The Holocaust Thread - The Great Debate Between Affirmers, Revisionists and Deniers

[Chugger]

Dude, that picture literally says they rebuilt them. Stop being a faggot retard.

oh i thought you meant it was built for the first time after the war. because otherwise your post has no point

(no hard feelings btw, I'm about to bounce for a while and wanted to show you some good tunes for a change)

 

[Stabmaster Arson]

oh i thought you meant it was built for the first time after the war. because otherwise your post has no point

I am retarded- Hemorrhoy Rogers

Noticed the last 14 seconds were cut out of the last upload. Reuploaded. Hemorrhoy's classic tune, not by TMBG.

www.youtube.com

(no hard feelings btw, I'm about to bounce for a while and wanted to show you some good tunes for a change)

Fuck off and die.

 

[Chugger]

Is it too late to make a cover song request? the last one. no need to change any of the lyrics

you could also do this (change 'you' to 'I')

 

[Bonesjones]

oh i thought you meant it was built for the first time after the war. because otherwise your post has no point

https://youtube.com/watch?v=vsSlXk0lA5g
(no hard feelings btw, I'm about to bounce for a while and wanted to show you some good tunes for a change)

Lol you are retarded good job

 

[Cymophane]

Is it too late to make a cover song request? the last one. no need to change any of the lyrics

you could also do this (change 'you' to 'I') https://youtube.com/watch?v=W0-OKMmtq8s

just die pls.

 

[mrolonzo]

Plans to put showers in the undressing room (not the corpse/special/gassing cellar) of Crema 3

and a tentative project to create hot water supply for about 100 showers, of which there is no indication would be all housed in the Crema

Ver archivo adjunto 3574662

This is not evidence the installed shower heads in the corpse/special/gassing cellar were ever intended to be used as such, but even if it was, this would be a refutation of a relatively unimportant part of the holocaust story, because people could clearly be killed there , working showers or no

https://dagobertobellucci.wordpress.com/2012/10/19/goebbels-on-the-jews-part-2-by-thomas-dalton/

Ver archivo adjunto 3574687

ok. a literal reading of his diary as translated by Dalton suggests the Germans "killed the Jews like rats"

Ver archivo adjunto 3574697

1. No indication they would be housed in the crema?

What was it that the krema had that other places didn't that would make them want to use it?

2. This is an unimportant refutation because people 'could' be killed there?

What does that mean Chugger? Is there somewhere where people cannot be killed?

3. Once again, we see you avoid the actual argument about Goebbels. See attached.

you're delusional if you think that Hitler and his inner circle's own words don't demonstrate the reality of the Holocaust. I've read testimony from the train managers before, I'll look for it again, but you might not like the source since using collections from holocaust museums is absolutley haram and forbidden here. Do you realize just how dogmatic and purposefully unmoved you sound when you say Hitler's own words don't count?

1. They demonstrate the reality of deportation as a war aim. So yes Hitler's words do count.

2. Do you have complete train records? Yes or no?

nah, it's lazy as can be. You're too chicken to look at the sources without someone like Mattogno to comfort you and keep the dream alive, because if you did even you could discern the truth of the Shoah. You don't even read them, you just ctrl+f to what you want and browse for the right, predetermined talking point. It doesn't save any time or effort to just parrot crap you found on CODOH here; it just illustrates what a waste of time it is to talk to you.

1. I've just told you why my approach is correct, useful and moral. You guys pulling up the odd document from the HC blog when for example, the Moscow Archive contained 88,000 documents on Auschwitz alone (Germar Rudolf recent interview) is a direct attack by deception about the true scope of the evidence on the kiwifarms posters here.

2. You're free to fuck off any time Stan. But we all know you won't, so quit whining.

Ver archivo adjunto 3575607

https://youtube.com/watch?v=0ovTBmmxZCU

1. See attached.

oh i thought you meant it was built for the first time after the war. because otherwise your post has no point

https://youtube.com/watch?v=vsSlXk0lA5g
(no hard feelings btw, I'm about to bounce for a while and wanted to show you some good tunes for a change)

Why would you think he meant it was built for the first time after the war?

He's owning you here while literally just shitposting and you just admitted the "authorities" weren't happy with what they had in crema 1 so they built something themselves to go along with the story of what they wanted to tell.

 

[Stan]

Which is completely amateur history. Textual and contextual analysis is central to actual history. One does not simply say " he said X therefore this meant Y."

As someone who spent five years learning German and ten months living in Wiesbaden, I take offense to Mattogno's alternate realities where "Gaskammer" and "gasdichte Tür" don’t mean what they plainly do.

Is this the speeches now? Or your special quotation?

Eye witnesses? Your eye witnesses like Filip Muller?

What im doing is actual textual analysis, or revisionists do, this is superior to your silly propositions. Which is why you cannot ever give quotes of authors in full, as revisionists do.

“Textual analysis” is when you consider a text in the context of the motivations, beliefs, realities (like the ones evident in senior Nazi writings) of those who wrote it. What you Carlo Mattogno is doing is constructing alternate possibilities where morgues need gas-tight doors and “liquidating” human beings has the equivalent meaning to “evacuate” when it’s obvious from senior Nazi writings that these two words don’t mean the same thing to Goebbels.

---

Hard evidence would be a body and a murder weapon, not some one saying something being loosely interpreted as "I'm going to kill you"

Actually a note from the suspect threatening to kill the victim is hard evidence. And we do have bodies… and murder weapons… but you would like to pretend the whole thing is a false flag.

You reject scientific reality, no one cares what you think. You are literally subhuman intelligence.

OK now you sound like a Nazi. I’m sure you don’t get how ridiculous you look cause if you did you would have stopped by now.

Funny how plain language is always code words and the most unfavorable interpretation possible and never directly said.

“Gasgedichte Tuer” and “Gaskammer” are plain to me. As are demographic evidence and Goebbels writing “Hitler’s decided to make a clean sweep of things with the Jews” or Himmler telling his own guys “nobody can know of our bravery here, just as nobody thanked you for your bravery purging corrupt men from our party.” (Let me guess… “purge” in this context doesn’t mean what it plainly does either.)

Kids have a better grasp of science than you do. As you've proven repeately.

“Repeately” kids have a better grasp of spelling than you do

Hitlers own words as translated and recontextualized by his nemesis. Which is what you fail to mention.

Im pretty sure this translator isn’t Hitler’s “nemesis” as that would require Hitler to know and despise this person. If you’d like to show the class why you think this particular translator has an axe to grind and wants to railroad Poor, innocent, Hitler, please “post the receipts” or STFU

How come you've never point by point rebutted me, but have endless time to complain about my tone? Almost like you are dodging something.

Seems like I just did, but I actually don’t know who you’re addressing at this point and I’m too lazy to scroll up and check. You’re dumb bones

ETA: new game: Holocaust deniers vs the German to English dictionary, round 1. Do you see any possible meanings here that would support “liquidierien” means “to evacuate”? Because I do not.

 

[mrolonzo]

As someone who spent five years learning German and ten months living in Wiesbaden, I take offense to Mattogno's alternate realities where "Gaskammer" and "gasdichte Tür" don’t mean what they plainly do.


“Textual analysis” is when you consider a text in the context of the motivations, beliefs, realities (like the ones evident in senior Nazi writings) of those who wrote it. What you Carlo Mattogno is doing is constructing alternate possibilities where morgues need gas-tight doors and “liquidating” human beings has the equivalent meaning to “evacuate” when it’s obvious from senior Nazi writings that these two words don’t mean the same thing to Goebbels.

---

Actually a note from the suspect threatening to kill the victim is hard evidence. And we do have bodies… and murder weapons… but you would like to pretend the whole thing is a false flag.

OK now you sound like a Nazi. I’m sure you don’t get how ridiculous you look cause if you did you would have stopped by now.

“Gasgedichte Tuer” and “Gaskammer” are plain to me. As are demographic evidence and Goebbels writing “Hitler’s decided to make a clean sweep of things with the Jews” or Himmler telling his own guys “nobody can know of our bravery here, just as nobody thanked you for your bravery purging corrupt men from our party.” (Let me guess… “purge” in this context doesn’t mean what it plainly does either.)

“Repeately” kids have a better grasp of spelling than you do

Im pretty sure this translator isn’t Hitler’s “nemesis” as that would require Hitler to know and despise this person. If you’d like to show the class why you think this particular translator has an axe to grind and wants to railroad Poor, innocent, Hitler, please “post the receipts” or STFU

Seems like I just did, but I actually don’t know who you’re addressing at this point and I’m too lazy to scroll up and check. You’re dumb bones

1. You take "offense" Stan? What does that even mean?

Fuck you and your offense Stan. Stick it right up your ass. This is emotional manipulation for purposes of deception. Why do you even bother?


2. Completely wrong as usual. Textual analysis” is when you consider a text in the context of other speeches, memos, letters, rules, guidelines, legislation, timetables, inventories, testimony, statements etc. That way you can determine the motivations and "realities" etc.

3. The buildings themselves had gas tight doors, multiple doors throughout in fact.

4. Wrong. The actual letters, of the time are the fundamental reality, they all show normal operations. They undermine your narrative, they do not support it. Therefore, your imagination about gassed bodies is the alternative scenario.

5. Then in desperation you make up stuff about Goebbels words.

 

[Stan]

1. You take "offense" Stan? What does that even mean?

It means don't go all Deutscherkenntnis für Anfänger: Teil 1 on the thread and pretend that words like "liquidierien" somehow need to be interpreted as "evacuate" unless you're prepared to go to the mats with me on the etymology and meaning of German vocabulary, because I spent enough time learning it not to fall for your polyanna "holocaust is a cultural misunderstanding / translation error" bullshit. I spent way too much time living in Germany, working in German, and submitting college term papers in German, and grading other people's bad German, to fall for this kind of switcheroo. What you're saying is naive to the point of idiocy; when you watch the mobster movies and the mobsters talk about "taking care of someone", do you think they're home health aides?

Fuck you and your offense Stan. Stick it right up your ass. This is emotional manipulation for purposes of deception. Why do you even bother?

It's now emotional manipulation to open a German to English dictionary and show you that your pretend definitions of what certain German words mean are not, actually, what those words mean? Am I supposed to believe you instead of my lying eyes?
Big papa C. Mattogno is gaslighting you by pretending that the words "gas tight door" somehow don't mean "gas tight door", so why are you angry at me?

2. Completely wrong as usual. Textual analysis” is when you consider a text in the context of other speeches, memos, letters, rules, guidelines, legislation, timetables, inventories, testimony, statements etc. That way you can determine the motivations and "realities" etc.

Somehow we're not disagreeing on what "textual analysis" means, although you're living in some candyland reality where all the evidence we have towards Hitler's state of mind, including the numerous times he comes right out and says the Jews are needing to be destroyed, somehow shouldn't be considered when we're reading the fucking Wannsee Minutes.
Were you bad at school? Cause I'm getting the sense that you're not that good at critical reading or critical thinking.

3. The buildings themselves had gas tight doors, multiple doors throughout in fact.

OK why? Why does a building marked "Leichenkammer" on most of its blueprints need a gas-tight door? It doesn't.

4. Wrong. The actual letters, of the time are the fundamental reality, they all show normal operations. They undermine your narrative, they do not support it. Therefore, your imagination about gassed bodies is the alternative scenario.

If the correspondence between the Nazi top brass proves your point, then why did you tell me it doesn't count and I have to disregard it yesterday evening? Pick a lane, bro

5. Then in desperation you make up stuff about Goebbels words.

I'm making up direct quotes from Goebbel's diary now? I made it up when Josef Goebbels wrote this?

“Regarding the Jewish question, the Fuehrer is determined to clean the table. He prophesized that should the Jews once again bring about a world war, they would be annihilated. These were no empty words. The world war has come, therefore the annihilation of the Jews has to be its inevitable consequence. The question has to be examined without any sentimentality. We are not here to pity Jews, but to have pity for our own German people. If the German people have sacrificed about 160,000 dead in the battles in the east, the instigators of this bloody conflicr will have to pay for it with their lives.” (Goebbels’ diaries, Part II, Volume 2, pg. 498 - entry for December 13, 1941)​

Please explain to the class how I was able to fabricate this diary entry in a text discovered more than half a century before I was born. While you're at it, I'd like the textual-analytic explanation for what Goebbels does mean in this passage if he's not talking about killing Jews like cattle. Or is this another act of malicious translation to railroad poor old Hitler?

Stanly,
Stanley.

 

[Stan]

ok thread, buckle up because we’re going to read a bit of:

ADOLF HITLER IN HIS OWN WORDS

Spoiler: “We are going to destroy the Jews.” H-dog

Antisemitism based on purely emotional grounds will always find its ultimate expression in the form of pogroms. A rational antisemitism, however, must lead to the systematic legal fight against and the elimination of the prerogatives of the Jew. ... Its ultimate goal, however, must unalterably be the elimination of the Jews altogether.” [Letter (16 September 1919), quoted in Eberhard Jäckel, Hitler's World View: A Blueprint for Power (Harvard University Press, 1981), p. 48]



“Since we are socialists, we must necessarily also be antisemites because we want to fight against the very opposite: materialism and mammonism... How can you not be an antisemite, being a socialist!” "Why We Are Anti-Semites," August 15, 1920 speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus. Translated from Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 16. Jahrg., 4. H. (Oct., 1968), pp. 390-420. Edited by Carolyn Yeager.



“Once I really am in power, my first and foremost task will be the annihilation of the Jews. As soon as I have the power to do so, I will have gallows built in rows—at the Marienplatz in Munich, for example—as many as traffic allows. Then the Jews will be hanged indiscriminately, and they will remain hanging until they stink; they will hang there as long as the principles of hygiene permit. As soon as they have been untied, the next batch will be strung up, and so on down the line, until the last Jew in Munich has been exterminated. Other cities will follow suit, precisely in this fashion, until all Germany has been completely cleansed of Jews.” Statement to Josef Heil, 1922 quoted in Gerald Fleming, Hitler and the Final Solution pg. 17



“If the National Socialist Movement should fail to understand the fundamental importance of this essential principle [race], if it should merely varnish the external appearance of the present State and adopt the majority principle, it would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground.” Mein Kampf, Volume 2, Chapter IV, "Personality and the Ideal of the People's State," Trans. Marco Roberto, MVR, 2015, p. 33, first published 1926



“At one time the Spartans were capable of such a wise measure, but not our present, mendaciously sentimental, bourgeois patriotic nonsense. The rule of six thousand Spartans over three hundred and fifty thousand Helots was only thinkable in consequence of the high racial value of the Spartans. But this was the result of a systematic race preservation; thus Sparta must be regarded as the first Völkisch State. The exposure of sick, weak, deformed children, in short their destruction, was more decent and in truth a thousand times more humane than the wretched insanity of our day which preserves the most pathological subject, and indeed at any price, and yet takes the life of a hundred thousand healthy children in consequence of birth control or through abortions, in order subsequently to breed a race of degenerates burdened with illnesses.” As translated in Hitler's Secret Book (1961) Grove Press edition, pp. 8-9, 17-18



“In a most generous and humane manner you, Mr. Field Marshal, plead the cause of those members of the Jewish people who were once compelled, by the requirements of universal military service, to serve in the war.

I entirely understand these lofty sentiments, Mr. Field Marshal. But, with the greatest respect, may I point out that members and supporters of my movement, who are Germans, for years were driven from all government positions, without consideration for their wives and children or their war service... Those responsible for this cruelty were the same Jewish [political] parties which today complain when their supporters are denied the right to official positions, with a thousand times more justification, because they are of little use in these positions but can do limitless harm...” [Letter to President Hindenberg, (April 5th 1933)]



“In general, the primary aim of this cleansing process is only to restore a certain sound and natural balance, and, secondly, to remove from official positions of national significance those elements to which one cannot entrust Germany's survival or destruction. For it will not be possible to avoid, in the next few years, [the need] to make sure that certain processes which must not be communicated to the rest of the world for reasons of the highest national interest, will indeed remain secret. This can only be guaranteed by the inner homogeneity of the administrative bodies concerned.” [Letter to President Hindenberg, (April 5th 1933)]

“We are going to destroy the Jews. They are not going to get away with what they did on 9 November 1918. The day of reckoning has come.” [To the Czechoslovakian foreign minister (January 21, 1939) quoted in Sarah Ann Gordon, Hitler, Germans, and the "Jewish Question" pg. 130]

The Non-Aggression and Mutual Assistance Pact with the Soviet Union constituted the most outstanding feature of the year now past. From the outset, the attempt of the plutocratic statesmen of the West to pit Germany and Russia against each other was foiled;... [T]he reactionary Jewish warmongers in the capitalist democracies were not willing to let this opportunity to destroy Germany pass: too long had they prepared for this. For years they had waited for this hour. These Herren warmongers wanted war: they were to get it.” [Speech, "New Year's Proclamation to the National Socialists and Party Comrades", Adolf Hitler: Collection of Speeches 1922-1945 (1 January 1940) pp. 678-679]
“Providence shows no mercy to weak nations, but recognizes the right of existence-only of sound and strong nations...

This Jewish bolshevist annihilation of nations and its western European and American procurers can be met only in one way: by using every ounce of strength with the extreme fanaticism and stubborn steadfastness that merciful God gives to men in hard times for the defense of their own lives...



We have suffered so much that it only steels us to fanatical resolve to hate Our enemies a thousand times more and to regard them for what they are destroyers of an eternal culture and annihilators of humanity. Out of this hate a holy will is born to oppose these destroyers of our existence with all the strength that God has given us and to crush them in the end. During its 2,000-year history our people has survived so many terrible times that we have no doubt that we will also master our present plight.” [Speech on the 25th Anniversary of the Announcement of the National Socialist Party's Program (February 24, 1945)]

Would any of our 7-9 Holocaust denying friends care to give some contextual analysis to Hitler’s words? When he says “the day of reckoning has come”, what does that mean? Can you really say that when Hitler says “we are going to destroy the Jews”, the verb he uses (zerstoeren) somehow doesn’t mean “destroy” without lying to yourselves (or being taken in by other liars?) When Hitler said in 1922 that he wanted to build gallows in Munich (“as many as traffic allows” and “indiscriminately” hang Jews there and leave them until their bodies stink, why is it a reach to infer he wouldn’t have wanted and approved of the Final Solution?

Do you see why I regard your Nazi LARP as an offense to truth, reason, and history? These quotes are fully, exhaustively attested, so we know Hitler said these things. But you all would try to pilpul these statements into meaninglessness and gaslight everyone about the intentions Hitler and his inner circle had towards the Jews from the very beginning.

 

[mrolonzo]

It means don't go all Deutscherkenntnis für Anfänger: Teil 1 on the thread and pretend that words like "liquidierien" somehow need to be interpreted as "evacuate" unless you're prepared to go to the mats with me on the etymology and meaning of German vocabulary, because I spent enough time learning it not to fall for your polyanna "holocaust is a cultural misunderstanding / translation error" bullshit. I spent way too much time living in Germany, working in German, and submitting college term papers in German, and grading other people's bad German, to fall for this kind of switcheroo. What you're saying is naive to the point of idiocy; when you watch the mobster movies and the mobsters talk about "taking care of someone", do you think they're home health aides?

Oh really Stan?

What is German for evacuate?

What is the meaning of the English word liquidate?

What is German for deportation?

It's now emotional manipulation to open a German to English dictionary and show you that your pretend definitions of what certain German words mean are not, actually, what those words mean? Am I supposed to believe you instead of my lying eyes?
Big papa C. Mattogno is gaslighting you by pretending that the words "gas tight door" somehow don't mean "gas tight door", so why are you angry at me?

Its Thomas Dalton I've been quoting here actually.

See part 1 as given above and now below.

Somehow we're not disagreeing on what "textual analysis" means, although you're living in some candyland reality where all the evidence we have towards Hitler's state of mind, including the numerous times he comes right out and says the Jews are needing to be destroyed, somehow shouldn't be considered when we're reading the fucking Wannsee Minutes.
Were you bad at school? Cause I'm getting the sense that you're not that good at critical reading or critical thinking.

How is "he comes right out and says the Jews are needing to be destroyed" count as actual textual analysis?

OK why? Why does a building marked "Leichenkammer" on most of its blueprints need a gas-tight door? It doesn't.

For delousing.

If the correspondence between the Nazi top brass proves your point, then why did you tell me it doesn't count and I have to disregard it yesterday evening? Pick a lane, bro

The camp officials are the Nazi top brass now?

I'm making up direct quotes from Goebbel's diary now? I made it up when Josef Goebbels wrote this?

This has been addressed already. You're just too lazy to read what you're given. Another naughty boy.

To quote Dalton part 1,

Is there a clear difference between (a) many dying from disease, exposure, lack of medical care, periodic shootings, etc, and (b) all dying in a complex and systematic gassing operation?

Please explain to the class how I was able to fabricate this diary entry in a text discovered more than half a century before I was born. While you're at it, I'd like the textual-analytic explanation for what Goebbels does mean in this passage if he's not talking about killing Jews like cattle. Or is this another act of malicious translation to railroad poor old Hitler?

Stanly,
Stanley.

To quote Dalton part 1, since you refuse to read articles I give you;

There is no doubt that concentrating and deporting thousands or millions of people in wartime would lead to many deaths. But this is not genocide.

The next entry (after the one you quote) is telling:

Dec 18, 1941 (II.2.533-534)
I speak with the Führer regarding the Jewish Question. He is determined to take consistent action and not be deterred by bourgeois sentimentality. Above all, the Jews must leave the Reich (aus…heraus). We discuss the possibilities for especially clearing out (räumen) Berlin as quickly as possible. Objections are sure to be raised here—from the Four Year Plan, from the Economics Ministry—because about 13,000 Jews are employed in the armaments industry in Berlin; but, with some good will, they can be replaced by Bolshevik prisoners of war. In any case we will tackle this problem as soon as possible, especially when we have the transport capacity to move this body of people. Berlin cannot count as absolutely consolidated as long as Jews are living and working in the capital. Besides, the bourgeois Schlappmeier has ever-new excuses to save the Jews. Earlier it was Jewish money and influence; now it is the Jewish workers. German intellectuals and elite have no anti-Jewish instinct at all. Their vigilance is not sharp. It is therefore necessary that we solve this problem, since it is likely that, if it remains unsolved, it will lead to the most devastating consequences after we are gone. The Jews should all be pushed off (abgeschoben) to the East. We are not very interested in what becomes of them after that. They have wished this fate upon themselves, they have started the war, and they must now pay the price\.

“We are not very interested in what becomes of them after that.” Harsh and brutal, perhaps, but clearly far less than genocide.

https://codoh.com/library/document/goebbels-on-the-jews-part-1/en/

This is what happens Larry, you refuse to read all 29 volumes of his diary. Which is understandable. But then you also refuse to read anything else.

Would any of our 7-9 Holocaust denying friends care to give some contextual analysis to Hitler’s words? When he says “the day of reckoning has come”, what does that mean? Can you really say that when Hitler says “we are going to destroy the Jews”, the verb he uses (zerstoeren) somehow doesn’t mean “destroy” without lying to yourselves? When Hitler said in 1922 that he wanted to build gallows in Munich (“as many as traffic allows” and “indiscriminately” hang Jews there and leave them until their bodies stink, why is it a reach to infer he wouldn’t have wanted and approved of the Final Solution?

Do you see why I regard your Nazi LARP as an offense to truth, reason, and history? These quotes are fully, exhaustively attested, so we know Hitler said these things. But you all would try to pilpul these statements into meaninglessness and gaslight everyone about the intentions Hitler and his inner circle had towards the Jews from the very beginning.

1. Oh no! A day of reckoning!

2. What does destroy mean? To de-struct?

3. Is that the most criminal and influential Jews or every man woman and child? Did you record this? And this is Gerald Fleming telling us this right?

4. It's a reach because there is neither speech, diary entry, budget, plan, order, mechanism, technical theory or subsequent bodies of gassed jews anywhere in all Europe.

5. I can see why you're confused if that's what you mean. After all, you're basically imbecilic in your argumentation. Most people agree with this here.

 

[Stan]

Oh really Stan?

What is German for evacuate?

What is the meaning of the English word liquidate?

What is German for deportation?

Zo vs the dictionary, round 2. It’s not looking good for ya friend. “Liquidate” doesn’t have great implications in English or German. When a company is “liquidated”, that means all business is stopped and any assets the company has are being sold to cover liability. It means the company is over and they’re just tidying up loose ends.

To ‘liquidate’ an asset generally means to sell it for cash value.

“Liquidate” is really only ever applied to persons in this specific context in the German language, but when applied to animals it means “to kill”, or “to destroy”. Here’s some article from a pork farming website that uses the word over and over again in reference to sows.

How is "he comes right out and says the Jews are needing to be destroyed" count as actual textual analysis?

It confers context on later documents that you would like us to believe are harmless deportations, gives us insight to the state of mind of Hitler, and gives us context needed to be suspicious about the later “liquidation” of Jews in Aktion Reinhard.

For delousing

Then why is the delousing chamber cheek to jowl with a crematorium? Why is it sometimes called a morgue, which has no need for delousing?

This has been addressed already. You're just too lazy to read what you're given. Another naughty boy.

Actually I’ve been busy reading Lipstadt and Sereny and primary sources instead of some no-account Holocaust denier author who twists the meaning of German words to a non German fan base.

If you were willing to actually apply some textual analysis or even plain common sense to that entry when considered with the one before it, and Hitler’s numerous statements that Jews are an evil bacillus, that they all deserve to die, then it becomes obvious that while Goebbels doesn’t care about Jewish death with quite the same passion, they’re gonna get ganked. The whole gestalt, the body of Nazi writings, always points towards antisemitism. Destroying the Jews was a long time Nazi policy goal. In that context, your document is evidence of that goal proceeding to completion.

 

[Stan]

Wenn jeder von euch mit mir Deutsch sprechen wollen, einfach melden Sie mich in direktnachtrichten ein. Ich warte hoffnungsvoll auf Ihre Bekanntschaft.

Mit freundlichen Grussen,
Ihre Stanley

 

[Feline Supremacist]

Wenn jeder von euch mit mir Deutsch sprechen wollen, einfach melden Sie mich in direktnachtrichten ein. Ich warte hoffnungsvoll auf Ihre Bekanntschaft.

Mit freundlichen Grussen,
Ihre Stanley

Ja, gern

 

[mrolonzo]

Zo vs the dictionary, round 2. It’s not looking good for ya friend.

It's good enough by your own answers so far right?

It confers context on later documents that you would like us to believe are harmless deportations, gives us insight to the state of mind of Hitler, and gives us context needed to be suspicious about the later “liquidation” of Jews in Aktion Reinhard.

How?

Then why is the delousing chamber cheek to jowl with a crematorium? Why is it sometimes called a morgue, which has no need for delousing?

Since when do lice care what building they're in?

Actually I’ve been busy reading Lipstadt and Sereny and primary sources instead of some no-account Holocaust denier author who twists the meaning of German words to a non German fan base.

Exactly like I said. Too lazy.

If you were willing to actually apply some textual analysis or even plain common sense to that entry when considered with the one before it, and Hitler’s numerous statements that Jews are an evil bacillus, that they all deserve to die, then it becomes obvious that while Goebbels doesn’t care about Jewish death with quite the same passion, they’re gonna get ganked. The whole gestalt, the body of Nazi writings, always points towards antisemitism. Destroying the Jews was a long time Nazi policy goal. In that context, your document is evidence of that goal proceeding to completion.

1. Do you mean analysis applied to entries before each other in time by the same person or entries as you've decided to post them?

2. In fact Goebbels by his own writings is even more of an anti semite. So again you don't know what you're talking about.

3. Did you just tell me that the Nazis were anti semitic?

4. And that therefore killing every Jewish man woman and child is a foregone conclusion?

5. It's evidence of deportation.

Response to your late edit on "liquidate",

Dalton,

Mar 19, 1941 (I.9.195)
Early flight to Posen. … Here, all sorts have been liquidated (liquidiert), above all the Jewish trash. This has to be. I explain the situation to Greiser\.

Mar 22, 1941 (I.9.199)
I am deeply troubled about the cultural impact of foreign laborers working in the Reich. There are several hundred thousand. The harsh line towards prisoners of war is also somewhat mitigated. The Jews themselves cannot be evacuated (evakuiert) from Berlin because 30,000 are working in the armaments industry. Who, earlier, would have thought this possible?

In the March 19 entry we find the first occurrence of another troublesome word, ‘liquidation’. It proves to be rather popular, appearing in eight different entries. The troublesome part is that, in many cases, it means something other than killing. Goebbels speaks of liquidating the “Jewish danger” (30 May 1942) and of liquidating Jewish marriages (6 December 1942). The word ‘liquidation’ means, primarily, ‘to make fluid.’ And this in fact is a fairly apt description of the deportation process: a large, entrenched Jewish community who had to be uprooted, made liquid, and then to flow out across the borders. Nothing in this entails killing. Nor at the time, in the 1940s, did the word necessarily mean murder. An article in the London Times had this to say: “The rest of the Jews in the General Government…would be liquidated, which means either transported eastward in cattle trucks to an unknown destination, or killed where they stood” (4 December 1942; p. 3). Holocaust survivor Thomas Buergenthal (2009: 49) writes of his experience in the Kielce ghetto: “The ghetto was being liquidated or, in the words bellowing out of the loudspeakers, Ausseidlung! Ausseidlung! (‘Evacuation! Evacuation!’).” And later he comments, “After the liquidation of the labor camp…” (p. 56). Clearly the word means, and meant, something other than killing.

Obviously, ‘liquidate’ can mean killing, as can a huge variety of words under contrived circumstances. In Mafia circles, a ‘kiss’ can mean death. Motion pictures use a variety of silly terms: whack, pop, bump, waste, take for a ride, off, do in, and so on. In the case of Goebbels, we must ask once again, why would he go to lengths to use euphemisms or silly code words in a personal diary? And one in which, when motivated, he was happy to call a spade a spade?

 

[mgc]

"Liquidate" as applied to people (as opposed to companies, marriages, or abstractions like the "Jewish danger") plainly means "to kill." Your denial about this shows the irrationality of your overall position.

Goebbels also used "liquidate" when talking about what the Soviets did to the Poles in Katyn. Was it a "code word" there?

 

[mrolonzo]

"Liquidate" as applied to people (as opposed to companies, marriages, or abstractions like the "Jewish danger") plainly means "to kill." Your denial about this shows the irrationality of your overall position.

Goebbels also used "liquidate" when talking about what the Soviets did to the Poles in Katyn. Was it a "code word" there?

Its cool. I know you don't actually read my stuff:

In the March 19 entry we find the first occurrence of another troublesome word, ‘liquidation’. It proves to be rather popular, appearing in eight different entries. The troublesome part is that, in many cases, it means something other than killing. Goebbels speaks of liquidating the “Jewish danger” (30 May 1942) and of liquidating Jewish marriages (6 December 1942). The word ‘liquidation’ means, primarily, ‘to make fluid.’ And this in fact is a fairly apt description of the deportation process: a large, entrenched Jewish community who had to be uprooted, made liquid, and then to flow out across the borders. Nothing in this entails killing. Nor at the time, in the 1940s, did the word necessarily mean murder. An article in the London Times had this to say: “The rest of the Jews in the General Government…would be liquidated, which means either transported eastward in cattle trucks to an unknown destination, or killed where they stood” (4 December 1942; p. 3). Holocaust survivor Thomas Buergenthal (2009: 49) writes of his experience in the Kielce ghetto: “The ghetto was being liquidated or, in the words bellowing out of the loudspeakers, Ausseidlung! Ausseidlung! (‘Evacuation! Evacuation!’).” And later he comments, “After the liquidation of the labor camp…” (p. 56). Clearly the word means, and meant, something other than killing.

 

[Stan]

It's good enough by your own answers so far right?

Well, I also attached the dictionary definitions of these words so it wasn’t just my opinion.

How?

Through a special skill called considering each piece of evidence you have and then going with the explanation that fits the most pieces. You do the opposite; you grind on one document looking for alternative explanations that could fit, irrespective of the whole.

Since when do lice care what building they're in?

Since when did the Germans care about delousing people who were on their way out of their borders, Socrates?

Exactly like I said. Too lazy.

Since when is reading primary sources lazy and reading the works of Holocaust deniers isnt? “Into that darkness” is, like it or not, a primary source cause Gitta personally interviews Stangl.

1. Do you mean analysis applied to entries before each other in time by the same person or entries as you've decided to post them?

Chronologically in the timeline. Like most rational people might approach this.

2. In fact Goebbels by his own writings is even more of an anti semite. So again you don't know what you're talking about.

Re read the Hitler quotes behind the spoiler text and get back to me on that one.

3. Did you just tell me that the Nazis were anti semitic?

No, hitler did, i think the exact quote is “socialism is inherently anti-Semitic” or something along those lines.

4. And that therefore killing every Jewish man woman and child is a foregone conclusion?

That’s what Hitler repeatedly and explicitly said he wanted to happen, over and over for decades. From 1919-1945, Hitler’s position on this is remarkably consistent. He said Jews are the enemy of a socialist state, the enemy of the Aryan people, a stateless human disease upon society.

5. It's evidence of deportation.

To where? You still can’t find a single survivor who experienced this deportation; if it happened finding one should be trivial because millions of persons were affected.

But the truth is there was no “resettlement”. Hitler and Himmler both say that they were doing the entire world a favor by eliminating Jews from Europe. And the sad thing is, they rather succeeded. Almost all Jews who survived the Shoah moved to America or Israel.

Dalton,

Mar 19, 1941 (I.9.195)
Early flight to Posen. … Here, all sorts have been liquidated (liquidiert), above all the Jewish trash. This has to be. I explain the situation to Greiser\.

Mar 22, 1941 (I.9.199)
I am deeply troubled about the cultural impact of foreign laborers working in the Reich. There are several hundred thousand. The harsh line towards prisoners of war is also somewhat mitigated. The Jews themselves cannot be evacuated (evakuiert) from Berlin because 30,000 are working in the armaments industry. Who, earlier, would have thought this possible?

In the March 19 entry we find the first occurrence of another troublesome word, ‘liquidation’. It proves to be rather popular, appearing in eight different entries. The troublesome part is that, in many cases, it means something other than killing. Goebbels speaks of liquidating the “Jewish danger” (30 May 1942) and of liquidating Jewish marriages (6 December 1942). The word ‘liquidation’ means, primarily, ‘to make fluid.’ And this in fact is a fairly apt description of the deportation process: a large, entrenched Jewish community who had to be uprooted, made liquid, and then to flow out across the borders. Nothing in this entails killing. Nor at the time, in the 1940s, did the word necessarily mean murder. An article in the London Times had this to say: “The rest of the Jews in the General Government…would be liquidated, which means either transported eastward in cattle trucks to an unknown destination, or killed where they stood” (4 December 1942; p. 3). Holocaust survivor Thomas Buergenthal (2009: 49) writes of his experience in the Kielce ghetto: “The ghetto was being liquidated or, in the words bellowing out of the loudspeakers, Ausseidlung! Ausseidlung! (‘Evacuation! Evacuation!’).” And later he comments, “After the liquidation of the labor camp…” (p. 56). Clearly the word means, and meant, something other than killing.

Obviously, ‘liquidate’ can mean killing, as can a huge variety of words under contrived circumstances. In Mafia circles, a ‘kiss’ can mean death. Motion pictures use a variety of silly terms: whack, pop, bump, waste, take for a ride, off, do in, and so on. In the case of Goebbels, we must ask once again, why would he go to lengths to use euphemisms or silly code words in a personal diary? And one in which, when motivated, he was happy to call a spade a spade?

Dalton is desperately searching for wiggle room on this word “liquidate”, but as applied to animals (see my link from earlier from a pork industry journal) it always means “to kill”. And it’s not uncommon to see that word used in slaughterhouse trade publications as opposed to “pig murder” or something, Goebbels may have used “liquidate” rather than “murder” or “finish off” or any other phrase because he, like Hitler, viewed Jews as subhuman animals. To an extent I view this irrational hatred towards Jews as the sine qua non of Nazism

 

[JohnDoe]

Per my prior post, all the references to 'liquidation' are just coded language for loading the Jews onto liquid fueled rockets for Moon Resettlement.

 

[mrolonzo]

Referring to post #3568

1. Right so thanks for proving me correct by posting dictionary definitions.

2. Ah yes, except that special skill is what revisionists do while peddlers hunt for "criminal traces".

3. Since typhus.

4. I was only asking to read the stuff given to you by us, but instead you want to read your own stuff. What happened to Franz after the last interview by the way?

5. Ok go ahead and show why it has to be murder by textual analysis.

6. We're talking about truly authentic words, right? Not just some guy said to some guy?

Yeah. So see links provided.

7. Hitler was a national socialist so what the fuck are you talking about now?

8. Right, so when asked you provide no murder talk then thanks for proving it.

9. We already have documents of the time talking about Jews coming from the west to the east. Mentioned repeatedly in this thread. Lemme guess, another text you didn't read.

10. Any words can be applied by anyone anywhere. Throwing in that some people refer to liquidation when referring to killing animals is profoundly weak. Goebbels refers to liquidation when talking about Jewish marriage. Do animals generally, excepting your mother and father of course, get married?