Denier Absurdities

Discussions
User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9854
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:24 pm

Nessie wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:52 pm
The latest hypothesis is

https://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php? ... 50#p135238

"From what I have read they never stayed at the transit camps except for a night before settling into their farms the next day depending on weather conditions and so on."

By transit camps, he means AR camps and he read that crazy hypothesis off another denier, rather than from any evidence.
That’s a lot of farms.

Where are these farms?

Never mind, VFX won’t have an answer, he’s just making {!#%@} up again.
“They say..that in Slonim they gathered in the town square 14,000 people...and all were machine-gunned. I ask you, is it possible to believe such a thing?...How can the world remain silent? It is probably not true.”
Calel Perechodnik, Polish Jew, 1942

https://twitter.com/jonronson/status/10 ... 24832?s=21

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm

Stat:
In English one would indeed say eradicate ideas or beliefs - meaning eliminate them, obliterate them, make them cease to exist. The object need not be physical. There might be an effort to eradicate illiteracy or as I said disease. Or corruption. Or bad attitudes or negative feelings. Or discrimination. In all these cases eradicate means to completely destroy or to make disappear or to make be no more.
Am i dreaming or what?
We are not talking about the term eradicate. Of course, just like in English, ausrottung means precisely that when it comes to ideas, beliefs, or other non physical concept, like Christianity, or Protestantism, or national identity aspiration.

Did i write ? (answer to Balmoral)
Etymologically, the closer verb would be "to eradicate".
Now, let me asked THE question one last time: Would an normal English speaker talk about extermination of illiteracy, corruption, bad attitudes, negative feelings, discrimination, or more focused on the discussion would one talk about extermination of Christianity - unless of course one finds mass graves -in the middle east? extermination of identity aspiration of a minority? an extermination of foreign influences?

this was the question i have asked!
If it is common English, then i apologize for my lack of expertise in the language.

How many times should i repeat my question:
I will ask my question again: does the translation of "Ausrottung des Judentums" into "extermination of the Jews" seem correct to you?
That is on a pure linguistic PoV!
Would an English understand, especially in the 1930's, "eradication of Jewry or Judaism" as "extermination of the Jews" automatically?
OTOH, you had written, "to exterminate has clear physical implications which a term like 'eradication' has not." That's not correct, as I said, using examples like pests, people, populations, species, etc. Climate change might eradicate a species meaning, well, to completely destroy it or to make it disappear or to make it be no more.
So you tell me that, those two sentences would make no great difference for an English

1./ The eradication of the Jesuits (in the case the Jesuit Order)
2./ The extermination of the Jesuits.

Seriously?
Even though, in fine, there were no massacre of Jesuits?
If that is the case, that might be one of the explanation of president Trump!

Just to jump on one of your example:
Climate change might eradicate a species! Let's even let the might down: "Climate change has eradicated seagulls in Scotland"
HOW? WHICH EFFECT OF CLIMATE CHANGE? WHAT KIND OF ERADICATION? DID THEY DIE? DID THEY LEAVE?
If a bird specie leaves Scotland because of too high temperature, and fly to Greenland instead, one could of course say that this specie has been eradicated in Scotland, but that does not mean that they were exterminated.
Now of course, if one finds 1000's of dead birds in Scotland, one could conclude that the bird specie has been exterminated by "climate change", but not before!

So ONCE AGAIN:
Eradication of birds = no more birds = birds gone from a territory = needs for further information to understand how it happened.
Extermination of birds = no more birds = birds gone from a terrtory = clear picture of how they might have been...exterminated...Poison, hunters, etc.
Sergey paired exterminate and eradicate, which you asked about; that is a proper pairing and he used eradicate the way an English speaker would use the verb.
LOL...
I did not asked about. And pairing exterminate and eradicate is wrong.
I don't remember that many words in one time from Sergey, though.
Seriously why are you telling me about how to use the verb eradicate?
Nothing really, as said numerous time, my telling is about extermination.
And just that to eradicate a minority religion somewhere does not equal and is/ should not be understood as the extermination of each members of the said minority religion.
As noted, I don't know about the German - unlike English, I not only never taught German but I don't speak the language - but as to English the meaning of eradicate is, as I said, synonymous with exterminate, obliterate, annihilate ... or completely destroy.
So again, to English there is no distinction between the eradication of Judaism from a region and the extermination of the Jews from the same region.
Ok understood.
I must have a serious problem with English then.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:51 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:08 pm
Can we give this conversation a mercy killing?
Me ?
Of course,
First in the Nazi context:
forced and unauthorized euthanasia program targeting defenseless sick and handicapped people.
Or extermination of defenseless sick and handicapped people.

Second in today's context:
Euthanasia program addressed to relieve unjustified and useless sufferings from patient who expresses clearly and without possible doubts their intention to end their lives.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: LOL I thought you were asking for a definition! :frown:

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:38 pm

> In my very first post, i wrote that when the term "Ausrottung" is followed by a physical object, like persons, as in "Die Ausrottung der Juden", it had to be understood as "to kill" or even to "exterminate" as there are no real alternative to what can happen to an ausgerottet person.

Since this has always been the case and nothing has changed, what are you even talking about? Do you even know yourself?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23551
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:40 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm
Stat:
In English one would indeed say eradicate ideas or beliefs - meaning eliminate them, obliterate them, make them cease to exist. The object need not be physical. There might be an effort to eradicate illiteracy or as I said disease. Or corruption. Or bad attitudes or negative feelings. Or discrimination. In all these cases eradicate means to completely destroy or to make disappear or to make be no more.
Am i dreaming or what?
We are not talking about the term eradicate.
You wrote, "It is a really interpretive definition, as to exterminate has clear physical implications which a term like 'eradication' has not."

And, replying to where Sergey R defined "eradicate" as "complete destruction", you wrote, "How do you understand 'eradication', Sergey? What does the Schwarzy pocket dictionary say about it?
Complete distruction?
From Latin: eradicare = to tear off = to remove . . ."

That's what I replied to. So I'm confused about what you asked, I guess. I was not trying to give an answer about German usage, simply to answer what you asked about an English word.

Exterminate is more often used to apply to physical "eradication," but when used to apply the living beings, for example, eradication usually (without qualifiers) means to completely destroy.
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm
Now, let me asked THE question one last time: Would an normal English speaker talk about extermination of illiteracy, corruption, bad attitudes, negative feelings, discrimination, or more focused on the discussion would one talk about extermination of Christianity - unless of course one finds mass graves -in the middle east? extermination of identity aspiration of a minority? an extermination of foreign influences?
The word an English speaker would most likely use is eradication, meaning to completely destroy. OTOH one would "exterminate a heresy" or a language or a prevalent behavior. Exterminate can be used for living things; however, if one eradicates living things, it most often, unless something else is signaled with other words or phrasing, means the same thing as to exterminate them.
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm
Would an English understand, especially in the 1930's, "eradication of Jewry or Judaism" as "extermination of the Jews" automatically?
Yes, when eradicate is applied to groups of people, it is interchangeable with exterminate, unless there is some term added in that would imply driving out; on its own, applied to, e.g., pests in a home, it does not mean to move them around.
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm
1./ The eradication of the Jesuits (in the case the Jesuit Order)
2./ The extermination of the Jesuits.
If you wanted to discuss disbanding the Jesuit Order, you would not say "eradication of the Jesuits." In English. You might say dissolution, disbanding, or liquidation (ha!) - but you normally wouldn't say "liquidation of the Jesuits" for fear of being misunderstood. You'd say "liquidation of the order."
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm
Just to jump on one of your example:
Climate change might eradicate a species! Let's even let the might down: "Climate change has eradicated seagulls in Scotland"
HOW? WHICH EFFECT OF CLIMATE CHANGE? WHAT KIND OF ERADICATION? DID THEY DIE? DID THEY LEAVE?
No, eradicate means completely destroy. The birds will have been destroyed unless you insert a qualifier or say something like the problem was eradicated, rather than the birds.
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm
If a bird specie leaves Scotland because of too high temperature, and fly to Greenland instead, one could of course say that this specie has been eradicated in Scotland, but that does not mean that they were exterminated.
Now of course, if one finds 1000's of dead birds in Scotland, one could conclude that the bird specie has been exterminated by "climate change", but not before!

So ONCE AGAIN:
Eradication of birds = no more birds = birds gone from a territory = needs for further information to understand how it happened.
Extermination of birds = no more birds = birds gone from a terrtory = clear picture of how they might have been...exterminated...Poison, hunters, etc.
You wouldn't use eradicate that way. Eradicate is most often used, with living things, with pests, viruses, bacteria, etc. It doesn't mean to move the pest somewhere else. It means to destroy the pests, etc. Except as noted above.
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm
Sergey paired exterminate and eradicate, which you asked about; that is a proper pairing and he used eradicate the way an English speaker would use the verb.
LOL...
I did not asked about. And pairing exterminate and eradicate is wrong.
I don't remember that many words in one time from Sergey, though.
Sergey wrote, "I guess you are not aware that neither extermination, nor 'eradication' of Jews or Judaism was in the official party program?"

You answered, "How do you understand "eradication", Sergey? What does the Schwarzy pocket dictionary say about it?
Complete distruction?"
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm
And just that to eradicate a minority religion somewhere does not equal and is/ should not be understood as the extermination of each members of the said minority religion.
Of course not. When applied to an organization or idea or behavior, eradicate refers to the organization, idea or behavior, not those who belong, share, or act. But when applied to living things, eradicate means to destroy the living things it refers to. Again, except as above.
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:46 pm
So again, to English there is no distinction between the eradication of Judaism from a region and the extermination of the Jews from the same region.
But you're changing the object of action?

"In English there is no distinction between the eradication of the Jews and the extermination of the Jews."
(In English, exterminating a religion sounds odd, you'd use eradicate here, as with communism, etc, exterminate only in special cases).
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9854
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:52 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:51 pm
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:08 pm
Can we give this conversation a mercy killing?
Me ?
Of course,
First in the Nazi context:
forced and unauthorized euthanasia program targeting defenseless sick and handicapped people.
Or extermination of defenseless sick and handicapped people.

Second in today's context:
Euthanasia program addressed to relieve unjustified and useless sufferings from patient who expresses clearly and without possible doubts their intention to end their lives.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: LOL I thought you were asking for a definition! :frown:
I really don’t understand the obsession with the word, Balsamo, when the context is clearly about extermination. When you look at the context it becomes obvious.

Himmler isn’t talking about Jews in an isolated circumstance.

He is talking about having to do something unpleasant, just as in 1934 when the SS participated in the destruction of the leadership of the SA.

He’s talking about keeping it secret.

He is talking about eradicating a bacillus.

Is a bacillus an idea, Balsamo? Do you deport a bacillus?
“They say..that in Slonim they gathered in the town square 14,000 people...and all were machine-gunned. I ask you, is it possible to believe such a thing?...How can the world remain silent? It is probably not true.”
Calel Perechodnik, Polish Jew, 1942

https://twitter.com/jonronson/status/10 ... 24832?s=21

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:36 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:52 pm
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:51 pm
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:08 pm
Can we give this conversation a mercy killing?
Me ?
Of course,
First in the Nazi context:
forced and unauthorized euthanasia program targeting defenseless sick and handicapped people.
Or extermination of defenseless sick and handicapped people.

Second in today's context:
Euthanasia program addressed to relieve unjustified and useless sufferings from patient who expresses clearly and without possible doubts their intention to end their lives.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: LOL I thought you were asking for a definition! :frown:
I really don’t understand the obsession with the word, Balsamo, when the context is clearly about extermination. When you look at the context it becomes obvious.

Himmler isn’t talking about Jews in an isolated circumstance.

He is talking about having to do something unpleasant, just as in 1934 when the SS participated in the destruction of the leadership of the SA.

He’s talking about keeping it secret.

He is talking about eradicating a bacillus.

Is a bacillus an idea, Balsamo? Do you deport a bacillus?
Was i so unclear that anyone could understand my remarks as a form of denial?
The more i read the reaction, the more i wonder. Has anyone noticed that I wrote:
when confronted with a Nazi documents mentioning Ausrottung along with some comparison with virus, then the meaning of ausrottung makes no doubt at all, as of course, the eradication of the Jews who are compared to bacillus, can clearly be translated by "extermination of the Jews".
Or are you all "windows frozen" in some anti-denial reflex?
How the hell could anyone deduct from what i wrote that Himmler was not talking of the genocide with his fellow SS generals? It is getting absurd.

The Posen speech is ill translated because it kind of squeezes things to such a point that one is forced to makes some concession - like Himmler's exaggerations, a program could be a plan, some substantives and unrelated verbs can make a verbal sentence, etc - in order to maintain some coherence.

The issue again is the consequence of all my post? Were 80 millions German seriously speaking lightly of genocide, saying " Yeah, we are eliminating the Jews, we are exterminating them...No big deal..." as the translation suggests. from " Auschaltung, Ausrottung...Machen wir" ( first time i tempted to use Been There's rolling {!#%@}**g eyes)

Indeed, he is talking - more than once - about the secrecy that should not be discussed, but today...but in between saying that the "difficult task" was spoken about, since like forever ,this very same solemn secret issue.

While when one substitute the " we are eliminating, exterminating the Jews" by a more logical interpretation, saying that " well, yes it is easy to promote such things like Auschaltung or Aursottung, without assuming the consequences of those decisions, without realizing what it really meant", and therefore which are only words easy to say.
I mean Himmler clearly mocks those people, not so different from our deniers, who thought/still think that it was even possible to displace and resettled millions of people within 2 years to a moving front without problems, and who naively thought that to organize an "Ausrottung" through "evacuation" was well possible...As Himmler says, "Easy job, let's do it" said those 80 millions Germans and Parteigenosse.
And yes that was in the program, to make Germany and Europe Judenfrei, which fits with the usual meaning of Ausrottung in this context - i gave 5 examples of the term designating a destruction, which 4 out of 6 did not involve genocide or massive extermination. (ignored of course, Strawman some said)

But, as i interpret Himmler, he continues: "They just did not know what they were talking about, they cann

could not even imagine what 100, 500, 1000 bodies lying aligned mean, BUT WE, the SS, blablabla...WE assumed the task with our dignity and again blablabla"...And only then, he makes the full confession...not only that it meant the physical extermination of the Jews, but that it also included the kids, the elders...everyone.

This is why i have asked if anyone had some extracts of the speech of the 6th, as the 4th Himmler was addressing his SS who knew what was going on.

Sometimes i really feel you all should take a break from pure Holocaust Denial, really. Watching the circus going on on the dying Rodoh certainly does not help to have a mind open to remarks.

You do understand that under this Phdn translation, Himmler talks about 80 million Germans lightly and easily speaking about genocide, don't you?

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am

Please, Stat, don't do this again.
You wrote, "It is a really interpretive definition, as to exterminate has clear physical implications which a term like 'eradication' has not."
I wrote many other important things that are still being ignored.
Now again if you don't make a "cognitive" difference between: Judaism has been eradicated in Germany and Jews have been exterminated in Germany", there is no pòint keeping on.

As for Sergey, and his one definition "the main one" which actually was "complete destruction" - which is still different from "exterminating people" - chose to ignore all the instances where Ausrottung of a minority did not involve a systematic killing of the member of the community, calling them strawmen, which could be actually a new fallacy, fallacious use of fallacy.

Actually here is it how it goes:
Ausrottung = Vernichtung= to exterminate...Now let's remove the center, and you get "Ausrottung= to exterminate as the principal translation.
Exterminate is more often used to apply to physical "eradication," but when used to apply the living beings, for example, eradication usually (without qualifiers) means to completely destroy.
Well, thank you, this why i wrote at least four times:
Of course, Stat, but that is not what is in dispute.
In my very first post, i wrote that when the term "Ausrottung" is followed by a physical object, like persons, as in "Die Ausrottung der Juden", it had to be understood as "to kill" or even to "exterminate"
Is Judentum a living being?

Sergey wrote, "I guess you are not aware that neither extermination, nor 'eradication' of Jews or Judaism was in the official party program?"

You answered, "How do you understand "eradication", Sergey? What does the Schwarzy pocket dictionary say about it?
Complete distruction?"
Were the Jesuits eradicated from France?
Were they exterminated ?

What is the title of the book "Die Ausrottung der Jesuiten" in German and "The destruction of Jesuits in France" in french.
What was it that was unclear?

Easy answer:
YES
NO
Of course not. When applied to an organization or idea or behavior, eradicate refers to the organization, idea or behavior, not those who belong, share, or act. But when applied to living things, eradicate means to destroy the living things it refers to. Again, except as above.
Agree
So again, is Judentum a living thing?
"In English there is no distinction between the eradication of the Jews and the extermination of the Jews."
(In English, exterminating a religion sounds odd, you'd use eradicate here, as with communism, etc, exterminate only in special cases).
Finally !!!
Yes indeed it sounds odds. That what i am losing my time telling you all!
You don't use the verb "to exterminate" in English when it comes to a Religion, Well, the Germans use the BLODDY TERM "AUSROTTEN"!!!!!!!!!
Now one last question, which was my first one, does the Eradication of communism systematically implies the extermination of the all the communists?
Does the eradication of a Religion, or religious minorities, systematically requires the physical murder of all the believers of that religion?

Now if you answer is NO, then you are quite close to at least understand what i am trying to defend here.
;)

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23551
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:25 am

Calm, it's all good.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
I wrote many other important things that are still being ignored.
????? I replied to one aspect of your posting. I told you that what I was doing. I think others are replying to other aspects.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
Now again if you don't make a "cognitive" difference between: Judaism has been eradicated in Germany and Jews have been exterminated in Germany", there is no pòint keeping on.
Actually, you do seem a little worked up! I simply tried to tell you how American English speakers would use the word eradicate. Now, in the discussion I did say that you are making different statements when you say Judaism in one case and Jews in the other, and that doing so tells us nothing about exterminate and eradicate, because you have them acting on different kinds of objects. That was all.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
Is Judentum a living being?
Whatever you think you are proving, you're not. You're just causing confusion.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
Were the Jesuits eradicated from France?
This isn't something I would say. Removed? I don't know what you're trying to say, so I don't know how to say it in English.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
What is the title of the book "Die Ausrottung der Jesuiten" in German and "The destruction of Jesuits in France" in french.
What was it that was unclear?
Ausrottung has to be translated, so I have no idea. I told you I don't know the German and didn't mean to make statements about something I don't know about.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
Easy answer:
YES
NO
Hi, Greg!

I am skipping over a number of other points you make as I don't think they're directed to me. I told you that I wasn't posting about Ausrottung/Ausrotten/German words.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
Finally !!!
Yes indeed it sounds odds. That what i am losing my time telling you all!
In that particular instance. But English words are not German words. There are other instances, as I told you and you have ignored, where it doesn't sound odd. The main point, in line with Sergey's comments, is that if I tell you that I've eradicated the bugs, you will think I killed them. If I say that I've eradicated the bug problem, you might think I killed them - or not be quite sure what I did.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
You don't use the verb "to exterminate" in English when it comes to a Religion, Well, the Germans use the BLODDY TERM "AUSROTTEN"!!!!!!!!!
Greg, I told you that I can't speak to Ausrotten and I didn't try to.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
Now one last question, which was my first one, does the Eradication of communism systematically implies the extermination of the all the communists?
You are very confused. Of course not, but the eradication of the communists is different to the eradication of communism. Your sleight of hand here has been noted a number of times.
Balsamo wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:08 am
Does the eradication of a Religion, or religious minorities, systematically requires the physical murder of all the believers of that religion?

Now if you answer is NO, then you are quite close to at least understand what i am trying to defend here.
;)
Greg, I've told you why what you are doing is false.

I'm dropping out of this, as I can't speak to the meaning and usage of Ausrotten/etc, I've said my piece and am happy to let those of you who know German discuss ... the German.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:37 am

Stat:
????? I replied to one aspect of your posting. I told you that what I was doing. I think others are replying to other aspects.
Thanks for calming me down, :lol:
You are right and wrong. You replied to some things, but very few did for the others. ;)
Actually, you do seem a little worked up! I
I am probably.
Actually, i start realizing it when i was hearing Sergey with the voice of Silverster Stallone and picturing myself as Louis de Funes in this scene:


I guess that you'll identify which one.
Whatever you think you are proving, you're not. You're just causing confusion.
Is it that difficult to answer. Whatever you want to call it, diversion or strawmen, it is nevertheless essential to understand the meaning of the term in question.
This isn't something I would say. Removed? I don't know what you're trying to say, so I don't know how to say it in English.
Really?
Yes removed, dispossessed, expelled, banned from their country...Well in German this was called the Ausrottung der Jesuiten and in French "the destruction of Jesuite".

I can't believe i am still asked the question: what i am trying to say that the usual usage of the term Ausrottung when it comes to religious minorities does not systematically means extermination, neither does the expression "destruction" used in French in this context.
Now you are free to find an English article or book talking about the fate of the Jesuits in Europe in the XVIIIth century.
Ausrottung has to be translated, so I have no idea. I told you I don't know the German and didn't mean to make statements about something I don't know about.
After all those posts you still puzzled by the meaning of Ausrottung?
Anyway, according to google translate, it means "the extermination of the Jesuits"
According to Sergey dictionary, it means "Complete destruction of the Jesuits" which is the term chosen by d'Alembert.
Hence my question: were those Jesuits exterminated?

Now are you really going to pretend that you do not have the level of German to assess if the translation of
"Ausrottung des Judentums" into "the extermination of the Jews" is correct?

I'll skip your last remark.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9854
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:30 am

Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:36 pm

Was i so unclear that anyone could understand my remarks as a form of denial?
Did I make that accusation?

No, I’m just wondering why I have to sit through walls of text over a subject that’s been examined over and over again. I think we all get it.

It is getting absurd.
No kidding.
The Posen speech is ill translated because it kind of squeezes things to such a point that one is forced to makes some concession - like Himmler's exaggerations, a program could be a plan, some substantives and unrelated verbs can make a verbal sentence, etc - in order to maintain some coherence.
Not only do I look at PHDN but I’ve got Carlos Porter’s translation from CODOH. He actually translated the whole thing. If I’m not mistaken Roberto translated part of it as well.

I think I’m set. They all essentially say the same thing only Porter substitutes the word “extirpation” for “extermination.”

“am thinking now of the evacuation of the Jews, the extirpation of the Jewish people. It is one of those things that's easy to say: "The Jewish people will be extirpated" , says every Party comrade, "that's quite clear, it's in our programme: elimination of the Jews, extirpation ; that's what we're doing.”

https://codoh.com/library/document/891/

This is why i have asked if anyone had some extracts of the speech of the 6th, as the 4th Himmler was addressing his SS who knew what was going on.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tapata ... 1825&amp=1

Sometimes i really feel you all should take a break from pure Holocaust Denial, really. Watching the circus going on on the dying Rodoh certainly does not help to have a mind open to remarks.
Balsamo, to a degree I moved on. I no longer want them here, I’m more interested in the history. It’s something of a waste of time. If I get an urge to annoy some denier I can do that on Twitter, if I really want annoy some idjits I can log back into RODOH.
You do understand that under this Phdn translation, Himmler talks about 80 million Germans lightly and easily speaking about genocide, don't you?
Is Himmler being sarcastic? Yeah, I get it. So did his audience.
“They say..that in Slonim they gathered in the town square 14,000 people...and all were machine-gunned. I ask you, is it possible to believe such a thing?...How can the world remain silent? It is probably not true.”
Calel Perechodnik, Polish Jew, 1942

https://twitter.com/jonronson/status/10 ... 24832?s=21

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balmoral95 » Fri Nov 09, 2018 4:04 am


User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Fri Nov 09, 2018 4:15 am

Thanks Jeffk and Balmoral for that 6th october speech, really appreciated.

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balmoral95 » Fri Nov 09, 2018 4:20 am


User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3059
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Nessie » Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:39 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:24 pm
Nessie wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:52 pm
The latest hypothesis is

https://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php? ... 50#p135238

"From what I have read they never stayed at the transit camps except for a night before settling into their farms the next day depending on weather conditions and so on."

By transit camps, he means AR camps and he read that crazy hypothesis off another denier, rather than from any evidence.
That’s a lot of farms.

Where are these farms?

Never mind, VFX won’t have an answer, he’s just making {!#%@} up again.
It is the latest nut job lunacy from Troll, VFX and Huntinger. Others are keeping quiet, probably because even they think it is the most idiotic claim so far. I think the Nazis sent them to the moon is coming next.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Fri Nov 09, 2018 11:46 am

Yawn.

The meaning did not change during the Nazi rule, as dictionaries from before and after show. Nobody has ever claimed ausrotten always means physical destruction. Translations are, as before, context-dependent.

Here, the result of the discussion and exactly what I wrote in the beginning.
Last edited by Sergey_Romanov on Fri Nov 09, 2018 5:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23551
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Fri Nov 09, 2018 3:54 pm

On a related denier claim - "liquidation" of people is like dissolution of a company - here is how Jürgen Stroop replied under cross-examination during his trial in 1951 when prosecutors asked him, in the light of his testimony that during the Warsaw Uprising the Jews were deported for labor, why he'd used the word "liquidation" in his famous report to Himmler:
This is an editorial error. . . . I don't care about these reports . . .
Stroop was smarter than today's Nazi apologists, and didn't try redefining "liquidation" in an absurd manner, but there was no way of wriggling out of the meaning of what he'd written.

(Finder & Prusin, Justice behind the Iron Curtain, pp 160-161)
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Darren Wilshak
Regular Poster
Posts: 965
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:16 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Darren Wilshak » Fri Nov 09, 2018 7:05 pm

Liquidation by transporting to fantasy farmville. Those who just lie for the sake of it at rodoh want attention. They need to grow up though instead of crying for Wannabe Nazi Moon.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23551
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Fri Nov 09, 2018 7:11 pm

I haven't checked there or ISF in the past few days, so I don't know if blake121666 is still fuming about his flub on the EGs in Poland. That got him kind of hepped up, as we used to say.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Darren Wilshak
Regular Poster
Posts: 965
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:16 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Darren Wilshak » Fri Nov 09, 2018 7:42 pm

Yes, well you answered him comprehensively, so he should have been satisfied. Hasn't got back yet though.

ISF Is still at the stage of Faurisson leaving the building.

I am at the stage of

'No one but You and I say the bells of Prince Far I.'

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23551
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Fri Nov 09, 2018 7:54 pm

:)
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:07 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:30 am
Balsamo wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:36 pm

Was i so unclear that anyone could understand my remarks as a form of denial?
Did I make that accusation?

No, I’m just wondering why I have to sit through walls of text over a subject that’s been examined over and over again. I think we all get it.

It is getting absurd.
No kidding.
The Posen speech is ill translated because it kind of squeezes things to such a point that one is forced to makes some concession - like Himmler's exaggerations, a program could be a plan, some substantives and unrelated verbs can make a verbal sentence, etc - in order to maintain some coherence.
Not only do I look at PHDN but I’ve got Carlos Porter’s translation from CODOH. He actually translated the whole thing. If I’m not mistaken Roberto translated part of it as well.

I think I’m set. They all essentially say the same thing only Porter substitutes the word “extirpation” for “extermination.”

“am thinking now of the evacuation of the Jews, the extirpation of the Jewish people. It is one of those things that's easy to say: "The Jewish people will be extirpated" , says every Party comrade, "that's quite clear, it's in our programme: elimination of the Jews, extirpation ; that's what we're doing.”

https://codoh.com/library/document/891/

This is why i have asked if anyone had some extracts of the speech of the 6th, as the 4th Himmler was addressing his SS who knew what was going on.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tapata ... 1825&amp=1

Sometimes i really feel you all should take a break from pure Holocaust Denial, really. Watching the circus going on on the dying Rodoh certainly does not help to have a mind open to remarks.
Balsamo, to a degree I moved on. I no longer want them here, I’m more interested in the history. It’s something of a waste of time. If I get an urge to annoy some denier I can do that on Twitter, if I really want annoy some idjits I can log back into RODOH.
You do understand that under this Phdn translation, Himmler talks about 80 million Germans lightly and easily speaking about genocide, don't you?
Is Himmler being sarcastic? Yeah, I get it. So did his audience.
Well, Carlos Porter is a clown, as is David Irving, both promoting a "extirpation" as the best translation, even if they have to invent new uses for terms. I don't even understand the point of using this word, actually.

Himmler might have been sarcastic, of course, but my issue with the translation has nothing to do with his humor.
My point being that there are various ways to use the term Ausrotten /ausrottung, all related with destruction, eradication, annihilation, extinction, yes also extirpation, extinction, and even uprootings (note that a uprooted flowers dies).. and of course, to kill, and extermination, they all goes in the same direction.
And depending on the context, i guess that each language has its preferred term to express the same idea.

For example, in French - better to stay on save ground - extirpation (same word) means "radical destruction", but its mostly used in medicine, like in the case of cancer cells. A long time ago, it was also used in the context of religion minority, and very rarely for ideas. But there are many words that are used in real life. One could find a "extirpation du protestantisme" in some 19th century book, while one would use the term eradication today.

My point is that some of those terms are more or less explicit about the means used to achieve the "destruction".
Destruction for example is more a state - something is destroyed - but gives no clue on how the object was destroyed.
If i say, "my car is destroyed", it gives no clew on what happened to it.
Extermination, on the other hand, is much more explicit, so if i tell that my neighbor family has been exterminated last night, you can imagine that some criminals entered the house and killed them, in a deliberate action. There is no other way to imagine an extermination without a focus of the process, that is a murder or execution.
And as you probably understood by now, is that the term ausrottung covers all the terms above, sometimes expressing a process when killing is involved, and in this case meaning extermination, or one of the others depending on the specific context.

Actually, Sergey little dictionary surely picked the most obvious definition: "destruction" which is not explicit about the means, quite the contrary. ;)

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9854
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:29 pm

On this we can agree:
Carlos Porter is a clown.

:D

I saved that in case any denier accused me of only reading court historians. Like you I’m perplexed at the use of the word “extirpate.”
“They say..that in Slonim they gathered in the town square 14,000 people...and all were machine-gunned. I ask you, is it possible to believe such a thing?...How can the world remain silent? It is probably not true.”
Calel Perechodnik, Polish Jew, 1942

https://twitter.com/jonronson/status/10 ... 24832?s=21

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:33 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 11:46 am
Yawn.

The meaning did not change during the Nazi rule, as dictionaries from before and after show. Nobody has ever claimed ausrotten always means physical destruction. Translations are, as before, context-dependent.

Here, the result of the discussion and exactly what I wrote in the beginning.
No, which is of course, what i was trying to say.
But to exterminate always means physical destruction.
Which is the issue with such a systematic translation.
The problem i have tried to point out being that whether physical destruction is used or not in the context of a "Ausrottung" process (having here in mind the context of the destruction of minorities (religious or nationals), the level of bloodshed has no influence on the use of the term.
The use is just the same, and correct in all cases, when one talks of the "ausrottung" of the Cathar or the "ausrottung der Jesuiten"...and of course the "Ausrottung der Juden"...One of them cannot be translated by "extermination of..."
And this is why, in my opinion, the Nazis chose the term in the first place.

Statmec:
On a related denier claim - "liquidation" of people is like dissolution of a company
Oups, i thought it was to be put in bottle! there were rumors about Black publishing a book on "Coca Cola and the Holocaust"...

Actually, as an irony, my first post was meant to privilege denier's misused of this term instead of focusing on "ausrottung". But well...

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Sat Nov 10, 2018 3:21 pm

Nope.

"to get rid of completely usually by killing off"

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Sat Nov 10, 2018 3:22 pm

"Originally, to exterminate something was to banish it or drive it away. And it is this meaning that can be found in the Latin origin of "exterminate." "Exterminate" comes from "exterminatus," the past participle of exterminare, meaning "to drive beyond the boundaries." The Latin word exterminare was formed from the prefix ex- ("out of" or "outside") and "terminus" ("boundary"). Not much more than a century after its introduction to English, "exterminate" came to denote destroying or utterly putting an end to something. And that's the use with which the word is usually employed today."

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:49 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Sat Nov 10, 2018 3:22 pm
"Originally, to exterminate something was to banish it or drive it away. And it is this meaning that can be found in the Latin origin of "exterminate." "Exterminate" comes from "exterminatus," the past participle of exterminare, meaning "to drive beyond the boundaries." The Latin word exterminare was formed from the prefix ex- ("out of" or "outside") and "terminus" ("boundary"). Not much more than a century after its introduction to English, "exterminate" came to denote destroying or utterly putting an end to something. And that's the use with which the word is usually employed today."
:lol:
I know - in my days we had Latin classes at school for 6 years - but i confess, i did not want to use THIS.
As you say, today no one would even think about using the term "extermination" to express the idea of "banishment".
I thought about revealing it on Rodoh to see if they would all adopt the term extermination all of a sudden.

Sergey:
Nope.

"to get rid of completely usually by killing off"
Nope what ?

to get rid of completely USUALLY by killing off..."usually suggest there are some exceptions.
I have just seen an article about the counter-reform in the Habsburg possessions mentioning various "ausrottung" under Karl IV and her daughter Maria-Theresa...
I would say "to get rid of / to destroy completely by any means" (in the context of religious, national, political minorities).

Here is another example that puzzle me.
It's Goebbels entry following the Posen speech of October 6th.

" He (Himmler) is a partisan of the most radical and harshest solution, that is to exterminate the Jews and their brood. Even if it is the most brutal solution, it is also the most logic. We have the responsibility to solve completely this question in our time. The future generation would probably not have the courage to deal with this problem with the same determination than we have today"

Unfortunately, this is a personal translation from a French edition.
Goebbels seems to suggest that other solutions existed - less radical, less harsh, less brutal - which is troubling if the solution/ausrottung could only be understood as "killing/extermination".
Did he have in mind less brutal forms of extermination? Could have been about the methods used, but then Himmler did not mention any method of killing, just "to kill or let killed".

Does anyone have a German version of this quote from Goebbels diary (entry of 7th october 43) ?
Would be appreciated.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:35 pm

> to get rid of completely USUALLY by killing off..."usually suggest there are some exceptions.

Bravo!

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:37 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:35 pm
> to get rid of completely USUALLY by killing off..."usually suggest there are some exceptions.

Bravo!
De nada

Did you pick that definition in a dictionary?
Does it mention when it s by killing off and when it is not? Does it give some range of certainty (like between 70 % and 100%)? How is a listener or a reader supposed to know when it is by killing of and when it is not just based on the word?

So how are we supposed to understand Goebbels entry?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23551
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:22 am

Saul Friedländer's note on the passage from Goebbels' diary is translated as follows on AHF (https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic ... 9#p1809569):
Regarding the Jewish question, he [Himmler] gives a very unadorned and frank picture. He is of the conviction that the Jewish question can be solved by the end of this year. He advocates the most radical and most severe solution, namely to exterminate Jewry, bag and baggage. Of course, if brutal, this is a consistent solution. Because we must take on the responsibility of entirely solving this question in our time. Subsequent generations will doubtlessly no longer dare address this problem with the courage and obsession as we are able to do today.
(Unfortunately p 572 is missing in the Google Books online version of Friedländer's German edition.)

Peter Longerich in his biography of Goebbels translates (p 611) the passage as follows, that Himmler gave:
a completely and frank picture. He is convinced by the end of the year we can solve the Jewish question. He advocates the most radical and toughest solution, namely to exterminate the Jews, the whole lot of them. That is certainly a consistent, albeit brutal solution. For we must take on the responsibility of ensuring that this issue is resolved in our time. Later generations will certainly not have the courage and obsession to tackle this problem in the way we can now.
HDer Thomas Dalton gives:
Oct 7, 1943 (II.10.72)

As to the Jewish Question, [Himmler] gives a very frank and candid picture. He is of the opinion that we can solve the Jewish Question for all of Europe by the end of this year. He advocates the most radical and harshest solution, namely, that the whole of Jewry will be rooted out (auszurotten).This is surely a consistent, if brutal, solution. We must accept the responsibility to completely solve this question in our time. Later generations will surely no longer have the courage or dedication to address this problem, as we do today.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Goody67 » Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:02 am

VFK is now posting as NSDAP and VFK on the RODOH forum, haha.
"Anyone who starts with the Holocaust didn’t happen is operating with a severe mental deficit." - Jeff

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9854
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:25 am

Goody67 wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:02 am
VFK is now posting as NSDAP and VFK on the RODOH forum, haha.
He’s his own sock puppet????

:lol:
“They say..that in Slonim they gathered in the town square 14,000 people...and all were machine-gunned. I ask you, is it possible to believe such a thing?...How can the world remain silent? It is probably not true.”
Calel Perechodnik, Polish Jew, 1942

https://twitter.com/jonronson/status/10 ... 24832?s=21

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balmoral95 » Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:55 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:25 am
Goody67 wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:02 am
VFK is now posting as NSDAP and VFK on the RODOH forum, haha.
He’s his own sock puppet????

:lol:
Not that uncommon in this bizness... but it does get more facked up when they start having a conversation with... each other. :shock:

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1921
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Balsamo » Tue Nov 13, 2018 1:27 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:22 am
Saul Friedländer's note on the passage from Goebbels' diary is translated as follows on AHF (https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic ... 9#p1809569):
Regarding the Jewish question, he [Himmler] gives a very unadorned and frank picture. He is of the conviction that the Jewish question can be solved by the end of this year. He advocates the most radical and most severe solution, namely to exterminate Jewry, bag and baggage. Of course, if brutal, this is a consistent solution. Because we must take on the responsibility of entirely solving this question in our time. Subsequent generations will doubtlessly no longer dare address this problem with the courage and obsession as we are able to do today.
(Unfortunately p 572 is missing in the Google Books online version of Friedländer's German edition.)

Peter Longerich in his biography of Goebbels translates (p 611) the passage as follows, that Himmler gave:
a completely and frank picture. He is convinced by the end of the year we can solve the Jewish question. He advocates the most radical and toughest solution, namely to exterminate the Jews, the whole lot of them. That is certainly a consistent, albeit brutal solution. For we must take on the responsibility of ensuring that this issue is resolved in our time. Later generations will certainly not have the courage and obsession to tackle this problem in the way we can now.
HDer Thomas Dalton gives:
Oct 7, 1943 (II.10.72)

As to the Jewish Question, [Himmler] gives a very frank and candid picture. He is of the opinion that we can solve the Jewish Question for all of Europe by the end of this year. He advocates the most radical and harshest solution, namely, that the whole of Jewry will be rooted out (auszurotten).This is surely a consistent, if brutal, solution. We must accept the responsibility to completely solve this question in our time. Later generations will surely no longer have the courage or dedication to address this problem, as we do today.
LOL, Thomas Dalton Phd... :lol:

Thanks Stat, for Longerich and Friedlanger's translation.
Just to illustrate here is the french one...you can check what it translates through Google translate:

" En ce qui concerne la question juive, il se livre à un tour d'horizon franc et sans fard. Il est persuadé que nous pouvons résoudre dans sa totalité la question juive d'ici la fin de l'année. Il est partisan de la solution la plus radical et la plus dure, en l'occurrence d'exterminer les juifs avec leur marmaille. Même si c'est la solution la plus brutale, c'est aussi la plus logique. Car nous devons assumer la responsabilité d'avoir régler entièrement cette question pour notre temps. Les générations futures n'oseront certainement plus aborder ce problème avec le même courage et la même conviction que nous aujourd'hui."

Though Google translate which seems to have improved a lot as it is very very close to the French version.

"As far as the Jewish question is concerned, he gives a frank and unabashed overview. He is convinced that we can solve the entire Jewish question by the end of the year. He is in favor of the most radical and hardest solution, in this case to exterminate the Jews with their brats. Even if it is the most brutal solution, it is also the most logical. Because we have to take responsibility for having to fully resolve this issue for our time. Future generations will no doubt*** dare to approach this problem with the same courage and conviction as we do today. "
** Here it seems to be a mistake. The French version insists on the negation, and it should have come out as " will, no doubt, NOT dare to..."


So if one focus on the now three English versions - we'll leave Dalton and his roots aside - there is this thing:
- we have twice the Jews (1 the whole of them, 2 with their brats (which is what "marmaille" means) (which seems the most logic with the original speech)
- And Friedlander with the again metaphoric "Jewry, bags and baggage"

That really makes me wonder about the original in German. Just to know if Goebbels keeps playing the metaphor in his diary, or, as the two others translations suggest, if he write down that the extermination included the kids.

Is the German version available somewhere?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23551
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Denier Absurdities

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:45 am

I can't find the German. I have a lot of entries from the diary in German but that day's entry is not in the collection for some reason.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"