Nazis Shrunk the Heads of Jews

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Nazis shrunk the Heads of Jews

Shrunken head (http://www.shamash.org/holocaust/photos/images/Shrunken.jpg)


Holocaust Photos (http://www.shamash.org/holocaust/photos/)


Does anyone believe this?

[Gene L]

I have read that the wife of a death camp commandant had the skins of people made into lampshades. Especailly those with tattoos.

Shrinking heads? I'm doubt the Nazis had the knowledge but don't doubt they would have had it suited their fancies.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I have read that the wife of a death camp commandant had the skins of people made into lampshades. Especailly those with tattoos.

Shrinking heads? I'm doubt the Nazis had the knowledge but don't doubt they would have had it suited their fancies.

I found a photo of a human skin lampshade with the shrunken heads and tattooed skin presented in a trial.

Display table at Buchenwald (http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Dachauscrapbook/DachauTrials/IlseKoch.html)

[Gregory]

Is there a reason we shouldn't believe it? It wouldn't surprise me in the least, and there are photographs available.

So ... yes. In light of photographic evidence, and no reason not to believe it, I believe that two shrunken heads were found in Buchenwald, and will continue to believe it unless you offer some reason not to.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Is there a reason we shouldn't believe it? It wouldn't surprise me in the least, and there are photographs available.

So ... yes. In light of photographic evidence, and no reason not to believe it, I believe that two shrunken heads were found in Buchenwald, and will continue to believe it unless you offer some reason not to.

Do you also believe the soap made from humans story?

[Gregory]

No, I believe that was discredited.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

No, I believe that was discredited.

It was not discredited until the 90's.

So, how are we to know which stories are real?

The soap story was fact for about 40 years.

[TX50]

Any hard evidence that it really is the head of a
camp inmate? There was a roaring trade in shrunken
heads out of S. America in the 1930s.

[Gregory]

It was not discredited until the 90's.

So, how are we to know which stories are real?

The soap story was fact for about 40 years.

The people who discredited the soap myth provided evidence that it was false.

If you believe that the shrunken head story was also false, and that the shrunken heads that were displayed in the court room were fake (or were real but not take from Buchenwald, or whatever you believe), then you also should provide evidence for it.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Any hard evidence that it really is the head of a
camp inmate? There was a roaring trade in shrunken
heads out of S. America in the 1930s.

It was presented at the Nuremberg trial as evidence.

International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (http://www.daylife.com/photo/04ck3IAbbqcT8)

Thomas Dodd, assistant U.S. prosecuting attorney at the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Germany, holds a human shrunken head, Dec. 20, 1945, that he introduced as evidence of cruelty in German concentration camps during the unprecedented trial.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

The people who discredited the soap myth provided evidence that it was false.

If you believe that the shrunken head story was also false, and that the shrunken heads that were displayed in the court room were fake (or were real but not take from Buchenwald, or whatever you believe), then you also should provide evidence for it.

Ohh, standards of Woo alert.

I have to prove someone else's claim is false?

You have the burden of proof reversed.

[Gregory]

Since the people your arguing against have already presented compelling evidence of the shrunken heads--e.g. the actual heads--you do indeed have to provide evidence if you are claiming that they didn't exist, or whatever it is you're claiming.

You are making a claim--certain pieces of evidence are somehow false. So back it up.

[TX50]

It was presented at the Nuremberg trial as evidence.


That still doesn't really prove that it is the treated head of a
camp inmate. These things were popular souvenirs around
that time.

[Cainkane1]

Nazis shrunk the Heads of Jews

Shrunken head (http://www.shamash.org/holocaust/photos/images/Shrunken.jpg)


Holocaust Photos (http://www.shamash.org/holocaust/photos/)


Does anyone believe this?

Way back in the 50's there was a documentary about nazi atrocities. The pictures included the shrunken heads.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Way back in the 50's there was a documentary about nazi atrocities. The pictures included the shrunken heads.

I saw a documentary about Thor, does that mean Thor is real?

[Uzzy]

Oddly enough, Jerome, I do not think that shrunken heads were the main thrust of the prosecutions argument at Nuremburg, nor were they a key piece of evidence.

[Gregory]

Really, Jerome? You saw a documentary with photographic evidence that Thor was real? Where was it, History Channel? Do you know if they're planning to rerun it?

I assume that your documentary had photographic evidence, since that's the only way the situations would be parallel and your analogy would be anything but a farce.

Oddly enough, Jerome, I do not think that shrunken heads were the main thrust of the prosecutions argument at Nuremburg, nor were they a key piece of evidence.

In point of fact, nobody was charged for the deed, so the shrunken heads weren't evidence against anybody in particular.

[Gregory]

double post

[Gazpacho]

The people who discredited the soap myth provided evidence that it was false.
Actually, what happened with the soap was a familiar theme in holocaust denial. Actual events inspired a rumor, and then holocaust deniers imputed the rumor to historians who had never been particularly persuaded by it.

[Gene L]

I doubt the rumor about soap. For one reason, there wasn't enough fat on concentration camp victims to make soap. Lye and fat are required to make soap, as I recall from my youth when my ol' mama used to make it.

Hitler used to say to his inner circle that Parisian lipstick was made from the fat from Paris sewers.

[dudalb]

Jerome, do you really,really,want to go down the path you are heading down?
If you have an decency, you will not like the company you will find yourself with.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I doubt the rumor about soap. For one reason, there wasn't enough fat on concentration camp victims to make soap. Lye and fat are required to make soap, as I recall from my youth when my ol' mama used to make it.

Hitler used to say to his inner circle that Parisian lipstick was made from the fat from Paris sewers.

Did the Germans not kill the Jews right away whilst they were still fat?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Jerome, do you really,really,want to go down the path you are heading down?
If you have an decency, you will not like the company you will find yourself with.

What? Are you going to call me a denier and an anti-Semite because I think that the Germans killed 4 million Jews and not 6 million?

[Gurdur]

Oh dear. One step at a time on the road to perdition, apparently all out of pure spite just because others rejected libertarianism or something. Weird, off-putting and defintely ugh.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Apperently the International Military Tribunal determined that the Nazis made soap from Jews.

After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer, and in some instances attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap.

What the Judgment of the IMT actually says? (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/soap01.html)


We have learned that this is not true.

Why should we continue to believe the shrunken heads?

[uruk]

What? Are you going to call me a denier and an anti-Semite because I think that the Germans killed 4 million Jews and not 6 million?Just a quick question. Do you really beieve that the NAZIs killed 4 million Jews or are you trying to work the number down Don Adam's, Get Smart style. "Would you believe 3 and half million Jews?"

It looks like you are pointing out some minor questionable and discredited evidence for what purpose?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Just a quick question. Do you really beieve that the NAZIs killed 4 million Jews or are you trying to work the number down Don Adam's, Get Smart style. "Would you believe 3 and half million Jews?"

It looks like you are pointing out some minor questionable and discredited evidence for what purpose?

I am using logic and not emotion to examine the issue.

I truly believe that the holocaust happened. I am curious as to why any questioning of specific aspects are countered with name-calling derision. This is what peaks my interest in the subject.

[Gene L]

Just a quick question. Do you really beieve that the NAZIs killed 4 million Jews or are you trying to work the number down Don Adam's, Get Smart style. "Would you believe 3 and half million Jews?"

It looks like you are pointing out some minor questionable and discredited evidence for what purpose?


Six million Jews is the operative number. More Russians but not because of their religion or race.

[uruk]

I am using logic and not emotion to examine the issue.

I truly believe that the holocaust happened. I am curious as to why any questioning of specific aspects are countered with name-calling derision. This is what peaks my interest in the subject.

It could just be post-holocaust-denier syndrome. Some of the guys here have had a history with HDs so they may be a bit trigger happy.

Any incident like the holocaust is going to be emotionaly charged. Are you are suggesting that evidence was manufactured?

The shrunken heads and soap anecdote seem to be a minor issues. There was alot more damning evidence that were used in the trials.

[Loss Leader]

I am using logic and not emotion to examine the issue.


No, you're not. I'll wave to you when you are.

[Doctor Evil]

The reaction may depend on the actual question being asked. For instance, the soap issue. As far as I know it was never considered as fact in academic circles. In any case, the story was discredited decades ago. Raising this may lead people to think that you either did not search for facts, or worse, got your facts from denialist websites which will happily distort the facts.

Another possible reason is the claim that 'any questioning of specific aspects are countered with name-calling derision'. This tactic is very common in discussion with denialists. Note that I do NOT claim that you are one, I am try to give possible reasons for the reaction.

One of the posters here, Nick Terry, is an professional Historian which specializes in the Holocaust. I vaguely remember a thread where the issue of the number of Jewish victims was discussed. I seem to remember estimates ranging around 5.1-5.7 Million Jews Murdered. No one called him any names. I wonder why?

[Doctor Evil]

Here is a link for the thread I mentioned:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=107844

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Any incident like the holocaust is going to be emotionaly charged. Are you are suggesting that evidence was manufactured?

The shrunken heads and soap anecdote seem to be a minor issues. There was alot more damning evidence that were used in the trials.

I am suggesting that some "evidence" was falsely presented.

There was no need to make up shrunken heads, human soap, human skin lamp shades, or human bone ashtrays, but it was. Why?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

The reaction may depend on the actual question being asked. For instance, the soap issue. As far as I know it was never considered as fact in academic circles. In any case, the story was discredited decades ago. Raising this may lead people to think that you either did not search for facts, or worse, got your facts from denialist websites which will happily distort the facts.

Another possible reason is the claim that 'any questioning of specific aspects are countered with name-calling derision'. This tactic is very common in discussion with denialists. Note that I do NOT claim that you are one, I am try to give possible reasons for the reaction.

One of the posters here, Nick Terry, is an professional Historian which specializes in the Holocaust. I vaguely remember a thread where the issue of the number of Jewish victims was discussed. I seem to remember estimates ranging around 5.1-5.7 Million Jews Murdered. No one called him any names. I wonder why?

a few years ago, i did my own little research and calculations. i compared european census data, from the same sources, from 1929 and then post ww2. i came up with a figure around 4.3 million.

i think the 6 million figure is not correct, but its definately atleast 4 million.

Though I am waiting for someone to respond to this post saying "how dare you question the 6 million figure!!! It is sacred!! You Nazi sympathizer!!!"

we know, these kind of folks are out there.


I said virtually the same this when I first stared posting on this board without the caveat of my race and I was immediately called a denier and anti-Semite. In fact posters followed me about the forum in other threads accusing me of the same.


ETA: In fact my assertion that I had done the research concerning the amount of Jews in Europe prior to WWII and after WWII was nominated for a Stundie.

[Gregory]

Jerome, I do not think you are a Holocaust denier; from this thread (which is the only Holocaust-related thread I've seen you post in) I have formed no opinion either way. I do, however, think you are being extremely irrational in your argument, which, so far, has never become more advanced than "Well, the soap thing never happened, did it?"

There were two shrunken heads found at Buchenwald.
The surviving prisoners told the liberating soldiers that they were the heads of prisoners.

I'm not saying that there's irrefutable evidence that the Nazi's really shrunk people's heads. Maybe, as TX50 suggested, they were simply souvenirs that the Nazi's picked up. You'd still have to account for prisoners' claims about them, but there are several possible explanations for that: the prisoners lies. The prisoners didn't lie, but were simply passing on a false rumor that they heard somewhere. The guards lied to the prisoners.

But if you believe the above scenario I've outlined, then why won't you come right out and say it? All you've done this entire thread is parrot back, "soap, soap, soap." That's not an argument. "This one rumor was false, therefore there's no reason we should pay attention to this prisoner testimony and this physical evidence" is not an argument. It's not "using logic"; the idea that because one rumor was false, another rumor--backed up by physical evidence and witness testimony--can be dismissed out of hand is not logical. And that's all you're doing.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Jerome, I do not think you are a Holocaust denier; from this thread (which is the only Holocaust-related thread I've seen you post in) I have formed no opinion either way. I do, however, think you are being extremely irrational in your argument, which, so far, has never become more advanced than "Well, the soap thing never happened, did it?"

Curious as to why you would propose the characterization of an individual.

Does the avatar created have bearing on the thoughts presented?



There were two shrunken heads found at Buchenwald.
The surviving prisoners told the liberating soldiers that they were the heads of prisoners.

I would think that the prosecutors would not use this hearsay as evidence in such an important trial. This may have been the most important trial in the century!

I'm not saying that there's irrefutable evidence that the Nazi's really shrunk people's heads. Maybe, as TX50 suggested, they were simply souvenirs that the Nazi's picked up. You'd still have to account for prisoners' claims about them, but there are several possible explanations for that: the prisoners lies. The prisoners didn't lie, but were simply passing on a false rumor that they heard somewhere. The guards lied to the prisoners.

I doubt that the Nazis were shrinking heads. They may have, or course, but it is not plausible with the evidence presented.

My problem is why would this implausible hearsay still be touted as evidence, and why if one doubts this "evidence" is one derided. This is the most interesting aspect. Much more interesting than the shrunken heads.

But if you believe the above scenario I've outlined, then why won't you come right out and say it? All you've done this entire thread is parrot back, "soap, soap, soap." That's not an argument. "This one rumor was false, therefore there's no reason we should pay attention to this prisoner testimony and this physical evidence" is not an argument. It's not "using logic"; the idea that because one rumor was false, another rumor--backed up by physical evidence and witness testimony--can be dismissed out of hand is not logical. And that's all you're doing.

Because this "evidence" was presented in maybe the most important trial in the 20th century.

[Doctor Evil]

Because this "evidence" was presented in maybe the most important trial in the 20th century.

All kinds of evidence is presented in every trials. It is the role of the Judges (or jury) to decide which parts are reliable and which are not. It seems to me that the things you presented played no role in the Judges decisions.

If you want to convince anyone that this evidence was material to the judgment you should do a much better job. Alternatively, if you want to to discuss the current historical understanding you have to include the evidence collected in the years after the war. So what is your point here, to discuss the proceedings of the trials, or the historical evidence?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

All kinds of evidence is presented in every trials. It is the role of the Judges (or jury) to decide which parts are reliable and which are not. It seems to me that the things you presented played no role in the Judges decisions.

You are changing the question. Besides, you are claiming that these prosecutors did not understand what evidence is proper to present. This is a ridiculous claim.

[Doctor Evil]

You are changing the question. Besides, you are claiming that these prosecutors did not understand what evidence is proper to present. This is a ridiculous claim.

:rolleyes:

All I am saying is that the court does not have to accept everything that the prosecutors say as facts. Its not that complicated. You should have known that already. You know, people are sometimes found to be not guilty.

In this case I would think the prosecutors believed the evidence they provided. Moreover, you still have not supplied any evidence that the shrunken heads were not genuine. We only have your personal incredulity.

Finally, please answer my question. Are you interested in the trials, or in the historical evidence? The distinction is important. Historians have not stopped working in 1945, and managed to gather a lot of additional evidence since then.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

In this case I would think the prosecutors believed the evidence they provided. Moreover, you still have not supplied any evidence that the shrunken heads were not genuine. We only have your personal incredulity.

Did you look at the picture of the South American shrunken head that was supposed to be the head of a European?

Finally, please answer my question. Are you interested in the trials, or in the historical evidence? The distinction is important. Historians have not stopped working in 1945, and managed to gather a lot of additional evidence since then.

I am most interested in the vitriol presented when questioning the "evidence" that is suspect.

[Gregory]

Curious as to why you would propose the characterization of an individual.

Does the avatar created have bearing on the thoughts presented?

My avatar is a villain in a British comic; it doesn't have anything to do with anything, and I don't know what you mean by "propose the characterization of an individual." I'm specifically not characterizing you as a Holocaust denier or anything else.

I would think that the prosecutors would not use this hearsay as evidence in such an important trial. This may have been the most important trial in the century!

Well, nobody was convicted for shrinking heads. Anyway, you call it hearsay; for all you or I know, it was a documented fact. I've tried to nail down the specifics, but my Google-fu was too weak (I found something that might have been official confirmation that this stuff was going on (in the form of a letter saying to knock it off), but I only have the site author's word to go by--it's in German, which I can't read.)

I doubt that the Nazis were shrinking heads. They may have, or course, but it is not plausible with the evidence presented.

My problem is why would this implausible hearsay still be touted as evidence, and why if one doubts this "evidence" is one derided. This is the most interesting aspect. Much more interesting than the shrunken heads.

Well, the Nazi's, as a group, obviously weren't. I do not find it implausible, with all the other atrocities they committed, that an individual guard, prison warden, etc had that idea.

As for being derided, you're being judged (by one or two people; I wouldn't call this thread a dog-pile) by the company you keep, and most of the websites out there claiming what you're claiming claim a lot of other things you probably wouldn't want to be associated with ( e.g. Holocaust denial (http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/)

Because this "evidence" was presented in maybe the most important trial in the 20th century.

I don't see how this answers my question. The fact that this was taking place in an important trial does not, to my mind, make your arguments logically valid.

[Doctor Evil]

Currently it seems to me you are not interested in a constructive discussion. If you are please make a choice.

If you would like to find out whether the trials were fair, please point out to a specific trial in which you feel there was miscarriage of justice. Then people here may choose to look at the overall evidence. I do not have legal training, and frankly, am not very interested in that direction.

If you are interested in the historical evidence, please try to find more recent discussion of this issue. As I told you, research has not stopped in 1945. I will definitely be interested to hear what professional historian think about this.

[yairhol]

I am a jew and half of my once large family was murdered by the Nazis. I have heard many many stories over the years from those who did survive the Holocaust. It is a vital part of the education system in Israel to study the events that took place before and during the Holocaust yet never have I heard of shrinking heads of Jews.

[Gazpacho]

There was no need to make up shrunken heads, human soap, human skin lamp shades, or human bone ashtrays, but it was.
The shrunken heads were not made up. They were physically entered into evidence along with a US Army pathology report. (Something that was not done for the alleged lamp shade)

You can't discredit the heads by lumping them in the same sentence with actual discredited rumors.

[Foolmewunz]

Did you look at the picture of the South American shrunken head that was supposed to be the head of a European?



I am most interested in the vitriol presented when questioning the "evidence" that is suspect.

Mods: Crossing the line from post to poster, I know, but there's no way to address a non-issue without addressing the poster and the motives for posting.

Jerome,

I will posit that you are NOT IN THE LEAST merely interested in the vitriol presented, but more interested in inspiring such reactions.

Look carefully at the second Jerome post in this thread. Did Jerome say, "Please read the accounts and you will see that the tatooed skin lampshades have been pretty clearly debunked"? Nope. Jerome presented a link to a photograph and said, "Look, I found this picture!".

Why is that, Jerome? You surely read the article you linked to. It is rather clear that the evidence of human skin being used for lampshades is - nada!

You set up the scenario hoping for someone to take the bait so that you could just knock it down, again.

Why didn't you open the thread with "Look you ignorant bastages, I'm tired of hearing this nonsense. Everyone knows that there were no shrunken heads, human soap, or human skin lampshades. So, would you stop posting this crap, please.."?

Why? Well, I'll tell you... because then you wouldn't have gotten any attention. The only reaction would've been for several people to say, "Huh? No one here ever posts this kind of stuff, so what are you on about?"

Instead, you just toss the chum onto the water, hoping you can get some emotional but ill-informed individual to bite, and then you can feel all intellectually superior for another few moments.

(See ya in AAH.)

[CFLarsen]

It was not discredited until the 90's.

So, how are we to know which stories are real?

You've hit it, spot on.

What is your answer to your question?

[Nogbad]

I think we are all agreed that the Nazis were not very nice to the Jews. It may be that two shrunken heads were used at the camp to upset the prisoners. It may be that these heads were of former inmates or simply two S American heads that the guards told the prisoners were former inmates.

At the end of the day it is merely a footnote to the overall nastiness that went on. Some truly dreadful things did happen and an awful lot of innocent civilians died.

[Gene L]

The shrunken heads were not made up. They were physically entered into evidence along with a US Army pathology report. (Something that was not done for the alleged lamp shade)

You can't discredit the heads by lumping them in the same sentence with actual discredited rumors.


I don't know what the pathology report showed, but it would be interesting to read it. The presence of a shrunken head does not in itself mean the one who posses it actually did the shrinking, and the same with the lampshades. I've heard the lampshade story before, and it the lampshades were attributed to the wife of a concentration camp commandant. I have not heard the story about shrunken heads.

I also can understand reasons why they were entered into evidence but not (apparently) used. Such evidence can be used in a conspiracy trial to show "state of mind" or "criminal intent" of the defendants. Decorative items made of body parts would be persuasive of Nazi depravity, along with the mountain of testimony, photographs, and admissions of suspects.

It's the same today. Say a group of cult child molesters go on trial. In a conspiracy, pictures or artifacts in possession of any member of the conspiracy to show state of mind, or intent, whatever. There are rules of when this evidence can be used, and I don't know what they are, but a trial lawyer would.

I don't find it impossible to believe that one or two of the thousands of sociopaths in Nazi Germany made lampshades of human skin or shrunk heads, but I haven't read any evidence that it was done in any quantity. But at this point, the evidence is definitely circumstantial.

[Loss Leader]

1. I've found a detail about the Holocaust that may not have been true
2. Thus, every detail about the Holocaust is equally suspect.

Genius.

[Nogbad]

1. I've found a detail about the Holocaust that may not have been true
2. Thus, every detail about the Holocaust is equally suspect.

Genius.

Is it worth trying on the IRS?

[Gazpacho]

I think we are all agreed that the Nazis were not very nice to the Jews. It may be that two shrunken heads were used at the camp to upset the prisoners. It may be that these heads were of former inmates or simply two S American heads that the guards told the prisoners were former inmates.
Maybe so, which would be rather depraved in itself.

In any case, what's the goal here? Justice for Ilse Koch? She got it. Her case was reviewed.

[Gene L]

I don't think assumptions of either guilt or innocence in the matter of shrinking heads is appropriate unless there is evidence to support either view. This forum isn't a court of law, where we are required to assume innocence until proven guilty, nor is guilt by implication necessarily the way to become an informed and free-thining person.

I have no idea what happened and haven't heard anyone who does. Because Nazis were capable of them doesn't mean they did such things. At any rate, the known atrocities of the Nazis are dreadful enough for me without speculating any further.

[SDC]

Recently read Zofia Nalkowska's collection of WW2 (and aftermath) short works, Medallions (Medaliony, in Polish). One of the pieces involves an immediate post-war Polish investigation of a German scientist's attempt to render fat from human corpses -- but the corpses were of criminal and political prisoners, I believe both German and Polish. And it was on a small scale.

My understanding is that Nalkowska's book is non-fiction. But again, please note what I just wrote; this was not the idea of converting Jews' corpses into fat for soap. But it could have contributed to the idea.

I see I'm off topic, but it seems connected.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

1. I've found a detail about the Holocaust that may not have been true
2. Thus, every detail about the Holocaust is equally suspect.

Genius.

Nobody here has said anything of the sort.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Recently read Zofia Nalkowska's collection of WW2 (and aftermath) short works, Medallions (Medaliony, in Polish). One of the pieces involves an immediate post-war Polish investigation of a German scientist's attempt to render fat from human corpses -- but the corpses were of criminal and political prisoners, I believe both German and Polish. And it was on a small scale.

My understanding is that Nalkowska's book is non-fiction. But again, please note what I just wrote; this was not the idea of converting Jews' corpses into fat for soap. But it could have contributed to the idea.

I see I'm off topic, but it seems connected.


This goes to the point I am generally trying to make. There is no need to exaggerate anything the Nazis did. The question I have is, why exaggerate what the Nazis did?

:confused:

[fuelair]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/nov/21/secondworldwar.world

[fuelair]

http://www.auschwitz.dk/Women/Grese.htm

[MaGZ]

What? Are you going to call me a denier and an anti-Semite because I think that the Germans killed 4 million Jews and not 6 million?

How did they kill 4 million and why do you believe that figure?

[MaGZ]

I once saw some shrunken heads in a museum which was part of a South American anthropology display.

Rationally which is most likely: the shrunken heads found in Germany came from South America or Jewish inmates?

[Gene L]

1. I've found a detail about the Holocaust that may not have been true
2. Thus, every detail about the Holocaust is equally suspect.

Genius.

I don't think you can find a single subject that doesn't have errors in some regard. If that's the standard for belief you require, then you're not being realistic.

The overwhelming fact of the Nazi regime should speak for itself...whether they killed 6 milion Jews, or 4 million. They killed a whole lot of Russians, I think 100 million and Poles, British, Americans and others.

It was a dirty regime who tried to accomlish political goals through horrendous act, and to me that overrides any error in the minutia of facts. The ideology of the Nazis is the issue, not the number nor the details of the people who died because of the Nazi belief.

"After the first death, there is no other"

Dylan Thomas

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I don't think you can find a single subject that doesn't have errors in some regard. If that's the standard for belief you require, then you're not being realistic.

The overwhelming fact of the Nazi regime should speak for itself...whether they killed 6 milion Jews, or 4 million. They killed a whole lot of Russians, I think 100 million and Poles, British, Americans and others.

It was a dirty regime who tried to accomlish political goals through horrendous act, and to me that overrides any error in the minutia of facts. The ideology of the Nazis is the issue, not the number nor the details of the people who died because of the Nazi belief.

"After the first death, there is no other"

Dylan Thomas


This is my curiosity concerning this subject. Why is it common to claim racism against anyone that talks about the subject?

:gnome:

[-Fran-]

Nazis shrunk the Heads of Jews

Shrunken head (http://www.shamash.org/holocaust/photos/images/Shrunken.jpg)


Holocaust Photos (http://www.shamash.org/holocaust/photos/)


Does anyone believe this?

I can not tell if these objects (shrunken heads, tattoo lampshades) are genuine or not, but it doesn't seem very likely to me that the nazis did things like this on any regular basis (as for example the soap story would seem to indicate). However, it wouldn't surprise me if individual extra loony nazis might have experimented with things like this, and these objects might be more or less unique expressions of such disturbed minds.

The picture of the shrunken head does not look like a South American head to me (though I am not at all sure, because I am no expert in shrunken heads) and I don't say that because the head looks Europen and not Native American, but because all shrunken heads I've seen that were made by South American tribes were richly decorated. Often the lips were sewn through with colorful threads and the like. This really do look more like a horrible experiment.

ETA:

For comparison:

The History of the Shuar
http://www.head-hunter.com/headhunter.html

[-Fran-]

Ooops