Challenge for Believers

[TlsMS93]

What's the 1 million Soviet "escapes"? this is prior to barborossa or in the wake of the German advance? Why is this something Himmler wanted to hide? Does this have anything to do with special treatment --> deportation to the Russian (presumably under German control since moving 1.5 million Jews across enemy lines would be pretty insane).

I'm not following your logic. From the orthodox view, the "camouflage" is intended to disguise the killings at Reinhardt camps, and this also dovetails completely with the change of terminology from a code word "special treatment". I don't see your issue with this.

Revisionists Jürgen Graf, Thomas Kues and Carlo Mattogno:

"The conclusion we can draw from the analysis of the Korherr report is that the "special treatment of Jews" applied only to the deportation of Western Jews (those from Altreich with Sudetenland, Ostmark and Protectorate) and Eastern Jews (those from Ostgebiete with Bialystok and General Government with Lemberg) to the East, i.e. beyond the limits of the Greater German Reich. The Jews deported within these limits, in particular the approximately (121,428+8,500=) 130,000 Jews sent to Auschwitz, were not subjected to "special treatment." Nor were the 69,084 Jews deported from Altreich, Ostmark, Protectorate and Slovakia to Nisko and the Lublin district formally subjected to it. We say formally, because they acquired the status of "treaty Jews" "specially" (sonderbehandelt) gradually as they moved from the Polish ghettos through the various camps. This is also true of the 18,004 Jews deported to Theresienstadt and then from that ghetto to Treblinka. In practice, there was a system of double accounting: one for Jews evacuated from individual countries and one for Jews who moved through the above camps and who were counted regardless of their origin."

I took this from the metapedia regarding this report, this seems to be the standard revisionist interpretation of special treatment contained in the report

[bombsaway]

What's the 1 million Soviet "escapes"? this is prior to barborossa or in the wake of the German advance? Why is this something Himmler wanted to hide? Does this have anything to do with special treatment --> deportation to the Russian (presumably under German control since moving 1.5 million Jews across enemy lines would be pretty insane).

I'm not following your logic. From the orthodox view, the "camouflage" is intended to disguise the killings at Reinhardt camps, and this also dovetails completely with the change of terminology from a code word "special treatment". I don't see your issue with this.

Revisionists Jürgen Graf, Thomas Kues and Carlo Mattogno:

"The conclusion we can draw from the analysis of the Korherr report is that the "special treatment of Jews" applied only to the deportation of Western Jews (those from Altreich with Sudetenland, Ostmark and Protectorate) and Eastern Jews (those from Ostgebiete with Bialystok and General Government with Lemberg) to the East, i.e. beyond the limits of the Greater German Reich. The Jews deported within these limits, in particular the approximately (121,428+8,500=) 130,000 Jews sent to Auschwitz, were not subjected to "special treatment." Nor were the 69,084 Jews deported from Altreich, Ostmark, Protectorate and Slovakia to Nisko and the Lublin district formally subjected to it. We say formally, because they acquired the status of "treaty Jews" "specially" (sonderbehandelt) gradually as they moved from the Polish ghettos through the various camps. This is also true of the 18,004 Jews deported to Theresienstadt and then from that ghetto to Treblinka. In practice, there was a system of double accounting: one for Jews evacuated from individual countries and one for Jews who moved through the above camps and who were counted regardless of their origin."

I took this from the metapedia regarding this report, this seems to be the standard revisionist interpretation of special treatment contained in the report

I'm aware of all of this, now explain the change in terminology plus camouflage better. I'm still confused about the escaped Jews. Why couldn't he just tell the truth?

[Nessie]

....

Revisionists Jürgen Graf, Thomas Kues and Carlo Mattogno:

"The conclusion we can draw from the analysis of the Korherr report...

Their analysis is faulty, as it ignores a lot of evidence of mass murder and they cannot evidence millions of Jews in camps and ghettos in the east, with populations that kept on growing and growing.

[TlsMS93]

Their analysis is faulty, as it ignores a lot of evidence of mass murder and they cannot evidence millions of Jews in camps and ghettos in the east, with populations that kept on growing and growing.

The problem is that you think the Soviets were meticulous about transparency or that this population of Jews in the occupied USSR would have come west in the chaos of war. There is no way to know for sure how many Jews there were in the post-war USSR. So stop asking where the Jews are in ghettos and camps because most of them were deported to the USSR because after all I am still waiting for the 2,400 tons of ash to be found in Treblinka II that corresponds to the alleged 800,000 bodies.

[TlsMS93]

I'm aware of all of this, now explain the change in terminology plus camouflage better. I'm still confused about the escaped Jews. Why couldn't he just tell the truth?

This is what I would like to know from you. Why is it not stated in the report addressed to Hitler that 1.2 million Jews were executed, like in that report by Himmler mentioning more than 300 thousand Jews executed by police actions on the Eastern Front?

[bombsaway]

I'm aware of all of this, now explain the change in terminology plus camouflage better. I'm still confused about the escaped Jews. Why couldn't he just tell the truth?

This is what I would like to know from you. Why is it not stated in the report addressed to Hitler that 1.2 million Jews were executed, like in that report by Himmler mentioning more than 300 thousand Jews executed by police actions on the Eastern Front?

Korherr inquired and was told that they had received "special treatment" a self evident code word that more often than not was used by the Nazis killing (just search the EG OSR's for "special treatment" and you will see this). Killing is not explicitly indicated here but very possible, just based on the terminology. Himmler saw this and how suspect that term was and then ordered it changed for purposes of future camouflage, eg if post-war officials from Britain or US ask about what happened to the Polish Jews, who they had intel were being killed at these camps in the GG, they can show them this document which will evidence otherwise. From the orthodox perspective the deception worked, because many or most revisionists believe that this vast population movement did occur.

[TlsMS93]

Korherr inquired and was told that they had received "special treatment" a self evident code word that more often than not was used by the Nazis killing (just search the EG OSR's for "special treatment" and you will see this). Killing is not explicitly indicated here but very possible, just based on the terminology. Himmler saw this and how suspect that term was and then ordered it changed for purposes of future camouflage, eg if post-war officials from Britain or US ask about what happened to the Polish Jews, who they had intel were being killed at these camps in the GG, they can show them this document which will evidence otherwise. From the orthodox perspective the deception worked, because many or most revisionists believe that this vast population movement did occur.

Oh, and what about the report of 300,000 Jews executed because they were not careful? Do you see how their vision is to go wherever they please? Special treatment is not a fixed terminology. You are simply swallowing the code word theory. I suggest you learn more about what the most serious revisionists have said about this terminology.

[bombsaway]

Korherr inquired and was told that they had received "special treatment" a self evident code word that more often than not was used by the Nazis killing (just search the EG OSR's for "special treatment" and you will see this). Killing is not explicitly indicated here but very possible, just based on the terminology. Himmler saw this and how suspect that term was and then ordered it changed for purposes of future camouflage, eg if post-war officials from Britain or US ask about what happened to the Polish Jews, who they had intel were being killed at these camps in the GG, they can show them this document which will evidence otherwise. From the orthodox perspective the deception worked, because many or most revisionists believe that this vast population movement did occur.

Oh, and what about the report of 300,000 Jews executed because they were not careful? Do you see how their vision is to go wherever they please? Special treatment is not a fixed terminology. You are simply swallowing the code word theory. I suggest you learn more about what the most serious revisionists have said about this terminology.

It is self evidently code-word, and it has been used to describe Jews being killed. I agree it's not a fixed terminology and I didn't say so anywhere. What I said was " Killing is not explicitly indicated here but very possible, just based on the terminology."

Just because they use coded language some of the time, doesn't mean they would use it all of the time. There's a pattern of coded language being used less in the east , but it was still used even there https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... flage.html

You're hallucinating. Any other objections, or are you ready to explain your narrative and answer the questions I have asked you?

[TlsMS93]

You're hallucinating. Any other objections, or are you ready to explain your narrative and answer the questions I have asked you?

You're hallucinating, there are many contemporary documents with coded and uncoded words.

The Jäger Report ("uncoded") and the Wannsee Protocol ("coded") were supposedly produced at about the same time. Likewise, the Einsatzgruppen Report: December 29, 1942 ("uncoded") and the Korherr Report ("coded") were supposedly produced at about the same time and both were supposedly intended for Hitler.

To support a hypothesis it must have a pattern, it must not allow for ambiguities or only point to the document that pleases my worldview. The codeword hypothesis is dead.

[bombsaway]

You're hallucinating. Any other objections, or are you ready to explain your narrative and answer the questions I have asked you?

You're hallucinating, there are many contemporary documents with coded and uncoded words.

The Jäger Report ("uncoded") and the Wannsee Protocol ("coded") were supposedly produced at about the same time. Likewise, the Einsatzgruppen Report: December 29, 1942 ("uncoded") and the Korherr Report ("coded") were supposedly produced at about the same time and both were supposedly intended for Hitler.

To support a hypothesis it must have a pattern, it must not allow for ambiguities or only point to the document that pleases my worldview. The codeword hypothesis is dead.

What do you mean supports?

[TlsMS93]

What do you mean supports?

Don't you understand? I said to "support" a hypothesis, in the sense of giving it a basis. What did you understand?

[bombsaway]

What do you mean supports?

Don't you understand? I said to "support" a hypothesis, in the sense of giving it a basis. What did you understand?

You mean that it's a part of the Holocaust narrative? Yes the Nazis using coded language is a part of it. It's blatantly obvious feature.

[TlsMS93]

You mean that it's a part of the Holocaust narrative? Yes the Nazis using coded language is a part of it. It's blatantly obvious feature.

No, what I said is that the codeword hypothesis must have a standard, there cannot be a document that is coded and another that is not, and this in the same context, otherwise it does not specify to whom it is addressed what such terminology really means, you know this but you are beating a dead horse here. The only obvious thing here is your inability to judge what is not convenient for you.

I myself am not a cynic who has believed in revisionism since a young age, this was gradual, but you seem to have believed in the Holocaust as a vaccine brand since childhood, so what is your basis for judging something without this bias?

[bombsaway]

You mean that it's a part of the Holocaust narrative? Yes the Nazis using coded language is a part of it. It's blatantly obvious feature.

No, what I said is that the codeword hypothesis must have a standard, there cannot be a document that is coded and another that is not, and this in the same context, otherwise it does not specify to whom it is addressed what such terminology really means, you know this but you are beating a dead horse here. The only obvious thing here is your inability to judge what is not convenient for you.

I myself am not a cynic who has believed in revisionism since a young age, this was gradual, but you seem to have believed in the Holocaust as a vaccine brand since childhood, so what is your basis for judging something without this bias?

The hypothesis is not that 100% of the time they used the term "special treatment" it meant killing. The hypothesis is that sometimes it did. Is your assertion that the Holocaust is not possible for this reason? That the Nazis necessarily would have consistently used coded language, or never used it, otherwise the event couldn't have occurred? This is absurdity, utter absurdity my friend

[TlsMS93]

The hypothesis is not that 100% of the time they used the term "special treatment" it meant killing. The hypothesis is that sometimes it did. Is your assertion that the Holocaust is not possible for this reason? That the Nazis necessarily would have consistently used coded language, or never used it, otherwise the event couldn't have occurred? This is absurdity, utter absurdity my friend

No, what is not sustainable is the use of coded language in one context and another context that is just as brutal as not having such language, as in the action report that Himmler sent to Hitler mentioning more than 300,000 executed Jews. The same occurs with Goebbels' diaries, a private diary, where coded language would not be applicable, but he uses the expression "kill" referring to the Jews only in the last days of the war. In this case of Goebbels, we can see him appealing for harsh measures during the war, but he reaches the peak of wanting no one to live when, in his view, the Jews asked the Germans for zero clemency.

I am not saying that the Nazis never used coded language for fear of having broken their Enigma code, but there is no pattern within the same context, and the exterminationists know this but ignore the problem or do not even accept it as one.