'text of Himmler's speeches support claims of extermination'

[gl0spana]

[For clarity and focus I have moved gl0spana's post concerning what he claims is convincing proof supposedly found in Himmler's speeches to this thread. It was originally posted in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13837
I made the title of this thread since gl0spana's post in the previous location had the title of that thread. Thanks, M1]
He posted:

deniers on twitter talking about the Himmler's speeches led me to do a quick review

Himmler explicitly mentions orders

"Thus I have basically given the order to also kill the wives and children of these partisans, and commissars. I would be a weakling and a criminal to our descendants if I allowed the hate-filled sons of the sub-humans we have liquidated in this struggle of humanity against subhumanity to grow up."

"The Jewish question has been solved within Germany itself and in general within the countries occupied by Germany. [...] You can understand how difficult it was for me to carry out this military order which I was given and which I implemented out of a sense of obedience and absolute conviction. If you say: 'we can understand as far as the men are concerned but not about the children', then I must remind you of what I said at the beginning. [...] In my view, we as Germans, however deeply we may feel in our hearts, are not entitled to allow a generation of avengers filled with hatred to grow up with whom our children and grandchildren will have to deal because we, too weak and cowardly, left it to them."

"Another question which was decisive for the inner security of the Reich and Europe, was the Jewish question. It was uncompromisingly solved after orders and rational recognition. I believe, gentlemen, that you know me well enough to know that I am not a bloodthirsty person; I am not a man who takes pleasure or joy when something rough must be done. However on the other hand, I have such good nerves and such a developed sense of duty – I can say that much for myself – that when I recognise something as necessary I can implement it without compromise. I have not considered myself entitled – this concerns especially the Jewish women and children – to allow the children to grow into the avengers who will then murder our children and our grandchildren. That would have been cowardly. Consequently the question was uncompromisingly resolved."

"It was the most terrible task and the most terrible order which could have been given to an organisation: the order to solve the Jewish question. In this circle, I may say it frankly with a few sentences. It is good that we had the severity to exterminate the Jews in our domain."

Since Hilberg certainly views these speeches as authentic, how can you seriously take his position to be it was it was all carried out with a "wink and a nod"?

[Hannover]

deniers on twitter talking about the Himmler's speeches led me to do a quick review

Himmler explicitly mentions orders

"Thus I have basically given the order to also kill the wives and children of these partisans, and commissars. I would be a weakling and a criminal to our descendants if I allowed the hate-filled sons of the sub-humans we have liquidated in this struggle of humanity against subhumanity to grow up."

"The Jewish question has been solved within Germany itself and in general within the countries occupied by Germany. [...] You can understand how difficult it was for me to carry out this military order which I was given and which I implemented out of a sense of obedience and absolute conviction. If you say: 'we can understand as far as the men are concerned but not about the children', then I must remind you of what I said at the beginning. [...] In my view, we as Germans, however deeply we may feel in our hearts, are not entitled to allow a generation of avengers filled with hatred to grow up with whom our children and grandchildren will have to deal because we, too weak and cowardly, left it to them."

"Another question which was decisive for the inner security of the Reich and Europe, was the Jewish question. It was uncompromisingly solved after orders and rational recognition. I believe, gentlemen, that you know me well enough to know that I am not a bloodthirsty person; I am not a man who takes pleasure or joy when something rough must be done. However on the other hand, I have such good nerves and such a developed sense of duty – I can say that much for myself – that when I recognise something as necessary I can implement it without compromise. I have not considered myself entitled – this concerns especially the Jewish women and children – to allow the children to grow into the avengers who will then murder our children and our grandchildren. That would have been cowardly. Consequently the question was uncompromisingly resolved."

"It was the most terrible task and the most terrible order which could have been given to an organisation: the order to solve the Jewish question. In this circle, I may say it frankly with a few sentences. It is good that we had the severity to exterminate the Jews in our domain."

Since Hilberg certainly views these speeches as authentic, how can you seriously take his position to be it was it was all carried out with a "wink and a nod"?

Gl0spana, this is so yesterday's newspaper. Real yawners debunked repeatedly.

- Himmler said nothing about Jews being 'exterminated'. You are naively being fed fake English 'translations' by the usual shysters.
- And what orders? Please show us these alleged Himmler "orders".
- Hilberg's laughable nonsense is matched by the unsubstantiated claims that you are making here and elsewhere.

More which demolishes your post:

On the Himmler Posen Speeches:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13199
ex., I posted:

– No human remains to back up the unfounded claims. Not a single enormous mass grave as alleged has ever been excavated, contents verified and shown. Not one. The storyline says 6M Jews & 5M others = 11M, now just think about that.
How bizarre, claims of mass murder where there is no evidence to support it. The gas chambers are scientifically impossible as alleged and have been debunked ad nauseum by Revisionists, and the alleged 1,000,000 – 2,000,000 supposed mass shootings of thousands at a time in claimed known sites have produced no mass graves at those sites. Why is that?

– In 1993, Robert Wolfe, supervisory archivist for captured German records at the National Archives admitted that a more precise translation of ‘ausrottung’ would be extirpation or tearing up by the roots. Wolfe also pointed out that in Himmler’s handwritten notes for the speech, that Himmler used the term, ‘judenevakuierung’, or evacuation of the Jews, not ‘extermination’.

– There are missing pages of the alleged text, retyped pages by different hands, even pages have been re-numbered..

– Then we have a so called “secret” speech in front of thousands. Frankly the assertions about it are laughable.

– Yivo (Yiddish Scientific Institute) of New York was very active in the Rosenberg Ministry to process documents for submittal to the Nuremberg trials.

– Members of the audience like SS-OGruF Gottlob Berger denied that Himmler was talking about the extermination of the Jews at all. I suggest reading: NMT, vol 13. p. 457-487

– This alleged (recorded) speech, as German judge Staeglich has adroitly pointed out, is a hodgepodge of non-sequitors, nonsense, and re-worked text,see:
‘Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, by Wilhelm Stäglich’: https://codoh.com/library/document/ausc ... idence/en/


– To have a speech with such alleged secret content recorded? Right. SS General Berger did not recognize Himmler’s voice listening to the tape.

– the complete lack of orders for the desperate assumptions made about it.
more here:
‘Posen speech’:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=372
and here:
Heinrich Himmler’s Posen Speech from 04.10.1943, , By Heinrich Himmler
Published: 1943-10-04, Given at Posen 4 October 1943, Translation of Document No. 1919-PS, Nuremberg Trial, by Carlos Porter: http://codoh.com/library/document/891/

and:
Posen speech:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=372
and:
Himmlers speech "Endloesung ???:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12325
and:
Himmler's so called "Extermination of Jews" speech:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5474
and:
Himmler's Sonthofen Speeches:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7225
and:
Himmler, Poznan speech:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9524
much more:
search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=himmler+speeches&fid%5B%5D=2
Search found 169 matches: Himmler speeches

- Hannover

[gl0spana]

obviously i can't prove the recordings are authentic. my point was that hilberg believed they were, and they mention orders, so clearly his position was more than the holocaust was achieved "with a wink and a nod".

[Hannover]

obviously i can't prove the recordings are authentic. my point was that hilberg believed they were, and they mention orders, so clearly his position was more than the holocaust was achieved "with a wink and a nod".

Considering what I have posted in response, and the fact that you have advocated in favor of the text that you posted, tell us why you believe the alleged text that you posted is authentic & truthful?
Please be specific.

- Hannover

[Otium]

"Hilberg certainly views these speeches as authentic" - yeah and Hilberg also claimed the existence of Hitler orders to exterminate the Jews. He's discredited.

I have already written at length about why speeches are not proof, and why they can mean very little in the way of proof. Read my post here.

Even if this Himmler speech was real it doesn't suddenly produce human remains or Prussian blue and Zyklon B residue in the alleged homicidal gas chambers of Auschwitz or anywhere else. I would suggest you stop trying to deal in snake oil Gl0spana and start delivering on real evidence. Believing the speech is true doesn't answer, let alone prove anything unless you already believe the Holocaust happened. In which case it just confirms your view despite the fact you still have no proof.

Regarding the speech, David Irving found that:

The two pages of the unedited transcript of this speech which contain the problematic passage have been typed on a different typewriter than the rest of the document and have also been paginated in a different style (handwritten instead of typed). So there is plenty of reason to be suspicious about this passage of the speech. Like with many other dubious documents, this piece of evidence was simply filed away unchallenged. So, you see, there is a need to research the origin and authenticity of this recording and of its transcript.

Germar Rudolf, Lectures on the Holocaust: Controversial issues cross-examined (Castle Hill Publishers, 3rd edition, July 2017), Pp. 355.

This fact was brought up in the 1988 Zundel trial, and during the Lipstadt trial in 2000. In neither was were these facts disputed by the establishment "historians". It's fairly safe to suggest that the incriminating page was a pure invention. By who? We don't know. Perhaps the two volume biography Irving has written on Himmler will yield a more in-depth look at this alleged Himmler speech? Here's hoping it does!

[Otium]

obviously i can't prove the recordings are authentic. my point was that hilberg believed they were, and they mention orders, so clearly his position was more than the holocaust was achieved "with a wink and a nod".

None of what you quoted illustrates the nature of the 'orders' or whom they came from. In fact he claims he issued them ('I have basically given the order'). Ordering the killing of partisans has nothing to do with any Holocaust, and unfortunately children can be used as weapons of partisans too.

You could also interpret what Himmler is saying in a number of ways. The closest Himmler comes is: 'the order to solve the Jewish question', but he doesn't tell us how this was to be 'solved'. If there was an order, it wouldn't be surprising because we already know there were plans for the 'final solution' and all of them without exception were territorial solutions, not murderous ones.

Himmler uses the word 'exterminate' (vernichten/vernichtung/ausrottung) yet the word can mean many things, like to uproot as has been demonstrated conclusively at this forum by giving examples taken right from German dictionaries of this period - and certainly of the period in which men like Hitler and Himmler grew up.

Hilberg's position was indeed that the Holocaust was conceived with winks and nods, you haven't proven otherwise, in fact the other forum user 'JustAsking' did a fine job quoting Hilberg, and nowhere did Hilberg mention any such 'orders', not can any 'orders' in the way you're thinking Gl0spana be shown to exist. You'll never find them either, no historian today accepts that an order to exterminate the Jews ever existed:

"Ninety-nine percent of what we know [about the Holocaust] we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove... it has become part of our inherited knowledge."

— Robert Jan van Pelt (A Case for Letting Nature Take Back Auschwitz, The Toronto Star, 27 December 2009)

---

There does not exist then, anything like a written order signed by [Hitler] for the extermination of the Jews in Europe."

— Colin Cross (Adolf Hitler, 1973, p. 313)

---

"Predictably, a written order by Hitler for the ‘Final Solution’ was not found. The presumption that a single, explicit written order had ever been given had long been dismissed by most historians."

— Ian Kershaw (Hitler, the Germans, and the Final Solution, 2008, p. 96)

---

"What became known in high Nazi circles as the Fuehrer Order on the Final Solution apparently was never committed to paper — at least no copy of it has yet been unearthed."

— William Shirer (The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, 1960, p. 1256)

---

"There subsists no document bearing an extermination order signed by Hitler... the traces are not only few and far between, but difficult to interpret."

— Philippe Burrin (Hitler et les Juifs: Genèse d'un génocide, 1994, p. 13)

---

Insofar as no one has yet discovered a written trace of this order [to exterminate the Jews] in the sources which have been exploited up to the present."

— Saul Friedländer (L'Allemagne nazie et le genocide juif, 1985, pp. 177)

---

"No written document containing or reporting an explicit command to exterminate the Jews has come to light thus far."

— Arno J. Mayer (Why did the Heavens not Darken?: The 'Final Solution' in History, 1990, pp. 235-36)

---

"No written order by Hitler for the extermination of the Jews has been discovered and the evidence of an oral order is only indirect."

— J. Noakes and G. Pridham (Nazism: A History in Documents and Eyewitness accounts 1919-1945 - Vol. 2, 1988, p. 1136)

---

For more information, see: The "Final Solution to the Jewish Question", Part One and Part Two. Also see: The Missing Hitler Orders
. Archive. And: The Victories of Revisionism, Part One and Part Two. Archive One and Archive Two.

All the mainstream historians are thus forced to believe in the 'winks and nods' conspiracy theory.

The fact is when you read Himmler's October 4, 1943 Posen speech, it actually supports revisionism rather than refutes it, as Carlos Whitlock Porter - fluent in German and works as a professional translator - has proven:

Reading Himmler's speech in its entirety, rather than the usual out-of-context quotations, results in a new level of understanding. Brief, out-of-context quotations have been used to support the orthodox Holocaust story since the end of the Second World War. [...] In 1993, Robert Wolfe, supervisory archivist for captured German records at the National Archives admitted that a more precise translation of Ausrottung would be extirpation or tearing up by the roots. Wolfe also pointed out that in Himmler's handwritten notes for the speech, that Himmler used the term, Judenevakuierung, or evacuation of the Jews, not extermination.

See: Heinrich Himmler's Posen Speech from 04.10.1943. Archive. Also see from the website of C.W. Porter. Archive. And the extensive Metapedia article. Archive.

[Lamprecht]

obviously i can't prove the recordings are authentic. my point was that hilberg believed they were, and they mention orders, so clearly his position was more than the holocaust was achieved "with a wink and a nod".

Was there a recording for this particular speech? I am not sure about that.

I don't see how the statements, assuming they are authentic for the moment, support the "Holocaust" narrative (or, in other words, refute "holocaust denial").
Has anyone said that women and children weren't killed during the Second World War? Yes, of course they were. There are WW2 casualties of all ages, but not a single "Holocaust victim" because there was no "holocaust."

It should also be pointed out that executing civilians -- women, children, elderly -- was not even illegal at the time if it was a reprisal for partisan/terrorist attacks. Obviously, executing partisans on sight was always legal, but there was only a ban on killing POWs in response to these attacks. Civilians were fair game under the law.

There were orders, yes. The Germans gave many orders during WWII because they liked to be organized like that. There was obviously no "kill all Jewish children" order given before this date (October 1943) because so many Jewish children survived the war, or died from disease/starvation unintentionally. A famous example is Anne Frank and her sister - they were deported out of "extermination camp" Auschwitz and sent to Bergen-Belsen, where they died of disease like many others in the final moments of the war. If there was a "kill all Jewish children" order they would not have been sent out of Auschwitz.

More likely than some phantom "kill all Jews" order, it would be in reference to one of these:

Kommandobefehl, Kommissarbefehl, and Sühnebefehl / "Nazis destroyed all incriminating documents" or not?
viewtopic.php?t=12626

Apparently, the Germans decided to destroy all of their "kill all Jews" orders, but not the incriminating orders that did not explicitly state "kill all Jews" yet were otherwise incriminating. Some people were given death sentences after the war, and the existence of these orders was cited as justification for this punishment. So they were absolutely the kind of "orders" that would have been destroyed in a desperate scramble to do so, but they weren't.

They also forgot to destroy the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Majdanek and Stutthof, even though they attempted to destroy the crematoria. viewtopic.php?t=12617

[borjastick]

There were orders, yes. The Germans gave many orders during WWII because they liked to be organized like that. There was obviously no "kill all Jewish children" order given before this date (October 1943) because so many Jewish children survived the war, or died from disease/starvation unintentionally. A famous example is Anne Frank and her sister - they were deported out of "extermination camp" Auschwitz and sent to Bergen-Belsen, where they died of disease like many others in the final moments of the war. If there was a "kill all Jewish children" order they would not have been sent out of Auschwitz.

Obviously there was no 'kill all jewish children' order because so many, about 3000, were born inside Auschwitz. And many more who arrived at Auschwitz as under 18s survived to live long and happy lives all around the world including 'that shitty little country' israel...

[Lamprecht]

As for OP's direct question:

Since Hilberg certainly views these speeches as authentic, how can you seriously take his position to be it was it was all carried out with a "wink and a nod"?

Again, assuming this is even authentic, it can not reasonably be construed as some overall extermination of Jews policy which is what Hilberg alleges.
It is abundantly clear that this is in reference to reprisals for partisan activity. As posted:

"I have basically given the order to also kill the wives and children of these partisans, and commissars"

An order to execute the family members of terrorists is not equivalent to an order to physically exterminate the Jews.

As revisionists Mattogno, Graf & Kues admit:

"We have no difficulty admitting that the German reprisal measures in the East, and not only there, were at times excessive and disproportionate, sometimes even performed with false pretenses, but this has nothing to do with a 'radicalization' which would have almost automatically led to a mass extermination of the Jews."

- The "Extermination Camps" of "Aktion Reinhardt"
https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/28-tecoar.pdf

Germar Rudolf stated:

"Dr. jur. Karl Siegert, Professor at the University of Göttingen, drew up a legal expert report shortly after the end of World War Two, in which he showed that reprisal killings were, to a certain degree, common practice and not against international law. Hence, reprisals and shootings of hostages can be considered as tactically questionable and possibly as morally reprehensible, but strictly speaking, this was not against the law at that time."

- Partisan War and Reprisal Killings
https://codoh.com/library/document/part ... llings/en/

Mark Mazower in his book 'Hitler's Empire' notes that partisan warfare and the brutality of it was not a specifically Nazi invention, but rather a traditional method of European warfare, stating (p. 353):

"The uncomfortable truth is that the counter-insurgency war was more the product of a certain European way of fighting than of Nazism itself."

What exactly does executing the family members of terrorists engaged in illegal warfare -- which was not illegal and tactically speaking a way to discourage other civilians from taking up arms and becoming partisan fighters themselves -- have to do with shoving Jews into homicidal gas chambers in concentration camps? These prisoners were already accounted for, they were no threat.

Think about it like this. You are a civilian in an Eastern European village and your country was just under Soviet occupation but now it's under German occupation. Your neighbor was an avowed communist and once the Germans rolled into your town, he grabbed his firearm and fled into the local forest to camp out with some other guys: Soviet soldiers left behind, Jews, and villagers that were Marxist and/or collaborated with the Soviet occupiers.
This group comes around every couple of weeks and rampages through the village, stealing livestock and supplies, sometimes raping women or killing those suspected of collaborating with the Germans. One day they attack a German military base and steal weapons. A few of them are caught, including your neighbor. They find out his identity and go to his house and grab his wife and children, and arrest them all. Then the German occupiers call everyone in the village to the town square, pull the man and his family out, tell everyone what he did (which was illegal), and shoot his wife and children right in front of him. Then they shoot him. And everyone in the village sees that and realizes that if they wish to engage in anti-occupation terrorist activity, they are also risking the lives of their wife and children in the process.

Is that harsh? Sure. But this sort of thing is not unprecedented at all, and I don't see why it could be construed as evidence for a policy of genociding the Jews.



In fact, it is evidence against the standard "Holocaust" narrative. If the Einsatzgruppen were tasked with exterminating all Jews solely on the basis of them being Jews (a decision allegedly made in mid-1941 or early 1942) then an order to execute the families [women and children] of Jewish partisans would be redundant. If the soldiers were already given the task of killing women and children simply because they were Jews, with no other qualifier needed, there would be no need for this Himmler order to execute Jewish women and children based on this additional qualifier (being family to the partisans).

Probably you did not think about this very hard. You read "execute the women and children" and thought "wow, that's mean, it's a war crime, that's evidence for the Holocaust!"
But it is not "Evidence for the Holocaust" it is just evidence of the brutal nature of WWII, which nobody denied. It also was not even illegal, nor is the killing of civilians [by all sides in WWII] even disputed by revisionists. Hilberg, given that he wrote a long book and presumably did a lot of research, would have thought about this a lot longer and would not have made such a silly mistake. He would have understood that an order to execute the families of terrorists on the Eastern front has nothing to do with setting up homicidal gas chambers in concentration camps to execute already-imprisoned Jews.