Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

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).
Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by Roberto »

From the HC blog Friedrich Berg's follow-up questions:
Question # 1:

Yesterday you mentioned the demographic studies of Sergio Della Pergola and Jacob Ukeles, which are briefly summarized here. You argued that if 1,092,000 Holocaust survivors were alive in 2003 (Della Pergola, who applied the broadest definition of "Holocaust survivor", even including as survivors Jews who lived in Arab countries - Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Lebanon and Algeria - that passed anti -Jewish law) or 688,000 Holocaust survivors were alive in 2000 (Ukeles, who included only Jews that had lived for any period of time in a country that was ruled by the Nazis or their allies, but not Jews living in the aforementioned Arab countries), there must have been "millions" of survivors in 1945. Not what I would call a pertinent argument after I had at the beginning of the debate spoken of about 3.5 million Jews left in Europe at the end of World War II, but maybe you can convince me otherwise. In the blog Thomas Dalton responds to Roberto Muehlenkamp and Andrew Mathis (2) I mentioned demographic studies made shortly after the war. One of them concluded that between 3,825,000 and 3,889,000 Jews, out of a prewar population of 9,612,000 Jews, were still alive in Europe at the end of World War II. The other counted 9,946,300 Jews in Europe in 1939 and 4,224,7600 after the war. The Jews left after the war, or at least the overwhelming majority of them (take away the native Jews of the UK, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland) would be considered Holocaust survivors according to Ukele's criteria. Can you demonstrate that the number of Holocaust survivors after the war according to either or both of these demographic studies is incompatible with 688,000 remaining survivors in 2000, as counted by Ukeles? If you think you can make this demonstration, please fire away. If not, kindly admit that you are not able to demonstrate any incompatibility.

Question # 2:

According to the documentary evidence mentioned in my blog Challenge to Supporters of the Revisionist Transit Camp Theory, 1,274,166 Jews were supposedly transited to the "Russian East" through "the camps in the General Government" (mainly Bełżec, Sobibór and Treblinka, as we know now from the Höfle telegram). Can you provide the name of one single Jew that you can prove to have been transited through Bełżec, Sobibór and Treblinka to the Nazi-occupied territories of the Soviet Union, i.e. the areas of what was then known as the Reichskommissariat Ostland, the Reichskommissariat Ukraine or the Soviet territories under German military administration, in the years 1942 or 1943? By transited I mean that the person in question must have undergone the procedure that Jews are supposed to have undergone according to "Revisionist" claims: taken to the respective camp, bathed and deloused and perhaps (but not necessarily) given a hot meal or drink there, then shipped to a certain destination in the Nazi-occupied territories of the Soviet Union as defined above, e.g. to Minsk, Riga, Kovno or Kiev.

Yes or no, Mr. Berg?

If the answer should be "no", what do you think this tells us about the "Revisionist" transit camp theory, and why?

Question # 3:

In my previous blog following our radio debate, I pointed out a video clip showing, among other things, the excavations conducted by Father Desbois at Busk in Ukraine. I also pointed to an excerpt from Father Desbois' book describing the excavations and explaining what further evidence led him to conclude that the corpses of men, women and children found in the Busk mass graves were of Jews murdered by Nazi killing squads. Can you provide any evidence that might suggest another context of these killings, namely perpetrators other than your Nazi heroes? Yes or no? If the answer should be "no", do you admit that these skeletons found at Busk are of Jews murdered by Nazi killing squads?

Question # 4:

Yesterday, towards the end of the debate, you claimed that Soviet investigators had described the corpses of gassing victims examined in the Kharkov area after the German occupation as "cherry red", and attributed this to the fact that the Soviets had themselves used homicidal gas vans to kill people. You are requested to provide
a) the source according to which Soviet investigators described the aforementioned corpses as "cherry red", together with a comprehensive quote from that source;
b) the evidence that led you to conclude that the Soviets killed people by gassing in vans prepared for that purpose, and
c) an explanation of why you consider the evidence to these supposed Soviet gas van killings to be conclusive but do not accept as conclusive the evidence to Nazi mass killings involving the use of gassing vans.
When can I count on your answers to these follow-up questions, Fredo?

As you can see here, I answered your follow-up questions (which you later removed from your site, apparently because you were embarrassed about them).

So why are you running away from my follow-up questions?
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


rollo the ganger
Posts: 6232
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by rollo the ganger »

According to Roberto's logic, any photo, film, etc. of human remains be it skeletal or otherwise is by default the remains of Jews murdered by Nazis by poison gas. That makes for a lot of murdered Jews. 6 Million at least.

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by Roberto »

rollo the ganger wrote:According to Roberto's logic, any photo, film, etc. of human remains be it skeletal or otherwise is by default the remains of Jews murdered by Nazis by poison gas. That makes for a lot of murdered Jews. 6 Million at least.
Got any less stupid remarks to make?

If not, let Fredo answer my questions, thanks.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Heimie
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:10 pm
Contact:

Re: Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by Heimie »

Stupid questions to begin with in my opinion.

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by Roberto »

Heimie wrote:Stupid questions to begin with in my opinion.
Opinions, especially unsubstantiated ones, are like assholes. Everybody has one.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Heimie
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:10 pm
Contact:

Re: Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by Heimie »

Roberto wrote:
Heimie wrote:Stupid questions to begin with in my opinion.
Opinions, especially unsubstantiated ones, are like assholes. Everybody has one.

You might even have two of your own.

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by Roberto »

Heimie wrote:
Roberto wrote:
Heimie wrote:Stupid questions to begin with in my opinion.
Opinions, especially unsubstantiated ones, are like assholes. Everybody has one.

You might even have two of your own.
No, I don't look like you.

Got any arguments, or are you just another troll?
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

rollo the ganger
Posts: 6232
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by rollo the ganger »

Are my remarks too advanced for you Roberto? How dumb does it have to be in order for you to understand it?

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by Roberto »

rollo the ganger wrote:Are my remarks too advanced for you Roberto? How dumb does it have to be in order for you to understand it?
Your remarks are well understood and too dumb to qualify as arguments. You'll have to do better.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

rollo the ganger
Posts: 6232
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Questions that Friedrich Paul Berg refuses to answer

Post by rollo the ganger »

Here, let's test your intelligence; how do photos of excavation machinery digging up sand prove mass murder?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 24 guests