Next question,
http://www.auschwitz.dk/sobibor/franzstangl.htm
That seems pretty frank. Is there any reason to doubt what he said?
Stangl interview with Gitta Sereny?
Moderator: Moderator
Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Mattogno about Gitta Sereny in his book "Treblinka":
Her book as a historic source is totally worthless, because the author could not bring a trace of proof that Stangl actually made those remarks as she said; an audio tape of the interview does not exist.
And then he quoted the French revisionist Pierre Guillaume who had a discussion with G. Sereny:
Guillaume:
"I read your book several times, some passages even often. During the first reading one cannot doubt the truth of the described events nor the reality of Stangl's confession. But the more I went through the text the larger became my surprise not so much of what I read, but what was evidently missing what one would have expected to find. The passages where Stangl confesses were without exception written in an indirect or ambiguous style, so that it became impossible to differentiate within these passages what Stangl and what Sereny said.
In other words: He did not confess!"
Sereny: "But of course not… he couldn't!"
(The rest of Mattogno's comments about Gitta I better leave out)
fge
Her book as a historic source is totally worthless, because the author could not bring a trace of proof that Stangl actually made those remarks as she said; an audio tape of the interview does not exist.
And then he quoted the French revisionist Pierre Guillaume who had a discussion with G. Sereny:
Guillaume:
"I read your book several times, some passages even often. During the first reading one cannot doubt the truth of the described events nor the reality of Stangl's confession. But the more I went through the text the larger became my surprise not so much of what I read, but what was evidently missing what one would have expected to find. The passages where Stangl confesses were without exception written in an indirect or ambiguous style, so that it became impossible to differentiate within these passages what Stangl and what Sereny said.
In other words: He did not confess!"
Sereny: "But of course not… he couldn't!"
(The rest of Mattogno's comments about Gitta I better leave out)
fge
Read Supplement 2 of Butz's book. (Hannover posted a link to download it. (http://www.ihr.org/books/hoax.pdf).
It starts on page 379. I would advise skipping the part about the Donation of Constantine. (Only to save time and effort.)
He gives a profoundly good reason to give little regard for what Sereny has to say about Stangl's 'confessions'.
It is so
ing. The New Statesman will print Sereny's article. But, as is so typical of all Holocaust lackeys, they did not publish Butz's letter to them.
The Holocausters can say anything they want. Well, I admit, so can the revisionists. So, for us little people to determine what's what, it would help to see a debate between the two. (Holocausters and revisionists.) But, the Hoaxers refuse to debate. That alone should tell you something.
Steve
It starts on page 379. I would advise skipping the part about the Donation of Constantine. (Only to save time and effort.)
He gives a profoundly good reason to give little regard for what Sereny has to say about Stangl's 'confessions'.
It is so
ing. The New Statesman will print Sereny's article. But, as is so typical of all Holocaust lackeys, they did not publish Butz's letter to them.
The Holocausters can say anything they want. Well, I admit, so can the revisionists. So, for us little people to determine what's what, it would help to see a debate between the two. (Holocausters and revisionists.) But, the Hoaxers refuse to debate. That alone should tell you something.
Steve
If the Moderator wants to make this a separate topic, it's fine.
Sereny loves to say that it's important that a nonJew like her takes the stance that she does, but I read the other day she was raised in the house of Von Mises, my favorite economist. He's also Jewish. She's suposed to be a real -----, but I would like to know more about her too. She frankly seems sneaky.
Sereny loves to say that it's important that a nonJew like her takes the stance that she does, but I read the other day she was raised in the house of Von Mises, my favorite economist. He's also Jewish. She's suposed to be a real -----, but I would like to know more about her too. She frankly seems sneaky.
Her book as a historic source is totally worthless, because the author could not bring a trace of proof that Stangl actually made those remarks as she said; an audio tape of the interview does not exist.
That's helpful...
Thanks everybody for the replies. I just downloaded Hoax yesterday so I'll check that out!
Samantha posted:
http://www.auschwitz.dk/sobibor/franzstangl.htm
That seems pretty frank. Is there any reason to doubt what he said?
============================================
I won't bother asking what 'frank' means. As far as I can see it's nothing more than some talk about how the person Stangl moralized on what he is said to have done and nothing in way of any details.
Here's why -
When asked during his later trial how many people could be murdered in
one day, Franz Stangl, attesting to his days as commandant of Treblinka, answered:
"Regarding the question of the optimum amount of people gassed in one
day, I can state: according to my estimation a transport of thirty
freight cars with 3,000 people was liquidated in three hours. When the
work lasted for about fourteen hours, 12,000 to 15,000 people were
annihilated. There were many days that the work lasted from the early
morning until the evening . ."
We can have it from this same Franz Stangl for when he came to be
commandant at Sobibor they exterminated up to 15,000 a day there also.
(We can have for Belzec up to 10,000 a day.)
Thus with Stangl's testimony alone we have it some 30,000 Jews a day were exterminated at just two camps.
Then we have from Stangl, ala Sereny's book him attesting to the dimensions of the cremation grill ("roaster") at Sobibor and up to 3,000 people at a time being cremated on the thing. Putting all the arithmetic together we would have Stangl attesting to a Holocaust body being cremated with a piece of wood about the size of a carton of cigarettes.
At most, the only thing that ever was at either the Treblinka/Sobibor locations would be that they were just layover area's with tents and portable field kitchens. With that in mind we can wonder what Stangl's 'commandant' title would really mean. It wouldn't have been like he was housed in some headquarters and there was any significant permanant nature to the places. Who knows, maybe he traveled around. Like first he was at Treblinka to oversee the operations while people were being shipped through that point and then went to Sobibor to oversee things there and then back and forth, here and there.
Too bad independent persons didn't get a chance to question Stangl about various things. But alas, the only thing we get from Stangl is nary anything from the mentioned trial and what we can find in Sereny's book.
http://www.auschwitz.dk/sobibor/franzstangl.htm
That seems pretty frank. Is there any reason to doubt what he said?
============================================
I won't bother asking what 'frank' means. As far as I can see it's nothing more than some talk about how the person Stangl moralized on what he is said to have done and nothing in way of any details.
Here's why -
When asked during his later trial how many people could be murdered in
one day, Franz Stangl, attesting to his days as commandant of Treblinka, answered:
"Regarding the question of the optimum amount of people gassed in one
day, I can state: according to my estimation a transport of thirty
freight cars with 3,000 people was liquidated in three hours. When the
work lasted for about fourteen hours, 12,000 to 15,000 people were
annihilated. There were many days that the work lasted from the early
morning until the evening . ."
We can have it from this same Franz Stangl for when he came to be
commandant at Sobibor they exterminated up to 15,000 a day there also.
(We can have for Belzec up to 10,000 a day.)
Thus with Stangl's testimony alone we have it some 30,000 Jews a day were exterminated at just two camps.
Then we have from Stangl, ala Sereny's book him attesting to the dimensions of the cremation grill ("roaster") at Sobibor and up to 3,000 people at a time being cremated on the thing. Putting all the arithmetic together we would have Stangl attesting to a Holocaust body being cremated with a piece of wood about the size of a carton of cigarettes.
At most, the only thing that ever was at either the Treblinka/Sobibor locations would be that they were just layover area's with tents and portable field kitchens. With that in mind we can wonder what Stangl's 'commandant' title would really mean. It wouldn't have been like he was housed in some headquarters and there was any significant permanant nature to the places. Who knows, maybe he traveled around. Like first he was at Treblinka to oversee the operations while people were being shipped through that point and then went to Sobibor to oversee things there and then back and forth, here and there.
Too bad independent persons didn't get a chance to question Stangl about various things. But alas, the only thing we get from Stangl is nary anything from the mentioned trial and what we can find in Sereny's book.
Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests
