401. Comment #160110 by ASMarques on April 13, 2008 at 4:28 pm

Here is an introduction to acquaint live brains with what you call "the vast body of evidence:"

IHR set of leaflets (short and accurate)
http://www.ihr.org/main/leaflets.shtml

A searchable directory, useful for reference by name, concentration camp etc.
http://www.ihr.org/main/search.shtml

A name dictionary in French, equally useful for the same purpose
http://vho.org/aaargh/fran/dicbio/dicbiogOancres.html

I also recommend these two articles by Prof. Arthur R. Butz:

A short introduction to the study of Holocaust revisionism
http://www.codoh.com/butz/di/intro.html

Context and Perspective in the 'Holocaust' Controversy
(in English, French and German)
http://www.codoh.com/butz/di/context/context.html

Other Comments by ASMarques

402. Comment #160111 by ASMarques on April 13, 2008 at 4:32 pm

A choice of sites where you may find evidence you've never been confronted with:

IHR
Institute for Historical Review
http://www.ihr.org/index.html

CODOH
The Comitee for Open Debate on the Holocaust
(large site, maintains a forum where you can debate, search or ask for specific information)
http://www.codoh.com/index.shtml

Aaargh
L'Association des Anciens Amateurs de Récits de Guerres et d'Holocaustes
(multilingual site with a vast archive of revisionism in its main section in French, including Faurisson and Rassinier)
http://vho.org/aaargh/fran/fran.html

VHO
The Holocaust Controversy
(multilingual site)
http://vho.org/

Air Photo Evidence
(useful maps and air photos)
http://www.air-photo.com/

Other Comments by ASMarques

403. Comment #160115 by Goldy on April 13, 2008 at 4:46 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/programmes/reporting_religion.shtml
Have a listen. Jesus might have existed, but Paul is who the "Christians" worship :-)
I guess all those jewish Holocaust survivors were all wrong too. As were the gypsies, Slavs and other undersireables. All a Zionist conspiracy...
You an Arab?

Other Comments by Goldy

404. Comment #160117 by Goldy on April 13, 2008 at 4:48 pm

What are your views on the Armenian Holocaust? That false too?

Other Comments by Goldy

405. Comment #160152 by ASMarques on April 13, 2008 at 6:17 pm

Said Goldy:

What are your views on the Armenian Holocaust? That false too?

False if by "Armenian Holocaust" you mean "the extermination of the Armenians by the Turks during the Great War." True if you mean simply the deportation of Armenians by Turkey, from their homes into southern regions of the Turkish empire.

If that's your choice of terminology (not mine, though), then it's not really different from the 1941 "holocaust" of the Volga Germans by the Soviet Union, the 1942 "holocaust" of the Nisei Americans by the United States, the "Holocaust" of the Jews by Germany, or the "holocaust" of the Palestinians by Israel from 1948 on (the two last ones still going on; the one with the capital H in terms of unjust reparations, widespread blackmail of entire nations, judicial railroading or plain assassination of defenseless old people, and political exploitation on behalf of the Jewish state established in Palestine; and the other one in the form of internationally tolerated ghettoisation and robbery of the Palestinians by the same state conceived along exclusivist racial and religious lines).

All of those should, of course, be seen as criminal abuses of individual human rights. No doubt some were more brutal than others, but you should consider -- as indeed any decent court of law should -- the circumstances peculiar to each and the reasons behind the differences. For instance, if Americans had found themselves losing the war, pressed on all sides by advancing enemy armies, their cities reduced to rubble to a historically unprecedented scale, the population in hiding, in flight under devastating bombing, or being massacred, raped and robbed by the invading armies, their hospitals crammed, their communication infrastructure in shambles, their road and railroad systems utterly disrupted and under attack from both high-altitude bombers and low-flying ground attack planes, you might also have had a large unwarranted disaster in, say, the New Mexico and Arizona concentration camps, riddled with typhus and other epidemics in the last months of the war before the final collapse of the United States, with lots of "photogenic" piles of Nisei corpses resulting.

I guess all those jewish Holocaust survivors were all wrong too. As were the gypsies, Slavs and other undersireables.

No more so than all those folks who attest to miraculous events, sometimes even with no lucrative "reparations" in their event horizon and no thirst for any sort of vengeance. Sometimes you even have eyewitnesses by the thousands for well-defined and well-located miracles such as the dance of the sun and the rain of perfumed heavenly petals over Fatima in 1917, in my own part of the World. It's part of the human nature to love tall tales, I guess...

All a Zionist conspiracy...

Your choice of words. I'll never understand why so many conspiratorially-minded people (remember the silent "Holocaust" by zer Fuehrer and his tiptoeing minions?) refuse to believe conspiracies exist.

You an Arab?

Why do you ask? You a racist bigot?

Other Comments by ASMarques

406. Comment #160161 by Goldy on April 13, 2008 at 6:42 pm

Why do you ask? You a racist bigot?

You looking for a disciple? ;-)
But yeah, I guess those piles of Armenian skulls turning to dust in the Syrian deserts are but...well, nothing. Just natural. I guess the sudden dearth of Jews after the war in middle Europe was just a consequence, that the trials and records found concerning the death of Jews and other undesireables a conspiracy theory.
You sound like an Arab - everything is a conspiracy.
My mother remember the Jews disappearing. She also very much remembers the local opinion of Jews. Somehow the two can't be related, can they...nah! Of course not. They just got deported to...ummm, well, where ever one had a camp of a few million people who, would you believe, no one can trace. And after having been at the receiving end of...how did you put it?

...pressed on all sides by advancing enemy armies, its cities reduced to rubble to a historically unprecedented scale, the population in hidding, in flight under devastating bombing, or being massacred, robbed and raped by invading armies, its hospitals crammed, its communication infrastructure in shambles, its road and railroad systems utterly disrupted and under attack from both high-altitude bombers and low-flying ground attack planes,...

it does seem odd that all the Austrians remained but all the Jews left.
Hey, maybe the Nazis were in contact with aliens! Yeah, that'd be it - all those millions of disappeared people (unlike the deported Germans, Tatars and other ethnic soviet minorities) are in fact in a distant planet...

Other Comments by Goldy

407. Comment #160180 by ASMarques on April 13, 2008 at 7:22 pm

Said Goldy:

it does seem odd that all the Austrians remained but all the Jews left.

Well, Goldy, that's what you expect when a deportation of Jews to the Eastern ghettos and camps, in accordance with the Wansee plan, takes place, ain't it?

Hey, maybe the Nazis were in contact with aliens! Yeah, that'd be it - all those millions of disappeared people (unlike the deported Germans, Tatars and other ethnic soviet minorities) are in fact in a distant planet...

Or maybe those aliens the Nazis were in contact with are the ones pretending to be migrated European Jews and their descendants since 1945 (or earlier), you know, the ones in Israel, Russia, the United States, Canada, indeed all over the World, perhaps posing as victimized Jews for power and profit, not to speak of fun...

Ohmygod (excuse the profanity), I really don't want to offend anyone, but I thought the famed Dawkins cheerleading club was composed mostly of bright folks. I now have some doubts and I'm out of here (again). See you.

Other Comments by ASMarques

408. Comment #160186 by Goldy on April 13, 2008 at 7:37 pm

Ohmygod (excuse the profanity), I really don't want to offend anyone, but I thought the famed Dawkins cheerleading club was composed mostly of bright folks. I now have some doubts and I'm out of here (again). See you.

It is.
You are the weakest link
Goodbye.

Other Comments by Goldy

409. Comment #160211 by ASMarques on April 13, 2008 at 8:01 pm

I thought the famed Dawkins cheerleading club was composed mostly of bright folks.

It is.
You are the weakest link

Sorry. I don't cheerlead and I don't cheerfollow either.

In my opinion "our" Richard is truly lion-hearted when it comes to the soft old religions, but rather a sorry dick when it comes to see through a hard, young one on the rising, with a real menacing power behind it [no offense intended, of course, or at least no more than anyone would take from being called a liar.]

Goodbye.

Never say goobye, Goldy.

See you.

Other Comments by ASMarques

410. Comment #161979 by Scientifical Madness on April 15, 2008 at 11:52 pm

Institute for Historical Review:

The IHR at the crossroads

IHR published the non-peer-reviewed Journal of Historical Review.

The IHR was originally founded by Dave McCalden (also known as Lewis Brandon), a former member of the National Front, and Willis Carto, the head of the now-defunct Liberty Lobby. Dave McCalden left the IHR, and Willis eventually lost control of it, in an internal power struggle. Liberty Lobby was an antisemitic organization best known for publishing The SPOTLIGHT, now reorganized as the American Free Press. The current head of the IHR is Mark Weber.

Beginning in 1979, IHR publicly offered a reward of $50,000 for verifiable "proof that gas chambers for the purpose of killing human beings existed at or in Auschwitz." This money (and an additional $40,000) was eventually paid in 1985 to Auschwitz survivor Mel Mermelstein, who sued the IHR for breach of contract for initially ignoring his evidence (a signed testimony of his experiences in Auschwitz). As a result of Mermelstein's case, a U.S. Superior Court in California declared the Holocaust an indisputable legal fact.

According to British historian of Germany Richard J. Evans:

Like many individual Holocaust deniers, the Institute as a body denied that it was involved in Holocaust denial. It called this a 'smear' which was 'completely at variance with the facts' because 'revisionist scholars' such as Faurisson, Butz 'and bestselling British historian David Irving acknowledge that hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed and otherwise perished during the Second World War as a direct and indirect result of the harsh anti-Jewish policies of Germany and its allies'. But the concession that a relatively small number of Jews were killed was routinely used by Holocaust deniers to distract attention from the far more important fact of their refusal to admit that the figure ran into the millions, and that a large proportion of these victims were systematically murdered by gassing as well as by shooting.

The Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH)

Bradley Smith and CODOH

In 1987, Bradley R. Smith founded a group called the "Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust". He is former media director of the "Institute for Historical Review" which is a clearing house for Holocaust denial propaganda.

Holocaust Denial: Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust

VHO

What's in a nym?

Many of the articles on the VHO website - though they may look as though they are written by different people - are actually by the same person, using different pseudonyms!


That just about discredits most of the sites that ASMarques has linked to. I can certainly present more information, if necessary.

Myth/Fact Sheets

The Holocaust History Project

Other Comments by Scientifical Madness

411. Comment #162409 by kintaro_crab on April 16, 2008 at 10:17 pm

That program was hard to watch, the outright ignorance and stupidity of the crowd was truly disturbing. Does the devil exist? Come on, this is the 21st century not the dark ages.

ASMarques, holocaust denial? Let me exercise my freedom of speech and say, you sir are one stupid fucker.

Other Comments by kintaro_crab

412. Comment #162457 by ForestMist on April 17, 2008 at 2:20 am

ASMarques - still not answering questions I see? Hmmm, why am I not surprised??

Other Comments by ForestMist

413. Comment #162840 by porcupine on April 17, 2008 at 2:39 pm

I have just finished reading this thread.

ASMarques,

On behalf of those who debated you on this thread, may I present you with this?
It is sir, your arse, mounted on this fine silver cyber plate.

It should look good on your wall.

Other Comments by porcupine

414. Comment #162908 by ASMarques on April 17, 2008 at 4:44 pm

That just about discredits most of the sites that ASMarques has linked to. I can certainly present more information, if necessary.

Again, "indisputable legal facts ruled by courts" are claimed to prove the "Holocaust" (extermination, gas chambers, 6 million) and the rational examination of the evidence is addressed as secondary to the matter.

Would you accept any court decision on the reality of evolution (Scopes trial, for instance)? How about witchcraft? Or the blood libel against Jews?

Would you let me know your justification for the 6 million figure? Would you establish a list of the homicidal gas chambers you believe in? Would you give me the name of a single eyewitness you trust? Of course, you won't (hint: if you do, don't look for "judicial decisions" or you'll get yourself in trouble).

Boring.

Tell you what: since you won't choose any particular line of evidence, I'll present you with a random quote from the links you recommend. Here it is:

Revisionist claim: "Gas Chambers" could not have been used for gassing. [*]

Response: However, extensive evidence of the gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau remains. Cremas 2 and 3 had holes in the roof for the introduction of Zyklon-B into the gas chamber below. Eyewitness and photographic evidence documents these holes, and a recent study has proved their precise location.

Show me the photographic evidence for the holes. Surely such an easy refutation of the revisionist claim will be easy to find on the Internet. Post the URLs.

[*] Meaning, of course, there were no holes to introduce the Zyklon B through the roofs of the morgues, and there are no significant vestiges of cyanidric compounds on the mortar and bricks that constitute the walls of the Leichenkeller alleged to be homicidal gas chambers, as opposed to what happens in the disinfection gas chambers for clothes and other materials that show enormous amounts of such compounds (they can even be recognised by the naked eye, due to their blue colour).

Other Comments by ASMarques

415. Comment #163041 by ASMarques on April 17, 2008 at 9:53 pm

Said al-rawandi in 172 (Comment #157621)

The ovens and gas chambers were indoors, away from the prying eyes of the public.

Forgot that one, sorry. Here are the secret gas chambers, away from the prying eyes of the public (Auschwitz II or Birkenau):
http://www.air-photo.com/english/camp1.html
http://www.air-photo.com/english/extview.html

Bring your cursor to 7 and 8 here (Auschwitz I):
http://www.air-photo.com/english/sola.html#

Then ask yourself how appropriate is a gas chamber for mass murder directly under the windows of the SS hospital (on the other hand, all hospitals have nearby crematories, in case you haven't noticed). Now go to the movies again and pay attention to what you're seeing when you hear about a gas chamber and the nearby hospital (see all 7 parts):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXKHw0EZrqM

Finally try to understand why the "Holocaust" is an evolutionary -- and not necessarily consciously so, by the way -- strategy, largely created by the same godly folks who gave us the original mold for the exclusivist abrahamic religions:
http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/nazishrunkenheads/nshrunkenheads.wmv

[There is a small error in there: the idiotic "atrocity display" we see in the photos was mounted near Buchenwald, not Nuremberg, but the atrocity bric-à-brac itself was indeed presented and accepted as evidence at a variety of trials, including the ones at Dachau and Nuremberg. The short movie on the whole is accurate and perceptive]

Other Comments by ASMarques

416. Comment #168197 by Teague on April 24, 2008 at 5:47 pm

The usual idiotic crowd one can expect from these programs. Listening to those people talkin about the devil as if it exists was like listening to little children telling ghost stories. Other than a few decent speakers, what an absolute waste of time.

Perhaps Dawkins should look elsewhere to speak because there seems to be a seperation of understanding between what he says and what they think he says. That idiot of a woman couldn't understand the difference between someone's opinion and factual comments and judging by the reaction of the audience, they were unable to comprehend that vitally important point.

Alexzk - what do you expect? He was in an audience of 1% Gay, 2% equal rights and 97% bigotted religious morons.

Other Comments by Teague

417. Comment #169442 by sysboy on April 26, 2008 at 5:27 am

Holes:
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/auschwitzscrapbook/tour/Auschwitz1/Auschwitz08D.html

Quote from Dr. Goebbels:

"The Jews are now being deported to the east. A fairly barbaric procedure, not to be described in any greater detail, is being used here, and not much more remains of the Jews themselves. In general, it can probably be established that 60 percent of them must be liquidated, while only 40 percent can be put to work […] A judgement is being carried out on the Jews which is barbaric, but fully deserved."


Perhaps reading fewer anti-semitic sites will broaden your view.

Other Comments by sysboy

418. Comment #170250 by ASMarques on April 27, 2008 at 2:07 pm

Sysboy said:

Holes:

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/auschwitzscrapbook/tour/Auschwitz1/Auschwitz08D.html

Quote from Dr. Goebbels:

"The Jews are now being deported to the east. A fairly barbaric procedure, not to be described in any greater detail, is being used here, and not much more remains of the Jews themselves. In general, it can probably be established that 60 percent of them must be liquidated, while only 40 percent can be put to work […] A judgement is being carried out on the Jews which is barbaric, but fully deserved."

Perhaps reading fewer anti-semitic sites will broaden your view.

Here comes the "anti-semitic" straw man. Again.
:^(

Sysboy, thanks anyway for your preoccupation with my reading. I assure you it's rather more extensive than you assume and I even take the liberty of thanking you for reading me and hopefully widening your own horizons on the "Holocaust" hoax. Here we go.

I) THE HOLES.

Your choice of holes is pretty naïve.

Nobody doubts those holes exist. They are not the alleged -- but non-existent -- holes in Krema II at Birkenau (i.e. Auschwitz II), the epicenter of the alleged "Holocaust" gassings.

The holes you chose are the ones shown to every visitor to the Auschwitz main camp (i.e. Auschwitz I). Their existence is not in doubt. And, of course, thanks to revisionist efforts -- definitely not to any investigations by the ultra-conformist so-called "Holocaust scholars" -- even the camp authorities have been forced to agree they have been drilled after the war, even though they show the same alleged gas chamber to visitors as being "in its original state."

See David Cole's amateur, but very interesting, video on the subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXKHw0EZrqM

And please do read the first comment in the very page you linked to (my italics): "The Krema I gas chamber in the Auschwitz main camp has four reconstructed holes in the ceiling through which Zyklon-B gas pellets could have been poured into the room."

A "reconstructed" hole means, of course, a hole that has been drilled again where a previous one has been filled up, so you may be interested in the two versions of the history of your alleged gas chamber:

1) THE CURRENT OFFICIAL VERSION, since the revisionist criticism made it impossible to hold on to the "straight gas chamber" story, appears to be as follows:

-- There was a crematory close to the Auschwitz I hospital, and like every crematory it had a cremation room, a morgue, and other smaller rooms for normal related functions.

-- Then this crematory in a highly conspicuous place, directly under the windows of the hospital, was thought a good place to perform mass murder. The morgue was adapted as a gas chamber, a large doorway was made on one of its inner walls, opening directly into the cremation room (with no antechamber whatsoever!), and holes were perforated in its ceiling in order to introduce the very dangerous Zyklon B (and never mind the immediate vicinity of the ovens room or the effects of any possible wind that might be blowing in the direction of the hospital or any of the other surrounding buildings when evacuating the cyanhydric gas).

-- Then the morgue that had been adapted as a gas chamber and had had the large inner doorway opened and the holes perforated on its ceiling was re-adapted as an air raid shelter. The large inner doorway and the holes in the ceiling were filled up, and several inner walls were built.

-- Then, after the war, the morgue that had been adapted as a gas chamber and had had the large doorway opened and the holes perforated in its ceiling, and had next been adapted as an air raid shelter and had had the doorway and the holes filled up, was restored to its pristine "gas chamber" phase. Its inner walls were demolished, the large doorway was reopened and the filled holes were re-drilled, in order for it to become simultaneously a "gas chamber in its original state" for the tourists, and a "reconstructed gas chamber" for the evil revisionists that ought to be censored, fined and imprisoned (as they indeed are in many European countries)...

2) THE REVISIONIST VERSION that you may follow with the help of the plans shown by Robert Faurisson in this 1986 short clip. It's in French, but even if you don't speak the language, a modicum of common sense may be enough for you to understand the gist of what you're being shown (an on-line version dubbed in German also exists):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J40KGfF4clI

-- Until July 1943 there was a crematory close to the Auschwitz I hospital, and like every crematory it had a cremation room, a morgue, and other smaller rooms for normal related functions (plan at 01:38). However, the Auschwitz Museum authorities -- the same "scholars" that gave cover to the 4 million commemorative stone slabs -- claimed it had been a gas chamber without breathing a word about any alternate role as an air shelter (plan at 00:30).

-- In July 1943 the whole crematory was converted into an air raid shelter that probably included an operating room (adequately close to the hospital). Inner walls were built in the ex-morgue, dividing it in a way consistent with its new use. The air raid shelter role is even visible from the outside if you notice the slopped earth embankments against the sides (plan at 02:58) [NOTE: Incidentally, this conception of crematory morgues that might easily be transformed in air shelters explains the features, for instance, of the underground morgue of the Krema II at Birkenau, with its reinforced concrete ceiling (and no holes in it)]

-- Then, after the war, in order to give some appearance of reality to the outlandish claims of homicidal gas chambers, the Polish communist authorities transformed the ex-morgue into a naïve alleged gas chamber for mass murder, with the unbelievable characteristics I pointed out above. The inner walls were demolished, new crematory ovens were installed in the old cremation room (no one any longer maintains -- except for the naïve tourists -- that the current ovens are the original ones), the large inner doorway was opened for the first time, and so were the holes in the ceiling. As is often the case with the crudest -- but very effective -- forms of propaganda, the alleged role of the ex-morgue as a gas chamber doesn't resist close inspection. Everything is false about it, as you will quickly realize once you observe such incredible things as a door with a glass pane on the western side (at 04:30). Alas, emotion and shock is what is sought by the "Holocaust" peddlers, not logical thinking.

In short, this is the current state of affairs concerning the alleged holes in the ceilings of the Auschwitz-Birkenau gas chambers: the holes that can indeed be observed in Auschwitz are claimed to have been "reconstructed" after the war, and the alleged holes in Birkenau that cannot be observed, are not there for the simple reason they never existed in the first place (any refilling in their alleged locations would be easy to detect).

Even Robert Van Pelt (in the Irving vs Penguin & Lipstadt trial) admitted the alleged holes in Birkenau's Krema II cannot be found:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/controversies/holes/PeltReportExtract.html

"Today, these four small holes that connected the wire-mesh columns and the chimneys cannot be observed in the ruined remains of the concrete slab. Yet does this mean they were never there? We know that after the cessation of the gassings in the fall of 1944 all the gassing equipment was removed, which implies both the wire-mesh columns and the chimneys. What would have remained would have been the four narrow holes and the slab. While there is no certainty in this particular matter, it would have been logical to attach at the location where the columns had been some formwork at the bottom of the gas chamber ceiling, and pour some concrete in the hole and thus restore the slab."

In other words: according to Van Pelt, the Birkenau holes may have been refilled too, but careful close inspection -- not to speak of modern science -- is not deemed capable of finding these odd refilled holes, even when their precise location is well known...

II) THE QUOTE FROM DR. GOEBBELS.

As often happens, you assume the quote without looking up the original German and the wider context. I don't speak German, but I have some lights into the language, I know how to use dictionaries, and I have often compared my own opinions with those of people who speak German as a first language. Here is the original German you're quoting in translation, from the entry in the Goebbels Diaries for March 27, 1942:

"Aus dem Generalgouvernement werden jetzt, bei Lublin beginnend, die Juden nach dem Osten abgeschoben. Es wird hier ein ziemlich barbarisches und nicht näher zu beschreibendes Verfahren angewandt, und von den Juden selbst bleibt nicht mehr viel übrig. Im großen kann man davon feststellen, daß 60 Prozent davon liquidiert werden müssen, während nur 40 Prozent bei der Arbeit eingesetzt werden können. Der ehemalige Gauleiter von Wien, der diese Aktion durchführt, tut das mit ziemlicher Umsicht und auch mit einem Verfahren, das nicht allzu auffällig wirkt."

And here is a word-by-word translation that sounds awkward in places but facilitates the understanding of the original German meaning (my italics):

"Out of the General Government will now, beginning by Lublin, the Jews to the East be deported. It will be used a pretty barbaric and not proper to describe here process, and of the Jews properly it will not be left a great remnant. Generally speaking, one can foretell of the process that 60% are likely to become liquidated as a result of it, while just 40% we will be able to put to work. The former Gauleiter of Vienna, who is to carry this measure through, is doing it with considerable circumspection and according to a method that does not attract too much attention."

Now compare. The worst mistranslation concerns the words "davon" and "müssen," because "davon liquidiert werden müssen" does not mean "we must kill them." It means "they are almost certain to get liquidated from... (what has gone before), i.e. to be dead and gone due to... (what has gone before)." If you were writing the same in English, in your own diary, the equivalent would be something like "60% of them are likely to be goners (from the deportation)."

Obviously if the "liquidiert" is "davon" (from it), it means it's the deportation -- clearly acknowledged as a "pretty barbaric one" -- that is expected to be the cause of the shrinking numbers of Jews, not any secret gas-chambering disguised as a false deportation to the East, as the "Holocaust" tale requires you to believe. So, once again, it is not "we will have to liquidate them", but "the deportation process is expected to make them goners". The "nur" ("just", "only", "not more than") in the last sentence even implies that Goebbels would have liked more surviving Jews. I guess the more usable forced labour for a longer time, the better.

Your "not much more remains of the Jews themselves," is also misleading. The correct translation is "it will not be left a great remnant of Jews," which, of course, means not many Jews will be left in Lublin or the General Government (not Europe or the whole World!), after Operation Reinhardt (the deportation). What Goebbels is describing is the phased deportation through and from the General Government to the labour camps in the East, such as the ghetto complex of Maly Trostynets we have only recently begun to hear about, and not to any gas chambers that are supposed to have been operating within the General Government itself, not outside of it.

He is also estimating round symbolic percentages (40/60) in his rambling thoughts, and not referring to any precise secret statistics. Certainly no "planned extermination percentages" have ever been claimed to have existed. He is simply saying in an informal fashion that he believes a majority of the deportees (the "60%") will not survive the rough conditions they will be exposed to in the East, but he actually acknowledges the rest will survive (the "40%"). Hardly a description of a secret extermination program if one was up!

Also note that the former Gauleiter of Vienna he is referring to is Odilo Globocnik, who was SS and Police Leader in the Lublin district of the General Government at the time. If you read the passage with this in mind, it's clear that what Goebbels is saying is the deportation process has begun with the Lublin district and the local man in charge there is managing to achieve it without too much civil disturbance or revolt, not that he hopes to exterminate an entire race through a vast net of locally improvised weirdly conspiratorial methods in the forlorn hope that no one would ever notice such a necessarily visible event, as "Holocaust" peddlers would have it...

Obviously if a real extermination program was on, the result would be 0% and 100% , not 40% and 60%. The 40/60 rough indication is his own manner of speaking of what he feels to be a barbaric but necessary process, not an unheard-of historical extermination to be attempted. He might be talking about the effects of incendiary bombings on enemy civilian targets, or indeed about wholesale barbaric deportations into Siberia or Kazakhstan if he were an Allied leader and had some human feelings concerning what was going on. Nothing new here. No special unheard-of gas chamber "Holocaust" devised to secretly remove an entire race from the face of the World.

Altogether a glaring confirmation that the Germans were concerned with winning the War and getting the Jews out of Germany, not with turning them into soap bars or vaporising them in burning pits. Deporting entire families out of their homes into adverse life conditions in labour camps during a savage war is indeed a barbaric procedure. I wonder what Churchill, Roosevelt or Truman wrote in their personal diaries when they ordered entire cities scratched from the map. Maybe even Stalin had some misgivings every now and then, but I don't think he wrote any personal diaries...

So this is how Goebbels's perfectly unequivocal talk of a deportation program is twisted into a vague mention of an outlandish extermination that is assumed to be there in "coded" form, even though this is Goebbels talking to himself in his own private diary... without a single mention of any gas chamber mass-murdering program!

Here are some more quotes from Goebbels's diaries around the time of your citation (February to December 1942), in order to see what's going through his mind when he mentions the violent suppression of the Jews.

**********
1942, Feb 5: "The Jewish question is again giving us a headache; this time, however, not because we have gone too far, but because we are not going far enough. Among large sections of the German people the idea is gaining headway that the Jewish question cannot be regarded as solved until all Jews have left the Reich."

Why does he say "until all Jews have left the Reich," instead of "until all Jews have been killed"? Is he hiding dark secrets from himself in his own unedited personal diary?

*********
1942, Feb 14: "The sufferings of the Russian people under Bolshevism are indescribable. This Jewish terrorism must be radically eliminated from all of Europe. That is our historic task. World Jewry will suffer a great catastrophe at the same time as Bolshevism. The Fuehrer once more expressed his determination to clean up the Jews in Europe pitilessly. There must be no squeamish sentimentalism about it. The Jews have deserved the catastrophe that has now overtaken them. Their destruction will go hand in hand with the destruction of our enemies. We must hasten this process with cold ruthlessness."

He is now speaking in the most violent language about "this Jewish terrorism of Bolshevism." He is supposed to be utterly contemptuous of every Slavic Untermensch, and yet he speaks about "the sufferings of the Russian people." He equates "Jews" with "Communists" and speaks of the defeat and destruction of both in the sense of an European "clean-up," not of a piecemeal extermination, individual by individual. And, of course, even though he mentions "cold ruthlessness," still no gas chambers in sight...

**********
1942, Mar 6: "The Partisan danger is increasing week by week. The Partisans are in command of large areas in occupied Russian and are conducting a regime of terror there. The national movements, too, have become more insolent than was at first imagined. That applies as well to the Baltic States as to the Ukraine. Everywhere the Jews are busy inciting and stirring up trouble. It is therefore desirable that many of them must pay with their lives for this. Anyway, I am of the opinion that the greater the number of Jews liquidated, the more consolidated will the situation in Europe be after this war."

Unmistakably speaking about insurgency, subversion and the Partisan War, not of a program to exterminate innocent people in any gas chamber slaughterhouses. Indeed he is even speaking of a limited war against the Jews ("the greater the number" not "all," as would be appropriate to any hoped for racial extermination), with no sign of any "Holocaust," just the mention of a tremendous guerrilla / subversive war in the eastern occupied territories, wishing maximum casualties were inflicted to those he sees as insidious enemies.

**********
1942, Mar 16: "I read a report of the SD about the situation in the occupied East. The activity of Partisans has increased noticeably during recent weeks. They are conducting a well-organised guerrilla war. It is very difficult to get at them because they are using such terrorist methods in the area occupied by us that the population is afraid of collaborating with us loyally any longer. The spearheads of this whole Partisan activity are the political commissars and especially the Jews. It has therefore proven necessary once again to shoot more Jews. There won't be any peace in these areas as long as any Jews are active there. Sentimentality is out of place here. Either we must renounce the lives of our own soldiers, or we must uncompromisingly prevent further propaganda by criminal and chaotic elements in the hinterland."

Again he is speaking of the war in the hinterland behind the front lines and the Jewish role in the Partisan War, and not of any program to process the lot of the European Jews in the alleged gas chambers within the General Government or the Reich itself.

**********
1942, Mar 27: "It's a life-and-death struggle between the Aryan race and the Jewish bacillus. No other government and no other regime would have the strength for such a global solution of this question. Here, too, the Fuehrer is the undismayed champion of a radical solution necessitated by conditions and therefore inexorable. Fortunately a whole series of possibilities presents itself for us in wartime that would be denied us in peacetime. We shall have to profit by this. The ghettos that will be emptied in the cities of the General Government now will be refilled with Jews thrown out of the Reich. This process is to be repeated from time to time. There is nothing funny in it for the Jews, and the fact that Jewry's representatives in England and America are today organising and sponsoring the war against Germany must be paid for dearly by its representatives in Europe - and that's only right."

He is now elaborating on what he said immediately before (your citation from this date's entry), namely that the "barbaric" deportation process starting with Lublin consisted of sending the Jews eastwards to the labour ghettos and camps, not westwards (Lublin is located in the Eastern part of the General Government, while Auschwitz is to the West).

The emptied ghettos, he now says, will be progressively repopulated by Jews from the Reich, and these will subsequently be sent eastwards too. This is as clear a description of the deportation process as one might wish for. You can only slip the gas chambers in if you assume he is using "East" for "West" and speaking in coded words to himself in his own personal diary...

**********
1942, Apr 29: "The danger of the Partisans continues to exist in unmitigated intensity in the occupied areas. The Partisans have, after all, caused us very great difficulties during the winter, and these difficulties have by no means ceased with the beginning of spring. Short shrift is made of the Jews in all eastern occupied areas. Tens of thousands of them are liquidated."

Again clearly speaking with virulence about the results of the Partisan War in the East against what he sees as the irregular forces of the communists and Jews, not about any gas chambers in Poland.

**********
1942, May 15: "As far as I am concerned, it would be best if we either evacuated or liquidated all eastern Jews still remaining in Paris."

Note this carefully: "all eastern Jews still remaining in Paris." During the war the French-born Jews were generally left alone. Out of 350,000 (minimum) Jews living in France -- many of them eastern immigrants -- 75,721 (according to Arno Klarsfeld himself) were deported, i.e. 22% of the total number, overwhelmingly of non-French eastern origin -- including those deported for violent or terrorist activities ("resistance") -- while 78% were not disturbed. This seems to go well with the deportation of perceived enemies, and not at all with any real "extermination" plans for the entire Jewish race. See an interesting article (in French)"Vous avez dit 'Extermination'?" by Pierre Guillaume here:

http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/archVT/bullVT/bullVT10a.html#anchor549984

**********
And finally here is an amazing entry if one assumes a real "Holocaust" is going on in Poland:

1942, Dec 15: "Generally speaking, the Jewish propaganda has become extraordinarily active of late. The Jews in London proclaimed a day of mourning for the atrocities allegedly committed on Jews in Poland by us."

Get it? Allegedly!

He has described a process of deportation to the East because this process is real. He has also described the difficult Partisan War (in words today's Americans will easily recognise after all the "body counts" their Armed Forces indulged in in Vietnam and elsewhere) because that too was real.

When it comes to atrocities in Poland, however, he uses the doubtful conditional form "allegedly." Does this sound like he is thinking of the extermination that he is supposed to have been refering to all the time in his allegedly coded wordings concerning in reality a deportation?

Where is, in Goebbels' writings, any mention to the genocide supposedly being carried out in the so-called "extermination camps" within the General Government?

Note that he sounds furious and is certainly not mincing his words. As I said, one wonders whether the Allied leaders ever described in their own unedited personal diaries their deportations of innocent people and their air warfare campaigns as "barbaric." They may have, since they weren't any more stupid than the Nazis, and they knew very well what they were doing.

Nobody really manages to hide the true prosaic mass murders that result from wartime national policies forever. What the clever mass murderers do is to attribute outlandish holocausts without end to the opposite side, thus putting public opinion behind themselves and making everybody their accomplices in the overall killing. The day you understand this will be the day you'll cease to believe in the silly gas chambers tale. You'll also understand why feeding us the "Holocaust" hoax and prohibiting any investigation into it is of such paramount importance to the powers that be, and especially to Israel, the only country that dared to demand universal censorship at the United Nations General Assembly.

Other Comments by ASMarques

419. Comment #174313 by ~manic-depressive on May 2, 2008 at 5:43 am

Just finished watching this. Had to watch it in parts; there was just too much idiocy to tolerate in one go!

Professor Dawkins, I don't know how you do it. As you rightly say it is extraordinary that in the 21st century people are taken seriously for such ignorance. For example, thinking that "the devil" is a useful explanation for anything. The people who suffer because of these idiotic ideas are, more often than not, those who do not have a voice: children & the mentally ill. The retarding influence that it has had in the field of psychiatry cannot be underestimated.

Thank you for doing what you do Professor. A. C. Grayling pointed out rather well how tiresome it must be for you to have to keep confronting the same stupidities coming out of the mouths of intelligent people.

Other Comments by ~manic-depressive

420. Comment #175159 by Last Man In Europe on May 4, 2008 at 4:52 pm

For those people comparing Richard to the devil, the recent response given by Christopher Hitchens when an audience member tried to link athiests with 20th century mass murderers seems apt:

(Paraphrasing) How dare you put someone like me, who has worked for justice in the world, into the same basket as these creeps! You should take it back! You owe me an apology.

I'm sure Richard is much too polite to be so forcefully angry in his response, but something along the same lines would be justified.

Other Comments by Last Man In Europe

421. Comment #175171 by phasmagigas on May 4, 2008 at 6:04 pm

what strikes me firstly about this programme is that discussing topics with rationalists on this site has made me forget just how utterly naive, gullible and stupid the british audience can be, its not just the USA, the fact that the most ridiculous viewpoints were given anything but ridicule was astounding.

after listening to clearly hammered out reasonable arguments from the posters on this site its pure comedy to hear comments by the most unspohisticated members of society speaking as if they have some credible viewpoint, its like nursery school.

education obviously is failing somewhere.

i can say that at least my skills at reasoned argument have incereased dramatically since joining this site.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

422. Comment #176559 by blake121666 on May 7, 2008 at 3:21 pm

Says ASMarques:

I admire Richard Dawkins's fight against religion, the kind of blind belief that is based on unexamined superstition instead of rational evidence, but it seems to me he should avoid dogmatically pronouncing himself on topics of an historical nature he seems to have carried little or no investigation into.

He does that twice, first concerning the supposed existence of Jesus the individual (an unsound vestige of religious belief that goes against all reasonable historical evidence that clearly points to Jesus the elaborate syncretic myth instead), and then about the so-called "Holocaust" (in fact the latest politically and religiously motivated aggiornamento of Judaism, riddled with contradictions and straight falsehoods that fly in the face of careful examination).

I entirely agree. I don't like how he idolizes Einstein either. Not being a physicist himself, he's pandering to the crowd. The blind leading the blind on that one.

Other Comments by blake121666

423. Comment #176883 by JernJane on May 8, 2008 at 8:44 am

Is this just the way British live debate programs are, or are most of the people there just extremely selfish and impolite?

I wanted to tell them to shut up on a number of occasions.

Some of them seem to simply love hearing their own voice.

What a revealing thing to say that the only satisfactory explanation for evil in the world is the existence of a/the devil.

EDIT: Oh and one more thing: Is it just me or do the same people clap after every single comment/reply?

Other Comments by JernJane

424. Comment #177873 by ASMarques on May 9, 2008 at 9:38 pm

Said Last Man In Europe:

For those people comparing Richard to the devil, the recent response given by Christopher Hitchens when an audience member tried to link atheists with 20th century mass murderers seems apt:

(Paraphrasing) How dare you put someone like me, who has worked for justice in the world, into the same basket as these creeps! You should take it back! You owe me an apology.

I don't think Hitchen's answer was all that clever. I mean, in any sense other than pandering to the crowds.

First of all, Hitchens probably wouldn't mind being put in the same basket with Churchill, a far worse warmonger than Hitler, who actually supported British gas warfare against Iraqis, much like Hitchens himself supported the savage "Shock and Awe" assault on much the same people, apparently seen as sub-standard humans unworthy of much consideration.

Second, like Dawkins himself, Hitchens probably swallows the "Emmanuel Goldstein" portrait of Hitler of pop culture and distorted historiography, hook, line and sinker.

Dawkins actually thinks Goldstein shouted and raved hysterically like the crazy rabbi Shmuley Boteach does, which, of course, is nonsense. Just look at Boteach working himself into a frenzy at (04:15), when he makes the same points Dawkins makes [*]:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOAdXUf9DG0

Anything goes. And most "Brights" seem oddly adept at using the Reductio ad Goldsteinum argument in its radical form, which goes: "all you have to do is connect the word 'Goldstein' with your opponent or your opponent's view and the populace will think you've won."

Well, yes, Goldstein was a bad guy. Much like Churchill, Roosevelt and Truman (Stalin and Mao were even worse). But he was a very effective orator, hardly a hysterical, clownish one. He was quite calm and collected in speech, which of course didn't preclude loud oratory effects when appropriate.

Naturally, anyone who has only seen Goldstein on the Hollywood-style clips on television, subject to silly cutting, sudden still grimacing, weird repetition, blood-coloured tinting, etc., and has never looked for the real film registers -- very hard to find, believe me -- will easily fall into the trap. That's what conditioning propaganda is designed for. Dawkins probably even believes Goldstein actually chewed on his carpet when crossed...

Just for curiosity's sake here are two interesting clips where you can actually hear the voice in oration and normal everyday speech:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_doNw6Csu4w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWFk7fzaRGc

The first one is very interesting and a true rarity, because you can actually hear normal conversation (it's the bass voice speaking almost all the time).

The second one is from Goldstein's speech to the Eurasian Reichstag. You can hear the burst of laughter when he mentions Roosevelt's demand for assurances that Eurasia would not invade... Palestine, of all places (an Oceanian administered territory promised by God to the Jews, of course).

Hardly hysterical antics...

I'm sure Richard is much too polite to be so forcefully angry in his response, but something along the same lines would be justified.

Well, okay folks, I confess. I'm just trying to win a bet I made on this site being a really tolerant one where even a Goldstein speech would be heard in peace and tranquility!

I think it's high time we start to overcome our artificial borders, and mainly the mental ones we create for ourselves. After all, Last Man in Europe, isn't the real historical Europe more like this than this?

Okay, folks, it's done. One more clip for the image context of the Finland meeting, and run to the shelters!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7uoR8jRSSw
_____________________

[*] No, I don't hate crazy rabbis! I find them extremely funny.

Other Comments by ASMarques

425. Comment #181954 by Iruhazuganai on May 18, 2008 at 10:24 pm

ASM wrote

Churchill, a far worse warmonger than Hitler

Yet more nonsense. Is this the same Churchill that fretted when having to sign death warrants as Home Secretary?

As for the show Richard summed up my feelings entirely when he said he was astonished at the ridiculous comments regarding the Devil. I couldn't believe Nicky Campbell didn't turn to the camera and say the show was over due to the utter stupidity of what was being said!

Other Comments by Iruhazuganai

426. Comment #184766 by Diocletian on May 26, 2008 at 6:13 am

These threads that are completely off topic are annoying. While not asking for people to be censored - there should be at least some form of protocol (since we cannot rely on people's good sense) to limit threads from going completely out of control. I do not know what the agenda is of some people, however taking an interesting interview and switching it to a holocaust denial thread is really destroying this website. To those of you moderating the threads... you might wish to consider that people are just going to stop posting or even visiting the site because of few people who apparent posed their perverted views on just about EVERY thread now. They completely derail the discussion. Unfortunately, many good people take the bait and further derail the topic at hand.

So perhaps we should start policing ourselves, and not let a few rotten apples spoil what is perhaps one of the best websites around. If someone tries to derail the topic into some idiotic rant - just ignore them. They are a bore - you would probably ignore them at a party - although, as might be happening here - leave altogether.

If you find someone trying to take over a thread on an unrelated (and very offensive) topic - use the Troll and Offensive feed back buttons!

Other Comments by Diocletian

427. Comment #184774 by hungarianelephant on May 26, 2008 at 6:29 am

426. Comment #184766 by Diocletian on May 26, 2008 at 6:13 am

... and you don't see anything ironic about the fact that you posted basically the same comment on three different threads?

Who made you the RD.net comment police anyway?

Other Comments by hungarianelephant