Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

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
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8944
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by been-there »

.
Here's an illustration showing what is required to confirm whether any belief-system is credible or not:

Image
Last edited by been-there on Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:34 am, 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


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


User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 28106
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by Nessie »

Plese encourage denieers to apply that 10 point plan to their belief in millions more surived Nazi imprisonment.
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: 8944
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by been-there »

.
The following are excepts from a book about the use of psychiatry by the victorious Allies. It contains the usual hash of non-credible and now refuted demonisations and bogus accusations against high ranking German officials. But it contains much interesting info also.
Regarding the psychiatric treatment of post-war trials, it shows there were different motives. Some of those involved were genuinely interested in maintaining and monitoring the mental health of the accused for the duration of their usefulness during a show trial. Others seemed intent on using the opportunity to later depict the German high command as psychopathic monsters for the dual purpose of i.) Jewish-motivated revenge and propaganda and ii.) to personally earn some shekels for themselves.

E.g. here is an assessment of the American psychiatrist Douglas Kelley with a comparison to the fluent German-speaking Jew Gustave Gilbert who was assigned to assist him interact with the Nuremberg- show-trial-accused in his capacity as a psychiatrist.

Image
Gilbert giving testimony at the Eichmann show-trial in Tel Aviv in 1961
Image
Gilbert talking to Albert Speer at Nuremberg.

Image
Gilbert analysing Rudolf Hess as his indictment is read to him.

Before his Nuremberg assignment, Gilbert had been working in the army interrogating POWs. His German was superb and proper, and he was determined to ferret out those who were responsible for the Nazi war crimes. He regarded the Nuremberg assignment as an opportunity to “write history’s most perfectly controlled experiment in social pathology.” 17

Kelley and Gilbert had different strengths and approaches. Kelley viewed his Nuremberg position as yet another interesting assignment, complementing his vast clinical and forensic experience. The Nazi prisoners were interesting to him, but they were, after all, just more prisoners. Kelley was, however, intellectually stimulated by the challenge of his job and was troubled by the Nazis. Colonel Kelley viewed Lieutenant Gilbert as his interpreter and assistant, particularly since Gilbert was replacing Dolibois and Kelley outranked him.

Gilbert’s perspective didn’t coincide at all with Kelley’s. To him, the Nazi defendants were the devil incarnate, and he viewed his task not as Kelley’s interpreter but as an interrogator who criticized the prisoners for their moral failings.
In addition to his job as interpreter, Gilbert was given an ambiguous assignment by Warden Andrus: he was to be the warden’s eyes and ears among the prisoners. Gilbert and the warden had a fraught relationship. Although Gilbert was not insubordinate to Andrus, he conveyed disdain, particularly when Andrus offered his own peculiar ideas about the prisoners’ psyches. The interactions got so bad that Andrus wanted to transfer Gilbert from Nuremberg, but Kelley dissuaded him, while also warning Gilbert to mend fences with the warden. 18

The ambiguous responsibilities and reporting relationship between Kelley and Gilbert also aggravated their interactions. Kelley was a Rorschach expert but spoke little German; Gilbert was fluent in German but was not very knowledgeable about the Rorschach. Kelley was dispassionate and sardonic; Gilbert was intense and humourless. Kelley was from an affluent, long-established California family; Gilbert was raised in poverty in an orphanage in New York as the child of recent immigrants.
One night over dinner, Kelley and Gilbert talked about the prisoners in their care and decided to write a book based on their observations. As a first step, Kelley suggested that Gilbert take notes about each interview. Gilbert felt that taking notes in the prisoners’ presence would inhibit the conversation, so he did the best he could to reconstruct the interactions and gave Kelley a copy of his notes. At that point, he had no reason to suspect Kelley’s motivations.
Both were ambitious men who realized the importance of the topic and how later publication could influence their personal careers. Both have also been accused of exaggerating their assessments of the prisoners for later fame and fortune.
48

Here is something on the use of psycho-analysis by the Americans for propaganda purposes both before and during the war...
German psychoanalytic émigrés such as Erich Fromm and Frieda Reichmann, as well as social
philosophers like Theodor Adorno and Herbert Marcuse, wrote extensively about the Nazi psyche even
before the war started. Sociologists such as Talcott Parsons helped with morale efforts, and
anthropologists like Margaret Mead and Gregory Bateson were hired to help explain national character
(enemy cultures) and to assist with white propaganda (to bolster domestic morale) and black propaganda
(to undermine the enemies’ morale). Psychoanalytic thinking regarding toilet training and infant swaddling
heavily shaped their discourse.
32
Harvard historian William Langer headed the research and analysis branch of the OSS. This forerunner
of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was heavily stocked with psychiatrists and psychologists.
33
Langer’s brother Walter was a psychoanalyst who coauthored a classified “Psychological Analysis of
Adolf Hitler” with Harvard psychologist Henry Murray, Ernst Kris of the New School for Social
Research, and Bertram Lewin of the New York Psychoanalytic Institute. 34
The War Department’s special project branch was headed by Murray Bernays, a young lawyer who had married Sigmund Freud’s niece.
This was clearly not a time when the social sciences stood in opposition to the government. On the
contrary, the developing American social sciences and the OSS were so intertwined that it was hardly
surprising when the intelligence services expressed interest in testing the Nuremberg prisoners.
Finally, General Donovan had a long track record of interest in psychological analysis throughout the
war, and he brought those interests with him when he arrived in Nuremberg. His agency had embraced
many sensible psychological goals — analysing propaganda, supporting morale, inferring the enemy’s
motivation and goals, establishing screening procedures for new recruits — as well as some less sensible
ideas like launching incendiary bats at the enemy’s cities or drugging Hitler’s vegetable garden to alter his
behaviour.

Here is more on the comparison between Kelley and Gilbert:
Kelley’s Special Examinations
Douglas Kelley was one of the few individuals to have completely unfettered access to the prisoners. He
and his interpreter, John Dolibois, set about visiting them daily. Dolibois did favors for the Nazis, such as
helping them communicate with their wives. The Nazis thus welcomed Dolibois’s presence during the
psychiatric interviews and testing sessions, and his presence, if anything, facilitated Kelley’s interviews.
Kelley later claimed to have spent eighty hours with each prisoner, but he may have stretched things a bit.
He clearly did spend an enormous amount of time with Göring, but it is hard to believe that he could have
spent eighty hours with each of the twenty-two Nuremberg defendants. After all, the defendants arrived in
Nuremberg on August 12, 1945, and Kelley left in January 1946.
Kelley’s gift of gab helped him with the prisoners. In his writings, he stated that he considered them all
desk murderers, buccaneers, and careerists, but in interacting with them, he kept those thoughts to himself
and was not judgmental or critical. The prisoners were accustomed to frequent interrogation about what
they had done. Kelley’s questions, however, were different; he wanted to understand them as people, and
the prisoners enjoyed his visits.
In addition to Kelley’s formal role in the prison, he had a personal agenda. He would characterize the
war criminals’ minds by testing their IQ and by administering the most powerful psychological test of the
day — the Rorschach.

Gustave Gilbert’s Role
Gustave Gilbert entered Nuremberg as Dolibois’s replacement in late October 1945, and he could not
have been more different. Dolibois wanted out of Nuremberg; he had other aspirations for his final years
of military service. On the other hand, Gustave Gilbert desperately wanted in at Nuremberg to study and
characterize the depravity of the Nazi leadership. In the beginning, Kelley and Gilbert appeared to work
together satisfactorily, but they had an enormously different interpersonal style — Kelley with his
easygoing blarney contrasted with Gilbert with his intensity and efficiency. In their writings, one senses
profound differences in terms of how the Nazis affected them. Kelley found the Nazis to be “interesting
specimens” and relished telling stories about them to the news media. One doesn’t get the sense that he
lost sleep over his interactions with the Nazis. Gilbert didn’t find them interesting in Kelley’s
dispassionate way but loathed them and told them so. There were other differences as well. Kelley had an
enormous amount of clinical experience and expressed sympathy for the many GIs he treated for combat
exhaustion. Gilbert was less sympathetic to the troops, describing them years later as “misfit solders.”
The men’s differences in style and temperament were exemplified in their vacation plans over the
Christmas holidays in 1945. Kelley went off on vacation, pure and simple. Gilbert traveled to Dachau to
interview concentration camp guards who were awaiting execution.
39
With these varied styles, they appealed to different prisoners, some liking Kelley’s easygoing manner,
others appreciating Gilbert’s serious formality.
Kelley noted that the prisoners were eager to talk:
“Seldom have I found psychiatric interviews so easy as were most of these... They talked almost without probing or prompting.”
He commented that Hess kept his distance but that Göring “was positively jovial over my daily comings and wept unashamedly when I left Nuremberg for the States.” 40

Image
Douglas Kelley

Kelley actually became genuinely close to Göring and would take messages and letters to Göring's wife and daughter for him. A book has been written about their relationship called 'The Nazi and the psychiatrist'.
Kelley eventually did write and publish his own book of his time at Auschwitz which he titled 22 Cells in Nuremberg.
Image

It wasn't appreciated by many who expected and wanted a harsh condemnation.
E.g.
one reviewer wrote: “While I compliment the book on its admirable objectivity for students of human nature and the social sciences, I believe this same objectivity could be easily misunderstood by the general public as a too sympathetic account of the Nazi mentality.”

Other reviewers were less sympathetic and were offended by Kelley’s breezy style. A prominent psychoanalyst confided to publisher Greenberg: “I find it such trash that frankly I regret that you are publishing it. It is not even good reporting, much less good psychiatry.”

Style aside, the book deeply angered readers by suggesting that
“the Nazi revolution... was not the fabrication of warped minds out of the wards of a psychopathic hospital, but the creation of ordinary men, not unlike many with whom we brush elbows every day ...in the United States.”
Eventually, Gilbert published The Nuremberg Diary, and given the antagonism between the two men, they (and their followers) emphasized their differences rather than their many similarities.
It is striking that neither of these classic books discussed the Rorschachs, other than in passing. Instead, the books are filled with the authors’ observations and recollected conversations with the war criminals as well as the authors’ assertions about the meaning of these interactions.
Kelley’s book was small and contained no references or footnotes. Kelley was very clear that he was writing a book for the popular reader, not the professional. The cover notes are punchy and provocative:
“What kind of men were the Nazi overlords? How did they get that way? — And could it happen again? A
Rogue’s gallery of the arch criminals of all time by the official United States psychiatrist who examined
them and learned their most intimate secrets.”
Kelley trumpeted his credentials, noting that he served as the Nuremberg psychiatrist for five months
and interviewed the prisoners daily. He mentioned Gilbert, acknowledging him for adapting the
intelligence tests, and noted that Gilbert “was assigned to my office as an interpreter and, at my direction,
made records of many of the conversations which I had with these prisoners and which are reported in
this book.” Kelley noted that although most of the defendants spoke “fairly good English” sometimes he
relied upon an interpreter “to prevent misunderstandings.” This was all fairly polite, but it also was
marking the territory for Kelley and relegating Gilbert to the role of his assistant.

In his book (also lacking in notes or references), Gilbert thanked Kelley, “prison psychiatrist for the first two months, for facilitating my assignment to the Nuremberg jail with free access to all the prisoners.”
The clause “for the first two months” was certainly not necessary, but it was a way for Gilbert to circumscribe Kelley’s role and emphasize his brief tenure at Nuremberg. So, who knew most — Kelley with his experience in Ashcan and Nuremberg from August 1945 to January 1946 or Gilbert with his Nuremberg experience from October 1945 to October 1946?
The battle of the books shifted to Europe. Kelley’s editor at Greenberg wrote him that they had the advantage by being first to publish in the United States but that, regrettably, Gilbert had beat them to the audience in England.
16

...Kelley, the expert in psychopathology and forensic psychiatry, saw things from a social psychological perspective and viewed the defendants as basically ordinary people who were creatures of their environment, influenced by mendacity and bureaucracy. He compounded this assertion by saying that one could find such people anywhere. In 1947, many viewed this claim as a lancinating insult

The book gives details of the increasingly acrimonious and professionally contradictory nature of their psychiatric 'expert' analyses.
Check this out:
Both planned follow-up books that would focus on the Rorschachs tests and they were both determined to get there first. Kelley threatened to sue Gilbert if he used Kelley’s Rorschach materials. Harrower pieced together a reasonable but doomed-to-fail compromise by suggesting that they collaborate on one book in which each would have his own chapters discussing his own Rorschach findings with commentary fromindependent Rorschach experts supplementing the chapters. In the meantime, she worried about Gilbert, writing a colleague in October 1947 to share her concerns that Gilbert was so affected by the conflicts with Kelley that it was adversely affecting him personally and his work.

For a (very) short while, it looked as if the compromise would work, but as it started to unravel, Harrower chronicled the failure in a series of letters now buried in the archives.

The intellectual division of territory was not that controversial. Kelley and Gilbert could agree about who would write each chapter, but Gilbert started sniping that he doubted Kelley’s truthfulness and suspected that Kelley had doctored his records. Then Gilbert insisted on being first author and relegating Kelley to a status of “with the assistance of Goldensohn and Kelley.”
Not “Kelley” even as a third author but “with the assistance of” to denote his clearly peripheral status.

To make matters worse, Gilbert decided he did not want Rorschach experts commenting on his contributions and referred to them in his correspondence with Molly as “the experts” (in quotation marks), implying that he questioned their expertise. He was also reluctant to acknowledge the “experts” as coauthors on the monograph.
. . . . . .

Dimsdale's book has a quite detailed and fascinating account of Rudolf Hess and his crazy behaviour. It convinced me that Hess's abrupt and unexpected court declaration that he had been pretending amnesia was false. Hess only made it to be able to stay in the court proceedings and not be humiliated with a designation of insanity/unfit to face trial. If he HAD been faking it to get off, he would hardly have done that.
Here is an interesting interview by Colonel Amen of Rudolf Hess, questioning his claim of amnesia:
Throughout history defendants have pretended to be insane to avoid punishment. Was Hess just another instance of this? Colonel John Amen, head of the American army interrogations unit, thought so, as did many others. The following extracts give an idea of Amen’s interrogation.
Q. What was your last official position?
A. Unfortunately, this already comes into a period which I cannot remember any more... The doctor has told me that this is a frequent occurrence, especially in time of war, but that there is some chance that my memory will return. There are many cases where I cannot even remember what happened ten or fourteen days ago... Yesterday, I was told by a doctor... that it happens sometimes that people don’t even know their own names any more, and he said that possibly by a shock it would suddenly all return again. This is terrible for me, and everything depends on it for me because I will have to defend myself in the process which is going to come soon. There is nobody to defend myself if I cannot do it myself.
Q. You mean that you cannot even remember what your last official position was in Germany?
A. No; I have no idea. It is just like a fog.
Q. But you don’t know what the proceeding is for?
A. I have no idea. I don’t even know whether I was told what I am accused of. I know that it is a political trial.
The interrogation continued the following day:
Q. How is your memory today?
A. The same, it hasn’t altered any. I don’t feel very well just now. I just had a cramp in my intestines.
Q. When did you get this idea of losing your memory?
A. I don’t know. It is a fact that I don’t have it now.
Q. I say, when did you get the idea that it would the smart thing to lose it?
A. I don’t quite understand that. You mean to say... that I thought it might be a good idea to lose my memory and then deceive you like that?
Q. Yes. That is just what I mean.
A. Well, I can only say that that is not true.
Q. Well, it might be very helpful in connection with the coming proceedings, might it not?
A. ...I don’t see the benefit I could derive from losing my memory there.
Q. Oh, no, but, for instance, when you directed the murder of various people, which you did.
A. I did that?
Q. Yes, so the witnesses say.
A. You mean that because I can’t remember it, the witnesses are less creditable?
Q. Oh, somewhat.
A. Or, do you mean because I am lying?
Q. To make people feel sorry for you also.
8
Colonel Amen served Hess with his formal indictment in October 1945 and then returned two weeks
later, accompanied by Kelley. On this occasion, Hess denied even recognizing Amen despite his many
previous interrogations. This was going to be a hard struggle.
When Hess arrived at Nuremberg, he passed Göring in the corridor and promptly said, “Heil Hitler,”
giving the Nazi salute. Yet he claimed later that he didn’t know Göring.
needed his chocolates from Ashcan as part of his defense to show that the British were poisoning him. It
was Andrus’s opinion that Hess was “a total fake.”
he could remember how to speak English? Andrus was obsessed with crashing through Hess’s memory
loss. He showed Hess movies of early Nuremberg rallies, but Hess claimed he still didn’t remember. “I
must have been there because obviously I was there. But . . . I don’t remember.”
The interrogators tried to jog Hess’s memory by bringing in his wife, his former secretaries, and his old
professor. Hess didn’t remember any of them.

...the judges were leaning toward excusing Hess from needing to be
in the courtroom. A hearing was held on November 30, 1945, to decide the matter (fig. 18). Just before
the session, Gilbert told Hess that he might be considered incompetent and excused from the proceedings.
The court returned to session, and Hess’s lawyer had begun to summarize the arguments for dismissing
Hess on psychiatric grounds when Hess suddenly stood up and shouted that he had made up the amnesia:
In order to anticipate any possibility of my being declared incapable of pleading... I would like to give the following declaration...
Henceforth my memory will again respond to the outside world. The reasons for simulating loss of memory were of a tactical nature. Only my ability to concentrate is, in fact, somewhat reduced. But my capacity to follow the trial, to defend myself, to put questions to witnesses, or to answer questions myself is not affected thereby.
28
Kelley thought that Gilbert’s “suggestion undoubtedly upset [Hess] considerably, since he felt that to be
denied a trial would indicate mental inferiority and he felt that he must stand trial with his companions.
...[His behavior reveals] his hysterical nature and his desire to thrust himself into the limelight, fatal as
it might be.

...Kelley commented that Hess’s memory switched off and on, sometimes volitionally and sometimes
when he was under great emotional pressure. Hess later told him that much of his amnesia had been real
and that his boast in court had been false. He continued that although his mind was improving, it was “still
weak and my brain tires easily.” To support his assertion that Hess was not always malingering, Kelley
noted that the amnesia was not providing any gain: it interfered with his defense and handicapped his
lawyer. It did not “get him off” the case but actually thrust him back into it.

Gilbert commented: “He gave his declaration of malingering in Court, apparently as a face-saving device. In later conversations he admitted to me that he had not been malingering and that he knew he had lost his memory twice in England.”
30

Here is an except from a part of this book detailing the pyschiatric assessment of Göring:
GÖRING
Göring was incensed by the premise of the Nuremberg Trial and regarded the Allies as hypocrites,
pointing out that the British had invented concentration camps in the Boer War, the Russians had
massacred Polish officers in Katyn Forest and millions of their own people, and the Americans had
slaughtered American Indians.
When Göring heard that the Americans had dropped the atom bomb on Hiroshima, he commented, “Aha, now who are the war criminals?”
7
Colonel John Amen interrogated Göring extensively, and the transcript provides an unusual glimpse of Göring’s view of personal responsibility. On September 6, 1945, Amen asked Göring about the bombing of Rotterdam.
QUESTION: Did you personally order the bombing of Rotterdam?
ANSWER: Yes, but I did not personally order the bombing of Rotterdam but of the place where the fighting took place. We had dropped parachutists there and they were surrounded and they were fighting there. That was why the place was bombed. I wish to say the entire bombardment of Rotterdam was done by 36 planes, and if the people of Rotterdam hadn’t been such cowards, they could have extinguished the fires. Nobody from the people or fire brigades from Rotterdam made any attempt to extinguish the flames and that is why the fire spread so much and demolished all those houses, which were old. The fire then spread throughout the houses and . . . blocks and the situation got worse. And even after the fight was over, nobody attempted to extinguish it. The whole bombing only lasted five minutes.”
8
This interchange is arresting for a number of reasons. Göring had a phenomenal memory for details.
Even though the bombing had occurred five years earlier, he remembered every detail of the bombing
sites and pointed them out to Amen on a large, detailed map of Rotterdam. Göring’s repeated efforts to
shift blame are particularly striking. He didn’t order the bombing of Rotterdam but only “the place where
the fighting took place” (that is, Rotterdam). Further, only thirty-six planes had bombed the city, and at
that, the bombing was very brief. Moreover, the buildings were old firetraps, and it was the people of
Rotterdam’s fault that the place burned down because they were cowards and didn’t try hard enough to put
out the fire.
Amen’s efforts to trap Göring were inevitable flops. Göring parried each leading question with a
rebuttal that had its own edge to it.

...In his suicide note, Göring wrote:
“I would have allowed myself to be executed by a firing squad. But the German Reichsmarschall should not die on the gallows.
...Therefore I choose the manner of death of the great Hannibal... I knew that I would be sentenced to death, because I viewed the entire trial as a political stunt of the victors... but I expected that I would be granted the right to die like a soldier. Before God, my people and my conscience, I consider myself not guilty of the crimes of which an enemy court has convicted me.”
59
In a letter to his wife, Göring added: “My one and only sweetheart, after serious consideration and sincere prayer to the Lord, I have decided to take my own life, lest I be executed in so terrible a fashion by my enemies. . . . My life came to an end when I bade you farewell for the last time...”
60

Colonel Andrus had to announce the suicide to the world. When Kelley heard the news, he commented:
“His suicide, shrouded in mystery and emphasizing the impotency of the American guards, was a skillful,
even brilliant, finishing touch, completing the edifice for Germans to admire in time to come.”
62
Gilbert called it differently:
“Göring died as he had lived, a psychopath trying to make a mockery of all human values and to distract attention from his guilt by a dramatic gesture.”
63
How Göring obtained the cyanide is still a mystery.
The book from which all these excerpts are taken has the rather delusional title of 'anatomy of malice'.

Image

. . . . .

P.S. Douglas Kelley committed suicide aged 45. He did it suddenly and totally unexpectedly in front of his father, wife and children on New Year's day, 1958.
"He was cooking dinner, burned himself and exploded," Kelley's son said. "The next thing we knew, he was on the stairs saying he was going to swallow the potassium cyanide and that he'd be dead in 30 seconds." His wife, father and three children all witnessed his death and then the children and wife watched as his father tried to pour water down his throat.

His son said that his father had a dark side that he didn't show in public. He had become an alcoholic who frequently erupted in anger.
Last edited by been-there on Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:42 am, 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

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8944
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by been-there »

Excerpt from Gilbert's book:
Page 169 April 19-22
Ribbontrop’s Cell
Ribbentrop:“….Tell me, I wasn’t in court on Monday. Did Höß actually say that Hitler had ordered the mass murders?”

Gilbert: “He said that Himmler gave him a direct Führerbefehl for the extermination of the Jews in 1941.”

Ribbentrop held his head in his hand and repeated in a descending whisper:
“’41, ’41 ’41. My God! Did Höß say in ’41?”

Gilbert: “Yes, transports started arriving as soon as he got the Führerbehfel. From all over occupied Europe — men, women, and children who had been living a perfectly peaceful family life. They were undressed, led into gas chambers and murdered by the thousands. Then the gold rings and teeth were removed from the corpses, the hair was cut off the women’s heads, and the bodies were burned in the crematorium.”

“Stop! Stop, Herr Doktor. I cannot bear it! All those years — a man to whom children came so trustingly and lovingly. It must have been a fanatic madness. There is no doubt now that Hitler ordered it? I thought even up to now that perhaps Himmler, late in the war, under some pretext. But ’41, he said? My God! My God!”

Gilbert: “What did you expect? You were all making reckless statements about solving the Jewish problem. There is no reasonable limit to human hatred when you have whipped it up to such a fury as you Nazi leaders did.”

“But we never dreamed it would end like this. We only thought they had too much influence – that we could solve the problem with a quota system or that we would transport them to the East or Madagascar. You know, I didn’t know anything about the exterminations – until the Maidanek affair came out in ’44 – My God!.....”

Jodl’s Cell:
He then asked me whether it was in 1941 that Höß had got the Führerbefehl to start the extermination of the Jews in Auschwitz, i.e. before the military situation had become serious. I confirmed that, also reminding him that the extermination had already started in Treblinka in 1940, but that Höß had improved the methods. Jodl hung his head and I ventured to read this thoughts.

Gilbert: “And that man sat in GHQ with you and spoke of protecting the Fatherland and preserving German honour” I suggested.

Page 175
April 23
Down in the dock, Göring, who was feeling very ill at ease because of the developments in the trial and the coolness shown by many of the defendants, started to make conversation, but nobody was paying much attention. Finally, nervous little Sauckel went over to him and asked him if he thought it was really true that 2.5 million Jews had been exterminated at Auschwitz.
“No, no, of course not,” Göring said off-handedly. “I’ve thought it over – it’s technically impossible.”
“You heard Höss’s testimony,” I reminded him, “ and you know that Höß described the whole procedure to me in detail. It was a regular mass production system.”
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 28106
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by Nessie »

been-there wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 5:34 pm
.
Here's an illustration showing what is required to confirm whether any belief-system is credible or not:

Image
Interesting, the answers are, for those who deny there was mass gassing;

1 - not very (see answers below)
2 - yes, some like other CTs, some also claim no mass shootings and some also want to push blame onto the Jews for causing WWII
3 - no, denial claims about gassing have not been independently verified
4 - no, they demand only one side proves it s claim and use an inappropriate method of enquiry
5 - yes, numerous historians have proved deniers are wrong
6 - it points to there was mass gassing
7 - in this case it is the rules of history and no they are not
8 - no, most of the denialists dispute or excuse that they even need to evidence their beliefs!
9 - no, it ignores the main phenomena, which is c5.5 million people being alive when the evidence is they were dead
10 - yes, many denialists also express anti-Semitic beliefs and/or they are Nazi apologists and/or they are attracted to CTs.

Conclusion, denialism is baloney.
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: 8944
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by been-there »

.
‘THE Holocaust’™© competition.
Spot the mistakes/errors/problematical issues.

Prizes for those true-believers who get the highest scores.
been-there wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 10:47 pm
Excerpt from Gilbert's book:
Gilbert: “...transports started arriving as soon as he got the Führerbehfel [1941]. From all over occupied Europe — men, women, and children who had been living a perfectly peaceful family life. They were undressed, led into gas chambers and murdered by the thousands. Then the gold rings and teeth were removed from the corpses, the hair was cut off the women’s heads, and the bodies were burned in the crematorium.”

...[snip]... Gilbert: “What did you expect? You were all making reckless statements about solving the Jewish problem. There is no reasonable limit to human hatred when you have whipped it up to such a fury as you Nazi leaders did.”

Jodl’s Cell:
He then asked me whether it was in 1941 that Höß had got the Führerbefehl to start the extermination of the Jews in Auschwitz, i.e. before the military situation had become serious. I confirmed that, also reminding him that the extermination had already started in Treblinka in 1940, but that Höß had improved the methods. Jodl hung his head and I ventured to read this thoughts.

“And that man sat in GHQ with you and spoke of protecting the Fatherland and preserving German honour” I suggested.

Page 175
April 23
...Sauckel went over to him [Göring] and asked him if he thought it was really true that 2.5 million Jews had been exterminated at Auschwitz.
“No, no, of course not,” Göring said off-handedly. “I’ve thought it over — it’s technically impossible.”
“You heard Höss’s testimony,” I reminded him, “ and you know that Höß described the whole procedure to me in detail. It was a regular mass production system.”
"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: 8944
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by been-there »

Another major problem with closed-off fundamentalist belief systems is they are very susceptible to propaganda. All belief systems are to some extent, but fundamentalist systems even more so because there are no checks and balances. If bad information gets in, it doesn’t get out and because there are no internal mechanisms to guard against it, it usually ends up very damaging to the whole. A closed-off belief system is like spinal fluid—it is great as long as nothing infectious gets into it. If bacteria get into your spinal fluid, it causes unbelievable damage because there are no white blood cells to fend off invaders and protect the system. Without the protective services of white blood cells in the spinal column, infection spreads like wildfire and does significant damage in a short period of time. Once inside the closed-off spinal system, bacteria are free to destroy whatever they want.

The same is true with closed-off belief systems. Without built-in protective functions like critical analysis, self-reflection, openness to counter-evidence, and willingness to re-evaluate any and all beliefs, bad information in a closed-off system ends up doing massive damage in a short period of time. What has happened to too many fundamentalist belief systems is damaging information has been allowed in from people who have been granted “expert status.” If someone is allowed into a closed-off system and their information is deemed acceptable, anything they say will be readily accepted and become gospel

…Everyone who isn’t just like them has been sold to them as a threat and they’ve bought it hook, line and grifting sinker. Since there are no self-regulating mechanisms in their belief systems, these threats only grow over time. Since facts and reality don’t matter, nothing you say to them will alter their beliefs.

…Are their fears rational and justified? Hell no. The problem isn’t understanding their fears. The problem is how to assuage fears based on lies in closed-off fundamentalist belief systems that don’t have the necessary tools for properly evaluating the fears.

I don’t have a good answer to this question. When a child has an irrational fear, you can deal with it because they trust you and are open to possibilities. When someone doesn’t trust you and isn’t open to anything not already accepted as true in their belief system, there really isn’t much, if anything, you can do.

Extract from an essay by Forsetti's Justice

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48782.htm
"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: 8944
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by been-there »

.
Below is the self-contradictory reasoning that Lord Justices Pill, Mantell, and Buxton gave in in July 2001 to justify their reason for refusing the appeal of David Irving.

It's psychotic, I'm tellin' ya!
In July 2001, three British High Court Judges — Lord Justices Pill, Mantell, and Buxton — wrote:We are not persuaded that the expression can be given any precise technical meaning or that 'Holocaust denier' defines a class of persons precisely.
Having regard to the views expressed by [David Irving] about a range of events in the history of the Third Reich, we agree with the Judge that the applicant may be described as a Holocaust denier.
Image

Image
"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: 8944
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by been-there »

Image

Jacob Bronowski claimed in 1973:
"Into this pond were flushed the ashes of some four million people."
...



Image
been-there wrote:
Sat Jan 06, 2018 11:44 am

If we accept the holocaust industry's narrative, then Birkenau is the scene of the largest act of mass-murder in known history. So where are the signs of that, using forensic research? How do we explain the absence of these signs? If over a million people died/were killed there and were then cremated, where is the evidence commensurate with such a total?
As we all here should know by now, teeth are not destroyed by the cremation process, nor are all the bones. So that is over 32 million teeth and tons of ashes including bone fragments that should exist there somewhere. And as anyone who has visited Birkenau will know, the signs maintain that the cremains of all these alleged 'holocausted' people where thrown in small pools and in one large one called 'the pond of ashes'.

Its so obviously not credible that only a people in the grip of a collective delusion can explain why more people are not expressing disbelief, that these pools could contain all these alleged cremains.

Image

Image

Image

Image
'The pond of ashes' and other pools that visitors to Birkenau are told contain the cremains of approximately 1 million people.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
NSDAP
Posts: 2536
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:33 am
Location: München, Deutschland

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by NSDAP »

There is an average of 2.25kg of ash after a modern cremation (1.4kg -4.5kg) so 1 million people equate to 2250 tonne of ash. With that amount thrown into those little ponds the ash would be quite effective as landfill. Those ponds would not exist.
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

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests