Gack has at least hinted at some answers: he mentioned the borders of Poland changing and suggested some of them were relocated to the interior of the Soviet Union. Stalin hated Jews and believed at least some of them were plotting against him, so I have no idea why he he is supposed to have done that. In any event there is plenty of detailed demographic research into these events and I’ve never heard any suggestion that large numbers of Jews wound up in the USSR.
Eleven pages and Gack still hasn’t made any attempt to summarize his OP and clearly state where he stands on this subject. He’s said enough where most of us can make some pretty obvious conclusion on his position but I’d sure as hell would like to hear the OP state his opinion, in his own words.
Here’s my summary view:
Motive:
Nazi’s had motive in persecuting Jews prior to WWII. Gack seems to have admited as much.
Intent:
Nazi’s certainly made their intent well known and the “final solution” has been well document by their own hand. Cites provided in this thread already. I don’t recall if Gack has stated his opinions on this evidence but I believe he’s not denied it outright.
Means:
Nazis had the means with which to carry out their intent and did so as demonstrated by historical evidence and witness accounts and documentation by both witnesses and perpetrators. Gack appears to concede that the Nazis did have camps and various other tools at their disposal to carry out their objectives.
Results:
Estimates of casualties of the Nazi extermination efforts vary but are widely accepted to be around the 12 million mark. This includes, Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, mentally disabled, communists, Russian prisoners of war, etc.
This is the point that Gack wants to argue most aggressively and where his opinions diverge significantly from the generally accepted accounts and statistics. I’m not sure where Gack’s “research” puts the casualty rate at because I’ve not yet seen his final account. I assume it will be a number far less than 12 million.
I have three questions:
- What is that number according to you, Gack?
- Given that you’ve accepted Motive, Intent, and Means (I assume you will stick with your previous statements), do you acknowledge that Nazis committed atrocities and attempted genocide in Europe during the course of WWII?
- If not, what would the number of casualties need to be in order for you to acknowledge that genocide and war crimes were committed by the Nazis?
Well, to be fair, it’s actually iiandyiiii’s OP.
:smack:
Therefore, this thread doesn’t exist.
If the thread doesn’t exist, Gack doesn’t exist.
And if that’s true, the world doesn’t exist, and therefore there was no Holocaust.
There. QED. We can all go home now.
Your entire post is genius, but this part in particular really cracked me up.
::: sigh ::: More ignorance that needs to be fought:
inflammable
(With luck, Gack has better skills at reading dictionaries than history books.)
Examples:
Wood is flammable; gasoline is inflammable.
Coal is flammable; thermite is inflammable.
And wood floats. As do ducks, very small rocks, and witches.
So logically, witches are flammable. So we burn them.
Do you know what else floats?
MF-ing clowns, that’s what. You thought it was Hitler, right?
But Hitler did end up getting burned. So it’s all good.
But it required inflammable material poured on his body.
And the only supposed evidence of Hitler’s body is his upper jaw, which is held by the Russians, and we know how reliable they are with historical artifacts, so…Hitler lives!
Or at least his brain.
brain, brain, what is brain?
I am afraid of gas, but did a little experiment today. Put some gas in a small plastic cup and tossed a burning piece of paper into it. It burned pretty impressively but didn’t explode or anything. As the plastic melted it became clear that the gas would spread onto a wooden fixture in the yard that I didn’t want to burn, so I had to quickly fetch the hose, and when I hosed it it was a little like a fireworks display with drops of flaming gas exploding forth, a couple of feet, it was impressive with lots of patches of flame on the yard, but really no biggie. I hosed it down and the wood didn’t catch on fire.
So, I think we’re good to go on the experiment. It did appear that the gas would burn for a while, but the melting plastic cut the experiment short. The gas may do some damage to the chicken, we’ll see.
-
was addressed in an earlier post, at least regarding the Jews that disappeared from Poland, summary: I just linked to a short paper by Butz, the demographic arguments are beyond me
-
this was addressed in a previous post, summary: the World Jewish Congress and the American Jewish Congress were behind many of the fund raising campaigns during WW ONE with holocaust claims, and as documented worked with H. Morgenthau of the War Refuge Board to publish WJC documents as US position papers.
-
The presiding judge at the opening ceremony was Iona T. Nikitchenko who was also the presiding judge at the Moscow show trials.
I can find 15 quotes by famous jurists, politicians, etc., that the Nuremberg trials were a complete travesty of justice …
http://codoh.com/library/document/231
here is one …
“I think the Nuremberg trials are a black page in the history of the world…I discussed the legality of these trials with some of the lawyers and some of the judges who participated therein. They did not attempt to justify their action on any legal ground, but rested their position on the fact that in their opinion, the parties convicted were guilty…This action is contrary to the fundamental laws under which this country has lived for many hundreds of years, and I think cannot be justified by any line of reasoning. I think the Israeli trial of Adolf Eichmann is exactly in the same category as the Nuremberg trials. As a lawyer, it has always been my view that a crime must be defined before you can be guilty of committing it. That has not occurred in either of the trials I refer to herein.”
Edgar N. Eisenhower, American Attorney, brother of President Dwight D.Eisenhower
- addressed in an earlier post: the document explicitly states that it is a plan for relocating Jews to the east, it is 15 pages long and goes into detail on who is a Jew, where the Jews are, etc. There is one sentence that I don’t have an explanation for.
I’m afraid I am going to have to deduct points for failure to work a cardboard paper towel tube into the post.
(Actually, I’m just jealous. You brilliant bastard, you.)
Thanks. Still, it would be interesting to see the German version, if I understood German, that is 