crematory capacity of existing “muffels”, to be differentiated from “practical” capacity, calculated from construction history and maintenance necessities.

Perhaps such statistics must start to ask what a crematory oven and its muffels are, and how they work, and then make probability calculations, to be checked against documentary evidence of breakdowns and reparations of those ovens and muffels.

“Cheating” or forgery may exist in making calculations from theoretical capacity, and destroying evidence of breakdowns and reparations, and ignoring “actual records” from comparable sources, crematories being in use all over the world during and before the time of WWII.

The slave trade has some similarities with the transportation of Jews of occupied Europe to the death camps of Poland. The Jews were collected by the Germans with the help of the collaborating populace and even their own people (“Judenräte”, Jewish Councils http://www.jsource.org/jsource/Holocaust/judenrat.html), in the former case because of inherent antisemitism existing before the occupation, and in the second case as a “necessary evil” in a hopeless situation.

The slave trade had similar collaboration from the African population, having harbored the institution of slavery since times immemorial (as you point out). Perhaps the chieftains or priest class of a conquered people hoped to “negotiate” some favors from the victor of a tribe war, by allowing and organizing the “dissolution” of the tribe?(compare the link above.)

The “death marches” to the ports of Africa can be compared to the calculations of the Wannsee Protocol or Goebbels diary, a sort of “natural selection” of the strongest for the waiting slave ships. The shipping transportations themselves assuredly assured a “survival of the fittest”, and “useless eaters” were easily “brought aside”, i.e., “overboard”.

Tarpon27 wrote:
As a mere point, a modern ocean liner carrying 5,000 people and making a round trip of 6,000 miles in 16 days at 15 mph would require 935 years to transport 100 million people. Now you can play with live vs. dead, mortality rates, number of vessels (but also with little capacity and far slower), etc., etc., but the point is, this is not much more than a Red Herring...at least to me.
But history can be “mastered” and be understood by making such calculations and comparisons, can’t it? Isn’t that the “science” of it? If it is a Red Herring fallacy to do so, what is the straight and narrow path to historical knowledge? “Just follow the facts”? Are these “facts” “monolithic” (Scott Smith’s designation) to such a degree that you can ignore the rest of human history?

Your own calculations above can readily be compared to revisionist calculations of crematory capacity of Auschwitz and burial capacity of the acres of Treblinka, for example.

The prevalence of antisemitism of Eastern Europe and the pogroms following the retreat of the Red Army from Poland and Ukrainia can be used to exculpate the Germans (Jedwabne?) just as the old and unquestioned institution of slavery and slave trade among the warring peoples of Africa can be used to make them look less “victimized”.

You wrote:
History is filled with the use of slaves, surely theirs is not unique.
Etc.

Mr. Thompson wrote:
(…) I haven't put very much time into studying holocaust statistics, other than Nazi records. To me, it's like arguing over whether a serial killer murdered 18, 27, or "over 40" victims. I'm more interested in a showing that there was a crime, it was the result of a policy, and that a specific person or group of persons did it.
The institution of slavery and the Final Solution of Genocide are not comparable. The policy of the latter is history of an other order.

Then, doesn’t numbers of victims belong to the “showing” of Genocide? Is the murderous intention is enough? 6,000,000 or 600,000 , “big deal”?

The failure of the Final Solution cannot make the intention less horrifying and criminal?

Revisionists point out that the 6,000,000 murder victims has a history of its own in Jewish history, and that the Final Solution of an antisemitic murder lust has followed the Jews during the whole history of the Diaspora.

Compare Disraeli in 1852
The world has by this time discovered that it is impossible to destroy the Jews. The attempt to extirpate them has been made under the most favourable auspices and on the largest scale; the most considerable means that man could command have been pertinaciously applied to this object for the longest period of recorded time. Egyptian pharaohs, Assyrian kings, Roman emperors, Scandinavian crusaders, Gothic princes, and holy inquisitors, have alike devoted their energies to the fulfilment of this common purpose. expatriation, exile, captivity, confiscation, torture on the most ingenious and massacre on the most extensive scale, a curious system of degrading customs and debasing laws which would have broken the heart of any other people, have been tried, and in vain. The Jews, after all this havoc, are probably more numerous at this date than they were during the reign of Solomon the wise, are found in all lands, and unfortunately prospering in most. All which proves, that it is in vain for man to attempt to baffle the inexorable law of nature which has decreed that a superior race shall never be destroyed or absorbed by an inferior.
http://www.gwb.com.au/2000/myers/100300.htm

Here we have the Final Solution and its failure lineated by a great Jewish statesman and writer, well equipped to survey the history of his people, nearly a hundred years before the latest attempt.

Can we say that the “institution” of a Final Solution has followed the Jews since Biblical times?

The “policy” of it is not a Nazi “innovation” in history?

Do we have to look “abroad” from WWII to understand it? I.e., make “comparisons”?
Last edited by Erik on 19 Jan 2003 13:30, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 19 Jan 2003 09:10

Scott - once again you amaze me.
I brought up the quotation from her own work.
Under the pretext of "Hitler's antagonism to the Jews," the world was excited into war against Germany; because of "Hitler's antagonism to the Jews," Germany was destroyed; because of "Hitler's antagonism to the Jews," a policy of occupation that has just one purpose: the moral and spiritual destruction of its people, was put into effect in Germany.
(Kristallnacht 1938 )
You wrote
Scott Smith wrote
. If you think Weckert is a Hater then you'd better look at her directly and not at what her critics say.
Doesn't not the above quotation prove her stance as a Hater ?
I don't need any critics to see it.
Also as far Kristallnacht and Irving are concerned I think that it is obvious that during the trial it was demonstrated that he was deliberetely distorting the historical evidence to whiten up the Hitler role in it .
Do you need some proofs ? :)

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 19 Jan 2003 09:27

Second, Irving states that Hitler ordered an end to the violence during the night of November 9-10 when the available evidence indicates that he did nothing of the sort. As Mr Justice Gray puts it:
Irving's endeavour to cast sole blame for the pogrom onto Goebbels is at odds with the documentary evidence. Goebbels's diary entry for 9 November, the telegram sent by Muller at 23.55 that night and the message despatched by Bohmcker all suggest that Hitler knew and approved of the anti-Jewish demonstrations. Given the significance of the events of Kristallnacht, an objective historian would in my view dismiss the notion that Hitler was kept in ignorance until a relatively late stage. Yet Irving pays little attention to the evidence which implicates Hitler. He gives a misleading and partial account of Goebbels's diary entry. I cannot accept Irving's explanation for his omission to refer to Muller's telegram and Bohmcker's message, namely that they add little, for both lend support to the thesis that Hitler knew and approved of the violence. Irving also omits to refer to the statement contained in the report of the internal party enquiry into the events of Kristallnacht that Goebbels had claimed in his speech at the Old Town Hall that Hitler had been told of the burning of Jewish shops and synagogues and had decided that such spontaneous actions should continue.27
Third, Irving gives the impression that Reinhard Heydrich, Himmler's right hand man, tried to end the violence through a telegram sent that night. In Irving's words:
What of Himmler and Hitler? Both were totally unaware of what Goebbels had done until the synagogue next to Munich's Four Seasons Hotel was set on fire around 1am. Heydrich, Himmler's national chief of police, was relaxing down in the hotel bar; he hurried up to Himmler's room, then telexed instructions to all police authorities to restore law and order, protect Jews and Jewish property and halt any ongoing incidents. 28
In fact, this is not what happened at all. What the telegram actually said was:


a) Only such measures may be taken as do not involve any endangering of German life or property (e.g. synagogue fires only if there is no danger of the fire spreading to the surrounding buildings),
b) The shops and dwellings of Jews may only be destroyed, not looted. The police are instructed to supervise the implementation of this order and to arrest looters.

c) Care is to be taken that non-Jewish shops in shopping streets are unconditionally secured against damage.

d) Foreign nationals may not be assaulted, even if they are Jews.29

As this makes clear, the police were only to interfere if there was looting (destroying was acceptable), and the instruction was the opposite of "protecting" Jewish property. Rather than halt any ongoing incidents, the police were instructed to "supervise the implementation of this order".

For all these reasons, the Judgement has harsh words for Irving's methodology as a historian:
Readers of the account in Goebbels of the events of 9 and 10 November 1938 were given by Irving to understand that Hitler bore no responsibility for the starting of the pogrom and that, once he learned of it, he reacted angrily and thereafter intervened to call a halt to the violence. I accept the evidence of Evans and Longerich that this picture seriously misrepresents the available contemporaneous evidence
http://www.holocaust-history.org/irving-wrong/
Of course Scott I am aware that you call this site the "Holo-site "
That is fine with me but it doesn't change the fact of the Irving distortions ,does it ? :)
:)

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

FLASHPOINT...

Post by Scott Smith » 19 Jan 2003 12:39

witness wrote:Of course Scott I am aware that you call this site the "Holo-site " That is fine with me but it doesn't change the fact of the Irving distortions, does it ?
Gee, Irving and his credibility (or lack thereof) must be the last word on everything. Yes, I know it is hard to believe that LICA and other Zionist organizations might have had some noble part in fanning the flames of anti-Semitism, being as the success of the Zionist movement actually hinges upon it.
witness wrote:Doesn't not the above quotation prove her stance as a Hater ? I don't need any critics to see it.
I disagree with that assessment, witness. First of all, the German people were indeed the big losers over the RKN because the world was incited to war against Germany--though this did not cause the war--but because of that the Jews in Europe (and not the international Zionist movement) lost everything as well. There is no doubt that the riot was overblown. American race-riots were FAR worse. Btw, I don't see how you possibly could have quoted Weckert directly from a Holo-Site.
:wink:

Anyway, here is Weckert's essay on the RKN, which sums-up the thesis of her book:
Weckert wrote: "Crystal Night" is the name that's been given to the night of 9-10 November 1938. In almost all large German cities and some smaller ones that night, store windows of Jewish shops were broken, Jewish houses and apartments were destroyed, and synagogues were demolished and set on fire. Many Jews were arrested, some were beaten, and some were even killed. The "Reich Crystal Night" (Reichskristallnacht) was one of the most shameful events of National Socialist Germany. Although the Jews suffered initially, the greatest harm was ultimately done to Germany and the German people. [Emphasis added.]

"'Crystal Night' 1938: The great Anti-German spectacle," by Ingrid Weckert.
Revisionist Mark Weber wrote: Frau Weckert's greatest achievement is probably her careful but devastating analysis of what passes today for "history writing." She exposes the superficiality, sloppiness and plain dishonesty of various prominent contemporary writers who have made names for themselves as specialists in modern Jewish history. She demonstrates that several key Crystal Night "documents" presented at the Nuremberg trial by the Allies to incriminate the German leaders are undoubtedly forgeries. This charge, with its staggering implications, dare not be made lightly. Frau Weckert has opened the door on a subject that deserves much more detailed attention. My own research at the National Archives confirms her observation that the originals of many widely cited Nuremberg trial "documents" are now "unavailable" and seem to have disappeared completely-if they ever existed at all. [Emphasis added.]

Feuerzeichen: Die 'Reichskristallnacht,' Anstifter und Brandstifter -- Opfer und Nutzniesser (FIRE SIGN: "REICH CRYSTAL NIGHT", INCITERS AND INCENDIARIES, VICTIMS AND BENEFICIARIIES), by Ingrid Weckert, Grabert Verlag, Tübingen, 1981, 281pp with appendix, annotated bibliography, index, clothbound, 29.80 DM, ISBN 3-87847-052-5.

Reviewed by Mark Weber.
Last edited by Scott Smith on 19 Jan 2003 14:00, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 19 Jan 2003 13:12

Scott - That is really getting to be ridiculous.What Zionism got to with the
Irving' distortions and Weckert ' frank bigotry in the extract of her
"Kristallnacht 1938 " I quoted above ?
Interesting tactic btw being caught on the lies or racism to raise a fuss
about evil Zionists :D
I have nothing to do with Zionism and its purposes (whatever they are)
but it doesn't automatically mean that I am ready to accept any crap in the name of the struggle against it .
A little logic on your side would be really greatly appreciated . :)

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

Post by Scott Smith » 19 Jan 2003 13:14

Erik wrote:Perhaps we can’t do without the story of the Holocaust? It brings Good Tidings to us all, if we believe and follow its teachings?
Exactly. That's why we should question the Big-H.
:)

Erik
Member
Posts: 488
Joined: 03 May 2002 16:49
Location: Sweden

Post by Erik » 19 Jan 2003 13:16

Mr. Thompson wrote:
Erik -- Here is a practical example of the destruction of evidence and the consciousness of guilt. Zutter's KZ Mauthausen affidavit concerns (among other things) the execution of members of an allied military mission to Slovakia. These men were captured, in uniform, in Jan 1945 and then killed pursuant to the "Commando order," in violation of the Geneva Convention of 1929 (There is a lot more information on this subject posted on the "'Other'" War Crimes - Commando Order" thread in this forum). Other POWs were also murdered at KZ Mauthausen. The secret execution orders were subsequently deliberately destroyed, as you can see.


The “practical example” you give (thanks!) can also illustrate the way evidence is “construed” from affidavit and their “consciousness of guilt”.

How did Zutter know that they were “captured in uniform”? Because they arrived in uniform? Is that necessarily the same thing?

Were these men sent to Slovakia – parachuted? – to some sort of “suicide” mission? Why weren’t they shot on the spot? Were they protected by their uniforms?

I know too little of the military situation in Slovakia in Jan 1945. Was that the war front at that date? Were the members of the military mission surrendering? Some shot in combat, some brought wounded to the camp, to be shot? After torture/ interrogation?

Well, does it matter? We know that the Germans killed them in the camp, since they were registered there as POW's, with names and nationalities and grades and all.

Right?

Only the execution orders were destroyed, since they were illegal?
Other POWs were also murdered at KZ Mauthausen.


Are their execution orders extant? Or were they murdered “ad-lib”, or even AGAINST orders?

I’m sorry for all these questions. Perhaps they are naive? An attempt at “spam” by irrelevance? (No!!!) If I’m that curious, why don’t I find out for myself? :oops: Etc.

The world of the Nazi’s has been described by Roberto as a “realm of madness”, and in particular the Eastern warfare and its camps, the death camps or labor/KZ.

On the thread “The Last Words of Franz Ziereis”, the commandant of Camp Mauthausen, we find an affidavit given on a death-bed, insisting on a gassing capacity and execution of 1,5 million people at Castle Hartheim, under the pretext of mentally derangement Euthanasia.

Ziereis insisted on this figure, in spite of protests from his interrogators; but he didn’t know how many prisoners from Camp Mauthausen that died there, although he sent them there himself, suitably “classified”; perhaps just because they were too weak to pick “berries and buds” (sic)in the woods around Mauthausen – or too stupid to run away while picking(?).

They had a false shower-room for gassings at Mauthausen, too, according to the affidavit, but without the necessary capacity(?so sent to Hartheim).

And a gas van, of course, driven by the Commandant himself, although he “never put any gas in this automobile” himself, whatever that is supposed to mean.

The Eastern “realm” was implemented in all its genocidal madness.
http://www.thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/v ... hp?t=14129

Ziereis signed this.

If he had survived the bullets, would the affidavit have exculpated him? Like Zutter’s?

I take for granted that Zutter wasn’t hanged for his efforts, since he “followed orders”.(?). (I.e., those written execution orders that he was ordered to destroy to save his superiors and incriminate himself, since he then consequently must have killed those POW’s WITHOUT being ordered….but, on the other hand, by confessing to having destroyed the orders, he made it clear that he just followed orders, that otherwise would not have been known to have existed, except for the fact that the registered POW’s were not to be found… and so must have been executed without orders…so he confessed…thereby confessing the guilt of ordered illegal executions of POW’s… that perhaps would remain unknown…unless he confessed…)

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

Anti-Anti-Semitism

Post by Scott Smith » 19 Jan 2003 13:27

witness wrote:Scott - That is really getting to be ridiculous. What Zionism got to with the Irving' distortions and Weckert ' frank bigotry in the extract of her "Kristallnacht 1938 " I quoted above ? Interesting tactic btw being caught on the lies or racism to raise a fuss about evil Zionists :D I have nothing to do with Zionism and its purposes (whatever they are) but it doesn't automatically mean that I am ready to accept any crap in the name of the struggle against it . A little logic on your side would be really greatly appreciated . :)
I'll try to type slowly. The anti-antisemites accuse Weckert and Irving of anti-Semitism because they are critical of Zionists and have exposed some of their interests. Basically the Big-H serves as Zionist propaganda because it is "the founding-myth of modern Israel" (in the words of Ben-Gurion, IIRC).

To get back to my previous point, it takes iconoclasts to think outside of the proverbial box. The easiest tactic against them is an ad hominem attack, to discredit them for being baaad or having bad ideas, irrespective of their actual work.

Irving may be wrong on this and many other points, but he is brilliant in many other areas and has mastered the use of primary materials. Nobody thinks "outside of the box" better than Irving, and yes, he is bound to get a lot of things wrong. Driven people usually do.

Weckert is a non-academic German scholar (the only kind who are not "kept" in the Bundestablishment today) who has been critical of much so-called "Nuremberg evidence." She has paid a personal price for that. She makes many points.

Deal with it Nizkorites.
:lol:

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

CLARIFICATION...

Post by Scott Smith » 19 Jan 2003 13:43

witness wrote:a fuss about evil Zionists. I have nothing to do with Zionism and its purposes (whatever they are)
My beef with the Zionists (and fellow-travellers) is the same as with Germanophobic British imperialists from 1914-1945: Their combinations threaten to involve my own country in Interventionist crusades and Internationalist/Imperialist adventures that are not in the interests of the American nation or its people, from my point of view. For example, the only reason that anybody can rationally give as to why Iraq is such a great threat today is because she is a threat to racist-expansionistic Israel (our supposed ally). Without American tax dollars and American Jewish and Christian support, would they even have a country? I don't know and I don't care. Is that anti-Semitic? I don't think so. Many Jews are critical of Zionism and Israeli policies as well.
:)

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”