Wannsee

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
Post Reply
neugierig
Posts: 619
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:49 pm
Contact:

Wannsee

Post by neugierig »

Hi All (yes True Believers, you too)

I just received another storybook The Holocaust. The destruction of European Jewry 1933-1945 (1968), by Nora Levin. I like these earlier publications, for comparison, although 1968 is a little late.

Anyway, re. the Wannsee Konferenz minutes, Levin quotes from IMT (Nuremberg Government) document NG-2586. I looked at Avalon and this came up: “Your search - NG-2586 - did not match any documents.” A Google search was successful, however:
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlesto ... genumber=1

The wording between this document and the one used now is different, I need to compare all of it yet. My question: Why not use NG-2586 as the official translation, since it was apparently submitted at the IMT? And why nothing in the Avalon data base? OK, two questions.

Regards
Wilf
Ohne Meinungsfreiheit gibt es keine Freiheit (frei nach I. Kant)

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


neugierig
Posts: 619
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:49 pm
Contact:

Re: Wannsee

Post by neugierig »

Yes greendoormat, but why is that translation, NG-2589, the official version, not used now? From the little I’ve read so far, it is an adequate translation of what is presented as the Wannsee minutes, why change it?

Regards
Wilf
Ohne Meinungsfreiheit gibt es keine Freiheit (frei nach I. Kant)

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 10011
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Wannsee

Post by been-there »

neugierig wrote:...re. the Wannsee Konferenz minutes, Levin quotes from IMT (Nuremberg Government) document NG-2586. I looked at Avalon and this came up: “Your search - NG-2586 - did not match any documents.” A Google search was successful, however:
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlesto ... genumber=1
Regards
Wilf
Thanks for that link. I followed and have now read the "TOP SECRET" fifteen page document. Fascinating.
I think the more people are able to read the actual alleged evidence (such as this) for 'THE Holocaust' and the less we rely on the interpretations of that evidence by the mainstream media and TV/film industry, the more openess and honesty will be possible about this whole topic.
Nothing in there about killing methods, nothing about 'factories of death', nothing about methods of annhilation, and this is supposed to be the 'top secret' minutes of the conference alleged to be discussing and solving the practicalities of exactly that?! :o
It really does not add up the way it has been presented to us! Again I feel I have been deceived. We have been deceived.
Talking of which... I recently watched the 2000 dramatisation of the Irving vs Lipstadt libel trial.
The Wannsee minutes feature in that dramatisation but by employing deceits-by-omission. E.g. the Eichmann "confession".
We are shown Eichmann telling Judge Raveh that what was discussed at the Wannsee conference was "different methods of killing" (28:39). We are not told nor shown that when Judge Landau asked him why there was nothing in the minutes about that, Eichmann replied that was because there was no talk of specific killing methods.
Last edited by been-there on Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

neugierig
Posts: 619
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:49 pm
Contact:

Re: Wannsee

Post by neugierig »

Sorry greendoormat, my mistake, the issue here is document NG-2586 and its apparent disappearance. Nora Levin quotes from it (p.294), the different wording made me wonder why it is no longer used???

You are right been-there, this documents contains nothing about mass killings in gas chambers. Levin however performs the usual mental gymnastics and turns it into a plan for the “Final Solution”, a term she is in love with. I need to read the rest of NG-2589 and compare it to the new wording as presented now.

So far I only glanced at what Levin wrote, picking some subjects because I have no intention of reading the whole book (720 pages of Fairy-Tales). But comparing these early publications to what is now presented shows how the story developed. True Believers claim, as does Levin, that new material has turned up, fact is, no investigation by experts in crime scene investigations has ever been undertaken, all we have are more pieces of paper, many of dubious origin.

A little more of what Levin wrote about this Wannsee-Konferenz of January 20th 1942. On the same page, 294, she tells us:

“There is not much reason to suppose that the nine civilians at Wannsee could have been shocked by anything that Heydrich said.”

Hmmm, ‘nine civilians’? I wonder where that came from. Then this:

“The Grossen-Wannsee luncheon-meeting lasted a few hours and then formed into what Eichmann called an intimate social gathering, a very important occasion for Eichmann, who had never before met so many "high personages." He had prepared some material for the conference and after the other dignitaries had left, he sat near a fireplace with Müller, his chief, and Heydrich. He wrote:
“After the conference, Heydrich, Müller and your humble servant sat cozily around a fireplace. I noticed for the first time that Heydrich was smoking. Not only that, but he had cognac. Normally he touched nothing alcoholic. The only other time I had seen him drinking was at an office party years before. We all had drinks then. We sang songs. After a while we got up on the chairs and drank a toast, then on the table and then round and round—on the chairs and on the table again. Heydrich taught it to us. It was an old North German custom. But we sat around peacefully after our Wannsee Conference, not just talking shop but giving ourselves a rest after
so many taxing hours”
.5
(5. Life, November 28,1960, op.cit.pp.24, 101)

I have not seen this before, but found the Life reference
file:///C:/Users/Wilf/Desktop/The%20Confession%20of%20Adolf%20Eichmann.htm
in this part:
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/german/ ... final.html

According to this, the meeting lasted ‘many taxing hours’, a given when looking at the minutes. So, lets say the meeting was adjourned at around 3pm, followed by the drinking and table dancing. At that time of year, in Berlin, it is pitch dark at 4pm the latest, earlier on a cloudy day (Kempner tells us in Ankläger einer Epoche, that it was a snowy day [p.313]). There, however, is a small problem with this scenario. The following is from Part IV of my essays on Heydrich (http://revblog.codoh.com/2012/09/reinhard-heydrich-4/ ):

“Heydrich’s next task was the building of a new government, a government that would be accepted by the Czech people but of course also loyal to Germany. He made concessions whenever necessary and on January 19, 1942 the government was formed, Hacha had naturally also been involved in picking the members of this new government. To give this government a good start, Heydrich lifted all remaining restrictions on that day, and also released a number of prisoners. At 5pm on the next day, January 20th, Hacha welcomed the members of the cabinet at the Hradčany and swore them in to be loyal “to the Führer, the patron of Protectorate”. He pointed out that now a new course will be taken, and that the attempts by local and foreign bodies to subvert will be combatted. Heydrich then spoke, thanking all for their cooperation (Amtsblatt des Protektorats Böhmen und Mähren, Januar 1942, pp.557-561[official journal of the protectorate Bohemia and Moravia for January 1942, pp.557-561]).”

I was not aware of the table dancing episode by Heydrich & Co. when I wrote the essays, but Levin is apparently unaware of the Prague issue or is unable/unwilling to make the connection. Others have Heydrich in Prague a little later, but no matter, Heydrich would not have been sitting in Berlin drinking cognac and dancing on the table knowing he had to be in Prague later, in reasonable shape, not drunk.

Robert Gerwarth realized that something doesn’t add up, but he has an easy fix:

“On 20 January 1942, a snowy Tuesday morning, Heydrich gathered fourteen senior Nazi civil servants, party officials and high-ranking SS officers in a former industrialist’s villa on the shores of Berlin’s Lake Wannsee” (Hitler’s Hangman, The fife of Heydrich, Yale University Press New Haven and London, 2011, p.209)

According to Gerwarth, the meeting started on ‘a snowy Tuesday morning’. The snowy part seems to be right, but the meeting started at noon (in my essay I have the 20th as a Wednesday, I am wrong, it was a Tuesday but I am unable to access our Blog at the moment to correct this, sorry Herr Gerwarth). Also, Heydrich allegedly had invited 14 officials, not 7.

If there was a meeting on January 20th 1942, and there might have been, it was not chaired by Heydrich, he was in Prague. In fact his name is not mentioned as chair in the minutes.

Regards
Wilf
Ohne Meinungsfreiheit gibt es keine Freiheit (frei nach I. Kant)

rollo the ganger
Posts: 6230
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Wannsee

Post by rollo the ganger »

I was reading the link that Wilf gave and, if true, it would verify that the Germans wanted to deport all the Jews out of Reich territory. Not exterminate them. Where does it say otherwise?

neugierig
Posts: 619
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:49 pm
Contact:

Re: Wannsee

Post by neugierig »

Forgive me greendoormat, but I have no idea what you are talking about. NG-2586 (Bohlinger/Ney claim it is also referred to as NG-2586 G at times), was introduced as evidence in the Wilhelmstraße trial. But, the wording of that document (of dubious origin) differs from what we are shown today. My question is: Why?

This has nothing to do with any filing system or the like, it is only about the different wording offered now.

Regards
Wilf
Ohne Meinungsfreiheit gibt es keine Freiheit (frei nach I. Kant)

Pa Gromheizer
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 7:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Wannsee

Post by Pa Gromheizer »

Wannsee was about a road building project. Who, why, what, where, when and how.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1968
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:24 am
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Wannsee

Post by Statistical Mechanic »

neugierig wrote:My question: Why not use NG-2586 as the official translation, since it was apparently submitted at the IMT? And why nothing in the Avalon data base? OK, two questions.
This is confused. For the NMT cases, that is, the US tribunals, documents were registered in four series, the NG series standing for "Nuremberg Government" and having to do with agencies of the Third Reich. Further, the Wannsee notes were not discovered until March 1947, the IMT having concluded the previous fall, in October 1946.
"the Germans had ample justifiable cause to oppose a minority within their society who worked AGAINST their county's interests" -- been-there, 24 April 2014

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1968
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:24 am
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Wannsee

Post by Statistical Mechanic »

Pa Gromheizer wrote:Wannsee was about a road building project. Who, why, what, where, when and how.
Excuse me, what leads you to this conclusion about the Wannsee Conference?
"the Germans had ample justifiable cause to oppose a minority within their society who worked AGAINST their county's interests" -- been-there, 24 April 2014

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1968
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:24 am
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Wannsee

Post by Statistical Mechanic »

greendoormat wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Pa Gromheizer wrote:Wannsee was about a road building project. Who, why, what, where, when and how.
Excuse me, what leads you to this conclusion about the Wannsee Conference?
Road construction was the only example of use of labor given in the conference protocols.
Of course, there is a single sentence on road building in the protocol. An example is, of course, different to the topic under discussion. So, again, what leads one, other than poor comprehension skills, to the conclusion that the Wannsee Conference was about a road building project - its details including who, where, how, etc.?

You will admit, as one must, that the formulation "Wannsee was about a road building project. Who, why, what, where, when and how" is wonderfully deficient, as we've already seemingly agreed that the sole reference in the protocol to road building is an example consisting of one sentence with no mention of who, why, what, where, when, and how or even a nod to these details having been addressed at the conference.

Further, the mention of road building as an example of labor is different to the main subject under discussion at Wannsee and the purpose of the conference, unless you see some reason to conclude that the subject under discussion was labor, which conclusion, given certain problems raised by the contents of the protocol, would beg too for an explanation.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sat Oct 05, 2013 1:05 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"the Germans had ample justifiable cause to oppose a minority within their society who worked AGAINST their county's interests" -- been-there, 24 April 2014

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 23 guests