'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

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).
User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1972
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:24 am
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:45 pm

been-there wrote:There will always be some possibility of a small statistic of moronic members of any online discussion group. This is a statement of obvious fact. Similarity of this fact to avatar names is the opposite of lugubrious. ;)
Knock it the fuck off.
been-there wrote:Major Cranfield:
"Eleven witnesses had recognized Grese in Court. Of these eleven, five made no allegation of any kind against her. This fact threw doubt on the evidence of those witnesses who said that she was notorious, a ferocious savage and the worst S.S. woman.
So what? What would you expect the defense to say? We've already seen that she was a perpetrator guilty of aggravated crimes against Jews at Auschwitz. Aggravated by her own testimony, quoted above. Also involved in selections for the gas chamber, she said, which she made with eyes wide open.
been-there wrote:Then the point of the replies concerning SB.
The term SB has been interpreted and perpretrated by a Shoah-indoctrination -programme as a eupehimism for 'gas chamber homicide'.
No, that is not true. I suggest you re-read this: http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... =80#p28216 where the meaning of the term Sonderbehandlung is illustrated with examples that rubbish your statement. You seem not to understand the meaning of S.B. on a number of levels, and you reveal a stunning ignorance of the basic facts involved here.. No, S.B. was not a euphemistic term synonymous with "gas chamber homicide."
been-there wrote:such comprehension-challenged individuals who actually would like to be involved in a genuine well-intentioned exchange of understandings.
Says he who comprehends not the well-known term Sonderbehandlung. LOL.
been-there wrote:Special treatment, special privilige, special. What does it mean?
Well, special privilege and special camp (yes, Bergen-Belsen had a Sonderlager, which had the purpose of isolating eastern Jews holding passports) and special squad and special this or that are not interchangeable with special treatment, if that is what you're trying to say.
been-there wrote:If the 53 accused Jewish collobarators of Vergen-Belsen had not survived the War we can be fairly sure that there special privilege status would be interpreted as meaning "elimination".
Says he who can't distinguish special Kommando from special treatment. Here is an example of pure speculation without any basis in reason or evidence. In fact, historians have documented 8 sections of Bergen-Belsen IIRC on the basis of evidence concerning the camp. The exchange Jews, for example, are well known, including from documentation concerning the Hotel Polski Jews in Warsaw.
been-there wrote:But whatever.
Translation: "I am grasping for straws and have nothing."
been-there wrote:Irma Grese and her lynching for crimes not deserving of a death penalty
Tell us, please, then of what crimes Ms Grese was guilty and what punishment she deserved.
been-there wrote:a prophylactic to the predicted media monsoon of mendacious shoah memoria. But now it is upon us. For those of us here aleady heavily infected with false aspects of 'the holocaust' meme, this was not intended to cure you. But you can perhaps take comfort from the knowledge that there are those who have made a healthy recovery from this memoria meme.
What an abject and ludicrous failure of an idea.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:35 am, edited 2 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

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1972
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:24 am
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:53 pm

been-there wrote:As said before to St. Mck on numerous occassions, I do not feel the need to answer a.) either deliberate obfuscation of the subject matter and intention of threads or b.) replies that are based upon a lack of comprehension of the the subject matter and intention of threads.
An admission of bad faith.

In addition to which, your arbitrary - and mostly lunatic - definitions of "lack of comprehension" and "deliberate obfuscation" are nothing but deluded self-justification for your habit of dodging, evading, and weaseling.

That said, please keep acting this way. It shows you for what you are - unable to answer challenge after challenge to your claims. If you think such avoidance is the method that will convince people that arguments against your claims are mistaken, your delusions are bigger than even I have understood up until now.
"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
Joe Future
Posts: 591
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:17 am
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by Joe Future » Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:31 am

Sorry, I do not wish to butt in again with this topic, however...

Been-there, you should not assume that you are somehow exempt from the guidance I have just issued concerning insulting wordplay and which everyone is to respect and to follow in this latest quip of yours. Ignoring a mod's words in order to make a joke as if a guidance or a warning somehow didn't matter, is a challenge to the clearly defined boundaries which have been set in this, the main forum.

"...Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters. Failure to head warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban."
That's not a semi colon, that's a colon!

User avatar
Bernard
Posts: 3462
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by Bernard » Tue Jan 28, 2014 2:01 am

Bernard wrote:3) Ms Grese's statements that she only heard about the gas chambers from prisoners and not from superiors is transparently exculpatory as it makes it seem as though she is outside of the "loop" and without power.

been-there
To me "it makes it seem as though" she only heard rumours from prisoners about gas chambers. Erm... exactly as she said. No more no less.
Yes, of course, no Nazi EVER uttered an exculpatory statement and if any Nazi waffled or demured about his knowledge of gas chambers we are absolutely obliged to conclude that gas chambers were the product of Jew rumors.

It might do well for been-there to peruse the Frankfurt/Auschwitz Trial testimony and cross examination of Rudolf Hoess's adjutant, Robt Mulka. Mulka denies having anything to do with Auschwitz gas chambers, in fact, arguing at first that he just learned of these gassings after the war. But Mulka is a way bigger fish to fry than Irma Grese, and the prosecutor wasn't buying exculpatory bullshit. Bit by bit, the lying Nazi pig was broken to bits with inescapable evidence and documents featiuring his own signature. This narrative leads to a great finale and a stunning confession as Mulka had ordered with his own signature, "raw materials for the resettlement of the Jews." And what did Mulka admit these raw materials were? Zyklon B!!!

Read it and dodge, been-therehttp://holocaustcontroversies.yuku.com/topic/1803

If we are going to believe Ms Grese about only hearing about gas chambers from prisoners, we have to believe that she never questioned her superiors for corroberation, that Nazis never talked about the gassings among themselves nor ever dispelled rumors and allowed their staff members to believe that they were participating in a mass murder program when they were not. Also, we would have to believe that Ms Grese never smelled the continuous stench of burning corpses attested to by Hoess, Mulka and Oskar Groening amomg others, and that she believed that she personally selected murder victims with nothing but rumor to inform her.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1972
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:24 am
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:41 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
been-there wrote:As said before to St. Mck on numerous occassions, I do not feel the need to answer a.) either deliberate obfuscation of the subject matter and intention of threads or b.) replies that are based upon a lack of comprehension of the the subject matter and intention of threads.
An admission of bad faith.

In addition to which, your arbitrary - and mostly lunatic - definitions of "lack of comprehension" and "deliberate obfuscation" are nothing but deluded self-justification for your habit of dodging, evading, and weaseling.

That said, please keep acting this way. It shows you for what you are - unable to answer challenge after challenge to your claims. If you think such avoidance is the method that will convince people that arguments against your claims are mistaken, your delusions are bigger than even I have understood up until now.
To pursue this just a bit further, and the issue of been-there's repeatedly dishonest representation of nearly everything he refers to, here is a recent case in point, where been-there "did not feel the need to answer" and now attributes this "feeling" to supposed obfuscation and miscomprehension: http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 210#p31787. That is, he receives a direct and in fact informative answer to a question he himself has asked, won't acknowledge the answer (which stands, to be sure, as a bit of an admonishment as to his making unwarranted assumptions and posting without doing his homework), fails to reflect on the answer's implications for his claims, and now whines about obfuscation and lack of comprehension on my part. LOL.
"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: 1972
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:24 am
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:22 am

Scott wrote:
Bernard wrote:Did anyone read through Roberto's translation of the Robt Mulka trial excerpt? < snip >
I read it over. Kudos to Roberto but same old story. Yawn. The eyewitnesses have to affirm the grand design of the postwar political belief system because they have to: the infallibility of the Pope, the divinity of Jesus, there is no God but Allah, and like Sgt. Schultz, "I knew nothing, noth-ing!"

Supposedly they incriminate themselves in mass-murder somehow because they signed an order for floor wax for the Death House at Sing Sing, or pesticide for the morgue. As if the mere existence of a crematoria or an invoice for Zyklon-B could not mean anything other than mass-murder.

Then of course the court gives them time off of a dozen life sentences for mass-murder accessorizing or something like that, and then they go about their business and keep mum. You dodge a bullet and you keep a low profile. When pressed for details about your wartime service you didn't like the style of the striped uniforms that prisoners wore.

This is pretty much the scenario anytime you look at it that passes for evidence. No lemon freshness added to the furniture polish that you ordered during the war? That obviously means mass-murder, doesn't it? Kah-zing! The epistemology of postwar courts could not have been written better as a Monty Python skit.

:)
Over in Crazy Whites we can read where Scott Smith recycles some revisionist cliches about "what passes for evidence," innocent pesticides, and now floor wax.

Really? That is all? Floor wax and lemon freshness? Or their moral equivalent?

Scott's playback of Mulka's utterly self-serving and self-contradictory testimony is dishonest and reductionist - in the snese that Scott has made it into a few revisionist slogans. But here are some excerpts - and one needs to read the Q&A to see how forthcoming Mulka is about the so-called floor wax and other cleaning agents, which, were the wax and other orders nothing to hide, raises the sharp question why did Mulka not just give a direct and forthcoming answer?

Having lied that he only learned the full story after the war, Mulka muddies his message more than a little, we can see in the transcript, by also saying the following:
Presiding Judge: Was it known to you that they burned corpses daily?
Mulka: One smelled it. And at night one saw the pyres light all the way to Kattowitz. The whole population knew what was happening. But there was no inquiry by court or public prosecutors office.
Mulka: They issued a fifth of a liter of brandy and a higher meat ration.
Public Prosecutor Kügler: As an adjutant in Auschwitz you were in charge of supervising the economic enterprises. Do you remember that gas tight doors with a peephole for the crematoria in Birkenau were ordered from the Deutsche Ausrüstungswerke, which belonged to the Auschwitz Economic Area?
Mulka: I do not recall such an order for doors, but it is well possible that the head of this factory submitted one such order to me.
Presiding Judge: How then is the sickeningly sweetish smell supposed to have come into being, if only eight corpses were burned?
Mulka: In my time the burning was done in the open, this fire light I saw. It is also known to me that transports arrived and were gassed. This made the rounds. I also saw telexes, in which transports were announced. In these telexes it was stated that the transports were meant for SB. The term SB only gradually became clear to us all, also to me.
After a statement by the prosecutor handing over questioning to the court due to Mulka's lack of responsiveness on the stand, and Mulka's dancing around some more, we read this:
Presiding Judge: But the people were disciplinarily subordinated to you. Did you condone the drives to the gas chamber? If not, what did you do against them?
Mulka: In my time the respective persons even went on foot to the gas chamber.
And finally we get this abject performance from the defendant, other witnesses having testified against him and his own jumping to and fro having put him into a pickle:
Presiding Judge: Defendant Mulka, did you issue driving orders to Dessau?
Mulka: I only know of one such occasion. A driving order was signed by Glücks and underwritten by me on the left below. It was about disinfectants.
Presiding Judge: Here it reads: For resettlement of Jews and For the correctness of the copy Mulka. What resettlements of Jews were you knew, didn’t you?
Mulka: Yes, that was known to me.
Presiding Judge: And what were these materials for the resettlement of Jews?
Mulka (in a very low voice): Yes, raw material.
Presiding Judge: Well then, that was Zyklon B.
Mulka (in an even lower voice): Yes, Zyklon B.
Presiding Judge: Mr. Mulka, until know you always said that you had nothing to do with the gassing of the Jews. Isn’t that so?
Mulka: Yes, Mr. President, I gave a driving order to Dessau.
Defense Attorney Dr. Stolting II: May I ask to reproduce the conversation. It is hard to understand, as Mr. Mulka did not speak into the microphone.
Scott's ruminations and recyclings come off as beyond ludicrous in the light of the trial transcript, thanks to Roberto Muehlenkamp's work.

Lemon fresh: what a repulsive bit of Jew baiting we're given here, too, I have to add, mockery of the whole situation and the victims, the situation that made even Mulka, publicly confronted, declare
Mulka: Yes, of course. The things that were going on there had a strong shock effect on me from the beginning.
Presiding Judge: What was going on?
Mulka: Well, the people in the striped clothes.
Presiding Judge: Only the clothing?
Mulka: No, that was not all. The whole tone.
But our deniers, from the safety of their laptops, feel free to insult and belittle those who went through all that.

Note to Scott: It wasn't funny, Scott, and neither are you.
"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
Bernard
Posts: 3462
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by Bernard » Tue Jan 28, 2014 2:59 pm

An excellent post by Stat Mack!

The Mulka testimony offers absolutely no wiggle room for deniers. Forget your usual bizzarre slobber about torture and miraculous feats of cosmic brain washing, we have a Nazi war criminal, one of the most powerful cogs in the Nazi murder machine, clearly empowered to lie and tap dance in West German court, but painted into a corner by documentary evidence. It was a fabulous check mate, and Mulka flicked over his own king at endgame. He confessed, deniers. Read the transcript. The Nazi had no intention of confessing but the evidence left him with no choice. The evidence!

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 2937
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by Charles Traynor » Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:12 pm

Bernard wrote:So Grese admitted that she went beyond her orders and aggressively punished prisoners of her own volition. k0nsl didn't tell you that did he been-there.
Used objectively Grese’s testimony actually tells us a very different story about conditions at Auschwitz than the one Bernard and SM are currently attempting to peddle here.
Major CRANFIELD:

How did the prisoners behave?

— In the beginning when there were smaller numbers of them and they had sufficient to eat they were quite all right. Later, on when I had twenty to thirty thousand they behaved like animals, when food was a bit more scarce. Then at food distribution when people carried the food from the kitchen to the blocks, at nearly every corner there were 20 or 30 people who waited to pounce upon them and take the food away. With regard to sanitary conditions, in the beginning it was quite all right, but later on when the camp was over-crowded wherever you went it was just as if the prisoners thought that any place was good enough for a latrine, and the proper latrines were ruined by throwing all sorts of stuff into them, and then they simply ceased to function.

How old were you at this time, when you were in “C” Lager?
— Twenty.

Did you carry a stick at Auschwitz?

— Yes, an ordinary walking-stick.

Did you carry a whip at Auschwitz?

— Yes, made out of cellophane in the weaving factory in the camp. It was a very light whip, but if I hit somebody with it, it would hurt. After eight days Kommandant Kramer prohibited the whips, but we nevertheless went on using them. I never carried a rubber truncheon.

Did you, at Belsen, carry any kind of weapon?

— No.

Will you explain to the Court on what occasions you struck prisoners, and the reason why you did it?

In the beginning I did not use anything at all, but later on, when the crowds in Camp “C” became larger, then a great deal was stolen and prisoners did not obey my orders, even when they were quite light orders. Every day there were complaints of things stolen in the kitchen, and I put two Aufseherinnen in charge and gave them orders to keep their eyes open and whenever they found somebody on the spot who stole anything, to give them a good thrashing. In the beginning every prisoner had two blankets, but when the crowds became bigger I had to see that everybody got a blanket and therefore each prisoner only got one. We found they had cut up all those blankets and made all sorts of things out of them - shoes, jackets, etc. I gave strict orders that everything which had been made out of blankets was to be returned at once, but I got nothing at all, so then I ordered the control of all the blocks and also personal searches of the prisoners. On those occasions I used my whip. The Jewish Lagerälteste gave the signal for parades, but there were always prisoners who tried to evade them, and when I found the numbers were not right I gave orders to the Aufseherin to count again and again until those who were missing had been found, and I said the parades would go on until the number was right.
It is plain to me that any hardships suffered by the inmates at Auschwitz were caused by their own hand. I know the exterminationists here will find that idea unpalatable but I am afraid that the facts speak for themselves.

Image
Compound BIIC (Used for holding Jewish women deported from Hungary who were NOT gassed as per the myth)

It was forbidden for the camp guards to beat the prisoners and under normal circumstances this order was followed to the letter. Grese only resorted to hitting prisoners as a last resort when all other methods of enforcing discipline had failed (controlling thousands of belligerent and unhelpful Jews is no mean feat at the best of times). We should also remember that Irma Grese was only twenty years old when these incidents took place and that the guard force at Auschwitz was spread very thinly on the ground due to a shortage of manpower.

A favourite complaint of “survivors” is that the Germans forced them to endure lengthy roll calls lasting many hours. They will of course never admit that these roll calls sometimes became lengthy because the Jews themselves were actually sabotaging them.

The Jews were also responsible for the spread of disease within the camps because of their poor hygiene and deliberate avoidance of disinfection. We know that the Hungarian Jews in Grese’s compound even went so far as to deliberately block the toilets with rubbish so that they became unusable.

All Jewish “survivors” boast about how good they were at organising (stealing) when they were in the camps. The truth is that those who stole from the cookhouses were actually stealing food from the mouths of fellow prisoners. By enforcing strict discipline which may have occasionally included the beating of prisoners Irma Grese was actually helping to save the lives of Jews.
Then and later, internees were reluctant to accept that one of the main causes of death at Belsen was the hoarding of food by prisoners themselves...
After Day Break, Ben Shephard, pp.195-196


RIP Irma Grese.
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Bernard
Posts: 3462
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by Bernard » Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:18 pm

Fish, do you follow these threads and actually read what was posted? In this thread we have established via the testimony of Rudolf Hoess's adjutant, Robt Mulka, that everyone on staff at Auschwitz understood unequivocally that sonderbehandlung meant death/murder/extetrmination. Grese herself testified that she had no doubt what SB meant and yet she testified that she worked with Dr Mengele in the selection process.
Q: What were the prisoners supposed to do when the whistle went?

A: Fall in in fives, and it was my duty to see that they did so. Dr.
Mengele then came and made the selection. As I was responsible for the
camp my duties were to know how many were leaving and I had to count
them, and I kept the figures in a strength book. After the selection
took place they were sent into "B" Camp, and Dreschel telephoned and
told me that they had gone to another camp in Germany for working
pur-poses or for special treatment, which I thought to be the gas
chamber. I then put in my strength book either so many for transfer to
Germany to another camp, or so many for S.B. (Sonder Behandlung). It
was well known to the whole camp that S.B. meant the gas chamber.
What more do we need to know about Grese? She also admited to beating prisoners, whatever excuses you wish to make for her. She was a cog in the Auschwitz extermination program, and although the mockery of justice is quite flagrent when Bob Mulka gets 14 years and some small tool like Irma Grese swings by the neck, it wasn't Grese's sentence that mocked justice, but Mulka's.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8559
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: 'Holocaust reindoctrination' prophylactic.

Post by been-there » Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:36 pm

Charles Traynor wrote: Used objectively Grese’s testimony actually tells us a very different story about conditions at Auschwitz than the one Bernard and SM are currently attempting to peddle here.
Major CRANFIELD:

How did the prisoners behave?

— In the beginning when there were smaller numbers of them and they had sufficient to eat they were quite all right. Later, on when I had twenty to thirty thousand they behaved like animals, when food was a bit more scarce. Then at food distribution when people carried the food from the kitchen to the blocks, at nearly every corner there were 20 or 30 people who waited to pounce upon them and take the food away. With regard to sanitary conditions, in the beginning it was quite all right, but later on when the camp was over-crowded wherever you went it was just as if the prisoners thought that any place was good enough for a latrine, and the proper latrines were ruined by throwing all sorts of stuff into them, and then they simply ceased to function.
All Jewish “survivors” boast about how good they were at organising (stealing) when they were in the camps. The truth is that those who stole from the cookhouses were actually stealing food from the mouths of fellow prisoners. By enforcing strict discipline which may have occasionally included the beating of prisoners Irma Grese was actually helping to save the lives of Jews.
Then and later, internees were reluctant to accept that one of the main causes of death at Belsen was the hoarding of food by prisoners themselves...
After Day Break, Ben Shephard, pp.195-196
RIP Irma Grese.
Thanks for this Mr. T. A welcome breath of sanity to a subject that I am increasingly seeing evokes some quite insane reactions and twists of logic. And thanks for bringing the thread back on topic.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 2 guests