I came across this, with a bunch of documents on supposed Nazi extermination of Jews:
https://phdn.org/histgen/documents/nazisdoc.html
Looking through it, it seems like a lot of it is grim and exaggerated wartime rhetoric as well as rumor and hearsay. A few forged documents as well. There are familiar documents in here that I've seen addressed in revisionist works and on this forum. I wonder if anyone has gone to the trouble to compile a list of homicidal rhetoric against Germans on the Allied side as well?
Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
Moderator: Moderator
Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
Last edited by fireofice on Sun Apr 23, 2023 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
fireofice wrote:I came across this, with a bunch of documents on supposed Nazi extermination of Jews:
https://phdn.org/histgen/documents/nazisdoc.html
Looking through it, it seems like a lot of it is grim and exaggerated wartime rhetoric as well as rumor and hearsay. A few forged documents as well. There are familiar documents in here that I've seen addressed in revisionist works and on this forum. I wonder if anyone has gone to the trouble to compile a list of homicidal rhetoric against Germans on the Allied side as well.
Indeed that's what it is. Lots of bombastic language and indeed some anger about what they are confronted with (rumors, spies, partisans, cruelty, etc.) But the context is usually quite clear that this isn't about 'extermination of the Jews', rather removing them from the sphere, putting them to work as well as lock and key. The bombastic language can however be used to create an impression to 'make more' believable. And that's how it is used in media and by Holocaustians.
Re: Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
Hektor wrote:But the context is usually quite clear that this isn't about 'extermination of the Jews', rather removing them from the sphere, putting them to work as well as lock and key.
Yes, although sometimes the wording does make it more explicitly about killing, like Robert Ley's speech for example. That I still say is hyperbolic language, like how sometimes someone will say "I'll kill them!" or "They're dead!" even though they don't mean it literally.
From Arthur Butz's The Hoax of the Twentieth Century:
It is well known that Nazi oratory and rhetoric tended to have a provocatively inflammatory character whose origins go well back into the days when the Nazis were a minor party in Weimar Germany. It appears that this was a result of a deliberate and studied policy, for in 1931 Hitler explained the reasons for it in a private interview:
“What some madman of an editor writes in my own press is of no interest to me. […] We can achieve something only by fanaticism. If this fanaticism horrifies the bourgeoisie, so much the better. Solely by this fanaticism, which refuses any compromise, do we gain our contact with the masses.”
Put more simply, he often found that he could get attention by making wild statements.
Naturally, all of the Nazi leaders, especially Goebbels, were infected with this attitude to some degree. It is true that, after the Nazis came to power and assumed responsibility for ruling Germany, their public declarations became much more moderated in tone, but the tendency never entirely departed from them, and of course the war and the problem of attempting to reach public opinion in the Allied countries revived the feature somewhat. Under the circumstances, it is actually remarkable that Hitler and Goebbels only rarely made such declarations.
He then later goes on to list some extreme rhetoric from the other side. It seems Hitler didn't mind the rumors about extermination as well. Here is a quote from table talks:
Nobody should tell me: We cannot send them into the marshes! Who is then concerned about our people? It is good if the fear that we exterminate the Jews precedes us.
Notice how he doesn't say there is an extermination program, just that it's good that people believe that. This attitude of his may have influenced other members of the Nazi government. Make some extreme rhetoric to scare the enemy, although it wasn't just that. It's ironic then that this attitude of theirs then contributed to the hoax against them afterwards.
Re: Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
Hyperbolic language was indeed frequently used by National Socialists. It's a bit of grand-standing by the speakers, but also to fire-up the crowd of listeners. There is of course a difference between a speech and putting something into writing still. And then the type of writing makes a difference. There is thousands, if not millions of documents, recordings, letters, diaries, etc. Now if one is malicious one can go and collect the most juicy statements being made there. Compile this, repeat this over and over again and that way create an impression and spin a narrative around this. This and the situation in the late 1940s, which indeed was dire, would indeed be the ideal setting for an 'exterminationist narrative'. If it wasn't for pesky details of course and all the contradictory evidences. But one can get an audience to ignore or reinterpret this. And if you keep on being pushy with extermination/Holocaust, people will continue to believe it.
What is overlooked is that 'the Jewish question' was a side issue for the vast majority of National Socialists and Germans in general. They were concerned about the economic situation, work and income opportunities and building some modest wealth for themselves and their families. So economics policy and social policy were of far higher interest to them. Second to that, but also as a necessity for that, was the foreign policy issues. That Germany would re-establish itself as a 'Great Power' in Europe and resolve any of the post-Versailles issues that had build up over time. One should not forget that during the 1920s Germany was frequently invaded and attacked by it's neighbors, especially France and Poland. The attitude was however not revenge, but restoring a balance with them. The Allied narrative was turning this into a 'will to world conquest' kind of thing. Just as they turned statements against the Jews as a 'will to exterminate the Jews'. The fact that Germany charged and invasion against Poland and also invaded several other countries implementing measures against Jews assists the exterminationists to make their thesis more believable. But that actually ignores the reasons for military action, which were there in all the cases. Poland wasn't exactly innocent in receiving the invasion and there was a refusal from the British side to reconcile on matters. Norway and the Netherlands did declare neutrality, but it turned out that this was merely pretentious on the side of their governments. The populations wanted for sure to stay out of the war. But their Elites were pro-Western Allies and neglected to maintain clear neutrality in the conflict. Keeping those details out of the public mind is vital to maintain the 'world-conquest-myth'. And something crazy like 'conquering the world' is conducive to make people believe more crazy and wicked stuff. The fact that official Germany doesn't refute this openly is to many an affirmation of the narrative. And given that they have selective knowledge/information on their minds the story persists. On its own the narrative is however not that strong and hence they must suppress any contradictory information. Hence disparage and persecute Holocaust Revisionists. Most folks only heard about it on a sideline. Only know claims and pictures. And that has a sweeping effect. Explaining what really happened and why some stuff simply didn't is far more complicated and difficult. And that's the challenge for Holocaust Revisionism.
What is overlooked is that 'the Jewish question' was a side issue for the vast majority of National Socialists and Germans in general. They were concerned about the economic situation, work and income opportunities and building some modest wealth for themselves and their families. So economics policy and social policy were of far higher interest to them. Second to that, but also as a necessity for that, was the foreign policy issues. That Germany would re-establish itself as a 'Great Power' in Europe and resolve any of the post-Versailles issues that had build up over time. One should not forget that during the 1920s Germany was frequently invaded and attacked by it's neighbors, especially France and Poland. The attitude was however not revenge, but restoring a balance with them. The Allied narrative was turning this into a 'will to world conquest' kind of thing. Just as they turned statements against the Jews as a 'will to exterminate the Jews'. The fact that Germany charged and invasion against Poland and also invaded several other countries implementing measures against Jews assists the exterminationists to make their thesis more believable. But that actually ignores the reasons for military action, which were there in all the cases. Poland wasn't exactly innocent in receiving the invasion and there was a refusal from the British side to reconcile on matters. Norway and the Netherlands did declare neutrality, but it turned out that this was merely pretentious on the side of their governments. The populations wanted for sure to stay out of the war. But their Elites were pro-Western Allies and neglected to maintain clear neutrality in the conflict. Keeping those details out of the public mind is vital to maintain the 'world-conquest-myth'. And something crazy like 'conquering the world' is conducive to make people believe more crazy and wicked stuff. The fact that official Germany doesn't refute this openly is to many an affirmation of the narrative. And given that they have selective knowledge/information on their minds the story persists. On its own the narrative is however not that strong and hence they must suppress any contradictory information. Hence disparage and persecute Holocaust Revisionists. Most folks only heard about it on a sideline. Only know claims and pictures. And that has a sweeping effect. Explaining what really happened and why some stuff simply didn't is far more complicated and difficult. And that's the challenge for Holocaust Revisionism.
Re: Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
I find it mighty convenient that the Nazis totally annihilated all documents and communication transcripts that actually explicitly mention mass extermination of the Jews and developed a whole secret code using only vague terms like 'Austrotten' that implicitly really mean mass murder and can easily be mistranslated, but then dropped subtle innuendos and hints everywhere. You would think that just one explicit document would be found or an SS corporal talking on what he thinks is a secure line of military communication would slip up and drop the act saying something like "Hey Hans, do you when that shipment of Zyklon B is going to reach Auschwitz? You know, for that extermination program we're running to kill every Jew in Europe" or something like that, but no, everyone of the thousands of SS officers that were running the operation used this super top secret code of subtle little hints and vague innuendos that sound kind of ominous to refer to what is the biggest mass Genocide in history. This is the caliber of evidence we're dealing with to prove the Holocaust
Re: Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
fireofice wrote:I came across this, with a bunch of documents on supposed Nazi extermination of Jews:
https://phdn.org/histgen/documents/nazisdoc.html
Looking through it, it seems like a lot of it is grim and exaggerated wartime rhetoric as well as rumor and hearsay.
With an accurate translation of the words Ausrotten/Ausrottung and Vernichten/Vernichtung and a proper assessment of the statements made by an alcoholic hothead not even involved in the wartime deportation of the Jews like Robert Ley, what is left of that alleged verbal evidence?
Unlike what Holohoaxers claim for deceptive purposes, the word Ausrotten/Ausrottung hadn't a meaning for living things and another meaning for non-living things. As many words in all languages, the word Ausrotten/Ausrottung had a literal meaning and a figurative meaning. The literal meaning of Ausrotten/Ausrottung derived from its original agricultural meaning. The word Ausrotten/Ausrottung derives from the old Germanic verb roden and Ausroden, which describes the removal of stumps (i.e. the extirpation; from Latin words ex = "out" and stirps = "stump") in a forested area to be used for agricultural purposes. And in the 1930s and 1940s, the figurative meaning of Ausrotten/Ausrottung described the full removal, roots and branches, of something or somebody unwanted by any means, lethal or non-lethal.
And the word Vernichten/Vernichtung described the neutralization of a hostile force (the defeat of an enemy) by any means, including non-lethal ones such as imprisonment, as found out by the Allied reporter Dewitt MacKenzie when he investigated the reported Vernichtung of Russian armies during WWII. Anyway, one can annihilate (i.e. reduce to nothing) a people within a specific geographical area without killing anyone. Deporting a whole people somewhere else annihilates that people in the area from where it was deported.
Annihilated but alive...
Ironically, the favorite trick of Holohoaxers (i.e. claiming that the words Ausrotten and Vernichten meant and only meant "Kill them all") was debunked by the Germanophobic Jew Theodore N. Kaufman when his 1941 book "Germany Must Perish" was translated into German by some of Hitler's employees. Since Kaufman ruled out the killing of anybody ("massacre and wholesale execution must be ruled out"), the Nazi propagandists wouldn't have used the words Ausrotten and Vernichten to translate and publicize that infamous plan. But they did use those words, so demonstrating that they didn't mean and only mean "kill them all" as Holohoaxers claim on and on since 1945.
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
Re: Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
Kaufman did not rule out 'killing anybody'. But he didn't deem it feasible to 'kill everybody'. So he proposed other measures to diminish the Germans in the longer run.
Leading NS used figurative and inflammatory language. To 'root out' their opponents was however never understood as killing them. And 'vernichten' is military language as well. It doesn't mean killing all his troops neither. But in an aftermath those that are a little malicious can have a field day with this type of language.
In the end you however need physical evidence to back up what your saying. And not some substitute for this.
Leading NS used figurative and inflammatory language. To 'root out' their opponents was however never understood as killing them. And 'vernichten' is military language as well. It doesn't mean killing all his troops neither. But in an aftermath those that are a little malicious can have a field day with this type of language.
In the end you however need physical evidence to back up what your saying. And not some substitute for this.
Re: Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
Hektor wrote:Kaufman did not rule out 'killing anybody'. But he didn't deem it feasible to 'kill everybody'. So he proposed other measures to diminish the Germans in the longer run.
He didn't plan to kill anybody in order to reach his goal and make the German people go extinct. That's what I meant when I said that he ruled out killing anybody. I didn't mean that he would have been bothered by the killing of some Germans. I meant that his program made the killing of any German unnecessary. One can make a whole people go extinct by undermining or destroying its birth rate. All the White peoples are now experiencing it, kaufmanned out of existence (through an anti-natalist social engineering, a mental sterilization) at full speed...
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
Re: Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
hermod wrote:Hektor wrote:Kaufman did not rule out 'killing anybody'. But he didn't deem it feasible to 'kill everybody'. So he proposed other measures to diminish the Germans in the longer run.
He didn't plan to kill anybody in order to reach his goal and make the German people go extinct. That's what I meant when I said that he ruled out killing anybody. I didn't mean that he would have been bothered by the killing of some Germans. I meant that his program made the killing of any German unnecessary. One can make a whole people go extinct by undermining or destroying its birth rate. All the White peoples are now experiencing it, kaufmanned out of existence (through an anti-natalist social engineering, a mental sterilization) at full speed...
What he suggests is doing this by "political means" using policy to shrink the German nation. He's not the only author that came up with this. He is also not as fringe as his apologists suggest. Killing via gaslighting is what has been done to the Germans. This got something really diabolical to it, as well.
And yes, I think the method is used with others as well. Also more of a cultural struggle than a political and it is not by having military or police going from door to door to kill people. That wont be feasible and would also lead to more vigorous resistance.
NS-policy didn't have any interest in destroying Jewish culture or to brain-wash them. There it was physical removal from Germany and it's sphere of influence at the time. The Jews could have their place and run it to their liking, then. Just no re-entry afterwards.
Re: Nazi Documents on "Jewish Extermination"
Hektor wrote:What he suggests is doing this by "political means" using policy to shrink the German nation. He's not the only author that came up with this. He is also not as fringe as his apologists suggest. Killing via gaslighting is what has been done to the Germans. This got something really diabolical to it, as well.
Not only the shrinking of the German nation by political means, also the complete biological elimination of the German people in Europe by compulsory surgical sterilization of all the Germans capable of having kids.
Hektor wrote:And yes, I think the method is used with others as well. Also more of a cultural struggle than a political and it is not by having military or police going from door to door to kill people. That wont be feasible and would also lead to more vigorous resistance.
NS-policy didn't have any interest in destroying Jewish culture or to brain-wash them. There it was physical removal from Germany and it's sphere of influence at the time. The Jews could have their place and run it to their liking, then. Just no re-entry afterwards.
From Germany and its sphere of influence before the outbreak of WWII, but from all over Europe after that moment (as announced in Hitler's notorious January 30, 1939 'prophecy' on "the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe"). The final solution of the Jewish question/problem was a program devised by the founders of political Zionism. It was all about the mass resettlement of Europe's Jews whether advocated and/or carried out by the Zionists (WZO), the Territorialists (ITO) or the Nazis (NSDAP). No code name or euphemism behind that term. No misleading quotation marks and alleged decoding needed. Just a lasting end of the age-old cycle of Jewish departures and returns in European countries through a mass resettlement in a land far away from Europe.
What the final solution of the Jewish question/problem was to eliminate in Europe...
The real final solution of the Jewish question/problem :
World Zionist Organization
HaHistadrut Hazionit HaolamitFounded
1897; 126 years ago
Founder
Theodor Herzl
Max Nordau
Location
Jerusalem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Zio ... ganization
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Hektor and 9 guests
