Scrapbookpages Blog

March 27, 2011

My second response to Paolosilv’s Blog

Filed under: Buchenwald, Dachau, Holocaust, World War II — Tags: , , — furtherglory @ 2:24 pm

Paolosilv’s Blog, which you can read here, is an attack on literally every word that I have ever written on my blog, including my comments in answer to the comments of readers.

His last update on August 23, 2010 included a long list of statements made by me, which Paolosilv thinks are grounds for accusing me of being a “Holocaust denier,” meaning a criminal who is far worse than an axe-murderer.

I have held off for months, hoping that his blog would eventually go away, but today I finally decided to answer his accusations.

Paolosilv’s attack on me reminds me of two episodes on the Seinfeld show, in which a young comedian, played by Kathy Griffin, had a whole comedy show that was nothing but an attack on fellow comedian Jerry Seinfeld.  Similarly, Paolosilv’s blog is nothing but an attack on my blog.

I don’t have much longer to live, and it would take me the rest of my life to answer every accusation by Paolosilv, so I have selected just two of his accusations to answer.  The first accusation, of Holocaust denial, on Paolosilv’s blog, is quoted below:

” The Holocaust, with a capital H, was the state sponsored genocide of the Jews, which took place in what is now Poland, not at Dachau. “

This is of course false. It overlooks the deaths of over 100,000 persons, some of whom were Jews at Sachsenhausen-Oranienberg; at Mauthausen-Gusen camps; at Bernberg, Hadamar, Sonnenstein and other sites in which euthanasia was practiced. Even if he means, the Holocaust of the Jews did not take place within the German Reich , while the Holocaust of the Gentiles did, it is still a false statement. Jews were murdered demonstrably at these camps within the Reich borders of Sept 1 1939. Hence, it is falsehood.

My answer:  The Holocaust with a capital H refers to Jews only.  The 5 million others, who were killed by the Nazis, are not included in “The Holocaust.”

The euthanasia program was not part of “The Holocaust.”

The word “murder” is used for the deaths of all prisoners in all the Nazi concentration camps, even if the prisoner was executed or died from a disease.

Jews did, in fact, die in the camps in the Old Reich (1938 border of Germany before the Anschluss with Austria) but most of the 6 million Jewish deaths occurred in what is now Poland.  Calling my statement, that most of the deaths occurred in Poland and not in Dachau, “Holocaust denial” is really stretching the definition of “Holocaust denial” in my humble opinion.

Here is another quote from Paolosilv’s blog:


“The prisoners on the train were given enough food to last them until they got to the Flossenburg camp, but when they got there, the Flossenburg camp had already been evacuated, so they had to continue on to Dachau, a distance of only 220 miles. However, the tracks had been destroyed by American planes and the train had to be re-routed through Czechoslovakia. The train took around three weeks to get to Dachau, so that’s why food and water became a problem. All of Europe was starving in the last days of the war and the towns along the way did not have much food to give the prisoners. You can read about the train at and about the trial of the leader of the train at

“These prisoners were evacuated from Buchenwald because they were considered dangerous to the civilians in the area. They were evacuated to delay their release as long as possible so that they would not attack German civilians. Prisoners were marched out of Dachau for the same reason.”

Comment by furtherglory — July 7, 2010 @ 6:10 am

He doesn’t mention why they were being held in the first place, often without a fair trial and a right to counsel. Some prisoners attacked civilians at Weimar, but is that really what concerned Hitler? By April 45, did Hitler really ‘care ‘ about civilians? Hitler was furious with Hitler (sic) for releasing some prisoners in a ‘prisoners for trucks ‘ deal with the Allies, and forbade any further release of prisoners.

My answer: There are three issues here:

1. the reason that prisoners were held at Buchenwald

2. the releasing of prisoners for ransom

3. the protection of German civilians.  I will respond to the first issue first:

1.  The Buchenwald camp, from which the prisoners on the “death train” were transported to Dachau, was THE main camp for Resistance fighters, who were fighting as illegal combatants. Buchenwald was not specifically a camp for Jews; it was mainly a camp for political prisoners.

Monument to the Resistance fighters who were prisoners at Buchenwald concentration camp

The photo above shows a large monument to the Resistance fighters at Buchenwald; there is no large monument to the Jews who were mainly brought to Buchenwald after they had been marched out of Auschwitz. The Resistance fighters did not have the protection of the Geneva Convention because they had violated the Geneva Convention themselves. The prisoners who had violated the Geneva Convention were not given a trial, nor the right to counsel in the camps, but some of the prisoners at Buchenwald did have a trial before being sent there.

In 1937, the Buchenwald camp was specifically set up for prisoners who had been convicted twice and had served two sentences in prison. They were sent to Buchenwald under a new law, which said that such prisoners had to undergo rehabilitation for at least six months in a concentration camp. Homosexuals who had been convicted twice under Paragraph 175 of the German law were sent to camps under this new law.  This means that many of the Buchenwald prisoners had already been given two trials.

2.  Hitler was furious with Himmler for releasing prisoners FOR RANSOM; he was not furious with himself, as Paolosilv mistakenly wrote.  I don’t know whether Hitler had expressly forbidden any more releases of prisoners for ransom, but there were other prisoners released for ransom after the “prisoners for trucks” deal which was actually “Jews for trucks” as only Jews were released for ransom in World War II.

A total of 2,896 Jews were released for ransom, according to information given at the Bergen-Belsen Memorial site. Bergen-Belsen was specifically set up as a camp for Jews who were available for exchange for German prisoners.

3.  The protection of civilians.  Hitler definitely feared attacks on civilians in April 1945, and that is why he ordered prisoners to be evacuated from the camps so that they would not be released by the Allies.  The whole Sachsenhausen camp, which was near Berlin, was evacuated except for around 3,000 sick prisoners.  The order to evacuate Sachsenhausen was given after prisoners from Buchenwald had gone to Weimar and attacked civilians.

Prisoners were marched out of Sachsenhausen camp

Prisoners were also marched out of Dachau so that they would not be able to attack civilians if they were released.  The prisoners who were marched out were Jews and Russian POWs, or in other words, the prisoners that were most likely to get revenge on the German people.

Russian POWs and Jews marching out of Dachau

There are several books about the attacks on German civilians after World War II ended; these books are too sickening to read, so I am not recommending them.

August 22, 2010

My long-awaited answer to accusations on Paolosilv’s blog

Filed under: Dachau, Germany, Holocaust, World War II — Tags: , , , — furtherglory @ 1:32 pm

I am finally feeling well enough to wade through a long blog post accusing me of being a Holocaust denier, and to answer the accusations. You can read the accusations on Paolosilv’s blog here.

The long, tedious post on Paolosilv’s Blog reminds me of the Seinfeld show, which I watch in re-runs every evening.  The Seinfeld show is famously about “nothing” and it includes many long conversations in which the members of the cast argue about something that is very insignificant.  I don’t have the time, nor the motivation, to address all the points brought up on the Holocaust denier accusation blog post, but there is one point which I believe should be cleared up: the reason for the death marches out of the Nazi camps near the end of World War II.

I wrote this in a comment on my blog on February 22, 2010:

“Towards the end of the war, trains were scarce in Europe. The Germans did not use valuable trains to bring prisoners from the Auschwitz death camp to camps in Germany, which were not death camps, in order to kill them. The prisoners were brought to Germany so that they could work in the factories in the sub-camps.”

Paolosilv’s blog wrote this in answer to my comment:

This is again, untrue. The prisoners were ordered to Germany by Hitler/Himmler so they could not testify. The orders were that they were to be killed, as I have posted the quotes from the Nazis elsewhere.

Why would prisoners be marched all the way from Auschwitz -Birkenau to camps in Germany so late in the war (early January 1945)? Just for ‘labor’? Unlikelihood.

Where is the order from Hitler or Himmler, which said that the prisoners should be marched out of Auschwitz to Germany to be killed?  Was this order entered into evidence at the Nuremberg IMT?

What about all the survivors of the march out of Auschwitz who ended up in the sub-camps in Germany where they worked in factories?  Otto Frank, the father of Anne Frank, said that the prisoners at Auschwitz were given a choice about whether they wanted to join the march or stay behind.  Did the order from Hitler or Himmler say that the Auschwitz prisoners had a choice between being killed or staying behind?

Why did 60,000 prisoners join the march, which was led through two feet of snow, by German soldiers?  Maybe because the prisoners knew the Germans would feed them and keep them in good health because Germany needed workers during World War II.

In America, women worked in the factories, but in Germany, most of the women stayed at home to take care of their six children.

I also wrote this on my blog:

So that leaves the question: Why didn’t the Nazis just kill the 67,000 Jews that were at Auschwitz and all of its sub-camps on January 18, 1945. Even with three large gas chambers still in operation on that date, it would have taken a long time to kill them all and burn the bodies. The Germans had to leave in a hurry because they knew the Soviet soldiers were close by. If they left all the prisoners behind, there would be 60,000 healthy Jews on the loose who would potentially take revenge on the German people, plus 7,000 sick Jews and children. Besides that, the Nazis needed prisoners to work in the German munitions factories, building Messerschmitt airplanes and V-2 rockets so Germany would have at least some chance of winning the war.”

So, actually the “death march” out of Auschwitz does make historical sense.

In answer to the above statement, Paolosilv’s said this on his blog:

Here he denies that there were death marches, or puts them into quotes so as to deny their purpose.

Paolo is still insisting that the prisoners were marched out of Auschwitz in order to kill them.  In fact, he is not the only one who believes this.  Even college professors, who teach the Holocaust, believe that the “death marches” were a means of killing the prisoners so that they could not testify against the Nazis after the war.  So why leave 7,000 prisoners behind, who could potentially testify?

Another quote from Paolosilv’s blog:

Furtherglory writes that the Nazis did not want them to take revenge on the civilian population, as happened at Weimar.

It makes no sense at all. Most of these people were in rough shape, and were not able to work. You would not march people in the dead of winter hundreds of miles so that they could work. This is utter bullshit.

The prisoners, who were marched out of Auschwitz, walked 50 kilometers (around 35 miles) to Gleiwitz which was on the border between what had been Poland and Germany in 1938.  From Gleiwitz, the prisoners were put on trains to camps in Germany and then transferred to sub-camps where they were, in fact, put to work in factories, no bullshit.  The 7,500 prisoners who “were not able to work” were left behind in the three Auschwitz-Birkenau camps.

If the purpose of the death marches was to kill the prisoners, why weren’t they, in fact, killed, as planned?  The prisoners who were marched out of Auschwitz wound up working in the sub-camps of the major camps in Germany.

The most famous prisoner, who marched out of Auschwitz, was Elie Wiesel, who says that he got up out of his hospital bed and voluntarily joined the marchers.  He was taken to Buchenwald where he survived.  Primo Levi, another famous Auschwitz survivor, stayed behind and also survived.

I have already addressed the issue of whether or not the Jewish prisoners at Buchenwald were taken out of the camp to prevent them from taking revenge on the civilians in Weimar.  The original Yiddish version of the book “Night” tells about the Jewish prisoners who did, in fact, go to Weimar to get revenge, just as the Nazis had anticipated that they would.

In February 2010 I wrote this on my blog:

Dachau was a camp for political prisoners who had a good chance of being released. There was a special badge for prisoners who had been released and then re-arrested, which means that there were numerous prisoners that were given their freedom after they had been “rehabilitated.”

Paulosilv wrote this on his blog, in his answer to the above statement:

Here he overlooks the unregistered deaths at Dachau, some of whom were Jews. Others were Poles, Russians and assorted prisoners.———-

If these deaths were “unregistered,” how do we know that the deaths occurred?  Maybe the reason that some deaths were “unregistered” is because the deaths never happened.

There were, in fact, prisoners who were brought to Dachau, given a shower, and then were never seen again.  All of them turned up later, very much alive, at the eleven Kaufering sub-camps.  The Official Army Report, by the American liberators of Dachau, mentions these prisoners who disappeared. The Official Army Report says that their alleged deaths were “unregistered.”  That is the origin of this false information.

I am beginning to feel like Jerry Seinfeld, arguing with George about nothing, so I will end this post now.