David Irving

boomchicawawa

Tks for that, just looked it up as haven't read it and it looks well worth the read.:)

jonniebgood1

Wibbs wrote: »

Richard Dimbleby on Belsen?

These accounts are all subject to the shock of what the reporter has seen past and present. Trying to compare grossman and dimbllby is interesting though as many of your criticisms of the treblinka account can by put similarily on Belsen. I don't think there is much point though, both had impact in their target home audiences which is an important point.

HansHolzel

One of the many things that stick in my head from The Drowned and the Saved is the incident where the kapos drown the big Italian in the soup tub before his first 'meal' in Auschwitz.

Nonetheless, given the time of year, there is a Christmas story to be found in that hell. Levi talks about Frau Mayer in a couple of other books he wrote but please see the attachment, which refers to his biographer Carole Angier.

Wibbs

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Trying to compare grossman and dimbllby is interesting though as many of your criticisms of the treblinka account can by put similarily on Belsen.

Dimbleby's account*? How so? He gives a (brilliant IMHO)witness account as a journalist, but also gives plenty of facts and figures that still hold water today with the historical research since then. In other words he's more reliable than an account that gets quite a number of subsequently discovered facts wrong, very wrong in the case of victim numbers and the closing date of the camp. Whatever about the numbers being prey to hyperbole, the date is a real howler. A year out. For someone to get a fact like that wrong would mean they were at some remove from the events in question.





*I would agree JB other Belsen accounts from some sources got things wrong(presence of gas chambers as one glaring example).

jonniebgood1

Wibbs wrote: »

Dimbleby's account*? How so? He gives a (brilliant IMHO)witness account as a journalist, but also gives plenty of facts and figures that still hold water today with the historical research since then.
.

His first fact was a liberated population of 40,000.
Records show this to be inaccurate by approximately 20,000 people or half as many again.

This was in front of him, not an estimate of hidden casualties. It is also understandable but my point is that you should treat all such accounts for what they are, eye witness accounts rather than something to be discounted due to errors in such data given that the data is supplementary to the service such a reporter was providing at the time.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Has anyone ever watched David Cole's documentary? He's an American Jew who questioned the activities in the German camps, he disputes that there was an extermination policy. He pointed to things like no Nazi records been kept, Soviet propaganda, and the the fact that the 4 million figure of Auschwitz was revised to just over 1 mil in 1988. He claimed disease and lack of supplies in the last months of the war led to most deaths and said that the revised figure was exaggerated. I have to note that I'm not some sort of Neo Nazi or anti semite , I just find history intriguing and I like to hear all angles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQjNs-Ght8s

Jawgap

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Has anyone ever watched David Cole's documentary? He's an American Jew who questioned the activities in the German camps, he disputes that there was an extermination policy. He pointed to things like no Nazi records been kept, Soviet propaganda, and the the fact that the 4 million figure of Auschwitz was revised to just over 1 mil in 1988. He claimed disease and lack of supplies in the last months of the war led to most deaths and said that the revised figure was exaggerated. I have to note that I'm not some sort of Neo Nazi or anti semite , I just find history intriguing and I like to hear all angles.

.....by who?

DEFTLEFTHAND

Jawgap wrote: »

.....by who?

The Auschwitz State Museum headed by Franciszek Piper at the time. It's explained in the doc, The 4 million figure was a rough guesstimate at the time of the Nuremberg Trials.

Jawgap

A quick google would lead me to think that a discussion about Mr Cole and his 'theories' have no real place in a history forum.

Also, some of the correspondence posted online would lead me to think his treatment of Dr Piper was somewhat disingenuous.

DEFTLEFTHAND

I just put it there for what it is, to generate discussion. I didn't mention that David Cole a Jewish man was threatened by the JDL (Jewish Defence League) for expressing his views.

It's good to debate history and not have any restrictions.

jonniebgood1

It is important to acknowledge the background of people if you aregoing to be posting their views.
Restrictions and qualifications are absolutely required in discussions on history. Irving is the perfect example of this.

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I just put it there for what it is, to generate discussion. I didn't mention that David Cole a Jewish man was threatened by the JDL (Jewish Defence League) for expressing his views.

It's good to debate history and not have any restrictions.

GideonMcGrane

Jawgap wrote: »

A quick google would lead me to think that a discussion about Mr Cole and his 'theories' have no real place in a history forum.

Also, some of the correspondence posted online would lead me to think his treatment of Dr Piper was somewhat disingenuous.

Cole appeared on the Larry Elder show as David Stein...

http://youtu.be/_ZB4aYZn7lA

Mister Trebus

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Has anyone ever watched David Cole's documentary? He's an American Jew who questioned the activities in the German camps, he disputes that there was an extermination policy. He pointed to things like no Nazi records been kept, Soviet propaganda, and the the fact that the 4 million figure of Auschwitz was revised to just over 1 mil in 1988. He claimed disease and lack of supplies in the last months of the war led to most deaths and said that the revised figure was exaggerated. I have to note that I'm not some sort of Neo Nazi or anti semite , I just find history intriguing and I like to hear all angles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQjNs-Ght8s

Cole recants


From revisionists.com

Make of it what you will:


This young Jewish Revisionist filmmaker came to the defense of Ernst Zündel when Zündel needed defending. Subsequently, Zündel and Cole made a film in Auschwitz, with David Cole pointing out all the things wrong with that theme park of hate against Germans. Later yet, Cole came to Canada to lecture to large audiences on his Revisionist findings in Auschwitz, together with David Irving. He also appeared with Zündel in Munich, Germany, spreading Revisionism right under the watchful eyes of the German political police. In a vicious letter posted on the Internet, the Jewish Defense League threatened Cole's life. Emotionally fragile and torn between his conscience and family loyalties as well as filial devotion, he could not withstand the pressure and recanted with an abject apology to his tribesmen and tormentors. Every serious Revisionist understands that this act of recantation was coerced and may have bought David his very survival.
Repercussions:

Became a victim of the JDL. Was physically beaten. Had his life threatened on the Internet by the Jewish Defense League.

GideonMcGrane

Mister Trebus wrote: »

Cole recants


From revisionists.com

Make of it what you will:


This young Jewish Revisionist filmmaker came to the defense of Ernst Zündel when Zündel needed defending. Subsequently, Zündel and Cole made a film in Auschwitz, with David Cole pointing out all the things wrong with that theme park of hate against Germans. Later yet, Cole came to Canada to lecture to large audiences on his Revisionist findings in Auschwitz, together with David Irving. He also appeared with Zündel in Munich, Germany, spreading Revisionism right under the watchful eyes of the German political police. In a vicious letter posted on the Internet, the Jewish Defense League threatened Cole's life. Emotionally fragile and torn between his conscience and family loyalties as well as filial devotion, he could not withstand the pressure and recanted with an abject apology to his tribesmen and tormentors. Every serious Revisionist understands that this act of recantation was coerced and may have bought David his very survival.
Repercussions:

Became a victim of the JDL. Was physically beaten. Had his life threatened on the Internet by the Jewish Defense League.

If you are saying it never happened, why does history academia go along with what would basically be a lie; surely the very idea is unsustainable

Reekwind

Mister Trebus wrote: »

Zündel and Cole made a film in Auschwitz, with David Cole pointing out all the things wrong with that theme park of hate against Germans

I think that statement says it all about Holocaust deniers

Mister Trebus

GideonMcGrane wrote: »

If you are saying it never happened, why does history academia go along with what would basically be a lie; surely the very idea is unsustainable

The holocaust story is changing all the time....even with numbers killed fluctuating and dropping.
But the holocaust is more than just the camps... In my opinion it goes back to crystal night , Nuremberg Laws etc.
Prussian blue causes a lot of problems too....it is huge subject and cause for great debate.
It is surely, or was at least, used by groups to push their agenda and as it comes under more and more scrutiny can open more up for debate and disproving as the dropping in numbers of dead shows.

Mister Trebus

Reekwind wrote: »

I think that statement says it all about Holocaust deniers

Deniers, strangely enough, do a service to all of this by keeping it alive, by debating the sources and "facts" offered and lead to truths and lies coming to the surface!
There have been plenty of things incorrect about it all, and rightly should be corrected in honour and memory of those who died, and there have been things that have stood up to scrutiny and made strionger by having to debate and stand over them!

Reekwind

Mister Trebus wrote: »

The holocaust story is changing all the time....even with numbers killed fluctuating and dropping

They are? As far as I'm aware, academic consensus remains around the six million Jewish deaths mark, as it has since the 1960s or so. Most of the Jewish deaths in Western and Central Europe are relatively well documented with the only real uncertainty being around those killed on Soviet soil. I don't see the numbers dropping

Mister Trebus

Reekwind wrote: »

They are? As far as I'm aware, academic consensus remains around the six million Jewish deaths mark, as it has since the 1960s or so. Most of the Jewish deaths in Western and Central Europe are relatively well documented with the only real uncertainty being around those killed on Soviet soil. I don't see the numbers dropping

The numbers at Auschwitz have been revised have they not, this on the back of research and review.
I would hasten to add that this is not an attempt on my part to diminish or deny but simply pointing out that numbers have been revised.....

Reekwind

Not since the 1960s, AFAIK. Since then the Auschwitz range has generally been 1-1.5m deaths at the camp.

There's certainly been no major revision of the Holocaust numbers that I'm aware of. To take an example, there's certainly been nothing akin to the upheaval that Stalinist studies has seen over the past two decades

Mister Trebus

Reekwind wrote: »

Not since the 1960s, AFAIK. Since then the Auschwitz range has generally been 1-1.5m deaths at the camp.

There's certainly been no major revision of the Holocaust numbers that I'm aware of. To take an example, there's certainly been nothing akin to the upheaval that Stalinist studies has seen over the past two decades

1990 I believe

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/11/12/weekinreview/ideas-trends-auschwitz-revisionism-an-israeli-scholar-s-case.html?src=pm

http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/47d380f3e1b5e0bc0010417ef6849481.jpg

Reekwind

From the very article that you referenced: 'Among Holocaust historians, Mr. Bauer said, the larger figures ''have been dismissed for years, except that it hasn't reached the public and I think it's about time that it did"'

I can't think of a serious historian who as posited a figure of four million deaths at Auschwitz alone

GideonMcGrane

Mister Trebus wrote: »

The numbers at Auschwitz have been revised have they not, this on the back of research and review.
I would hasten to add that this is not an attempt on my part to diminish or deny but simply pointing out that numbers have been revised.....

How have the numbers at Auschwitz been revised

Mister Trebus

GideonMcGrane wrote: »

How have the numbers at Auschwitz been revised

They were revised as in my previous post.

Mister Trebus

This is actually an interesting read, you might find it interesting considering where it comes from

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/controversies/deathroll/MHerald050492.html

Reekwind

Mister Trebus wrote: »

They were revised as in my previous post.

Again: Correcting one sign does not equate to a wholesale revision of academic consensus. The latter has been settled for decades and there has been no significant shift amongst historians in the "numbers killed fluctuating and dropping".

What is happening is that the popular view of the Auschwitz numbers (note: not the overall death toll, the six million figure for Jewish deaths has not been recently questioned in the academic or popular realm) is catching up with the view of historians. Which, to reiterate, has not significantly moved since the early 1960s.

Mister Trebus

Indeed, but it does raise questions in the minds of deniers as to what else is "wrong" .
And I still maintain that the deniers etc are doing a service by keeping this subject "alive" and making people continue to prove or disprove aspects of it....the drop in numbers killed in Auschwitz is a point showing this.
Is is important that this continues and that deniers offer new debunks, possibly new, and that non- deniers refute them or not .
Prussian blue is a case for this on its own.

Nobody was gassed as Dachau, but I have spoken to many people who are unaware of this. There are plenty of ideas people have about this dreadful time in history and it is important that they are informed if what happened and informed correctly ...or as best can be done now all these years later.

I still maintain the holocaust was more than the camps....pity so many latch onto this part of it without exploring the wider crime!

Reekwind

Mister Trebus wrote: »

And I still maintain that the deniers etc are doing a service by keeping this subject "alive" and making people continue to prove or disprove aspects of it....the drop in numbers killed in Auschwitz is a point showing this.

Good academic research established the numbers killed at Auschwitz decades ago. What role did deniers play in that?

I think there is a fundamentally flawed understanding of how historical research operates at work here. Historians do not jump onto a subject whenever it appears on the news or is challenged. Rather, research is a full-time occupation that continues regardless of what is on television. A subject like the Holocaust has had an army of historians work on it for decades. (As if history departments up and down the land are dependent on denier controversy for funding!) The worthy challenges to the various theories and figures assembled by them do not come from outside academia but from within – every generation of historians is 'revisionist' to a degree.

This is a process that does not need deniers. I'd go so far as to suggest that spending time debunking deniers is a spectacular waste of academic time. Instead of pursuing new research, people are forced to respond in detail to the various crackpot and nonsensical theories of uneducated or dishonest deniers. Where the outside world does impinge on academia it's in the form of political or cultural upheaval that provides fresh ways of looking at the evidence or new sources of information (eg the fall of the USSR).

Wibbs

Reekwind wrote: »

I think there is a fundamentally flawed understanding of how historical research operates at work here.

+1. There's a huge gulf between public perception(and often the media) and Historians and historical research. EG a historian would never claim there were gas chambers at Belson, even though a couple of witnesses claimed this, but many people might believe this and it might be disseminated in some media. Big difference.

Since the unimaginable horror of the sordid end of the Third Reich first came to light many wild theories have come up, from flying saucer superweapons, to Hitler escaping Berlin and living out his days in Argentina and the Shoah had a few wild theories of it's own, but it was the historians who shuffled through the data, evidence and documentation to winnow out such stuff and give us a truer picture of what occurred. Historians are not the issue(if one exists).

Mister Trebus

Wibbs wrote: »

+1. There's a huge gulf between public perception(and often the media) and Historians and historical research. EG a historian would never claim there were gas chambers at Belson, even though a couple of witnesses claimed this, but many people might believe this and it might be disseminated in some media. Big difference.

.

The same point I raise about Dachau.