I was looking up some information about Crystal Night and happened to come accross this web page first. Crystal Night It is a rather lengthy article but I couldn't even finish it without stopping and asking for some of the other members to please give me some opinion and perspective on the way the author is presenting this issue. I would especially like it if the European members would pipe up about it. I will reserve my comments until some others have chimmed in.
I would describe it as rather undisguised Holocaust denial. Which is not surprising considering the site it is published on (the Insitute for Historical Review). The chapter entitled National Socialistic Ethical Standards is particularly damning, just note the "In my opinion, the youth of Adolf Hitler's Germany was the finest of all Europe and perhaps of the entire world" followed by "The same ethical standards applied to the SS and SA." The author also goes on to state that "[The] "Final Solution" did not mean physical extermination -- it meant only emigration of the Jews from Germany", not to mention "In fact, most German Jews survived the anti-Semitic measures quite well"! The entire article is complete and utter rubbish, of course.
Must say that the author is, like Heartland says, trying to say "we did not know what happened to the jews " kinda thing. Also his writing reminds me of, yes you guessed it, Mr Irving... I do believe several of the mentioned things are true but as themselves do not prove the author´s point. Forbidding to destroy shops was not protecting the jews but because the nazis wanted to get the shops unharmed to themselves. Also the people were ripped off their money and valuables when they were sent out of the country. And the problem that those leading German nazis argued and blamed each other was because everybody wanted to get their place in the sun ( =Hitler ), not to protect the jews. The most amazing fact is that foreign agents are accused of causing the Crystal night, or even the jews causing it to get worldwide attention... Sorry but
Yup, it's using one of the oldest tricks in the book, throwing in a few (misinterpreted) facts or half-truths to support the bigger lie. Like the thing Kai mentioned about the shops being "protected" by the Nazis. Basically, the theory goes that a vile and bitter-tasting lie is always easier to swallow when it's sugercoated with just a pinch of truth.
The Institute for Historical Review is one of the most famous neo-nazi revisionist sites on the web. The article is the usual mix of lies and half-truths, It is not worthy of consideration.
Originally posted by redcoat: I very quickly came to the conclusion that this was indeed some sort of crap like that. If our forum is one of the wonderful things about the internet, places like this are one of the worst. I sat my daughter down and showed her the sight and warned her about the dangers of internet information. There are way too many people out there who don't understand the concept of getting a balanced mix of information sources and they could belive this kind of trash. I can only see this kind of deception being more pervasive and more persuasive as the people who actually lived through it pass away. When there is no individual who can stand up and say "This, this is what happened. I was there". Then it becomes more of a debate, with people providing supposed evidence from whatever source they wish.
