bombsaway wrote:You're making a claim that documentary and witness evidence wouldn't exist for this, but you can read about the deportation of the Volga Germans, which was an event where "a large population was scrambled into countless different directions internally during the greatest war of all-time". They were dispersed into a far greater area and less developed than the Jews could have been, Siberia, Kazakhstan, and other places. The Soviets mistreated them horribly and hundreds of thousands likely died (this is documented, yes the Soviets didn't destroy evidence of their crimes here). We know in great detail the places they were sent, and about what happened to them when they got there
Let's sum up your argument, bombsaway:
Butterfangers explains why documentary evidence wouldn't exist for X but it exists for Y, therefore should exist for X.
In the above, "Y" is Volga Germans. In your previous posts, though, you had a different argument:
Butterfangers explains why documentary evidence wouldn't exist for X but it exists for Z, therefore should exist for X.
"Z", of course, is Jews in Transnistria.
You have seemingly now abandoned "Z" in favor of "Y". Does this mean you finally concede that "Z"/Transnistria is not sufficiently comparable [to resettlement per Final Solution policy] to sustain your argument?
It seems you have avoided discussing in any detail the considerable differences between resettlement of Jews in Transnistria versus those resettled in German Eastern-occupied territories, now shifting the discussion toward comparison to another resettlement altogether. Here is a recap:
bombsaway: "What about Transnistria?"
Butterfangers: "Transnistria isn't comparable to Jewish resettlement in the East, bombsaway, here's why..."
bombsaway: "I still think it is."
Butterfangers: "Okay, bombsaway, please explain why."
bombsaway: "What about Volga Germans?"
In any case, I suppose I'll bite. Here you go (comparison):
So, clearly, the plan was not to make them 'disappear' forever. The same cannot be said of Soviet intentions toward Jews.
What you fail to show is that the differences would likely amount to massive amounts of direct documentary and witness evidence being generated for Transnistria as opposed to zero for the Reinhard Jews.
This is completely false, bombsaway. I have demonstrated this quite clearly, breaking everything down into categories for you. You're welcome, btw.
Are you saying enough Jews should have survived (and long enough) to have had their movements documented? I broke that down in my last reply (quoted from another thread). I won't waste space by doing it again here.
Or, are you saying that those Jews who did survive and stick around should have also left evidence? Because, again, I have covered that already as well, above (somewhat) and even more thoroughly in the other thread.
You tend to do this "thing" where you say things that simply are not true, and hope that no one calls you out on it. You do it often.
Nevertheless I'll answer these a few at a time.
Oh boy. Can't wait.
You haven't shown the "stark differences" in administration. German documentation of Jews in ghettos in occupied USSR was extensive, even in the furthest out and remote territories captured in 1942 in Case Blue. You can read about some of these places here:
https://www.ushmm.org/online/camps-ghet ... _PartB.pdf
bombsaway, unfortunately for you, I have spent a good deal of time investigating the labor sites in the East.
Very little is known of these places. For example, here is perhaps one of the most comprehensive mappings of eastern labor camps currently in existence, (put together by yours truly):
https://www.mapcustomizer.com/map/Zwang ... ndUkraine7This map includes data on what work, activities, population, open-close dates etc. is known of these camps. Some camps have useful data, but most... have very little. And these camps represent only perhaps a small fraction of those of the same type estimated to exist in the region.
Data is from here:
http://www.deutschland-ein-denkmal.de/It's noted that you don't quantify your claim that "German documentation of Jews in ghettos in occupied USSR was extensive". Just how "extensive" was it, bombsaway? Did it capture 100% of all Jewish camps and collection sites? 90%? 50%? 20%?
Unfortunately for you, "German documentation of Jews in ghettos in occupied USSR was extensive" was, in fact, piss-poor,
as indicated by your own source:
From the time that work began on this volume in January
2002, unique challenges arose that made the production pro-
cess different than it was for Volume I. The existing lists of
ghettos were by no means complete and were somewhat con-
tradictory. In addition, there was no clear definition of what a
ghetto was. Even the wartime German authorities themselves
had varying conceptions of a ghetto, using it to mean quite
different things according to the time and place. They also
made only very sporadic attempts to record where ghettos
existed, other than the few major ones. Whereas the concen-
tration camp system was highly organized with a considerable
degree of internal documentation, ghettoization was at best a
regional— and often, a local— phenomenon. What soon be-
came clear was that there were many more ghettos than
recorded on the previous lists and that a great many sites
would have to be examined closely to determine whether or
not a ghetto existed. In addition, due to the scarcity of Ger-
man documentation, a considerable amount of reliance would
have to be placed on the accounts of survivors and postwar
investigations.
From the Editor's Introduction, p. xliii:
https://www.ushmm.org/online/camps-ghet ... _PartA.pdfClearly, there is neither a strong case for how many ghettos there actually were nor what actually happened within them and in what scale. But what about that "convergence of evidence" we are always hearing about? Are we back to "converging testimony" again?
Let's consider something else for a moment. Consider the amount of time and resources that went into the project of developing the multi-volume, multi-thousand page USHMM Encylopedia linked above
This volume of the Encyclopedia of Camps and Ghettos has
truly been a collaborative work in many different respects.
Not only have more than 100 individuals been involved in its
preparation, but many essays were written by two or more
people, and in some cases, more than one translator was in-
volved in the preparation of an entry. This reflects above all
the multilingual nature of the source material used. Often
drafts were received in Russian or Polish from historians
working with documents from archives in Eastern Eu rope;
then additions were made to the entries from archival sources,
yizkor books, or other publications located at USHMM. A
number of volunteers played an important role translating and
summarizing many oral and visual histories, documents, and
publications in languages such as Polish, Hebrew, Russian,
Yiddish, and Lithuanian, which were then incorporated into
the essays.
p. xlvi
Is a project of this scale
ever anticipated to being possible for Revisionists, against the vicious current of major suppression and persecution?
Not only do you have a number of well-paid scholars who have the time and resources to dedicate their entire lives to their work defending the orthodox view, but you have many others (altogether 100 individuals) who, at most, lose only the time they invest in this work.
If Revisionists were to attempt such an effort, they would have a choice: remain anonymous or risk your life being destroyed. But how do you organize 100 people (strangers) to collaborate on a project, anonymously? How difficult is it to even find 100 people who have gained adequate expertise in a field which requires dealing with threats of persecution and constant suppression?
The resource gap between Revisionist scholars and orthodoxy has always stood out to me as an understated element in this ongoing debate. I think the quoted paragraph above highlights that quite well.
Moving on, although there is good reason to suggest many if not the vast majority of "Aktions" against Jews have been exaggerated to some significant degree (and that many were invented altogether), I found one passage interesting, from the same source last referenced:
The Jews on work details
heard rumors about killing Aktions conducted against other
Jewish communities nearby, and some Jews made plans to es-
cape to the forests to join the Soviet partisans.
On March 14, 1942, Soviet partisans attacked the Cho-
cienczyce estate, which enabled some of the Jews from the
ghetto there to flee with the partisans into the forests. In re-
sponse, the German Security Police from Wilejka conducted
a reprisal Aktion against the ghetto in Ilja on March 17, in
which about 600 Jews were murdered.
p. 1175
This tells of a very interesting pattern: Jews hear rumors of mass executions of Jews (often related to partisan activity) so they decide to join the partisans. Reprisal killings then happen as a result, which more Jews elsewhere then hear rumors of. Wash, rinse, repeat.
I wonder how many Jews may have been killed (or gotten others killed) in this way.
I'm short on time so will have to finish the rest of my response later.
I am calling your bluff, 110%. You say shit like, "give me your best arguments", "we'll get into the nitty gritty real soon", etc., to feign confidence because you are a clown who will not admit he was wrong and would prefer to remain prideful rather than approach this objectively, honestly, or with any amount of integrity. You have shown your tactics and biases repeatedly in recent threads over multiple topics. No one who has followed these topics thus far and is keeping an open mind can possibly take you seriously at this point. 
