Goebbels diaries are suspect!

[zapper]

Following up on this discussion

Re: Goebbels Feb. 15, 1942 Diary Entry
viewtopic.php?p=101994#p101994

I have little reason to suspect the diaries are not authentic.

Not so fast, the "famous" Mar 27 entry is not so easy to explain. Worth examining the whole thing carefully

Dalton's translation:

Mar 27, 1942 (II.3.561) **

Beginning with Lublin, the Jews in the General Government are now being evacuated (abgeschoben) eastward. The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that about 60 percent of them will have to be liquidated (liquidiert) whereas only about 40 percent can be used for forced labor.

The former Gauleiter of Vienna, who is to carry this measure through, is doing it with considerable circumspection and according to a method that does not attract too much attention. A judgment is being visited upon the Jews that, while barbaric, is fully deserved by them. The prophesy which the Führer made about them for having brought on a new World War is beginning to come true in a most terrible manner. One must not be sentimental in these matters. If we did not fight the Jews, they would destroy us (vernichten). It’s a life-and-death struggle between the Aryan race and the Jewish bacillus. No other government and no other regime would have the strength for such a global solution of this question. Here, too, the Führer is the undismayed champion of a radical solution necessitated by conditions, and therefore inexorable. Fortunately a whole series of possibilities presents itself for us in wartime that would be denied us in peacetime. We shall have to profit by this.

The ghettos that will be emptied in the cities of the General Government will now be refilled with Jews thrown out (ausgeschobenen) of the Reich. This process is to be repeated from time to time. There is nothing funny in it for the Jews, and the fact that Jewry’s representatives in England and America are today organizing and sponsoring the war against Germany must be paid for dearly by its representatives in Europe—and that’s only right.

I scoff at the notion that the barbaric procedure or method he allegedly keeps bringing up could in any way relate to resettlement, evacuation, or even plunder.

Remember he also allegedly says it will be carried out by "the former Gauleiter of Vienna", that is Globocnik, with "considerable circumspection" and "according to a method that does not attract too much attention"

Taken on it's own, this entry points to extermination. Any other alternative is nonsensical. Let's play a word replacement game - this 'wealth appropriation' is being conducted according to a method that does not attract too much attention. What!?

And how does this square with his alleged statement "Not much will remain of the Jews?" Even if he is talking about evacuation, before this the Jews were sequestered in disgusting disease ridden ghettos, deprived of most of their ability to work and therefore justify their own existence. All evidence suggests that following their evacuation from the ghettos and firmly into German hands their level of care dramatically increased. His statement "only 40% can be used for labor" is similarly rubbish. Rather, as is well documented, even children and the aged  were put to work, and sick Jews were rehabilitated. 

So the document, or at least this single entry, is as contrived and ridiculous as most witness statements. It is alarming so many here casually assume it is authentic. Hannover's view must be taken more seriously.

[PrudentRegret]

Imagine having to appeal to vague-posting from a diary entry to support your claim of an event that allegedly took, like, 15x the number of lives as the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Taken on it's own, this entry points to extermination. Any other alternative is nonsensical. Let's play a word replacement game - this 'wealth appropriation' is being conducted according to a method that does not attract too much attention. What!?

Deportation and confiscation would make perfect sense with this entry, in fact.

Imagine having so little evidence that the US nuked Japan that you have to appeal to the vague diary entry of someone in the Truman administration.

[Otium]

So the document, or at least this single entry, is as contrived and ridiculous as most witness statements. It is alarming so many here casually assume it is authentic. Hannover's view must be taken more seriously.

You haven't offered any evidence to support the possibility that the diary has been tampered with let alone that this specific entry is fake. Disagreeing with a single entry because it doesn't accord with your own preconceptions of what the truth should be doesn't make it fake either.

I said that I have little reason to suspect the diaries are not authentic, you haven't given any reason why they're inauthentic. Until you can do that, I will err on the side of what's most likely, that they're probably authentic. You can display some scepticism, but you should not extrapolate unsupportable conclusions based on it.

[Werd]

the "famous" Mar 27 entry is not so easy to explain.

Graf touched on this a long time ago.

“On 27 March 1942, Joseph Goebbels wrote in his diary that ‘barbaric methods,’ which he preferred not to describe, were used against the Jews, and that 60% of them would be liquidated; the other 40% would be used for labor.”

Answer
No revisionist has ever been able to furnish a satisfactory explanation for this passage. But let us compare it with what Goebbels wrote in the same diary only 20 days earlier, on 7 March 1942:[40]

“There are about 11 million Jews in Europe [a heavily inflated figure!]. Later it will be necessary to concentrate them in the East. After the war some island such as Madagascar can be assigned to them.”

The deportation of the European Jews to Madagascar was not Dr. Goebbel’s brainchild. The so-called “Madagascar plan” was taken very seriously by the National Socialist leadership, but finally abandoned as unworkable.[41] Now, mainstream “holocaust” historians may argue that the German government dropped this plan between 7 and 27 March and decided to exterminate the Jews instead. This would explain the discrepancy between the two diary entries. However, this argument would be untenable for the following reason: According to the “holocaust” story, the first “extermination camp,” Chelmno, started to function as early as in December 1941. Since it is unthinkable that a local commander would have set up an “extermination camp” without an order from the highest authorities, an extermination policy must already have existed in late 1941, if the claims about Chelmno are correct (which the revisionists dispute[42]). Being one of the leading figures of the Third Reich, Dr. Goebbels would of course have known about such an extermination policy, so how do the “holocaust” historians explain the fact that he spoke of the concentration of the Jews in the East and advocated assigning them Madagascar (or another island) as late as on 7 March 1942?

Let’s sum up: While the revisionists are unable to explain the second entry in Goebbels’ diary, the “holocaust” historians are at a loss to explain the first one! It is unlikely that this mystery will ever be solved.


http://juergen-graf.vho.org/articles/hu ... ebate.html

[Hannover]

You haven't offered any evidence to support the possibility that the diary has been tampered with let alone that this specific entry is fake. Disagreeing with a single entry because it doesn't accord with your own preconceptions of what the truth should be doesn't make it fake either.

I said that I have little reason to suspect the diaries are not authentic, you haven't given any reason why they're inauthentic. Until you can do that, I will err on the side of what's most likely, that they're probably authentic. You can display some scepticism, but you should not extrapolate unsupportable conclusions based on it.

Reasons to more than suspect tampering:

- No actual, original diary to see in comparison to alleged English translation.

- Apparently & too conveniently there is 'no longer' any paper originals, and we do not even see the glass plates that are said to exist.
All of which is odd considering that to show the real diary would, if you believe the curious language that is claimed, would add credence to True Believer claims.

- Such "translations" of alleged German documents have been shown to be fraudulent in the past. Nuremberg for example is full of fake "translations" for which no real German originals exist.

- The alleged claims made about the curious Goebbels text did not happen.
The alleged gas chambers were simply impossible and the claimed massive human remains are said to exist in known locations, yet in fact they do not exist.

Werd quoted Jurgen Graf:

No revisionist has ever been able to furnish a satisfactory explanation for this passage. But let us compare it with what Goebbels wrote in the same diary only 20 days earlier, on 7 March 1942:[40]

“There are about 11 million Jews in Europe [a heavily inflated figure!]. Later it will be necessary to concentrate them in the East. After the war some island such as Madagascar can be assigned to them.”

Indeed, that's more than satisfactory proof that some of the text in Goebbels diary, as quoted in the OP and other examples elsewhere, has been tampered with.

more:
The Unsourced [alleged] Excerpts of Joseph Goebbels' Diary
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11824
and:
The Goebbels diary: a forgery?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3793
and:
Goebbels' diaries and Nizkor's manipulations
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=22198

- Hannover

[stinky]

- Apparently & too conveniently there is 'no longer' any paper originals, and we do not even see the glass plates that are said to exist.
All of which is odd considering that to show the real diary would, if you believe the curious language that is claimed, would add credence to True Believer claims.

This cannot be overstated

[Turpitz]

I have always been uncomfortable with the manner in which it was just lying around on top of the pile, waiting for someone to trip over it. That will never sit well with me.

[zapper]

I said that I have little reason to suspect the diaries are not authentic, you haven't given any reason why they're inauthentic. Until you can do that, I will err on the side of what's most likely, that they're probably authentic. You can display some scepticism, but you should not extrapolate unsupportable conclusions based on it.

the entry heavily infers widespread extermination occurred which has been demonstrated to be physically and scientifically impossible

What do each of these "vague" words and remarks refer to? Please be specific.

"Procedure"
"Measure"
"Not much left of the Jews"
"Radical Solution"

Hannover correctly points out we haven't seen the original diary, and that probably only this entry and perhaps a few more were fabricated. The reason they didn't just have Goebbels say, "the Jews are being gassed in Globocnik's camps" is because this would have attracted too much attention and they would have had to produce the original diary, potentially exposing their fraud

Similarly they have refused to allow independent excavation at any of the AR sites, or at the very least shown photographic evidence of their digs. Do you doubt the studies stating mass cremains were found at these locations?

[Otium]

the entry heavily infers widespread extermination occurred which has been demonstrated to be physically and scientifically impossible

What do each of these "vague" words and remarks refer to? Please be specific.

"Procedure"
"Measure"
"Not much left of the Jews"
"Radical Solution"

None of these words and phrases imply extermination in and of themselves.

If you're going to deport the Jews, that's a procedure. It's also a 'radical solution', as I think deporting millions of people from any continent could be considered as such. And indeed there wouldn't be 'much left of the Jews' once that's done. If you wanted to solve the Jewish problem, that would be the most appropriate 'measure'.

Hannover correctly points out we haven't seen the original diary, and that probably only this entry and perhaps a few more were fabricated. The reason they didn't just have Goebbels say, "the Jews are being gassed in Globocnik's camps" is because this would have attracted too much attention and they would have had to produce the original diary, potentially exposing their fraud

We do have the original diary. It's the original as it was copied on the orders of Goebbels himself and turned into glass plates. A paper diary would be easy to tamper with, unlike glass plates. Anyway, I'm not an expert on the Goebbels diary, so I cannot tell you what parts of the original paper diary still exist.

You and Hannover have still presented no evidence that this entry is fabricated, or that the diary has been tampered with. That the contents might be wrong, doesn't mean they've been altered.

None of the 'issues' you or Hannover brought up in support of the diary having been tampered with actually pertain to the diary itself, but to inferences you've arbitrarily made based on extraneous facts that don't have anything to do with the diary.

That translations of other German documents have been wrong, and others fraudulent, doesn't mean the same has been done to the Goebbels diary. You would need to furnish proof. If you don't trust the translation, then locate a microfilmed copy of the original diary at whatever University around the world is closest to you and check it for yourself.

If you think that the plate copies of the original diary cannot be trusted, then you'd need to furnish proof of why that is, perhaps try and find out what of the original diary exists in paper form or find out how easy it would be to alter glass plates. The point is you have offered no proof that this particular historical document has been altered. If we used your criteria, then we could just assert that any document is a 'fabrication' because documents in the past have been fabricated, but that isn't saying anything about the document actually in question.

My position is quite simple, without substantial proof, whatever that might be, I'm not going to decide that the diary has been altered. I don't know, and cannot tell you whether it has been or not, but I don't think it's likely. The question isn't off the table, but it's not a very large question either. When diaries have been altered in the past (eg. the diary of Ciano, Gerhard Engel and the OKW diary too I believe) they have been substantially altered to include tracts against Hitler and his leadership, and or obvious falsifications with specific, unambiguous claims made to prove the guilt of the Germans. Not to mention the fact that they'd been exploited immediately. None of this has been found in regards to Goebbels' diary. This of course doesn't mean that the diaries haven't been tampered with, but the usual tell-tale signs don't seem to be present. For that reason I think it's unlikely. Also that the diaries remained untouched for decades, and as Dalton notes, the final volume of the diary to be published was only in 2006! Therefore hardly any historian has actually had the time to fully take stock of the entire diary. It's only been fully available for 15 years.

This is my final word on this.

I can tell that this is the kind of discussion that will go around and around in circles, because you'll insist on the same points. You can believe what you want, but I'm not going to spend my time hashing it out with you.

[Lamprecht]

Werd quotes Graf:

While the revisionists are unable to explain the second entry in Goebbels’ diary, the “holocaust” historians are at a loss to explain the first one! It is unlikely that this mystery will ever be solved.

Really? see: viewtopic.php?t=3763

The personal opinions of Goebbels on how Jews should be treated (after hearing of atrocities committed against Germans on a weekly basis) should not be treated as actual Third Reich policy.

Goebbels:

In general one may conclude that 60% of them must be liquidated, while only 40% can be put to work...

Yet many times after this entry we see that he defines "Final Solution" in non genocidal terms...

[Werd]

Werd quotes Graf:

While the revisionists are unable to explain the second entry in Goebbels’ diary, the “holocaust” historians are at a loss to explain the first one! It is unlikely that this mystery will ever be solved.

Really? see: viewtopic.php?t=3763

The personal opinions of Goebbels on how Jews should be treated (after hearing of atrocities committed against Germans on a weekly basis) should not be treated as actual Third Reich policy.

Goebbels:

In general one may conclude that 60% of them must be liquidated, while only 40% can be put to work...

Yet many times after this entry we see that he defines "Final Solution" in non genocidal terms...

I wonder if Graf was making a rhetorical point and would be in obvious agreement with you.

I sure hope that Thomas Dalton's book on all the Goebbels diary entries on the Jews gets into this kind of territory.

[zapper]

I believe the excerpt is vitally important.

Mark Weber used to be arguably the world's foremost revisionist. Now he believes mass extermination took place at Globocnik’s camps and cites this excerpt as a big reason why in the following interview

https://archive.org/details/MarkWeberIn ... Rizoli2016

Holocaust fanatics will always trumpet this entry, and as you can see it was convincing evidence of genocide to a very practiced and intelligent revisionist. And indeed, taken on it's own, without knowledge of the scientific and physical impossibility of the gassing claims and obvious witness manipulation and lies, it certainly supports extermination more than any other hypothesis

Unfortunately neither you or Dalton go into detail about this, I asked for specificity

If you're going to deport the Jews, that's a procedure. It's also a 'radical solution', as I think deporting millions of people from any continent could be considered as such. And indeed there wouldn't be 'much left of the Jews' once that's done. If you wanted to solve the Jewish problem, that would be the most appropriate 'measure'.

.

Let's say the "barbaric" procedure that Goebbels is so loathe to describe "more definitely" is resettlement. Does resettlement lead to "not much" remaining of the Jews? Perhaps geographically, but clearly at this point in the war there was no way to move them out of German territory so it's an odd thing to say. I'll buy your interpretation though.

But then he says: "On the whole it can be said that about 60 percent of them will have to be liquidated (liquidiert) whereas only about 40 percent can be used for forced labor . . ." I pointed this out earlier but it is ridiculous to assume the Germans would even consider keeping 60% of the Jews around without making them work for it (at a time when the war was turning against Germany no less).
Then he says

"The former Gauleiter of Vienna, who is to carry *this measure* through, is doing it with considerable circumspection and according to a method that does not attract too much attention."

So the "barbaric" (he uses this word twice) resettlement is carried out with "considerable circumspection" and "according to a method that does not attract too much attention." How do you carry out a mass transfer of humans without attracting attention and why would you even want to hide such a thing? We know (also from Goebbels diaries) that the ghettos were horrendous, disgusting and delivering the Jews from these horrid places was a true beneficence on the part of the Germans that the Jews should have been eternally grateful for (They were sent instead to well run camps like Auschwitz where they received extensive medical care and enjoyed fine recreation). Why would you want to cover this up? With the case of Theresienstadt, they went to great lengths to show the Allies the sterling treatment Jews were getting. Also their deportation was never a secret, in fact it was the official public position of the government they were being moved to Russia. This interpretation is absolutely nonsensical
Let us now imagine Goebbels means that the 60% liquidated are instead going to be murdered (this fits in perfectly with the thesis of the holocaust fanatics, who have been forced to admit that the Germans never had a broad extermination plan, but rather planned merely to kill the majority, who they say the Germans didn't deem useful for work.

Lets see how this fits into the diary entry

Beginning with Lublin, the Jews in the General Government are now being evacuated (abgeschoben) eastward. The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that about 60 percent of them will have to be *murdered* whereas only about 40 percent can be used for forced labor.

The former Gauleiter of Vienna, who is to carry out this *murder* is doing it with considerable circumspection and according to a method that does not attract too much attention.
It also makes sense with the rest of the passage, much more so than resettlement. He talks of a "life and death struggle". The radical solution too, makes more sense as murder, since the Jews had already been deported to ghettos, and soon would be sent to camps with much better conditions.

Notice the the propagandists who conceived this passage couldn't help but try to make Goebbels out as a bit of a dolt, by having him speak of a "global solution" which clearly isn't the case because Germany was never even close to having influence over the fate of the millions of American and British Jews. 

A judgment is being visited upon the Jews that, while barbaric, is fully deserved by them. The prophecy which the Führer made about them for having brought on a new World War is beginning to come true in a most terrible manner. One must not be sentimental in these matters. If we did not fight the Jews, they would destroy us (vernichten). It’s a life-and-death struggle between the Aryan race and the Jewish bacillus. No other government and no other regime would have the strength for such a global solution of this question. Here, too, the Führer is the undismayed champion of a radical solution necessitated by conditions, and therefore inexorable. Fortunately a whole series of possibilities presents itself for us in wartime that would be denied us in peacetime.

It is quite obvious that this entry (taken on it's own, without knowledge of the scientific and physical impossibility of the gassing claims and obvious witness manipulation and lies) supports the holocaust fanatics thesis more than our own. For this reason there is a very high likelihood it is a fake. Of course I don't have 100% certainty

Finally I can turn to a very important point, where I compared the reluctance of the holocaust fanatics to publicly show the plates with their refusal to allow independent investigation of the supposed Reinhardt killing sites. This says it all. Concealing evidence is crime in most places and tantamount to admission of guilt! We have no "evidence" Kola fabricated his studies which state discovery of many thousands of cubic meters of cremated remains. But we know these things are scientifically and physically impossible, and they refuse to allow verification of their surveys so for these reasons the studies are  easily discounted. The same should be true of nonsensical, ridiculous diary entries like the one above.

It's a shame HMS chooses to retire here, before even hearing my full argument!, because this is a vitally important topic that really should be hashed out.