2
   

A Factual Appraisal of the "Holocaust" by the Red Cross

 
 
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 04:13 pm
The Jews And The Concentration Camps:
A Factual Appraisal By The Red Cross.


In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews. In all its 1,600 pages the Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence on the subject of planned extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like the Vatican representatives with whom they worked, the Red Cross found itself unable to indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order of the day. So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the Jewish doctors from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so that they were unavailable when the typhus epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps (Vol. I, p. 204 ff)

thunderbay.indymedia

Is this the reason for the sudden flurry of "Holocaust Denial" arrests?

Without even questioning what happened during the Holocaust, we should be asking ourselves: if it’s necessary to exact such draconian measures against those who ask questions, what exactly is being protected here? Are historical truth and the memory of dead holocaust victims being defended?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 3,461 • Replies: 33
No top replies

 
bermbits
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 04:31 pm
Interested to see where this one goes.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 04:44 pm
Oh boy! A new kind of history.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 04:45 pm
I'll quickly take exception to anything that puts the Holocaust in quotation marks.

That said, misleading title aside, you seem to be asking something more interesting about arrests of people questioning it -- Walter has addressed the laws in Germany on that subject, worth reading (or maybe he'll stop by here with a reprise...)
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 05:36 pm
I'd be interested to see the primary sources.

And I have tinfoil hats that can protect you from those darn Jews perpetuating the Holocaust myth....
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 06:23 pm
I think he may be referring to the trampling of free speech in Europe, as referenced in recent headlines:

Quote:
A senior member of the Hungarian Communist Workers' Party has received a one-year suspended sentence for wearing a red star, the communist symbol which is banned under Hungarian law. ...Sporting communist or Nazi symbols is forbidden in Hungary. The red star was banned after Hungary threw off communism in 1989.

Link


British historian David Irving, who once famously said that Adolf Hitler knew nothing about the systematic slaughter of 6 million Jews, has been arrested in Austria on a warrant accusing him of denying the Holocaust. ...If formally charged, tried and convicted, he could face up to 20 years in prison, said Otto Schneider of the public prosecutor's office.

Link
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 07:57 pm
The Germans hide the crematoriums from the Red Cross then deniers use the fact that the Red Cross never saw them as evidence that they didn't exist.

Try this one.. It qoutes Germans officials at Nuremburd trials where they state they hid them from Red Cross.
Quote:
For example, former SS-Untersturmfuehrer Dr. Hans Münch confirmed this in his testimony at the International Nuremberg Trial (Trial of the Major War Criminals, 1948, Vol. VIII, p. 313-321). He said:

I repeatedly witnessed guided tours of civilians and also of commissions of the Red Cross and other parties within the camp, and I was able to ascertain that the camp leadership arranged it masterfully to conduct these guided tours in such a way that the people being guided around did not see anything about inhuman treatment. The main camp was shown only and in this main camp there were so-called show blocks, particularly block 13, that were especially prepared for such guided tours and that were equipped like a normal soldier's barracks with beds that had sheets on them, and well-functioning washrooms.

Source
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 08:19 pm
When was this alleged Red Cross study published? As there is abundant photographic evidence, as well as testimony of participants, documenting the workings of the death camps including the crematoriums there seems to be a disconnect here.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 08:22 pm
It wasn't a study by the Red Cross. It is the written record of their visits to German prison and work camps during the war.

One could make the same argument that there was no torture at Abu Ghareb since the Red Cross never saw evidence of it in their visits.

Just because it is hidden from the Red Cross doesn't mean it didn't happen.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Nov, 2005 08:45 pm
The old "absence of evidence is evidence of absence" fallacy.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 07:49 am
Acquiunk wrote:
When was this alleged Red Cross study published? As there is abundant photographic evidence, as well as testimony of participants, documenting the workings of the death camps including the crematoriums there seems to be a disconnect here.


Yes exactly.

Its all documented in this book - Did Six Million Really Die? (Truth at Last–Exposed:)

Quote:
Did Six Million Really Die?

Richard Harwood

Table of contents.

0. Introduction
1. German Policy Toward The Jews Prior To The War
2. German Policy Toward The Jews After The Outbreak Of War
3. Population And Emigration
4. The Six Million: Documentary Evidence
5. The Nuremberg Trials
6. Auschwitz And Polish Jewry
7. Some Concentration Camp Memoirs
8. The Nature And Condition Of War-Time Concentration Camps
9. The Jews And The Concentration Camps: A Factual Appraisal By The Red Cross
10. The Truth At Last: The Work Of Paul Rassinier
11. Conclusion
12. Imaginary Slaughter
13. Comments About Did Six Million Really Die?
14. The Court Cases Sparked By Did Six Million Really Die?
15. What's Wrong With Did Six Million Really Die?

You can read the whole book here


JustWonders, i was talking about Zundel

Actually discussing and refuting these ideas openly will do much good. Yes, there are some people like Zundel who will always be stubborn and believe what they want to believe. However, Zundel's entire reputation, fanbase, and income is based on him being a holocaust 'denier' and neo-nazi. There are many people who do actually find these arguments convincing. Considering that almost everyone is taught to believe that the holocaust happened and in a manner much different than 'deniers' claim, it is a great stretch to say that holocaust 'deniers' are inordinately stubborn about their beliefs. For most, to not believe in the holocaust requires at least some initial open mindedness. Certainly, many people eventually become set in their beliefs, but there is a place for refuting holocaust 'denial' before people accept it in the first place.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 08:22 am
freedom4free wrote:
There are many people who do actually find these arguments convincing.


Are you one of them?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 08:31 am
JustWonders wrote:
I think he may be referring to the trampling of free speech in Europe, as referenced in recent headlines:

Quote:
A senior member of the Hungarian Communist Workers' Party has received a one-year suspended sentence for wearing a red star, the communist symbol which is banned under Hungarian law. ...Sporting communist or Nazi symbols is forbidden in Hungary. The red star was banned after Hungary threw off communism in 1989.

Link

Well, look at it this way, JW.

There are still people alive, in this country (Hungary, I mean), who actually were in Recsk or other such Stalinist-era prison camps.

People were tortured in these camps. And they were tortured in the name and under the sign of the red star.

Now imagine how it feels, if you've been tortured in a camp of the red star and hammer-and-sickle, to walk down the street in every-day life and see those signs coming back, ever again?

To be sure, I am ambivalent about this myself. For one, because, unlike the swastika, the red star has been used in last century's politics in many ways, for bad but also for good (or at least in democratic fashion). It's also a bit arbitrary: why the red star and not the red flag? Where do you stop?

Not to mention that, in this same country, a techno-version of an old communist anthem became a number one hit a few years ago: people apparently do have a complicated, ambiguous relationship with their past. So not quite sure whether slapping a ban on this or that symbol is the way to go there.

But I can also well see the point of those who do fervently propone the ban. I mean, it's perhaps just a matter of plain decency and respect to, at least for as long as the camp survivors still live, ban the symbols in whose sign they were tortured, raped, almost killed.

So I dont think "trampling of free speech" quite covers the story.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 08:34 am
JustWonders wrote:
Are you one of them?

I was wondering about that too...
0 Replies
 
AliceInWonderland
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 08:44 am
It's absolutely amazing that with 12 - 14 million dead (6 million Jewish, 6 - 8 million others) in Nazi death camps, with full supporting evidence, eye witness testimony, mass graves, etc. that this is even a point of contention.

On the real issue of Germany's laws prohibiting questioning the holocaust - it seems like lack of discussion only fuels the fire for the folks that have some bizarre need to believe it's all a myth.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 08:53 am
Can't get used to you not being in Holland, nimh, although I know you did tell me in another thread that you've moved Smile

I see your point(s) and totally understand your ambivalence. There are those in my country that lived through the Holocaust and lived to tell their stories and I can imagine it's just as painful for them when they see certain reminders which unfortunately crop up from time to time.

I think most sensible people will always find totalitarian ideologies like communism and Nazism to be repugnant, but is outlawing free speech the way to defeat these horrible ideas?

Is the European mindset so contrary to the principles of individual liberty that the right to free speech is being trampled? The arrests in Hungary and Austria appear to tell the story.

<I see where Hirsi Ali is taking on Islam's attitude towards gays. Methinks this courageous soul will need to triple her bodyguards>
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 10:10 am
JustWonders wrote:
I think most sensible people will always find totalitarian ideologies like communism and Nazism to be repugnant, but is outlawing free speech the way to defeat these horrible ideas?

Is the European mindset so contrary to the principles of individual liberty that the right to free speech is being trampled?


It was in fact the Allied Control Council that strictly prohibited use of the swastika in 1945. The Federal Republic of Germany later followed suit and outlawed the use of all NSDAP insignia and symbols.

Another issue yet is the denial of the Holocaust. The judicial basis for the prohibition of that allegation is

- the prohibition of propaganda material issued by unconstitutional organizations (§ 86 StGB)
- the prohibition of incitement of the people (§ 130 StGB)
- the prohibition to denigrate the memory of the deceased (§ 189 StGB)
- the prohibition of defamation (§ 185 in Verbindung mit § 194 Abs. 1 Satz 2 StGB)

Furthermore, a decision by the Bundesverfassungsgericht (the Federal Constitutional Court) specifically states that the allegation that there was no persecution of Jews during the Third Reich constitutes

Quote:
an allegation of facts, which have been proven to be untrue by innumerable eye witness testimonies and documents, by the conclusions of courts in numerous criminal proceedings and by the insights gained through the science of history. Taken as an isolated statement, an allegation of said content therefore does not enjoy the protection of free speech.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 10:37 am
Yep. We have the First Amendment and Europe doesn't.

Liberty, European-Style
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 11:28 am
I can see why the Constitution had to be amended, withFreedom of Speech not included. Whereas we have the Basic Law, and Article 5 of it.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Nov, 2005 11:32 am
Too bad the swastika was hijacked from Hinduism which is a religious symbol in India. I guess the "hh" appearance without the heels appealed to Hitler.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » A Factual Appraisal of the "Holocaust" by the Red Cross
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/15/2019 at 10:48:23