Free e-books by David Irving on history of WW2

thorbiorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Note from 20061021: For an update on David Irving kindly refer to Signs Editorial: The Mystic vs Hitler
by Laura Knight-Jadczyk in Signs of the Times
20 October 2006 - end of note

"Has our true history been concealed from us? Join in the search for clues..." is the introduction to this section of the forum and therefore I submit a link to free pdf e-books by the British historian David Irving.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/index.html

From one book I quote a few bits from the beginning to give you an idea of who the author is and how he organizes the theme he writes about:
From 'NUREMBERG THE LAST BATTLE':

'David Irving is in the first rank of Britain's historical chroniclers' - THE TIMES

David Irving is the son of a Royal Navy commander. Educated at Imperial College of Science & Technology and at UniversityCollege London, he subsequently spent a year in Germany working in a steel mill and perfecting his fluency in the language. Among his thirty books the best-known include Hitler's War; The Trail of the Fox: The Life of Field-Marshal Rommel; Accident, the Death of General Sikorski; The Rise and Fall of the Luftwaffe, and Goering: a Biography. He has translated several works by other authors. He lives in Grosvenor Square, London, and is the father of five daughters. In 1963 he published The Destruction of Dresden. This became a best-seller in many countries. In 1966 he issued a revised edition, Apocalypse 1945, as well as his important biography, Goebbels. Mastermind of the Third Reich and the second volume of Churchill's War.

Copyright (c) 1996, Parforce (UK) Ltd. Copyright Website edition (c) Focal Point Publications 1999 [...]

'There is more dynamite in this question than Krupp ever produced out of his plant!'
- JUSTICE ROBERT H. JACKSON at a secret meeting of the Nuremberg chief prosecutors, November 12, 1945

'The trials served both to illuminate and to falsify history. In the hand of the experienced historian, their documentation is a good guide; in the hand of a demagogue it is a dangerous knobkerry.'
- Naval judge advocate Captain OTTO KRANZBAHLER, lecturing at the University of Göttingen in September 1949 [...]

NUREMBERG, THE LAST BATTLE

Contents
Author's Introduction ................................................................ 6
1: In Which Stalin Says No to Murder........................................ 11
2: Lynch Law............................................................................ 31
3: Mr Morgenthau and the All-American Judge .......................... 57
4: If We Can't Lynch Them, Flog Them..................................... 72
5: The Origin of 'Six Million' ..................................................... 95
6: Architect of a New International Law................................... 105
7: Meeting with Two Traitors ................................................... 125
8: The London Agreement ....................................................... 143
9: Those Boys Are Out for Blood ............................................. 163
10: I'm Running the Show....................................................... 181
11: Hess Can't Quite Remember the Reichsmarschall ............... 198
12: An Honourable Criminal ................................................... 218
13: Showtime .......................................................................... 242
14: Much Vodka and Fun ........................................................ 263
15: The Cadavers Concerned................................................... 282
16: Cooking Goering's Goose.................................................... 300
17: Schacht Saved on the Square ............................................. 322
18: Final Solution ................................................................... 340
19: Behind Closed Doors ........................................................ 357
20: Deadly Alliances ................................................................ 379
21: Prize Day .......................................................................... 399
22: The Lion Escapes .............................................................. 429
Notes ..................................................................................455 [...]
thorbiorn
 
Thank you for the link. An amazing story indeed and a history worthwhile having a look at.
 
About the first book I read on Conspiracy Theory was Pawns in the Game <http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/paw1indx.htm>
first published in and put out by the a group affiliated with the John Birchmeplease Society. Very Aryan. It cross referenced with other books by Nesta Webster and drew upon the much earlier work of Abbe Barruel and John Robison.
http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/anti-masonry/carr.html
The conclusion of the author, William Guy Carr, who was a Royal Naval Officer and son in law of Admiral Barry Domville, a connected chap, was that England had been manouervered into WW2 as a result of the machinations of the Rothschilds et al and that their immediate aim at that time was the destruction Of the British Empire, which was a bulwark of true civilisation (as the Irish well know) the pinnacle of achievment of the Aryan race ("noble lords" or somesuch). Directed by these atheistic Satanists (sic) descended from Khazars, the author's spin was that their greatest enemy was The Roman Catholic Church which of course is the true church mandated by Jesus as everyone knows.Hitler was in Carr's belief, merely an innocent altar boy who attempted to introduce the benevolent political system of fascism into Germany like his allies Mussolini and Franco.His attempts at this worthwhile enterprise were thwarted by the anti Christian pagan Nazis under the control of Himmler, Goebbels et al,who were ultimately under the control of the Illuminati. Carr claims that he met a Royal Mail courier who had given the future King of England, Edward 7th, documentation whilst he was on a trip to the colonies as the conspiracy was also directed against the monarchy, indeed Western Civilisation as a whole.The courier died mysteriously shortly afterwards of course.

Hitler, according to this scenario sent Hess to Britain on a secret mission to end this war between the two Aryan peoples, British and German, who had been manipulated by the conspirators,notably Churchill, into mutual destruction but was thwarted by Them.
Domville and associates, meantime, were imprisoned for the duration of the war because THey Knew Too Much.
It's an interesting book.
Quotes :
"While Hitler suffered imprisonment prior to 1934 because he was considered the personal enemy of the Nazi War Lords and the international bankers, he wrote "Mein Kampf." On the very last page he stated: "The party (National-Socialist) as such stands for positive Christianity but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any profession. It combats the Jewish materialistic spirit within and without us."
In 1933 Hitler also announced his policy in regard to Britain. He pointed out that Marx, Lenin, and Stalin had all repeatedly reiterated that before International communism could reach its final objectives, Britain and her Empire had to be destroyed. Under these circumstances Hitler said: "I am willing to help defend the British Empire by force if called upon."

I've tracked this particular meme as it has mutated down to the present day, and as people have read Carr's books and quoted him and then been quoted in turn it turns up all over.
In Henry Makow.http://www.savethemales.ca/000369.html
In Jeff Rense .http://rense.com/general51/strange.htm

Irving as one of it's main proponents in the present day is simply not to be trusted as anything but a far right spinmeister IMO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving
gives an otline of his life and works.
It is also salutary to read History On Trial by Deborah Lipstadt, review here.
http://dir.salon.com/story/books/review/2005/02/07/lipstadt/index.html

Quotes from http://www.nizkor.org/ (which claims 12 million victims of the Holocaust!)
Irving Tells Outright Lies
Goebbels' diary on the Jews:
...the greater the number of Jews liquidated, the more consolidated will the situation in Europe be after this war.
Joseph Goebbels,
March 6, 1942
The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that about 60 per cent of them will have to be liquidated whereas only about 40 per cent can be used for forced labor.
Joseph Goebbels,
March 27, 1942
Short shrift is made of the Jews in all eastern occupied areas. Tens of thousands of them are liquidated.
Joseph Goebbels,
April 29, 1942
Irving on Goebbels' diary:
I am very familiar with the Goebbels diaries... There is no explicit reference either implicit in these documents or legible in these documents to liquidation of Jews.


David Irving,
April 22, 1988
(in sworn testimony!)
In 1992, Mr. Irving entered Canada as a visitor at Niagara Falls on October 26, 1992 and subsequently became the subject of an immigration inquiry at Vancouver, British Columbia on October 30, 1992. As a result, he was issued a departure notice to leave Canada on or before midnight, November 01, 1992.
During a hearing before Immigration Adjudicator Thompson, Mr. Irving asserted that he left Canada on October 30, 1992, at Blaine, Washington and reentered Canada later that same day.
In the introduction to the Immigration Adjudicator's report[2], Adjudicator Kenneth Thompson wrote:
"This purported departure is pivotal, since if it is factually accurate, it would mean that the action taken against you by immigration officials in Niagara Falls on November 01, 1992 was based on erroneous facts; namely, that you were a person attempting to leave Canada pursuant to a yet unexecuted departure notice.
"If, as you claim, you did in fact depart and then reenter Canada at the Washington/B.C. border crossing then it might be said that you had already satisfied the terms of your departure notice and therefore could not be a person referred to in paragraph 14(1)(C) of the Act. However, the question as to whether you did or did not leave is an issue of fact for this tribunal to determine."
After hearing testimony from witnesses, including that of Mr. Irving, Adjudicator Thompson presented his findings[3], which included the following:
(On November 1, 1992, Mr. Irving told an immigration officer, who had shown Mr. Irving his identification and his badge, that he had remained in Canada continuously since his arrest in Victoria, British Columbia.) Thompson added:
"In assessing your evidence as a whole, you have been unable to persuade me that you did leave Canada on October 30, 1992. I have a great deal of difficulty accepting your evidence. It did it not have the ring of truth to it, but observing you and listening to your testimony, I could not help but get the impression that you were at times reciting a rehearsed script....
"When viewed as a whole this evidence can lead to only one conclusion; the event was a total fabrication and never took place. I can only speculate that you and your supporters concocted your story to garner further publicity and prolong your stay in Canada, both of which you have done with some success."
http://www.holocaust-history.org/pamphlets/irving/
Personally I think Irving is a perfect example of an English gentleman (=gentile man)... but then again I have an Irish background. LOL.
 
A couple of afterthoughts.Perhaps there is a twofold agenda involved in the imprisoning of both Irving and Zundel.When Hitler was imprisoned for several months on a charge of treason,after the Munich Putsch, something that by law he should have been executed for,
he wrote Mein Kampf -originally"Four and a half years of struggle against Lies, Stupidity and Cowardice (but I still couldn't get them out of my system)."
Both are "persecutions" of good Aryan Christians by those perfidious Jews. Will this be proof of the Jewish Bolshevik Zionist etc conspiracy resulting in more scribblings,updated Mein Kampfs, free on the internet ?
The other side of the coin is heightened Jewish paranoia-t"hose furschlugginner goyim are at it again!", resulting in the attitude that only in Israel are they truly safe. And then.... the final Final Solution is enacted.
 
In this post I have followed some of the trails and links criticising the work of David Irving as suggested by Godot in his posts. I have to agree with Godot on David Irving not being accurate.

The Holocaust and the history of WW2 are still relevant, because some of what happens today is like flavours of WW2 transposed in time. Today as then one meets the concept of creating the good guys, creating the bad guys, misrepresenting what takes place to the eyes and ears of the public, forgetting about International conventions when need is, etc. It is happening now. In front of our eyes and ears and the governments several of us live in support these abuses directly or diplomatically, just like they did before or during ww2.

Excuse me, we are not supposed to do that. At least some think like that, just read Deborah Lipstadt on http://lipstadt.blogspot.com/ she is the one with whom David Irving had a court-case, [a three month long affair in early 2000]. In her blog she writes:
Katrina vanden Heuvel in Washington Post:"Stop Using Hitler analogies" A group of scholars of the Holocaust -- myself included -- have sent a letter : http://www.americangathering.com/?p=1032
I have inserted it here:
SCHOLARS TO PUNDITS: STOP USING HITLER ANALOGIES HOLOCAUST SCHOLARS URGE PUNDITS TO STOP USING HITLER ANALOGIES
Prominent Holocaust scholars have appealed to politicans and writers to stop comparing their opponents to the Nazis.
The scholars' action came in response to a recent op-ed in the Washington Post by Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of the liberal political newsweekly The Nation, who offered what she called "A modest proposal for improving national political discussion": a "cease-fire" on Nazi analogies.
Vanden Heuvel cited numerous recent examples of such "demonizing rhetoric," including a Democratic Senator comparing Guantanamo Bay interrogators to the Nazis and a Republican Congressman comparing the Guantanamo detainees to the Nazis; entertainer Harry Belafonte calling the Homeland Security Department "the new Gestapo"; NAACP chairman Julian Bond saying Republicans want "the American flag and the swastika flying side by side"; and conservative activist Grover Norquist equating some tax laws with "the morality of the Holocaust."
Continuation of Lipstadt:
to the Washington Post supporting an op-ed by Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of the liberal political newsweekly The Nation, who offered what she called "A modest proposal for improving national political discussion": a "cease-fire" on Nazi analogies."
I understand that Katrina vanden Heuvel published her letter on the 26 of January and that the Holocaust scholars and The Washington Post publish their views on the 29th. First The editor of Washington Post CHRIS CASTLE McLean responds to Katrina vaden Heuvel and the scholars:
... "Many reasonable people are concerned, even frightened, by government infringement on civil liberties in the name of security: reprisals against political opponents (the outing of Valerie Plame); spying on U.S. citizens without warrants; condoning torture; intimidating the press and government employees against whistle-blowing; and sifting through the Library of Congress to reclassify declassified documents. Similarities between these actions and the tactics of "domestic security" police such as the Gestapo and the KGB used to squelch public debate and political opposition are worrisome."... ... "I am not ready for a ban on the "H-word," but I am ready to ask public officials to refrain from being careless and vindictive."
Next the the entry from the Holocaust scholars:
"As historians of the Holocaust, we applaud the appeal by Katrina Vanden Heuvel for an end to the use of Hitler analogies by public figures and pundits. Such analogies trivialize the Holocaust and undermine efforts to educate the public about the real nature of Adolf Hitler, Nazi Germany and the murder of 6 million European Jews.
Comparing one's opponents to the Nazis has become all too prevalent in contemporary discourse, whether by politicians or writers trying to score rhetorical points or by political partisans or government officials trying to delegitimize Israel. We agree with Ms. Vanden Heuvel that the time has come to "declare a ceasefire on such demonizing rhetoric." - RAFAEL MEDOFF, Director"
Godot said:
"Irving as one of it's main proponents in the present day is simply not to be trusted as anything but a far right spinmeister IMO. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving gives an otline of his life and works.
It is also salutary to read History On Trial by Deborah Lipstadt, review here http://dir.salon.com/story/books/review ... index.html "
Before we carry on, one needs to know that in the court case between Prof Deborah Lipstadt and David Irving a key witness was Professor Richard J Evans who testified for Prof Deborah by creating a thorough analysis of David Irving's work. Of which you can see the content on http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.org/evidence/evanscontent.asp and his conclusion on http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.org/evidence/evans006.asp

I followed the link above from Godot and came to: http://dir.salon.com/story/books/review/2005/02/07/lipstadt/index.html?pn=3 which has

Charles Taylor writes:
"Eminent historians defended Holocaust denier David Irving in the name of free speech and scholarship. Deborah Lipstadt's account of her libel trial with Irving proves how colossally wrong they were." Taylor concludes: "And that risks obscuring one of the most important lessons to be gleaned from Irving's unsuccessful libel case against Lipstadt, namely that intellectual accountability entails moral accountability. The work of Keegan and Watt, and of other historians who have more tentatively applauded Irving's "scholarship," should not be dismissed because of that praise. But now that Irving's mendacity has been revealed, and his research proven thoroughly and irrevocably worthless, those who have praised him have a choice to make. If they choose to stand by their view of Irving, they must, in this at least, be judged as having abandoned the very concept of historical fact, which Richard Evans defined as "something that happened in history and can be verified as such through the traces history has left behind." It is not a simplification but the essence of this case to ask how you can trust any historian who defends a Holocaust denier."
But on David Irving's site I also found:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Letters/trial/Evans_lied160104.html : "THIS was from Professor Richard Evans in an interview with Philip Adams in Australia, August 2002:
"Well, yes, he knows an enormous amount about Hitler and his entourage and his immediate circle in the second world war and their conduct of military affairs, and over the years he's dug up through contacts and through sheer energy and diligence enormous amounts of new documentation of varying interest and importance, but some of it is undeniably important."
For more on Richard John Evans: http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,5500,1102384,00.html :
"So is there anything left for us still to discover? "Oh yes," he enthuses. "We still know very little about the concentration camps - especially the satellite camps, the German economy and the criminal justice system. I've plenty of ideas if anyone is stuck for a PhD topic."
Professor Richard J Evans later published a book: "Lying About Hitler: History, Holocaust, and the David Irving Trial (Paperback) For all publications see his website: http://roundyourway.com/r/richardjevans/productservice.php?productserviceid=563 The above book has by the date of posting 40 reviews on Amazon.com. I went through them all and some were very interesting.

Next Godot mentioned http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving which has:
"Ruling: Irving unsuccessfully represented himself and his work during the trial. The Court found that Lipstadt did not libel Irving when she called him a Holocaust denier in her book. Gray, who sat without a jury, praised Irving's "thorough and painstaking research into the archives" and commended his discovery and disclosure of many historical documents. He also noted Irving's intelligence and thorough knowledge of World War II history. However, as stated at paragraph 13.167 of his judgment, he found the following claims against Irving to be 'substantially true': Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence; that for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews; that he is an active Holocaust denier; that he is anti-Semitic and racist, and that he associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism.
Irving lost subsequent attempts at appeal."
On the above issue see also: http://www.fpp.co.uk/trial/judgment/index.html which has: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/Appeal/judgment.html
"We are not persuaded that the expression can be given any precise technical meaning or that 'Holocaust denier' defines a class of persons precisely. Having regard to the views expressed by [David Irving] about a range of events in the history of the Third Reich, we agree with the Judge that the applicant may be described as a Holocaust denier." -- Lord Justices Pill, Mantell, and Buxton in July 2001, explaining their reason for refusing the Irving Appeal."
For the whole judgment go to: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/Appeal/judgment.html

I kept looking for more information about the trial and there is a lot. All books listed below have reviews on Amazon.com: "History on Trial: My Day in Court with David Irving" by Deborah E. Lipstadt Amazon review average is currently 3,5 stars. One reviewer says:
"There are some interesting allusions to the differences between selective interpretation (Irving) and convergence of evidence (everyone else) in the art of history, but this is mostly lost under Lisptadt's frequent self-aggrandizement about the righteousness of her struggle."
"Beyond Belief : The American Press And The Coming Of The Holocaust, 1933- 1945" (Paperback) by Deborah E. Lipstadt. T: Actually a good illustration that the American Medias have not changed too much.

"Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory" (Paperback) by Deborah E. Lipstadt

"The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial" (Hardcover) by Robert Jan Van Pelt

"The Holocaust on trial: History, justice and the David Irving libel case" by D. D Guttenplan

Having read many of the reviews and opinions I come to the conclusion about David Irving that the way he deals with his material is like a person who has a mask of sanity.

Godot mentions http://www.niskor.org as his source on Holocaust, then I began to look to other sites related to the issues David Irving has interest in:

Report of the Red Cross on the situation in Germany during ww2 including Jews: http://christianparty.net/holocaustredcross.htm

How many Jews there were in Europe at the time of the ww2: http://christianparty.net/jewsevacuated.htm

The number varies as to how many died in the Holocaust: http://christianparty.net/holocaust.htm

Ebook on Holocaust research by Jurgen Graf with the title: "With Feet of Clay, Raul Hilber and his Standard Work on the "holocaust"" http://vho.org/dl/ENG/Giant.pdf :

Two different opinions about a website: http://www.jewwatch.com/ which has something on the Holocaust are http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=2712 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew_Watch

Another site similar to jewwatch is http://litek.ws/k0nsl/detox/?do=home

While looking at the holocaust-history controversy I found on the forum of http://www.codoh.com a link to http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndvalue.html#ftnref26 which has:
"3.3. Methods of Obtaining Testimony

3.3.1. Allied Post-War Trials

In order to assess the value of eyewitness testimony and confessions relating to the Holocaust, one must first examine the conditions prevailing in the Allied post-war trials in Nuremberg and elsewhere. For it is the verdicts handed down in these trials which recorded, in sketchy outlines, the accounts of the Holocaust given by eyewitness testimony and putative confessions. These Allied trials may be roughly divided into two types, namely those carried out by the respective occupying powers as these saw fit, and those carried out with at least initial co-operation between the victorious powers within the framework of the International Military Tribunal (IMT) in Nuremberg.[25]

3.3.1.1. American Trials

Immediately after the end of the war the Americans placed all Germans who held leading positions in the Party, the state or the economy under "automatic arrest" without trial.[26] In this way hundreds of thousands ended up in prison camps consisting in the main only of fenced-in meadows. Shortly after the end of the war all German prisoners were stripped of their status as prisoners-of-war.[27] The Allies considered civilian internees to have no rights whatsoever; particularly in the American and French spheres of influence, these prisoners lived mostly in burrows in the ground, received insufficient food, were denied all medical assistance, and neither the International Red Cross nor other organizations nor even private individuals were allowed to help. In this way the prisoners in the American run camps died like flies by the hundreds of thousands.[28] Military Government Ordinance No. 1 required every German, on pain of lifetime imprisonment, to give the Allies any and all information they required.[29] Thus German witnesses could be forced to give evidence by imprisoning them for years, subjecting them to hours of interrogation, or threatening to hand them over to the Russians.[30] A separate department, "Special Project", was responsible for obtaining incriminating evidence against reluctant witnesses. The material obtained in this way was used to bend the witnesses to the Allies' will, since this information was used to threaten them with prosecution if they refused to give incriminating evidence against others.[31]"
For more on that "Reinhard" from the forum at http://www.codoh.com suggested to his forum buddy from where I got the above to read James Bacque, "Other Losses: The Shocking Truth Behind the Mass Deaths of Disarmed German Soldiers and Civilians under General Eisenhower's Command", Stoddart, Toronto 1989 (ISBN 0773722696)

On Amazon I looked for reviews and found the average to be four stars. Here are two from people who pretend to know the subject:
"5 STARS. Valuable addition to WWII history, July 4, 2001, Reviewer: Ernst Rodin M.D. (Sandy, UT United States)
Mr. Bacque is to be congratulated for publishing this book which describes the fate German soldiers who had surrendered to General Eisenhower's forces at the end of WWII. They had expected to be treated according to the Geneva Convention governing the conduct of armies in regard to captured enemy personnel. This was not to be the case. As Mr. Bacque points out an entire new category of "Disarmed Enemy Forces", DEF, was created. Its only purpose was to avoid having to feed and house these millions of ex-soldiers and thereby bypass the Geneva Convention to which America was a signatory. One may argue about the precise numbers of ex-soldiers who died in these "temporary enclosures" but the fact that inhuman treatment did exist cannot be denied. Neither can the fact that a considerable percentage of them was subsequently given to the French for what is called today "slave labor," albeit this term refers nowadays only to non-German nationals. Readers who may feel negatively about Bacque's revelations should be aware that this treatment of former members of the German army was not just happenstance but the execution of the Morgenthau plan to render Germany harmless forever. The plan was not directed against the German leadership or Nazis, but the German people at large. Mr. Baque makes frequent reference to this unfortunate document but readers, who cannot conceive that U.S. personnel may also carry out atrocities should look at the Document section of Warren F. Kimball's "Swords or Ploughshares? The Morgenthau plan forDefeated Nazi Germany."The book clearly shows that Roosevelt had endorsed a policy of "being hard on Germany" and Eisenhower was in full accord. That you cannot be "hard" on a country but only on its people and that this policy is bound to involve cruelties was not a consideration. The conditions changed only after Eisenhower's return to the U.S. and the appointment of Lucius D. Clay as High Commissioner. He clearly saw that the existing situation, even for the civilian population, made neither military nor political sense. It would merely turn the population to communism because even the Russians fed the people in their zone better than the Americans did. It is also to President Truman's credit that he quietly dropped the Morgenthau plan soon after the Potsdam meeting. As a former member of the Wehrmacht I had become aware of the Morgenthau plan in the winter of 1944-1945 but had regarded it as Nazi propaganda. I had always had high admiration for the principles America stood for and the Morgenthau plan seemed to be in total contradiction to those ideals. As mentioned in my book War and Mayhem I had intended to surrender to the U.S. forces towards the end of the war, but changed my mind on VE day and through the grace of God managed to avoid American as well as Soviet captivity. Having read Mr. Bacque's book I am even more grateful for the good fortune which kept me out of DEF status and instead allowed me to go to medical school within about six weeks after Germany's capitulation. I had no idea about the conditions German ex-soldiers were exposed to in those days, just as I had no idea about what really went on in the Nazi concentration camps until after the war. There are things people just didn't talk about. To "let it all hang out" became popular only in the late sixties and thereafter. But for the sake of historical accuracy both sides need to be heard and Mr. Bacque has done us this service for which he deserves our gratitude.
5 STARS. The truth about Other Losses, January 9, 2006 Reviewer Spk Rhein-nahe (Frankfurt, Germany) - The Book "Other Losses" tells the same story my father told. He was an ambulance driver in the war. After WW2 was over and his unit found out, the entire unit surrendered to the Americans who in turn sold(!) him and all others of his unit to the Russians for slave-labor in siberian coal mines. He managed to escape in 1951, but almost all others of his unit died of hunger and lack of food and medical help. He never recovered physically or mentally. My Father-in-Law survived an American POW-Camp, being just a pen in the open field with barbed wire and guards around it. No buildings, no food no nothing! He also told of the prisoners were just left to die. A very good book."
Returning to the generally accepted version of the WW2:
"The Holocaust Websites - Crimes, Heroes And Villains" a few sites that look related.
www.oskarschindler.com
[ http://pub50.bravenet.com/guestbook/show.php?usernum=4244340804&cpv=2 is
about osckar schindle also, there is a short summary of his deeds followed by 3100 reader comments.]
www.emilieschindler.com
www.deathcamps.info As a curiosity on http://www.deathcamps.info/Nazis/Default.htm a little down there is a link to something called Hitler's Artworks. It opens up and plays like a Powerpoint presentation.
www.auschwitz.dk
www.oskarschindler.info/
www.shoah.dk
www.annefrank.dk
www.fatherkolbe.com
www.canaris.dk/
www.mengele.dk/ and http://www.mengele.dk/Courage/index.htm has:
The Holocaust is a history of enduring horror and sorrow. It seems as though there is no spark of human concern, no act of humanity, to lighten that dark history. Yet there were acts of courage and kindness during the Holocaust - this site focus attention on five men, who risked their lives to help Jews escape the Nazi genocide: Wilm Hosenfeld, Oskar Schindler, Raoul Wallenberg, Kurt Gerstein and Albert Goering. Today their names are known to millions as household words for courage.
Their stories are interesting.

And last but not least on a site I mentioned in the beginning: http://www.americangathering.com/?p=1032 there are a hundred(s) of links to sites that study or present the Holocaust history. Godot's http://www.nizkor.org is also there.

Richard J Evans in http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,5500,1102384,00.html says
"Research has gone in three phases: in the 50s and 60s West German historians tried to understand how fascism arose from the Weimar democracy, then in the 70s and 80s historians worked on the structures of the Reich between 1933-39, and since the 90s the main focus has been the war and the Holocaust."
Now that we have a few Holocaust deniers "safely behind bars" what is next?

Some final remarks:
As for how much of the Holocaust is history and how much is hi-story I can only say what I learned in School is 6 million. It is one of the most significant numbers from WW2, a Sign of the Times. Six relates to Star of David, and in the New Testament they triple it, so it is easy to remember.

Another way of using the Holocaust history is as suggested in the beginning to forbid people making parallels between what happens now and what happened then. So we should not make correlation between Israel's way of treating Palestinians, or the American way of treating Iraqis or prisoners and the Nazi way of treating Jews. In this way one can create a historical dissociation in our culture retarding our attempts to learning something from history and thus invite a greater number of us to repeat past failures with a higher degree of probability.

A third manner of perceiving the Holocaust is as a means to divert people into researching something which is of less importance than some other subjects like the overall situation the planet is placed in now. While making this post I thought at times it is waste of time to go into the details. Now I do not really regret the effort, if I did not reach a conclusion I did at least visit the subject.

A fourth way is to consider that some of what is written about the holocaust is not really that accurate. I for one did find the words of Richard J Evans: "We still know very little about the concentration camps - especially the satellite camps" rather interesting. What if some of what is told to be the truth is not so, like the six million figure or the 12 as nizkor.org has. Then people are believing in a partial truth/lie with all that this entails.

A fifth use of the Holocaust is to associate a collective global failure with a limited group, in this case the Jews and the Nazis thus making sure the majority will not relate it to themselves, and consider it a part of their history and responsibility.

Possibly the real holocaust is to leave our soul behind, to let it down. to give in to gravity, apathy and entropy. For more on the soul consider the small SOTT books soon to come out as one volume.

Thorbiorn
 
Life is very interesting and surprising. I did NOT expect to end up with so many intrigues, feuds, lies, and manipulations which I could not help but uncover when I began searching after reading Godot's post. Today I continue hoping to bring the work to some conclusions.

A Dr. Karl Kolcheck has written a strong critique against David Irving, see http://www.davidirving.8m.com/ called "Suffering Fools Gladly? David Irving & Revisionism" which I found via http://oracknows.blogspot.com/2004/12/living-forever.html where it is listed as: "David Irving debunked" under the heading "Combating Holocaust denial" There you will also find a long list of sites about how to do that, if you like to study further.

When I looked on Googel it turned out that Dr. Karl Kolcheck's article is mirrored on many of websites. Having learned a bit of a lesson from posting the link to the books of David Irving, I decided to find out who this Dr. Kolcheck is. Google gave quite few listing, I began to doubt the person existed, and the suspicions turned out to be supported, especially as I looked at http://www.vho.org/GB/c/GR/StahlDouglas.html where Germar Rudolf refers to him in note 34 and 46. He writes:
Stahl has repeatedly stated that he possessed these documents and had posted them on his website. The names appearing there are: Walter Storch,[33] Karl Kolcheck,[34] George S. MacAlister.[35] ...

The charge that Stahl initiated personal attacks under cover of pseudonyms is valid, as shown by his sometimes tasteless, below-the-belt attacks on Irving.[46] However, they occurred only after Irving's attacks on Stahl had been published.
Footnotes to Germar Rudolf's article:
[34]: This name is given as the author of an article about, which is almost identical with the one posted at www.gregorydouglas.com, but in this case, the author is G. Douglas.
[46] Cf. his article under the pen name Karl Kolcheck, note 34
Germar Rudolf on David Irving:
Evaluation
David Irving has earned the reputation of suing everyone who dares to say anything uncomplimentary about him. As a consequence, the matters which we mention here in passing have never come to the surface. Since I have no desire to expose myself to David Irving's malicious attacks and ruinous lawsuits, I will abstain from evaluating his person as well as the nature of his charges against Gregory Douglas/Peter Stahl. The facts will have to speak for themselves. ...

Furthermore, Irving is mistaken when he claims that Stahl has a compulsion to be acknowledged as an author and historian; Irving is describing himself when he asserts that. Unfortunately, Stahl's desire to be taken seriously is sadly underdeveloped.
What is the link between Gregory Douglas and Peter Stahl? Germar Rudolf writes:
In other words, Weber's and Irving's charges represent unproven, apparently unprovable accusations. Stahl could charge them with defamation if he were so minded. All three are chronically broke, however. Stahl is unable to sue either Weber or Irving because he could never rake up enough money for a trial. The same goes for Gregory Douglas, Stahl's son, who is vilified in the same breath as his father. However, he has already won several civil suits with corresponding monetary damages.
What about Stahl? Germar Rudolf:
Stahl casually reveals much to those whom he instinctively trusts. This includes documents and material evidence, plus eyewitness accounts of his trusted friends, who affirm everything he says. However, he certainly does not share with those who insult him and call him a liar, counterfeiter, swindler, etc.

Stahl has a terrible reputation for dealing ruthlessly with those who make his life difficult. He has ways of ruining their economic and social lives by means which are legal and yet very effective. As a trained secret agent with many influential connections he has both the abilities and opportunities to do this. He seems to derive real pleasure from carrying on private feuds.
And Germar Rudolf himself? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germar_Rudolf has:
Finishing Ph.D postgraduate studies after his military service, he was temporarily employed at the Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research in Stuttgart, beginning in October 1990. During this time he wrote a paper, titled "Report on the formation and verifiability of cyanide compounds in the Auschwitz gas chambers" on behalf of the D
 
A great bit of research on a topic, that despite it's simple appearance is a complex issue with many vested interest.

Thorbiorn said:
What next?
In a previous post I asked a question about where the research will go next? I find it interesting that three prominent revisionists at the moment are in prison. And it happens around time with a lot of other events in Europe like the Danish cartoons which were responded to by an Iranian newspaper by making a holocaust cartoon competition, and in early March 2006 a Jewish website wrote that "Iran Regime's Holocaust Denial Campaign Intensifies":
http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/apps/nl/ ... mp;notoc=1 Some cartoons are reprinted there, but I can't find out if they want their readers to laugh or explode. Maybe you can help decide by clicking?
I clicked at the link and it appears to me as though they want their readers to explode and probably donate heavily to the wiesenthal institute. It was interesting to see that the Wiesenthal institute is supported by 400000 american families and is a NGO at some of the most influential international institutions. It is not difficult to see how such a powerful lobby group can effectively stifle any real debate on the Holocaust.

It reminds me further how some organisations such as the above have taken a monopoly on the use of the word holocaust and actively worked to discredit other examples of genocide. One such example was the Armenian genocide, which was a template for the Nazis. The following website has a little on this:http://www.armenianholocaust.com/
From this link one learns:

One can summarise the genocide of the Armenian nation by giving the figure of 300,000 dead during the reign of Sultan Abdul Hamid and 1,500,000 killed during World War I (encyclopedia LAROUSSE). Countless others were crippled or listed as missing. The Turkish State used every criminal method in order to complete this genocide including: oppression, hunger, thirst, walking without stop, murder, rape, fire, cold, heat and the sword. Everything that could exterminate this innocent people whose only crime was their Armenian Nationality, was used by the Ottoman Turks. We are not referring to those Armenians who were killed fighting the Turks in the battle-fields during their revolution, but to the non-combatents, such as women, children, the sick and the old who perished during this period.

Unfortunately, these Turkish crimes have remained unpunished. An International Court has not condemned the holocaust of an entire nation to this date, and this impunity has permitted the Turks to repeat similar crimes against the Greek inhabitants of Asia Minor, the Syrian orthodox people and more recently, against the Cypriota and the Kurds.

The impunity of the assassins of the Armenian people became the inspiration to the Nazis in using similar methods of genocide against the Jews, the Poles, the Russians and the other nationalities.

"Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?" said Hilter to justify these latter crimes.
During the 90'es the Armenian holocaust almost got recognised for what it was by the United Nations, but some quick footwork from the Israeli Government put that to rest. Robert Fisk describes a little in this article: http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/cragsite/2001PressReportArticles/Article2.htm
Another link http://www.middleeast.org/read.cgi?category=Magazine&num=170&standalone=&month=4&year=2001&function=text
has the following to say

One of Israel's leading scholars of the Jewish Holocaust has angrily compared the country's Nobel prize-winning Foreign Minister, Shimon Peres, to a holocaust denier after an interview in which Mr Peres made the astonishing claim that the Armenians - 1.5 million of whom were slaughtered by Ottoman Turks in 1915 - never experienced a genocide.

Mr Peres' statement appeared in the Turkish Daily News prior to a recent state visit to Turkey; the paper says he went so far as to refer to the Armenian account of the mass slaughter as "meaningless".
As it has been said before history is always written by the victors. I will dig up some more another day.
 
It is quite strange that denying other genocides/holocausts will not risk you any imprisonment.
 
At some stage above I was wondering what the next stage is in the Holocaust history development? On answer might be found on CNN which reported:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/04/18/nazi.archives.ap/index.html
Germany backs open Holocaust records
Weighing privacy concerns, 10 other nations to consider action

Tuesday, April 18, 2006; Posted: 11:43 p.m. EDT (03:43 GMT)
Germany said Tuesday it would help clear the way for opening records on 17 million Jews and other victims of the Nazis, a major step toward ending a long battle over access to a vast and detailed look into the Holocaust.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Germany said Tuesday it would help clear the way for opening records on 17 million Jews and other victims of the Nazis, a major step toward ending a long battle over access to a vast and detailed look into the Holocaust.

German Justice Minister Brigitte Zypries said her country would work with the United States to assure the opening of the archives, which are held in the German town of Bad Arolsen, and allow historians and survivors access to some 30 million to 50 million documents.

Until now, Germany had resisted providing access to the archives, citing privacy concerns.

The dramatic announcement, made at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, came after a 20-year effort by the museum and some other countries to get the archives opened.

Negotiations intensified in the past four or five years and took on even greater momentum in the past two years, said Arthur Berger, spokesman for the museum.

In a meeting Tuesday with museum director Sarah Bloomfield, Zypries said Germany had changed its position and would immediately seek revision of an 11-nation accord governing the archives. The 10 other countries must also formally agree if the records are to be opened, a process she said would take no more than six months.

Edward B. O'Donnell Jr., the State Department's special envoy for Holocaust issues, said he was encouraged, but he added, "We still have negotiations to do."

The next step is a meeting in Luxembourg on May 15, when all 11 countries would have to reach a consensus agreement. In some instances, parliaments would have to approve of the archives' opening as well.

Opening the archives would enable many survivors and families of victims of the Nazis to find out with more certainty than ever before what happened to their relatives.

"We are losing the survivors, and anti-Semitism is on the rise, so this move could not be more timely," Bloomfield said in an interview. ...



...Besides Germany and the United States, the other countries involved are Belgium, Britain, France, Greece, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Poland.
Well we shall see in a few days what they decide. And then what happens next.

thorbiorn
 
Back
Top Bottom