DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

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
blake121666
Posts: 2675
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by blake121666 » Sun Apr 29, 2018 6:07 pm

Nessie wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 9:27 am
When Hitler ignored the ultimatum and invaded Poland, it did change everything.
Since you became pedantic about this earlier, the sequence was:

1. German invasion of Poland
2. Ultimatum from Britain to Germany
3. Ultimatum ignored = state of war between Britain and Germany

So the invasion was obviously before the ultimatum. Any further German war actions in Poland would not technically be an "invasion" in the context you are using the term. You meant to say that "When Hitler did not comply with Britain's ultimatum, ...".

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 24894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Sun Apr 29, 2018 7:57 pm

Scott wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 3:07 pm
Nessie wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 9:11 am

When Germany invaded numerous countries during WWII, the civilians in those countries who took up arms and fought back, they were freedom fighters.


Whatever they are called, under the Hague and Geneva international agreements (treaties) they are Illegal Combatants....
Link and quote please.
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
Nessie
Posts: 24894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Sun Apr 29, 2018 8:06 pm

blake121666 wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 6:07 pm
Nessie wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 9:27 am
When Hitler ignored the ultimatum and invaded Poland, it did change everything.
Since you became pedantic about this earlier, the sequence was:

1. German invasion of Poland
2. Ultimatum from Britain to Germany
3. Ultimatum ignored = state of war between Britain and Germany

So the invasion was obviously before the ultimatum. Any further German war actions in Poland would not technically be an "invasion" in the context you are using the term. You meant to say that "When Hitler did not comply with Britain's ultimatum, ...".
I think you need to properly recognise the Anglo-Polish agreements prior to the invasion, in particular

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk19.asp

"Agreement of Mutual Assistance between the United Kingdom and Poland.-London, August 25, 1939."

Hitler knew prior to invading Poland it would guarantee war.
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
blake121666
Posts: 2675
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by blake121666 » Sun Apr 29, 2018 8:12 pm

Nessie wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 8:06 pm
blake121666 wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 6:07 pm
Nessie wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 9:27 am
When Hitler ignored the ultimatum and invaded Poland, it did change everything.
Since you became pedantic about this earlier, the sequence was:

1. German invasion of Poland
2. Ultimatum from Britain to Germany
3. Ultimatum ignored = state of war between Britain and Germany

So the invasion was obviously before the ultimatum. Any further German war actions in Poland would not technically be an "invasion" in the context you are using the term. You meant to say that "When Hitler did not comply with Britain's ultimatum, ...".
I think you need to properly recognise the Anglo-Polish agreements prior to the invasion, in particular

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk19.asp

"Agreement of Mutual Assistance between the United Kingdom and Poland.-London, August 25, 1939."

Hitler knew prior to invading Poland it would guarantee war.
Notice the date: a week before Germany invaded Poland. But you still technically mis-wrote what I corrected you on. The ultimatum was AFTER the invasion of course. You were pedantic with me by pointing out that an ultimatum was given and not a simple straight-away declaration of war. I was simply responding in kind. ;)

You've put me in a pedantic mood. I corrected your incorrect usage of "disinfect" in another thread.

User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 2066
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 2:43 am
Location: USA, West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Scott » Sun Apr 29, 2018 11:13 pm

Nessie wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 7:57 pm
Scott wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 3:07 pm
Nessie wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 9:11 am

When Germany invaded numerous countries during WWII, the civilians in those countries who took up arms and fought back, they were freedom fighters.

Whatever they are called, under the Hague and Geneva international agreements (treaties) they are Illegal Combatants....

Link and quote please.


/wiki/Unlawful_combatant#International_criticism_of_unlawful_combatant_status

/wiki/Irregular_military

I am not sure what part you are having trouble with. Maybe you could be more specific. It is a convoluted subject.

Anyway, maybe instead of Freedom Fighters (a subjective term if there ever was one) you meant that those who assassinated German troops on the Paris Green after the Armistice were "Freedom Fries."

;)


Image

“Now we have forced Hitler to war so he no longer can peacefully annihilate one piece of the Treaty of Versailles after the other.”
~ Major General J.F.C. Fuller,
historian – England

papasha
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 11:07 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by papasha » Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:01 am

been-there wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 4:00 pm

:roll:

No, I didn't "try to bait you by insinuating that Wolff's statement isn't reliable."
Again that demonstrates your own weak comprehension abilities. I actually think Wolff's statement is reliable and I have shown is confirmed independently by court testimony of Bach-Zelewski.

And I didn't confirm “Himmler's troops were exterminating Jews in the East”. I confirmed that Bach-Zelewski said they were, and wrote that him saying that does NOT undermine the credibility of his diary entry and memories of the execution of 20 to 30 people for Partisan activity and murder, which Himmler witnessed — as attested to by himself and Karl Wolff who were also present.
And just for the record, I have never denied nor doubted Jews were being massacred in the East. But I no longer expect you to have the intellectual capacity to recognise the difference.
good, at least now we're on the same page. why you totally accept mass shootings of Jews in the East but think the idea of gassings is completely baseless and ludicrous is beyond me.. what else were they going to do with the millions of Jews they had starving to death in the Ghettos inconveniently located in the middle of major Polish and other European cities? whatever, let's leave that for now
been-there wrote: Wolff's and Bach-Zelewski's accounts are in complete accordance.
They contradict the version that you began with.
The only consistent fact between the account you kept repeating without knowing its source and Wolff's is that Himmler felt nauseous watching an execution. But this has been explained to you numerous times and yet you STILL haven't understood it yet! :?
How to explain that lack of comprehension of a simple comparison??

Obviously "taken out of context" is not the same as distorted and "misrepresented" by deliberately deceitful film editing.
You clearly haven't understood how the two different stories were deceitfully made to appear as two different versions of the same event. In reality they are fundamentally different. One is a story of extermination of over one hundred Jews because they were Jews picked at random and killed to suit the spontaneous whim of Himmler as part of an alleged policy to exterminate ALL Jews. The other describes a chance arrival at an execution of abour 25 previously arrested, tried and condemned partisans of whom only 2 or three were Jewish.

Again and again you are showing you are in discussion of this whole H topic way over your comprehension ability, but can not admit it.

Papasha, your dishonesty and unfortunate stupidity has tried my patience further than I am prepared to go. Attempting to reason with you using facts, evidence and logic, you have repeatedly shown is a completely fruitless activity.
right then, so when I said earlier that there is more to this story:

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... onism.html

From the "Munich District Court (Landgericht München) at the trial against Dr. Otto Bradfisch and other former members of Einsatzkommando 8 (hereinafter EK 8)."
While stationed in Minsk (July/August 1941), EK 8 or parts thereof carried out at least 7 shootings of Jews, in which for the first time there were also women and children among the victims. In one of these executions, in which at least 300 Jews were killed, the then Reichsführer-SS Himmler was present. […]A further 6 executions carried out in Minsk by EK 8 victimized at least 800 Jewish people. These were one large execution, in which at least 400 Jews were killed, and 5 smaller shooting actions, in which respectively at least 80 persons of Jewish descent met their death. According to Operational Situation Report nº 36 dated 28 July 1941 (page 2) at least 200 persons sorted out of a camp for civilian prisoners were liquidated every day. In Operational Situation Report nº 50 it is stated on page 8 that in Minsk the combing-through of the civilian prisoner camp and the liquidations are continuing. Specific figures are contained in Operational Situation Reports nº 67 (page 25) and nº 73 (pages 27/28), in which the liquidation of another 615 racially inferior elements and a special action against the Jews of Minsk, in which 214 persons were shot, are mentioned.[…]
The findings of fact made are grounded on the testimonies of witnesses Ba., B., Ro., N., Th., W., Sc., P., Gu., K., Kl., G., J., Sch., Ru., Fu., Ra., Ne., T., M., H. (whose statements during his interrogations by the police and the public prosecutor were read out, due to his having died in the course of the investigation procedure), Fr., L. and D., and on the depositions of the defendants Dr. Bradfisch and Winkler. Furthermore the accounts in Operational Situation Reports nos. 36, 50, 67 und 73 were taken into consideration in finding the facts.[…] In regard to the execution numbers contained in the trial opening decision there were deviations insofar as the minimum numbers established at the trial for the respective actions were in part considerably lower, a consequence of the difficulties of proof already mentioned.
And this from Google Books ("Masters of Death" by Richard Rhodes, 2002)
Otto Bradfisch’s Einsatzkommando 8 and members of Police Battalion 9 organized the executions the next morning in a forest north of the city. Two pits had been dug in open ground. Bach-Zelewski claimed in his postwar testimony that “the criminals were without exception partisans and their helpers, among which a third to a half were Jews,” but Bradfisch testified to the contrary that “the shooting of the Jews was not a matter of destroying elements that represented a threat either to the fighting troops or to the pacification of the field of operations behind the lines; it was simply a matter of destroying Jews for the sake of destroying Jews.” Of the victims, whose number Bradfisch estimated as between 120 and 190, two were women—still a new category of victims in mid-August.

Bradfisch claimed to have questioned Himmler before
proceeding with the executions, asking him “who was taking responsibility for the mass extermination of the Jews…. Himmler answered me in a fairly sharp tone that these orders had come from Hitler as the supreme Führer of the German government, and that they had the force of law.”

The victims were held inside the forest and brought up to the pits by truck, one group at a time, to face a twelve-man firing squad. Wolff remembered them as “ragged forms, mostly young men.” Bach-Zelewski described an unforgettable confrontation between Himmler and one of the victims:
Among the Jews was a young man of perhaps twenty who was blond and blue-eyed. He was already standing in front of the rifle barrels when Himmler intervened. The barrels were lowered; Himmler approached the young man and asked several questions.

“Are you a Jew?”
“Yes.”
“Are both your parents Jews?”
“Yes.”
“Do you have any ancestors who were not Jews?”
“No.”
The Reichsführer stamped his foot and said: “Then even I can’t help you.”


Bach-Zelewski’s version of the massacre conflicts with
Bradfisch’s. Rather than a stand-up execution, Bradfisch described a Sardinenpackung: forcing the victims to lie face down in the piand shooting down on them from above. Both Wolff and Bach-Zelewski remembered that Himmler was shaken by the murders. “Himmler was extremely nervous,” Bach-Zelewski testified. “He couldn’t stand still. His face was white as cheese, his eyes went wild and with each burst of gunfire he always looked
at the ground.” When the two women were laid down to be murdered, Bach-Zelewski said, “the members of the firing squad lost their nerve” and shot badly; the two women were injured but “did not die immediately.” Himmler panicked then.

“Reichsführer Himmler jumped up and screamed at the squad commander: ‘Don’t torture these women! Fire! Hurry up and kill them!’”
Immediately after the massacre, Bach-Zelewski claimed, he challenged Himmler to reconsider ordering mass killings:

I said to him, “Reichsführer, that was only a hundred!”
“What do you mean by that?”
I answered: “Look at the men, how deeply shaken they are! Such men are finished for the rest of their lives! What kind of followers are we creating? Either neurotics or brutes!”


Himmler was visibly moved, Bach-Zelewski remembered, and impulsively called the men to assemble around him. The Higher SS and Police Leader paraphrases Himmler’s speech:
I left out the speech cause that's enough spam and Bach-Zelewski's account of it is similar enough to Wolff's, with the addition of Himmler making the standard comparisons to vermin etc. Anyway, don't sorry, this is all I could find, but as you can see other than there being more discrepancy in the kill count in all these sources (which apparently include written reports), it appears Bradfisch corroborates Wolff's account of the "sardine packing" style of execution, with the additional details that specify that yes they were Jews, and it was about killing Jews because they were Jews, not partisans. Can you still honestly say all these people aren't talking about the same event?

User avatar
NSDAP
Posts: 2526
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:33 am
Location: München, Deutschland

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by NSDAP » Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:17 am

papasha wrote:
Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:01 am
It was about killing Jews because they were Jews, not partisans. Can you still honestly say all these people aren't talking about the same event?
Yes, because of the declaration of War by International Juden on the Reich. All Juden were declared enemies of the State which resulted in the deportations. All Juden in the East were thought of as Partisans by the Einsatzgruppen and dealt with. This was indeed a war crime by those SS Commanders in Charge.
Wenn wir die Flagge, die wir aus dem Nichts gerissen haben, nicht halten können, müssen Sie, meine Söhne und Töchter, greifendie Fahne in deiner Faust...Führer der NSDAP Adolf Hitler
𝕹𝕾𝕯𝕬𝕻

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 24894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:37 am

Scott wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 11:13 pm
Nessie wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 7:57 pm
Scott wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 3:07 pm
Nessie wrote:
Sun Apr 29, 2018 9:11 am

When Germany invaded numerous countries during WWII, the civilians in those countries who took up arms and fought back, they were freedom fighters.

Whatever they are called, under the Hague and Geneva international agreements (treaties) they are Illegal Combatants....

Link and quote please.


/wiki/Unlawful_combatant#International_criticism_of_unlawful_combatant_status

/wiki/Irregular_military

I am not sure what part you are having trouble with. Maybe you could be more specific. ....
It is very simple. Link to and quote the Hague and Geneva international agreements (treaties) which state when civilians fight back against an occupying army, they are illegal combatants.
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
Nessie
Posts: 24894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:39 am

NSDAP wrote:
Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:17 am
papasha wrote:
Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:01 am
It was about killing Jews because they were Jews, not partisans. Can you still honestly say all these people aren't talking about the same event?
Yes, because of the declaration of War by International Juden on the Reich. All Juden were declared enemies of the State which resulted in the deportations. All Juden in the East were thought of as Partisans by the Einsatzgruppen and dealt with. This was indeed a war crime by those SS Commanders in Charge.
There is no legal basis on which an American civilian can declare war on behalf of anyone against another country. It is ridiculous in the extreme to justify Nazi oppression of German and then other Jews on what an American said.
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
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 7790
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by been-there » Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:45 am

.
Image
Erich von Bach-Zelewski answers a question.
Perhaps it was asking him how much of his post-war testimony was fair and accurate.



Image
Bach-Zelewski in Minsk in 1943.

In exchange for his testimony against his former superiors at the Nuremberg Trials, Bach-Zelewski never faced trial for any war crimes.

In 1951, Bach-Zelewski was sentenced to 10 years in a labour camp for the murder of political opponents in the early 1930s; however, he did not serve prison time until 1958, when he was convicted of killing Anton von Hohberg und Buchwald, an SS officer, during the Night of the Long Knives, and was sentenced to four and a half years imprisonment.

In 1961, Bach-Zelewski was sentenced to an additional 10 years in home custody for the murder of 6 German Communists in the early 1930s.

None of the sentences referred to his role in Poland, in the Soviet Union, or his participation in the Holocaust.

Image

Bach-Zelewski died in a Munich prison on 8 March 1972, a week after his 73rd birthday.

Bach-Zelewski gave evidence for the defence at the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Israel in May 1961. His evidence was to the effect that operations in Russia and parts of Poland were conducted by Operations Units of the Security Police and were not subject to the orders of Eichmann's office, nor was Eichmann able to give orders to the officers in charge of these units, who were responsible for the murder of Jews and Gypsies. The evidence was provided at a hearing in Nuremberg in May 1961.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_von ... h-Zelewski[/quote]
Last edited by been-there on Mon Apr 30, 2018 12:26 pm, edited 5 times in total.
"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] and 12 guests