The Mushroom. as per Der Sturmer

[cerberus]

Whilst looking for a drop banner I found this book for sale.
Might be of interest to some of the true believers in the revisionist message.
The vendor is a highly respected dealer and it is being sold as a historically important example of the nature of the propaganda of the times.
Might seem insane today , but there are still plenty of fools who swallow it hook, line and sinker.


http://www.craiggottlieb.com/data/inspect.asp?Item=1053&Filter=German+Militaria

[Felix the Cat]

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/thumb.htm

[cerberus]

Pretty vile stuff.

[Commander]

Julius Streicher, Name The Jew : Hall of Fame

October 16, 1946 - Fifty Years Ago,
The Martyrdom of Julius Streicher

Julius Streicher:

# Streicher died on the gallows at Nuremberg solely for publishing a paper critical of the Jews.

# Streicher was not part of the German government during the war.

# Streicher had no role in the German war effort or in the concentration camps.

Julius Streicher -- martyred Crusader For Truth: Julius Streicher is the most famous writer and authority on the Jewish problem in all of history. He has been greatly maligned by the forces of organized Jewry. Of the eleven German martyrs who went to their deaths on the gallows at Nuremberg on October 16, 1946, Streicher alone died solely for his speeches and writings.

link here (http://www.stormfront.org/truth_at_last/archives/julius.htm)

[cerberus]

http://www.stormfront.org/truth_at_last/archives/julius.htm


Yes , I am sure he as a very nice man.:rolleyes:

[tricknologist]

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a174/tricknologist/nopity00.gif

[Thomas777]

http://www.stormfront.org/truth_at_last/archives/julius.htm


Yes , I am sure he as a very nice man.:rolleyes:

Julius Streicher was, by all accounts, a perverted, nasty character. That said, its not OK to execute people for publishing vulgar and offensive magazines.

[Felix the Cat]

Written by Ernst Hiemer, with pictures by "Fips."

Anyone have more info on these people?

[<flame deleted>]

Written by Ernst Hiemer, with pictures by "Fips."

Streicher didn`t write it himself but he published it.

Hiemer was a schoolteacher just like he also wrote Der Pudelmopsdackelpinscher (http://od43.com/Pudelmopsdackelpinscher.html)

[Der Sozialist]

Julius Streicher was, by all accounts, a perverted, nasty character. That said, its not OK to execute people for publishing vulgar and offensive magazines.

It was war time and the allies were craving blood—Julius was particularly worthless (unlike some German leaders who were recycled because of their intelligence of the Soviets) and so he made an easy target.

But, I don’t see why it is not “OK” to do so—conquering nations have executed others for less. When you are conquered, you no longer have “rights”—legal or otherwise (I am aware of the various International Laws but these laws serve no purpose more than petty formalities—no one adheres to them when they are an inconvenience) .

[Thomas777]

It was war time and the allies were craving blood—Julius was particularly worthless (unlike some German leaders who were recycled because of their intelligence of the Soviets) and so he made an easy target.
That may be so. However, from a Due Process/fundamental fairness perspective I find it rather dubious to execute a defendant based upon "mere words". What exactly would the prevailing theory be in this case? Solicitation to murder? I think its tenuous to claim that Streicher harbored specific intent to facilitate the mass murder of Jews based upon magazine charicatures that he published. Furthermore, Streicher was not part of the Nazi regime, and it strains credibility to suggest that he was priivy to the plans of the SS and acted with an intent to further the objectives on the SS with his publications. Finally, "Der Sturmer" did not enjoy the mass circulation that many of the official Party publications did. As I understand it, it was popular among the more vulgar elements and Goring actually tried to distance the Party from the magazine on account of its grotesque and lascivious content.


But, I don’t see why it is not “OK” to do so—conquering nations have executed others for less. When you are conquered, you no longer have “rights”—legal or otherwise (I am aware of the various International Laws but these laws serve no purpose more than petty formalities—no one adheres to them when they are an inconvenience) .

And herein the problem lies. The theory of international law dictates that jurisdiction accrues against state actors who willfully and wantonly disregard the laws and customs of warfare. The Nuremburg Tribunal derived its legitimacy from the (ostensible) claim that defendnants who were charged by the Tribunal were afforded Due Process in accordance with commonly accepted principles of fair play and substantial justice. A Tribunal that acts as nothing more than a political formality that imposes "victor's justice" is really not legitimate by any measuring stick.

[Der Sozialist]

A Tribunal that acts as nothing more than a political formality that imposes "victor's justice" is really not legitimate by any measuring stick.

However, that was what the Nuremberg trials were used for. The allies (namely Britain and the USA) rode in on the horse of “moral superiority” and thus found it hard to justify the execution of the senior party members without some sort of “trial”.

But you know this already.

A bit of a digression but I always wondered if Germany had won— would the Axis have done the same to the senior allied leadership?

[Thomas777]

However, that was what the Nuremberg trials were used for. The allies (namely Britain and the USA) rode in on the horse of “moral superiority” and thus found it hard to justify the execution of the senior party members without some sort of “trial”.

Agreed.



A bit of a digression but I always wondered if Germany had won— would the Axis have done the same to the senior allied leadership?

The Axis were far less concerned with the appearance of propriety, and they would not have had a stake in creating a moralistic narrative. They probably would have just summarily executed the Soviet leadership in some mass purge. With respect to America and England, I can't see an Axis conquest of either country happening even in the event of defeat. There would have likely been some formal cessation of hostilities and the discreditation of Roosevelt and Churchill in the eyes of the public.

[Der Sozialist]

With respect to America and England, I can't see an Axis conquest of either country happening even in the event of defeat. There would have likely been some formal cessation of hostilities and the discreditation of Roosevelt and Churchill in the eyes of the public.

I am not sure about this but I believe that I read somewhere that Soviet POWs that were executed in the camps were given some sort of trial—this might have been only for officers however.

And while Germany lacked the ability to invade America I believe Germany would have had to invade Britain or at least see the implementation of a Germanophile government. Would Churchill have been executed in that case?

I believe he would. Furthermore, I don’t believe Germany would simply execute the high command of Soviet leadership quickly/without trial—one of the main justifications given to the people for the invasion of the USSR was Stalin’s future intentions and thus I believe a “kangaroo court” would be in the interest of validating that previous bit of propaganda.

[Thomas777]

I am not sure about this but I believe that I read somewhere that Soviet POWs that were executed in the camps were given some sort of trial—this might have been only for officers however.
This is an interesting issue...I was unaware of that.

And while Germany lacked the ability to invade America I believe Germany would have had to invade Britain or at least see the implementation of a Germanophile government. Would Churchill have been executed in that case?
Conquering Britain would not have been feasible, IMO...that is why "Sea Lion" never got off the ground. In order to invade Britain, you have to sink the Royal Navy. I can't see that the Luftwaffe and the Kreigsmarine could vanguish the RAF and the Royal Navy...even if they did, how many men would have to be landed to conquer the island? 500,000? A million? Think about the tactical considerations of such an effort...think about fighting England, Scotland, and Wales in their own backyard...pretty daunting prospect.

I think that if the Nazis had better understood European politik (in the traditional sense) they could have swayed the British people against War...whether this could have ultimately led to the creation of a Reich-friendly BUF government is debatable.

Let's suspend disbelief for a moment and imagine a victorious Reich and a BUF controlled Britain...I cannot see a man like Mosley ordering Churchill executed...it would appear unseemly, IMO, but this is pure speculation.


I believe he would. Furthermore, I don’t believe Germany would simply execute the high command of Soviet leadership quickly/without trial—one of the main justifications given to the people for the invasion of the USSR was Stalin’s future intentions and thus I believe a “kangaroo court” would be in the interest of validating that previous bit of propaganda.

This is true (RE: justification for war), but after hostilities had ensued, and hundreds of thousands of Germans had faced the Russians in savage combat, I think that they no longer needed the justification. The Germans hated and feared the Russians (and vice versa), and considered the war against them to be a war of civilization against barbarism. I think if Stalin had been summarily beheaded and his head paraded through the streets of Berlin, the rank and file would have cheered and sighed with relief.

Yankees and Brits on the other hand require some sort of narrative...i.e. "justice was done today; we are improving the world; evil was vanquished;" etc.

Interesting issues.

[Der Sozialist]

Conquering Britain would not have been feasible

It would have been difficult but a hostile British government still in place would only allow America to use it for future operations against the Reich. Political change (in Britain) or conquering the Island are Germany’s only two choices IMO.

IMO...that is why "Sea Lion" never got off the ground.

“Sea Lion” never got off the ground because the plan was making slow progress in the destruction of the Royal Navy—and Hitler was preoccupied with the fear of a “two-front” war and believed that America would enter soon.

Therefore, IMO, Hitler decided to eliminate the USSR to avoid the possibility of a two-front war but would have probably resumed with “Sea Lion” once that was accomplished.


In order to invade Britain, you have to sink the Royal Navy.

I believe Germany had this ability—after all, Germany’s Industrial base was larger than Britain’s and with the subsequent victories in France and Scandinavia—Britain was isolated completely.

500,000? A million? Think about the tactical considerations of such an effort...think about fighting England, Scotland, and Wales in their own backyard...pretty daunting prospect.

While this is speculation—if Hitler managed to storm London then I believe we would have had a similar phenomenon as what occurred in France. The invasion and subsequent victory was virtually costless.

Think about the tactical considerations of such an effort...think about fighting England, Scotland, and Wales in their own backyard...pretty daunting prospect.

That would not necessarily be required—Hitler conquered France without having his armies reach Ariege.

Also, Scotland and Wales are different ethnic groups and thus could provide a source for exploitation.

I cannot see a man like Mosley ordering Churchill executed...it would appear unseemly, IMO, but this is pure speculation.


I believe Hitler would have ordered it. I cannot imagine a NAZI puppet state allowing a defunct leader, rabid Germanophobe, with a residual following walk the streets of London.

The Germans hated and feared the Russians (and vice versa), and considered the war against them to be a war of civilization against barbarism. I think if Stalin had been summarily beheaded and his head paraded through the streets of Berlin, the rank and file would have cheered and sighed with relief.

I still believe that a show trial would be in the best interest of German propaganda. And the quick execution of Stalin would leave the masses unappeased IMO—dragging out his execution (via a trial) and re-demonstrating what was at stake would only help the situation.

Not to mention, that Germany did not just have its own people to consider but millions of conquered E. Europeans and Russians. Germany tried selling a narrative to these people, as well, that Germany’s only goal was the elimination of the Bolsheviks and reclaiming lost territory. Certainly, an execution of a figure like Stalin would enrage the Russian masses if it was done in a disrespectful, arrogant fashion.

[Captain Marinesko]

On Soviet POWS: Party members(many of them officers) were to be shot on sight according to the Commisar Order(it included Jews, Commisars, and Party Members), so no there were no trials of them. Most Soviet POWs starved to death or died of exposure to the elements- the same thing that Hans Schmidt whines about in Panzergrenadier(he claims the Americans did the same thing to SS men without mentioning Germany doing it to the Soviets).

It is true that Nuremburg and the other tribunals involved a lot of vengeance actions, such as the death of General Yamashita. He was tried and convicted of crimes in the Phillipines that were carried out before he even arrived.

[calvin]

Most Soviet POWs starved to death or died of exposure

How many are we talking about Marinesko?

[Captain Marinesko]

How many are we talking about Marinesko?

Of POWs? The ratio was something like 3 out of 100 survived.

[cerberus]

CalvinHow many are we talking about Marinesko?
Calvin - you ask question to which you already know the answers, not "Ad. Hom" , simply a fact.
As far as J.S. goes - was it right to hang him - No - I don't think it was.
German treament of Soviet POW's - they became a slave work force which was unfed and cared for , their deaths made room for more - in "The New Order" tese people would have no place.
The Germans had made no plans for dealing with this mass of captured humanity.
Captian Marinesko mentions the shooting of Political Officers - this has been done before and whilst some of the revisionists may say (claim) the order was ignored and not carried out - this order did take lives and it was issued from the highest level. That it was not carried out was down to the morality and conscience of the officers and soldiers themselves those who did the fighting - it reflects no credit on the likes of Hitler who ordered it and Keitel / Jodl who distributed the order to the front line.

[Captain Marinesko]

It is correct that some officers made a conscious decision not to follow the order or even ordered their troops to ignore it. However, much to the dismay of revisionists- that would not exonerate the Hitler regime that ordered it, as Cer has pointed out.

[calvin]

97 out of every hundred Red Army rapists killed through cold and starvation. Didn't the Germans take hundreds of thousands of soviets prisoner?

Imagine that, entire army groups exterminated......and not a gas chamber in sight

[cerberus]

calvin97 out of every hundred Red Army rapists killed through cold and starvation. Didn't the Germans take hundreds of thousands of soviets prisoner?

Imagine that, entire army groups exterminated......and not a gas chamber in sight

Calvin - if you play the fool you will be treated accordingly.
Now which 97 were you talking about , can you name them .:rolleyes:

[calvin]

MARINESKO: Of POWs? The ratio was something like 3 out of 100 survived

Ask Marine Eskimo, it’s his allegation.

If you want me to speculate about names, I’d say it goes a bit like this, Boris, Boris, Boris, Ivan, Ivan, Boris, Ivan, Ivan, Ivan, Ivan, Boris, Boris, Ivan, Boris……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….......................................................

[cerberus]

calvinAsk Marine Eskimo, it’s his allegation
Don't worry calvin , its like some twits who ask you to name the poeple gassed- same old bluff reversed.
I know you are much to reasonable to believe that all the Red Army were criminals - just as I don't believe the same about the Wehrmacht.

Bottom line is the "Captain" is still right and I don't have to ask him.

[calvin]

Cerberus

If the allegations of mass-rape are true then the entire Red Army would have to be classed as a criminal organization just as the Waffen SS was.

[Captain Marinesko]

Ask Marine Eskimo, it’s his allegation.

If you want me to speculate about names, I’d say it goes a bit like this, Boris, Boris, Boris, Ivan, Ivan, Boris, Ivan, Ivan, Ivan, Ivan, Boris, Boris, Ivan, Boris……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….......................................................


It's called starvation Einstein. Most of these prisoners never even MADE it to camps, they starved in barbwire enclosures with no food or shelter. If you are going to start denying the treatment of Soviet prisoners of war, which is well documented and understood around the world to be correct- you might as well start denying the Normandy landings as well.

[Captain Marinesko]

Cerberus

If the allegations of mass-rape are true then the entire Red Army would have to be classed as a criminal organization just as the Waffen SS was.


1. No, that wouldn't be the case because although these did happen, this was not the policy of the Red Army, nor was it ordered- unlike the killings that the SS carried out(this was mostly Allgemeine, not Waffen).

2. If we use REVISIONIST logic, let's examine those stories of rape. Many of the stories are vague and conflicting, and told by Nazi citizens. PLUS, many of the women later reported that they had "conceded" to the invaders, rather than stating they were raped(look in Anthony Beevor's Fall of Berlin for examples). ERGO: By Holocaust revisionist logic- NONE OF THE RAPES HAPPENED!!!

[eggheadbanga]

2. If we use REVISIONIST logic, let's examine those stories of rape. Many of the stories are vague and conflicting, and told by Nazi citizens. PLUS, many of the women later reported that they had "conceded" to the invaders, rather than stating they were raped(look in Anthony Beevor's Fall of Berlin for examples). ERGO: By Holocaust revisionist logic- NONE OF THE RAPES HAPPENED!!!

Dresden didn't happen either, apparently.

:dance2:

EXPOSING THE DRESDEN DECEPTION
An Open Response to Ernst Zundel's"Z-Gram" of February 13, 1999
by
THE MAD REVISIONIST
> February 13, 1999
>
> Good Morning from the Zundelsite:
>
> Today is "Dresden Day."
Apparently Mr. Zundel is unaware that recent research conducted by the courageous and politically incorrect truth-seekers of THE MAD REVISIONIST has revealed startling evidence that the bombing of Dresden and other German cities during the conflict known as World War II is in fact an elaborate German propaganda hoax.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that a few buildings might not have burned down, and that maybe a few people weren't singed or even killed as a result. But revisionists are scorned, and even laughed at, when we ask difficult questions about what really caused the tragedy, and how many people were really killed. Meanwhile, so many establishment lies about this alleged event have been exposed by revisionist research that its hard to take the normatively accepted version seriously.

Take the fact that there are numerous memorial sites in Germany that supposedly mark "mass graves" of civilians alleged to have been killed in these so-called "bombings". Yet not one of these sites have ever been excavated and subjected to impartial forensic examination to confirm that they contain what they are alleged to contain. Appalling, is it not? These Dresden hoaxers obviously have something to hide.

> Fifty-four years ago today, the city of Dresden, which had no strategic
> military significance at all and which had become a huge refugee city for
> civilians fleeing the Red Terror, became a huge fireball in the fiercest
> Allied terror bombing ever.

Indeed, the city of Dresden had no military or strategic significance. Is it therefore not the least bit fishy that the Dresden hoaxers expect you to believe the ridiculous notion that the Allies, while fighting a war that they intended to win, would waste valuable military resources on it?

> David Irving has written about the Dresden Holocaust, and it is a book well
> worth reading - and one you will never forget.
>
> It is estimated by some that as many as 350,000 - 600,000 victims were
> incinerated beyond being identifiable or even recognizable as human remains
> in that Holocaust. Only 35,000 could be identified.

Ah, so only 35,000 victims could be identified, and yet Zundel expects us to believe that another 350,000-600,000 people (why does the number vary so widely, hmmm?) were killed as well, simply because they are unaccounted for. How gullible does he think we are? Does he offer any proof to support this absurd number?

> Many of the pictures that people were served up as "pyres of gassed Jews"
> from Auschwitz and elsewhere in early Allied "atrocity flicks" are, in
> fact, photographs the Wehrmacht took of German victims of the Allied war
> crime of Dresden.

But every revisionist knows that it is physically impossible to burn bodies in open pits. That's why the photos and eyewitness testimonies of Jews being burned outside the kremas at Auschwitz must be fakes, right? So it serves as proof, as well, that the Dresden bombing is a hoax.

> The War Department, describing another city, Hamburg, described how people
> died in such a firestorm:
>
> "Literally hundreds of people were seen leaving shelters after the heat
> became intense. They ran across the street and were seen to collapse very
> slowly like people who were utterly exhausted. They could not get up."
>
> A reporter, Melitta Maschman, wrote of what happened in the City of Darmstadt:

Well, I suppose it is accurate to refer to Melita Maschmann (correct spelling) as a reporter at the time of the bombing. Though it would, perhaps, be more accurate to say that she was a reporter for the Bund Deutscher Madel. In fact, it would be more accurate still to say that she was the head of the BDM Press and Propaganda division in Berlin from 1943 until the end of the war. Interesting how Mr. Zundel is willing to, er, prune information that might cast doubt on the reliability and objectivity of his sources. Particulary when the source in question, in her memoir (Account Rendered: a Dossier on my Former Self) written after the war, was quite open in describing how the Nazis used to brainwash German youth.

> "There was not a house anywhere in the street which had not turned into a
> blazing firebrand. Above the sea of flames, a glowing cyclone raged over
> the town, and whenever it caught the bodies of people in flight, it
> shriveled them in a second to the size of a child, and the next day they
> lay all over the streets, hardly burnt, but like mummified children."

HBO should have saved this lie for its "Tales from the Crypt" program. Preposterous nonsense! So called "eyewitness" testimonies of these alleged bombings of German cities contain so many impossibilities and discrepancies as to make the whole story unbelievable. Sure, all of the survivors pretty much agree on the point that the city was bombed by the Allies, but how reliable are survivors who also testify to "puddles of melted human flesh" and people "glowing blue (or orange) and disintegrating" - and this, in sealed bunkers which were protected from the fire. There have been so many lies told by so-called "Dresden survivors" that all of these testimonies are wide open to reasonable doubt. After all, how much can you trust people testifying against their hated enemies?

And is there a single witness who actually saw a bomb dropped from an American plane land on the city and explode? No. Not one such witness. Who could have survived to have described such a thing? All we have are rumors. I don't want to hear what people thought they heard from inside the bomb shelter, or what they figured might be going on above. I want to know what they saw.

No, the Dresden myth relies almost entirely on hostile eyewitness testimony and questionable "confessions" by those alleged to have done the dirty deed. There is not a single survivor account of the Dresden bombing that has ever stood up to hostile cross-examination, and I challenge you to find one.

> These German victims' wartimes stories are not known. They left no diaries.
>
> They perished in the flames of the devastating inferno of March 16, 1945 -
> among the thousands of victims of this Allied atrocity the following women
> and children named "Anna":

<snip: list of names>

> I would like you to honor and remember these German victims of a deliberate
> Allied policy with genocidal overtones in a few moments' worth of silence.

While I'm sure that Mr. Zundel considers it good history to tug at the heart strings in the hopes of disabling our ability to think rationally and critically, this tactic will not work any better than the diary of Anne Frank. It stands that he has yet to show us one proof... one single proof... that any one of these persons died as a result of Allied bombs.

In light of the fact that I have shown that the Dresden story has no non-biased eyewitnesses and no conclusive physical evidence, it appears that alternative explanations for the destruction are entirely plausible. It could have been caused by someone smoking in bed (smoking is more common in continental Europe than it is in, say, North America). Also, it is entirely plausible that the German Air Force bombed the city themselves by accident (as they did to Freiburg), and then tried to cover up their heinous error by blaming the disaster on their hated enemies.

Its not looking good for the Dresden hoaxers now. Where is the proof that this city was bombed by the Allies? Considering the gravity of the charges, is it really so much to ask?

http://www.revisionism.nl/Dresden/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm

[Captain Marinesko]

Here's a good article referring to Soviet POWs and the figures. Again, the last figure I heard quoted on the subject was a ratio of 3 out of 100, but that was a rather source.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/08/one-might-think-that.html

[eggheadbanga]

Here's a good article referring to Soviet POWs and the figures. Again, the last figure I heard quoted on the subject was a ratio of 3 out of 100, but that was a rather source.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/08/one-might-think-that.html

The actual proportion _all told_ of surviving Soviet POWs to dead ones was 40% surviving, 60% dead.

But if you're referring to Soviet POWs handed over to concentration camps like Mauthausen, Sachsenhausen, Majdanek or Auschwitz, a much smaller group, then 3% surviving is correct (and documented). And that's only in reference to those handed over to work as labourers. There were as many who were handed to the SS in the camps simply to be executed. (And this is also documented.)

[Petr]

I have also read that besides those 3-4 million Soviet POWs who perished in captivity, a very great amount of soldiers in the Eastern front were simply shot on the spot they surrendered - that is, they were never even registered as prisoners. This happened especially in harsh conditions where German units did not want to consume their scarce resources on prisoners.


(Russians of course did much of the same, especially to Waffen-SS soldiers)


Petr

[eggheadbanga]

I have also read that besides those 3-4 million Soviet POWs who perished in captivity, a very great amount of soldiers in the Eastern front were simply shot on the spot they surrendered - that is, they were never even registered as prisoners. This happened especially in harsh conditions where German units did not want to consume their scarce resources on prisoners.
(Russians of course did much of the same, especially to Waffen-SS soldiers)
Petr

The numbers being killed out of hand were lower than is often assumed. The commissar order was carried out by frontline troops only on a small scale, and eventually stopped being carried out at all, months before it was rescinded. German units did obey 'take-no-prisoners' orders for short periods in reprisals for Soviet mutilations of captured and murdered soldiers. But the numbers of prisoners captured and passed to the rear compared with Soviet reports of missing in action make it clear that this phenomenon cannot have been widespread. Germans tended to round up any man between 16 and 50 and count them as 'prisoners of war', too.

Soviets certainly also murdered prisoners on the spot, but they took very few until Stalingrad.

[Petr]

egghead, do you have good source on Soviet military losses in WW II? I would recall Marshal Dmitry Yazov stating 1991 that almost 9 million soldiers were lost as dead (perished POWs presumably included).

A surreal figure.


Petr

[calvin]

If we use REVISIONIST logic, let's examine those stories of rape. Many of the stories are vague and conflicting, and told by Nazi citizens. PLUS, many of the women later reported that they had "conceded" to the invaders, rather than stating they were raped(look in Anthony Beevor's Fall of Berlin for examples). ERGO: By Holocaust revisionist logic- NONE OF THE RAPES HAPPENED!!!

That’s why I said IF the allegations of mass-rape are true, Einstein.

No, that wouldn't be the case because although these did happen, this was not the policy of the Red Army, nor was it ordered- unlike the killings that the SS carried out(this was mostly Allgemeine, not Waffen)

Nothing to do with policy; the SS was deemed to be a criminal organization on the basis of its affiliation to the Nazi party headed by alleged mass-murderer Adolf Hitler. The RED Army was affiliated to the Communist party headed by alleged mass-murderer, Joseph Stalin.

I have also read that besides those 3-4 million Soviet POWs who perished in captivity

How many of them were gassed?

[Captain Marinesko]

egghead, do you have good source on Soviet military losses in WW II? I would recall Marshal Dmitry Yazov stating 1991 that almost 9 million soldiers were lost as dead (perished POWs presumably included).

A surreal figure.


Petr

For servicemen the figure is 13 million. 7 million for civilians for a grand total of 20 million. Lately in the past few years I have heard higher figures quoted, like 22-25 million. I haven't heard any explanation of that.

[Captain Marinesko]

That’s why I said IF the allegations of mass-rape are true, Einstein.

I'm not doubting them, and I have the feeling you totally believe them.



Nothing to do with policy; the SS was deemed to be a criminal organization on the basis of its affiliation to the Nazi party headed by alleged mass-murderer Adolf Hitler. The RED Army was affiliated to the Communist party headed by alleged mass-murderer, Joseph Stalin.

The problem is that the Nazi party was responsible for the war and the Waffen SS carried out its stated policies of genocide.



How many of them were gassed?

The first victims of gassing at Auschwitz were Soviet POWs, but to the best of my knowledge most POWs starved, were worked to death, or shot.

[eggheadbanga]

egghead, do you have good source on Soviet military losses in WW II? I would recall Marshal Dmitry Yazov stating 1991 that almost 9 million soldiers were lost as dead (perished POWs presumably included).

A surreal figure.

Petr

there is a 1990s study by the Russian Ministry of Defense, team headed up by Krivosheev, whose first edition is in English via Greenhil. 'Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses in the Twentieth Century'. The calculation was 8.6 million though they think it could be 2 million higher.

Russian versions are online everywhere.

http://www.soldat.ru/files/4/6/15/

among others.

[calvin]

The problem is that the Nazi party was responsible for the war

The Soviets weren’t responsible for the invasion of Finland, Poland and the Baltic states then Marinesko?

The first victims of gassing at Auschwitz were Soviet POWs, but to the best of my knowledge most POWs starved, were worked to death, or shot

So an initial policy of gassing was abandoned in favour of a policy of starvation, work and shooting? I’ve just been on a thread where affirmationists have been keenly asserting that mass-gassings were a piece of piss, merely requiring a big shed, a few windows and a couple of gas masks, why the change in policy?

[eggheadbanga]

The first victims of gassing at Auschwitz were Soviet POWs, but to the best of my knowledge most POWs starved, were worked to death, or shot.

This is because very few POWs were handed over to the SS. The Wehrmacht presided over the mass starvation in the Stalags.

[Commander]

1. No, that wouldn't be the case because although these did happen, this was not the policy of the Red Army, nor was it ordered- unlike the killings that the SS carried out(this was mostly Allgemeine, not Waffen).

2. If we use REVISIONIST logic, let's examine those stories of rape. Many of the stories are vague and conflicting, and told by Nazi citizens. PLUS, many of the women later reported that they had "conceded" to the invaders, rather than stating they were raped(look in Anthony Beevor's Fall of Berlin for examples). ERGO: By Holocaust revisionist logic- NONE OF THE RAPES HAPPENED!!!

For what it's worth, an old Hungarian I worked with in my dept. at work, back in the early 1980's [this man is long dead] was a veteran of the Hungarian Army. He fought on the side of The Reich, so he may of had some bias.

What he told me was, it was absolutely terrible what the Red Army did in it's drive threw Hungary near the end of the war. They [soldiers] stole everything of any value, raped the women, even Red Army female soldiers ordered local men to have sex with them.

I knew this man, as well as one other old veteran from the war on the Eastern front, for several years. I have no reason not to believe what the Hungarian said. The other old guy, he was sorta out of it, his English was bad, & talking to him was not easy. I never discussed the war [or much else] with him.

[Captain Marinesko]

The Soviets weren’t responsible for the invasion of Finland, Poland and the Baltic states then Marinesko?

The invasion of Finland, the Baltics, and the part of Poland that was Russian territory(Ukrainian and Western Belarus) were annexed in response to Germany's actions in Czechoslovakia and Poland.



So an initial policy of gassing was abandoned in favour of a policy of starvation, work and shooting? I’ve just been on a thread where affirmationists have been keenly asserting that mass-gassings were a piece of piss, merely requiring a big shed, a few windows and a couple of gas masks, why the change in policy?

The POWs who were gassed were simply part of a test for the gas chamber method, this was not the normal method of killing them. Milhouse has explained what happened to most of them.

[cerberus]

Calvin , Auschwitz was first considered for housng polish political prisoners and later Soviet POW's , as no doubt Millhouse / Egghead has stated the first gassings in the punishment block comprised some 700 soviet POW's as a test batch.
Nice guys these low lifes who ran the camps .
Did the guy you work with have much comment to make on his country wanting out of the war and the Germans actions to ensure that they did not get out - occupation ?

[Captain Marinesko]

... even Red Army female soldiers ordered local men to have sex with them.




Raped by FEMALE Red Army soldiers? Where do I sign up for THAT?!

[Sudaev]

its not OK to execute people for publishing vulgar and offensive magazines.

You haven't seen The Aryan Advisor.

[Commander]

Raped by FEMALE Red Army soldiers? Where do I sign up for THAT?!

I'm not making that up, the old guy, that's what he told me, in his broken English, Hungarian accent. Every once in a while those old guys would feel like chatting a little, if you have ever worked with very old men, you would know what I mean.

Another poster asked me why I did not ask this guy something , I forget what the poster said, but these old guys, you don't start bugging them, asking them about the war. If they felt like talking about it, I was more than happy to listen.

[Captain Marinesko]

You haven't seen The Aryan Advisor.


Don't you mean "Aryan Alternative" or has someone come up with something even more vulgar and retarded than that.

[Captain Marinesko]

I'm not making that up, the old guy, that's what he told me, in his broken English, Hungarian accent. Every once in a while those old guys would feel like chatting a little, if you have ever worked with very old men, you would know what I mean.

Another poster asked me why I did not ask this guy something , I forget what the poster said, but these old guys, you don't start bugging them, asking them about the war. If they felt like talking about it, I was more than happy to listen.


I personally doubt it. From what I read the Red Army women never seemed really disturbed about the men raping women- they even found it somewhat amusing. But that's what men is such conditions do after suffering as much as they did. Hitler built that rage and unleased it on Europe. The only reason why the battle of Budapest was so bloody is because the Nazis prevented Horthy from surrenduring like Romania, Bulgaria, or Finland.

[Sudaev]

Don't you mean "Aryan Alternative" or has someone come up with something even more vulgar and retarded than that.

Yeah, whatever TAA stood for.

And on top of that, there was a paper that Miller was peddling--can't recall the name.

On VNN at this point the idiots would be chiming in with "at least he's doing something".

[Captain Marinesko]

Yeah, whatever TAA stood for.

And on top of that, there was a paper that Miller was peddling--can't recall the name.

On VNN at this point the idiots would be chiming in with "at least he's doing something".


I think that is the TAA.

I always loved the "doing something" canard, it's also popular with NSM and NSM ass-kissers. You could ask them if running around naked with VNNForum.com tattooed on their ass would count as "doing something".

[Sudaev]

I think that is the TAA.
I just looked at VNN and Miller's new rag is the White Patriot Leader.

Antiochus Epiphanes may have been a bright guy but even he endorsed TAA. He seemed to think that there was some mathematical probability that X number of copies would produce X number of supporters, e.g., 10,000 copies would average one supporter and so on. He had this mistaken belief that all it took was perseverance and massive distributions. What a pipe dream!

I haven't been over there since my banishment. One of their recent threads was "Who is the informant on VNN" or something similarly nutty. You were never mentioned, I suppose due to your forthrightness although Hitler Goddess made the top ten; as I read on I was heartened to see that eventually Chain mentioned me.

Chain--he was halfway entertaining but what a paranoid, delusional little fart, just like the rest of them. He was under the delusion that I admitted that I was a "national level cop" (I guess he means a Fed) however the fuck he came up with that I'll never know, and he also swears that he once called either the ADL or the SPLC and that they directed him to the "Hate Dept", (my ill-thought-out username).

What a joke it is that these people think that Feds sit there and monitor VNN, let alone post. I bet no law enforcement official has ever logged on to VNN; the most they probably ever did was glance at it after getting a hysterical email from some do-gooder. They probably laugh even harder than we do.

The level of these VNN clowns' paranoia is part-and-parcel of that Walter Mitty syndrome that someone here mentioned. It's sad, really.

[Commander]

I just looked at VNN and Miller's new rag is the White Patriot Leader.

The level of these VNN clowns' paranoia is part-and-parcel of that Walter Mitty syndrome that someone here mentioned. It's sad, really.

I don't think it is just mere paranoia. If you recall VNN was shut down after, what was it, AT&T who had the line support to their host > Cable Bay Internet, cut off.

I don't think on-duty Feds look at the site much, but ADL, & CJC/ B'nai Brith operatives, I am real certain, do pay pretty close attention to it.

As for those fliers, myself, I would have left out all the "dumb Nigger" stuff. All that does is get the majority of people, even those who may have an interest in other matters, pissed off, & the flier disposed of. Concentrating on foreign lobby groups, & how they, in particular AIPAC, are destroying America, is what I would make a priority.

[calvin]

I personally doubt it. From what I read the Red Army women never seemed really disturbed about the men raping women- they even found it somewhat amusing. But that's what men is such conditions do after suffering as much as they did. Hitler built that rage and unleased it on Europe. The only reason why the battle of Budapest was so bloody is because the Nazis prevented Horthy from surrenduring like Romania, Bulgaria, or Finland

The Red Army “soldiers” even raped their own female POW. Red army raping and looting in occupied Romania are not disputed by mainstream historians. What had imprisoned Russian women done to unleash the hatred of the Red Army?

[Captain Marinesko]

The Red Army “soldiers” even raped their own female POW. Red army raping and looting in occupied Romania are not disputed by mainstream historians. What had imprisoned Russian women done to unleash the hatred of the Red Army?

Yes we all know that rape happened, and some drunk soldiers often raped people who weren't even German, such as the SLAVE laborers kidnapped from Ukraine and Russia. That is the only tragedy- for everything else, Hitler opened the door to it.

In the words of Will Smith, "Don't start nuthin', won't BE nuthin!"

[Captain Marinesko]

I just looked at VNN and Miller's new rag is the White Patriot Leader.

Any more hardcore porn in it?


Antiochus Epiphanes may have been a bright guy but even he endorsed TAA. He seemed to think that there was some mathematical probability that X number of copies would produce X number of supporters, e.g., 10,000 copies would average one supporter and so on. He had this mistaken belief that all it took was perseverance and massive distributions. What a pipe dream!

Yeah but he was smart enough to see where things were going and speak out against it. He was the only one on there who made an effort to stop the nutcases from calling people Jews. And who would I be to judge him- I came on that board defending the National Alliance!


Chain--he was halfway entertaining but what a paranoid, delusional little fart, just like the rest of them. He was under the delusion that I admitted that I was a "national level cop" (I guess he means a Fed) however the fuck he came up with that I'll never know, and he also swears that he once called either the ADL or the SPLC and that they directed him to the "Hate Dept", (my ill-thought-out username).

Oh now I remember you- my comrade in arms from the 9-11 Conspiracy wars.


What a joke it is that these people think that Feds sit there and monitor VNN, let alone post. I bet no law enforcement official has ever logged on to VNN; the most they probably ever did was glance at it after getting a hysterical email from some do-gooder. They probably laugh even harder than we do.

I think that's about the extent of it.


The level of these VNN clowns' paranoia is part-and-parcel of that Walter Mitty syndrome that someone here mentioned. It's sad, really.

It's basically a less graphically intensive incarnation of Everquest for these nuts.

[calvin]

Will Smith?

In West Bavaria born and raised

The shletls where I spent most of my days

You start one little revolution and the Krauts get the shitz

You’re staying with your Auntie and your Uncle in Auschwitz….