Hitler Wanted to Exterminate the Jews

Joseph Hell ConversationJoseph Hell was a journalist that interviewed Hitler for his newspaper. He wrote down Hitler’s exact words from the questions he asked. You can see his exact words here:http://www.ifz-muenchen.de...Con hasn’t brought up any evidence or any reason of why this was not a legitimate conversation, merely claims. Con can deny it all he wants, but I have the evidence on my side.Con says that he ‘searched Google’ and that he found that Hell ‘attributed that quote to Hitler’. Yet I find it odd that Con didn’t manage to cite one single source that backs up this claim. Either Con lied and is just hoping that we wouldn't look into it, or he merely forgot to cite them. So I decided to do my own research and found no sources that back up Con’s claim. Google it yourself, I visited about 20 different websites and none of them say what Con says they say. I actually found the exact oppositel; numerous websites and books backing up the legitimacy of Hell's interview.http://www.nizkor.org...http://users.ipfw.edu...http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu...https://books.google.com...http://www.nizkor.org...https://books.google.com...https://books.google.com...https://books.google.com...https://books.google.com...https://books.google.com...http://holocaust.hklaw.com...Even if all this wasn’t enough, Con still has the audacity to claim that Joseph Hell never existed!Joseph Hell, by all appearances, is a figure who pops into the historical record once, serves his purpose of getting Hitler to incriminate himself, and then disappears… the journalist, Joseph Hell, seems to be a fabrication too.Joseph Hell was a major in the army, he was a journalist who collaborated with Dr. Fritz Gerlich, he was an editor of the weekly newspaper Der Gerade Weg. What Con says it not only an extreme exaggeration, but also a lie in the face of abundant evidence.Con then gives an example of Hitler’s speeches, and concludes, from his own reasoning, that it doesn’t ‘sound like Hitler’.Con then reasons that Hitler didn’t say this because ‘shooting is more effective than hanging’. Con thinks that because shooting Jews would be easier than hanging them, Hitler never said this. Hitler was merely portraying his desire to kill all the Jews, and portrayed it in a way to encompass his burning hate for the JewsBesides, what Con says is a red herring anyways. It is still clear that Hitler wanted to kill the Jews, by hanging or by shooting. If it wasn’t the last round, I would remind Con to stay on topic, and not commit fallacies.1b."I will once more be a prophet: if the international Jewish financiers ... succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will [be] the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe."Con attempts to defeat this quote by quoting an expert. I click on Con’s link to the evidence and it says,JSTOR could not retrieve the requested item because the link does not resolve to any existing content.I don’t see how we are supposed to believe Con’s evidence if it doesn’t exist. Even if Con hadn’t fabricated this quote, he is still a hypocrite. Later on in his response, he criticizes me for quoting experts, yet then he does the same thing! Hilarious! Con’s argument here amounts to absolutely nothing.Con then gives more examples, all from the same source, which is nonexistent.Hitler didn't actually want to kill them. If he did want to, and in fact carried it out, then where is the written order from Hitler commanding such an atrocity? The fact such a document doesn't exist is telling.At first the reader might believe Con’s statement as convincing, yet any research completely contradicts his claim.Even if we ignore the aforementioned evidence for why Hitler never issued a written FinalSolution order and hypothetically suppose that one did at some point exist, its absence from thehistorical record can still be explained as being due to the large-scale destruction of documents and other physical evidence of the Holocaust by the Nazis in the waning days of the war. As their impending defeat became increasingly clear in 1944 and into 1945, the Nazi regime began a desperate undertaking to destroy all documentary evidence of their various crimes against humanity, including internal reports, personal correspondence, and various propaganda materials.http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu...You would think Con would realize this exact document would be the first thing they would destroy.2b.Here Con accuses me of an appeal to authority, when he does the same exact thing and criticizes me for it. But we don’t even know if his appeal authority was real either. If Con is going to disallow my appeal to authority, he must disallow his own, which gives me this argument. If he allows appeal to authorities, then I lose this point, but win the other point. Whichever way I win a point, and if I win one point I win, I have won!Con then asks me for proof of Hitler's intent on mass murder,How about the fact that, Joseph Goebbels, Rudolf Hoss, and Heinrich Himmler all document it in their private diaries that correlate in Hitler giving the order for genocide of the Jews? Or that while all the mass murder of 6 million Jews was going on, Hitler never gave the order to stop it? He obviously knew about it, and could stop it, yet never gave the order to stop. Because he wanted it to happen.3b.Con doesn't mention which quote he is talking about so I can't address it.4b.Con implies that I was deceitful and that I took the quote out of context, and then tells you to find it in context and scroll through the entire book to find it. The quote was in context.Scroll to the 40th paragraph starts with, “Any idea of real resistance to France…”http://www.hitler.org...This is another example of Con trying to be deceitful, he's hoping that you will just believe him and not look into it yourself.Con claims that there is no desire to kill Jews. I ask the readers to read the sentence again, If at the beginning of the War and during the War twelve or fifteen thousand of these Hebrew corrupters of the people had been held under poison gas, as happened to hundreds of thousands of our very best German workers in the field, the sacrifice of millions at the front would not have been in vain.Hitler wants to kill 15,000 Jews so that hundreds of thousands of German’s lives would not be in vain. 5b.I did mistakenly cite this quotation, my apologies.Yet after Con points out my mistake, he makes the claim that this quote never occurred. He then gives evidence to the jewishvirtuallibrary.com. Yet this is exactly where I got my quote, look and see, the fourth quotation. from,https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...This quote is true, evidence of such from the same site as Con uses to prove that it wasn’t. This shows that Con never read through his evidence, and was being deceitful…again.6b.Here Con says that this evidence is false because Albert Speer was tortured to give a false confession during the Nuremberg Trials. He then sites a website as evidence. There are two things wrong with this.1. The article that Con cites as evidence of his claim is Institute for Historical Review (IHR), an American Holocaust Denial organization, and it was written by Mark Weber (https://en.wikipedia.org...), director of the Institute for Historical Review. This is the most biased source Con could possibly use.2. Con tells us that it is ‘obvious that Albert Speer was tortured’ yet when you read his source, they never mention he was tortured at all. Look for yourself:http://www.ihr.org...Con has no evidence that Albert Speer was ever involved in the torture, and therefore can’t deny it as a credible source, it is upheld!