RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Indeed they did ... and America supplied them with the technology (via IBM) to do the record-keeping ... and then looked the other way ...
What would war with Russia look like?
- Thread starter runrunner
- Start date
Well, I don't know if "looked the other way" is a fair characterization, as that would mean they (IBM) knew what was going on, or knew something bad was going on and they chose not to be aware of it. Edwin Black's book highly detailed and heavily documented, and along with newly researched documents prompted by the book, including IBM's own historical records, show unquestionably that IBM technology enabled the Holocaust to happen, but that they really didn't know what was going on. IMB started losing control of their business in German by the mid-30s, and by the time the Holocaust began they really had little information out of their German subsidiary about how their technology was being used, other than it was being used to run train schedules and was being used by the 500-man team of Nazis in Krakow to crunch statistics for the stat-loving Germans. They had no idea, for example, that the train schedules were being used to efficiently take people who were efficiently selected by punch cards to death camps, or that the Germans were cranking out stats showing both proposed and actual deaths per square kilometer due to forced starvation, among other mysterious statistics. Statistics, I might add, which constitute hard evidence of the Holocaust.
Disputing? I have no doubt. But refuting? Not a chance. There is simply too much hard evidence of the Holocaust to be intelligently denied by anyone other than the most ardent anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist. As Layout noted, the Germans had impeccable records, more than 3000 tons of which were presented at Nuremberg. And that doesn't even include the products of Nazi Germany's dedicated filming of itself, which included hundreds of thousands of photographs and films produced by the state and by individual Nazi soldiers documenting the atrocities that took place during the Holocaust. These films, photographs and Nazi testimony is not that hard to find.
The picture that Ragman posted? It wasn't taken "following the war," it was taken the same day, but several hours prior, to Germany signing their unconditional surrender. It was taken by photographer Arnold E. Samuelson when the US Army stormed the camp and liberated the prisoners there. It's not merely just anotehr picture of prisoners - it was the first one taken by non-Nazi photographers as the Army walked through the front gates of Ebensee Camp. This has not been refuted.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Ahh ... no ...
Believe what you like, but Black's claims that Watson and IBM specifically and knowingly participated in genocide, that he and IBM knew precisely what was going on, are unproven. Statements from the actual engineers and technicians who worked on the machines indicate they were performing tasks for which they did not know what they would be used for. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary, other than Black's claims, of course. In Black's mind, IBM sat down regularly with Hitler and helped plan all the details of the Holocaust. Black's book, and the articles he's posted on the Internet, are extraordinarily sensationalist, as if he has a personal agenda against IBM and wants to lay most of the blame of the Holocaust right at the feet of Watson. He even makes his case that the Holocaust could not have happened at all without the intimate help of IBM.
For example, in his book he states, "From the first moments of the Hitler regime in 1933, IBM used its exclusive punch card technology and its global monopoly on information technology to organize, systematize, and accelerate Hitler's anti-Jewish program, step by step facilitating the tightening noose." But that's not true. IBM didn't do any of that. IBM didn't use its exclusive punch card technology and its global monopoly on information to organize, systematize and accelerate Hitler's anti-Jewish program - the Nazi's did.
In the timeframe of the book and IBM's involvement, nothing happened that looked anything like the holocaust, and nothing shows that IBM continued to keep a close bond with Nazi Germany after 1939, and none at all after 1941. This isn't to say that Watson and IBM had nothing to do with the Holocaust, but their 'contribution' was far smaller than implied and stated by Black.
Maverick
Seasoned Expediter
The figures keep changing until we finally arrived at 6 million? If the record keeping is so impeccable....why the constant figure change? No denial here that Jews were targeted, I just don't buy the whole gas chamber/6 million thing. Many photos presented during Nuremberg were just that...photos of dead bodies.
Do you know how many lives were lost, due to typhus, and other such illness during the war, and in the camps? I've not simply been satisfied by those who claim what happened, but rather, have researched many people who claim otherwise. Weighing the information on both sides (IBM aside) it seems very dubious to make the final claim. This is where the "supposed" part came in.
I think it quite silly to go through all this process, just to eliminate a certain group of people. I also think it quite telling, that this story keeps being hammered into the minds of people....while much larger atrocities have been committed throughout history, but are not discussed, to anywhere near the volume.
Problem with some people? They just believe what they're told, with no questioning or research to the contrary. Thus, we're just espousing what we do "know" as if there's absolutely no doubt it happened, just that way. Would be scary in choosing a jury from that group.
The fact remains, and point made....Germany was not the only entity, in either war, who could be Nuremberged. One good way to hide, or reflect truth, is to keep hammering the loser side of things. All victors do it, like it or no.
The figures keep changing until we finally arrived at 6 million?
6 million is NOT the number that was finally arrived at. That number is the number of Jews that were killed. You need to double that number to include all that were killed. All of those deaths were recorded.
6 million is NOT the number that was finally arrived at. That number is the number of Jews that were killed. You need to double that number to include all that were killed. All of those deaths were recorded.
Maverick
Seasoned Expediter
Really? Then all this controversy could be ended......simply by producing those recorded people's names? That's a Wizard of Oz kinda thing.
"Well, why didn't you just say so!"
A list of those names is forthcoming then? Don't mean the whole 13 Million. Say, just a handful, from those archives. If you can point me in the right direction, would like to take a peek.
Last edited:
Really? Then all this controversy could be ended......simply by producing those recorded people's names? That's a Wizard of Oz kinda thing.
"Well, why didn't you just say so!"
A list of those names is forthcoming then? Don't mean the whole 13 Million. Say, just a handful, from those archives. If you can point me in the right direction, would like to take a peek.
They were "FINALLY" made fully public, by the German government in 2006-7 time frame. You are MORE than welcome to go over and examine them. My nephew did, he is still in Germany. He said that visit was one of the most profound moments in his life. Which is saying something, since he is a decorated combat veteran. He also visited Auschwitz, which brought him to tears.
I believe that such a trip would be something that would benefit you.
Fifty Million Nazi Documents: Germany Agrees to Open Holocaust Archive - SPIEGEL ONLINE
Auschwitz-Birkenau - Home Page - Museum
Maverick
Seasoned Expediter
Enlighten me further, for a moment. These were offered at Nuremberg, and the Allies already had possession of them, then gave them back, for Germany to place in storage? Or, did we just pass them by, while gathering the many reported tons of other documents....back then? This one has me curious to the answer, and thanks for sending.
It might, indeed.
I don't know enough about history to know the "journey" that the documents have taken over the years. I have seen, copies, of many documents, and with the help of a German linguist, was able to hear just a little of what happened, that was enough to make one sick.
I really do believe such a trip would be of benefit for you. I am NOT being a smart butt when saying that. The chance to have questions answered, to clarify, to see with your own eyes, would serve you well.
It is important that the world not forget what took place. That is the ONLY way that we can try to insure that it NEVER happens again. It can, and will, happen again, any where on the globe, at any time. We must learn and remember so we can recognize the signs and put an end to it before it takes hold.
I really do believe such a trip would be of benefit for you. I am NOT being a smart butt when saying that. The chance to have questions answered, to clarify, to see with your own eyes, would serve you well.
It is important that the world not forget what took place. That is the ONLY way that we can try to insure that it NEVER happens again. It can, and will, happen again, any where on the globe, at any time. We must learn and remember so we can recognize the signs and put an end to it before it takes hold.
Maverick
Seasoned Expediter
Agreed. And thanks for the info.
That's what happens when people cling to a conspiracy by dismissing actual evidence that doesn't bolster their beliefs.
Yes, one might. In fact, one should. And while they are looking, they might also want to take a hard look at the evidence that was presented there.
The diff, really, is that it wasn't somehow staged well after the war so as to be meaningless.
My point is, contrary to your depiction that it's just another picture of prisoners that could have been taken by anyone well after the way and is therefor not evidence of anything, it's not that at all.
While I do admit the striking similarities, especially in their fervor, conspiracy theorists and religious folk should not be confused with one another.
The things Holocaust deniers claim to be "proof" that it never happened have all been refuted, and as with any good conspiracy theory, the more irrefutable evidence there is to debunk something, there tighter they hold on to the belief. It makes them even more convinced they are right, because the more evidence is presented, it is nothing more than additional evidence of a conspiracy.
Last edited:
Maverick
Seasoned Expediter
Ah...no, no, and no. One believes any story, because one believes the evidence.
Looking at the presented evidence from both sides, I see some wild things being presented, for sure. Shrunken heads, human lampshades, some pictures of this and that. The evidence given against this....seems more plausible to this viewer.
And nice try on the prison picture. I made the point as to why these prisoners were malnourished......which of course was deflected using the old "I'll tell you what you meant by that" tactic. Probably pulled it off for most, but some may see through it.
Falling back on the conspiracy thing explains it all, every time, right? Putting this case aside.....it's been proven many a time, that the so called theorists was correct. But it's way too easy at the present, to just scream the words, and be right yourself. That proves an effective ploy, right up until you're wrong.
For the record, I do not believe either side in total, nor do I deny atrocities. The extend of those atrocities, and who alone is guilty of them....is the point. Germany for sure, Russia for sure, and I don't think any country in fever of war, is immune to what victims might term....atrocities.
Last edited:
Oh, well, my apologies then, as I have clearly misinterpreted your statement that said, "There was no starving people to death, death showers, systematic extermination....or anything of the kind." And then when asked if you really believed that, you noted there was no evidence to support it. Obviously, you meant something other than what you wrote. I just don't know what it is. So, again, my apologies.
Maverick
Seasoned Expediter
Well, you do have me dead to rights on that one. Sometimes in a hurry, and write what I know I mean, but not necessarily concrete enough to explain it fully.
In standing corrected, I will re-word the intention......there is no evidence that I believe, supports it.
I'll trade you a gold star, for one of those conspiracy stickers? Kinda decorating my van, and it might add the personal touch I'm looking for, dontcha see.
Be safe.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
To address just a portion of your post:
If it is case, then I think Black himself would take issue with your characterization.
If that is not the case, then I am now enlightened as to what you actually meant.
The fact is, of course, failure to prove or adequately substantiate an allegation or assertion is not the same thing as disproving the allegation or assertion, or showing it to be false.
BTW - are those "newly researched documents" you reference available online anywhere ?
And, if not actually available, at least referenced or covered in some online article ?
That may well be the case ... the thing that I had an issue with was your statement where you said:
It appeared to me (rightly or wrongly), based on the particular construction of the sentence, that you were asserting that Black's book "show[ed] unquestionably ... that they didn't really know what was going on" ...
If it is case, then I think Black himself would take issue with your characterization.
If that is not the case, then I am now enlightened as to what you actually meant.
The fact is, of course, failure to prove or adequately substantiate an allegation or assertion is not the same thing as disproving the allegation or assertion, or showing it to be false.
BTW - are those "newly researched documents" you reference available online anywhere ?
And, if not actually available, at least referenced or covered in some online article ?
Last edited:
Yeah, it's the latter. Instead of comma but, it should have been period But. The yeti ideas should have been better separated into didn't sentences.
The newly discovered documents, some are referenced in the updated, expanded edition of the book (published exactly10 years after the original book, IIRC), and are referenced in at least one of Black's own articles online. I don't recall if they are actually published online, but they are in the book (paperback a well as the eBook). I read an article within the last month where he and others reference them. Not IBM the computer right now, but a Google news search should find it easily enough.
Edit: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/edwin-black/ibm-holocaust_b_1301691.html
The newly discovered documents, some are referenced in the updated, expanded edition of the book (published exactly10 years after the original book, IIRC), and are referenced in at least one of Black's own articles online. I don't recall if they are actually published online, but they are in the book (paperback a well as the eBook). I read an article within the last month where he and others reference them. Not IBM the computer right now, but a Google news search should find it easily enough.
Edit: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/edwin-black/ibm-holocaust_b_1301691.html
Last edited:
Just seen this today for some that could be in doubt.
Dig at Nazi camp reveals gas chamber, mass graves | Fox News
Dig at Nazi camp reveals gas chamber, mass graves | Fox News