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).

Moderators: Budu Svanidze, Joe Future

Heinrich Hovis
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 6:50 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by Heinrich Hovis » Sat May 31, 2014 4:24 pm

been-there wrote:The point seems to me so clear.

Irving was confirmed as actually being what is called a "holocaust denier" by Judge Gray in his summing up of the libel trial.

So what did Irving actually "deny" to deserve the ad hominem epithet?

Its quite a simple question.

Please try and give a simple answer.
As quoted above, he denied all gassing at Auschwitz and he also denied gassing at the three Aktion Reinhard camps in his original written reply to Lipstadt.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1972
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 10:24 pm
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat May 31, 2014 4:27 pm

been-there wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
been-there wrote:He appears to be exceptional in that he acknowledges that wasn't intended to be "immediately" ALL the Jews they could get their hands on, and admits perhaps not ever was intended to be murder of ALL of them that came within their control at some opportune later date either.
Which rubbishes one of your three original premises.
:lol: He, he. Wow. So... Arithmetic is not your strong point either.
I've already explained that you have changed both the formulations and number: your original statement, repeated twice, spelled out three premises: a planned genocide, ALL-Jews, and homicidal-gassings. Guess what? Three.

Now, you are free to revise, rewrite, squirm, wriggle, move goalposts, of course. But just as I wrote - one of your three original premises had to do with a planned-genocide, as you put it. Hell, I even italicized three to underscore my point.
been-there wrote:It has always been two premises. :roll:
Nope.
been-there wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Infact there's a whole subset of Holocaust historians who don't see the Holocaust as being planned from the outset - see fuctionalism.
Idiotic strawman misinterpretation. You are repeatedly proving my point. :?
You're descending further into raving: this wasn't my comment - it was Cerdic's, whom you've been trying to "enlist" as supporting the umpteenth restatement of your challenge.
been-there wrote:No part of my premise challenge stated it had to be planned from the outset.
Well, then, don't write "planned-genocide." Simple.
been-there wrote:Which other accepted historians/authors do not base their work on the premises that there were mass gassings (premise1) as a part of a 'final solution' that is taken as meaning an intended/planned genocide of all Jews (premise2).
(Holy moly! :roll: )
Again, once you moved the goalposts, you scotched any meaningful dialogue. What you wrote was a "planned genocide" and "via homicidal-gassings": that's what I - and HH - replied to.

Sorry, you have become a ranting street-corner crank at this point.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sat May 31, 2014 4:38 pm, edited 3 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: Thu Oct 03, 2013 10:24 pm
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat May 31, 2014 4:34 pm

been-there wrote:The point seems to me so clear.

Irving was confirmed as actually being what is called a "holocaust denier" by Judge Gray in his summing up of the libel trial.

So what did Irving actually "deny" to deserve the ad hominem epithet?

Its quite a simple question.

Please try and give a simple answer.
Can you not read? HH posted a link to where Irving denied any "authentic wartime archival evidence" for mass extermination in gas chambers at Auschwitz and the AR camps. With regard to the AR camps, Irving's statement read, "It is denied that Aktion Reinhardt was itself an extermination operation . . ." Irving's summary statement included one minor "out," that the Nazis "may have used them [gas chambers] on occasion on an experimental scale, which fact he does not deny."

By the way, this material is found on Irving's website.
"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

Heinrich Hovis
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 6:50 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by Heinrich Hovis » Sat May 31, 2014 5:26 pm

And that "an experimental scale" get-out (which doesn't concede anything about specific gassings) is just an equivalent of how deniers says they don't deny shootings whilst refusing to concede any specific shootings. It's vague waffle, a dishonest evasion of what they're really denying. At no point does Irving in that statement concede a single gassing at Auschwitz or any other specific site, but he does make several outright denials concerning "authentic wartime archival evidence" for mass extermination in gas chambers at Auschwitz and the AR camps, as you say. And that's why the waffle doesn't convince the judge or any other sane observer that Irving is not denying the Holocaust at that point.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1972
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 10:24 pm
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat May 31, 2014 5:32 pm

I am afraid that's about the size of it.

It is like when been there says "planned-genocide" he couldn't have meant planned and in fact meant in any old way, when he writes "via homicidal-gassings" anyone should be able to figure out that meant to include such not gassings as, well, other unspecified stuff, and when he puts it "ALL-Jews" what he was driving at was more or less, maybe, could have been.

Writing dumb as a strategy: denial in action.
"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
theblackrabbitofinlé
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:33 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by theblackrabbitofinlé » Sat May 31, 2014 7:04 pm

Heinrich Hovis wrote:This was Irving's initial position:
(ii) It is denied that these alleged quotations from the public lecture delivered by the Plaintiff in Munich on April 21, 1990 are either authentic, complete, properly transcribed, or presented in their complete context. The Plaintiff admits that he delivered a one-hour lecture, to the whole of which speech he will refer at the hearing of this action. It is admitted that in separate parts of that lecture he uttered the following sentences or phrases:--

(a) Meanwhile, we now know, and I need mention this here only by way of footnote, that there were never any gas chambers at Auschwitz.

(b) Meanwhile, we believe that, just as the gas chamber which the Americans built here at Dachau in the first days after the war was a fake, the gas chamber structures which you can now see as a tourist at Auschwitz were erected by the authorities in Poland after World War Two.

(c) For the German taxpayers have had to pay around sixteen billion deutschmarks as a punishment for Auschwitz.

(d) For a fake.

All of the above remarks are true.
Where are you off to with the goal posts HH?

Irving was confirming in that 1996 letter that he had stated the above on April 21, 1990, i.e. almost a decade prior to the trial. He's notorious for about-facing on his opinions, but that's not the issue here, the issue is your assertion:
Heinrich Hovis wrote:Irving (Lipstadt trial) denied that any Jew ever died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz.
Heinrich Hovis wrote:If Irving modified his position it was clearly a tactical move. Irving's true position is that which he spelled out in his response to Lipstadt that I posted above. The judge saw through Irving's mendacious switches that occurred during the trial because he had obviously read the initial response, which is pure gas chamber denial with no attempt to retract or modify the position he adopted at the time of the Leuchter Report.
Well, it's not quite "pure gas chamber denial" in the 1996 letter you've cited:
it is denied that the Plaintiff has denied that gas chambers were used by the Nazis as the principal means of carrying out that extermination; they may have used them on occasion on an experimental scale, which fact he does not deny.
You've clearly been unable to substantiate your recently-adopted-from-Gray claim that Irving switched position on the GC during the trial, because you've provide nothing from the transcript which proves "Irving (Lipstadt trial) denied that any Jew ever died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz," even initially.
Heinrich Hovis wrote:My initial post was clearly referring to Irving's real position not some fake one he adopted on Day 11 to try to fool a judge whom he clearly underestimated.
So you were proving what Irving was thinking, opposed to what he was saying. How novel! Do you also bend spoons.

As for this assertion:
Heinrich Hovis wrote:He denied not only all gassing at Auschwitz (see page 3) but also gassing at the Aktion Reinhard camps (page 2):
The Defendants have not explained what became of the one million cadavers which they claim were produced by killing operations at Auschwitz.

(vi) Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka. The Plaintiff is not aware of any authentic wartime archival evidence for the allegations raised in this paragraph by the Defendants. Aktion (Operation) Reinhardt was named after Staatssekretär Fritz Reinhardt, the civil servant in the Reich finance ministry in charge of exploiting the assets of deceased and murdered Jews and other concentration camp victims. It is denied that Aktion Reinhardt was itself an extermination operation -- or that it was named after the assassinated Reinhard Heydrich.

It is denied that diesel engines can be used for killing operations. These engines exhaust non-lethal carbon dioxide (CO2), and only minute quantities of toxic carbon monoxide (CO). These howlers typify the flawed historical research into 'the Holocaust' even now, fifty years after the tragedy. The alleged murder statistics raise the same questions about body-disposal as voiced in 2 (v) above.

He denied:

1. Aktion Reinhardt was an extermination operation
2. It was named after Heydrich
3. Diesel kills

And raise a question about body disposal.

He did not, though, deny the gas chambers. He makes no mention of gas chambers. But he does state AR was about "exploiting the assets of deceased and murdered Jews and other concentration camp victims."

But this is all by the by, I've no interest in arguing about Irving's change-with-the-wind-opinions, and won't bother commenting on any others you dredge up to further muddy the waters over your incorrect assertion that "Irving (Lipstadt trial) denied that any Jew ever died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz."
We just wish to point out to the court that is not a signed sworn statement of Dr. Bender but merely a translation of an alleged or purported statement of Dr. Bender, the original of which, like many other things, is not to be found today.
- Defence counsellor, Dachau trial, 7 August 1947

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 7384
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 3:59 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by been-there » Sat May 31, 2014 7:29 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
been-there wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Infact there's a whole subset of Holocaust historians who don't see the Holocaust as being planned from the outset - see fuctionalism.
Idiotic strawman misinterpretation. You are repeatedly proving my point. :? No part of my premise challenge stated it had to be "planned from the outset."
Well, then, don't write "planned-genocide." Simple.
What a complete retard. Either that or a horrendously dishonest self-deceiver. I assume the latter, but it could be a mix of both.
When was the "outset" you moron? 1920 perhaps? Or 1933? 1939 at the outbreak of war? When was the "outset" of alleged 'THE Holocaust' with a capital H? Was it 1941 and op Barbarossa? Or Jan 1942 and the Wannsee conference.
There is no unanimous view, is there? :roll:
Holy moly. What an arrogant but idiotic pillock.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1972
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 10:24 pm
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat May 31, 2014 7:33 pm

been-there wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
been-there wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Infact there's a whole subset of Holocaust historians who don't see the Holocaust as being planned from the outset - see fuctionalism.
Idiotic strawman misinterpretation. You are repeatedly proving my point. :? No part of my premise challenge stated it had to be "planned from the outset."
Well, then, don't write "planned-genocide." Simple.
What a complete retard. Either that or a horrendously dishonest self-deceiver. I assume the latter, but it could be a mix of both.
When was the "outset" you moron? 1920 perhaps? Or 1933? 1939 at the outbreak of war? When was the "outset" of alleged 'THE Holocaust' with a capital H? Was it 1941 and op Barbarossa? Or Jan 1942 and the Wannsee conference.
There is no unanimous view, is there? :roll:
Holy moly. What an arrogant but idiotic pillock.
Losing it, I see. LOL. Your technique of writing stupid to keep all your options open doesn't cut it here. Tough shit for you, Nazi boy.
"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
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 7384
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 3:59 am
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by been-there » Sat May 31, 2014 7:52 pm

Heinrich Hovis wrote:
been-there wrote:The point seems to me so clear.
Irving was confirmed as actually being what is called a "holocaust denier" by Judge Gray in his summing up of the libel trial.
So what did Irving actually "deny" to deserve the ad hominem epithet?
Its quite a simple question.
Please try and give a simple answer.
As quoted above, he denied all gassing at Auschwitz and he also denied gassing at the three Aktion Reinhard camps in his original written reply to Lipstadt.
Well then, if you believe that, then that proves my point. You believe he accepted all other aspects of what has come to be called 'THE Holocaust'. ALL other aspects. He even acknowledged that some minimal killings by gassing occurred. He just denied the extent of gassings and pointed out there is no proof it was ordered by Hitler. But he was still defamed with the idiotic ad hominem epithet of 'Holocaust denier' by a British High Court judge. And the world's press dutifully followed suit. And so-called 'expert' historians have done likewise since, to make money with their books of the case.

You have proved my point.

This is one premise of the premises I challenged you all on, that is not allowed to be questioned or revised.

I.e. if anyone accepts every other aspect of persecution and murder of Jews, but dares quibble over the mass-gassings allegation then they are denying 'the Holocaust'. They are a 'holocaust denier'!
How can that be?
Does this mean that without the mass-gassings there is no holocaust?
If not, how else can Irving be regarded as a denier of that 'holocaust' if mass-gassings is not an essential and indispensable article of faith?
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Posts: 1972
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 10:24 pm
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Forensic Psychiatry and the "Holocaust Syndrome"

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat May 31, 2014 9:11 pm

been-there wrote:You have proved my point.
Whatever it was - and whatever been-there now wants it to be.

In point of fact, HH simply gave a factual answer to what Irving denied in his statement. On the other hand, if you deny the mass shootings, or rationalize them away, you're also a denier.
been-there wrote:Does this mean that without the mass-gassings there is no holocaust?
If not, how else can Irving be regarded as a denier of that 'holocaust' if mass-gassings is not an essential and indispensable article of faith?
It simply means that what Irving denied was the mass gassings at the death camps. It doesn't say anything about other people. Like you, with your denial-supreme thread on Barbarossa, for example. Like people who ridicule Father Desbois's findings. Like a number of people, including Hannover, discussing Irving's views in this CODOH thread:
what the Einsatzgruppen supposedly did is shown in ridiculous 'photos'; whereas some of us at this Forum can utterly debunk the absurd allegations about the Einsatzgruppen. No one can allegedly murder 1,000,000-2,000,000 Jews, bury them, and not have mass graves under every acre in eastern Europe. Revisionist have consistently shown that alleged mass graves stories are frauds; it's not even that difficult.
Or this guy's declaration:
I myself reject the Einsatzgruppen allegation because it’s nonsensical.
These are also denier positions, although they are not convenient to what you are trying to put over on us at this point.
"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

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Friedrich Paul Berg, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 9 guests