Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

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).
rollo the ganger
Posts: 6206
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by rollo the ganger » Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:34 pm

Why don't you post the credits Mr. Muehlenkamp? Post them here on Rodoh Roberto. And as far as the pigeon photos go, the dubbed subtitles refer to the person as "her" and you keep saying "he or she". What's your problem Roberto? I also wonder how many wild pigeons there were in Kiev at the time. Every city I've been to has millions at least. Too much "coulda, woulda, shoulda" in your responses. A little more certainty in your answers Roberto. I don't even believe YOU would want to be hung on such evidence.

rollo the ganger
Posts: 6206
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by rollo the ganger » Sun Sep 30, 2012 3:41 pm

Roberto said; "The Soviet filmmakers placed a pigeon (dead or alive) on the corpse for dramatic effect, ... " That about says it all.

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by Roberto » Sun Sep 30, 2012 3:54 pm

rollo the ganger wrote:Why don't you post the credits Mr. Muehlenkamp? Post them here on Rodoh Roberto.
What "credits" are you talking about?

All information I have about the Soviet film is mentioned here. I know the film starts with a list of the cameramen who shot the sequences and an affidavit signed by these cameramen wherein they declare that they filmed just what they saw and didn't alter anything. However, the YouTube page where the film used to be presented is no longer available. If I should gain access to another copy of the film, I'll be glad to transcribe the names of the cameramen and the text of their affidavit.
rollo the ganger wrote:And as far as the pigeon photos go, the dubbed subtitles refer to the person as "her" and you keep saying "he or she". What's your problem Roberto?
Trying to make a point, or just trying to kick your frustration? Methinks it's the latter.
rollo the ganger wrote:I also wonder how many wild pigeons there were in Kiev at the time. Every city I've been to has millions at least.
Wild pigeons are one thing. The order obviously refers to domestic pigeons kept by people.

I see lots of wild pigeons in downtown Lisbon, by the way, but millions? I don't think so.
rollo the ganger wrote: Too much "coulda, woulda, shoulda" in your responses.
Actually there's no more and no less supposition than is warranted by the available evidence, and the supposition is altogether reasonable.
rollo the ganger wrote: A little more certainty in your answers Roberto.
In order to comply with whose standards? Yours, which you only apply when it comes to your Nazi heroes?
rollo the ganger wrote: I don't even believe YOU would want to be hung on such evidence.
As this evidence is being presented not in order to hang anyone but in order to document historical events, your comment is rather out of place.

And no, none of your Nazi heroes was hung on the basis of only this Soviet film let alone any particular sequence.

But they looked rather uneasy when watching it, IIRC.

Face it, Rollo, you've got no case for the film stills in question showing anything other than what they are purported to show.

And your frustration about your ruined act is palpable.
Last edited by Roberto on Sun Sep 30, 2012 4:16 pm, edited 10 times in total.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by Roberto » Sun Sep 30, 2012 3:57 pm

rollo the ganger wrote:Roberto said; "The Soviet filmmakers placed a pigeon (dead or alive) on the corpse for dramatic effect, ... " That about says it all.
No, that says just what I wrote:
If you are right about pigeons not returning to their owners, there are two possibilities:

1. The Soviet filmmakers placed a pigeon (dead or alive) on the corpse for dramatic effect, in order to convey the message that the person in question had been executed for owning a pigeon and refusing to give it up.

2. The Germans had, after executing the person in question, placed a dead pigeon on that person to convey the message that the person in question had been executed for owning a pigeon and refusing to give it up, as a warning to others.

Neither of these possibilities rules out that the person in question was actually executed for owning a pigeon and refusing to give it up.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

rollo the ganger
Posts: 6206
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by rollo the ganger » Sun Sep 30, 2012 11:07 pm

Who dubbed in the subtitles Roberto? Why was it taken off Youtube? If the film was part of the Nuremberg evidence why is it that only the Holocaust Controversies site (which I refuse to hit the link to) is the only website where it can be found? And if you don't know anything about the origins of the film and the dubbing why do you use it so much?

The possibilities of how that person died are nearly endless. Not just two. "YOUNG" Vita Golovlev (doesn't that tug your heartstings? ... so young.). Murdered for refusing to give up her pigeon. If so it appears she was warned. Why didn't the Germans kill the pigeon too? With it's head and tail in an up position you can tell it's alive. Maybe she (as the film says but Roberto isn't sure what sex it's supposed to be) was a victim of a Soviet artillery barrage to retake the town. Maybe just someone caught up in the middle of the shooting. "Look Comrade, corpski! Put a pigeon on it for effect and take photo. Say Germans did it." Maybe a collaborator shot by the Red Army. Coulda, woulda, shoulda been a lot of possibilities on how this person died. No proof of any.

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by Roberto » Sun Sep 30, 2012 11:59 pm

rollo the ganger wrote:Who dubbed in the subtitles Roberto?
The filmmakers, I presume.

Or someone else who added the subtitles for the benefit of an English-speaking audience that doesn't understand Russian.
rollo the ganger wrote:Why was it taken off Youtube?
Probably due to copyright issues.
rollo the ganger wrote:If the film was part of the Nuremberg evidence why is it that only the Holocaust Controversies site (which I refuse to hit the link to) is the only website where it can be found?
Any particular reason why a film included in Nuremberg evidence should necessarily be online?
rollo the ganger wrote:And if you don't know anything about the origins of the film and the dubbing why do you use it so much?
Why not?

Much if not most of what is shown there can be checked against evidence independent of the filmmakers.
rollo the ganger wrote:The possibilities of how that person died are nearly endless. Not just two.
Maybe, but there's no reason to doubt that the cause of that person's death was the one mentioned in the film.

Especially considering that order I showed you.

And your pathetic arguments.
rollo the ganger wrote:"YOUNG" Vita Golovlev (doesn't that tug your heartstings? ... so young.).
Are you trying to make a point, or just concerned that readers might fail to notice your asshole?
rollo the ganger wrote:Murdered for refusing to give up her pigeon.
The guy(s) who killed her wouldn't have put it that way. He or they would have said that she was executed for refusing to comply with an order by the city commandant to give up domestic pigeons lest they be used for transmitting messages to the enemy.
rollo the ganger wrote:If so it appears she was warned.
Sure, the order must have been as clear as the one I showed.
rollo the ganger wrote:Why didn't the Germans kill the pigeon too?
What makes you think they didn't?
rollo the ganger wrote:With it's head and tail in an up position you can tell it's alive.
I can't. Head and tail may have been bent upwards after the pigeon was killed and placed on the victim, for better visual impact.
rollo the ganger wrote:Maybe she (as the film says but Roberto isn't sure what sex it's supposed to be) was a victim of a Soviet artillery barrage to retake the town. Maybe just someone caught up in the middle of the shooting. "Look Comrade, corpski! Put a pigeon on it for effect and take photo. Say Germans did it." Maybe a collaborator shot by the Red Army. Coulda, woulda, shoulda been a lot of possibilities on how this person died.
Yeah, but there's only one that's borne out by documentary evidence (the film) and presumably also by testimonies of eyewitnesses who saw the killing and/or its aftermath. And as the killing of this girl and other Rostov citizens shown in the film fits well with what is known about the behavior of Rollo's heroes in Rostov and other Soviet cities they occupied, from evidence independent of the Soviets, there is little if any reason for doubting the accuracy of the film's narrative.
rollo the ganger wrote:No proof of any.
Except for a documentary film whose content matches a German order and other evidence independent of the filmmakers about German behavior in Rostov and other occupied Soviet cities.

Poor Rollo is sulking because I ruined his wise guy act.

And I'm enjoying the spectacle.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

rollo the ganger
Posts: 6206
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by rollo the ganger » Mon Oct 01, 2012 12:02 am

Roberto either answers a question with a question, or answers with "probably", or engages in ad hominem arguments. Totally bankrupt with his arguments.

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by Roberto » Mon Oct 01, 2012 12:12 am

rollo the ganger wrote:Roberto either answers a question with a question,
Which Rollo cannot answer, and I don't only answer with a question.
rollo the ganger wrote:or answers with "probably",
Nothing wrong with that.
rollo the ganger wrote:or engages in ad hominem arguments.
Yep, sometimes I can't hide the deep contempt I feel for the likes of Rollo.
rollo the ganger wrote:Totally bankrupt with his arguments.
Actually that's rather the problem of my opponent, who also displays a characteristic tendency for wishful thinking.

By the way, the crimes committed during the first occupation of Rostov were peanuts compared to what Rollo's heroes did there later. It's mentioned in the same blog.
Last edited by Roberto on Mon Oct 01, 2012 12:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

rollo the ganger
Posts: 6206
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by rollo the ganger » Mon Oct 01, 2012 12:25 am

As one can see, Roberto not only verifies my description of him but actually agrees with me most wholeheartedly. And then he admonishes me for getting it right. Yes, the truth does hurt.

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Porta Westfalica (Kitty Hart exposed)

Post by Roberto » Mon Oct 01, 2012 12:32 am

rollo the ganger wrote:As one can see, Roberto not only verifies my description of him but actually agrees with me most wholeheartedly. And then he admonishes me for getting it right.
My opponent's tendency for wishful thinking is taking on delusional proportions.
rollo the ganger wrote:Yes, the truth does hurt.
I have no problem with it, actually.

But my opponent obviously has a problem with certain facts inconvenient to his articles of faith.

I’m still chuckling about this masterpiece of "Revisionist" wit, by the way:
rollo the ganger wrote:Allow me to refer back to my Bergen Belsen thread showing lots of smoke on the fringes of the BB camp after liberation. Explain THAT Mr. Muehlenkamp!
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 7 guests