View Single Post
Old 13-03-2013, 07:13 PM   #16
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 65
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)

Originally Posted by johnfb View Post
Boots, my man, you are like a big old firewall taking on viruses as they come along.....well done again.

If I didn't find this so very funny I would surely drop down dead. We're in the Twilight Zone people!

You have celebrated a man who makes assertions without providing supplementary evidence, copy and pastes wholesale from wikipedia, where the vast majority of the citations are sourced from the same book (Smith, Peterson: Heinrich Himmler – which he will not have read), and addresses little of what is found in my posts.

However as I am a reasonable man who always enjoys having his perceptions shattered I will do some more reading, try to find the above book online and look into the second speech.

Boots, please address these topics:

1. “The Pozen speech is authentic and has been crossed checked with other recorded speeches given by Himmler.” Would you be kind enough to provide any and all analysis that you have discovered?

2. What is your take on the inconsistencies within the text? i.e. a. The willingness to treat Eastern Europeans as “human animals,” which is seemingly contradicted by the behaviour of National Socialists during the occupation of France. b. Why the Germans would be nervous or tense about Austria or the Sudetenland? What is the four year plan? c. Why would the famous extermination lines be found in a section subtitled Judenevacuierung? Why would the Allies withdraw the subtitle within the document presented to the court? d. The discussion of communists within the Reich that may contradict the argument that an extermination policy was in place. d. The text presenting Himmler as suggesting all Jewish peoples within Germany have been dealt with when Jews were to be found in the National Socialist armed forces and lived within the Reich as private citizens.

3. What is your take on the physical errors found within the document? i.e. a. The misnumbering of pages. b. No official signature or stamp to be found.

4. What is your take on the problems of the trial? i.e. a. We being told that the documents were found in Rosenberg's possession even though he was not questioned regarding them. b. Berger's doubt that the voice was Himmler's and his claim that what is found within the document was not what was presented at the speech. c. Judge Powers' claim that “there is no evidence, however, that it was delivered at Poznan or any other particular place” and the lack of analysis of the document. d. Why was only a short portion of the speech presented at the trial?

Also, I cannot see why you bring up Irving all the time unless you're working from a script. Irving is not a holocaust scholar, primarily, and he has little credibility in the revisionist community. I for one disagree with many of his assertions. You’d be better off getting your people to cough up the cash and damage the credibility of Robert Faurisson.

The shellac or wax master plates wasn't surpassed they were still in use, it's true radio station were using magnetic tapes but that doesn't mean the use of shellck wasn't used.
True, though wikipedia has “many speeches ... were recorded.” Of course, wiki isn't the best source (though don't use that after how you post) but we could assume that if not National Socialist speeches then whose? Especially given how renowned they were for embracing new technology. To add, “Magnetophon recorders were widely used in German radio broadcasts during World War II, although they were a closely guarded secret at the time.” The National Socialists controlled the radio industry during this period and this may show that it is highly likely that AEG tapes would have been used over shellac discs. The "guarded secret" line suggests only National Socialists would be privy to the format. Where do you take the argument from here?

How do you not know there weren't a team of people recording the speech?
We do not, but it doesn't seem likely. Take, for instance, the problem of changing the disc 44 times during a live speech. Either Himmler stopped and started during every change or it is reasonable to assume they would have skipped at least part of the talk. The potential for human error is high when dealing with 44 changes.

Also, on the subject of fakery in the recording; no one can make a conclusive claim until the recording has been released and analysed using modern methods. However, keep in mind that the Allies have been exposed for presenting shoddy documents at the trial (soap!) and editing recordings. Most famously, Churchill’s Hun speech. You can hear the differing versions here: http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.b...-congress.html

Last edited by crabhat; 13-03-2013 at 07:25 PM.
crabhat is offline   Reply With Quote