Posen Speech

Discussions
nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Posen Speech

Post by nickterry » Mon Aug 03, 2015 12:48 am

Monstrous wrote:
nickterry wrote: So all of your examples are entirely irrelevant to the question of whether Soviet authorities fabricated Nazi documents. Considering that leading revisionists like Carlo Mattogno make extensive use of Soviet-captured Nazi documents and do not declare them to be forgeries, then there is almost universal agreement that the Soviets did not forge Nazi documents.
Not all revisionists agrees with Mattogno on everything. Most revisionists consider the Wannsee protocol to be a forgery/editied but not Mattogno if I recall correctly.
Actually the Wannsee Protocol was evidently regarded as authentic also by Butz, and by the 2nd edition of Lectures on the Holocaust, Germar Rudolf had abandoned his earlier adherence to Wannsee-was-a-forgery. The split within revisionism over this issue is positively hilarious.

But thanks for confirming that Mattogno is wasting his time, he doesn't convince professional historians and he's evidently not convincing many deniers, either.
Many revisionists argue that the most important documents regarding the gas vans are Soviet forgeries.
And they'd be wrong on this one, too. Let's cut to the chase: not one single revisionist forgery claim has any credibility with professional historians.

In the case of the gas vans documents, the Americans captured 501-PS and the RSHA Amt II Rauff file, and they did so some distance away from Berlin - the PS stands for Paris Storrey, referring to the document sorting organisation that was sifting through documents taken as far as the UK, France and west Germany by the US Army.

Not. A. Soviet. Forgery.
nickterry wrote: Since the Posen speech and the Ereignismeldungen were discovered in Nazi document caches captured by the Americans, alleging that "the Soviets" (which ones? which department?) forged them is completely nonsensical. While there certainly were Soviet agents in the US government at the time, they were generally in Washington, DC or Los Alamos, and none of the agents exposed during or after the Cold War were involved in document management during the Nuremberg trials or in the National Archives

The problem with forgery claims about Nazi documents is the same facts and ideas found in IMT or NMT documents are also found in documents that were simply archived - on both sides of the Iron Curtain.
.
Again, it was the Soviets who captured Berlin and the archives there. All of these archives were thus under Soviet control for a period before being "captured" by Americans.
The first problem with this argument is the Soviets never captured the Foreign Office archive with the TuLBs, which contain verbatim summaries of the Ereignismeldungen. Copies of the Ereignismeldungen were also found in other archives that were likewise never in a Soviet zone.

The second problem is the Americans demonstrably captured most of the Wehrmacht's archives, including most of the sources I listed for Babi Yar on the other thread. They also captured most of the Ostministerium files which contain further matches. The BY sources are the most conclusive refutation of 'Soviets snuck in to seed forged reports' nonsense.

The third problem is that the Soviets had a pretty clear track record of hauling off archives they uncovered, just as the Americans did. The Ereignismeldungen were found in the cache of documents that became the Berlin Document Center, two tons and 8-9 million documents. The Americans did not even stumble across the Einsatzgruppen reports for more than a year after they had hauled them out of Berlin. The BDC archive consists in the main of SS personnel files - an obvious goldmine for any intelligence service.

Your rather feeble conspiracy theory (meaning, speculative nonsense without any proof or evidence) expects us to believe that the Soviets would pass up the chance to seize a vast cache of documents that would assist them in all manner of ways, simply so they could be left for the Americans to find, and then they'd be left to their own devices to stumble across a run of documents whose essential contents were already known from other captured document collections that were never in Soviet hands.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I doubt you can point to a single place in the Ereignismeldungen where a single line could have been altered. There are just too many other sources that corroborate the core details for too many actions. Ohlendorf testified from memory that his Einsatzgruppe had executed 90,000 victims by 1942 - extremely close to the number recorded in the Ereignismeldungen. But the actions of Einsatzgruppe D were substantially documented in multiple Wehrmacht reports in the files of 11th Army, i.e. files captured by the Americans.

Your argument about "the Soviets" doesn't go anywhere. And it's not even relevant to the files of the Personalstab RFSS which were not found in Berlin anyway.
nickterry wrote: The Posen speech was used at IMT, the Sonthofen speech was not - and it was discovered by historians in Himmler's extraordinarily jumbled Personalstab RFSS papers, captured, archived and microfilmed by the Americans. Goebbels' reaction to the 2nd Posen speech to the Reichs- and Gauleiter was recorded in his diary, which was split between east and west. The relevant entry may well have been in the portion discovered in Moscow during the 1990s, but the preservation of the diaries on glass plates prohibits the possibility of any subtle editing or fragmentary insertion. .
The diary only speaks of "rooting out" "(auszurotten)
No, Goebbels' diary said:
As far as the Jewish question is concerned, he [Himmler] gives a very unvarnished and frank presentation. He is convinced that we can solve the Jewish question throughout Europe by the end of this year. He proposes the harshest and most radical solution: to exterminate the Jews root and branch [Kind und Kegel]. It is certainly a logical solution, even if it is a brutal one. We have to take responsibility of completely solving this issue in our time.
This is confirmation that at the 2nd Posen speech, Himmler indeed spoke about the Ausrottung of the Jews, just as is quoted in the 1st Posen speech to the Gruppenfuehrer. Goebbels' interpretation was that this was 'the harshest and most radical solution'.

Since the October 1943 Posen speeches aren't nearly as explicit as the Sonthofen speech I fail to see where you're going with the forgery gambit anyway. Unless this is a typical denier example of 'it doesn't mean extermination/but it's a forgery anyway' heads-I-win-tails-you-lose dishonesty. Face it, Himmler spoke explicitly of Ausrottung at Posen - this was comprehended by his audience as illustrated by the Goebbels diary. He spoke in more detail of what the extirpation of the Jews meant to Wehrmacht audiences.

The fact that the Posen speech was recorded removes all doubt - the words of the typescript match the recording. But we also have a recording from his 1944 speeches. Sonthofen:
It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor. It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential. Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there. We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer 1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confidentially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to answer a little question that surely you must have. The question is, of course you had to kill the adult Jews, I understand that, but how could you do the same to the women and children? So I have to tell you something: The children will be grown one day. Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we're too weak to kill children. Our children can deal with them. Our children will fight that one out. But the Jewish hate, small today, will be big tomorrow, and the grown avengers will attack our children and grandchildren, who will then have to deal with them. I am convinced that this will be the case even if Adolf Hitler does not survive. No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews. That would have been cowardly and therefore we adopted a clear solution to the problem, as difficult as it was.
The Sonthofen speech didn't mention a single death camp or spell out anything about the methods. But it didn't need to. The meaning is plain, and cannot be obfuscated.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5072
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Jeff_36 » Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:04 am

nickterry wrote:
Monstrous wrote:"some of the most important Nuremberg documents are now generally acknowledged to be fraudulent. /47

For example, defense attorney Dr. Boehm protested to the Tribunal that Nuremberg document 1721-PS, which purportedly confirms attacks by stormtroopers against Jewish synagogues in November 1938, is a clumsy forgery. He went on to explain his reasons at some length. /48
LOL so a defense attorney alleges forgery of documents that primarily record the destruction of synagogues known to have been destroyed on Kristallnacht. Are you serious?
Besides, the events of 1938 have little to do with the physical FS.
Several Nuremberg documents based on the purported "death bed confession" of Mauthausen commandant Franz Ziereis, are demonstrably fraudulent. (Nuremberg documents 1515-PS, 3870-PS, and NO-1973.) These documents supposedly prove systematic killings of hundreds of thousands of people by gassing and other means at Mauthausen and Hartheim. /49
The Ziereis statement isn't a Nazi document, doofus. It was written down after the war by an ex-Mauthausen prisoner.
PWNED
Almost forty years after the Tribunal handed down its verdicts, Nuremberg document USSR-378 was definitively exposed as a fraud. It is a purported record of numerous private conversations with Hitler by Hermann Rauschning, a former National Socialist official in Danzig. In brutal language, the Führer supposedly revealed his most intimate thoughts and secret plans for world conquest. Rauschning's "memoir" was published in 1939 in Britain under the title Hitler Speaks, and in the United States in 1940 as The Voice of Destruction. It was this US edition that was accepted in evidence at Nuremberg as proof of the "guiding principles of the Nazi regime."

Chief British prosecutor Sir Hartley Shawcross and his Soviet colleagues cited numerous quotations from it. Defendant Baldur von Schirach contested its authenticity, but defense attorney Pelckmann (who did not know any better) accepted this "evidence" as authentic. /50 In 1983 Swiss historian Wolfgang Hänel established that the "memoir" is entirely fraudulent. Rauschning never had even a single private meeting with Hitler. /51
This, too, is not a Nazi document.
Shoddy autobiography =/= "Document". Jeff_36 is under the impression that monstrous's definition of "document" is not in line with reality.
PWNED

Another fraudulent Nuremberg document is the so-called "Hossbach protocol" (document 386-PS), a purported record of a high-level 1937 conference at which Hitler supposedly revealed his secret plans for aggressive conquest. US Nuremberg prosecutor Sidney Alderman called it "one of the most striking and revealing of all the captured documents," and told the Tribunal that it removed any remaining doubts about the guilt of the Germans leaders for their crimes against peace. It was largely on the basis of this document that Göring was condemned to death. /52
Sorry, Weber is relying on out-dated denialist claims falsified by the discovery of a copy of the Hossbach Memorandum in 1989 and the existence of a parallel text in Ludwig Beck's Nachlass, i.e two further documents that confirm the IMT-submitted text - Hossbach himself had confirmed it in his memoirs postwar.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ho%C3%9Fb ... derschrift
Bradley F. Smith: Die Überlieferung der Hoßbach-Niederschrift im Lichte neuer Quellen, in: Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 38 Jg., 1990, S. 329-336. http://www.ifz-muenchen.de/heftarchiv/1990_2.pdf
Corroboration. If the other docs were forged, why would the Americans bury them for 45 years?
PWNED
Similarly spurious is Nuremberg document L-3 (US-28), supposedly a record of a bellicose speech by Hitler to armed forces commanders on August 22, 1939. It contains a widely cited quotation attributed to Hitler, "Who talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?" /53
Problem being, L-3 was passed to the IMT prosecution by Louis Lochner, a journalist, and was thus known not to have come from Nazi archives. The prosecution did not submit it at Nuremberg. This is a classic case of when not to trust a document - if it emerges on its lonesome, then forgery is a possibility, whereas cases of forged documents found in archival files are far, far, far, far, far rarer.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansprache ... ugust_1939

There are incidentally multiple file notes of this Hitler speech as well as summaries in multiple diaries (Halder, von Bock, von Leeb) so the core of the speech is extremely well attested - just not the spin-doctoring in L-03.
Not a document in the classic sense but rather a very inaccurate summary by a charlatan journalist. It is safe to assume that, falsety of L-3 aside, Monstrous's pimp daddy did make some crude and coarse comments of some form or another at that meeting, proably not the Armenian quote though.
PWNED
Jewish historian Lucy Dawidowicz, author of The War Against the Jews, acknowledged that "There are also Holocaust documents that are outright falsification and some that purvey myth rather than historical fact." /54"
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p167_Webera.html
This is too vague to be helpful here.
[/quote]

The key is that those documents (like the Hitler diaries or the memoir of Himmler's masseur) are always outed as false the moment they arise. If a doc like Meldung-51 or the Goebbles diary can run the gauntlet of historical criticism, then it is real. Irving acknowledges the significance of those docs btw and he is one of the quickest to cry forgery.

Jeff_36 would like to use Dr. Terry's post as an example to monstrous of how a real Historian goes about his business in a diligent manner - leave the job to the professionals.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5072
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Jeff_36 » Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:09 am

critical point: Jeff_36 takes notice that neither mosntrous nor Irving have had anything to say about the third Posen Speech, nor the third Sonthofen speech, which was quoted by Dr. Terry. A huge chink in his armor in Jeff_36's opinion.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:59 am

Thanks for the additional detail on capture and custody of records, Nick. Our denier friend is not getting any closer to offering any kind of evidence for his shifting claims - re-reading the Sonthofen excerpt makes clear how off base are his witterings about partisans, unless beating down bandits comes under the heading, "the solution of the Jewish question."
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Mon Aug 03, 2015 3:12 am

nickterry wrote: Since the October 1943 Posen speeches aren't nearly as explicit as the Sonthofen speech I fail to see where you're going with the forgery gambit anyway. Unless this is a typical denier example of 'it doesn't mean extermination/but it's a forgery anyway' heads-I-win-tails-you-lose dishonesty. Face it, Himmler spoke explicitly of Ausrottung at Posen - this was comprehended by his audience as illustrated by the Goebbels diary. He spoke in more detail of what the extirpation of the Jews meant to Wehrmacht audiences.

The fact that the Posen speech was recorded removes all doubt - the words of the typescript match the recording. But we also have a recording from his 1944 speeches. Sonthofen:
It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor. It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential. Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there. We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer 1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confidentially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to answer a little question that surely you must have. The question is, of course you had to kill the adult Jews, I understand that, but how could you do the same to the women and children? So I have to tell you something: The children will be grown one day. Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we're too weak to kill children. Our children can deal with them. Our children will fight that one out. But the Jewish hate, small today, will be big tomorrow, and the grown avengers will attack our children and grandchildren, who will then have to deal with them. I am convinced that this will be the case even if Adolf Hitler does not survive. No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews. That would have been cowardly and therefore we adopted a clear solution to the problem, as difficult as it was.
The Sonthofen speech didn't mention a single death camp or spell out anything about the methods. But it didn't need to. The meaning is plain, and cannot be obfuscated.
Thanks for this evidence totally supporting and confirming my view. It is clear in this speech that Himmler is talking about the women and children of the partisans fighters in Warsaw. Extermination is as usual a misleading translation of auszurotten.Obviously Himmler did not claim he had killed all Jews everywhere in this speech but he did claim to have killed Jewish partisans and their relatives in Warsaw.

So what do we have?

* We have four speeches that ALL have exactly the critical pages retyped according to Irving testifying under oath in trials and this not contested by anyone: the October 4, 1943 speech, the October 6, 1943 speech, the May 5, 1944 speech, and the May 24, 1944 speeches. THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT EVIDENCE ANYWHERE SUPPORTING THE BELIEVERS.

* We have two not retyped speeches (the December 16, 1943 speech and the above June 21, 1944 speech). In these Himmler clearly speaks of killing only partisans and their relatives and in a style otherwise very similar to the four retyped speeches.

I thinks this settles it.
Last edited by Monstrous on Mon Aug 03, 2015 3:23 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5072
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Jeff_36 » Mon Aug 03, 2015 3:18 am

Read it again.
It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor. It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential. Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there. We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer 1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confidentially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to answer a little question that surely you must have. The question is, of course you had to kill the adult Jews, I understand that, but how could you do the same to the women and children? So I have to tell you something: The children will be grown one day. Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we're too weak to kill children. Our children can deal with them. Our children will fight that one out. But the Jewish hate, small today, will be big tomorrow, and the grown avengers will attack our children and grandchildren, who will then have to deal with them. I am convinced that this will be the case even if Adolf Hitler does not survive. No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews. That would have been cowardly and therefore we adopted a clear solution to the problem, as difficult as it was.
He is quite clearly speaking of the "problem" in general, using Warsaw as an example.

Please tell me you're trolling, because it's getting a bit cringeworthy. Like Rosanne Barr singing the national anthem level cringeworthy.

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Mon Aug 03, 2015 3:25 am

Jeff_36 wrote:Read it again.
It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor. It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential. Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there. We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer 1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confidentially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to answer a little question that surely you must have. The question is, of course you had to kill the adult Jews, I understand that, but how could you do the same to the women and children? So I have to tell you something: The children will be grown one day. Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we're too weak to kill children. Our children can deal with them. Our children will fight that one out. But the Jewish hate, small today, will be big tomorrow, and the grown avengers will attack our children and grandchildren, who will then have to deal with them. I am convinced that this will be the case even if Adolf Hitler does not survive. No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews. That would have been cowardly and therefore we adopted a clear solution to the problem, as difficult as it was.
He is quite clearly speaking of the "problem" in general, using Warsaw as an example.

Please tell me you're trolling, because it's getting a bit cringeworthy. Like Rosanne Barr singing the national anthem level cringeworthy.
Again, auszurotten does not necessarily mean extermination but more likely "rooting out"/extirpation = deportation.

Are you really arguing that Himmler claimed he had killed all Jews in this speech? Obviously not, Himmler is talking about ALL the Jews (both men and women/children) in the Warsaw uprising.

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Mon Aug 03, 2015 4:41 am

"Terry concludes this section with a long quotation of a Himm-
ler speech “in front of generals at Sonthofen” of 21 June 1944, in which
he referred i.a. to the killing of Jewish women and children. He ignores
the title of the speech: “The ‘final solution’ and the uprising in the War-
saw Ghetto (1944) [recte: 1943].” 1189 The whole excerpt refers in fact to
the Warsaw ghetto revolt. I do not count this as an omission by Terry,
because he has probably never seen the text he quotes (“Bradley F.
Smith and Agnes F. Peterson (eds.), Heinrich Himmler. Geheimreden
1933 bis 1945. Frankfurt am Main, 1974, p.203: footnote 328”), and
most likely took it instead from the web. 1190 This text contains unindi-
cated ommissions, and its translation swings between approximation
and falsification. I give here the most blatant examples. The following
passage: 1191
“The time when we cleaned out the last big ghetto in Warsaw – by all
means I can give the number – with more than 500,000 Jews in summer
1943 after five weeks of street fighting was also the last time. As isolated as
they may have been, the ghettos were the centers of all partisans – and of
all bandit movements.”
is rendered like this:
“We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer
1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confiden-
tially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to an-
swer a little question that surely you must have.” (p. 211)
The dissolution of the ghettos as “centers” of the war against the par-
tisans stands in contrast to the thesis of racial extermination of the Jews
inhabiting them, and therefore the pertinent passage has been omitted
(although the omission corresponds to twenty lines of text).
Further in the text, the sentence
“Do we want to be so indecent as to say: no, no, we are too weak for
that, but our children can once deal with them.”
is incorrectly translated in this way:
“Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we’re too weak to
kill children. Our children can deal with them.” (p. 211)
And finally “No, we can not take the responsibility for it” becomes
“No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews.” (p. 211)."
http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php ... page_id=28

User avatar
Balsamo
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2079
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Balsamo » Mon Aug 03, 2015 5:05 am

Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:Read it again.
It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor. It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential. Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there. We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer 1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confidentially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to answer a little question that surely you must have. The question is, of course you had to kill the adult Jews, I understand that, but how could you do the same to the women and children? So I have to tell you something: The children will be grown one day. Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we're too weak to kill children. Our children can deal with them. Our children will fight that one out. But the Jewish hate, small today, will be big tomorrow, and the grown avengers will attack our children and grandchildren, who will then have to deal with them. I am convinced that this will be the case even if Adolf Hitler does not survive. No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews. That would have been cowardly and therefore we adopted a clear solution to the problem, as difficult as it was.
He is quite clearly speaking of the "problem" in general, using Warsaw as an example.

Please tell me you're trolling, because it's getting a bit cringeworthy. Like Rosanne Barr singing the national anthem level cringeworthy.
Again, auszurotten does not necessarily mean extermination but more likely "rooting out"/extirpation = deportation.

Are you really arguing that Himmler claimed he had killed all Jews in this speech? Obviously not, Himmler is talking about ALL the Jews (both men and women/children) in the Warsaw uprising.
POINT 1: You are right when the term is used toward a abstract concept like Judentum (Jewry), or Jewish bolshevism.
But you just make a fool of yourself when ausrotten refers to a concrete concept like lets say a Man or a Woman, like in this quote
Es trat an uns die Frage heran: Wie ist es mit den Frauen und Kindern? Ich habe mich entschlossen, auch hier eine ganz klare Lösung zu finden. Ich hielt mich nämlich nicht für berechtigt, die Männer auszurotten sprich also, umzubringen oder umbringen zu lassen - und die Rächer in Gestalt der Kinder für unsere Söhne und Enkel groß werden zu lassen. Es mußte der schwere Entschluß gefaßt werden, dieses Volk von der Erde verschwinden zu lassen.
Given your expertise in German vocabulary, I guess I don't have to give a translation of that quote.

And you surely know that Umbringen means to kill and nothing else.

POINT 2:
Look at the context of the speech.
Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities
As a matter of fact, there was only of fraction of the Jews in German cities left. Goal achieved.
we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there.
As a matter of fact, the Jewish Ghettos in Poland had been liquidated, and their Jews killed. Goal achieved.

You would not expect Himmler to point out where he did not achieve his goal, and he clearly went ahead of himself by stating that the Solution would be completed by the end of the year, although he in fact did a pretty good job everywhere he could.

You are really the perfect illustration of what denial - as a pathology - really is. Thanks for that.

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Mon Aug 03, 2015 5:15 am

I think the case is pretty closed now We have four tampered with speeches which all have the critical pages retyped - these four speeches are by a mile the most important Holocaust evidence anywhere. We have two non-tampered with speeches which clearly speak only of killing partisans and their relatives (ignore Terry's misleading web translation as noted above) but are otherwise very similar to the tampered with speeches.

Game over.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27927
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: Posen Speech

Post by scrmbldggs » Mon Aug 03, 2015 5:33 am

:lol:
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Aug 03, 2015 9:45 am

Monstrous wrote:
nickterry wrote: Since the October 1943 Posen speeches aren't nearly as explicit as the Sonthofen speech I fail to see where you're going with the forgery gambit anyway. Unless this is a typical denier example of 'it doesn't mean extermination/but it's a forgery anyway' heads-I-win-tails-you-lose dishonesty. Face it, Himmler spoke explicitly of Ausrottung at Posen - this was comprehended by his audience as illustrated by the Goebbels diary. He spoke in more detail of what the extirpation of the Jews meant to Wehrmacht audiences.

The fact that the Posen speech was recorded removes all doubt - the words of the typescript match the recording. But we also have a recording from his 1944 speeches. Sonthofen:
It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor. It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential. Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there. We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer 1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confidentially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to answer a little question that surely you must have. The question is, of course you had to kill the adult Jews, I understand that, but how could you do the same to the women and children? So I have to tell you something: The children will be grown one day. Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we're too weak to kill children. Our children can deal with them. Our children will fight that one out. But the Jewish hate, small today, will be big tomorrow, and the grown avengers will attack our children and grandchildren, who will then have to deal with them. I am convinced that this will be the case even if Adolf Hitler does not survive. No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews. That would have been cowardly and therefore we adopted a clear solution to the problem, as difficult as it was.
The Sonthofen speech didn't mention a single death camp or spell out anything about the methods. But it didn't need to. The meaning is plain, and cannot be obfuscated.
Thanks for this evidence totally supporting and confirming my view. It is clear in this speech that Himmler is talking about the women and children of the partisans fighters in Warsaw.

Extermination is as usual a misleading translation of auszurotten.Obviously Himmler did not claim he had killed all Jews everywhere in this speech but he did claim to have killed Jewish partisans and their relatives in Warsaw.
Among that which you know nothing about is the Warsaw ghetto clearance. Himmler mentions 500,000 Jews cleared from Warsaw ghetto. Although the population of the ghetto reached that peak, it was not quite so large when the deportation actions began - in July 1942, about five months before the first resistance to the Germans by armed Jewish underground groups in the Warsaw ghetto. The first Warsaw action, called the Great Deportation, took about 300,000 Jews from the ghetto, nearly all of them to Treblinka. This action lasted from late July to mid September 1942.

Underground groups, to defend themselves in future such actions, organized, armed, and prepared defenses. This is common knowledge, for example, explained thusly on the USHMM website:
In response to the deportations, on July 28, 1942, several Jewish underground organizations created an armed self-defense unit known as the Jewish Combat Organization (Zydowska Organizacja Bojowa; ZOB). Rough estimates put the size of the ZOB at its formation at around 200 members. The Revisionist Party (right-wing Zionists known as the Betar) formed another resistance organization, the Jewish Military Union (Zydowski Zwiazek Wojskowy; ZZW).
In January 1943 now-armed and organized Jews resisted deportation - likely planned to take some 1000s of those remaining in the ghetto (35-50,000) to Trawniki and Poniatowa. When Himmler mentions 5 weeks of street fighting, he is referring to the final clearance of these 10s of 1000s of remaining Jews from the Warsaw ghetto, not the main deportation action against unarmed, unorganized, defenseless men, women, and children, which had occurred the previous year, in 1942. The street fighting in which two main armed fighting organizations tried to prevent the final destruction of the ghetto took place from 19 April to 16 May 1943 - about 40,000 Warsaw Jews were removed to Trawniki, Ponatiowa, Budzyn, the Krasnik camps, and Majdanek for slave labor; about 7,000 were taken to Treblinka to be murdered.

What has been totally supported and confirmed here are 1) your woeful ignorance of the history and context and 2) your propensity for pulling like rabbits from a hat hare-brained "solutions" to back up your dishonest claims. You've made painfully clear your ineptitude and ignorance, along with your dishonesty, but this one really surprised even me.
Monstrous wrote:So what do we have?

* We have four speeches that ALL have exactly the critical pages retyped according to Irving testifying under oath in trials and this not contested by anyone: the October 4, 1943 speech, the October 6, 1943 speech, the May 5, 1944 speech, and the May 24, 1944 speeches. THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT EVIDENCE ANYWHERE SUPPORTING THE BELIEVERS.
First, it is not evidence, without more, of anything other than retyping and error correction. Second, please show your sources for all 4 speeches.
Monstrous wrote:* We have two not retyped speeches (the December 16, 1943 speech and the above June 21, 1944 speech). In these Himmler clearly speaks of killing only partisans and their relatives and in a style otherwise very similar to the four retyped speeches.

I thinks this settles it.
Hardly, especially since Himmler was concerned with, of course, many issues, including anti-partisan warfare, so his speaking about partisans on some occasions and other matters (e.g., the Jewish question) on others does not make all his references to extermination actions about partisans. Nessie can tell you the name for the logical fallacy you’re using. Also, you have shown above that you do not have the slightest understanding of the anti-Jewish actions to which Himmler referred and that you "interpret" his references in terms of your idee fixe.

Now, start a thread on Warsaw ghetto to prove that your claim about the Great Deportation, involving 100s of 1000s of Jews (not quite the 500,000 mentioned by Himmler), is correct and my quick summary is not.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:00 pm, edited 4 times in total.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Aug 03, 2015 9:52 am

Monstrous wrote:Again, auszurotten does not necessarily mean extermination but more likely "rooting out"/extirpation = deportation.
You never answered Balsamo's question, are you a native German speaker?
Monstrous wrote:Are you really arguing that Himmler claimed he had killed all Jews in this speech? Obviously not, Himmler is talking about ALL the Jews (both men and women/children) in the Warsaw uprising.
Bozo, there were not 100s of 1000s of Jews in Warsaw ghetto at the time of the uprising; there were probably about 35,000 "legal" working Jews and 15,000 underground, illegal Jews. Himmler was talking about the destruction of the Warsaw ghetto - and the 100s of 1000s of Jews who lived there - extending from July 1942 through spring 1943, capped by a five-week battle to remove the last Jews from the ghetto. By far, most of the Jews who lived in Warsaw ghetto in July 1942 were murdered by the Germans in three main killing actions - 1) the 300,000+ killed at Treblinka in summer/fall 1942, 2) the 7,000 killed at Treblinka, along with the 1000s killed in fighting in the ghetto, when the ghetto was finally destroyed in spring 1943, and 3) the 10s of 1000s shot in Action Erntefest in Lublin district in early November 1943.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:15 am, edited 3 times in total.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Aug 03, 2015 9:59 am

Monstrous wrote:"Terry concludes this section with a long quotation of a Himm-
ler speech “in front of generals at Sonthofen” of 21 June 1944, in which
he referred i.a. to the killing of Jewish women and children. He ignores
the title of the speech: “The ‘final solution’ and the uprising in the War-
saw Ghetto (1944) [recte: 1943].” 1189 The whole excerpt refers in fact to
the Warsaw ghetto revolt. I do not count this as an omission by Terry,
because he has probably never seen the text he quotes (“Bradley F.
Smith and Agnes F. Peterson (eds.), Heinrich Himmler. Geheimreden
1933 bis 1945. Frankfurt am Main, 1974, p.203: footnote 328”), and
most likely took it instead from the web. 1190 This text contains unindi-
cated ommissions, and its translation swings between approximation
and falsification. I give here the most blatant examples. The following
passage: 1191
“The time when we cleaned out the last big ghetto in Warsaw – by all
means I can give the number – with more than 500,000 Jews in summer
1943 after five weeks of street fighting was also the last time. As isolated as
they may have been, the ghettos were the centers of all partisans – and of
all bandit movements.”
is rendered like this:
“We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer
1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confiden-
tially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to an-
swer a little question that surely you must have.” (p. 211)
The dissolution of the ghettos as “centers” of the war against the par-
tisans stands in contrast to the thesis of racial extermination of the Jews
inhabiting them
, and therefore the pertinent passage has been omitted
(although the omission corresponds to twenty lines of text).
Further in the text, the sentence
“Do we want to be so indecent as to say: no, no, we are too weak for
that, but our children can once deal with them.”
is incorrectly translated in this way:
“Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we’re too weak to
kill children. Our children can deal with them.” (p. 211)
And finally “No, we can not take the responsibility for it” becomes
“No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews.” (p. 211)."
http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php ... page_id=28
Utter bollocks. As I proposed, you explain the history of Warsaw ghetto in the light of this claim. That means you have to show Warsaw ghetto as a partisan center against whom the Germans were waging war before 22 July 1942, when the Germans began the destruction of the ghetto and removal of Jews to Treblinka - and then you have to do the same for a large number of other ghettos (like Lviv, Krakow, Lublin, Vilnius, Kaunas, Riga, Minsk, and so on). But let's start with Warsaw, since you and your anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi chums raised the question in this context - so start a thread on Warsaw, because, while you've clearly lost your battle on Posen, this is the Posen thread.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:04 am

Monstrous wrote:I think the case is pretty closed now We have four tampered with speeches which all have the critical pages retyped - these four speeches are by a mile the most important Holocaust evidence anywhere. We have two non-tampered with speeches which clearly speak only of killing partisans and their relatives (ignore Terry's misleading web translation as noted above) but are otherwise very similar to the tampered with speeches.

Game over.
LOL, tampered with speeches, you say, which contemporaries heard, referred to (caught on tape, in a diary), and about which listeners later testified - game has been over for weeks, only you're too obtuse to realize it.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:16 am

scrmbldggs wrote::lol:
In the grips of a hallucinatory episode involving delusions of competence.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5072
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Jeff_36 » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:53 pm

re the alleged "mistranslation":

This is nit Dr. Terry being dishonest. That is the translation trhat has been used by several sources over the years, including Fleming and Longeriech. I take their word over that pf a punk-ass-{!#%@} facist-ass bitch-ass blakshirt Jew hating mark-ass lying chump dolt from Italy who can't speak German particularly well (see his misinterpretation of the Reuter file note for evidence of his lack of German proficiency). But assuming that Mattogno's "translation" is correct (and I doubt very strongly that it is) He has still not considered the following:
It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor.
He is clearly discussing a general attitude towards the Jews.
It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential.
Not just in the Warsaw ghetto, but in the whole German sphere of influence. Only after this does he use Warsaw as an example of the order. Only then do Mattogno's whines have merit, but the damage to his cause has already been done.
Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there.
Clearly a reference to a general attitude towards the Jews, of which the following description of Warsaw was but an example.

Mattogno's complaints here were the equivalent of shuffling the deck chairs on his own ideological Titanic.

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:02 am

Jeff_36 wrote:re the alleged "mistranslation":

This is nit Dr. Terry being dishonest. That is the translation trhat has been used by several sources over the years, including Fleming and Longeriech. I take their word over that pf a {!#%@} facist-ass bitch-ass blakshirt Jew hating mark-ass lying chump dolt from Italy who can't speak German particularly well (see his misinterpretation of the Reuter file note for evidence of his lack of German proficiency). But assuming that Mattogno's "translation" is correct (and I doubt very strongly that it is) He has still not considered the following:
It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor.
He is clearly discussing a general attitude towards the Jews.
It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential.
Not just in the Warsaw ghetto, but in the whole German sphere of influence. Only after this does he use Warsaw as an example of the order. Only then do Mattogno's whines have merit, but the damage to his cause has already been done.
Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there.
Clearly a reference to a general attitude towards the Jews, of which the following description of Warsaw was but an example.

Mattogno's complaints here were the equivalent of shuffling the deck chairs on his own ideological Titanic.
If "mainstream" researches have indeed used this ridiculous translation, then this only proves their incompetence.

The section is entitled "The ‘final solution’ and the uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto". Himmler thus spoke of both "the final solution" = auszurotten = rooting out/extirpation/expulsion (as stated previously, what the word may mean in German today is irrelevant, relevant is the meanings at this time).

Then Himmler talks about the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and states (confidentially) that he also ordered women/children to be killed. (This likely being well-known already which is why Himmler felt it necessary to attempt to justify this decision).

Again, the not "retyped" speeches are very similar to the "retyped" speeches with the critical difference that it is clear that Himmler is not speaking about killing Jews in general but is speaking about killing specific groups.

Thus, the most important Holocaust evidence by a mile -these four "retyped" Himmler speeches- is a clear fraud...

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Aug 04, 2015 10:28 am

Monstrous wrote:Then Himmler talks about the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising
Not exactly, he speaks - loosely and in your translation confusedly - of the Warsaw ghetto deportations capped by the uprising - for the simple reason that there were not 100s of 1000s of Jews in Warsaw ghetto at the time of the uprising. No matter how Himmler put it. The full operation that "cleaned out the last big ghetto in Warsaw" (another bit of loose talk, as Lodz wasn't "cleaned out" until August 1944) began in summer 1942, months before there was any German fighting against Jewish self-defense groups. By referencing 100s of 1000s of Jews, Himmler is necessarily discussing the anti-Jewish "cleaning out" operation as a whole, which began in July 1942 and wound down in May 1943, and giving it his anti-Semitic twist, which you fall for, as a necessary operation to deal with (non)threats from the Jews.

So now you are flat-out lying, as you've been corrected on this point and ignore the correction. The Warsaw ghetto, whether Himmler claimed that it was a "bandit center" or not, was not a center for partisan operations in 1942 or, frankly, in 1943: the fighters there in 1943 were for self-defense and were largely unsupported by the Polish underground. In your translation he even pays lip service to the insignificance of the eventual fighters, calling them "isolated" (on this point, Himmler was correct). There were about 50,000 Jews in Warsaw ghetto in 1943 at the time of the 5 weeks of fighting - but between 335,000 and 380,000 Jews living in the ghetto in July 1942 (with a peak population of 490,000 about a year prior). If you would like to choose your own facts, and to assess Himmler's speech in the light of those facts, you're free to - but readers are free to judge you for doing so.
Monstrous wrote:Again, the not "retyped" speeches are very similar to the "retyped" speeches with the critical difference that it is clear that Himmler is not speaking about killing Jews in general but is speaking about killing specific groups.
What happened to the 100s of 1000s of Jews mentioned by Himmler and deported from Warsaw ghetto? He claimed that 500,000 were “cleaned out,” a fairly sizable “specific group.”
Monstrous wrote:Thus, the most important Holocaust evidence by a mile -these four "retyped" Himmler speeches- is a clear fraud...
Again, these speeches are not the most important evidence for the Final Solution. As I replied to Jeff at the outset,
As for my view, I agree with you that Himmler's statements at Posen are damning - but I don't believe there to be any single "coup de grace." The best - and incontrovertible - proofs of the Holocaust remain the vast web of independent pieces of evidence for the major elements of the genocide, from planning to actions on the ground.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Wed Aug 05, 2015 11:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5072
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Jeff_36 » Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:37 pm

The section is entitled "The ‘final solution’ and the uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto". Himmler thus spoke of both "the final solution" = auszurotten = rooting out/extirpation/expulsion (as stated previously, what the word may mean in German today is irrelevant, relevant is the meanings at this time).

Then Himmler talks about the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and states (confidentially) that he also ordered women/children to be killed. (This likely being well-known already which is why Himmler felt it necessary to attempt to justify this decision).
Read the speech again. Before talking about warsaw he mentions general actions against the Jews. The fighting in warsaw was just one example of the general solution being discussed.
He stated:
It was the most terrible task and the most terrible order which could have been given to an organisation: the order to solve the Jewish question. In this circle, I may say it frankly with a few sentences. It is good that we had the severity to exterminate the Jews in our domain.
He is talking about a terrible task, one that required a great deal of harshness and resulted in the extermination of Jews. The term Ausrottung has different meanings depending on it's use: When Hitler talks about the ausrottung of "The German Nation" or "Germanhood" or "The German State" he is probably not talking about killing, as he is referring to wide, theoretical concepts.
However that is not what Himmler was talking about here, he is talking about The Jews in territory occupied by Germany, a physical group of biological individuals. In that context the word has and always has had but a single meaning. You can talk about exterminating, say, the ongoing obesity epidemic in America, or addiction, but when you talk about exterminating the fat people and the addicts there is but one meaning.

Himmlers use of the term before and during the war was consistent. here is one example.
"I have the conviction that the Roman Emperors who exterminated the first Christians did what we are doing with the communists.
You have yet to discuss the January Posen Speech.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Aug 04, 2015 4:11 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:
The section is entitled "The ‘final solution’ and the uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto". Himmler thus spoke of both "the final solution" = auszurotten = rooting out/extirpation/expulsion (as stated previously, what the word may mean in German today is irrelevant, relevant is the meanings at this time).

Then Himmler talks about the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and states (confidentially) that he also ordered women/children to be killed. (This likely being well-known already which is why Himmler felt it necessary to attempt to justify this decision).
Read the speech again. Before talking about warsaw he mentions general actions against the Jews. The fighting in warsaw was just one example of the general solution being discussed.
He stated:
It was the most terrible task and the most terrible order which could have been given to an organisation: the order to solve the Jewish question. In this circle, I may say it frankly with a few sentences. It is good that we had the severity to exterminate the Jews in our domain.
He is talking about a terrible task, one that required a great deal of harshness and resulted in the extermination of Jews.
100% correct. The excerpt and reference to Warsaw we're discussing fall within the context of the solution of the Jewish question, as only makes sense and as the events in Warsaw to which Himmler referred unfolded.

Let's not beat around the bush, either: Mattogno & co. chopped up the speech and gave, so it was written, "blatant examples" that destroyed the very context which Jeff is restoring.

Mattogno & fascists lie when they write, "The whole excerpt refers in fact to the Warsaw ghetto revolt." The whole excerpt is in fact framed by what Jeff quoted and what the fascists omitted: "It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor. It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory."

Further, Himmler didn't mention just Warsaw but also Lviv, Lublin, and Krakow. The excerpt is about solving the Jewish problem and it uses Warsaw as an example of the hardness required.

The mendacity on display here - whether Mattogno or Monstrous is guilty - is beyond the pale.

And, again, Mattogno & fascists - and the dishonest dissembler and link-compiler Monstrous - use the speech in a way that, when they tackle the Warsaw example, flies in the face of everything known about that ghetto and its clearance and dissolution.

Monstrous gave us one more garbage argument by an increasingly desperate denier.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Sun Aug 09, 2015 5:47 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote: Among that which you know nothing about is the Warsaw ghetto clearance. Himmler mentions 500,000 Jews cleared from Warsaw ghetto. Although the population of the ghetto reached that peak, it was not quite so large when the deportation actions began - in July 1942, about five months before the first resistance to the Germans by armed Jewish underground groups in the Warsaw ghetto. The first Warsaw action, called the Great Deportation, took about 300,000 Jews from the ghetto, nearly all of them to Treblinka. This action lasted from late July to mid September 1942.

Underground groups, to defend themselves in future such actions, organized, armed, and prepared defenses. This is common knowledge, for example, explained thusly on the USHMM website:
In response to the deportations, on July 28, 1942, several Jewish underground organizations created an armed self-defense unit known as the Jewish Combat Organization (Zydowska Organizacja Bojowa; ZOB). Rough estimates put the size of the ZOB at its formation at around 200 members. The Revisionist Party (right-wing Zionists known as the Betar) formed another resistance organization, the Jewish Military Union (Zydowski Zwiazek Wojskowy; ZZW).
In January 1943 now-armed and organized Jews resisted deportation - likely planned to take some 1000s of those remaining in the ghetto (35-50,000) to Trawniki and Poniatowa. When Himmler mentions 5 weeks of street fighting, he is referring to the final clearance of these 10s of 1000s of remaining Jews from the Warsaw ghetto, not the main deportation action against unarmed, unorganized, defenseless men, women, and children, which had occurred the previous year, in 1942. The street fighting in which two main armed fighting organizations tried to prevent the final destruction of the ghetto took place from 19 April to 16 May 1943 - about 40,000 Warsaw Jews were removed to Trawniki, Ponatiowa, Budzyn, the Krasnik camps, and Majdanek for slave labor; about 7,000 were taken to Treblinka to be murdered.
Huh? Is there a point extremely well hidden somewhere here? My argument was that the not retyped June 21 1944 speech by Himmler was clearly about killings of women/children in connection with the uprising and not about killings of Jews in general. Never said anything about the uprising occurring in 1942. When Himmler is speaking of there being 500,000 Jews in the ghetto he is speaking about the maximum number in ghetto (which all had to be removed as the ghetto was dismantled) and not the number existing when the uprising occurred in 1943.

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Sun Aug 09, 2015 5:58 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Monstrous wrote:"Terry concludes this section with a long quotation of a Himm-
ler speech “in front of generals at Sonthofen” of 21 June 1944, in which
he referred i.a. to the killing of Jewish women and children. He ignores
the title of the speech: “The ‘final solution’ and the uprising in the War-
saw Ghetto (1944) [recte: 1943].” 1189 The whole excerpt refers in fact to
the Warsaw ghetto revolt. I do not count this as an omission by Terry,
because he has probably never seen the text he quotes (“Bradley F.
Smith and Agnes F. Peterson (eds.), Heinrich Himmler. Geheimreden
1933 bis 1945. Frankfurt am Main, 1974, p.203: footnote 328”), and
most likely took it instead from the web. 1190 This text contains unindi-
cated ommissions, and its translation swings between approximation
and falsification. I give here the most blatant examples. The following
passage: 1191
“The time when we cleaned out the last big ghetto in Warsaw – by all
means I can give the number – with more than 500,000 Jews in summer
1943 after five weeks of street fighting was also the last time. As isolated as
they may have been, the ghettos were the centers of all partisans – and of
all bandit movements.”
is rendered like this:
“We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer
1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confiden-
tially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to an-
swer a little question that surely you must have.” (p. 211)
The dissolution of the ghettos as “centers” of the war against the par-
tisans stands in contrast to the thesis of racial extermination of the Jews
inhabiting them
, and therefore the pertinent passage has been omitted
(although the omission corresponds to twenty lines of text).
Further in the text, the sentence
“Do we want to be so indecent as to say: no, no, we are too weak for
that, but our children can once deal with them.”
is incorrectly translated in this way:
“Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we’re too weak to
kill children. Our children can deal with them.” (p. 211)
And finally “No, we can not take the responsibility for it” becomes
“No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews.” (p. 211)."
http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php ... page_id=28
Utter bollocks. As I proposed, you explain the history of Warsaw ghetto in the light of this claim. That means you have to show Warsaw ghetto as a partisan center against whom the Germans were waging war before 22 July 1942, when the Germans began the destruction of the ghetto and removal of Jews to Treblinka
Why do I have to show that? The point is that Himmler in this speech justified the dismantling of the ghettos in part as due to them being centers for partisan activity which contradicts that Himmler in this speech was openly talking about dismantling for the purpose of genocide.

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:07 am

Jeff_36 wrote:
He is talking about a terrible task, one that required a great deal of harshness and resulted in the extermination of Jews. The term Ausrottung has different meanings depending on it's use: When Hitler talks about the ausrottung of "The German Nation" or "Germanhood" or "The German State" he is probably not talking about killing, as he is referring to wide, theoretical concepts.
However that is not what Himmler was talking about here, he is talking about The Jews in territory occupied by Germany, a physical group of biological individuals. In that context the word has and always has had but a single meaning. You can talk about exterminating, say, the ongoing obesity epidemic in America, or addiction, but when you talk about exterminating the fat people and the addicts there is but one meaning.

Himmlers use of the term before and during the war was consistent. here is one example.
"I have the conviction that the Roman Emperors who exterminated the first Christians did what we are doing with the communists.[/quote.
Sigh, just because ausrottung may mean killing does not mean that it always meant killing. Logical fallacy. This also applies when talking about people:
http://www.cwporter.com/Kolberg.htm
http://www.cwporter.com/use2.htm
http://www.cwporter.com/aussudet.htm

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:29 am

Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote: Among that which you know nothing about is the Warsaw ghetto clearance. Himmler mentions 500,000 Jews cleared from Warsaw ghetto. Although the population of the ghetto reached that peak, it was not quite so large when the deportation actions began - in July 1942, about five months before the first resistance to the Germans by armed Jewish underground groups in the Warsaw ghetto. The first Warsaw action, called the Great Deportation, took about 300,000 Jews from the ghetto, nearly all of them to Treblinka. This action lasted from late July to mid September 1942.

Underground groups, to defend themselves in future such actions, organized, armed, and prepared defenses. This is common knowledge, for example, explained thusly on the USHMM website:
In response to the deportations, on July 28, 1942, several Jewish underground organizations created an armed self-defense unit known as the Jewish Combat Organization (Zydowska Organizacja Bojowa; ZOB). Rough estimates put the size of the ZOB at its formation at around 200 members. The Revisionist Party (right-wing Zionists known as the Betar) formed another resistance organization, the Jewish Military Union (Zydowski Zwiazek Wojskowy; ZZW).
In January 1943 now-armed and organized Jews resisted deportation - likely planned to take some 1000s of those remaining in the ghetto (35-50,000) to Trawniki and Poniatowa. When Himmler mentions 5 weeks of street fighting, he is referring to the final clearance of these 10s of 1000s of remaining Jews from the Warsaw ghetto, not the main deportation action against unarmed, unorganized, defenseless men, women, and children, which had occurred the previous year, in 1942. The street fighting in which two main armed fighting organizations tried to prevent the final destruction of the ghetto took place from 19 April to 16 May 1943 - about 40,000 Warsaw Jews were removed to Trawniki, Ponatiowa, Budzyn, the Krasnik camps, and Majdanek for slave labor; about 7,000 were taken to Treblinka to be murdered.
Huh? Is there a point extremely well hidden somewhere here?
Not hidden at all - the main point is crystal clear: the operations to which Himmler made general reference against the Jews in Warsaw ghetto were not connected with war against partisans - the operations began before ghetto defense groups armed themselves and were carried out against 100s of 1000s of defenseless Jews. The second point is that the excerpt from Himmler's speech uses Warsaw and other ghetto clearance operations as examples, in his own words, of " the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question." This is something you keep ignoring.

I think that the chief problem here is your ahistorical, ideological fixation that reduces all German actions against civilian populations to a struggle against partisans, which makes it difficult for you to grasp simple contrary points and evidence. The contributing problem is your basic ignorance of the context, e.g., the Warsaw ghetto actions, and this ignorance makes it hard for you to understand.
Monstrous wrote:My argument was that the not retyped June 21 1944 speech by Himmler was clearly about killings of women/children in connection with the uprising and not about killings of Jews in general.
Not exactly. Here was your first reply to Nick Terry:
Thanks for this evidence totally supporting and confirming my view. It is clear in this speech that Himmler is talking about the women and children of the partisans fighters in Warsaw. Extermination is as usual a misleading translation of auszurotten.Obviously Himmler did not claim he had killed all Jews everywhere in this speech but he did claim to have killed Jewish partisans and their relatives in Warsaw.
In the excerpt, Himmler discussed cleaning out Warsaw, with the final cleaning out done in spring 1943, of 500,000 Jews, which is not about dealing with the "women and children of the partisans fighters in Warsaw"; it is about a general cleaning out, as Himmler put it, of the Jews from Warsaw (and, as he remarked, other ghettos).
Monstrous wrote:Never said anything about the uprising occurring in 1942.
Never said you did. I wrote that Himmler referred to the full scope of the operations against the Jews in Warsaw, which began in 1942, when he referenced 100s of 1000s of Jews cleaned out from the ghetto - and I wrote that you distorted his meaning by ignoring this point.
Monstrous wrote:When Himmler is speaking of there being 500,000 Jews in the ghetto he is speaking about the maximum number in ghetto (which all had to be removed as the ghetto was dismantled) and not the number existing when the uprising occurred in 1943.
You are simply wrong. The 100s of 1000s did not have to be removed "as the ghetto was dismantled." They were already gone by the time Warsaw ghetto was "dismantled," as they had been taken, almost all of them, to Treblinka during 1942. These 100s of 1000s of Jews were precisely cleaned out and murdered in an operation conducted in 1942 against the Jews of Warsaw, not in an anti-partisan operation during 1943, as you claim Himmler referenced. The number of Jews left in the ghetto at the time it was finally destroyed in spring 1943 was 10s of 1000s, among them Jewish defense groups, not 100s of 1000s of Jews.

In general, the cleaning out of the ghettos - Lublin, Krakow, Lviv also being mentioned - was an operation against the Jews as such, and not motivated by so-called anti-partisan aims, as you claim. You now need to explain to us how the ghetto-clearance operations in Lublin, Krakow, and Lviv fit your "theory," since Himmler highlighted these ghettos as well as Warsaw.

As an aside, Himmler's concerns about developing Jewish resistance during 1943 - provoked by months and months of German operations against Jewish communities - is different to the anti-partisan struggle, which, as Nick Terry and I have explained to you in the Einsatzgruppen thread, was not synonymous with Jewish resistance.

We all feel for you. We know that you're trying to defend illogical and ahistorical claims. We know that the history isn't easy. But we also wonder why you keep spouting total BS, like this latest post. We get that you have trouble understanding basic points, given your biases and ignorance; but you might calm yourself a bit, take some deep breaths, read what's been written in the posts you reply to, ponder what you read, and consider things a bit more before making foolish statements like "When Himmler is speaking of there being 500,000 Jews in the ghetto he is speaking about the maximum number in ghetto (which all had to be removed as the ghetto was dismantled)."

Anyway, we await your account of how the clearance of Jews from Lublin, Lviv, and Krakau were actually anti-partisan operations, in keeping with your "theory" of what Himmler was arguing. Let's start with Lublin.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:34 am

Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Monstrous wrote:"Terry concludes this section with a long quotation of a Himm-
ler speech “in front of generals at Sonthofen” of 21 June 1944, in which
he referred i.a. to the killing of Jewish women and children. He ignores
the title of the speech: “The ‘final solution’ and the uprising in the War-
saw Ghetto (1944) [recte: 1943].” 1189 The whole excerpt refers in fact to
the Warsaw ghetto revolt. I do not count this as an omission by Terry,
because he has probably never seen the text he quotes (“Bradley F.
Smith and Agnes F. Peterson (eds.), Heinrich Himmler. Geheimreden
1933 bis 1945. Frankfurt am Main, 1974, p.203: footnote 328”), and
most likely took it instead from the web. 1190 This text contains unindi-
cated ommissions, and its translation swings between approximation
and falsification. I give here the most blatant examples. The following
passage: 1191
“The time when we cleaned out the last big ghetto in Warsaw – by all
means I can give the number – with more than 500,000 Jews in summer
1943 after five weeks of street fighting was also the last time. As isolated as
they may have been, the ghettos were the centers of all partisans – and of
all bandit movements.”
is rendered like this:
“We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer
1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confiden-
tially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to an-
swer a little question that surely you must have.” (p. 211)
The dissolution of the ghettos as “centers” of the war against the par-
tisans stands in contrast to the thesis of racial extermination of the Jews
inhabiting them
, and therefore the pertinent passage has been omitted
(although the omission corresponds to twenty lines of text).
Further in the text, the sentence
“Do we want to be so indecent as to say: no, no, we are too weak for
that, but our children can once deal with them.”
is incorrectly translated in this way:
“Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we’re too weak to
kill children. Our children can deal with them.” (p. 211)
And finally “No, we can not take the responsibility for it” becomes
“No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews.” (p. 211)."
http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php ... page_id=28
Utter bollocks. As I proposed, you explain the history of Warsaw ghetto in the light of this claim. That means you have to show Warsaw ghetto as a partisan center against whom the Germans were waging war before 22 July 1942, when the Germans began the destruction of the ghetto and removal of Jews to Treblinka
Why do I have to show that? The point is that Himmler in this speech justified the dismantling of the ghettos in part as due to them being centers for partisan activity which contradicts that Himmler in this speech was openly talking about dismantling for the purpose of genocide.
Because Himmler referenced 500,000 Jews of Warsaw being cleaned out, not just pockets of Jewish resistance that remained in 1943. You made this difficulty for yourself when you quoted Il Re di Convoluzione writing that "The whole excerpt refers in fact to the Warsaw ghetto revolt." It doesn't: it refers to the solution to the Jewish question, it refers to the 100s of 1000s of Jews who were cleaned out of Warsaw, it refers to Lublin, it refers to Krakow, it refers to Lviv. And you added, "It is clear in this speech that Himmler is talking about the women and children of the partisans fighters in Warsaw."

If you want us to believe that the thrust of all this is a response to partisan activity, the Warsaw underground in 1943 being a case in point, you have to show us how all of it fits your claim.

I know you can't. So I know why you're complaining that you needn't. But the fact remains, you made the false claims - if you can't show what I requested you to show, your claim about the excerpt falls. Deal with that.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:48 am

I had thought that when Monstrous mentioned in the EG thread that he'd be coming back with some stuff on Posen he'd give us something new. I also thought he might be studying up for a change. Instead, all Monstrous gives us is rehash of his previous misunderstandings and some whining about the straits he finds himself in.

Let the "beauty" of Monstrous's argument be noted: because Himmler sometimes spoke about partisans, Monstrous argues, and although this cannot be shown in the Sonthofen speech currently under discussion, therefore Himmler must have been speaking about partisans at Posen - despite contemporary sources (Goebbels on Posen: "we can solve the Jewish question for the whole of Europe. He advocates the most radical and toughest solution, namely to exterminate the Jews, the whole lot of them"; Engel: "told us how he killed the Jews. I can well remember how he said: 'When I'm asked did you kill children as well? I can only reply I am not such a coward that I leave to my children a job which I can do myself'") and postwar testimony that he spoke about anti-Jewish actions and extermination of the Jews at Posen. LOL. Monstrous and his magic "Partisans" wand - flailing about without effect!
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1180
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Mary Q Contrary » Sun Aug 09, 2015 4:49 pm

nickterry wrote:
Monstrous wrote:"some of the most important Nuremberg documents are now generally acknowledged to be fraudulent. /47

For example, defense attorney Dr. Boehm protested to the Tribunal that Nuremberg document 1721-PS, which purportedly confirms attacks by stormtroopers against Jewish synagogues in November 1938, is a clumsy forgery. He went on to explain his reasons at some length. /48
LOL so a defense attorney alleges forgery of documents that primarily record the destruction of synagogues known to have been destroyed on Kristallnacht. Are you serious?
Several Nuremberg documents based on the purported "death bed confession" of Mauthausen commandant Franz Ziereis, are demonstrably fraudulent. (Nuremberg documents 1515-PS, 3870-PS, and NO-1973.) These documents supposedly prove systematic killings of hundreds of thousands of people by gassing and other means at Mauthausen and Hartheim. /49
The Ziereis statement isn't a Nazi document, doofus. It was written down after the war by an ex-Mauthausen prisoner.
So this death bed confession has absolutely no value at all.
Almost forty years after the Tribunal handed down its verdicts, Nuremberg document USSR-378 was definitively exposed as a fraud. It is a purported record of numerous private conversations with Hitler by Hermann Rauschning, a former National Socialist official in Danzig. In brutal language, the Führer supposedly revealed his most intimate thoughts and secret plans for world conquest. Rauschning's "memoir" was published in 1939 in Britain under the title Hitler Speaks, and in the United States in 1940 as The Voice of Destruction. It was this US edition that was accepted in evidence at Nuremberg as proof of the "guiding principles of the Nazi regime."

Chief British prosecutor Sir Hartley Shawcross and his Soviet colleagues cited numerous quotations from it. Defendant Baldur von Schirach contested its authenticity, but defense attorney Pelckmann (who did not know any better) accepted this "evidence" as authentic. /50 In 1983 Swiss historian Wolfgang Hänel established that the "memoir" is entirely fraudulent. Rauschning never had even a single private meeting with Hitler. /51
This, too, is not a Nazi document.
So these documents have no value either.
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5072
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Jeff_36 » Sun Aug 09, 2015 5:36 pm

Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
He is talking about a terrible task, one that required a great deal of harshness and resulted in the extermination of Jews. The term Ausrottung has different meanings depending on it's use: When Hitler talks about the ausrottung of "The German Nation" or "Germanhood" or "The German State" he is probably not talking about killing, as he is referring to wide, theoretical concepts.
However that is not what Himmler was talking about here, he is talking about The Jews in territory occupied by Germany, a physical group of biological individuals. In that context the word has and always has had but a single meaning. You can talk about exterminating, say, the ongoing obesity epidemic in America, or addiction, but when you talk about exterminating the fat people and the addicts there is but one meaning.

Himmlers use of the term before and during the war was consistent. here is one example.
"I have the conviction that the Roman Emperors who exterminated the first Christians did what we are doing with the communists.[/quote.
Sigh, just because ausrottung may mean killing does not mean that it always meant killing. Logical fallacy. This also applies when talking about people:
http://www.cwporter.com/Kolberg.htm
http://www.cwporter.com/use2.htm
http://www.cwporter.com/aussudet.htm
It never means that in regard to a group of persons. Please stop citing porter, he speaks no German and his ignorance of the language shows.

The quote from your link was such
"What would happen to a people that said, come, 'Napoleon, you are so much more powerful and stronger than we are, come and rule over us'? It would destroy itself, and it would deserve nothing better than to be destroyed!"
He is referring to the German nation and by extension the German state - theoretical concepts. When Himmler talks about exterminating the Jews, a group of indaviduals, the word has one meaning and one meaning alone.

Here is another example
Dear Party Comrade Rademacher!
On my return trip from Berlin I met an old party comrade, who works in the east on the settlement of the Jewish question. In the near future many of the Jewish vermin will be exterminated through special measures

not talking about deportation here.

More:
They have therefore from the moment of liberation until now participated copiously in the extermination of these parasites. However, as I found out especially regarding the railway personnel, they cannot understand why Germany brings the Jews to Latvia instead of having exterminated them in its own country
This quote is important in that the extermination is going on IN Latvia and contrasts it with the deportation of Jews from Germany to Latvia, as opposed to ausrottung in Germany. This clearly is not in reference to deportation.
"We are fully aware that this war can end either in the extermination of the Aryan people or in the disappearance of Jewry from Europe. I said as much before the German Reichstag on September 1, 1939. I wish to avoid making hasty prophesies, but this war will not end as the Jews imagine, namely, in the extermination of the European-Aryan people; instead, the result of this war will be the annihilation of Jewry. For the first time, the old, truly Jewish rule of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” will obtain"
He uses a "annihilation" in addition to ausrottung, this making clear that the end result is not compatible with the continued existence of the Jewish race.
"So the Jew smacks his thighs to see how his diabolic stratagem has succeeded. He bears in mind that if his victims suddenly became aware of these things, all Jews would be exterminated. But, this time, the Jews will disappear from Europe
Important to note that he says "all Jews" would be ausrottung, he is not referring to a decimation but a total, deadly solution.
"Today the idea of our National Socialist, and that of the fascist revolution, have conquered great and powerful states, and my prophecy will find its fulfillment, that through this war Aryan humankind will not be annihilated, but the Jew will be exterminated. Whatever the struggle may bring with it or however long it may last, this will be its final result. And only then, with the removal of these parasites, will a long period of understanding between nations, and with it true peace, come upon the suffering world"
He is contrasting here the prospect of the annihilation of the German race and the annihilation of the Jews. NOT deportation.

From the minister of Justice
The idea of exterminating them by labor is the best. For the rest however, except in the aforementioned cases, every case has to be dealt with individually.
The idea of deporting them by labor???? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: No. Clearly this precludes the continued existence of the individuals in question.
"If Judaism imagines by any chance that it can bring about an international world war for the extermination of the European races, the result will not be the extermination of the European races, but the extermination of the Jews in Europe
Again: the contrast is clear. He does not think that the world war will result in the deportation of the European races, but in the destruction and wiping out of said people. He wishes the same fate upon The Jews, the group of people.
In nature life always takes measures against parasites; in the life of nations that is not always the case. From this fact the Jewish peril actually stems. There is therefore no other recourse left for modern nations except to exterminate the Jew...."
You do not deport or resettle parasites. The fact that he talks of all nations means that there is nowhere to deport them to.

From a trial judgement
"The accused shall not be punished because of the actions against the Jews as such. The Jews have to be exterminated and none of the Jews that were killed is any great loss.
ausrottung = killing. Always, Always, Always Always Always Always Always Always.

My favorite, from a main figure in the forced labor structure.
"We swear we are not going to abandon the struggle until the Last Jew in Europe has been exterminated and is actually dead. It is not enough to isolate the Jewish enemy of mankind - the Jew has got to be exterminated!"
Needs no explanation.
To lock men, women, and children into barns and to set fire to them does not appear to be a suitable method of combatting bands, even if it is desired to exterminate the population. This method is not worthy of the German cause and hurts our reputation severely
You do not deport a group of persons by burning them alive, unless they were using a method that I am unaware of. Do you propose that they gave the Jews fireproof suits and that the fire was actually an inter-dimensional portal that transported them into a happier dimension where John Bonham never drank himself to death and the Montreal Canadiens won the Cup in 1989? If so please check yourself into the nearest hospital.
The Jews laughed in Germany too when they first saw us. They are not laughing any longer. They chose to wage war against us. But that war is turning against them. When they planned a war to totally destroy the German nation, they signed their own death warrant
Enough said.

When one says that they will exterminate a committee, that can mean a few things, but it has a deadly leaning. When you announce you intention to exterminate the committee members, it has but one meaning, For hundreds of years preceding us, and hundreds to come.

I think you've said enough on this topic.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5072
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Jeff_36 » Sun Aug 09, 2015 5:39 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:I had thought that when Monstrous mentioned in the EG thread that he'd be coming back with some stuff on Posen he'd give us something new. I also thought he might be studying up for a change. Instead, all Monstrous gives us is rehash of his previous misunderstandings and some whining about the straits he finds himself in.

Let the "beauty" of Monstrous's argument be noted: because Himmler sometimes spoke about partisans, Monstrous argues, and although this cannot be shown in the Sonthofen speech currently under discussion, therefore Himmler must have been speaking about partisans at Posen - despite contemporary sources (Goebbels on Posen: "we can solve the Jewish question for the whole of Europe. He advocates the most radical and toughest solution, namely to exterminate the Jews, the whole lot of them"; Engel: "told us how he killed the Jews. I can well remember how he said: 'When I'm asked did you kill children as well? I can only reply I am not such a coward that I leave to my children a job which I can do myself'") and postwar testimony that he spoke about anti-Jewish actions and extermination of the Jews at Posen. LOL. Monstrous and his magic "Partisans" wand - flailing about without effect!
The speech was clearly in reference to a general solution, of which the ghetto operation was used as one example. He prefaced this by stating "it is good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory". No mention at all of partisans.

The ghettos, btw, were not hubs of partisan activity at all. I have explained to Menstrateous the state of Polish resistance at the time. I'm not sure if he read my post.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:28 pm

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
nickterry wrote:
Monstrous wrote:"some of the most important Nuremberg documents are now generally acknowledged to be fraudulent. /47

For example, defense attorney Dr. Boehm protested to the Tribunal that Nuremberg document 1721-PS, which purportedly confirms attacks by stormtroopers against Jewish synagogues in November 1938, is a clumsy forgery. He went on to explain his reasons at some length. /48
LOL so a defense attorney alleges forgery of documents that primarily record the destruction of synagogues known to have been destroyed on Kristallnacht. Are you serious?
Several Nuremberg documents based on the purported "death bed confession" of Mauthausen commandant Franz Ziereis, are demonstrably fraudulent. (Nuremberg documents 1515-PS, 3870-PS, and NO-1973.) These documents supposedly prove systematic killings of hundreds of thousands of people by gassing and other means at Mauthausen and Hartheim. /49
The Ziereis statement isn't a Nazi document, doofus. It was written down after the war by an ex-Mauthausen prisoner.
So this death bed confession has absolutely no value at all.
Almost forty years after the Tribunal handed down its verdicts, Nuremberg document USSR-378 was definitively exposed as a fraud. It is a purported record of numerous private conversations with Hitler by Hermann Rauschning, a former National Socialist official in Danzig. In brutal language, the Führer supposedly revealed his most intimate thoughts and secret plans for world conquest. Rauschning's "memoir" was published in 1939 in Britain under the title Hitler Speaks, and in the United States in 1940 as The Voice of Destruction. It was this US edition that was accepted in evidence at Nuremberg as proof of the "guiding principles of the Nazi regime."

Chief British prosecutor Sir Hartley Shawcross and his Soviet colleagues cited numerous quotations from it. Defendant Baldur von Schirach contested its authenticity, but defense attorney Pelckmann (who did not know any better) accepted this "evidence" as authentic. /50 In 1983 Swiss historian Wolfgang Hänel established that the "memoir" is entirely fraudulent. Rauschning never had even a single private meeting with Hitler. /51
This, too, is not a Nazi document.
So these documents have no value either.
Dimwit, the allegation made by Monstrous was that these were some of the many forgeries of German documents. Monstrous gave a number of references to things which were not German documents and not forgeries. To prove, as Monstrous quoted, that "some of the most important Nuremberg documents are now generally acknowledged to be fraudulent." The issue wasn't the value, or lack thereof, of the examples: the issue is that they were not examples of the point Monstrous thinks they proved.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:38 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:The ghettos, btw, were not hubs of partisan activity at all. I have explained to Menstrateous the state of Polish resistance at the time. I'm not sure if he read my post.
The point he is trying to cover up about Warsaw is that the ghetto underground was not a partisan formation - it consisted of self-defense units, the self-defense units were formed in response to the deportation of 100s of 1000s of Jews from the ghetto to their deaths during July-September 1942, the Jewish self-defense units did make contact with the Home Army but were unable to garner significant support from the Polish underground, and because of the weak support gained by the Jewish underground, the Jewish self-defense units were poorly armed. The entire orientation and posture of the armed units in Warsaw ghetto was defense of the ghetto when attacked by the Germans - not carrying war to the Germans as partisans.

Leaving aside, of course, Monstrous's most significant lie - that the Germans' actions against the ghetto originated in the struggle against partisans, even if broadly defined as Jewish self-defense units. I'm not sure why Monstrous keeps this going - it is very embarrassing to them and now we have Maryzilla popping in to prove she can't even read and absorb the discussion. Not a very good outing for them, all around.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Tue Aug 11, 2015 8:46 am

Aha! Monstrous may have identified the source of "Statistical Mechanic"'s confusion. SM apparently thinks that Himmler, apparently being a simpleton, could only discuss one Jewish topic in a particular speech. Thus, Himmler could not possibly in the same speech have discussed both the general expulsion of Jews and also the specific killings of some Jews (such as partisans and their relatives or those associated with Warsaw uprising).

The supposed distinction between "self-defense units" and "partisans" is strange. Many partisans likely consider themselves to be acting in self-defense and from the viewpoint of a occupying force there is likely no distinction since both groups uses violence to resist the occupier.

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Tue Aug 11, 2015 8:51 am

The Monstrous Himmler Speeches - Einsatzgruppen Reports Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory

Monstrous can now reveal a grand unified conspiracy theory integrating the speeches by Himmler and the reports by the Einsatzgruppen.

* Many of the Einsatzgruppen reports were forged/edited by the Soviets, copied many times, and were then inserted into various German archives in order to be discovered by non-Soviets (such as when they arrived in Berlin which had originally been captured solely by the Soviets) or were simply stated to have been found by the Soviets themselves in the archives. They were probably based on some original Einsatzgruppen documents that served as models but with added invented or exaggerated numbers of Jews killed (with Believers claiming 1.5 - 3 million Jews killed by the Einsatzgruppen). They may also have been edited by excluding from the original documents statements to the effects that many of those killed were suspected communists (Jews or not Jews) accused of participating in the communist atrocities, reprisal killings of both Jews and non-Jews, killings done by locals rather than Germans in pogroms, and so on. The Soviets also added the allegation that these documents had been widely circulated in order to implicate the German leadership in general in the Holocaust and for use during the trials against specific individuals. In general this editing was often rather subtle with only minor parts of the original documents being changed (such as by increasing some of the numbers). However, the combined large amounts of changes made it difficult to avoid various inconsistencies which have been discovered by revisionists but which are ignored by the Believers. But the most important evidence against these large scale killings having taken place is the absence of any found large mass graves (small WWII mass graves on the Eastern Front can be almost anything including killed partisans) and the simple physical impossibility of the described clean-up operation ("Aktion 1005") as discussed in various revisionists articles/books and with these revisionist arguments being unanswered by the Believers.

* At the same time the Soviets surveyed other documents, in particular those in the SS archives, and edited/deleted those to fit with with edited/forged EG documents. In particular, several Himmler speeches were "retyped" to fit with the EG documents. At this time there were still no agreed on consensus on how Jews were killed in the camps (with witnesses claiming methods such as hot steam, electrocution on conveyor belts, and skull-crushing machines) which is why there is no explicit mentioning of gassings the edited speeches. However, several contradictory documents were missed such as the not "retyped" Himmler speeches, the Schlegelberger note, the Luther Memorandum, and so on.

* The October 4 speech is in many way a completely different kind of beast from the other Himmler speeches in regards to both origin and contents. It contains problematic statements not just in the section on Jews but also everywhere in the document such as by appearing to support the L-3 forgery which appears to be a Western and not a Soviet forgery. It is also rather different regarding the Jews such as by not including any statements on Himmler ordering the killing of women/children which appear in the other speeches. This suggests that the October 4 speech was discovered by non-Soviets but thought to be too ambiguous. Hence, it was most likely edited again (heavily this time), by, for example, the Allied/Jewish prosecutor Kempner and his team (involved in many other irregularities). Thus, the October 4 speech has actually been edited two times. In addition, the forged sound recording was produced at this time.
Last edited by Monstrous on Tue Aug 11, 2015 1:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:05 am

Monstrous wrote:Aha! Monstrous may have identified the source of "Statistical Mechanic"'s confusion. SM apparently thinks that Himmler, apparently being a simpleton, could only discuss one Jewish topic in a particular speech. Thus, Himmler could not possibly in the same speech have discussed both the general expulsion of Jews and also the specific killings of some Jews (such as partisans and their relatives or those associated with Warsaw uprising).
No, I told you that Himmler discussed both "phases" of the process. The two phases are boldfaced here:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:. . . Himmler mentions 500,000 Jews cleared from Warsaw ghetto. Although the population of the ghetto reached that peak, it was not quite so large when the deportation actions began - in July 1942, about five months before the first resistance to the Germans by armed Jewish underground groups in the Warsaw ghetto. The first Warsaw action, called the Great Deportation, took about 300,000 Jews from the ghetto, nearly all of them to Treblinka. This action lasted from late July to mid September 1942.

Underground groups, to defend themselves in future such actions, organized, armed, and prepared defenses. This is common knowledge, for example, explained thusly on the USHMM website:
In response to the deportations, on July 28, 1942, several Jewish underground organizations created an armed self-defense unit known as the Jewish Combat Organization (Zydowska Organizacja Bojowa; ZOB). Rough estimates put the size of the ZOB at its formation at around 200 members. The Revisionist Party (right-wing Zionists known as the Betar) formed another resistance organization, the Jewish Military Union (Zydowski Zwiazek Wojskowy; ZZW).
In January 1943 now-armed and organized Jews resisted deportation - likely planned to take some 1000s of those remaining in the ghetto (35-50,000) to Trawniki and Poniatowa. When Himmler mentions 5 weeks of street fighting, he is referring to the final clearance of these 10s of 1000s of remaining Jews from the Warsaw ghetto, not the main deportation action against unarmed, unorganized, defenseless men, women, and children, which had occurred the previous year, in 1942. The street fighting in which two main armed fighting organizations tried to prevent the final destruction of the ghetto took place from 19 April to 16 May 1943 - about 40,000 Warsaw Jews were removed to Trawniki, Ponatiowa, Budzyn, the Krasnik camps, and Majdanek for slave labor; about 7,000 were taken to Treblinka to be murdered.
Oh, and here too:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Himmler was talking about the destruction of the Warsaw ghetto - and the 100s of 1000s of Jews who lived there - extending from July 1942 through spring 1943, capped by a five-week battle to remove the last Jews from the ghetto. By far, most of the Jews who lived in Warsaw ghetto in July 1942 were murdered by the Germans in three main killing actions - 1) the 300,000+ killed at Treblinka in summer/fall 1942, 2) the 7,000 killed at Treblinka, along with the 1000s killed in fighting in the ghetto, when the ghetto was finally destroyed in spring 1943, and 3) the 10s of 1000s shot in Action Erntefest in Lublin district in early November 1943.
And also here:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Not exactly, he speaks - loosely and in your translation confusedly - of the Warsaw ghetto deportations capped by the uprising - for the simple reason that there were not 100s of 1000s of Jews in Warsaw ghetto at the time of the uprising. No matter how Himmler put it. The full operation that "cleaned out the last big ghetto in Warsaw" (another bit of loose talk, as Lodz wasn't "cleaned out" until August 1944) began in summer 1942, months before there was any German fighting against Jewish self-defense groups. By referencing 100s of 1000s of Jews, Himmler is necessarily discussing the anti-Jewish "cleaning out" operation as a whole, which began in July 1942 and wound down in May 1943, and giving it his anti-Semitic twist, which you fall for, as a necessary operation to deal with (non)threats from the Jews.
Is distorting what I wrote your way to dodge replying to this request?
Statistical Mechanic wrote:In general, the cleaning out of the ghettos - Lublin, Krakow, Lviv also being mentioned - was an operation against the Jews as such, and not motivated by so-called anti-partisan aims, as you claim. You now need to explain to us how the ghetto-clearance operations in Lublin, Krakow, and Lviv fit your "theory," since Himmler highlighted these ghettos as well as Warsaw.
We're still waiting for a reply to how the German operations against Lublin, Krakow, and Lviv supposedly had anti-partisan aims.
Monstrous wrote:The supposed distinction between "self-defense units" and "partisans" is strange. Many partisans likely consider themselves to be acting in self-defense and from the viewpoint of a occupying force there is likely no distinction since both groups uses violence to resist the occupier.
Except that the Jewish self-defense squads were trapped in the ghetto . . . but you've now partially, in a warped way, come round to what I told you: in the case of Warsaw ghetto, there were "both the general expulsion of Jews and also the specific killings of some Jews," the general expulsion having nothing to do with your original claim that the clearance of 100s of 1000s mentioned by Himmler targeted partisan activity. It was a "general" attack on the Jews in Warsaw ghetto, launched prior to the formation and arming of the self-defense units in the ghetto, whilst the final destruction of the ghetto (which you still do misrepresent) was an attempt to destroy the ghetto as a whole, which met resistance (self-defense) and thus became a fight, which surprised the Germans for the tenacity of the resisters.

In other words, resisters or not, the Germans decided to "clean" Jews out of the ghettos in the General-Gouvernement.

You might do well to read about the deportations of July-September 1942 and try finding evidence of Jewish resistance, armed groups being cleared out, anti-partisan operations. Your continued harping on this theme is laughable.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26779
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:15 am

Monstrous wrote:The Monstrous Himmler speeches - Einsatzgruppen Reports Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory

Monstrous can now reveal a grand unified conspiracy theory integrating the speeches by Himmler and the reports by the Einsatzgruppen.

* Many of the Einsatzgruppen reports were forged/edited by the Soviets, copied many times, and were then inserted into various German archives in order to be discovered by non-Soviets (such as when they arrived in Berlin which had originally been captured solely by the Soviets) or were simply stated to have been found by the Soviets themselves in the archives. They were probably based on some original Einsatzgruppen documents that served as models but with added invented or exaggerated numbers of Jews killed (with Believers claiming 1.5 - 3 million Jews killed by the Einsatzgruppen). They may also have been edited by excluding from the original documents statements to the effects that many of those killed were suspected communists (Jews or not Jews) accused of participating in the communist atrocities, reprisal killings of both Jews and non-Jews, killings done by local rather than Germans in pogroms, and so on. The Soviets also added the allegation that these documents had been widely circulated in order to implicate the German leadership in general in the Holocaust and for use during the trials against specific individuals. In general this editing was often rather subtle with only minor parts of the original documents being changed (such as by increasing some of the numbers). However, the combined large amounts of changes made it difficult to avoid various inconsistencies which have been discovered by revisionists but which are ignored by the Believers. However, the most important evidence against these large scale killings having taken place is the absence of any found large mass graves (small WWII mass graves on the Eastern Front can be almost anything including killed partisans) and the simple physical impossibility of the described clean-up operation ("Aktion 1005") as discussed in various revisionists articles/books and with these revisionist arguments being unanswered by the Believers.

* At the same time the Soviets surveyed other documents, in particular those in the SS archives, and edited/deleted those to fit with with edited/forged EG documents. In particular, several Himmler speeches were "retyped" to fit with the EG documents. At this time there were still no agreed on consensus on how Jews were killed in the camps (with witnesses claiming methods such as hot steam, electrocution on conveyor belts, and skull-crushing machines) which is why there is no explicit mentioning of gassings the edited speeches. However, several contradictory documents were missed such as the not "retyped" Himmler speeches, the Schlegelberger note, the Luther Memorandum, and so on.

* The October 4 speech is in many way a completely different kind of beast from the other Himmler speeches in regards to both origin and contents. It contains problematic statements not just in the section on Jews but also everywhere in the document such as by appearing to support the L-3 forgery which appears to be a Western and not a Soviet forgery. It is also rather different regarding the Jews such as by not including any statements on Himmler ordering the killing of women/children which appear in the other speeches. This suggests that the October 4 speech was discovered by non-Soviets but thought to be too ambiguous. Hence, it was most likely edited again (heavily this time), by, for example, the Allied/Jewish prosecutor Kempner and his team (involved in many other irregularities). Thus, the October 4 speech has actually been edited two times. In addition, the forged sound recording was produced at this time.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Pro tip: repeating assertions you've failed to prove and peppering them with may have's and probably's and most likely's do not a grand unified theory make.

Nothing new here. Same old baseless assertion. You are correct about one thing: you're well off the deep end into CT's. Get out the tin foil hats . . .
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

Xcalibur
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Xcalibur » Tue Aug 11, 2015 12:31 pm

Monstrous wrote:The Monstrous Himmler speeches - Einsatzgruppen Reports Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory

Monstrous can now reveal a grand unified conspiracy theory integrating the speeches by Himmler and the reports by the Einsatzgruppen.

* Many of the Einsatzgruppen reports were forged/edited by the Soviets, copied many times, and were then inserted into various German archives in order to be discovered by non-Soviets (such as when they arrived in Berlin which had originally been captured solely by the Soviets) or were simply stated to have been found by the Soviets themselves in the archives. They were probably based on some original Einsatzgruppen documents that served as models but with added invented or exaggerated numbers of Jews killed (with Believers claiming 1.5 - 3 million Jews killed by the Einsatzgruppen). They may also have been edited by excluding from the original documents statements to the effects that many of those killed were suspected communists (Jews or not Jews) accused of participating in the communist atrocities, reprisal killings of both Jews and non-Jews, killings done by locals rather than Germans in pogroms, and so on. The Soviets also added the allegation that these documents had been widely circulated in order to implicate the German leadership in general in the Holocaust and for use during the trials against specific individuals. In general this editing was often rather subtle with only minor parts of the original documents being changed (such as by increasing some of the numbers). However, the combined large amounts of changes made it difficult to avoid various inconsistencies which have been discovered by revisionists but which are ignored by the Believers. But the most important evidence against these large scale killings having taken place is the absence of any found large mass graves (small WWII mass graves on the Eastern Front can be almost anything including killed partisans) and the simple physical impossibility of the described clean-up operation ("Aktion 1005") as discussed in various revisionists articles/books and with these revisionist arguments being unanswered by the Believers.

* At the same time the Soviets surveyed other documents, in particular those in the SS archives, and edited/deleted those to fit with with edited/forged EG documents. In particular, several Himmler speeches were "retyped" to fit with the EG documents. At this time there were still no agreed on consensus on how Jews were killed in the camps (with witnesses claiming methods such as hot steam, electrocution on conveyor belts, and skull-crushing machines) which is why there is no explicit mentioning of gassings the edited speeches. However, several contradictory documents were missed such as the not "retyped" Himmler speeches, the Schlegelberger note, the Luther Memorandum, and so on.

* The October 4 speech is in many way a completely different kind of beast from the other Himmler speeches in regards to both origin and contents. It contains problematic statements not just in the section on Jews but also everywhere in the document such as by appearing to support the L-3 forgery which appears to be a Western and not a Soviet forgery. It is also rather different regarding the Jews such as by not including any statements on Himmler ordering the killing of women/children which appear in the other speeches. This suggests that the October 4 speech was discovered by non-Soviets but thought to be too ambiguous. Hence, it was most likely edited again (heavily this time), by, for example, the Allied/Jewish prosecutor Kempner and his team (involved in many other irregularities). Thus, the October 4 speech has actually been edited two times. In addition, the forged sound recording was produced at this time.
:senile:

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5072
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Jeff_36 » Tue Aug 11, 2015 5:48 pm

Monstrous wrote:Aha! Monstrous may have identified the source of "Statistical Mechanic"'s confusion. SM apparently thinks that Himmler, apparently being a simpleton, could only discuss one Jewish topic in a particular speech. Thus, Himmler could not possibly in the same speech have discussed both the general expulsion of Jews and also the specific killings of some Jews (such as partisans and their relatives or those associated with Warsaw uprising).

The supposed distinction between "self-defense units" and "partisans" is strange. Many partisans likely consider themselves to be acting in self-defense and from the viewpoint of a occupying force there is likely no distinction since both groups uses violence to resist the occupier.
Dude, do you even history bro?

The self defense units in Warsaw were extremely poorly armed and were in no shape to seek out the German occupation force and engage it in any way. The fact that you don't know this is not a good sign at all. The ghetto was isolated and far from a base of partisans (I have already shown that the Polish partisan movement was unlikely to help the Jews and were antisemitic, often extremely so).

The average Oklahoma household has more guns than the Warsaw Ghetto did in 1943

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1180
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Mary Q Contrary » Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:32 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Mary Q Contrary wrote:
nickterry wrote:
Monstrous wrote:"some of the most important Nuremberg documents are now generally acknowledged to be fraudulent. /47

For example, defense attorney Dr. Boehm protested to the Tribunal that Nuremberg document 1721-PS, which purportedly confirms attacks by stormtroopers against Jewish synagogues in November 1938, is a clumsy forgery. He went on to explain his reasons at some length. /48
LOL so a defense attorney alleges forgery of documents that primarily record the destruction of synagogues known to have been destroyed on Kristallnacht. Are you serious?
Several Nuremberg documents based on the purported "death bed confession" of Mauthausen commandant Franz Ziereis, are demonstrably fraudulent. (Nuremberg documents 1515-PS, 3870-PS, and NO-1973.) These documents supposedly prove systematic killings of hundreds of thousands of people by gassing and other means at Mauthausen and Hartheim. /49
The Ziereis statement isn't a Nazi document, doofus. It was written down after the war by an ex-Mauthausen prisoner.
So this death bed confession has absolutely no value at all.
Almost forty years after the Tribunal handed down its verdicts, Nuremberg document USSR-378 was definitively exposed as a fraud. It is a purported record of numerous private conversations with Hitler by Hermann Rauschning, a former National Socialist official in Danzig. In brutal language, the Führer supposedly revealed his most intimate thoughts and secret plans for world conquest. Rauschning's "memoir" was published in 1939 in Britain under the title Hitler Speaks, and in the United States in 1940 as The Voice of Destruction. It was this US edition that was accepted in evidence at Nuremberg as proof of the "guiding principles of the Nazi regime."

Chief British prosecutor Sir Hartley Shawcross and his Soviet colleagues cited numerous quotations from it. Defendant Baldur von Schirach contested its authenticity, but defense attorney Pelckmann (who did not know any better) accepted this "evidence" as authentic. /50 In 1983 Swiss historian Wolfgang Hänel established that the "memoir" is entirely fraudulent. Rauschning never had even a single private meeting with Hitler. /51
This, too, is not a Nazi document.
So these documents have no value either.
Dimwit, the allegation made by Monstrous was that these were some of the many forgeries of German documents. Monstrous gave a number of references to things which were not German documents and not forgeries. To prove, as Monstrous quoted, that "some of the most important Nuremberg documents are now generally acknowledged to be fraudulent." The issue wasn't the value, or lack thereof, of the examples: the issue is that they were not examples of the point Monstrous thinks they proved.
Maybe they're not examples of forged German documents. But in proving that they are technically not German documents and that they are technically not forged documents, NickTerry showed us that these documents are completely worthless as evidence of anything. Fortunately, nobody with any brains at all uses the Ziereis statement as evidence of anything. So we're all good.
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1180
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Mary Q Contrary » Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:37 pm

Monstrous wrote:Aha! Monstrous may have identified the source of "Statistical Mechanic"'s confusion. SM apparently thinks that Himmler, apparently being a simpleton, could only discuss one Jewish topic in a particular speech. Thus, Himmler could not possibly in the same speech have discussed both the general expulsion of Jews and also the specific killings of some Jews (such as partisans and their relatives or those associated with Warsaw uprising).

The supposed distinction between "self-defense units" and "partisans" is strange. Many partisans likely consider themselves to be acting in self-defense and from the viewpoint of a occupying force there is likely no distinction since both groups uses violence to resist the occupier.
Yes, SM's distinction reminds me of the difference between a "terrorist" and a "freedom fighter."
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky