What is it that deniers deny?

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 11:36 am

supervitor wrote:W can definitely connect this approach with Arendt's. That's where she was trying to get (Ordinary Men)

Yup! Very relevant.

supervitor wrote:yeah, I guessed that on his first post I came across

He's not exactly subtle, is he?
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Sun Jul 19, 2015 12:31 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:So, e.g., of the death toll in the Holocaust, on which by the way, I follow Hilberg (about 5.1 million, not 6 million), about half the victims perished in camps (including in gas chambers) - and about 1.5 million died in "open-air" shootings. Rollo the ganger's formula (s/g/p) doesn't speak to the open-air extermination actions. As I pointed out just above, Mary (despite promoting g/p/s) has made a series of unsupportable arguments to wave away these 1.5 million deaths.

Mostly in Ukraine and Russia, right? The "Holocaust by bullets". Well, if that's their angle of approach, then there's really no debate

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby David » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:00 pm

supervitor wrote:I've checked that (Christopher?) Browning is a Holocaust Historian, not somewhat of a Denialist


Hello sup-
The work of Browning I was referring to was,"The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942."

Browning, following the lead of David Irving, revised the Story that Hitler issued a secret order to kill all European Jews
in June 1941. Brownings new theory is sort of odd and complex but boils down to there being a series of individual
decisions to commit mass killings.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:08 pm

Yup. The occupied parts of the USSR: the Baltics, Belorussia, Ukraine, Crimea. - operating behind the advance of the Wehrmacht.
Einsatzgruppe A operated in the Baltics and into area towards Leningrad IIRC.
Einsatzgruppe B was south of that, into Belorussia.
Einsatzgruppe C - Ukraine.
Einsatzgruppe D - southern Ukraine and the Crimea.
There were two large sweeps, the first in summer-fall 1941 and the second in 1942
We say "Einsatzgruppen" but the EGs were abetted by Order Police battalions, Waffen-SS, Sipo units, and even Wehrmacht. They also, notably in the Baltics, relied on local collaborators.

Pretty silly arguments about this from Mary Q.

Cf.: viewtopic.php?f=39&t=25165
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sun Jul 19, 2015 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:09 pm

David wrote:
supervitor wrote:I've checked that (Christopher?) Browning is a Holocaust Historian, not somewhat of a Denialist


Hello sup-
The work of Browning I was referring to was,"The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942."

Browning, following the lead of David Irving, revised the Story that Hitler issued a secret order to kill all European Jews
in June 1941. Brownings new theory is sort of odd and complex but boils down to there being a series of individual
decisions to commit mass killings.


Hmmm, I think you're skipping very important bits of information/history right there.. I think I'll wait for Statistical before I "believe" you..

Are you selectively reading?
Last edited by supervitor on Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:12 pm

David wrote:
supervitor wrote:I've checked that (Christopher?) Browning is a Holocaust Historian, not somewhat of a Denialist


Hello sup-
The work of Browning I was referring to was,"The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942."

Browning, following the lead of David Irving, revised the Story that Hitler issued a secret order to kill all European Jews
in June 1941. Brownings new theory is sort of odd and complex but boils down to there being a series of individual
decisions to commit mass killings.

David, the Browning work you referred to was actually Goldhagen's book! Check it out:
David wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:Mary Q Contrary,
Yet, I don't see how proving or disproving minor historical grievances regarding numbers matters to history or reality unless you have some intrinsic motive to harm the Jewish community for some reason. Whether 6 million Jews or only 4 million is the 'correct' number, what the hell does this matter? I understand Revisionists on the Holocaust base their apparent concern with such an irrelevant appeal on the basis that the winners of wars create.


Hello Scott-

At the start I would disagree that not believing in the "Holocaust" harms the Jewish community or anyone else
The horrible tales of making soap out of people and demonic images of throwing babies into burning pits
actually screw up peoples' heads, pushing a reasonable wariness of anti-Semitism into paranoia.
Bibi Netanyahu and his fear/hatred of the Iranians seems to be an example. I have seen many other examples in
individuals I know, guns kept under beds ready to shoot mobs of attacking skinheads/zombies.

I think that the Holocaust Story is a sick, twisted horrible Story. I was very happy when the figures of
dead at majdanek were dropped by 300,000 (and surprised at how angry many Believers got) I look at it
just like learning that the numbers of deaths in a plane crash is lower.

I also disagree that the Holocaust is a minor historical issue. In school we are actually taught that it is a major event
in history.

The "Holocaust" is the supposed to be an intentional crime.
Believers like Goldhagen paint a demonic portrait of the Germans delighting in torturing Jews.

I personally believe that the German government had a policy which, while almost always anti-Semitic,
varied from country to country and time to time. German policy toward Jews and Poles who settled on
land taken from Germans in 1919 were brutally booted. French-Jewish citizens had a very low deportation
rate of around 5% (although Believers are continually trying to challenge the numbers.)
However, it did not include murder. That, to me, is a significant difference.

Secondly, I think that the numbers of deaths are lower than 4 million.
I also think that 2 or 3 million people being not killed, is a significant fact, in its own right.
It is worth getting right. And it definitely should NOT be a crime to discuss it.

It is clear to me that there was significant exaggeration of real tragedies and the creation of outright lies
as part of a propaganda campaign-
I find it dangerous when the government can outright lie to us....take weapons of mass destruction and Iraq
or the Tonkin Gulf Incident as examples which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousand of people (most not American)


I also get very irritated when I am told that I must believe something which is obviously a lie.
A example is being told for years that the Germans destroyed "all evidence" of Treblinka.
It turns out to be a lie.
It turns out that Soviet photographs and aerial photographs show they left buildings, rail tracks, fences,
garbage pits, and human remains of 2-3 thousand people.

The Soviets and Poles destroyed all the evidence and blamed it on the Germans.
Believers don't even fess-up to the facts.

Thank you for your questions

Browning's Origins book is the one you avoided answering about when asked about it here.

Did you really write that Browning followed Irving's lead? Yes, I've read it three times now, you did . . . would you be so kind as to show us how Browning followed Irving's lead and which Irving works and arguments he supposedly followed?
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:16 pm

No need to wait, David!

Apparently you're just confused!
Look, Wikipedia can clear to you Browning's theory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christoph ... _Holocaust
Browning is a functionalist in the origins of the Holocaust debate, following the principles of the "moderate functionalist" school of thought, which focuses on the structure and institution of the Third Reich, moving the focus away from Hitler. Functionalism sees the extermination of the Jews as the improvisation and radicalization of a polycratic regime. Functionalists do not vindicate Adolf Hitler yet they recognize that many other factors were involved in the Final Solution.


So, he's just saying it's not the fruit of a single man, but of a radicalization of a regime! It makes a lot of sense, he's just adding perspective and saying that the structure of the society counts a lot for what happens! no need to get confused.

I would add that the regime was under extreme pressure, because going towards self-destruction, and they radicalized themselves towards their goal of "destroying the Jew", but that's just my bit
Last edited by supervitor on Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Jehovah's Witnesses gassed

Postby David » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:26 pm

supervitor wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote: Well, if that's their angle of approach, then there's really no debate


SM started this thread with the inaccurate and rather stupid title of "What is it that deniers deny?"

I was pointing out all the Myths that everyone now seems to deny.
In the last post on the subject of mass gassings of Dutch Gays, SM wrote "I know Nothing, I know Nothing."
I am assuming that SM did not revise his comment?

But I want to ask him if he denies the mass gassings at Auschwitz of Jehovah's Witnesses?
I have not kept up on it but in the 1970's the Story was that 60,000 Jehovah's Witnesseses were
murdered by the National Socialists-

I am assuming that you Deny the Story from the '70's but could you please confirm?

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby David » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:33 pm

supervitor wrote:No need to wait, David!

Apparently you're just confused!
Look, Wikipedia can clear to you Browning's theory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christoph ... _Holocaust
Browning is a functionalist in the origins of the Holocaust debate, following the principles of the "moderate functionalist" school of thought, which focuses on the structure and institution of the Third Reich, moving the focus away from Hitler. Functionalism sees the extermination of the Jews as the improvisation and radicalization of a polycratic regime. Functionalists do not vindicate Adolf Hitler yet they recognize that many other factors were involved in the Final Solution.


So, he's just saying it's not the fruit of a single man, but of a radicalization of a regime! It makes a lot of sense, he's just adding prespective and saying that the structure of the society counts a lot for what happens! no need to get confused.

I would add that the regime was under extreme pressure, because going towards self-destruction, and they radicalized themselves towards their goal of "destroying the Jew", but that's just my bit


Hello sup-
Maybe you should go back and read what I wrote about an "Order" from Hitler.
But start off reading the Wikipedia article on Functionalism v. Intentionalism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functiona ... ntionalism

To simplify to gobbledegook, the question boils down to whether or not Hitler issued an "Order" or not as was asserted at
the Nuremberg Tribunal. Browning says No. I agree with Browning.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses gassed

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:35 pm

David wrote:
supervitor wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote: Well, if that's their angle of approach, then there's really no debate


SM started this thread with the inaccurate and rather stupid title of "What is it that deniers deny?"

Blame Rollo the ganger or Maryzilla. I simply quoted them.

David wrote:I was pointing out all the Myths that everyone now seems to deny.
In the last post on the subject of mass gassings of Dutch Gays, SM wrote "I know Nothing, I know Nothing."
I am assuming that SM did not revise his comment?

What are you talking about? I told you I'd never heard of gassings of Dutch gays. End of story.

You, on the other hand, told us that "revisionism" is the revision of the IMT findings - yet you went silent when asked to show us where gassings of Dutch homosexuals were discussed in your so-called "official story." And you're still dodging the question! LOL

David wrote:But I want to ask him if he denies the mass gassings at Auschwitz of Jehovah's Witnesses?
I have not kept up on it but in the 1970's the Story was that 60,000 Jehovah's Witnesseses were
murdered by the National Socialists-

I am assuming that you Deny the Story from the '70's but could you please confirm?

Hunh? Again, please tell us about the portion of the "official story" (the IMT judgment) that concludes that 60,000 Jehovah's Witnesses were gassed. If this point is not in the IMT judgment, it seems, by your standard, whatever you're citing from the 1970s was the revisionist history . . . as with the gassings of Dutch gays. Are you now telling us that "Revisionism" is the argument that more groups than identified in the IMT judgment were killed in gas chambers? (As an aside, I've read that there were 25,000 - 30,000 Jehovah's Witnesses in Germany in the 1930s . . . )
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:37 pm

David seems blissfully unaware - might as well let him know while he works on his explanation of Browning's following Irving - that Browning was one of the expert witnesses against Irving in the lawsuit Irving brought against Lipstadt and Penguin.

E.g., http://www.hdot.org/en/trial/defense/browning/530.html
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby David » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:41 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Hello sup-
The work of Browning I was referring to was,"The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942."

Browning, following the lead of David Irving, revised the Story that Hitler issued a secret order to kill all European Jews
in June 1941. Brownings new theory is sort of odd and complex but boils down to there being a series of individual
decisions to commit mass killings.

David, the Browning work you referred to was actually Goldhagen's book! Check it out: [/quote]

So now you are Denying that Christopher R. Browning wrote The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942 (Comprehensive History of the Holocaust) Paperback – May 1, 2007? Or what?


Published by the University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, and Yad Vashem, Jerusalem
In 1939, the Nazi regime’s plans for redrawing the demographic map of Eastern Europe entailed the expulsion of millions of Jews. By the fall of 1941, these plans had shifted from expulsion to systematic and total mass murder of all Jews within the Nazi grasp. The Origins of the Final Solution is the most detailed and comprehensive analysis ever written of what took place during this crucial period—of how, precisely, the Nazis’ racial policies evolved from persecution and “ethnic cleansing” to the Final Solution of the Holocaust.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:42 pm

What David means by "To simplify" is actually "To misrepresent." Functionalists, unlike David, well, I will quote from the Wiki article David wants to lie about: "neither side [functionalist/intentionalist] disputes the reality of the Holocaust, nor is there serious dispute over the premise that Hitler (as Führer) was personally responsible for encouraging the anti-Semitism that allowed the Holocaust to take place."
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:44 pm

David wrote:
supervitor wrote:No need to wait, David!

Apparently you're just confused!
Look, Wikipedia can clear to you Browning's theory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christoph ... _Holocaust
Browning is a functionalist in the origins of the Holocaust debate, following the principles of the "moderate functionalist" school of thought, which focuses on the structure and institution of the Third Reich, moving the focus away from Hitler. Functionalism sees the extermination of the Jews as the improvisation and radicalization of a polycratic regime. Functionalists do not vindicate Adolf Hitler yet they recognize that many other factors were involved in the Final Solution.


So, he's just saying it's not the fruit of a single man, but of a radicalization of a regime! It makes a lot of sense, he's just adding prespective and saying that the structure of the society counts a lot for what happens! no need to get confused.

I would add that the regime was under extreme pressure, because going towards self-destruction, and they radicalized themselves towards their goal of "destroying the Jew", but that's just my bit


Hello sup-
Maybe you should go back and read what I wrote about an "Order" from Hitler.
But start off reading the Wikipedia article on Functionalism v. Intentionalism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functiona ... ntionalism

To simplify to gobbledegook, the question boils down to whether or not Hitler issued an "Order" or not as was asserted at
the Nuremberg Tribunal. Browning says No. I agree with Browning.


It feels like you're simplifying. Like reducing the debate to the answer of a simple question: "Was there a signature by Hitler of a Plan?", then you side with the Functionalists and choose that their answer is "No".

Now «you are be able to say "No Plan"»

Am I getting close?


That's simplifying and misrepresenting what they say: they say it's not all up to one man, it's due to many factors!

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:47 pm

David wrote:So now you are Denying that Christopher R. Browning wrote The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942 (Comprehensive History of the Holocaust) Paperback – May 1, 2007? Or what?

Can you be any stupider? I cited this very book earlier for your edification.!

To help you understand very simple points, what I told you is

1) you didn't mention this book in the post to which servitor replied - you mentioned Goldhagen. (In discussion with supervitor, I brought up Browning, actually, but a different book of his.)

2) earlier I asked you to explain Browning's views in Origins - and you didn't reply

You seem as incapable of reading what people write as you are of replying to questions you don't like.

David wrote:Published by the University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, and Yad Vashem, Jerusalem
In 1939, the Nazi regime’s plans for redrawing the demographic map of Eastern Europe entailed the expulsion of millions of Jews. By the fall of 1941, these plans had shifted from expulsion to systematic and total mass murder of all Jews within the Nazi grasp. The Origins of the Final Solution is the most detailed and comprehensive analysis ever written of what took place during this crucial period—of how, precisely, the Nazis’ racial policies evolved from persecution and “ethnic cleansing” to the Final Solution of the Holocaust.

Yup, just as I said, Browning didn't follow Irving's lead.

Now back to you: I asked that you show how you think Browning followed Irving. Go for it.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses gassed

Postby David » Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:54 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:What are you talking about? I told you I'd never heard of gassings of Dutch gays. End of story.

You, on the other hand, told us that "revisionism" is the revision of the IMT findings - yet you went silent when asked to show us where gassings of Dutch homosexuals were discussed in your so-called "official story." And you're still dodging the question! LOL



SM, You missed my earlier reply. Not all myths about persecution of people were created at Nuremberg.
"What about, "Tijsseling calls this image "a persistent fiction, created by the gay-emancipation movement in the 1970s don't you understand? It has nothing to do with the IMT except the idea of a "victim of Nazi persecution" status."

In the 1970's some members of various groups started to claim "victim status" for being persecuted by the National Socialist
government. They usually greatly exaggerated the extent of persecution.
"Victim status" actually had legal and economic ramifications. It was this investigation of Victim Status by Dr. Tijsseling and
others which "Denied" the whole Myth.

You are being a sneak with your "I know nothing, I know nothing" act.

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby David » Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:10 pm

supervitor wrote:

That's simplifying and misrepresenting what they say: they say it's not all up to one man, it's due to many factors!


Did you read the wikipedia article?

There are two questions- One is the very simple question of whether Hitler gave an "Order." That was part of the Intentionalist
Myth created at Nuremberg. It is now discredited. (Please don't ask how the lie was created!)

The second more complex question is "How the Heck was the vast operation of committing the mass murder of millions of
people organized?" Believers have been tap-dancing around that question since Irving wrote Hitler's War in 1977, showing that
Hitler never gave the "Order."

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby David » Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:14 pm

supervitor wrote:
Now «you are be able to say "No Plan"»



That is not what I am saying.
The Germans had a set of "plans" which varied from time to time and country to country.

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:15 pm

David wrote:
supervitor wrote:

That's simplifying and misrepresenting what they say: they say it's not all up to one man, it's due to many factors!


Did you read the wikipedia article?

Yes, I even quoted it for you. Now, did you read my post?

There are two questions- One is the very simple question of whether Hitler gave an "Order." That was part of the Intentionalist
Myth created at Nuremberg. It is now discredited. (Please don't ask how the lie was created!)

The second more complex question is "How the Heck was the vast operation of committing the mass murder of millions of
people organized?" Believers have been tap-dancing around that question since Irving wrote Hitler's War in 1977, showing that
Hitler never gave the "Order."

[/quote]
You tried to reduce Browning's position to answering 1 (or 2) questions: that's not how it's done! if you want to talk about what he says, you say what he says. I just quoted his position for you and it's very different from what you were (are) conveying

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:19 pm

David wrote:
supervitor wrote:
Now «you are be able to say "No Plan"»



That is not what I am saying.
The Germans had a set of "plans" which varied from time to time and country to country.


I addressed that issue when I replied originally to you. Did you miss that post also? Here:

viewtopic.php?f=39&t=25685&start=160#p472731

It's one of my best of the day, I feel it would be a shame if you don't read it. It was specially dedicated to you, David.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Jehovah's Witnesses gassed

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:24 pm

David wrote:You missed my earlier reply. Not all myths about persecution of people were created at Nuremberg.

Well, now you're just confusing yourself - what exactly is the set of myths you claim to have existed - and that need revising? You keep changing your claims - so how can anyone trust you?

David, we don't want to hear every little bit of whining from you - rather, we have been asking you to tell us what are the major "myths," which current scholars hold to, that you think need revising?

David wrote:"What about, "Tijsseling calls this image "a persistent fiction, created by the gay-emancipation movement in the 1970s don't you understand? It has nothing to do with the IMT except the idea of a "victim of Nazi persecution" status."

Again, David, read slowly so you understand: you wrote,
It is worth repeating that Revisionism is just a review of the admittedly incorrect and exaggerated claims presented at the Nuremberg Show Trial. Best.

When this didn't work out for you, you changed what you were claiming. We all see that.

Now you claim "Revisionism" is the revising of "all myths about persecution of people." Ok, again, what are the major myths which historians and scholars promote today about the Third Reich in need of revision? I even suggested some works of scholars you could explain your views on - here.

David wrote:In the 1970's some members of various groups started to claim "victim status" for being persecuted by the National Socialist
government. They usually greatly exaggerated the extent of persecution.
"Victim status" actually had legal and economic ramifications. It was this investigation of Victim Status by Dr. Tijsseling and
others which "Denied" the whole Myth.

So what? According to you, this wasn't part of what "Revisionism" is concerned with - how did you put it? - "Revisionism is just a review of the admittedly incorrect and exaggerated claims presented at the Nuremberg Show Trial."

David wrote:You are being a sneak with your "I know nothing, I know nothing" act.

'Fraid not. I don't know a thing about the gassing of gay Dutch people by the Nazis - and, as I told you, it may very well be because it never happened, as you say Tijsseling argues.

What do you make of this, David?:
As to Tijsseling, I looked around for material you referred to and came across where she says that "Homosexuals in Germany were clearly victims of the Nazi regime" and were among those "sent to the death camps." She says that her research indicates that "this wasn’t true for the Netherlands."

How are you coming with the "wrongway gas chambers" at Majdanek eh?
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:26 pm

David - do you agree with the functionalists - and my but this debate is old! - that, according to "your" article, there is no disputing "the reality of the Holocaust, nor is there serious dispute over the premise that Hitler (as Führer) was personally responsible for encouraging the anti-Semitism that allowed the Holocaust to take place"?
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:30 pm

I see where is your confusion, David.

You're probably confusing Nazi policy with the policies/attitudes of the occupied countries.. That's it, isn't it?

I'll explain:
Depending how they were occupied and at what extent they colaborated, each country were given a different set of rules:
So, for instance the Denmark was able to mantain some political power to its own internal matters as long as it supported Germany. They were able to mostly save their jews (thanks also to the Danish people)

France got to remain with half itself, and the Jews from Vichy France resisted until Vichy was itself occupied. Then they got screwed.

Other countries (baltics, Hungary, Ukraine) gladly colaborated on the final solution.

So, no, it's not "different set of plans" for different countries, it's different circunstances for different countries. They tried to get to the Danish Jews also, but they got screwed, the Jews had already mostly escaped.

You're over-simplifying again

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1177
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Mary Q Contrary » Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:45 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
supervitor wrote:
Statistical Mechanical wrote:(that is, Holocaust denial) in exactly the same terms discussed above - as the denial of six/gas/plan

six/gas/plan?

hehehe, you guys have your own language..

The formula is explained in the OP. It is not shared by "us guys."

supervitor wrote:you're saying that that other guy defined the term as denying the number was 6 million Jews, that there were no gas chambers and that there never was a plan, right?

I liked the detail of "six". So succint.

Sort of. The OP explains that, yes, Rollo the ganger, a denier at RODOH, and Mary Q Contrary have both sought to explain their views as follows: denial that 6 million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust, denial that the Nazis exterminated Jews in gas chambers, and denial that the Nazis had a master plan for extermination of Europe's Jews. The corollary for Rollo the ganger is that other arguments made by deniers are "nonsense." (In my opinion, Rollo the ganger realizes that the deep views of Holocaust deniers are an embarrassment and is trying to "cut away" some of that; sadly, his six/gas/plan is equally an embarrassment!)

So, e.g., of the death toll in the Holocaust, on which by the way, I follow Hilberg (about 5.1 million, not 6 million), about half the victims perished in camps (including in gas chambers) - and about 1.5 million died in "open-air" shootings. Rollo the ganger's formula (s/g/p) doesn't speak to the open-air extermination actions. As I pointed out just above, Mary (despite promoting g/p/s) has made a series of unsupportable arguments to wave away these 1.5 million deaths.

That kind of obfuscation - and confusion (given that deniers claim so much more than s/g/p) - is what I was trying to get at in the OP.

How much shorter can you make it?

And tell us again how open air shootings is evidence for gas chambers or how 1.5 million is evidence for 6 million. You could maybe use EG activity to support the p but you run away like a little girl rather than actually do that.
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1177
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Mary Q Contrary » Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:55 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:She also picked "Petro's" awkwardly worded description of the estimated capacity of the building and measurement of each chamber wall. Out of I don't know how many others. Probably a favorite one of the typo prone contortionist and another example of how it's done.

And then claims the numbers derived from the initial post came from elsewhere. They sure did:
Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Poodle wrote:"... It was not too small, square shaped, roughly five meters along each wall. Large enough to hold the seven to eight hundred people who I had seen enter before the last transport ..."

25 square metres for 700 to 800 people? That's 28 to 32 people per square metre. You think that credible?

Of course it's credible. You are probably having difficulty visualizing it because it's the metric system. One square meter is the same as 10.8 square feet. So 28 to 32 people per 10.8 square feet is only 28/10.8 to 32/10.8 which is between 2.6 and 2.9 people per square foot.
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=25005&p=444253#p444253

Good job, Mary.

Thank you for tracking that down for me. I knew Poodle never mentioned being able to move about the UFO as the reason my eyewitness wasn't credible.
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:56 pm

supervitor wrote:France got to remain with half itself, and the Jews from Vichy France resisted until Vichy was itself occupied. Then they got screwed.

Ahem. Actually, the Vichy government, on its own, passed anti-Semitic legislation (les Statuts des Juifs - defining who was Jewish and restricting Jewish rights, such as employment, business ownership, civil service, political rights) and collaborated (e.g., supplying police for roundups) with the Germans in deporting Jews without French citizenship from both zones, the large roundups from the occupied zone commencing in July 1942 (with convoys leaving Drancy and Pithiviers for Auschwitz almost at once) but roundups and deportations in the unoccupied zone occurring late the very next month (churches protested this action, in fact).
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21786
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby scrmbldggs » Sun Jul 19, 2015 6:08 pm

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote:She also picked "Petro's" awkwardly worded description of the estimated capacity of the building and measurement of each chamber wall. Out of I don't know how many others. Probably a favorite one of the typo prone contortionist and another example of how it's done.

And then claims the numbers derived from the initial post came from elsewhere. They sure did:
Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Poodle wrote:"... It was not too small, square shaped, roughly five meters along each wall. Large enough to hold the seven to eight hundred people who I had seen enter before the last transport ..."

25 square metres for 700 to 800 people? That's 28 to 32 people per square metre. You think that credible?

Of course it's credible. You are probably having difficulty visualizing it because it's the metric system. One square meter is the same as 10.8 square feet. So 28 to 32 people per 10.8 square feet is only 28/10.8 to 32/10.8 which is between 2.6 and 2.9 people per square foot.
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=25005&p=444253#p444253

Good job, Mary.

Thank you for tracking that down for me. I knew Poodle never mentioned being able to move about the UFO as the reason my eyewitness wasn't credible.


And he never claimed he did. What he said here is this:
Poodle wrote:It seems I have to remind Mary that he quoted that density of bodies at the same time as saying that his 'abductee' was moving around freely, which is patently ridiculous.


and which is absolutely in accord with the above linked to "alien abduction" story relayed by you.
.

Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 19, 2015 6:11 pm

Mary Q Contrary wrote:And tell us again how open air shootings is evidence for gas chambers

It's not - whatever gave you the idea evidence for open-air shootings of Jews could be evidence for the killing of Jews in gas chambers? You sure are screwy.

This may be hard for you to understand but try: evidence that the German police and military units shot 1.5 million Jews in the occupied USSR is evidence for part of the . . . Holocaust, a part not involving gas chambers.

Mary Q Contrary wrote:or how 1.5 million is evidence for 6 million.

Well, leaving aside "6 million," you do realize that big numbers can be understood by looking at the not-as-big numbers that build up to them. Let's try an example: 1.5 million Jews killed in open-air shootings + 2.9 million Jews killed in camps + 0.8 million from decimation in ghettos = 5.2 million. This is something called "addition." Maybe you will learn it in school next year.

Mary Q Contrary wrote:You could maybe use EG activity to support the p but you run away like a little girl rather than actually do that.

I don't support a "master plan" concept, so, no, I wouldn't try using the "EG activity to support the p." This was stated in the OP. On the other hand, I believe that the EG murders were state sanctioned, which you well know.

Still trying to find ways to deny these murders - or have you given that inane effort up?

(Little girl? LOL)
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Mon Jul 20, 2015 12:40 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
supervitor wrote:France got to remain with half itself, and the Jews from Vichy France resisted until Vichy was itself occupied. Then they got screwed.

Ahem. Actually, the Vichy government, on its own, passed anti-Semitic legislation (les Statuts des Juifs - defining who was Jewish and restricting Jewish rights, such as employment, business ownership, civil service, political rights) and collaborated (e.g., supplying police for roundups) with the Germans in deporting Jews without French citizenship from both zones, the large roundups from the occupied zone commencing in July 1942 (with convoys leaving Drancy and Pithiviers for Auschwitz almost at once) but roundups and deportations in the unoccupied zone occurring late the very next month (churches protested this action, in fact).


My impression is that Petain passed anti-Jewish laws under pressure from Germany, not on its own. And my point is that the Jews were safe from deportation in the South and the roundups only started when Vichy itself was occupied

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4600
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Jul 20, 2015 12:51 am

Vichy was not entirely in the loop. It was a very antisemitic government but arranging deportations was like pulling teeth.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21786
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby scrmbldggs » Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:06 am

.

Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:30 am

supervitor wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
supervitor wrote:France got to remain with half itself, and the Jews from Vichy France resisted until Vichy was itself occupied. Then they got screwed.

Ahem. Actually, the Vichy government, on its own, passed anti-Semitic legislation (les Statuts des Juifs - defining who was Jewish and restricting Jewish rights, such as employment, business ownership, civil service, political rights) and collaborated (e.g., supplying police for roundups) with the Germans in deporting Jews without French citizenship from both zones, the large roundups from the occupied zone commencing in July 1942 (with convoys leaving Drancy and Pithiviers for Auschwitz almost at once) but roundups and deportations in the unoccupied zone occurring late the very next month (churches protested this action, in fact).


My impression is that Petain passed anti-Jewish laws under pressure from Germany, not on its own.

This viewpoint is utterly demolished by Marrus & Paxton (1980 I believe), as a failed defense of Vichy, and, more recently, by Julian Jackson. From the NY Times' review of Marrus & Paxton:
The authors establish without a doubt that it was not Germans but French anti-Semites of deep conviction and long duration - many of them influenced by the grand old man of French reactionary thinking, Charles Maurras - who initiated the Vichy anti-Semitic legislation.

In many regards, Vichy was out in front of the Germans. Both Marrus & Paxton and Jackson are well worth reading. Poznanski too. The pov I'm articulating is so widely shared - "proven" - that Wikipedia states it.

supervitor wrote:And my point is that the Jews were safe from deportation in the South and the roundups only started when Vichy itself was occupied

That is, as I said, incorrect. The roundups in the unoccupied zone "commenced" in August 1942 - there was a large action (below) at the end of the month; the German occupation of the southern zone took place in November 1942.

Between the start of the roundups in July and the occupation of the southern zone in November 1942, the 26-28 August 1942 roundup took place in the unoccupied zone - this was a large French operation which seized foreign Jews in the southern zone, relying on December 1941 censuses; the seized Jews taken to assembly points and then to Drancy, Marrus & Paxton, p 258. "Suddenly, however, the transports were stopped . . . likely because of an unexpected interruption of railway timetables. No trains left during October. There were four in November, and then nothing again until the massive roundups and deportations of February 1943 from both zones.” Marrus & Paxton, p 260 At most 11,000 Jews were deported in the August action in the unoccupied zone, and, yes, at this time German pressure to change citizenship laws and expand the category of "deportables" was applied. Vichy was resistant to a point - but the government's main focus in this was preventing deportation of French citizens. That said, factually, the August operation in the unoccupied zone occurred prior to the occupation of zone sud. The Germans had very large ambitions for deportations in October, btw, trying to equal the 27,000 deported through early September during that month.


-
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:48 am

Jeff_36 wrote:Vichy was not entirely in the loop. It was a very antisemitic government but arranging deportations was like pulling teeth.

Well, Vichy was most certainly in the loop for the roundup and deportation program - negotiating throughout this period, including after the occupation of zone sud, about terms of deportation; deploying French police in roundups; and administering the holding camps from which Jews were deported to the east.

As late as February 1943 the French police were still actively rounding up Jews. At this point the Germans faced increasing obstacles: the lack of cooperation of the Italians and their passive-aggressive resistance to the deportations of Jews from their zone, French attitudes including that of the Vichy government concerning revisions to citizenship laws that would increase the numbers of deportation-eligible Jews, the withdrawal of the support of the French police in March IIRC, lack of staffing amongst the German police in Germany, Jewish flight and hiding. Not until summer did Brunner take direct control of Drancy as the Germans more and more, undergunned, took control of much of the program of roundups and deportations. In August the French finally said no to the requested revision of the citizenship law. But even then, Vichy gave tacit approval to the German roundups of non-citizens.

As to what Vichy knew, there's an interesting meeting in August 1942, I believe, between Oberg and Laval – Laval demurred on handing over Jews from the Vichy zone; around this time also Bousquet “made it clear to Hagen that the French could not commit themselves to supplying Jews for the daily train from mid-September, as the Germans demanded.” At this time Laval asked not what was happening to Jews sent to East but what to say was happening – he was told to say that they were being sent for labor in GG. (Lozowick, p 213) One can read this in two different ways: Laval knew and wanted the cover story or Laval didn't want to know but wanted the cover story.

We do have a FS in France thread, not much visited, to dig deeper than this.
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:51 am

scrmbldggs wrote:There's a thread for that. :-P

Danke.
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Mon Jul 20, 2015 2:33 am

SM, I read you: you present your authors, but I have a feeling that the conversation is starting to become ideologically charged. I'm trying to make the point (to David) that the differences we can see in different countries was due to the national policies and attitudes of its citizens, instead of Nazi policies being different.

I do think that Petain was a far-right wing nationalist, but I have many doubts he had something to do with strong fascism or anti-semitism. And that he did more to resist Hitler's attempts than to gladly help him in the persecution of Jews. He was weak in the end, but I think that if we look at the results (the big picture), maybe we can agree on my point:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holoc ... Zone_libre

Wikipedia wrote:From the summer of 1940, Otto Abetz, the German ambassador in Paris, organized the expropriation of rich Jewish families.[7] The Vichy regime took the first anti-Jewish measures slightly after the German authorities in the autumn of 1940. The Statut des Juifs ("statute on Jews") of 3 October was prepared by Raphaël Alibert. According to a document made public in 2010, Pétain himself made slight moderations to the term of the law.[8]


About the expel of Jews from Alsace and Lorraine

The nine trains carrying the deported Jews crossed over into France "without any warning to the French authorities",


Occupied France

The arrests of Jews in France begun from 1940 for individuals, and general round ups begun in 1941. (...)
Deporations begun on 27 March 1942, when the first convoy left Paris for Auschwitz
(...)
[Roundup] in which 13,000 Jews were arrested by the French police. In the occupied zone, the French police was effectively controlled by the German authorities.


then in goes on to non-French Jews being sent to occupied France to be deported to the East later. But the real problems started after the invasion of Vichy:

The German authorities took increasing charge of the persecution of Jews, while the Vichy authorities were forced towards a more sensitive approach by public opinion. However, the Milice, a French paramilitary force inspired by Nazi ideology, was heavily involved in rounding up Jews for deportation during this period. The frequency of German convoys increased.


So, I see much work done by the Nazis, and some resistance by the French authorities, I'm not excusing what the French did, but it seems to me we should consider the extreme pressure they were in, look at the big picture and perhaps recognize that they did tried to reduce the toll. And then look at the "final result"

Over 75,000 Jews were deported from France to death camps out of the 340,000 Jewish individuals in France in 1940. About 72,500 of these Jews were killed in the camps. The French Vichy government [1]and the French police participated in the roundup of Jews. Although most deported Jews died, the survival rate of the Jewish population in France was up to 75% which is one of the highest survival rates in Europe
[/quote]

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 20, 2015 3:40 am

supervitor wrote:SM, I read you: you present your authors, but I have a feeling that the conversation is starting to become ideologically charged. I'm trying to make the point (to David) that the differences we can see in different countries was due to the national policies and attitudes of its citizens, instead of Nazi policies being different.

I do think that Petain was a far-right wing nationalist, but I have many doubts he had something to do with strong fascism or anti-semitism.

The evidence about the Vichy regime says otherwise.

Frankly, I wouldn't be concerned with what David thinks and argues.

supervitor wrote:And that he did more to resist Hitler's attempts than to gladly help him in the persecution of Jews.

This is a misnomer. I explained above the Vichy had its own brand of anti-Semitism; Vichy's anti-Semtism drew on French right-wing and nationalist traditions, not Nazi racial anti-Semitism. Vichy's goals were bound up with France - but there were points of convergence with the German authorities. What I described above was how Vichy cooperated in some ways and stalled in others until finally drawing the line in 1943. An early, and lethal, point of convergence, which the Germans used while pressing for more, was the foreign-born Jews without citizenship - Vichy was glad to get them out of France and collaborated in the deportation program up to a point by focusing it on these people.

supervitor wrote:He was weak in the end,

But we weren't discussing the end - we were discussing the period before the Final Solution and the early part of the Final Solution - you yourself wrote about the German occupation of the south.

supervitor wrote:but I think that if we look at the results (the big picture), maybe we can agree on my point:

Well, I want to make sure that the facts are stated correctly; I also think that how the deportations were planned and executed is very important in understanding German goals, Vichy's interests and strategies, and other French "context." Vichy's interests diverged from that of the Germans on certain points - relevant to this, Vichy didn't want to see French citizens deported. Vichy's stance - largely okaying the deportation of Jews who were foreign-born and not citizens but not the removal of French citizens - will partly explain, in the light of German goals and strategies - why the composition of the deportations was what it was, that is, why the % of French citizens was low vs the non-citizens. There were prolonged negotiations between Vichy and the Germans over revoking citizenship of foreign born Jews to meet German goals; it was on this point that Vichy finally said no in 1943. Up to that point, France was not a safe place for foreign-born Jews without French citizenship.

The German goal was to remove all Jews from France to the east; Vichy cooperated for a long period of time in removing the Jews without French citizenship - and made French institutions including the police and detention camps available to do so; the Germans kept pressuring Vichy to revoke the citizenship recently granted to foreign born Jews - this was the German attempt to take a step towards making more Jews available for deportation. Vichy finally drew a line and said no, and Vichy also withdrew the French police. Contrary to your "big picture," mine shows that deporting Jews from France was harder without Vichy's cooperation - as was the case during 1943 and 1944. Thus, the relative success, even with the restrictions on which Jews could be taken, of the 1942 transports was because of Vichy's cooperation.

supervitor wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust_in_France#From_the_Armistice_to_the_invasion_of_the_Zone_libre

From the summer of 1940, Otto Abetz, the German ambassador in Paris, organized the expropriation of rich Jewish families.[7] The Vichy regime took the first anti-Jewish measures slightly after the German authorities in the autumn of 1940. The Statut des Juifs ("statute on Jews") of 3 October was prepared by Raphaël Alibert. According to a document made public in 2010, Pétain himself made slight moderations to the term of the law.[8]

I do not think that this is making your case. Alibert, e.g., was an Action Française activist before the war.

supervitor wrote:About the expel of Jews from Alsace and Lorraine

The nine trains carrying the deported Jews crossed over into France "without any warning to the French authorities",

These expulsions were not related to the deportations in 1942. In this case Jews were being shoved from two German Gaue into, not out of, the unoccupied zone. IIRC the Vichy authorities complained about being made into a dumping ground for Jews and interned these deportees.

supervitor wrote:Occupied France

The arrests of Jews in France begun from 1940 for individuals, and general round ups begun in 1941. (...)
Deporations begun on 27 March 1942, when the first convoy left Paris for Auschwitz
(...)
[Roundup] in which 13,000 Jews were arrested by the French police. In the occupied zone, the French police was effectively controlled by the German authorities.

Sorry but Bousquet, who headed the French police, negotiated terms of cooperation and independence of action with Oberg during summer 1942. Even before that agreement was finalized, Bousquet collaborated with Oberg and the other German authorities in the Vel d'Hiv roundups in July. The Bousquet-Oberg negotiations began in May and concluded in early August. They were not to do solely with Jewish affairs; Bousquet wanted to protect French police from certain actions sought by the Germans, like hostage actions.
At his meeting with Oberg on 6 May, Bousquet was informed by Heydrich that the Germans were intending to deport foreign Jews from the Occupied Zone to camps in the East. Bousquet asked if foreign Jews in the Unoccupied Zone, who were in internment camps, could be included. No decisions were taken on this occasion because the Germans had not decided their strategy.

Jackson, The Dark Years, p 217; in short, Bousquet was offering up certain foreign Jews in the unoccupied zone - before the Germans had worked this out.

supervitor wrote:then in goes on to non-French Jews being sent to occupied France to be deported to the East later. But the real problems started after the invasion of Vichy:

The German authorities took increasing charge of the persecution of Jews, while the Vichy authorities were forced towards a more sensitive approach by public opinion. However, the Milice, a French paramilitary force inspired by Nazi ideology, was heavily involved in rounding up Jews for deportation during this period. The frequency of German convoys increased.

You're repeating what I wrote to some degree but without recognition of the twists and turns and of Vichy's early role. I think your boldfaced sentence is a bit misleading:

- before the large-scale coordinated summer deportations, March-June 1942: 15,000 Jews deported from France
- from July - August 1942: 27,000 Jews deported from France
- from September - December 1942: 9,000 Jews deported from France
- during 1943: 17,000 Jews deported from France
- during 1944: 15,000 Jews deported from France

So, the 1942 total of 42,000 deported (nearly all foreign) was over half the total for 1942-1944. The most efficient deportation period was when Vichy assisted the most.

supervitor wrote:So, I see much work done by the Nazis, and some resistance by the French authorities, I'm not excusing what the French did, but it seems to me we should consider the extreme pressure they were in, look at the big picture and perhaps recognize that they did tried to reduce the toll. And then look at the "final result"

I am not actually excusing or blaming - at this point - but rather trying to establish a framework for understanding these developments that is consistent with the evidence. And I'm not interested only in the "final result" but also in how the Final Solution was implemented. Without Vichy's assistance in 1942 and early 1943, the final result in France, I'm afraid, would have been very different - and better for the Jews living in France.

supervitor wrote:
Over 75,000 Jews were deported from France to death camps out of the 340,000 Jewish individuals in France in 1940. About 72,500 of these Jews were killed in the camps. The French Vichy government [1]and the French police participated in the roundup of Jews. Although most deported Jews died, the survival rate of the Jewish population in France was up to 75% which is one of the highest survival rates in Europe

I am, as I said, in favor of a big picture view - we just disagree on what that picture is.

As scrmbdggs and I have suggested, there's actually a thread for this where these data and much more have been discussed, in a lot of detail. I'd prefer having this level of discussion on this issue in the ongoing thread.
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:07 am

So, my first impression is that we apparently are on the same page on the first part of your post, but then you seem to argue against the Wikipedia references I've provided, providing small details that don't disagree with the big picture (my point)

You also seemingly ignored my point that Vichy's will is not isolated from Germany

Am I reading you correctly, SM?

User avatar
supervitor
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1892
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby supervitor » Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:08 am

yes, maybe we are going off-topic, but isn't that what usually happens?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 20, 2015 9:35 am

supervitor wrote:So, my first impression is that we apparently are on the same page on the first part of your post, but then you seem to argue against the Wikipedia references I've provided, providing small details that don't disagree with the big picture (my point)

You also seemingly ignored my point that Vichy's will is not isolated from Germany

Am I reading you correctly, SM?

No, we actually see what happened in France during the war differently pretty much across the board. And, no, it's not just small details we disagree on; we disagree on the big picture. I'm arguing - and you're not - that (a) Vichy was proactively anti-Semitic in its own way, (b) Vichy legislated against Jews without German prompting, (c) Vichy and German interest overlapped especially focusing on foreign Jews, (d) with Vichy's help, foreign Jews were deported including some starting from the unoccupied zone in summer 42, and (e) until Vichy stepped back in 43, it support led to the greatest successes for the deportation program.

As to details on which I don't agree with your claims or with Wikipedia's, they are important: (a) the timing of the start of roundups in the unoccupied southern zone, (b) the relative independence of the French police (if as Wikipedia claims they were "effectively controlled" by the Germans, the Oberg-Bousquet negotiations make no sense and there's no good explanation for how the French police withdrew their participation, requested by the Germans, in 43), (c) the proactivity of Vichy in enacting its own anti-Jewish laws (which included property confiscation and Aryanization provisions, internments of foreign Jews), (d) the question of foreign Jews, and (e) the course of the deportations and under what conditions and at what time they were most successful.

Perhaps most important, Vichy’s help made the large Jewish death toll in France possible – but, other important factors (German reversals in the war, which encouraged Vichy to change course, public opinion and the church which put pressure on Vichy, Jewish flight, the Italians) combined to put a brake on the later phases of the Final Solution in France. Compared to Vichy, the Italians were more consistently and successfully opposed to the deportations of Jews from their zone.

I didn't ignore your point "that Vichy's will is not isolated from Germany"; I disagreed with it as you stated it and I explained why - and when and over what issues in Jewish matters Vichy had its own course, Vichy had a course that converged with that of the Germans, and Vichy finally stepped back from the deportation program. I gave you three sources that you could challenge. You relied on Wikipedia without directly challenging the sources.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Mon Jul 20, 2015 9:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20163
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 20, 2015 9:35 am

supervitor wrote:yes, maybe we are going off-topic, but isn't that what usually happens?

No.
You know, my dear Colonel General, I don't really believe that the Russians will attack at all. It's all an enormous bluff. - Heinrich Himmler to Heinz Guderian, December 1944


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest