I was researching the 5th SS Panzer Division 'Wiking', the course of which led me to this utter shitshow of a thread on Axis History Forum.

In this thread, the estimable Rob-wssob2 and a few other valiant posters try to combat the inherent Wehrabooism of AHF, with little success. The whole thing is a case study in Wehraboo delusion, even in the face of definitive proof: the SS enjoy the presumption of innocence whilst Soviet or East German sources are obvious lies and biased. There's even a rare sighting of a Russian Wehraboo. One poster, a 'michael mills', says writes that:

Holocaust scholars are not impartial, they are operating within a particular political and ideological framework that determines how they interpret historical events.

That is not to say that the material they present is not factual, or that they falsify historical events. What they do do is to interpret those events according to a particular ideological formula, the main element of which is the concept that the Jews of Europe were purely victims, and that their massacre during the war was some sort of mystical emanation of evil without any rational explanation.

In fact, "Holocaust" scholars seem to regard any attempt to find a rational explanation for the massacre of the Jews as a form of "denial", of justification or approval, which in itself is also some sort of emanation of evil.

In that respect, the study of the massacre of the Jews of Europe by the German Government during the Second World War differs in essence from the study of other large-scale massacres in history. Those other massacres are not usually seen in the same apocalyptic terms, not as cosmic conflicts between absolute good and absolute evil, but rather as the outcome of conflicts between rival groups that have rational and explicable causes.

While those other massacres are usually deplored by the historians writing about them, and the victims attract their sympathy as being for the most part innocent, those historians can see the objective reasons why the victims attracted the ire of the victimisers, and while they condemn the murderous actions of the victimisers, they can understand the motivations for those actions and do not simply write them off as the result of some evil force.

In the case of the massacres of Jews perpetrated by Ukrainians (and some other East European peoples), "Holocaust" scholars tend to deny that those peoples had any rational motivation for their actions, no genuine and understandable grievance against their Jewish neighbours. They describe the those peoples as either acting out of some internal evil tendency, or else as being passive dupes of the evil Germans.

It is for the above reasons that the works of the "Holocaust" scholars are flawed, even though they give an accurate account of the course of the Judeocide. Where they fail is in their explanations of its causes, seeing it in apocalyptic terms, as an outburst of totally irrational evil.

To which another poster, '4thskorpion', has a very interesting response.