A proper Sonthofen thread (Himmler's speeches)

[Archie]

I can give you a direct answer to the Churchill quote - I do think it was genocidal, they were trying to kill as many Germans as possible- I also think the war in Gaza is genocidal, and Israel's policy on the whole is genocidal ...

Here we see a curiously unorthodox maneuver from BA. Throwing Churchill under the bus like this does not fit well with the usual Anglo-American triumphalist accounts of WWII and Nuremberg since implicitly this admits that both sides were war criminals but that only one side was prosecuted (the side that lost). It seems to me this feeds dangerously into revisionist narratives about the illegitimacy of Nuremberg.

[Callafangers]

Who benefited from Himmler's efforts to appease consciences about the need to sacrifice children? The Wehrmacht generals? As far as we know, they did not participate in the extermination process. If the speech was directed at them, then the context is an anti-partisan war and not about the universality of Jews.

Indeed, if Himmler is speaking about universal Jewish policy, he would have had the need to "explain away" his atrocities to almost every audience, all of whom would be interested and appalled. Instead, we see this language only in front of Wehrmacht generals, precisely where partisan activity and internal security is the central focus.

Whenever I was forced to take steps against the partisans and Jewish commissars in some village – I’ll say it for the information of this group only – I made it a point to give the order to kill the women and children of these partisans and commissars. I would have been a weakling and I would be committing a crime against our descendants if I allowed the hate-filled sons of the subhumans we have liquidated in this struggle of humanity against subhumanity to grow up. (Himmler speech, 16 Dec 1943)

Excellent. I would say this ties off any remaining inference about what Himmler "really" meant, here.

[fireofice]

"OMG Himmler ordered the killing of WOMEN and CHILDREN in his speeches!!! What a monster!"

Meanwhile the Allies also killed women and children in their bombing campaigns like Dresden. Please.

[Callafangers]

"OMG Himmler ordered the killing of WOMEN and CHILDREN in his speeches!!! What a monster!"

Meanwhile the Allies also killed women and children in their bombing campaigns like Dresden. Please.

[HansHill]

Well Bombsaway, I will give you something - at least you are consistent!

Archie is right though, you have veered headlong into WW2 Revisionism that I would imagine many of your fellow travelers would be very uncomfortable to see. Actually I don't even have to imagine much, because already your buddie Nessie in the slop forum has just now defended "exterminate = destroy infrastructure".

Perhaps you guys should duke it out and ascertain exactly what "exterminating" means then come back to us.

[Wahrheitssucher]

I believe the Holocaust happened…

Bombsaway is still peddling the holyhoax-believer’s false dichotomy.

[bombsaway]

I can give you a direct answer to the Churchill quote - I do think it was genocidal, they were trying to kill as many Germans as possible- I also think the war in Gaza is genocidal, and Israel's policy on the whole is genocidal ...

Here we see a curiously unorthodox maneuver from BA. Throwing Churchill under the bus like this does not fit well with the usual Anglo-American triumphalist accounts of WWII and Nuremberg since implicitly this admits that both sides were war criminals but that only one side was prosecuted (the side that lost). It seems to me this feeds dangerously into revisionist narratives about the illegitimacy of Nuremberg.

When has the victorious side ever been prosecuted? Don't understand this line at all. This is not evidence of a conspiracy to fabricate or suppress evidence.

[bombsaway]

Nevermind that Himmler's speeches to actual SS leadership (e.g. at Krakow, Posen) explicitly describe Jewish policy as "deportation to the East", directly tie to the NSDAP program which is only about expulsion, and align with Goebbels' private diary where he emphasizes literal evacuation/quarantine/resettlement as the official policy well-into 1942-3.

Deportation to the east means very little, because people were deported east to death camps (we also have westward deportation to the Reinhardt camps and Chlemno).

What you absolutely don't see is any mention of them being maintained and resettled, other than in Himmler's broad decree to the GG which began the deportations https://www.yadvashem.org/docs/himmler- ... ution.html

But after this 0 evidence of resettlement, many mentions of killing which you have quoted

[Callafangers]

Deportation to the east means very little, because people were deported east to death camps (we also have westward deportation to the Reinhardt camps and Chlemno).

"Deportation to the East" absolutely has considerable meaning as it aligns with the official, documented Final Solution policy. "The East" is referred to in other contexts which consistently mean the Eastern-occupied territories and not 'death camps in the GG'.

Archie's earlier excerpt from Himmler's transcript of his meeting with Mussolini in October 1942 exemplifies this (I made a slight correction to the last sentence):

The Jews would be taken out of all of Germany, the General Government and all the countries occupied by us, because everywhere they were the carriers of sabotage, espionage, resistance and gang formation. In Russia we had to shoot a considerable number of Jews, both men and women, because even women and adolescent children there were carriers of information for the partisans. The Duce stressed on his own initiative that this was the only possible solution. I told the Duce that we were taking the Jews who were politically compromised to concentration camps, that we were using other Jews to build roads in the East, although the mortality rate was very high because the Jews had never worked in their lives. The oldest Jews were being housed in old people's homes in Berlin, Munich and Vienna. The other old Jews would have been placed in the small town of Theresienstadt, a retirement ghetto for German Jews, where they would continue to receive their pensions and benefits and could live their lives as they wished, although they fought among themselves there in the most lively way. We had tried to drive another group of Jews across the front lines to the Russians in the East, but the Russians often shot at these groups of Jews and clearly didn't like them either.

Here is the correct archival URL to this report (Archie had indicated page 229 but the archive has these pages in reverse order for some reason in its browser view, so it is p. 977, then move upward/backwards to progress through the pages):
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/2738638 ... ctPage=977

From the above, we see that as of late 1942:

• Himmler is able to speak openly with Mussolini about killing a large number of Jews (including women and adolescent children) -- Mussolini insists it's the 'only possible solution'
• Despite Mussolini's openness to Jewish extermination, Himmler describes to Mussolini what actions were actually being taken regarding Jews. These included:
  • Sending Jews to concentration camps
  • Sending Jews to build roads
  • Sending the oldest Jews into old people's homes in Germany/Austria
  • Other elderly Jews to Theresienstadt
  • Other Jews (in the East) driven across the front lines to the Russians

In addition to this, everything aligns with Wannsee which says Jews shall go to work in the East; Goebbels also puts them in the East (and in "quarantine"), the official documented policy is that they are to be sent East for the duration of the war (Luther memo, Schlegelberger letter), all aligning with the NSDAP program and Hitler's prophecy, etc.

So yes, bombsaway, Himmler's late-1943 speeches (i.e. Posen, Krakow) saying "deportation to the East" and not "sent to be gassed at Reinhardt camps" is a huge problem for you.

[bombsaway]

So yes, bombsaway, Himmler's late-1943 speeches (i.e. Posen, Krakow) saying "deportation to the East" and not "sent to be gassed at Reinhardt camps" is a huge problem for you.

Still no evidence provided here, that Mussolini exchange just says they were trying to push Jews across the front lines in Russia, not storing them there.

The Jews would be taken out of all of Germany, the General Government and all the countries occupied by us, because everywhere they were the carriers of sabotage, espionage, resistance and gang formation.

In Russia we had to shoot a considerable number of Jews, both men and women, because even women and adolescent children there were carriers of information for the partisans.

If Jews everywhere were carriers of sabotage, resistance etc, and in Russia they shot women and children for being carriers, why would the Jews stored there suddenly be pacified, not a threat?

There is far more evidence of killing in Russia than storing, maybe infinitely more, because again you have no evidence of a even single community being maintained there until liberation. German/Austrian Jews were resettled, but again the documents are clear that the resettlement places (ghettos) were dissolved and the non-employable members were killed.

Every piece of evidence you bring up is going to circumstantial, ie relying on inference to make your point, rather than directly positing. This is the failure of revisionism, and why we're different.

[Callafangers]

Still no evidence provided here, that Mussolini exchange just says they were trying to push Jews across the front lines in Russia, not storing them there.

Where did the Jews being 'pushed' come from?

If Jews everywhere were carriers of sabotage, resistance etc, and in Russia they shot women and children for being carriers, why would the Jews stored there suddenly be pacified, not a threat?

Jews being the carriers everywhere (in all locations) doesn't mean every Jew is a carrier.

There is far more evidence of killing in Russia than storing, maybe infinitely more, because again you have no evidence of a even single community being maintained there until liberation. German/Austrian Jews were resettled, but again the documents are clear that the resettlement places (ghettos) were dissolved and the non-employable members were killed.

Every piece of evidence you bring up is going to circumstantial, ie relying on inference to make your point, rather than directly positing. This is the failure of revisionism, and why we're different.

Nothing you just wrote here is convincing, especially given that your Reinhardt camps are missing millions of corpses. You cannot even rely on inference due to the fact that excavations were conducted and show nothing remotely near even an order of magnitude less than what you claim there. The 'Holocaust' was dead in that moment. Everything else is supporting evidence.

[Stubble]

Fangers, I believe you may have misspelled 'window dressing'. You appear to have mistakenly typed 'supporting evidence'.

[bombsaway]

Where did the Jews being 'pushed' come from?

Soviet Jews

You cannot even rely on inference due to the fact that excavations were conducted and show nothing remotely near even an order of magnitude less than what you claim there.

I believe you're misinterpreting the data, just like you misinterpreted the study initially (the thing about digging at the borders) in our last exchange. As I recall, you repeatedly called me incompetent (using harsher language than this probably) before backtracking completely on this claim. You maintain your belief system only because of chronically poor judgement.

[Callafangers]

Where did the Jews being 'pushed' come from?

Soviet Jews

Only Soviet Jews? How have you ruled out the other Jews which Himmler, Goebbels, and official policy said explicitly were being deported to the Eastern territories?

You cannot even rely on inference due to the fact that excavations were conducted and show nothing remotely near even an order of magnitude less than what you claim there.

I believe you're misinterpreting the data, just like you misinterpreted the study initially (the thing about digging at the borders) in our last exchange. As I recall, you repeatedly called me incompetent (using harsher language than this probably) before backtracking completely on this claim. You maintain your belief system only because of chronically poor judgement.

Blah blah, if you have an argument about grave volumes then make it in the appropriate thread where you have already been demolished/eviscerated.

As for calling you out with "harsh language", feel free to quote it there as well. I'm confident it was quite measured and appropriate for the situation, whatever it was.

[bombsaway]

"No, bombsaway, you're a wiggly fellow but you don't get to wriggle your way out of this one."

"This is clear-cut."

"bombsaway, you are a crackhead. Stop smoking crack."

"How are you this terrible at reading comprehension? This is embarrassing."

on this page alone

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=602&start=45

So you had time to investigate the issues, evaluate my argument, and you persisted in a line of reasoning that was totally wrong, despite my explanations. This is why you're not worth talking to for me. Also note how members like Stubble went along with your reasoning. An example of groupthink on this forum.