djq6a11
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 48 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Tueschen's expectorations: is he mad, an inveterate liar, or - 2006/03/23 09:22
You are one of the most intelligent contributers to RGCM.
There is some force in what you write, an anti-Semite would certainly use the sort of title that Tueschen employs; to me, though, there seems to be some irrational daemon possessing him.
'SCIENCE IF ANYTHING CAN CLARIFY
Or as Hitler put it in August 1920:
'We are convinced that scientific anti-semitism, which clearly recognises the frightful danger that that race represents to our people, can only be our guide; the broad masses, who will always react emotionally, must first be made aware of the Jew ... our task must be to arouse the mass instinct against the Jew, to stir it up and keep it on the boil ...'
Except in so far as it indicates Tueschen's "logic".
I wrote 'That article and the links from it clearly indicate the doubts about Moellemann's probity'
Tueschen appears to believe that
'I've read the page and couldn't discover the "clear doubts" you could read into it.
Quoting from the BBC site:
'Mr Moellemann, the former deputy leader of Germany's centrist Free
Democratic Party (FDP), was being investigated over allegations that he broke laws on party funding, fraud and breach of trust.'
Tueschen rants further:
'But thast is perhaps because you lack of the important knowledge that
Moellemann's main opponent, the second highest chief of the Jews in
Germany, can no longer be seen as a decent and honest politician & human being. Reason, he was convicted for cocaine "possession". He has now a so called previous conviction. Further his contacts to the Ukrainian prostitution pimp connection is somewhat irritating to say the least.'
Tueschen assumes that I haven't heard of Friedman; if he were capable of
would certainly cover Friedman: here is a link to an article I read:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V5BF25D86 , I also recall reading a few others, but I have no desire to trawl through the internet to find any more; the remarks about Friedman are below the Immendorf report, towards the bottom.
Note that Tueschen did not provide any kind of link to help the reader understand his ravings, assuming there is any logic to them. Note, too, that Tueschen believes that the probity of Moellemann justifies reflections upon the probity of Friedman, rather as if the murders of Jack the Ripper have any bearing upon the killings of Peter Sutcliffe the Yorkshire Ripper.
I recall reading that. I am certain you know that racism ('Great Russian chauvinism') was outlawed and therefore didn't exist (sic) in the Soviet
Union. Grigory Svirsky the Soviet writer gives an instance in one of his books:
'The mainstay (of the court) turned out to be a middle-aged woman. The judge asked the Tartar night watchman what words the woman tenant had used towards him and he replied, "swine." The mainstay wrote it down.
'"Filthy pig." The mainstay again scribbled in her pad.
'"Wog bastard." 'The fountain pen didn't move.
'"All Tarters are speculators!" 'The pen as before stayed motionless in the secretary's poised hand, like a dart aimed but not thrown.
'"Slavering jackal." This time the pen went to work.'
Following the breakup of the Soviet Union a lot of extra material became available. Previous calculations did include those murdered inside the
Ukraine and Russia, but they appear to have understated the numbers.
What you write is very true. I do have a weakness for off-topic posts; but I hope that I have never sunk to the depths of Tueschen, who appears to have more of Tudjman than Tushin (of War and Peace) in his makeup.
'Against that person and the Israelian MP Sharon Moellemann directed his critics. In fact Moellemann violated the long-time taboo that a German politician is NOT allowed to criticise Israel or Jewish officials. But that doesn't make him an Anti-Semite. On the other hand it's clear that Israel and German Jew officials are not pleased by such a turn-around. Of course it's fine to have a "protection" against critics, but the question is if such a taboo doesn't protect inhumanism against the Palestinian people.'
Notice the mispellings 'Israelian' and 'Jew officials', I can only see one other questionable spelling in this paragraph.
Tueschen adds:
'Hence
2) I believe in the Holocaust of 6 Million Jews.'
1) is a curious reason to believe in 2), Tueschen's epistemology is certainly rather odd.
Tueschen responded:
'Yes, but you should tolerate that a German lives a rather odd life after his forefathers had violated human ethics so deeply that it could be regarded a shame to live as a German! Was that clear enough?'
There are plenty of Germans living in London, the ones I know seem perfectly normal human beings to me. Some of them are friends of mine. A cousin of mine is married to a German. Tueschen appears to be obsessed with the
"nationality" of a person, I couldn't give a damn where someone is from;
nor do I believe that the sons should suffer for the sins of the fathers.
For the record I did have one relative killed in WWII, an uncle of mine, ironically by British artillery at El Alamein, but I can't get upset over someone I know nothing of, who was dead long before I was born.
'I wished you had taken this 100% clear statement as a proof for my
NOT-being-next-to-Anti-Semitism. But thanks that you quoted it at least.'
Tueschen means 'medical' where he has written 'chemical', some in RGCM have cast doubt upon his sincerity.
'That is what I would call a lie. A peopaganda lie from a Jew again. Sorry.
But this is a fact. You are intentionally lying below although you yourself knew that I had written the above. That is scientifically unacceptable.
It's a fraud.'
Actually, being half-Scottish, if the Nuremberg laws were applied in Britain
I would be classified as "Mischlinge ersten Grades" to be treated as
"Geltungsjuden" and therefore ultimately "Volljuden". I am sure Tueschen can explain the meaning of these words. I am an atheist myself. Note
Tueschen's implicit assumption that only a Jew would disagree with him on these matters, indeed only a 'lying Jew'
I am quite certain Tueschen knows that 'lying Jew' is an expression favoured by Nazis. Tueschen is being disingenuous when he claims that the prime intention behind the treatment of Jews in the camps was to provide work:
this is Neo-Nazi propaganda. Has Tueschen heard of the Krüger-Forster agreement? Notice that Tueschen never provides sources for his 'facts'
'Euthanasy mass murder of the disabled Germans. Also the in the same hidance. With complete veil in language too so that the people could not understand it.'
I responded, giving a source:
'Actually the euthanasia programme was nown of, that is why it was stopped.' 'Wrong! Of course it became known that suddenly your brother or sister had died although they were ok when you visited them the last time. Pneumonia was the cause of death, as the official note indicated.
Contrary to Tueschen's drivel, whatever seemed a plausible explanation was written on the death certificate.
Further ranting snipped.
Tueschen snarls:
'Also the main fallacy of the whole technique of that murder was the involvement of the medical personal and the undergraduate brothers and sistern of the religious orders.
'That was changed in the following action by the involvement of the SS and other military personal. They could be forced to keep the whole activities in secret. [BTW that is still the usual principle today, may that be in the
USAS or elsewhere. The moment something is defined as in the interest of the state, the truth of military declarations is going down the toilet.]'
Has Tueschen heard of Brandt, Linden, Unger, Heinze, Pfannmüller, Heyde,
Schneider, De Crinis, Nitsche? Practically the entire German psychiatric community was involved in these killings. One of the few noteworthy and honourable exceptions was Karl Bonhoeffer the father of Dietrich
Bonhoeffer.
When the war broke out the S.S. starting shooting inmates of every nationality to create 'room' for soldiers.
'A provincial probate judge wrote to Franz Gürtner, the minister of
Justice, stating... "everyone knows as well as I do" that "the murder of the mentally ill is as well known a daily reality as, say, the concentration camps".'
Tueschen wrote 'No way! If a judge had written that, calling it for what it was, he would have been executed after a short court case. That is a hoax, nothing else.
The source I quote gives "Euthanasie" im NS-Staat: Die vernichtung lebensunwerten Lebens by Ernest Klee, page 209: he also mentions Phillip
Aziz, Doctors of Death.
This is a defence frequently used by Nazis when put on trial, to wit: any sort of opposition would have resulted in punishment, even death. It is quite simply a lie.
Here are the words of an auxiliary policemen in Einsatzkommando Stalino:
'We could refuse to obey orders to participate in the Sonderaktionen without adverse consequences' (Page 76 of Those were the days). There are many other quotes in that book.
S.S. men were punished for excessive 'enthusiasm'; has Tueschen heard of
SS-Untersturmführer Max Täubner? 'The accused shall not be punished because of the actions against the Jews themselves. The Jews have to be exterminated and none of the Jews killed is any great loss ... It is not the German way to apply Bolshevik methods during the necessary extermination of the worst enemy of our people' Täubner got ten years for a variety of 'crimes'
'It is scientifically proven that Goldhagen is plain wrong.
I am not sure I know what 'scientifically proven' means in this context.
In a post some weeks ago I expressed my distate for Goldhagen's history. At no time have I quoted him. Tueschen should read Primo Levi, he will find there the concept of the grey zone: there is a world of difference between knowing something rotten is happening and being a willing participant or observer. We are all in various positions in that zone.
"When the farmers of Württemberg see the cars go by, they too know what is going on - just as when they see the smoke pouring from the crematory chimneys day and night".'
Tueschen can find it in Aziz, Doctors of Death, pages 100-104. Tueschen never gives a source for his mendacious bilge.
I further quoted Lifton:
'Indeed angry crowd reactions came close at times to public demonstrations against the killing of mental patients... One report ... tells of a priest offering communion to patients forced into a bus before large crowds of
Catholic townspeople, complains of the visibility of the whole operation ...' 'Was that published during the WWII? Or was it an ancdote from after the war?'
Tueschen can find it in a report to the S.S. Security Service from Absberg on 1 March 1941. I give sources, Tueschen gives lies.
Tueschen said:
'The main purpose of these camps was meant to allow the exploitation of the workers, not their killing. '
I replied:
'He is excluding the death camps and the Einsatzgruppen; why is he including only a part of the picture?'
Here is the proof of your evil Jewish hatred against Germans, silly boy! You are good in quoting me above, but here you go beyond the honestly allowed. I was NOT excluding death camps. Read you own quotes above.
Note the words: 'evil Jewish hatred'; this is the purest form of anti-Semitism. Tueschen does try to separate them out. His assertion that the prime purpose was exploitation not murder is a lie, particularly so if he is 'NOT excluding death camps'
'Millions died in the death camps and from the actions of the Einsatzgruppen: they cannot be excluded. Does Tueschen believe that Himmler's intention, for instance, was anything other than death, at least up until he imagined that a deal could be struck with the
Western Allies near the war's end. Here is a quote attributed to Speer the armaments minister from page 414 of Lodz Ghetto:'
Tueschen responded:
Yes, Speer is a reliable eye-witness in your opinion! Not in my books. He wanted to get away in Nuremberg and he successfully played his role.
Admiration, but he wasn't less innocent that some others who were hanged.
There's a lot more than Speer, does Tueschen not know what the 'Final
Solution' to the 'Jewish Question' was. It wasn't labouring in some camp, or resettlement in Madagascar.
Tueschen raves:
'You are of that same quality Omid David spread his propaganda lies in that forum. All that nonsense about my belonging or guilt in the Nazi crimes is simply ridiculous. Since I quoted one of the best Jewish experts on
Holocaust in America. A Jew himself. He gave the arguments that I quoted more or less that the Holocaust followed the technique of the Euthanasy of the German disabled. He pointed out that the main purpose of the Holocaust was the exploitation and not the instant kill. With such a view he and I myself do NOT deny the fact of the evil "selection" practice. The evil of deportation and all that. Also the activities of the "Einsatzgruppen" in
Poland, the Ukraine and Russia are absolutely outrageous and fully accepted as historical fact. The Soviet Union alone had more than 22 million victims in WWII. Who had denied that?'
I have never met Omid David, I have no idea what he said; given the only source is the loon Tueschen, I don't know what I am being compared to. All my quotes are backed up by verifiable sources. The prime intention of the
Holocaust was to kill all the Jews, exploitation was secondary.
Where does Tueschen get his figure of 22 million Soviet victims? Here is what John Ericksson gave in a seminar at Leeds University in 1991:
'The first post-war figure for Soviet losses, 7 million, was produced by
Stalin in February 1946. ... The much touted and oft-quoted figure of "in excess of 20 million" ... was announced by Krushchev ... in the 1960s. This seems to have been "plucked out of the air" in an act of political convenience...
'L. E Polyakov in his brochure Tsena pobedy, Demographichevskii aspekt adduces the figure of 46 million, from which he subtracts a figure of 26 million for "indirect loss", thus arriving at a figure of 20 million for battlefield/war loss. ... Given natural population growth, without the intervention of war, and using an officially accepted growth coefficient of
1.7 growth, we could anticipate a population level of 212.5 million in
1946, whereas it was only 178.5 million. Professor Kurganov strikes boldly for an absolute loss figure of 44 million.
'V. I. Kozlov approached the problem from a somewhat different angle, having first looked at morbidity, infant mortality and natural growth rates for
1940. ... Thus over the wartime period and including the first four postwar years, the "population deficit" was in the order of some 45-8 million. ..
Polyakov arrives at a deficit of 46 million, ... not disimilar to A. Ya.
Kvasha's estimate of 48-50 million.' 'As I wrote earlier, the point I made in a reaction to Larry Parr was in memory of our debates some years ago. When he also accused me to be in the neighborhood of Anti-Semitism if I wrote such things. When I was just quoting. You can find the quoted link above as the first mentioned.'
Larry Parr was right. Tueschen is making a lot of remarks that are characteristic of anti-Semites..
---------
Learning carries within itself certain dangers because out of necessity one has to learn from one's enemies.
Popular posts by djq6a11
It is easier to kill a man than it ...
Those embarassing moments (OT)
Why do Americans place so low in...
|
post new topic