Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

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
Nessie
Posts: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by Nessie »

been-there wrote:Bloody hell. Yet more Nessie idiocy. :? :roll:
Er-hem. (cough, cough). The Posen speech wasn't given in the English language. Nor was the Eichmann show-trial conducted in English.
That word therefore wasn't used by either of those two men.
Only a very stupid person would spend a lot of time debating something that they clearly have no ability to properly understand.

SUMMARY FOR IDIOTS:
Why can't you be polite and say that there is a dispute that translation of Ausrottung?

Learn to be polite if you want to debate further with me.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.


Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH, kindly contact Scott Smith. All contributions are welcome!


Werd
Posts: 10181
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by Werd »

I think he finds it hard to debate with someone who continually employs the argument from a negative fallacy and/or doesn't take the time to use the rodoh search engine. But I am not excusing his personal attacks. Just giving a reason for their occurence. Excuses and reasons are different.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:I think he finds it hard to debate with someone who continually employs the argument from a negative fallacy and/or doesn't take the time to use the rodoh search engine. But I am not excusing his personal attacks. Just giving a reason for their occurence. Excuses and reasons are different.
I find it hard to debate with him for all sorts of reasons. I don't stoop to being rude.

What is the argument from a negative fallacy?
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Werd
Posts: 10181
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by Werd »

To clarify, I was talking about been-there finding it hard; not you. As for the other thing, go here.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:To clarify, I was talking about been-there finding it hard; not you. As for the other thing, go here.
I understood he finds it hard and pointed out me too.

As for what you referred to as argument from a negative, I argued that because of the lack of proof, we do not know the answer for sure as there is a possibility of there being more than one outcome. That is not fallacious in any way. If you want to claim one outcome is a definite where there is no proof positive, that is a fallacy of proof by assertion. My position is if there is insufficient evidence to prove something, then you move to other evidence and look for corroboration.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
DasPrussian
Posts: 3257
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by DasPrussian »

been-there wrote:Bloody hell. Yet more Nessie idiocy. :? :roll:
Er-hem. (cough, cough). The Posen speech wasn't given in the English language. Nor was the Eichmann show-trial conducted in English.
That word therefore wasn't used by either of those two men.
Only a very stupid person would spend a lot of time debating something that they clearly have no ability to properly understand.

SUMMARY FOR IDIOTS:
Himmler never used the word "extermination" in any known speech.
Eichmann also did not use the word during his show-trial in the 'Jewish State of Israel'
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

This is basic stuff, already discussed many times.

http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... =10#p22234

http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... =30#p22321
You may have discussed it, Been There but you were heavily defeated by Roberto and co. In fact he bombarded you with so much evidence and logical thinking that you ended up changing the subject to Churchill's blockade.

So, in your eyes Himmler and Eichmann meant 'root out' ? So what does that mean? evacuation? I think you'll find it means to 'murder' if you look at the context of documents that include this word.

So, how does this all fit in with Himmlers other speeches , which were presented to you by someone called 'marcom' from that particular thread you linked to. Here are some extracts :

06.10.43

The hard decision to wipe this people off the face of the earth had to be made. For us, the organization that had to carry out this task, it was the most difficult one we ever had. But it was accomplished, and without — I believe I can say — our men and their leaders suffering any mental or spiritual damage. That was clearly a danger. To become too brutal, too heartless, and lose respect for human life, or to be too soft and bring oneself to the point of a nervous breakdown — the path between these two ever-present possibilities is incredibly narrow, the course between Scylla and Charybdis.


Maybe you would like to offer your Revisionist interpretation of 'wiping this people off the face of the earth' ? Had evacuations reached the moon at that stage of the 20th century? Ah, so that's where the Jews ended up!

16.12.43

"Whenever I was forced to take steps against the partisans and Jewish commissars in some village — I'll say it for the information of this group only — I made it a point to give the order to kill the women and children of these partisans and commissars. I would be a weakling and I would be committing a crime against our descendants if I allowed the hate-filled sons of the sub-humans we have liquidated in this struggle of humanity against subhumanity to grow up. Believe me, easy though it may be to talk in the lecture hall about carrying the idea behind this order to its proper, logical conclusion, it was not so easy to give the order and is not so easy to execute it. But we must come more and more to the realization that , we are engaged in a primitive, elemental, organic racial struggle."


I say, what a cad that Himmler was !!

24.5.44

"I believe, gentlemen, that you know me well enough to realize that I am not a bloodthirsty man nor a man who takes pleasure or finds sport in the harsher things he must do. On the other hand, I have strong nerves and a great sense of duty — if I do say so myself — and when I recognize the necessity of something, I will do it unflinchingly. As to the Jewish women and children, I did not believe I had a right to let these children grow up to become avengers who would kill our fathers [sic!] and grandchildren. That, I thought, would be cowardly. Thus the problem was solved without half-measures


Himmler explaining what a 'lady-killer' he was - ( and a baby killer too !)

21.7.44

I also want to answer a question which I am sure is on your minds. The question is: "Yes, of course, you're killing the adult Jews. I can understand that. But what about the women and children?" — Well, I have to tell you something. One day those children will have grown up. How could we be so contemptibly dishonorable as to say: No, no! We're too weak for this. Our children can take care of them. Let them fight it out, too! When the little Jews of today are all grown up, they'll vent their Jewish hatred on our children and grandchildren, who will have the same problem to solve as we did...



Himmler again boasts of his killing of women and children !

And now Eichmann :

How does your 'lost in translation' theory fit in with Eichmann admitting 'Treated Accordingly' ( from Wannsee Minutes) was a code word for being killed , and that Dr Buhler ( at Wannsee) was talking in code when he demanded the Jews of General Government be 'removed', and that this really meant killing them ( both from his interrogation ). And how does it fit in with Eichmann stating in court that the Korherr report included figures for migration, natural decrease, concentration camp inmates ( which were NOT inc in evacuations section) , AND THOSE WHO WERE PUT TO DEATH ? (Session 105).

Eichmann also informs us that Heydrich told him, sometime in Autumn 41, that Hitler had ordered the physical extermination of the Jews. Was this a mere case of 'Ausrotten' too ?
All I want for Christmas is a Dukla Prague away kit

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9363
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by been-there »

Adolf Eichmann denied doing what he was accused of (and executed for), to his prison chaplain prior to his execution:
"I have nothing to confess. I have not sinned.
I am clear with God. I did not do it.
I did nothing wrong. I have no regrets."
-- Adolf Eichmann to Prison Chaplain Pastor William L. Hull, in prison prior to his execution.
Pg.173. 'The Mark of Cain' by Katharina von Kellenbach
.
Heinrich Himmler denied it to Hans Frank in Krakow and declared in front of a group of key people whom Frank had officially called to a meeting, that the rumours of a systematic extermination of the Jews were "false":
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 130#p49276
"On 7th February 1944 I succeeded in being received by Adolf Hitler personally — I might add that throughout the war he received me three times only. In the presence of Bormann I put the question to him: "My Führer, rumours about the extermination of the Jews will not be silenced. They are heard everywhere. No one is allowed in anywhere. Once I paid a surprise visit to Auschwitz in order to see the camp, but I was told that there was an epidemic in the camp and my car was diverted before I got there. Tell me, My Führer, is there anything in it?"
The Führer said, "You can very well imagine that there are executions going on — of insurgents. Apart from that I do not know anything. Why don't you speak to Heinrich Himmler about it?"
And I said. "Well, Himmler made a speech to us in Krakow and declared in front of all the people whom I had officially called to the meeting that these rumours about the systematic extermination of the Jews were false; the Jews were merely being brought to the East."
Thereupon the Führer said, "Then you must believe that."
--Hans Frank.
Nuremberg Trial Proceedings Vol. 12. 18th April 1946
Adolf Hitler denied it to Otto Dietrich
Otto Dietrich wrote:"Toward the end of 1944 the first allegations about the crimes in Poland began appearing in the foreign press... I handed these reports to him [Hitler] and took the occasion to ask him TWICE...
Each time he replied indignantly that the reports were typical "propaganda lies and distortions of the enemy, intended to cover up their own crimes at Katyn Forest".
-- Otto Dietrich. 'The Hitler I knew: Memoirs of the Third Reich's Press Chief'. Pg 130.
Some previous references

Ernst Kaltenbrunner declared that the only knowledge that he had of it was reading allied claims in their wartime-propaganda news reports:
Interrogation of ERNST KALTENBRUNNER
By: Lt.Col.Brookhart, 3 October 1945
Kaltenbrunner stated that he had no information regarding the use of gas as a means of extermination. He admitted having read of the "mobile gas units" in the foreign press. He sent a photostatic copy of the article and a letter to Hitler telling him of the terrible consequences of the use of such methods. Germany's position among the other nations would be lost. (pp.15-16). On page 17 Kaltenbrunner stated that it is absolutely impossible that anyone should have believed that he was responsible for such acts.
Yet we are all expected to believe that Adolf had publically declared his intention to annihilate ALL and every Jew in Europe to all of Germany AND TO THE ENTIRE WORLD in a broadcast speech on 30th January 1939 at the Reichstag:
Und eines möchte ich an diesem, vielleicht nicht nur für uns Deutsche, denkwürdigen Tag nun aussprechen: Ich bin in meinem Leben sehr oft Prophet gewesen und wurde meistens ausgelacht. In der Zeit meines Kampfes um die Macht war es in erster Linie das jüdische Volk, daß nur mit Gelächter meine Prophezeiungen hinnahm, ich würde einmal in Deutschland die Führung des Staates und damit der ganzen Nation übernehmen, und dann, unter vielen andern, auch das jüdische Problem zur Lösung bringen. Ich glaube, daß dieses damalige schallende Gelächter dem Judentum in Deutschland unterdessen wohl schon in der Kehle erstickt ist.

Ich will heute wieder ein Prophet sein: Wenn es dem internationalen Finanzjudentum in und außerhalb Europas gelingen sollte, die Völker noch einmal in einen Weltkrieg zu stürzen, dann wird das Ergebnis nicht die Bolschewisierung der Erde und damit der Sieg des Judentums sein, sondern die Vernichtung der jüdischen Rasse in Europa.

Wir sind uns dabei im klaren darüber, daß der Krieg nur damit enden kann, daß entweder die germanische Völker ausgerottet werden, oder daß das Judentum aus Europa verschwindet. Ich habe am 3. September im Deutschen Reichstag es schon ausgesprochen -- und ich hüte mich vor voreiligen Prophezeiungen -, daß dieser Krieg nicht so ausgehen wird, wie es sich die Juden vorstellen, nämlich daß die europäisch-arischen Völker ausgerottet werden, sondern daß das Ergebnis dieses Krieges die Vernichtung des Judentums ist. Zum erstenmal werden nicht andere allein verbluten sondern zum ersten mal wird diesesmal das echt altjüdische Gesetz angewendet: „Aug' um Aug', Zahn um Zahn!"
Und je weiter sich dieser Kampf ausbreitet, um so mehr wird sich mit diesem Kampf--das mag sich das Weltjudentum gesagt sein lassen--der Antisemitismus verbreiten. Er wird eine Nahrung finden in jedem Gefangenenlager, er wird eine Nahrung finden in jeder Familie, die aufgeklärt wird, warum sie letzten Endes ihr Opfer zu bringen hat. Und es wird die Stunde kommen, da der böseste Weltfeind aller Zeiten wenigstens vielleicht auf ein Jahrtausend seine Rolle ausgespielt haben wird.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
And one more thing I would like now to state on this day memorable perhaps not only for us Germans. I have often been a prophet in my life and was generally laughed at. During my struggle for power, the Jews primarily received with laughter my prophecies that I would someday assume the leadership of the state and thereby of the entire nation and then, among many other things, achieve a solution of the Jewish problem. I suppose that meanwhile the laughter of Jewry in Germany that resounded then is probably already choking in their throats.

Today I want to be a prophet again. If international finance Jewry within Europe and abroad should succeed once more in plunging the peoples into a world war, then the consequence will be not the Bolshevization of the world and therewith a victory of Jewry, but on the contrary, the destruction of the Jewish race in Europe.
It is clear to us that the war can only end with the destruction of the Germanic peoples or the disappearance of Jewry from Europe. On September 3, I already announced in the German Reichstag (and I am careful not to make rash prophecies) that this war would not develop as the Jews imagine, namely that the European-Aryan peoples will be destroyed. Instead, the result of this war will be the destruction of Jewry. For the first time others will not bleed alone. For the first time the genuine old Jewish law will be applied: "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth!" And the more this war spreads, the more anti-Semitism will spread. This may be said to world Jewry. Anti-Semitism will be nourished in every prison camp, in every family which must be informed why they must sacrifice to the bitter end. And the hour will come when the most evil world enemy of all times will have played out its role for perhaps a thousand years at least.
Why was Adolf so allegedly honest and keen to inform EVERYONE in 1939 about his alleged intentions without USE OF euphemism, but so coy about it to his closest associates, top commanders and key personnel in 1944? It makes no sense.
Only people who are dishonestly stuck in a self-delusion will keep up the charade of believing this pernicious and racistly defamatory nonsense once this is pointed out to them.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9363
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by been-there »

Wilhelm Stäglich wrote: Even these excerpts — Peterson and Smith do not give the whole texts of the speeches — must be regarded with skepticism, for they were taken from documents that are manifestly unreliable.
In contrast to the Posen speeches, however, they show rather clearly that Himmler refers to the execution of Jews only in connection with the fight against partisans and other bandits operating behind the German lines on the eastern front. When some general comment on the "solution of the Jewish problem" or the "eradication of the Jews" appears, one may be sure that it is either the result of manipulation of the text or an outright forgery. It is simply inconceivable that Himmler would have given these high-ranking troop leaders a lecture on "genocide."

The indiscriminate actions against women and children during anti partisan operations were undeniably inhumane and virtually indefensible in terms of international law. Because those actions could hardly be concealed, Himmler had every reason to justify them to these leaders of the Army. As every veteran of the Eastern Front knows, women and even children often took part in guerrilla warfare. If the Germans sometimes made indiscriminate reprisals, they did so to assure the safety of their fighting men and to protect their lines of communication. But these reprisals were nothing in comparison with the carpet bombing of residential areas in German cities, which Churchill ordered for the purpose of indiscriminately killing German civilians — German women and children. For that slaughter there can be no justification whatever. Pg.143

But the essential point about these speeches of Himmler's, so far as our inquiry is concerned, is that none of them contains any reference to "mass gassings" in "extermination camps." In none of his extant speeches does Himmler mention Auschwitz in this regard. Indeed, the second Sonthofen address suggests an alternative explanation of the fate of the Hungarian Jews who, in the spring and summer of 1944, were transported to Auschwitz and — so the story goes — "gassed": They were brought there as a labor force for the construction of underground factories. Pg.144

From Himmler's remarks one can deduce that the Einsatzgruppen did deal harshly with the Jews in guerrilla-infested areas, proceeding mercilessly even against women and children. But it is also a fact that the Jewish population nearly always made common cause with the guerrillas. The operations of the Einsatzgruppen were a reaction to the insidious and illegal methods of warfare employed by a dastardly and vicious foe, and they can hardly be classified as "genocide." One recalls that Himmler himself, in a memorandum he sent to Hitler early in the war, called the idea of physically exterminating a people "un-Germanic and impossible"
-- http://www.vho.org/D/dam/M2II3.html
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by Nessie »

been-there wrote:........
Why was Adolf so allegedly honest and keen to inform EVERYONE in 1939 about his alleged intentions without USE OF euphemism, but so coy about it to his closest associates, top commanders and key personnel in 1944? It makes no sense.
Only people who are dishonestly stuck in a self-delusion will keep up the charade of believing this pernicious and racistly defamatory nonsense once this is pointed out to them.
It makes sense if you know about the historical narrative of the development of the Holocaust. So in 1939 when Hitler was talking about the Jews, the words used were in the context of the plan of ethnic cleansing. By 1944 that plan had changed to become genocide and so they had to be more careful about what they said. It is one thing to call for the elimination of Jews, for them to be still alive and in new communities elsewhere. It is another to call for their elimination and mass murder them.

To describe people who do not agree with you as dishonest, deluded and racism is yet more evidence that you are the one with the problem when it comes to debating the Holocaust.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
DasPrussian
Posts: 3257
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Cole (Again) on Treblinka and the "Reinhardt" Camps

Post by DasPrussian »

been-there wrote:Adolf Eichmann denied doing what he was accused of (and executed for), to his prison chaplain prior to his execution:
"I have nothing to confess. I have not sinned.
I am clear with God. I did not do it.
I did nothing wrong. I have no regrets."
-- Adolf Eichmann to Prison Chaplain Pastor William L. Hull, in prison prior to his execution.


First of all, this non-specific whining of a condemned man doesn't prove anything. He was trying to play the blame game all throughout his interrogation and court appearance and he tried to convince everyone listening that all he was responsible for was the transport of Jews. Maybe that was true, he may not have physically killed anyone himself, or was responsible for giving the order. So in his mind that makes him not guilty, and that what he is expressing to the chaplain.

For you to present this as evidence that Hitler didn't give the order, or that Eichmann was lying about the extermination aspects of Wannsee and Korrherr etc, is basically laughable. It's almost as bad as Bob trying to convince anyone stupid enough to believe that 'Special Treatment' actually meant 'being a western Jew or an eastern Jew transported through an AR camp to the East' - not being deloused, not being murdered, not being put up in a 5 star hotel, but just being a Jew transported through a camp. I mean, one may wonder what was the point of actually inventing a term to describe such a process. It's like inventing a code for doing the washing up, what was the point ?

Now if you had turned round and presented me with Eichmann claiming the Jews were sent to Siberia, and that the AR camps were transit camps, then I'd sit up and listen. But unfortunately he didn't, and no other German did either. Have you ever wondered why not?







Heinrich Himmler denied it to Hans Frank in Krakow and declared in front of a group of key people whom Frank had officially called to a meeting, that the rumours of a systematic extermination of the Jews were "false":
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 130#p49276
"On 7th February 1944 I succeeded in being received by Adolf Hitler personally — I might add that throughout the war he received me three times only. In the presence of Bormann I put the question to him: "My Führer, rumours about the extermination of the Jews will not be silenced. They are heard everywhere. No one is allowed in anywhere. Once I paid a surprise visit to Auschwitz in order to see the camp, but I was told that there was an epidemic in the camp and my car was diverted before I got there. Tell me, My Führer, is there anything in it?"
The Führer said, "You can very well imagine that there are executions going on — of insurgents. Apart from that I do not know anything. Why don't you speak to Heinrich Himmler about it?"
And I said. "Well, Himmler made a speech to us in Krakow and declared in front of all the people whom I had officially called to the meeting that these rumours about the systematic extermination of the Jews were false; the Jews were merely being brought to the East."
Thereupon the Führer said, "Then you must believe that."


Is this the same Hans Frank who maintained a...err...lets say 'incriminating diary' ??

How could you believe this man? He's a die hard anti semitic Nazi trying to defend the honour of his fellow Nazis.

And did Mr Frank enlighten us in any way over the location in Siberia ? If not, why not ? didn't any Nazi know anything about that either?

Adolf Hitler denied it to Otto Dietrich
Otto Dietrich wrote:"Toward the end of 1944 the first allegations about the crimes in Poland began appearing in the foreign press... I handed these reports to him [Hitler] and took the occasion to ask him TWICE...
Each time he replied indignantly that the reports were typical "propaganda lies and distortions of the enemy, intended to cover up their own crimes at Katyn Forest".
-- Otto Dietrich. 'The Hitler I knew: Memoirs of the Third Reich's Press Chief'. Pg 130.
Some previous references
So, if Hitler says so, it must be right then. Again it's a pity the conversation didn't continue with Hitler informing Dietrich ( who apparently was never in Hitlers 'inner circle' ) that the Jews couldn't have been exterminated because they had been sent to 'location X' in Siberia. Because that's what I would have said, if it was true. What about you?
Ernst Kaltenbrunner declared that the only knowledge that he had of it was reading allied claims in their wartime-propaganda news reports:
Interrogation of ERNST KALTENBRUNNER
By: Lt.Col.Brookhart, 3 October 1945
Kaltenbrunner stated that he had no information regarding the use of gas as a means of extermination. He admitted having read of the "mobile gas units" in the foreign press. He sent a photostatic copy of the article and a letter to Hitler telling him of the terrible consequences of the use of such methods. Germany's position among the other nations would be lost. (pp.15-16). On page 17 Kaltenbrunner stated that it is absolutely impossible that anyone should have believed that he was responsible for such acts.
Yet we are all expected to believe that Adolf had publically declared his intention to annihilate ALL and every Jew in Europe to all of Germany AND TO THE ENTIRE WORLD in a broadcast speech on 30th January 1939 at the Reichstag:
Did Kaltenbruuner receive a reply from Hitler ? If so, did Hitler give him the same answer he gave Dietrich ? Looks like here Hitler just ignored him then!
And was Kaltenbrunner aware of 'location X' ? He doesn't appear to know about this either !!!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
And one more thing I would like now to state on this day memorable perhaps not only for us Germans. I have often been a prophet in my life and was generally laughed at. During my struggle for power, the Jews primarily received with laughter my prophecies that I would someday assume the leadership of the state and thereby of the entire nation and then, among many other things, achieve a solution of the Jewish problem. I suppose that meanwhile the laughter of Jewry in Germany that resounded then is probably already choking in their throats.

Why was Adolf so allegedly honest and keen to inform EVERYONE in 1939 about his alleged intentions without USE OF euphemism, but so coy about it to his closest associates, top commanders and key personnel in 1944? It makes no sense.
Only people who are dishonestly stuck in a self-delusion will keep up the charade of believing this pernicious and racistly defamatory nonsense once this is pointed out to them.
[/quote][/quote]

But more importantly, why didn't any of his top commanders and key personnel know anything about location X in Siberia???
All I want for Christmas is a Dukla Prague away kit

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 14 guests