That’s a bait and switch. Even if it were true that some killings were investigated, that wouldn’t prove the Nazis were decent people and that there were no other killings.
Like everything else you have said so far, this was debunked within a couple of posts. I’m speaking literally when I say nothing you’ve posted has held up to scrutiny. I look forward to your addressing that point.
He doesn’t say “No” in that quote. He tells Frank to trust Himmler. (I’m not sure how this is supposed to help your case.)
Compare Morgan’s investigations to the US investigations of Abu Graib. Morgan investigated and prosecuted the SS from top to bottom. The US only prosecuted some hillbilly girl from WV (my homestate !) for the crimes at Abu Graib. Morgen’s career is consistent with an administration that operates by law and prosecutes crime, in contrast to the US administration of Abu Graib where crimes are exposed in the media and prosecuted reluctantly.
He also ignored the other Himmler quote- the “women and children” quote mentioned in post 573. He’s sidestepping almost all of the evidence only to offer ridiculous things like “some Nazis were prosecuted by the Nazis for crimes” as evidence, somehow, (it’s not evidence, of course) that the Holocaust didn’t happen.
OK. So a naif goes to the boss criminal and asks “Are we committing crimes?” The boss criminal says, “No, check with my top lackey.” The naif says, “Well, your top lackey denies it.” The boss criminal says , “There you have it.”
And you conclude that this is evidence that the criminals were innocent?
We’ve got a county commissioner in Ohio who is still claiming, from prison, that nothing bad happened on his watch, despite the successful prosecutions of around 100 of his underlings and associates. Jimmy would love for you to have been on his jury.
Except for, of course, the millions of Jews that administration murdered, which top officials like Himmler explicitly discussed murdering, including trying to assuage the potential guilt of his underlings for killing massive amounts of women and children.
You’ve made a case that the SS didn’t tolerate SS officers who kept gold and furs stolen from Jews for themselves, or had sexual relationships with Jews, and prosecuted those engaged in such conduct. How this equates to “Therefore, no Holocaust”, you will have to explain. I don’t think anyone, anywhere, has ever argued that the Nazis operated without laws, structure, or organization. They were the government of a Western industrial power, after all, not steppe bandits.
States in the American South in the early 19th century prosecuted some slave owners for crimes against slaves- therefore, most slaveowners were great people and slavery wasn’t so bad. In fact, maybe slavery didn’t even happen!
I have read about 2 percent of this thread so what I am about to say may have been said somewhere in these 13 pages.
Eichmann himself, during his trial, said that that he did not dispute the facts of what happened during the Holocaust. In his testimony, and during the whole trial, Eichmann insisted that he was only “following orders”.
In other words, one of the main players agrees it happened. How do you respond? He was delusional?
Wait, why are we doing that? And has anyone agreed that that’s a good idea? Since, after all, no Nazi would have any motivation to be less than completely honest and forthcoming in the context of a trial for crimes that could cost his life.
I have better things to do than argue with a Holocaust denier, but for those who are interested in the question of just what the Allies knew about the Holocaust from SIGINT decryption programs like ULTRA and why they didn’t know more, the NSA has an interesting history on the subject here. (.pdf: findings start at about page 121 of the document.)
Wikipedia: “The United States Department of Defense removed seventeen soldiers and officers from duty, and eleven soldiers were charged with dereliction of duty, maltreatment, aggravated assault and battery. Between May 2004 and March 2006, eleven soldiers were convicted in courts-martial, sentenced to military prison, and dishonorably discharged from service.”
(Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse - Wikipedia)
It’s nice to see that Gack is at least consistent in his standards of accuracy, even when talking about non-Nazis.
Do you concede, Gack, that during WWII the Nazis committed war crimes using various means, including but not limited to death camps, resulting in victim counts numbering in the millions?
If not, what is your best estimate for the number of victims?
You answered your own question. Nazis had every reason to lie and deny the Holocaust at their post-war trials. So if you want to find “evidence” that the Holocaust didn’t happen, their testimony is the place to go.
Notice, after all, that Gack wants to stick with the trial testimony. He wants to avoid the issue of the other evidence presented at the trials.
I think there’s only been one real question in this thread. The overwhelming mass of evidence shows the Holocaust happened and there’s no rational dispute against that. So Holocaust deniers can be divided up into two groups: those who dug through the mountains of proof to find the handful of items that look like a defense when taken out of context and those who have only heard about those handful of items. Essentially there are the liars and the lied to.
You can help one of the lied to. You can show them the huge amount of real evidence that their sources never told them about. If these people are honest, this will open their eyes to the truth and they’ll renounce their former position.
But the liars will stick to their story. They knew all along that what they’re saying wasn’t true so showing them evidence isn’t going to change their minds. They saw all the evidence when they were trying to hide it.
So the only real question in this thread is which group Gack belonged to and I think it’s become obvious.
On top of the contempt I have for the liars, I have a great deal of pity. It must be terribly difficult on one’s sense of self to constantly have to lie, especially to one’s self. Deep down, the liars probably realize that the Holocaust really happened, but they must devote an awful lot of brain-space to convince themselves, against all possible logic, that it didn’t.
Again, very reminiscent of creationists I’ve argued with. They know it’s bullshit, but desperately need to believe it anyway. Or else they’re just profoundly ignorant.