Upcoming Written Holocaust Debate [Dalton vs. HistorySpeaks]

[telleno]

Does anyone know how comments work on substack? For example, if comments left on the article are allowed to be removed by the article author. Someone already appears to be challenging Dalton’s opening:

One would think that if the Holocaust was made up to benefit Israel why neither the U.S. nor U.S.S.R. during the Cold War came out and said "fuck it, this didn't happen, stop complaining" when each came to blows with it, particularly during the Suez crisis when Israel lacked the nuclear capability to defend itself from American/Soviet attack. Or how the U.S. withdrew its initial endorsement for the UNGA plan establishing a Jewish state. Or how the U.S.S.R. turned sharply against Israel from the 1950s onwards...

[hermod]

Someone already appears to be challenging Dalton’s opening:

One would think that if the Holocaust was made up to benefit Israel why neither the U.S. nor U.S.S.R. during the Cold War came out and said "fuck it, this didn't happen, stop complaining" when each came to blows with it, particularly during the Suez crisis when Israel lacked the nuclear capability to defend itself from American/Soviet attack. Or how the U.S. withdrew its initial endorsement for the UNGA plan establishing a Jewish state. Or how the U.S.S.R. turned sharply against Israel from the 1950s onwards...

That's a dumb counterargument. Nobody can seriously believe that the U.S. or the US.S.R. would have dropped the biggest propaganda hoax for Uncle Sam's "Good War" myth and Uncle Joe's "Great Patriotic War" legend only to delegitimize Israel.

[Hektor]

Someone already appears to be challenging Dalton’s opening:

One would think that if the Holocaust was made up to benefit Israel why neither the U.S. nor U.S.S.R. during the Cold War came out and said "fuck it, this didn't happen, stop complaining" when each came to blows with it, particularly during the Suez crisis when Israel lacked the nuclear capability to defend itself from American/Soviet attack. Or how the U.S. withdrew its initial endorsement for the UNGA plan establishing a Jewish state. Or how the U.S.S.R. turned sharply against Israel from the 1950s onwards...

That's a dumb counterargument. Nobody can seriously believe that the U.S. or the US.S.R. would have dropped the biggest propaganda hoax for Uncle Sam's "Good War" myth and Uncle Joe's "Great Patriotic War" legend only to delegitimize Israel.

It moves tot the conspiracy straw man. And also hints at the bait and switch that the policies to deport and intern Jews were somehow "a Holocaust".
The USSR had their own motives to stick to the Holocaust Myth, so had the Communists in the West. For Communists "Antifascism" was an internally binding factor as well as a factor that they could use to bind with liberals and leftist Christianity. They also understood the concept of cultural capital, which the 'atrocity narrative' evolving into 'the Holocaust' actually was. Sure they will do anything to disparage their most vigorous enemy (National Socialism).

[curioussoul]

Does anyone know how comments work on substack? For example, if comments left on the article are allowed to be removed by the article author. Someone already appears to be challenging Dalton’s opening:

History Speaks fully controls what comments are approved. Arguably, all comments should be approved (impossible to control) or no comments at all.

[Hektor]

Does anyone know how comments work on substack? For example, if comments left on the article are allowed to be removed by the article author. Someone already appears to be challenging Dalton’s opening:

History Speaks fully controls what comments are approved. Arguably, all comments should be approved (impossible to control) or no comments at all.

There is three options:
* No comments : that means a page/article/etc will be less interesting.
* Free comments ; Any idiot can comment now spam the page and troll.
* moderated comment : Only on topic and decent comment will be allowed, but the comment function can be abused as well.

Rules are necessary in this world. But they need to be sound and the people that apply them have to be strict and fair at the same time.
On the other hand sometimes the comment function is only something that runs in the background. Not interfering and not of interest at all. It's different under certain types of videos.

[Archie]

We could argue about each of the documents HS's brings up (info on all or nearly all of these can be found with the forum search), but my major, overarching critique of his approach is that he has avoided using all of the classic testimonies that form the basis for the legend and has instead cited only very select documents of mostly ancillary importance which only support his case if you read them having been generously primed with holocaust lore. It is trivial to find bloodthirsty statements during a war, but these cannot generally be assumed to be proof that millions of people were killed as part of a formalized extermination program. If, for instance, Goebbels says "you have to kill these Jews like rats," this could be taken as support for "the holocaust" only if we are already inclined to believe it. It can only buttress in some vague way the primary evidence. And traditionally what has the primary evidence been? To the extent they have even bothered with real evidence (as opposed to movies and novels) the primary evidence has been the statements of Höss, Gerstein, etc, all of which HS revealingly avoids bringing up. The commandant of Auschwitz confessed at length to the extermination program at the camp. Why not use it? This is rather devious sleight of hand because he is taking full advantage of the "holocaust priming" but without being willing to defend the material that forms the true basis for it.

The material cited by HS:

Einsatzgruppen
-Stahlecker Report
-Jaeger Report
-Mentions the OSRs (no quotes)
-Kube-Lohse (PS-3428)
-Says adding up paper evidence suggests 2M killed (no citation)

AR Camps + Chelmno
-Goebbels diary (27 Mar 1942)
-Himmler 363,211 document (NO-1128)
-Stroop Report
-Chelmno: 16 Jun 1943 letter
-Archaeology: Kola Study

Auschwitz
-Kramer diary
-Pressac Documents
-Vergasungskeller document
-Zyklon induction holes supposedly found in ruins

Final Solution Policy
-Goebbels diary (12 Dec 1941)
-Hans Frank diary (12 Dec 1941)
-Robert Ley Speech (20 May 1942)
-Hans Frank diary (24 Aug 1942)
-Horthy and Hitler (17 Apr 1943)
-Himmler's Posen Speech (6 Oct 1943)
-Goebbels diary (14 Mar 1945)
-SS trial of Taubner (26 Oct 1942) [from the book The Good Old Days]

"Voluntary" Confessions
-Eichmann Sassen tapes
-Albert Speer 1971 letter
-The Mufti's memoirs

[Hektor]

We could argue about each of the documents HS's brings up (info on all or nearly all of these can be found with the forum search), but my major, overarching critique of his approach is that he has avoided using all of the classic testimonies that form the basis for the legend and has instead cited only very select documents of mostly ancillary importance which only support his case if you read them having been generously primed with holocaust lore. It is trivial to find bloodthirsty statements during a war, but these cannot generally be assumed to be proof that millions of people were killed as part of a formalized extermination program. If, for instance, Goebbels says "you have to kill these Jews like rats," this could be taken as support for "the holocaust" only if we are already inclined to believe it. It can only buttress in some vague way the primary evidence. And traditionally what has the primary evidence been? ....

That's how it works. Assume the thesis to be true. And then interpret anything in line with that thesis. If the thesis is true, why don't you go for primary evidence then (in terms of mass killings on the scale you allege, there should be huge quantities of remains you could find and show - you could also use it to ID people to see whether they are dead or still missing - but no. Everybody that was deported and could not be found back immediately was a 'extermination victims').

The documents HS cites have been dealt with. Some of them to be shown CLEAR forgeries.
In case of the Jaeger Report. https://pages.uoregon.edu/dluebke/NaziG ... Report.htm
The pages listing executions (which had no signatures) also list locations. What would be easier then checking whether there are mass graves at those locations? Yet, they didn't check for mass graves there, despite having the resources and motivation to do so! Best explanation for this would be that those in charge over the area did actually know that it is a forgery and hence nothing to be found there.

And so one can go on. If the Holocaust was real as alleged, one would not have to rely on circumstantial evidence, documents or testimony, one would have recovered physical evidence long ago and not have to rely on all kind of underhanded tactics to 'make people believe'.

[HistorySpeaks]

I have not deleted any comments and will not do so unless they blatantly contain racial slurs, etc. I also have told Thomas Dalton that he is free to register and comment as he wishes. I believe you have to sign up for substack to comment.

Regarding the Einstzgruppen, I absolutely do not estimate the death toll at 2 million. Two million (or slightly less) is my estimation for ALL mass shootings—carried out by the EG, the SS und Polizeiführer (SSPF), the Ordnungspolizei, the Wehrmacht, the Romanian military, local collaborators, and (in Yugoslavia) the Ustaše, among other bodies—of Jews. This includes not only Jews shot in the occupied USSR but in the borders of (pre-war) Poland, so it includes Operation Harvest Festival, for example.

[telleno]

Does anyone know how comments work on substack? For example, if comments left on the article are allowed to be removed by the article author. Someone already appears to be challenging Dalton’s opening:

History Speaks fully controls what comments are approved. Arguably, all comments should be approved (impossible to control) or no comments at all.

Yea, that’s what I figured. Unfortunately there is no way to know if he actually does approve all of them. Also, there was another thread on this substack debate started by HistorySpeaks himself, I can’t find it anymore; was it deleted?

[curioussoul]

The material cited by HS:

Einsatzgruppen
-Stahlecker Report
-Jaeger Report
-Mentions the OSRs (no quotes)
-Kube-Lohse (PS-3428)
-Says adding up paper evidence suggests 2M killed (no citation)

AR Camps + Chelmno
-Goebbels diary (27 Mar 1942)
-Himmler 363,211 document (NO-1128)
-Stroop Report
-Chelmno: 16 Jun 1943 letter
-Archaeology: Kola Study

Auschwitz
-Kramer diary
-Pressac Documents
-Vergasungskeller document
-Zyklon induction holes supposedly found in ruins

Final Solution Policy
-Goebbels diary (12 Dec 1941)
-Hans Frank diary (12 Dec 1941)
-Robert Ley Speech (20 May 1942)
-Hans Frank diary (24 Aug 1942)
-Horthy and Hitler (17 Apr 1943)
-Himmler's Posen Speech (6 Oct 1943)
-Goebbels diary (14 Mar 1945)
-SS trial of Taubner (26 Oct 1942) [from the book The Good Old Days]

"Voluntary" Confessions
-Eichmann Sassen tapes
-Albert Speer 1971 letter
-The Mufti's memoirs

Many of these documents refute his own position, such as the Kube/Lohse correspondence, in which Kube - exasperated at the non-stop flood of Jews being transported into his region - would have to be liquidated because there simply was no more space to house them. If an actual extermination programme was ongoing, there is no reason for Kube to be threatening the liquidation of incoming Jewish transports.

As you say, HS is counting on his readers to be fully primed on the Holocaust story and therefore automatically interpret everything within the framework of a preordained extermination programme. Since HS is completely unable to lay the foundation for this framework and defend it, he counts on the laziness and stupidity of his readers for them not to bother critically analyzing the contents of these "proofs".

Yea, that’s what I figured. Unfortunately there is no way to know if he actually does approve all of them. Also, there was another thread on this substack debate started by HistorySpeaks himself, I can’t find it anymore; was it deleted?

It was merged into this thread.

[Hektor]

I have not deleted any comments and will not do so unless they blatantly contain racial slurs, etc. I also have told Thomas Dalton that he is free to register and comment as he wishes. I believe you have to sign up for substack to comment.

Regarding the Einstzgruppen, I absolutely do not estimate the death toll at 2 million. Two million (or slightly less) is my estimation for ALL mass shootings—carried out by the EG, the SS und Polizeiführer (SSPF), the Ordnungspolizei, the Wehrmacht, the Romanian military, local collaborators, and (in Yugoslavia) the Ustaše, among other bodies—of Jews. This includes not only Jews shot in the occupied USSR but in the borders of (pre-war) Poland, so it includes Operation Harvest Festival, for example.

I'm not that much interested in the commenting. As said regulating it may be necessary.

As for 2.000.000 being killed by Einsatzgruppen or whomever:
That would be 200 mass graves with ~10.000 corpses. Has any of those ever been found? Or did the fiendish Nazis make all the evidence vanish afterwards?!

Bear in mind that smaller executions (as in connection with fighting partisans) or pogroms aren't in dispute as such. What is in dispute is where there is no physical evidence for it.

[DissentingOpinions]

The reason why it’s a written debate is simple: Michael Santomauro’s voice was in prior videos posted to his social media, so a spoken debate would expose Dalton as Santomauro. Not that it wasn’t obvious already, since he registered the Holocaust Handbooks domain & older editions of those books linked to Santomauro’s site, which Dalton advertised as his own on his site when Germar was in prison over a decade ago. At least HistorySpeaks doesn’t dox himself using his pseudonym.

[Otium]

also seems like he's gonna give up responding to Holocaust revisionists in favor of pretending to care about other history. This is what typically happens when anti-revisionists attempt to refute revisionists. Since they have no arguments they always end up having to throw in the towel.

Unsurprising.

I saw a stupid Tweet in which Matt (aka. History Speaks, Gl0spana) wrote about how he was going to make videos 'debunking' Ryan Faulk's statements regarding the German 'annexation' of Czechia in March 1939. He listed some preliminary points against Ryan which were typically smarmy, one sided, half-baked, and half-true; displaying the sort of hubis one shouldn't have as a historian, let alone one who supposedly cares about impartiality and the 'truth', which Matt does not. What he wants, more than anything, is to indict Hitler and National Socialism, that's his modus operandi.

---

At the end of Matt's amateurish tirade (in his opening remarks to the debate with Thomas Dalton) he asked "Why did the European-Jewish population fall so disproportionately in World War II? ", which has been discussed on this forum before plenty of times. One should consider general population losses as a result of war, diesease, etc. and of course that accurate census figures are for one reason or another, non-existant. The only orthodox Holocaust scholar to attempt a serious and detailed evaluation of Holocaust victims was Wolfgang Benz, and the work under his editorship: 'Dimension des Völkermords' (Munich, 1991), which was compared to the revisionist Walter N. Sanning's well-known work 'Die Auflösung des osteuropäischen Judentums' (Tübingen, 1983). Germar Rudolf provided a fantastic critical review, and refutation of Benz in his article 'Holocaust Victims: A Statistical Analysis' published in 'Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of “Truth” and “Memory.”' (Uckfield, 2019). Germar writes in the very first sentence of his contribution: "Polemic discussions about the Holocaust frequently come to a dead end when one party resorts to the argument that it is after all an indisputable fact that six million persons of Jewish faith were missing after the Second World War and that therefore it does not matter in the slightest how these people were killed." (Rudolf (ed.), Dissecting the Holocaust, p. 175) Evidently this is the same tactic employed by Cockerill in his opening remarks.

[curioussoul]

At the end of Matt's amateurish tirade (in his opening remarks to the debate with Thomas Dalton) he asked "Why did the European-Jewish population fall so disproportionately in World War II? ", which has been discussed on this forum before plenty of times.

Unsurprisingly, Matt/gl0spana/History Speaks relies on the ignorance of his readers and doesn't even attempt to substantiate the reality of these purported Jewish population losses. Remarkably - as you say - no serious demographic study on Jewish population losses was conducted until Sanning's book in 1983 (which, by the way, received an update just this year) and later Wolfgang Benz's lazy attempt at debunking Sanning. It bears pointing out that Jewish population estimates routinely vary by many millions. It is not rare to see estimates by different publications vary by as much as 4+ million, and sometimes by millions even by the very same publication depending on the edition (World Almanac/Book of Facts, etc). Therefore, even if we pretend that Jewish population losses were actually reflected in demographic statistics, this does not in and of itself prove the reality of the Holocaust. Undoubtedly, we'll see references to the completely made-up statistics released in 1949 by the American Jewish Committee and published in the World Almanac - but as we all know, there is very little empirical data behind these statistics, and they rather reflect the outcome of the Nuremberg trials.

[telleno]

I’m pretty sure Dalton is wrong when he says:

But isn’t the “6 million” figure documented in hundreds of history books? The number itself is, but not the details. Given all that we supposedly know about this event, one would expect that there would be a clear and concise breakdown of the number, showing roughly where, and how, 6 million died. Experts like Raul Hilberg claim that there are three main categories of deaths: death camps, shootings, and ghettos. So, the experts should be able to show us, by year, how many died in camps, how many by shooting, and how many in the ghettos—such that the numbers add up to 6 million. But they cannot do this. The reader is invited to look at any mainstream published source for this information; it does not exist. One can find numbers individually for each camp, or for certain ghettos, but virtually never any totaling 6 million. This alone strongly suggests that there are serious problems with the overall picture.

I believe Hilberg’s first book had a tally and it came to 5.1 million.