Posen Speech

Discussions
User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
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 Jul 14, 2015 9:18 pm

double post, sorry, I don't know how it happened!
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Tue Jul 14, 2015 9:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
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 Jul 14, 2015 9:24 pm

Monstrous wrote:The Party Program states nothing about granting resident alien status to non-citizens. They MAY be allowed to be in the country, implicitly this is to be case only if they work and are considered useful, since the Program also states that all citizens who can must work.
Uh, do you know what the word "like" connotes - a comparison, not an identity?
Like "resident aliens."
I said that what the party program described was "like" resident aliens, to help you grasp the simple point I was trying to make, not to propose an exact legal status. The party program did NOT say exactly what the technical legal arrangement would be, nor did it say one word about evacuation, as you are arguing; what it said was about conditions under which non-citizens could live in the Reich.

You now seem to be parsing to an absurd level - that Himmler was referring to the party program statement on the conditions under which non-citizens should be allowed to remain in the Reich to explain about evacuations of non-working non-citizens (even though working Jews were expelled - have you, e.g., ever heard of the Fabrik-Aktion? you might want to learn about it) - evacuations that are not mentioned in the party program!

Even paraphrasing your idiocy is headache producing.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:30 pm

Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote: That is not what he stated. He stated that they would be exterminated totally. The term "ausrottung" has but one meaning and one meaning alone.
Lots of arguments regarding the speeches seems to depend on this fundamental interpretation. Which is of course incorrect:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Aus ... ument.html
http://www.cwporter.com/ausrottung.htm
It is absolutely a reference to killing. Period. Any facsimile of an alternative suggestion kills your credibility. Every native German speaker I have ever known has stated the exact same thing.

Maybe if you stop reading CW Porter trash you would see the truth.
If you had actually bothered to read what Irving states, you would have realized that Irving is arguing that the meaning of the word has changed.
BS. It meant one thing then as well. You will find many uses of the word from the 1940's that were clearly in referece to extermination. Hitler ordering that the American divisions in the Ardennes be "ausrottung" is not a reference to their evacuation or resettlement. :lol:

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:31 pm

NathanC wrote:His credibility was already shredded the moment he asserted that the IMT defendants were "tortured". I'll bet he thinks IMT was the only trial against Nazi criminals and that historians take its findings as "gospel"

Worthless.
The ones who were (Pohl, Kaltbrunner) complained about it openly. Frank and VDBZ did not.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:32 pm

Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote: I won't repeat myself on the use of "Programm," but the Party Program actually says that non-citizen were to live in Germany as guests and would be subject to laws as foreigners. The party program doesn't say non-citizens would be "evacuated." Face it, Himmler wasn't giving a technical recounting of planks of the party platform and how they'd been fulfilled. This notion you've got stuck on is really silly.
Actually it states that "Non-citizens may live in Germany only as guests and must be subject to laws for aliens." No right to be in Germany and guests are usually expected to leave eventually, Jews being expelled is compatible with the Program unlike a genocide.
You are stretching this so thin that it's snapping. The Program had nothing in it that related to evacuation or expulsion. It in fact contained the opposite.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:33 pm

Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote: It is not unusual, of course, for re-typing to occur in the days of typewriters (Irving's claim was war-time re-typing).
Irving made no claim as to when the re-typing occurred. Yes, maybe there is a perfectly innocent explanation for re-typing just the critical parts of the speech. Or not. The fact is that this has grave implications for the reliability of the official speech version.
I am not saying this is a forgery, I think that's unlikely
From the horses mouth. He explicitly claimed wartime retyping by Himmler.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:36 pm

Even assuming that the transcript is correct, then Engel stated he heard Himmler state he had ordered children to be killed. Other sources has also stated that Himmler ordered child partisans or children of partisans to be killed so as to not grow up as avengers. A war crime for sure (but not a a genocide) but different from deliberate Allied bombing of German civilians?
[/quote]
Very different. Deliberate killing of children vs. tragic collateral damage. But this thread is not about that. You may open another one here if you like.
Actually, my point is not that Engel was tortured but that the transcripts cannot be trusted. An organization prepared to use torture would hardly hesitate at editing or forging text transcripts.
WOW. So why keep records of interrogations where Kaltbrunner and Stuckart denied all knowlage or complicity? That really hits your credibility hard.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:38 pm

Monstrous wrote:
NathanC wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote: That is not what he stated. He stated that they would be exterminated totally. The term "ausrottung" has but one meaning and one meaning alone.
Lots of arguments regarding the speeches seems to depend on this fundamental interpretation. Which is of course incorrect:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Aus ... ument.html
http://www.cwporter.com/ausrottung.htm
It is absolutely a reference to killing. Period. Any facsimile of an alternative suggestion kills your credibility. Every native German speaker I have ever known has stated the exact same thing.

Maybe if you stop reading CW Porter trash you would see the truth.
If you had actually bothered to read what Irving states, you would have realized that Irving is arguing that the meaning of the word has changed.
If you weren't a complete idiot, you would stop wasting everyone's time with your pointless nitpicking and look at the specific context that the word was used.

Totally worthless.
Indeed, let us look at the context. Which is a section titled "The evacuation of the Jews" and a sentence starting with "I am thinking now of the evacuation of the Jews..."
....the extermination of the Jewish people.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:43 pm

Good catch with Irving's forgery statement, as with Berger, Jordan, Wahl, and Engel, Monstrous's serves keep turning around into own-aces!
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:50 pm

Monstrous wrote:Generally, you are placing way to much emphasis on witnesses testimony which is the worst form of evidence due to the fallacies of human memory. Of course, this is to be expected of Believers who mainly believe various absurd witness stories such as mass murder by way of diesel exhaust and so on.
No one claims diesel exhaust was used.
Engel seem to have believed that false Allied propaganda stories of extermination camps in Germany proper such as at Belsen and Buchenwald. Should official history be changed to reflect this?
he never said that at all.
Here are two other witnesses who denies Himmler stating any genocide:
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Posen_spee ... olf_Jordan
Liar. Wahl stated that he missed the conference due to illness and said that he couldn't imagine Himmler stating it in public, which is his perception. Jordan stated that could not remember anything.
Both men were gaulitiers in Germany itself and were far out of the loop.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:51 pm

Speer in his old age stated that it was Hitler and not Himmler who gave the October 6 speech. Should official history be changed to reflect this?
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/15230/lot/621/
"THERE IS NO DOUBT: I WAS PRESENT WHENHIMMLER ANNOUNCED ON 6 OCTOBER 1943 THAT ALL JEWS WOULD BE KILLED": SPEER CONFESSES THAT HE MUST HAVE KNOWN OF THE FINAL SOLUTION.
You either did not pay attention or you lied.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:53 pm

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote: Regarding, Waffen-SS, Slavs are not just Russians. For example Ukrainians were recruited in large numbers well before the Posen speeches. Then there were the Eastern European Slavic allies.
Himmler adressed that in the speech, stating "they fight for us, but never forget that they are slavs, less than us" it was a matter of convenience at the time, given the disastrous state of the German war effort. They would have sent a {!#%@} turnip to fight at that point. Anyway: The 14th SS division was only founded six months before Posen.
Regarding the audio recording, whoever may have impersonated Himmler during the Posen speeches would have had little difficulty doing the same for the few other Himmler speeches allegedly recorded on discs from this period. Every single one of the surviving "Himmler" speeches (discs and tape) could have been recorded in a week or two by an impersonator. Let us remember that that there are voice actors who do this every day for a living (dubbing foreign films and so on).
That Himmler seldom made public speeches would make it easier to impersonate Himmler since so few comparisons could be made. One could even imagine that all of the few remaining official recordings of Himmler are forgeries which would make an audio comparison impossible.

Anyway, the audio quality on the dics is so poor that any voice analysis is difficult to make even assuming there are any genuine audio recording of Himmler left. Any person with a somewhat similar voice would be sufficient.

Yet another possibility is that no actor was used but that only selected parts of an original (tape) audio recording was played out in order to record a new disc audio recording. Then you actually have Himmler's voice. The simplest solution.
1. the technology you mention was not in existence at the time.

2. Himmlers voice would have been tough to fake due to the lack of reference materiel. I do a mean Al Pacino impression, but that's because I've seen Heat about thirty times. The reference materiel for such an impersonation of Himmler was not present. There would have been no inkling on what Himmler talked like among allied soldiers.

3. Your suggestions that all Himmler speeches were faked: LOLOLOLOL :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: so you are suggesting that they faked 40 speeches going back to the 1930's, dozens of hours of talking, and only include a minute long reference to genocide? Why not lay it on thick the whole time. The voice in the Posen recording is clearly the same as the voice in all the other Himmler speeches, most of which are 100% about random things.
Why couldn't all the other Himmler speeches be used as reference material?
They were not heard by the German public, only by other SS and Nazi party men. To perfect an impression one needs practice.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 Jul 14, 2015 11:57 pm

Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Monstrous wrote:Irving speculates which he is not particularly good at. But you're right, Irving did say that the re-typing was done during the war. There's no reason to think that the re-typing had to do with changing what Himmler said; nor is there any reason to think that it was done postwar, least of all by Kempner. I want to think so - but I have absolutely nothing except my biases to go on. The facts remain that the types version and the audio match - and that I was wrong about what Irving claimed, and I thank you for correcting me. Although I really appreciate that you called me out for lying, I must say that I will keep changing my story every time you catch me lying.
ftfy
I guess forgeries are to be expected from Believers. Even of quotes. Here is what I actually stated "Irving speculates which he is not particularly good at. What is factual and obviously not denied is that the critical parts of the speech have been retyped. This may have occurred during the war (to correct errors or as part of a Himmler conspiracy) or after the war (as part of a Kempner conspiracy). Impossible to say, The fact remains that the official speech version cannot be considered reliable."
Well, when I explain that I ftfy it is hardly a forgery!

I do want to thank you for clarifying what you said, no one would have guessed.

Is there a more skillful chimp out there you want to hand this off to?
No denial, so we can conclude that the official text version of the speech if basically worthless.

Then there is the audio version, with no proof of authenticity, admitted as "evidence" based on Berger when hearing the first lines first denying that the voice was Himmler, and then when hearing the first few lines again stating that it "might" be Himmler, demonstrating the show trial nature of the trials.
You complete imbecile, if it was a show trial you would have him limp to the stand after being broken, confess to everything, and go get shot. Do you know anything about real show trials?

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 12:00 am

Irving speculates which he is not particularly good at. What is factual and obviously not denied is that the critical parts of the speech have been retyped. This may have occurred during the war (to correct errors or as part of a Himmler conspiracy) or after the war (as part of a Kempner conspiracy). Impossible to say, The fact remains that the official speech version cannot be considered reliable.
Irving is an individual that has not hesitated to cry forgery on many occasions. He explicitly denies that this is a forgery. Full stop.

re your source: The original letter clearly states that it was Himmler.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 12:08 am

Having heard about Woyrsch's testimony telling everything about the speech
I have not heard of this testimony, could you extrapolate a bit?

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 12:13 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Monstrous wrote:Speer in his old age stated that it was Hitler and not Himmler who gave the October 6 speech. Should official history be changed to reflect this?
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/15230/lot/621/
According to The Guardian,
In the letter to Jeanty, written on December 23 1971, Speer wrote: "There is no doubt - I was present as Himmler announced on October 6 1943 that all Jews would be killed"
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/m ... teconnolly.
My source gives a more detailed account of the letter. Speer stated that it was Hitler who gave the speech and the whole letter and the surrounding circumstances seem weird in various ways. Demonstrates the little value witness testimonies have. Especially long after the events.
Please quote directly what you are talking about.
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/15230/lot/621/ in the top left corner you can clearly see that it is Himmler he is referring to.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
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 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 2:11 am

Oh, you mean you can't use a typo in the description of the letter to try to put a point across? Jeez.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 2:17 am

no typo, it's very obviously "Himmler"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
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 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 2:21 am

Jeff_36 wrote:
Having heard about Woyrsch's testimony telling everything about the speech
I have not heard of this testimony, could you extrapolate a bit?
Green Series, vol XIII, p 474, question for the witness Berger, “Witness, yesterday the witness von Woyrsch told us everything necessary about this notorious Poznan speech. . . .” And then, after citing the document #, on p 475, the question is put to Berger whether he too was present at Himmler's speech and whether he can confirm what von Woyrsch had told the tribunal. The footnote says that Udo von Woyrsch was a witness for the defense and that his testimony “is recored in the mimeographed transcript, 20 Mary 1948, pages 5921-5972.” That's all I know.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
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 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 2:24 am

Jeff_36 wrote:no typo, it's very obviously "Himmler"
Below the facsimile of the letter, in the the "FOOTNOTES," we read
The often febrile tone of Jeanty's correspondence with Speer is set by the latter's letter of 23 December 1971, written soon after their first meeting. Here Speer acknowledges that he must indeed have been present at the Posen Conference of 6 October 1943 (at which Himmler explicitly announced the Final Solution with the words 'I also want to refer here very frankly to a very difficult matter. We can now very openly talk about this among ourselves, and yet we will never discuss this publicly... I am now referring to the evacuation of the Jews, to the extermination of the Jewish people'). Speer tells Jeanty that this is going to be a very difficult letter, one of the most serious of his life. After assuring her that he has just read with enormous emotion her La Peine de Vivre, and that during the days he was reading it she continued to speak to him, and that their two days together were so good for him that he felt better, stronger and calmer, he then tells her that he received some news just before her departure that upset him deeply. For some time he held out hopes that this news would not be true. He asked the Federal Archives in Koblenz to check it for him. But there can be no doubt: he was present when Hitler announced on 6 October 1943 that all Jews would be killed. . . .
I assumed that this is what Monstrous confused with the contents of the letter, which is why I asked Monstrous to provide the exact quotation referred to. We will wait and see what Monstrous says.

I mean, the law of large numbers says that Monstrous is bound to get one right at some point.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 2:26 am

The footnote says that Udo von Woyrsch was a witness for the defense
As a defense witness he would have been fully expected to say that it was not discussed.

But no. Great find.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27488
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: Posen Speech

Post by scrmbldggs » Wed Jul 15, 2015 2:27 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Oh, you mean you can't use a typo in the description of the letter to try to put a point across? Jeez.
:rotfl:
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

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

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Mary Q Contrary » Wed Jul 15, 2015 7:00 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote: That is not what he stated. He stated that they would be exterminated totally. The term "ausrottung" has but one meaning and one meaning alone.
Lots of arguments regarding the speeches seems to depend on this fundamental interpretation. Which is of course incorrect:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Aus ... ument.html
http://www.cwporter.com/ausrottung.htm
It is absolutely a reference to killing. Period. Any facsimile of an alternative suggestion kills your credibility. Every native German speaker I have ever known has stated the exact same thing.

Maybe if you stop reading CW Porter trash you would see the truth.
If you had actually bothered to read what Irving states, you would have realized that Irving is arguing that the meaning of the word has changed.
BS. It meant one thing then as well. You will find many uses of the word from the 1940's that were clearly in referece to extermination. Hitler ordering that the American divisions in the Ardennes be "ausrottung" is not a reference to their evacuation or resettlement. :lol:
So Hitler ordered his troops to kill all the Americans in the Ardennes? Forcing them out of their positions and seizing control of the area wasn't going to cut it for the fuhrer? He wanted them dead?
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 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 7:03 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:Generally, you are placing way to much emphasis on witnesses testimony which is the worst form of evidence due to the fallacies of human memory. Of course, this is to be expected of Believers who mainly believe various absurd witness stories such as mass murder by way of diesel exhaust and so on.
No one claims diesel exhaust was used.
Gerstein did. I'm pretty sure Eliyu Rosenberg did as well. You should familiarize yourself with the literature.
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Thu Jul 16, 2015 2:01 am

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote: That is not what he stated. He stated that they would be exterminated totally. The term "ausrottung" has but one meaning and one meaning alone.
Lots of arguments regarding the speeches seems to depend on this fundamental interpretation. Which is of course incorrect:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Aus ... ument.html
http://www.cwporter.com/ausrottung.htm
It is absolutely a reference to killing. Period. Any facsimile of an alternative suggestion kills your credibility. Every native German speaker I have ever known has stated the exact same thing.

Maybe if you stop reading CW Porter trash you would see the truth.
If you had actually bothered to read what Irving states, you would have realized that Irving is arguing that the meaning of the word has changed.
BS. It meant one thing then as well. You will find many uses of the word from the 1940's that were clearly in referece to extermination. Hitler ordering that the American divisions in the Ardennes be "ausrottung" is not a reference to their evacuation or resettlement. :lol:
So Hitler ordered his troops to kill all the Americans in the Ardennes? Forcing them out of their positions and seizing control of the area wasn't going to cut it for the fuhrer? He wanted them dead?
He was referring to the divisions trapped in the Bulge. They had nowhere else to go.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Thu Jul 16, 2015 2:02 am

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:Generally, you are placing way to much emphasis on witnesses testimony which is the worst form of evidence due to the fallacies of human memory. Of course, this is to be expected of Believers who mainly believe various absurd witness stories such as mass murder by way of diesel exhaust and so on.
No one claims diesel exhaust was used.
Gerstein did. I'm pretty sure Eliyu Rosenberg did as well. You should familiarize yourself with the literature.
They were both wrong and both were indirect witnesses. Direct witnesses always claimed gasoline.

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

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Mary Q Contrary » Thu Jul 16, 2015 4:39 am

Jeff_36 wrote:
Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:Generally, you are placing way to much emphasis on witnesses testimony which is the worst form of evidence due to the fallacies of human memory. Of course, this is to be expected of Believers who mainly believe various absurd witness stories such as mass murder by way of diesel exhaust and so on.
No one claims diesel exhaust was used.
Gerstein did. I'm pretty sure Eliyu Rosenberg did as well. You should familiarize yourself with the literature.
They were both wrong and both were indirect witnesses. Direct witnesses always claimed gasoline.
They were both direct witnesses. If none of the witnesses claim diesel, why do Yad Vashem and the USHMM tell us diesel motors were used to generate the gas?
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 » Thu Jul 16, 2015 4:41 am

Jeff_36 wrote:
Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote: That is not what he stated. He stated that they would be exterminated totally. The term "ausrottung" has but one meaning and one meaning alone.
Lots of arguments regarding the speeches seems to depend on this fundamental interpretation. Which is of course incorrect:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Aus ... ument.html
http://www.cwporter.com/ausrottung.htm
It is absolutely a reference to killing. Period. Any facsimile of an alternative suggestion kills your credibility. Every native German speaker I have ever known has stated the exact same thing.

Maybe if you stop reading CW Porter trash you would see the truth.
If you had actually bothered to read what Irving states, you would have realized that Irving is arguing that the meaning of the word has changed.
BS. It meant one thing then as well. You will find many uses of the word from the 1940's that were clearly in referece to extermination. Hitler ordering that the American divisions in the Ardennes be "ausrottung" is not a reference to their evacuation or resettlement. :lol:
So Hitler ordered his troops to kill all the Americans in the Ardennes? Forcing them out of their positions and seizing control of the area wasn't going to cut it for the fuhrer? He wanted them dead?
He was referring to the divisions trapped in the Bulge. They had nowhere else to go.
So Hitler ordered his troops to kill all the Americans trapped in the Bulge who had nowhere else to go? Forcing them out of their positions and seizing control of the area wasn't going to cut it for the fuhrer? He wanted them dead?
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Thu Jul 16, 2015 4:47 am

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:Generally, you are placing way to much emphasis on witnesses testimony which is the worst form of evidence due to the fallacies of human memory. Of course, this is to be expected of Believers who mainly believe various absurd witness stories such as mass murder by way of diesel exhaust and so on.
No one claims diesel exhaust was used.
Gerstein did. I'm pretty sure Eliyu Rosenberg did as well. You should familiarize yourself with the literature.
They were both wrong and both were indirect witnesses. Direct witnesses always claimed gasoline.
They were both direct witnesses. If none of the witnesses claim diesel, why do Yad Vashem and the USHMM tell us diesel motors were used to generate the gas?
Neither witnessed nor handled the engine. The engine operators, the ones who knew said engines as intimately as anyone possibly can, and who dealt with/fixed the engines every day without exception described them as gasoline.

You're not winning this one.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Thu Jul 16, 2015 4:48 am

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote: That is not what he stated. He stated that they would be exterminated totally. The term "ausrottung" has but one meaning and one meaning alone.
Lots of arguments regarding the speeches seems to depend on this fundamental interpretation. Which is of course incorrect:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Aus ... ument.html
http://www.cwporter.com/ausrottung.htm
It is absolutely a reference to killing. Period. Any facsimile of an alternative suggestion kills your credibility. Every native German speaker I have ever known has stated the exact same thing.

Maybe if you stop reading CW Porter trash you would see the truth.
If you had actually bothered to read what Irving states, you would have realized that Irving is arguing that the meaning of the word has changed.
BS. It meant one thing then as well. You will find many uses of the word from the 1940's that were clearly in referece to extermination. Hitler ordering that the American divisions in the Ardennes be "ausrottung" is not a reference to their evacuation or resettlement. :lol:
So Hitler ordered his troops to kill all the Americans in the Ardennes? Forcing them out of their positions and seizing control of the area wasn't going to cut it for the fuhrer? He wanted them dead?
He was referring to the divisions trapped in the Bulge. They had nowhere else to go.
So Hitler ordered his troops to kill all the Americans trapped in the Bulge who had nowhere else to go? Forcing them out of their positions and seizing control of the area wasn't going to cut it for the fuhrer? He wanted them dead?
His orders were to "wipe them out, division by division". They were encircled, they had nowhere else to go, time to crush the pocket.

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

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Thu Jul 16, 2015 12:52 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:no typo, it's very obviously "Himmler"
Below the facsimile of the letter, in the the "FOOTNOTES," we read
The often febrile tone of Jeanty's correspondence with Speer is set by the latter's letter of 23 December 1971, written soon after their first meeting. Here Speer acknowledges that he must indeed have been present at the Posen Conference of 6 October 1943 (at which Himmler explicitly announced the Final Solution with the words 'I also want to refer here very frankly to a very difficult matter. We can now very openly talk about this among ourselves, and yet we will never discuss this publicly... I am now referring to the evacuation of the Jews, to the extermination of the Jewish people'). Speer tells Jeanty that this is going to be a very difficult letter, one of the most serious of his life. After assuring her that he has just read with enormous emotion her La Peine de Vivre, and that during the days he was reading it she continued to speak to him, and that their two days together were so good for him that he felt better, stronger and calmer, he then tells her that he received some news just before her departure that upset him deeply. For some time he held out hopes that this news would not be true. He asked the Federal Archives in Koblenz to check it for him. But there can be no doubt: he was present when Hitler announced on 6 October 1943 that all Jews would be killed. . . .
I assumed that this is what Monstrous confused with the contents of the letter, which is why I asked Monstrous to provide the exact quotation referred to. We will wait and see what Monstrous says.

I mean, the law of large numbers says that Monstrous is bound to get one right at some point.
Yes, Speer stated that it was HITLER who gave the October 6 speech. Evidence for the unreliability of witnesses. There is no "confusion" by me. There is even a footnote explaining that Speer misremembered: "As will be clear from the context, Speer's letter about the Poznan Conference refers to Himmler rather than Hitler."
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/15230/lot/621/

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

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Thu Jul 16, 2015 12:58 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
NathanC wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote: That is not what he stated. He stated that they would be exterminated totally. The term "ausrottung" has but one meaning and one meaning alone.
Lots of arguments regarding the speeches seems to depend on this fundamental interpretation. Which is of course incorrect:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Aus ... ument.html
http://www.cwporter.com/ausrottung.htm
It is absolutely a reference to killing. Period. Any facsimile of an alternative suggestion kills your credibility. Every native German speaker I have ever known has stated the exact same thing.

Maybe if you stop reading CW Porter trash you would see the truth.
If you had actually bothered to read what Irving states, you would have realized that Irving is arguing that the meaning of the word has changed.
If you weren't a complete idiot, you would stop wasting everyone's time with your pointless nitpicking and look at the specific context that the word was used.

Totally worthless.
Indeed, let us look at the context. Which is a section titled "The evacuation of the Jews" and a sentence starting with "I am thinking now of the evacuation of the Jews..."
....the extermination of the Jewish people.
This seems to be a very sensitive and embarrassing topic for Believers. No factual argument against Irving's or Porter's arguments has yet been presented.

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

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Thu Jul 16, 2015 1:04 pm

Jeff_36 wrote: BS. It meant one thing then as well. You will find many uses of the word from the 1940's that were clearly in referece to extermination. Hitler ordering that the American divisions in the Ardennes be "ausrottung" is not a reference to their evacuation or resettlement. :lol:
Failure of logical thinking. Even if ausrottung could mean killing, then this does not mean that it always meant killing. Irving/Potter has demonstrated this conclusively.

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

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Thu Jul 16, 2015 1:08 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:
Irving speculates which he is not particularly good at. What is factual and obviously not denied is that the critical parts of the speech have been retyped. This may have occurred during the war (to correct errors or as part of a Himmler conspiracy) or after the war (as part of a Kempner conspiracy). Impossible to say, The fact remains that the official speech version cannot be considered reliable.
Irving is an individual that has not hesitated to cry forgery on many occasions. He explicitly denies that this is a forgery. Full stop.
"All we can say is that for some reason this page was retyped at a different date. We do not whether it was retyped during the war, which is the likelihood. We do not know what has been inserted or taken out. On this occasion we do not have the other transcripts of that speech. So that is a page that I am unhappy about pinning a capital issue on. You do not often find a document that has been so clearly tampered with as that."
http://hdot.org/en/trial/transcripts/da ... 6-110.html

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

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Thu Jul 16, 2015 1:16 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote: I won't repeat myself on the use of "Programm," but the Party Program actually says that non-citizen were to live in Germany as guests and would be subject to laws as foreigners. The party program doesn't say non-citizens would be "evacuated." Face it, Himmler wasn't giving a technical recounting of planks of the party platform and how they'd been fulfilled. This notion you've got stuck on is really silly.
Actually it states that "Non-citizens may live in Germany only as guests and must be subject to laws for aliens." No right to be in Germany and guests are usually expected to leave eventually, Jews being expelled is compatible with the Program unlike a genocide.
You are stretching this so thin that it's snapping. The Program had nothing in it that related to evacuation or expulsion. It in fact contained the opposite.
If the party program does not contain anything supporting expulsion or genocide, then we must conclude that a) Himmler did not know the most basic NS text, or b) the speech text is a forgery by a particularly inept forger (supported by numerous other absurdities).

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

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Monstrous » Thu Jul 16, 2015 1:19 pm

This thread has seen a series of devastating defeats for the Believers. Some high points:
1. The critical page of the text of speech has been retyped, essentially making it useless as evidence.
2. The audio recording has always been useless as evidence since there is no evidence at all for it being authentic.
3. "Ausrottung" did not necessarily or even primarily mean "extermination" in the 1930s-1940s.
4. In the second Posen speech Himmler is talking about partisans and their relatives. Not Jews in general.
5. Speer revealed to think that it was Hitler who gave the second Posen speech, thus revealing the vagaries of the human memory and the limited value of witness testimonies.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Thu Jul 16, 2015 3:08 pm

Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:no typo, it's very obviously "Himmler"
Below the facsimile of the letter, in the the "FOOTNOTES," we read
The often febrile tone of Jeanty's correspondence with Speer is set by the latter's letter of 23 December 1971, written soon after their first meeting. Here Speer acknowledges that he must indeed have been present at the Posen Conference of 6 October 1943 (at which Himmler explicitly announced the Final Solution with the words 'I also want to refer here very frankly to a very difficult matter. We can now very openly talk about this among ourselves, and yet we will never discuss this publicly... I am now referring to the evacuation of the Jews, to the extermination of the Jewish people'). Speer tells Jeanty that this is going to be a very difficult letter, one of the most serious of his life. After assuring her that he has just read with enormous emotion her La Peine de Vivre, and that during the days he was reading it she continued to speak to him, and that their two days together were so good for him that he felt better, stronger and calmer, he then tells her that he received some news just before her departure that upset him deeply. For some time he held out hopes that this news would not be true. He asked the Federal Archives in Koblenz to check it for him. But there can be no doubt: he was present when Hitler announced on 6 October 1943 that all Jews would be killed. . . .
I assumed that this is what Monstrous confused with the contents of the letter, which is why I asked Monstrous to provide the exact quotation referred to. We will wait and see what Monstrous says.

I mean, the law of large numbers says that Monstrous is bound to get one right at some point.
Yes, Speer stated that it was HITLER who gave the October 6 speech. Evidence for the unreliability of witnesses. There is no "confusion" by me. There is even a footnote explaining that Speer misremembered: "As will be clear from the context, Speer's letter about the Poznan Conference refers to Himmler rather than Hitler."
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/15230/lot/621/
Read the original letter - it clearly says Himmler. Look in the top left corner, about 11 o clock.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Thu Jul 16, 2015 3:09 pm

Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote: BS. It meant one thing then as well. You will find many uses of the word from the 1940's that were clearly in referece to extermination. Hitler ordering that the American divisions in the Ardennes be "ausrottung" is not a reference to their evacuation or resettlement. :lol:
Failure of logical thinking. Even if ausrottung could mean killing, then this does not mean that it always meant killing. Irving/Potter has demonstrated this conclusively.
I have yet to see a use of this word from any time period that does not refer to killing, wiping out, or destruction.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Thu Jul 16, 2015 3:09 pm

Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Irving speculates which he is not particularly good at. What is factual and obviously not denied is that the critical parts of the speech have been retyped. This may have occurred during the war (to correct errors or as part of a Himmler conspiracy) or after the war (as part of a Kempner conspiracy). Impossible to say, The fact remains that the official speech version cannot be considered reliable.
Irving is an individual that has not hesitated to cry forgery on many occasions. He explicitly denies that this is a forgery. Full stop.
"All we can say is that for some reason this page was retyped at a different date. We do not whether it was retyped during the war, which is the likelihood. We do not know what has been inserted or taken out. On this occasion we do not have the other transcripts of that speech. So that is a page that I am unhappy about pinning a capital issue on. You do not often find a document that has been so clearly tampered with as that."
http://hdot.org/en/trial/transcripts/da ... 6-110.html
"I am not saying that this is a forgery, I think that is unlikely"

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5018
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 » Thu Jul 16, 2015 3:14 pm

Monstrous wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote: I won't repeat myself on the use of "Programm," but the Party Program actually says that non-citizen were to live in Germany as guests and would be subject to laws as foreigners. The party program doesn't say non-citizens would be "evacuated." Face it, Himmler wasn't giving a technical recounting of planks of the party platform and how they'd been fulfilled. This notion you've got stuck on is really silly.
Actually it states that "Non-citizens may live in Germany only as guests and must be subject to laws for aliens." No right to be in Germany and guests are usually expected to leave eventually, Jews being expelled is compatible with the Program unlike a genocide.
You are stretching this so thin that it's snapping. The Program had nothing in it that related to evacuation or expulsion. It in fact contained the opposite.
If the party program does not contain anything supporting expulsion or genocide, then we must conclude that a) Himmler did not know the most basic NS text, or b) the speech text is a forgery by a particularly inept forger (supported by numerous other absurdities).
That is a fallacy. Anyone conducting a forgery would have been part of the intelligence apparatus and would have had deep knowledge of Nazi affairs.