David Brody, Romans in America, Beyond Pre-Columbian Silliness |493|

#41
No, 'we' don't want to have a discussion on this topic and nor does Alex want to host one. Strictly verboten. I did have an interesting time finding more out about the folks referenced in the doco who also enquired though.
Perhaps the covid thread is a better place for the subject because what do you do when you see a doctor or scientist calling the pandemic into question - thats right, you have a dig for flaws in their character; as no doubt do the powers that be:)
 
#42
No, 'we' don't want to have a discussion on this topic and nor does Alex want to host one. Strictly verboten.
I did have an interesting time finding more out about the folks referenced in the doco who also enquired though.
Perhaps the covid thread is a better place for the subject because what do you do when you see a doctor or scientist calling the pandemic into question - thats right, you have a dig for flaws in their character; as no doubt do the powers that be[/QUOTE

No, 'we' don't want to have a discussion on this topic and nor does Alex want to host one. Strictly verboten.

Aye, thats more like it! Zucht und Ordnung muss sein!

I did have an interesting time finding more out about the folks referenced in the doco who also enquired though.

Ok, dont let me/us hang dry after that (well done!)teaser. what d`ya find out?

Perhaps the covid thread is a better place for the subject because what do you do when you see a doctor or scientist calling the pandemic into question - thats right, you have a dig for flaws in their character; as no doubt do the powers that be.

Come on, nobody does that, sounds like you are a conspiracy theorist...
 
Last edited:

Alex

Administrator
#44
Any 10 min Google search (and fair amount of sorting trash from quality of course, as with every topic) can potentially give anyone
instant access to actually thousands of precisely referenced documents, literature sources, material, scholarly (and other) articles from dozens of revisionist academics worldwide etc. Always been there (before Internet on paper), some since over 100years (WW1 included), not hard to find at all.
ok but it seems like we're kind of going around in circles. I keep asking for specifics... and you keep saying " google it" :)

here is my starting point... tell me if you disagree with any of this:

WANNSEE CONFERENCE AND THE "FINAL SOLUTION"
On January 20, 1942, 15 high-ranking Nazi Party and German government officials gathered at a villa in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee to discuss and coordinate the implementation of what they called the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question."

KEY FACTS

  • 1

    The mass murder of the Jews by Nazi Germany and its collaborators required the coordination and cooperation of governmental agencies throughout Axis-controlled Europe.

  • 2

    The Wannsee Conference was a high-level meeting of German officials to discuss and implement the so-called “Final Solution of the Jewish Question” (mass killing).

  • 3

    The SS envisioned that some 11 million Jews, some of them not living on German-controlled territory, would be eradicated as part of the Nazi program.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/wannsee-conference-and-the-final-solution
 
#45
ok but it seems like we're kind of going around in circles. I keep asking for specifics... and you keep saying " google it" :)

here is my starting point... tell me if you disagree with any of this:

WANNSEE CONFERENCE AND THE "FINAL SOLUTION"
On January 20, 1942, 15 high-ranking Nazi Party and German government officials gathered at a villa in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee to discuss and coordinate the implementation of what they called the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question."

KEY FACTS

  • 1

    The mass murder of the Jews by Nazi Germany and its collaborators required the coordination and cooperation of governmental agencies throughout Axis-controlled Europe.

  • 2

    The Wannsee Conference was a high-level meeting of German officials to discuss and implement the so-called “Final Solution of the Jewish Question” (mass killing).

  • 3

    The SS envisioned that some 11 million Jews, some of them not living on German-controlled territory, would be eradicated as part of the Nazi program.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/wannsee-conference-and-the-final-solution

Sorry for the very late reply, did not see your last reply.

-"I keep asking for specifics... and you keep saying " google it"
(Interesting interpretation, I thought that it was me who was asking for several rounds now for anything specific regarding the material/data /amount you actually have researched/read about that specific topic, without sofar much success it seems..anyways, not too important.)
With all due respect (and as said I have a lot of respect for your work in general), No, my actual point/question was/is "Why have you not done that (looked/googled at both/all sides/data of the picture) long ago already before (if) forming any strong opinion either way?"

Again-not meant polemically, I would just very much appreciate to have a level 3 (4?)discussion, 360 degree skeptical discussion. We all except me have biases I guess and would be nice to keep a skeptikal eye on those ours as well...?

So, I presume we shall simply continue in this thread, fair enough.

-"here is my starting point... tell me if you disagree with any of this.."
Agreeing or dis- I find that a very strange question here must say, nobody would ask if one (dis)agrees or not with f.ex. NDE, Flat Earth Theory or any Crime in Court, should not the only thing mattering be the scientific data/proof and whether it holds up to scrutiny according to science/law and common sense?

With that in mind I wonder practically about the page you link to: purely objectively seen it presents a narrative of "statements" (titled "Key facts") and that is of course fair enough as such, but what are those based upon exactly?
As pure statements they are no more no less than any others like f.ex."the universe is meaningless","Earth is flat after all" or "Saddam Hussein bought tubes for centrifuges to build WMD" and in our (alternative) community I think our reaction to all those latter would naturally be "Ok. But what are these statements/claims based upon, please present the objective evidence so we can scrutinize that and see if it actually holds water to scientific/lawfull investigation!".
So, presuming that we agree(?)that this of course also applies to the statements you/they present (off the USHMM site), could you please give an exact direct link to the primary source data on which those claims (at least the main ones) are based upon and which personally (if) convinced you that those are true as stated (please as exact as possible-If it is a document, please link to that original text with page and paragraph number of the exact phrases concerning the claim. If witness testimony, please name and link/pagenumber to the text, if forensic evidence, please link to the specific scientific report and page, as in standard historiography, so we can all have a look and effectively investigate)?

Must admit me being very surprised to find nothing of that kind on the whole USHMM site, proporting to be an encyclopedia and objective, no direct sources refered at all, no independant links, no footnotes?
As comparison, normal mainstream standard encyclopedia entries regarding other controversial topics (f.ex. even low bar Wikipedia at least gives sources and links to alternate/conflicting views):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychic_detective
Why this difference of style of presentation?

And if I may ask you:
In general- as starting point and to get exactly where you are coming from and avoid picking unimportant details-
Regarding the total overall mainstream picture/depiction, according to what I`ve read you write sofar I`d preliminarily assume:
1. That probably your position is not an extreme one that necessarily absolutely ALL in those general depictions/stories/testimonies is true, but a more pragmatic one that probably/surely the gist/most (if so, scale fom 10 (ALL is true) to 1 (a LITTLE CORE of it is) where approximately?)of it is and that is by far enough as well. Or maybe I am wrong?
2. Your main point seems to be- NO apologists for evil deeds/atrocities during WW2, free of partisanship to any side. According to international law and common (including spriritual) sense Germany/Axxispowers are to be held responsible for every atrocity they commited, as are the US/Allies for every they committed during that conflict. No apologists/justification one for the other..,correct assumed?
Lastly, would you agree that:
3. Generally the 3 worst sources for establishing what really happened in the camps (and other crime sites) are probably
a)the german accused perpetrators and
b)the (mostly jewish) victims/inmates and
c)(to maybe a lesser degree or maybe not..) the war time enemies of Germany (mainly Allies), for all having definitely something to gain (legal defence, emotion/revenge-, distraction from own crimes, reparation payment...)here-
a)-from minimizing what happened and
b)-and c) from maximising it.
Which practically casts doubt on all sides, which is of course impossible, so, as general rule, we have to accept the general flaw, all sides/testimonies etc must probably be taken with a (or several) grain(s) of salt?

(-Regarding specifics what I personally found informative:
The Holocaust Industry (Norman Finkelstein),
Why did the Heavens not darken (Arno Meyer).)
 

Alex

Administrator
#46
could you please give an exact direct link to the primary source data on which those claims (at least the main ones) are based upon
https://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/Holocaust/wansee-transcript.html

THE WANSEE PROTOCOL
This English text of the Wannsee protocol is based on the official U.S. government translation prepared for evidence in trials at Nuremberg, as reproduced in John Mendelsohn, ed., _The Holocaust: Selected Documents in Eighteen Volumes._ Vol. 11: The Wannsee Protocol and a 1944 Report on Auschwitz by the Office of Strategic Services (New York: Garland, 1982), 18-32. Substantial revisions to the Nuremberg text have been made to add clarity and, in some cases, to correct mistakes in an obviously hasty translation. These revisions were made by Dan Rogers of the University of South Alabama. This document is in the public domain and may be freely reproduced. Comments and suggestions may be e-mailed to [email protected].


Stamp: Top Secret

30 copies
16th copy

Minutes of discussion.

I. The following persons took part in the discussion about the
final solution of the Jewish question which took place in Berlin,
am Grossen Wannsee No. 56/58 on 20 January 1942.

Gauleiter Dr. Meyer and Reichsamt- Reich Ministry for
leiter Dr. Leibbrandt the Occupied Eastern
territories

Secretary of State Dr. Stuckart Reich Ministry for
the Interior

Secretary of State Neumann Plenipotentiary for
the Four Year Plan

Secretary of State Dr. Freisler Reich Ministry of
Justice

Secretary of State Dr. Buehler Office of the Govern-
ment General

Under Secretary of State Dr. Luther Foreign Office

SS-Oberfuehrer Klopfer Party Chancellery

Ministerialdirektor Kritzinger Reich Chancellery

SS-Gruppenfuehrer Hofmann Race and Settlement
Main Office

SS-Gruppenfuehrer Mueller Reich Main Security
SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann Office

SS-Oberfuehrer Dr. Schoengarth Security Police and SD
Chief of the Security Police and
the SD in the Government General

SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Lange Security Police and SD
Commander of the Security Police
and the SD for the General-District
Latvia, as deputy of the Commander
of the Security Police and the SD
for the Reich Commissariat "Eastland".


II. At the beginning of the discussion Chief of the Security
Police and of the SD, SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Heydrich, reported
that the Reich Marshal had appointed him delegate for the
preparations for the final solution of the Jewish question in
Europe and pointed out that this discussion had been called for
the purpose of clarifying fundamental questions. The wish of the
Reich Marshal to have a draft sent to him concerning
organizational, factual and material interests in relation to the
final solution of the Jewish question in Europe makes necessary
an initial common action of all central offices immediately
concerned with these questions in order to bring their general
activities into line.

The Reichsfuehrer-SS and the Chief of the German Police
(Chief of the Security Police and the SD) was entrusted with the
official central handling of the final solution of the Jewish
question without regard to geographic borders...
 
#47
https://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/Holocaust/wansee-transcript.html

THE WANSEE PROTOCOL
This English text of the Wannsee protocol is based on the official U.S. government translation prepared for evidence in trials at Nuremberg, as reproduced in John Mendelsohn, ed., _The Holocaust: Selected Documents in Eighteen Volumes._ Vol. 11: The Wannsee Protocol and a 1944 Report on Auschwitz by the Office of Strategic Services (New York: Garland, 1982), 18-32. Substantial revisions to the Nuremberg text have been made to add clarity and, in some cases, to correct mistakes in an obviously hasty translation. These revisions were made by Dan Rogers of the University of South Alabama. This document is in the public domain and may be freely reproduced. Comments and suggestions may be e-mailed to [email protected].


Stamp: Top Secret

30 copies
16th copy

Minutes of discussion.

I. The following persons took part in the discussion about the
final solution of the Jewish question which took place in Berlin,
am Grossen Wannsee No. 56/58 on 20 January 1942.

Gauleiter Dr. Meyer and Reichsamt- Reich Ministry for
leiter Dr. Leibbrandt the Occupied Eastern
territories

Secretary of State Dr. Stuckart Reich Ministry for
the Interior

Secretary of State Neumann Plenipotentiary for
the Four Year Plan

Secretary of State Dr. Freisler Reich Ministry of
Justice

Secretary of State Dr. Buehler Office of the Govern-
ment General

Under Secretary of State Dr. Luther Foreign Office

SS-Oberfuehrer Klopfer Party Chancellery

Ministerialdirektor Kritzinger Reich Chancellery

SS-Gruppenfuehrer Hofmann Race and Settlement
Main Office

SS-Gruppenfuehrer Mueller Reich Main Security
SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann Office

SS-Oberfuehrer Dr. Schoengarth Security Police and SD
Chief of the Security Police and
the SD in the Government General

SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Lange Security Police and SD
Commander of the Security Police
and the SD for the General-District
Latvia, as deputy of the Commander
of the Security Police and the SD
for the Reich Commissariat "Eastland".


II. At the beginning of the discussion Chief of the Security
Police and of the SD, SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Heydrich, reported
that the Reich Marshal had appointed him delegate for the
preparations for the final solution of the Jewish question in
Europe and pointed out that this discussion had been called for
the purpose of clarifying fundamental questions. The wish of the
Reich Marshal to have a draft sent to him concerning
organizational, factual and material interests in relation to the
final solution of the Jewish question in Europe makes necessary
an initial common action of all central offices immediately
concerned with these questions in order to bring their general
activities into line.

The Reichsfuehrer-SS and the Chief of the German Police
(Chief of the Security Police and the SD) was entrusted with the
official central handling of the final solution of the Jewish
question without regard to geographic borders...
Ok, short digression (return to specifics immediately!)-over the years have met quite many people both on the mainstream-holocaust-narrative believer and denier side and while neither dis/agree with either necessarily, my practical(social)experience has been that(unfortunately?) the latter infact have usually a far greater knowledge purely factually over details and overall context of the historic period/particular happenings within than the former, which often are only able to cite the most rudimentary schoolbook-/hollywood level statements/claims and when asked for any real evidentiary specifics, can hardly name the most basic of details or context regarding what they actually cite. Infact often react rather emotionally to such questions and instead of specifying then switch to another new statement/claim which shall "proof" the first as being self-evident (therefore needing no evidence...). Unfortunately when asked about the specific evidence for the latter claim now, exact same cycle again and after about 3 such rounds usually end up trying to discredit the opponent by personal attacks and/or just leaving the room (or forum discussion) by/and some general condemning/brushing off like "all bunk/wacky", without any detailed investigation ever happened...
The deniers can get angry as well and fall into fruitless polemics at times, but strangely enough seem overall calmer, tend to stay, seemingly feeling very comfortable investigating/discussing the very specifics and greater context to whatever degree of detail ..Not sure what to make of that, anyways....seems we have sofar here survived the first rounds of investigating (though I seem to test your patience more and more...), lets hope it continues that way...
(End digression.)


Hoping we agree that in any objective investigation any ovearching narrative/claims shall arise naturally out of the details of evidence and not the details made to fit according to a pre-supposed ovearching narrative:
Re- The Wannsee Protocol (original viewable here btw:https://www.ghwk.de/fileadmin/Redaktion/PDF/Konferenz/protokoll-januar1942_barrierefrei.pdf)
as proof that convinced you personally of the "Nazi-Mass Extermmination-Program"-narative/claim is true as stated on the USHMM site:

1. This is why I asked for real specifics like chapter and quote/sentence when referring to a document as evidence...
WHICH QUOTE/SENTENCE are you actually refering to in that document that in your view mentions/proofs anything regarding actual mass-killing or extermination? Objectively I can sofar only find the mentioning of expulsion, but maybe i have overlooked what you refer to..?
2. Are you factually familiar with the extensive scientific research done regarding that specific document and its pointed out numerous critical problems(among others: unverified origin; lack of obligatory official letterhead; unspecified issuing office; missing of the date, distributor, reference number, place of issue, signature, and identification; lack of all necessary properties of a protocol, i.e. the minutes of a meeting: opening and closing times of the conference, identification of the persons invited but not attending, names of each of the respective speakers, countersignature of the chairman of the meeting; most important participant, Reinhard Heydrich, missing from the list of participants; un-german spelling and grammatical errors throughout the original, etc...) and if, how do you explain them?

In case of interest- actually got this article sent to me by a (former) Skeptiko listener just recently,(in my experience) a surprisingly thorough account of an (to me sofar unknown) outsiders journalistic investigation of the phenomenon and history of Holocaust revisionism. Whatever one may think of his particular views on politics/his fellow countrymen, purely factually very thorough, many useful links and large database/starting point if anyone is interested in researching the topic for him/herself:
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-holocaust-denial/
 
#48
Speaking of documents, If interesting to anyone, just came over this one, according to my research sofar seems to be legit (if anyone knows better/more, please correct me) :

What do you think of it?


Official letter from ; British MINISTRY OF INFORMATION (MOI)
To: BBC and higher members of the British Clergy, from the British "Ministry of Information",
Date: 29.february 1944


“Sir,
I am directed by the Ministry to send you the following circular letter :
It is often the duty of the good citizens and of the pious Christians to turn a blind eye on the peculiarities of those associated with us.
But the time comes when such peculiarities, while still denied in public, must be taken into account when action by us is called for.
We know the methods of rule employed by the Bolshevik dictator in Russia itself from, for example, the writing and speeches of the Prime Minister himself during the last twenty years. We know how the Red Army behaved in Poland in 1920 and in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Galicia and Bessarabia only recently.
We must, therefore, take into account how the Red Army will certainly behave when it overruns Central Europe. Unless precautions are taken, the obviously inevitable horrors which will result will throw an undue strain on public opinion in this country.
We cannot reform the Bolsheviks but we can do our best to save them — and ourselves — from the consequences of their acts. The disclosures of the past quarter of a century will render mere denials unconvincing. The only alternative to denial is to distract public attention from the whole subject.
Experience has shown that the best distraction is atrocity propaganda directed against the enemy. Unfortunately the public is no longer so susceptible as in the days of the “Corpse Factory,” and the “Mutilated Belgian Babies,” and the “Crucified Canadians.”
Your cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public attention from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted support of various charges against the Germans and Japanese which have been and will be put into circulation by the Ministry.
Your expression of belief in such may convince others.
I am, Sir, Your obedient servant,
(signed) H. HEWET, ASSISTANT SECRETARY
The Ministry can enter into no correspondence of any kind with regard to this communication which should only be disclosed to responsible persons.​
Source: letter reproduced in :Allied Wartime Diplomacy: A Pattern in Poland by Edward J. Rozek, 1958, first edition (pages 209-210).
 
#49
...is it just that there is generally really no interest in exploring deeper perhaps unpleasant sides of oneself (privately or collectively)?
Bingo.

Personal identity and ego of a citizen becomes enmeshed with national pride. After the war is won, there is very little motivation for correcting the war propaganda and anyone who dares strive for some objectivity and historical critical reflection is ostracized as such a person is legitimately a threat to hard-fought position of national power which depends upon the cohesion of the people which depends upon the shared values and narrative.
 
#50
https://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/Holocaust/wansee-transcript.html

THE WANSEE PROTOCOL
This English text of the Wannsee protocol is based on the official U.S. government translation prepared for evidence in trials at Nuremberg, as reproduced in John Mendelsohn, ed., _The Holocaust: Selected Documents in Eighteen Volumes._ Vol. 11: The Wannsee Protocol and a 1944 Report on Auschwitz by the Office of Strategic Services (New York: Garland, 1982), 18-32. Substantial revisions to the Nuremberg text have been made to add clarity and, in some cases, to correct mistakes in an obviously hasty translation. These revisions were made by Dan Rogers of the University of South Alabama. This document is in the public domain and may be freely reproduced. Comments and suggestions may be e-mailed to [email protected].


Stamp: Top Secret

30 copies
16th copy

Minutes of discussion.

I. The following persons took part in the discussion about the
final solution of the Jewish question which took place in Berlin,
am Grossen Wannsee No. 56/58 on 20 January 1942.

Gauleiter Dr. Meyer and Reichsamt- Reich Ministry for
leiter Dr. Leibbrandt the Occupied Eastern
territories

Secretary of State Dr. Stuckart Reich Ministry for
the Interior

Secretary of State Neumann Plenipotentiary for
the Four Year Plan

Secretary of State Dr. Freisler Reich Ministry of
Justice

Secretary of State Dr. Buehler Office of the Govern-
ment General

Under Secretary of State Dr. Luther Foreign Office

SS-Oberfuehrer Klopfer Party Chancellery

Ministerialdirektor Kritzinger Reich Chancellery

SS-Gruppenfuehrer Hofmann Race and Settlement
Main Office

SS-Gruppenfuehrer Mueller Reich Main Security
SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann Office

SS-Oberfuehrer Dr. Schoengarth Security Police and SD
Chief of the Security Police and
the SD in the Government General

SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Lange Security Police and SD
Commander of the Security Police
and the SD for the General-District
Latvia, as deputy of the Commander
of the Security Police and the SD
for the Reich Commissariat "Eastland".


II. At the beginning of the discussion Chief of the Security
Police and of the SD, SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Heydrich, reported
that the Reich Marshal had appointed him delegate for the
preparations for the final solution of the Jewish question in
Europe and pointed out that this discussion had been called for
the purpose of clarifying fundamental questions. The wish of the
Reich Marshal to have a draft sent to him concerning
organizational, factual and material interests in relation to the
final solution of the Jewish question in Europe makes necessary
an initial common action of all central offices immediately
concerned with these questions in order to bring their general
activities into line.

The Reichsfuehrer-SS and the Chief of the German Police
(Chief of the Security Police and the SD) was entrusted with the
official central handling of the final solution of the Jewish
question without regard to geographic borders...
After briefly dipping into the H-denial stuff here's where I have tentatively settled:

1) The story told by the victors is a mixture of war propaganda, anecdotes, and a few facts.
2) Personal identity and ego of a citizen becomes enmeshed with national pride. After the war is won, there is very little motivation for correcting the war propaganda and anyone who dares strive for some objectivity and historical critical reflection is ostracized as such a person is legitimately a threat to hard-fought position of national power which depends upon the cohesion of the people which depends upon the shared values and narrative.
3) Historians can never have confidence and clarity about what actually happened unless there is no stigma associated with questioning it enabling open discussion and investigation.
4) The German people have been unfairly shamed.
5) Evils were certainly committed by the Nazis.
6) Evils were certainly committed by the Allies.
7) Had the war been fought on U.S. soil for years with our supply chains wrecked, our forces stretched to breaking, and morale in the tank, then we would have also had P.O.W. camps where many thousands of prisoners starved, died, were murdered, and were abused or experimented upon. Would that make the average WWII vet evil? No. The six million figure is very likely highly exaggerated. And some stories about the death camps are almost certainly fabricated as war propaganda.
8) Hitler was a great admirer of American eugenicists and the forced sterilization laws that had been passed by the majority of U.S. states at that time. Eugenics was in vogue, racism was still rampant, and it seemed obvious to most thinking people at the time that we needed to take draconian measures to improve the human gene pool as that was more important than individual rights to reproduce.
9) "International Jews" in high positions of politics and banking declared war on Germany first and imposed boycotts on German goods well before the war began. They maneuvered the chess pieces into a war partly with the intent of attaining the land of Israel as a Jewish state, which they got, so they were successful.
10) Hitler believed he was in a war or a fight to the death with these Jewish power brokers just as we believed we were in a fight to the death with Nazi Germany. At first this was limited war, but it eventually became total war, so yes eventually there was intent to completely wipe out the Jews.
11) Ironically, the Torah contains many episodes where the Jews committed genocide against "lesser" tribes exterminating all flesh, men, women, children and even the livestock and there is no indication that Jews today have repudiated this or reformed.
12) The level of evil and totalitarianism rampant in Germany during the war was not unique to Germany. Any people united with a rigid militaristic structure, esprit de corps, cohesive values and narrative, with well developed supply chain and technology, with a charismatic leader and a chip on their shoulder from the recent memories of being screwed after the last war... is a terrifying beast that will not likely be kind to its enemies or those within it who are marginalized.
 
Last edited:
#51
Bingo.

Personal identity and ego of a citizen becomes enmeshed with national pride. After the war is won, there is very little motivation for correcting the war propaganda and anyone who dares strive for some objectivity and historical critical reflection is ostracized as such a person is legitimately a threat to hard-fought position of national power which depends upon the cohesion of the people which depends upon the shared values and narrative.
Yes, that is my experience as well must say. I was wondering though for many years how is it purely practically possible to keep this often quoted "victors writing the history" so strong/pure to the fact that people like me for so many years never even get the idea that there could be an other side to it..... must be such an enormeous concerted effort, like keeping a constant pressured evertruthseeking-titlewave-dam from breaking anytime...
But recently I have come to think that I was totally wrong about that last assumption as well, there is no titlewave-pressure, there isn`t even a trickle and no dam therefore even needed at all (regarding the main populus), in addition to the motives you mentioned, the greatest asset and power in our societies might infact be the most overlooked:
simple Disinterest. constantly superpowered by the small core-laziness of our human nature and being caught up in the everyday-game.
And the real genius of any cover up or skewing of historical or other facts is to just tap into that, because you dont even need any ingeniousness nor effort, just join the party, man.
Truth or not about WorldWars, Germany and the Holocaust (or for that matter of course any other topic like Covid, Shadow Gov., Scientism...) will certainly neither get me a) any hot chick tonight, nor b) the new chilly BigMac or Iphone for reduced price. Ergo: who in the everloving flying ... should ever care, man....?
And infact, when looking through the quoted USHMM website and my initial surprise to the seeming total lack of footnotes, source-references and objective research context it hit me how easy it infact really seems to be to create this "victors history". just take real pictures and facts and present the most easy black-white narrative about it all, so onesided that all who try to present a different side infact seem completely crazy.
That at least is my latest impression, could be wrong of course....

One thing I sofar still have not been able to answer for myself is which power is it that can manage to bring the governments of practically entire Europe (and Canada and Australia...) to by law forbid scientific investigation and open respectful discussion on this one (and so far only in the history of mankind) topic?
Purely practical without any great conspiracy theory nor anti-semit-hamet-japhet-or whatever-ism ever coming into it, how is this possible? Israel nor organisations like the ADL or similar do not seem THAT powerful to me...or maybe it is just simple peer-pressure, after one of these countries has done it, all the others feel obliged to do the same to be as "morally" stainless?
 
Top