Deceit & Misrepresentation The Meaning of "Special Treatment" Perhaps, rather than quoting
Faurisson
in a vain attempt to confuse the issue, Holocaust deniers should
consider
Adolf Eichmann's
comments. (Unless, of course, they are going to claim that Eichmann
doesn't qualify as an "expert" in "special
handling," while Dr. Faurisson does?)
During his interrogation by the Israelis, the following question was
asked: "What does 'special treatment' mean, and who was subjected
to it?" Eichmann's response is at variance with Faurisson's, which
comes as no surprise. It is interesting to note here Faurisson's
employment of the "if it sheds doubt on my thesis, I will ignore
it" technique of Holocaust denial. Consider Eichmann's answer:
Eichmann: Special treatment was killing. Who thought up the term - I don't
know. Must have been Himmler, who else could it have been - but then, I
have no proof, maybe Heydrich thought it up after Göring gave him
his authorization. But I really don't know. I'm just trying to puzzle
it out.
[4]
"Special treatment was killing." (What part of that do
Holocaust deniers not understand? Why do Faurisson and Porter
ignore this?)
Interrogator: But you knew special treatment meant killing?
Eichmann: Everybody knew that, yes, Herr Hauptmann, everybody
knew. When a shipment was marked "for special treatment,"
they decided at the point of arrival who was fit for labor and who
wasn't.
[5]
"Everyone knew that," except, apparently, Dr. Faurisson,
Mr. Gannon, Mr. Porter, and the rest of the Holocaust denial social set.
There is an interesting correlation between the use of "special
treatment" by the Nazis, and the similar employment of the words
"special healing procedure" (Besonderes Heilverfahren) as they
related to the shipment of disabled and mentally ill children to
Grafeneck
and similar Nazi installations.
Only a Nazi could use such a term to describe the deliberate murder
of thousands of children!
[6]
Let's get back to Mr. Kaltenbrunner, shall we? Since Holocaust deniers
like Faurisson and Porter are fond of quoting some of his Nürnberg
testimony, it is apparent that they consider him a valid source of
information on this subject. That's encouraging, in light of the
following:
During the first two and one-half years of the occupation, the
security police in the government-general shot seventeen thousand
Poles, a figure that led Frank to comment: "We must not be
squeamish when we learn that a total of seventeen thousand people have
been shot; these persons who were shot were nothing more than war
victims." [7] In 1943, executions in Poland and Russia
accelerated, even though Kaltenbrunner directed that, "as a rule,
no more children will be shot [and] special treatment is to be
limited to a minimum." So that this order would not be
misunderstood, he explained that "if we limit our harsh measures
for the time being, that is only done [because] the most important
thing is the recruiting of workers. ...[Emphasis Nizkor's]" [8]
Let's take a look at the witness Kaltenbrunner, in light of Mr.
Gannon's assertion that "special treatment" equated with
champagne and bon bons, and Faurisson's silliness about keeping the
Jews alive.
Kaltenbrunner wanted to keep Poles alive so they can be employed as
slave labour. In order to effect this end, he orders that
"special treatment is to be limited to a minimum."
Isn't it ironic that Kaltenbrunner would order "special
treatment," Dr. Faurisson's "keeping the Jews alive,"
to be "limited to a minimum" in order to keep the Jews
alive? What's wrong with this picture?
On September 20th, 1939, SS-Gruppenführer Heydrich sent a
telegram to Gestapo regional and subregional headquarters on the
"basic principles of internal security during the war." You
can find this in Nürnberg document 1944-PS. Paragraph four of
the telegram reads:
To avoid any misunderstandings, please take note of the following:
...a distinction must be made between those who may be dealt with in
the usual way and those who must be given special treatment. The
latter case covers subjects who, due to their most objectionable
nature, their dangerousness, or their ability to serve as tools of
propaganda for the enemy, are suitable for elimination, without
respect for persons, by merciless treatment (namely, by execution).
[9]
On September 26th, 1939, a memo at a staff meeting held at the
Reich Security Main Office indicates which sections were to be
responsible for handling the "special treatments." Next to
the words "special treatment" are written, in parentheses,
"execution."
[10]
Paragraph A, section III of a memorandum from Heinrich Himmler,
dated February 20th, 1942, states: "Special treatment is carried
out by hanging."
[11]
From "USSR Operational Report No. 124," dated October
25th, 1941, page 6: "Due to the grave danger of epidemic, the
complete liquidation of Jews from the ghetto in Vitebsk was begun on
October 8th, 1941. The number of Jews to whom special treatment is to
be applied is around 3,000." The meaning of "special treatment"
is clearly spelled out in many such reports from the eastern front.
[12]
[
Previous |
Index |
Next ]
Home ·
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Search
Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.
The Techniques of Holocaust Denial
Part 2 of 3