MetTech Murray Rennie writes:
>Are you implying that a recollection of an event has no validity whatsoever?
>I assume that you believe the Hoess memoirs were written by Hoess while
>under Polish “influence”. If this is indeed what you believe, supply
>proof.
Dear Mr. Rennie,
I am certainly NOT trying to imply that a “recollection” has no validity,
simply that the so-called Hoess “Confession” is not a Nazi- wartime. It
was written, if the Translator’s Note by Constantine FotzGibbon is to be
believed at the beginning of–Commandant of Auschwitz:The Autobiography
of Rudolf Hoess–Popular Library, NY, 1951, pages 5-7, in “January and
Februaru of 1947, that is to say, after the preliminary inquiries had
been completed, but before he faced trial.”
Recollections do have validity, but when they are the obvious result of
torture–sane people do tend to reject them.
An old axiom of police work going back at least as far as the middle ages
and witchcraft trials is the following: If you have no evidence, try to
get a confession.
To get a written statement like Hoess’s under the circumstances was
rather easy. Any good communist interrogator–Russian communist or
Polish would have certainly qualified–would have known how to do it
easily enough. If his SS personnel records were available as they
probably were, it was even easier.
“Sit down Herr Hoess and write your entire life-story–we have time,
and tell us everything.” Hoess writes for a few days and then submits his
text. The interrogator then tells Hoess: “That was good but you did not
mention anything about all those people you murdered–you must add that
and describe the process in detail.” Hoess protests but is persuaded to
cooperate. He writes a new text, which is resubmitted and then rejected
because this or that is missing. After numerous rewrites, a satisfactory
text is finally produced–which means it says what the interrogator wants
the defendant to say, personal info is window-dressing–and, it is in the
defendant’s own handwriting with all kinds of personal details: therefore,
to the idiots who cannot think beyond the obvious–It Must Be A Genuine,
Voluntary Confession.
For all those people, who cannot believe Hoess was under “duress”, we
have some slightly used bridges around here that can be purchased for a
very good price.
Holocaust is a HOAX. Except for some rather short and vague sections
pertaining to mass murder, the vast bulk of the Hoess confession is
totally irrelevant to the Holocaust charges–except for convincing the
naive that those short and vague sections have some credibility.
Auschwitz was a nice place to spend the war–compared to many of the
alternatives.
FPBERG
Article 13638 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!
howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!trane.uninett.no!eunet.no!nuug!EU.net!uunet!
ankh.iia.org!mary.iia.org!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Friedrich Berg)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: back to basics
Date: 9 Jul 1994 08:54:32 -0400
Organization: International Internet Association.
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mary.iia.org
