Screw the Moon Landing. Celebrate (Would-Be) Hitler Killers!

Once you're done remembering the moon landing (or, in the case of my generation, watching people much older than you remember the moon landing), take a moment to think about Claus von Stauffenberg and the anti-Nazi German resistance. Their July 20 plot to kill Hitler went down 65 years ago today.

To call von Stauffenberg a libertarian would be wildly inaccurate. "Catholic conservative aristocrat" would be more accurate (see pic at right for evidence). And his associates were a mixture spanning the entire non-Nazi German political spectrum, including some less-than-savory bits. That aside, their work—the attempted assassination of one of the great tyrants of the 20th century—was surely a blow struck in defense of liberty and humanity, and worth remembering as such.

There aren't any awe-inspiring pictures or videos or obscenely detailed interactive online exhibits to accompany this anniversary, but the German Resistance Memorial Center in Berlin has an English-language website with plenty of information on the Resistance and their July 20 coup.

Comments

[Seward]

As long as as we are remembering this fellow, let us also remember that much of the moonshot's genesis can be found at Nazi facilities of Pennemunde, where slave labor was used to bring to fruition (amongst other things) the V-1 and V-2 rockets.

[John]

Interesting counter factual history. What if they had succeeded? They wanted to end the world but it is difficult to imagine the Allies giving terms agreeable to Schaffenberg and his crew or the German people. Further, assumeing they would have stopped the holocaust, what would they have done with the perpetrators? The German people knew the crimes that were being committed and were terrified of the retribution that would await them if they lost the war. That is why they faught so hard. Given that fact, would the coup members have brough the Nazis to justice or just covered the whole thing up and let them off? I am betting the latter. As strange as it is to say, I am not sure that the coup succeeding would have been for the good.

[EJM]

There aren't any awe-inspiring pictures or videos or obscenely detailed interactive online exhibits to accompany this anniversary...

There is, though, a related Google News story cluster.

[fyodor]

Geez, I don't think we need to consider someone's libertarian credentials or lack thereof to applaud him for trying to off Adolph!!

Anyway, thanks for the tip!! Will have to bring it up at a gathering tonight held partly to commemorate the moon thing!! (It's also the birthday of the hostess's deceased Dad....)

[Paul]

Stauffenberg was an interesting guy. Yes, he came from German aristocracy, and believed in a Germany with...'ahem' expanded borders. Like old-school aristocracy-- apparently he joined his families 'traditional regiment'. But no, by any metric, he was no libertarian.

I was surprised, however, to discover he never was a Nazi party member. I've had been previously programmed to believe that to make it anywhere in German political or military society in that time, party membership was pretty much a requisite.

According to the histories I've read, Stauffenberg found Hitler's treatment of the Jews morally repugnant.

Without judging him with a fine tooth moral comb, he was a fascinating character, and his story is a fascinating one. A history I highly recommend people read about.

[Running Interference for Pelos]

"That aside, their work-the attempted assassination of one of the great tyrants of the 20th century-was surely a blow struck in defense of liberty and humanity, and worth remembering as such."

But did they first brief Congress?

[William]

The main thing to note about the German anti-Nazi resitance is that it was pathetically small and ineffective. This is something to celebrate?

[Paul]

Given that fact, would the coup members have brough the Nazis to justice or just covered the whole thing up and let them off? I am betting the latter.

Like any complex political situation, it would have been a mixed bag. I mean, they were trying to kill Hitler after all. So I think we can infer that 'letting them all off' wouldn't have been their strategy.

It's also likely that even if Valkryie had succeeded, that the result would have been very messy. A confused populace, completely rapt by their Supreme Leader, now pledging allegiance to some new group, not affiliated with the Nazi's...

[Paul]

But did they first brief Congress?

In a sense, yes. They briefed the members of the (resistance) cabinet which were to take over after project Valkyrie had succeeded.

[Paul]

The main thing to note about the German anti-Nazi resitance is that it was pathetically small and ineffective. This is something to celebrate?

Define 'small and ineffective'. One could certainly argue 'ineffective' given that it didn't succeed (completely ignoring just how close they actually came to completely taking over Berlin and neutralizing the Nazi command structure). But 'small'? We're not talking about three guys in a cave in Pakistan.

[John]

Paul,

The Germans did manage to exterminate 13 million people in concentration camps. (6 million Jews and 7 million slavs, gypsies, and others) I don't think you can do that if a substantial part of your population isn't helping you. Sorry, but the German people were at worst participants and at best aquiesent to the Holocaust. Hell for that matter so was all of Europe sans the Netherlands. All of the those countries gladly gave up their Jews. Killing Jews was a feature of the Nazis to most of Europe.

[toxic]

Actually, it wasn't that small or ineffective. Obviously nothing like France's resistance of course, but if the Scwarzekappelle hadn't been roundly ignored by the allies and cockblocked by FDR's moronic insistence on "unconditional surrender" (The German definition of unconditional surrender was 'kill anyone who looks at you funny, enslave survivors', not 'establish a democracy and give them money to rebuild', which increased the average German's will to resist things may have turned out quite a bit different.

Hitler almost got overthrown any number of times, but somehow the allies always managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. If France and Britain had a pair, Hitler would probably have been toppled when he invaded Czechoslovakia.

[Seward]

William,

Well, one can at least celebrate the individuals. One cannot helped but be awestruck by the actions of the White Rose group; a bunch of teens who basically stood their ground even when they could have saved their asses. To stand before a Nazi judge and basically him to piss off, we make our stand here is I think something to celebrate, whatever its overall outcome.

[William]

From Wikipedia:

The term German Resistance should not be understood as meaning that there was a united resistance movement in Germany at any time during the Nazi period, analogous to the more coordinated (for example) Polish Underground State or French Resistance. The German resistance consisted of small and usually isolated groups. They were unable to mobilize political opposition to Hitler, and their only real strategy was to persuade leaders of the German Army to stage a coup against the regime: the 1944 assassination plan was intended to trigger such a coup.

[John]

"Obviously nothing like France's resistance of course,"

Actually it was a lot like the French Resistance. The Germans shot most of the resisters in the first year or so of occupation. The French Government was actively on the other side. The French Resistance is a myth dreamed up for French national pride.

[ClubMedSux]

The main thing to note about the German anti-Nazi resitance is that it was pathetically small and ineffective.

As a libertarian, I will be the last to mock any other political group for being small and ineffective...

[Seward]

John,

Denmark resisted; which is why almost all of Denmark's Jewish population made it to Sweden. And of course throughout at least Western Europe there were numerous individuals, groups and even whole towns who hid Jews and other people set for deportation.

[Paul]

The Germans did manage to exterminate 13 million people in concentration camps. (6 million Jews and 7 million slavs, gypsies, and others) I don't think you can do that if a substantial part of your population isn't helping you.

I'm not deying any of that. But I don't see how that counters my argument. And I should also add that even had Valkryie succeded, the ensuing political grappling may have ended up a failure. But to say they would have killed Hitler, and then simply allowed Himmler, Geobels, Gerring, D?nitz and the like simply continue to show up at work is pretty dubious.

[EJM]

One cannot helped but be awestruck by the actions of the White Rose group; a bunch of teens who basically stood their ground even when they could have saved their asses.

And then there's also Dietrich Bonhoeffer and some (but by no means all) of the other members of the Confessing Church.

[Paul]

They were unable to mobilize political opposition to Hitler, and their only real strategy was to persuade leaders of the German Army to stage a coup against the regime

So sort of small like French resistance small.

[peachy]

Hitler had some astounding luck - quite apart from the failure of the July 20 plot (which really should have gotten him), he was nearly blown out of the air in March of '43... the bomb (made to an ordinarily very reliable design) actually made it aboard his plane, but the fuse failed.

[Seward]

John,

The French Resistance is a myth dreamed up for French national pride.

The myth runs both ways actually; their is the myth of DeGaulle that the French resistance liberated France, and there is the myth that the French resistance was completely unimportant. Their role falls in between that.

[Seward]

John,

One of the towns I was thinking of is Le Chambon sur Lignon, which Israel has stated is "One of the Righteous Amongst Nations." The entire town that is.

[Paul]

Actually it was a lot like the French Resistance.

Except that the German resistance arguably came much closer to actually ending the war.

[Seward]

Paul,

Well, imagine how many people would not have died had Valkyrie been pulled off. Not only combatants, but those who were outright murdered in death camps, etc. That is one very possible outcome.

[Seward]

Paul,

Well, they actually had that opportunity; the French resistance had to live within its role of aiding an eventual invasion. They also had to deal with the notion of reprisals: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oradour-sur-Glane#Background

[Paul]

Seward,

That's what I'm trying to tell John.

[Seward]

Anyway, I do think it is easy for us to sit here and say, why weren't the resistance movements more effective? That they were effective as they were and as numerous in the face of state sponsored terrorism, reprisals which eliminated entire towns throughout Europe, etc. simply amazes me.

[T]

We're Americans. We don't generally celebrate failure. Second place is the first loser, remember?

Or, as we used to say in the Army, second place is the first casualty.

[R C Dean]

The main thing to note about the German anti-Nazi resitance is that it was pathetically small and ineffective.

Due largely, I have little doubt, to the savagery and therefor effectiveness of the Nazi's internal security.

I wouldn't overestimate the effectiveness of the resistance anywhere in Europe. It had no effect on the outcome of the war anywhere, and at best the penetration of British intelligence (which provided the support for it) by Communists laid the groundwork for Communist takeovers after the war (Yugoslavia) or brutal civil wars (Greece).

[Syd Henderson]

The Yugoslav resistance movements were effective when they weren't fighting each other.

[Hugh Akston]

Screw the Moon Landing.

Couldn't have put it better.

[FatDrunkAndStupid]

Paul,
Officers were forbidden to vote prior to 1933, and most retained an official apolitical stance even after that regulation was repealed. Von Seeckt (the father of the Wehrmacht) was adamant about fostering a professional, apolitical officer corp. So that a general was not a member of the Nazi party is pretty much meaningless. Checking the party registration of his wife (Rommel's wife, for example, was a Nazi Party member) is a far better way of divining an officer's personal politics.

[BakedPenguin]

Several people have mentioned the role of the French (and other) resistances. It makes a hell of a lot of sense that they would limit their roles to mainly intel, especially after it looked like the Allies might actually win, and after the brutal reprisals to overt military action took place.

Denmark resisted; which is why almost all of Denmark's Jewish population made it to Sweden.

Bulgaria (and to a lesser extent, Romania) were also relatively safe places for Jews. (Depending on local circumstance, of course.)

A history professor I once had who lived in Romania recounted a story he heard (with variations from several people, both Jews and Gentile): The Nazis would come to a town, and demand that all the Jews be surrendered. The village elders would go to them and say all the Jews had either died in pogroms, or had fled the advance of the Nazis. The Nazis would leave. When the Jews (who had been hidden by the Romanians) asked why they were willing to risk so much to hide them after committing pogroms from time to time, the response was "Yes, but you're our Jews."

[Tacos mmm...]

Hell for that matter so was all of Europe sans the Netherlands. All of the those countries gladly gave up their Jews. Killing Jews was a feature of the Nazis to most of Europe.

Denmark didn't. King Christian X even reportedly wore the star of David, and encouraged non-Jewish Danes to do so as well. The entire country then cooperated to smuggle the Jewish population over to neutral Sweden.

The plan of the Valkyrie conspirators was to arrange for peace with the allies as soon as possible. Even if some Nazis had gone free, I would trade away punishment for a handful of the guilty to save thousands of innocents anyday.

[Seward]

BakedPenguin,

Even at that the "career" of intelligence operative was often just a few months (when they were caught and then shot for their activities); for the French this was particularly true if they were trying to broadcast information over to the U.K.

[Mad Max]

'We're Americans. We don't generally celebrate failure. Second place is the first loser, remember?'

Remind me who lost WWII?

[H.F. Wolff]

For all those mental midgets that failed math and science in school and avoided it in college:

Governments of Israel, Poland, and Germany, published information refuting holocaust!

For decades the commemorative plaques at the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland proclaimed that the number of Jews murdered in that camp was 4 million; consequently 2 million must have been murdered elsewhere to arrive at the historic figure of 6 million Jews gassed and cremated by the Nazis.

In 1990 the Polish government, after years of study and research concluded that the number of Jews murdered in Auschwitz had been exaggerated by the communists who had liberated this concentration camp, and that 1.5 million was a more realistic number. The commemorative plaques were replaced with new ones acknowledging this reduced estimate.

Subsequently this lower figure was further reduced to a generally accepted number of 1.1 million (as per Wikipidia) for a revised total claim of 3.1 million murdered Jews.

In 2002 the Israeli government is on record as stating that in the year 2000 about 1.1 million holocaust survivors were still alive.

In 2005 the German government is on record as stating that it was still paying compensation to about 1.5 million holocaust survivors.

The conflicting data from Israel and Germany may be averaged: (1.1 m + 1.5 m) / 2 = 1.3 million survivers in 2003, to establish a point half-way between the two data points. That puts the number of survivors at 1.3 million 58 years after liberation of the camps.

The American Journal of Public Health, Dec. 1949, pg 1582, published the mortality rates for various European countries, varying from a low of 8 per thousand to almost 15 per thousand population. Since the camp survivors had been subjected to deprivations, disease, starvation, physical abuse, freezing cold, medical experiments, etc. it is reasonable to conclude that the camp survivors as a group would have a mortality rate at least at the higher level of 15 per thousand, certainly not less or the claims of deprivations would then sound hollow.

The mortality rate of 15 per thousand may be applied as a multiplier to the Jewish survivor population as follows: P x .985**58 = 1.3 m, where P is the number of survivors in 1945, .985 is the multiplier for a mortality rate of 15 per thousand, meaning that 1000 people x .985 = (1000 - 15) = 985 people survive after one year. After 58 years the original population will have decreased by .985 raised to the 58th power, ie. .985 x .985 x .985 x .... for 58 terms. Then, solving the equation for P, and using the known information as published by the above governments, the calculation shows that: P = (1.3 m / .985**58) = (1.3 m / .416) = 3.124 million survivors in 1945, ie. slightly more than the number claimed as murdered.

As author and professor Norman Finkelstein so aptly put it in his book: "With all these holocaust survivors, who did the Nazis kill"? Now we know: NOT ONE, as affirmed by those questioning the veracity of the premise of the holocaust.

HdC

H.F. Wolff

[Art-P.O.G.]

H.F. Wolff,

Your math proves nothing, but your post proves you're a clod.

[JB]

According to Valkyrie the movie in a post-script, there were at least 14 German assassination attempts on Hitler.

[qwerty]

I'm not sure Stauffenberg and the gang are big heroes. Nobody tried to kill Hitler while he was winning the war. They tried to kill him mainly so that they could get better surrender terms for Germany, not because they objected to Hitler's policies.

[The Bearded Hobbit]

Hey, Wolff

One is too fucking many.

... Hobbit

[Art-P.O.G.]

not because they objected to Hitler's policies.

I'd be willing to bet that the majority of the German Resistance did, in fact, object to Hitler's Policies. Yeah, their efforts probably weren't purely altruistic, but there was definitely a sizeable minority of Germans who were horrified to some extent at the policies of The so-called Third Reich.

One is too fucking many.

Well said.

[SugarFree]

Define 'small and ineffective'.

H.F. Wolff's penis.

[Art-P.O.G.]

Sugarfree with the late-breaking win.

[H.F. Wolff]

"One is too many" for what? Extracting "reparations"?

You mental midgets obviously have serious trouble with logic and arithmetic if you can't tell the difference.

Must be the "new math" you were taught, and explains why the USA is in such deep financial doo doo.

H.F. Wolff

[Glibertarian]

Hey Feldwebel Wolff,

What's your take on the whole global warming thing?

[H.F. Wolff]

The Jews di it.

[H.F. Wolff]

We're having the coldest July I have ever experienced.

My pool is at barely 22 deg. C. Normally it is at 28 deg. C due to solar heating alone. This decrease in July pool temp. has been going on for roughly 5 years.

Draw your own conclusions.

H.F. Wolff

P.S. the posting at 1:48pm is not mine.

[BG]

H. F. Wolff

For decades the commemorative plaques at the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland proclaimed that the number of Jews murdered in that camp was 4 million; consequently 2 million must have been murdered elsewhere to arrive at the historic figure of 6 million Jews gassed and cremated by the Nazis.

The "4 million" figure for Auschwitz deaths was a Soviet estimate that reliable historians never took seriously. Four million deaths at Auschwitz was never an assumption made in calculating the "6 million" figure. Raul Hilberg in Destruction of the European Jews puts the number of deaths at that Auschwitz at approximately 1 million (of course there were other death camps, as well as many victims of Nazi murders outside of death camps). Hilberg's total estimate of Jewish holocaust deaths is 5.1 million - with other academic estimates tending to range from 5 million to 6 million. I would also note that, contrary to your suggestion at the end of that paragraph, serious historians don't assert that all murdered Jewish holocaust victims were "gassed and creamated" (although many certainly were). I mention this lest you try to rely on this strawman point for a further "refutation" of the holocaust.

Subsequently this lower figure was further reduced to a generally accepted number of 1.1 million (as per Wikipidia) for a revised total claim of 3.1 million murdered Jews.

Nope. As stated above, serious researchers never thought it was "4 million dead in Auschwitz, 2 million elsewhere". The number dead in Auschwitz was always estimated to be in the 1 million to 1.5 million range, with the estimated number of Jews killed elsewhere ranging from 3.5 to 5 million.

The mortality rate of 15 per thousand may be applied as a multiplier to the Jewish survivor population as follows: P x .985**58 = 1.3 m, where P is the number of survivors in 1945, .985 is the multiplier for a mortality rate of 15 per thousand, meaning that 1000 people x .985 = (1000 - 15) = 985 people survive after one year. After 58 years the original population will have decreased by .985 raised to the 58th power, ie. .985 x .985 x .985 x .... for 58 terms. Then, solving the equation for P, and using the known information as published by the above governments, the calculation shows that: P = (1.3 m / .985**58) = (1.3 m / .416) = 3.124 million survivors in 1945, ie. slightly more than the number claimed as murdered.

Nothing about your numbers contradict the idea that approximately 6 million Jews (and many non-jewish people) were murdered by the Nazi regime. The 1932 edition of The American Jewish Year Book puts the number of Jews in Europe at just over 9,418,000. The 1947 edition gives an estimate of just over 3,642,000* (effective as of 1946). A death toll 5.8 million is within the range of credible historians. Of course between 1932 and the start of the war there was some emigration from Europe and natural death decreasing this number - and some new births increasing it. The net change, however, should not have been so much as to void this analysis.

So how exactly do you defend this opening statement:

Governments of Israel, Poland, and Germany, published information refuting holocaust!

How exactly is the information cited "information refuting holocaust"? At best what you're doing is nitpicking about the death toll based on a (false) premise about what historians have been using as their estimate for Auschwitz deaths.

http://www.holocaust-history.org/questions/numbers.shtml

- This is slightly more than your figure of 3.124 million, but not problematically so. A death rate of about 17.6 per thousand (slightly more than your 15 per thousand) would bring the initial population of 3,642,000 down to 1,300,000 over 58 years.

[JB]

I'm not sure Stauffenberg and the gang are big heroes. Nobody tried to kill Hitler while he was winning the war. They tried to kill him mainly so that they could get better surrender terms for Germany, not because they objected to Hitler's policies.

Not true. There were many assassination attempts, early and late:
http://members.iinet.net.au/~gduncan/assassination_attempts.html

[H.F. Wolff]

BG,

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

You will agree that the information contained in the essay I posted above is correct:

For decades popes, statesmen, literati, have payed homage and tribute to the "4 million" as proclaimed by the plaques in Auschwitz. This is incontrovertible fact.

Even with the reduction to 1.1 million or so the MSM still pontificate about the "6 million" Jewish victims of the holocaust. Ask any American or European about the number of Jews gassed and cremated... The answer is invariable "6 million".

The number and dates of survivors were as published by the respective governments. And the death rate of 15 per thousand is as published in that periodical which, btw., is available on-line.

Doing the mathematics as illustrated shows that no-one was gassed, contrary to what holocaustians would have you believe.

This "no-one was gassed" position is backed by the fact that there is no documentary, scientific, or forensic evidence to substantiate otherwise. This fact is lamented extensively by holocaustians who are forced to rely on "eye witness" testimony which has been proven erroneous, conflicting, scientifically impossible, or just plain lies for personal gain.

Even US Supreme Court Justices and Israeli Supreme Court Justices agree with the foregoing!

Whether the USSR and Poland was lying or not is immaterial to holocaustians since they supported and distributed these lies.

H.F. Wolff

Ps.: The debate about the assassination attempts on Hitler is interesting. How many assassination attempts have there been on US presidents over the last 200+ years?

Hitler travelled in public without any visible security. How many "democratically elected" US presidents, or other heads of state for that matter, can claim this ? w

[Art-P.O.G.]

Hitler travelled in public without any visible security.

Ever heard of the Gestapo or the S.S.? You're an idiot.

[H.F. Wolff]

Hitler also travelled in an open car; no bullet proof shields or such.

H.F. Wolff

[BG]

You will agree that the information contained in the essay I posted above is correct

I will not agree with your thesis statement that "Governments of Israel, Poland, and Germany, published information refuting holocaust". (I agree that those governments published information, I don't agree with your claim that the information they published "refutes the holocaust".)

Even with the reduction to 1.1 million or so the MSM still pontificate about the "6 million" Jewish victims of the holocaust. Ask any American or European about the number of Jews gassed and cremated... The answer is invariable "6 million".

There are three different figures being conflated here:

1) The number of Jews killed in the holocaust
2) The number of Jews killed in the Auschwitz
3) The number of Jews "gassed and cremated"

For the first of those, academic estimates usually range from 5 million to 6 million. This includes not only those Jews who died in concentration camps, but also many who were shot or otherwise murdered by the Nazis outside of camps.* So if this is what Americans and Europeans have in mind when they say "6 million", it is a reasonable estimate.

The second of those figures is a subset of the first. As I mention in my previous post, although the plaque replaced in 1990 said "4 million", serious researchers never accepted that figure when calculating the death toll of Jews from the holocaust. Therefore, pointing out that the new plaque gives a lower figure is a red herring if you are trying to dispute the generally accepted range of death toll estimates.

The third, again, is a subset of the first. I haven't seen any reliable figures on what percentage of victims were sent to gas chambers versus what percentage were killed by other means. But no credible historian would say that it is 0% or 100%.

* This is including only Jewish victims of the Nazis. There were also, of course, millions of non-Jewish victims; including political opponents, others who the Nazis deemed racially inferior, handicapped, homosexuals, hostages and civilians killed in "reprisal" for German soldier deaths, etc. There are widely varying estimates for the total number of Nazi murders. R. J. Rummel estimates the number to be at least 15 million and probably over 20 million (not including allied combatants killed in battle or civilians killed by accident during attacks on military targets).

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NAZIS.CHAP1.HTM#*

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/DBG.CHAP2.HTM

[BG]

Doing the mathematics as illustrated shows that no-one was gassed, contrary to what holocaustians would have you believe.

How do you get from this:

"Extrapolating backwards using a given death rate, approximately 3,124,000 holocaust survivors would have been alive at the end of world war 2"

to this:

"no-one was gassed"?

I think you're a few premises short of a syllogism here.

This "no-one was gassed" position is backed by the fact that there is no documentary, scientific, or forensic evidence to substantiate otherwise. This fact is lamented extensively by holocaustians who are forced to rely on "eye witness" testimony which has been proven erroneous, conflicting, scientifically impossible, or just plain lies for personal gain.

What is your explanation for why it is "scientifically impossible"? And why is there such a convergence of independent eyewitness testimony on this point - from victims in different camps in different parts of Europe, as well as some Nazi accounts - if there were no gas chambers?

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/not-the-science/

http://www.holocaust-history.org/~jamie/the-hoax.shtml

Even US Supreme Court Justices and Israeli Supreme Court Justices agree with the foregoing!

Source?

[H.F. Wolff]

BG,

The data I have quoted is publicly available for everyone to see. It was published by the respective governments. I am sure they did not do this to "minimize" any holocaustian claims but, the data they published will permit one to conclude that the holocaustian's claims are bogus, as my posting very well illustrates.

As to the scientific evidence against the holocaust: You have heard about one Germar Rudolf? Read what he had to say and what happened to him.

As to "eye witness testimony", it is anything but convergent once the details thereof are examined. The only convergence is the claim of "6 million" gassings and cremations... This is the only recurring theme in the MSM and eye witness testimony.

Even Eli Wiesel who got the Nobel prize for his "work" is a barefaced liar who changed his story every time he repeated it.

H.F. Wolff

[H.F. Wolff]

One can also include Simon Wiesenthal to that list of outrageous holocaustian liars.

The US Supreme Court Justices that looked askance at the Nuremberg trials were Harlan Fiske Stone, Justice Wennerstrum, and Justice William O. Douglas.

It was Justice Stone who reported that the confessions from the accused at Nuremberg had been obtained by means of torture.

One might also consider why the memoirs of Churchill, Eisenhower, and de Gaulle do not include a single word about any holocaust in a total of 7061 pages of writing?

And, finally, why in so many European countries are people thrown in prison for merely questioning various aspects of this holocaust? Because governments have much to hide? What?

H.F. Wolff

US Senator Robert Taft and E.L. van Rhoden of the Simpson Army Commission also had derogatory words regarding the Nuremberg trials.

Another author you might wish to look at is Arthur Butz's The Hoax of the 20th Century.

Also "Did 6 million really die" is quite informative.

[BG]

As to the scientific evidence against the holocaust: You have heard about one Germar Rudolf? Read what he had to say and what happened to him.

Germar Rudolf's main thesis was that the gas chambers could not have existed and functioned as claimed because it would take too long to vent the poison gas. His claims have been thoroughly debunked on the site I linked to. Here it is again:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/index.shtml#v

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/not-the-science/

As to "eye witness testimony", it is anything but convergent once the details thereof are examined. The only convergence is the claim of "6 million" gassings and cremations... This is the only recurring theme in the MSM and eye witness testimony.

In general the eye witness testimony of survivors is consistent with a large number of captured Nazi documents, diaries of Nazi death camp officers, eyewitness accounts from others, a recording of a speech made by Himmler in Poznan, etc. All of this evidence supports the conclusion that the Nazi regime systematically murdered millions of Jews (some immediately, some after using them as slave labor for as long as seemed convenient). It used a variety of methods to do this; including direct shooting, forced working to death, imprisonment under starvation conditions, and poison gassing (this is not an exhaustive list).

What are you really disputing?

- Millions of Jews were murdered by the SS in mass shootings in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. Do you dispute this?

- In addition to those; millions more Jews - from all over Nazi-controlled territory - were forcibly imprisoned in camps (for no other reason than the fact that they were Jews). Do you dispute this?

- The number of people still alive in those camps at the war's end was much less than the number brought there, because the Nazis murdered most of them. Do you dispute this?

- Or do you agree with all of that, but merely think the Nazis used no poison gas - and rather committed all their murders by other means? (It is not clear to me why anyone - let alone millions of people - would spontaneously lie about the means of a mass murder that is in fact occurring.)

I request that, if you reply, you respond to each of the above ideas individually and indicate your position. For all of the four ideas above the generally accepted version of events is supported by large volumes of evidence. The absurdity of claiming that the evidence is a hoax is detailed here:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/~jamie/the-hoax.shtml

[BG]

And, finally, why in so many European countries are people thrown in prison for merely questioning various aspects of this holocaust? Because governments have much to hide? What?

To be sure, laws censoring holocaust denial and/or revisionism is idiotic, unjust, and should be repealed. The correct response to nonsense is not censorship, but rather for reasonable people to use their free speech; and respond with the arguments and evidence that refutes those ideas. Freedom of Speech contains within itself the antidote to the problems that might arise from its excersize.

[H.F. Wolff]

BG,

I most whole-heartedly agree with your last post!

It speaks volumes that the holocaustians do their utmost to stifle any debate; indeed they avoid it at any cost.

To address your earlier queries I respectfully submit that you peruse a discussion forum entitled CODOH. A little searching there would disclose that many of your queries have been thoroughly reviewed.

Another informative website is "nazigassings".

I noticed that you failed to comment on the positions of Churchill, Eisenhower, de Gaulle, and the opinions of the Supreme Court Justices I mentioned.

The Supreme Court of Israel also dismissed Jewish eye witness testimony in the case of "Ivan the Terrible" (John Demjanjuk sp?) Interesting that the holocaustians now have to drag this poor fellow through the mud in Germany after the Israelis found him innocent.

H.F. Wolff

[H.F. Wolff]

The reasons Jews were rounded up in Germany and placed into concentration camps are the same reasons the the USA, Canada, Australia, rounded up Japanese, Italian, & German citizens and placed them into camps.

The main difference being that "Judea declared war on Germany" as per the newspaper headlines around the world in 1933 which made many Jews foreign agents not only in Germany.

Also the Jews have been compensated...

On the eastern front enemies with weapons and out-of uniform were shot in accordance with international laws. Considering the number of German troops assigned to this task (to protect the rear of the German armed forces) makes the claim of "millions" ludicrous.

The modern day evidence (or lack thereof) shows that no-one was killed on any mass scale in any German camp as there is no forensic, scientific, nor documentary evidence to support any other position.

Many people died of disease and malnutrition, and not only camp inmates, towards the end of the war because of disruption of supply lines due to incessant bombing by the British and Americans.

H.F. Wolff

[BG]

The reasons Jews were rounded up in Germany and placed into concentration camps are the same reasons the the USA, Canada, Australia, rounded up Japanese, Italian, & German citizens and placed them into camps.

The main difference being that "Judea declared war on Germany" as per the newspaper headlines around the world in 1933 which made many Jews foreign agents not only in Germany.

While I'm sure many prominent Jewish individuals complained that a rabid anti-Semite had just come to power in Germany, there is no such thing as "Judea", and thus "Judea" could not have "declared war on Germany".

Also the Jews have been compensated...

Internment victims were also compensated under Reagan. However, I am not aware of any demographic statistics indicating a massive population decline in Japanese Americans during this time, or any documents recovered that indicate Roosevelt was being given reports on how well the killings were going.

On the eastern front enemies with weapons and out-of uniform were shot in accordance with international laws. Considering the number of German troops assigned to this task (to protect the rear of the German armed forces) makes the claim of "millions" ludicrous.

The modern day evidence (or lack thereof) shows that no-one was killed on any mass scale in any German camp as there is no forensic, scientific, nor documentary evidence to support any other position.

You are repeating the claim that there is no documentary evidence, when in fact there is literally tons of evidence. Thousands of reports from SS units to commanders in Berlin, detailing the number of Jewish non-combatants they had killed (they had separate listings in their reports for non-combatants) and breaking this number down by men, women, and children. There are high-level Nazi documents discussing the "solution to the Jewish question" and talking about how those fit for work would be put to work building roads such that many would "fall away through natural diminution", how those who didn't "fall away" would be "dealt with accordingly", and how those unfit for work would be "eliminated immediately". This is also referenced in the memoirs of Rudolf Hoss and Adolf Eichmann.

http://www.hdot.org/en/trial/defense/browning/510

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/hoess-memoirs/

http://www.holocaust-history.org/questions/numbers.shtml

If you don't believe that these documents really exist, you can contact the US Holocaust Museum, ITS in Germany, or other institutions where historical records are kept; and ask to examine them yourself.

http://www.ushmm.org/research/center/research/

http://www.its-arolsen.org/en/homepage/index.html

There is also forensic evidence:

Many people died of disease and malnutrition, and not only camp inmates, towards the end of the war because of disruption of supply lines due to incessant bombing by the British and Americans.

This is a bogus explanation. There is a reason why we don't have immense amounts of pictures and video footage of emaciated civilians and piles of bodies from outside the camps at the end of the war. The Nazi regime brought Jews to camps by the thousands per week, from 1941 until almost the end of the war - including moving prisoners from death camps about to be captured by the allies to other camps deeper in Nazi territory. If you are saying that they weren't being killed en mass until near the end of the war, where do you imagine all these people were housed in the ensuing years? (Inmate quarters were grotesquely overcrowded when the camps were liberated, even though most of the people who had been brought there over the years were no longer there.) And the Nazis were transporting prisoners from one camp to another as late as 1945, so it is nonsense to say that transportation systems were too disrupted for them to get food to the camps (though if that were the case, and the Nazis chose to keep people under starvation conditions rather than free them, it would still not reflect very well on that regime).

As for the Supreme Court justices you cite, their criticisms were about procedure and legitimacy - and the question of whether the trial violated the principle of ex post facto law. They did not think the Nazis were innocent in fact.

[H.F. Wolff]

You are playing 'Monday Morning Quarterback' with your assertion what you THINK happened in the concentration camps and what you THINK the Supreme Court Justices thought.

In a court of law procedure is everything. Why should it be necessary to circumvent procedures and rules of jurisprudence established over hundreds of years when the evidence was so compelling?

Because in reality the evidence was bogus? This would also explain why serious doubters now are imprisoned because the evidence is bogus. There simply is no other explanation, at least not one I have heard.

H.F. Wolff

[H.F. Wolff]

You should be aware that the figure of "6 million" is steeped in Jewish mythology, and has been bandied about by Zionists for over 100 years. Significant discussions were in 1900 and 1918, pre-dating WWII. You can research the New York Times archives for this.

Or save yourself the trouble and read Germar Rudolf's Lectures on the Holocaust in which he cites all the references including those of the NYT.

H.F. Wolff

[John]

While I agree Von Stauffenberg was a unsung hero, "screw the moon landing" is a pretty lame ting to proclaim. The apex of human accomplishment in the 20th century paved the way to discovery and our future. All the brave men, from Von Stauffenberg to Armstrong paved a path for us to follow. Get with the program!