PangaeaProxima wrote: ↑Tue Mar 25, 2025 6:11 pm... Do you know about that experiment?
It's worth reading the rest of the exchange, which continued as follows:
SPEER: No, and I consider it utterly improbable. If we had had such a weapon under preparation, I should have known about it. But we did not have such a weapon. It is clear that in chemical warfare attempts were made on both sides to carry out research on all the weapons one could think of, because one did not know which party would start chemical warfare first.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The reports, then, of a new and secret weapon were exaggerated for the purpose of keeping the German people in the war?
In summary, Jackson claimed to have a report on nuked Jews "which was placed in [his] hands", but this report AFAIK is not in evidence. Speer replied immediately that the story is false, adding that they were conducting weapons research. Jackson then pivoted to a new topic, for no apparent reason and with no justification, to claim instead that the Germans were making propaganda about secret weapons.
Nizkor and other Jewish sources take from this that Jackson's report on nuked Jews must have originated from German propaganda, but that is not what Jackson or Speer said. Jackson fled the topic of nuked Jews to instead refer to weapons reports broadly. If Jackson intended to say that that specific report originated from German propaganda, he might have said so and offered some morsel of evidence to prove it. Instead there is nothing.
Speer continued further:
SPEER: That was the case mostly during the last phase of the war. From August, or rather June or July 1944 on I very often went to the front. I visited about 40 front-line divisions in their sectors and could not help seeing that the troops, just like the German people, were given hopes about a new weapon coming, new weapons and wonder-weapons which, without requiring the use of soldiers, without military forces, would guarantee victory. In this belief lies the secret why so many people in Germany offered their lives, although common sense told them that the war was over. They believed that within the near future this new weapon would arrive. I wrote to Hitler about it and also tried in different speeches, even before Goebbels’ propaganda leaders, to work against this belief. Both Hitler and Goebbels told me, however, that this was no propaganda of theirs but that it was a belief which had grown up amongst the people. Only in the dock here in Nuremberg, I was told by Fritzsche that this propaganda was spread systematically among the people through some channels or other, and that SS Standartenfiihrer Berg was responsible for it. Many things have become clear to me since, because this man Berg, as a representative of the Ministry of Propaganda, had often taken part in meetings, in big sessions of my Ministry, as he was writing articles about these sessions. There he heard of our future plans and then used this knowledge to tell the people about them with more imagination than truth.
And so he confirmed that propaganda-like rumors were circulating but that they did not originate from the state. It was only when he came to the IMT that he was told they originated from the Ministry of Propaganda.
One other item to address, poorly argued by Nizkor, is the hypothesis that Jackson regarded the nuked Jews story as German propaganda from the start. But if that was the case, why bring it up at all? Just prior to this, Jackson questioned Speer on gas warfare, gas experiments, and rockets, all real programs, and with no mention of propaganda. Nor would propaganda go toward proving any of the charges, so it wouldn't have served his case. The denials of nuclear experiments came entirely from Speer, while the claim that they happened came entirely from Jackson. Jackson was the one with this report. Jackson introduced it.
Therefore the most reasonable interpretation is that
Jackson (or someone on his team) did believe in the nuked Jews story or believed that it would be sufficient to demonize the Germans. But he changed tack when Speer's stark denial made it embarassing. Most critically,
the report is not in evidence and has not been made public, insofar as I'm aware.
PangaeaProxima wrote: ↑Tue Mar 25, 2025 6:11 pmFor instance, there is no entry for "atom bomb" or "nuclear weapon" in the Holocaust encyclopedia.
There isn't, but it still appears in several entries, and the relevant portion of the IMT transcript is quoted here:
https://holocaustencyclopedia.com/locat ... s/ohrdruf/