From here:
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... flage.html
They point to a few documents where it is claimed that the documents were tampered with to make references to killings into resettlements.
My questions:
How can we trust these supposed "experts" to "forensically examine" documents properly? The Nuremberg trials were not fair trials by any means. There is plenty of evidence of a frame up.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11053
The response to that would probably be these are different trials, not Nuremberg. But there's no reason to think that the other trials were that much more fair.
Do we have the originals of these documents? If not, and these are just copies, how can we come to any conclusions about what was and wasn't tampered with?
Since by their own admission these documents are tampered with, how do we know it was the Nazis who tampered with them and not the prosecutors? They may respond with claiming that they wouldn't want to change the documents to something less incriminating, but they could be trying to fraudulently establish that "code words" were used.
The final document doesn't involve tampering, but just references to pits and ammunition at a resettlement site. But this doesn't prove anything. Yes, bringing ammunition to a resettlement site where you have prisoners will be necessary. You need the threat of force to keep prisoners from going anywhere. Pits don't prove anything. I've been in pits before and there were no dead bodies. But even if it was to put bodies in, perhaps people who died of disease or prisoners executed for rebellion were put in there. We don't know.
To me, the above explanations are much more likely than using code words on a mass scale, which would cause much confusion in the operation of the state.
Use of Code Words Proven?
Moderator: Moderator
Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
I looked there. But seems to be 'hide and seek' with the evidence once again. Those 'hide and seek' games by Holocaustians are a way of them to avoid having a discussion:
"...the local military command of Bakhchisarai, a Wehrmacht headquarters in the occupied Soviet Union, reported on the killing of local Jews in its activity report of 14.12.41 as follows: "The Jews who lived here were not rich and led a relatively modest life. The S.D. completed the shooting of the Jews on 13.12.41".[5] In the report, the word "shooting" (Erschießung) has been deleted and has been replaced by the handwritten word "resettlement" (Aussiedlung)."
They try to peddle their idea that resettlement actually meant 'killing'. That they used 'resettlement' / 'Umsiedlung' as a camouflage term. But how is that proven by anything they cite there? To me it sounds like them trying to read something into documents that simply isn't there.
If it's a genuine document, perhaps someone only corrected an error there. If you try to camouflage something, striking out the real term and inserting a camouflage term, doesn't make sense at all.
It demonstrates how desperate they are to prove their case in the light of not having anything worth showing.
"...the local military command of Bakhchisarai, a Wehrmacht headquarters in the occupied Soviet Union, reported on the killing of local Jews in its activity report of 14.12.41 as follows: "The Jews who lived here were not rich and led a relatively modest life. The S.D. completed the shooting of the Jews on 13.12.41".[5] In the report, the word "shooting" (Erschießung) has been deleted and has been replaced by the handwritten word "resettlement" (Aussiedlung)."
They try to peddle their idea that resettlement actually meant 'killing'. That they used 'resettlement' / 'Umsiedlung' as a camouflage term. But how is that proven by anything they cite there? To me it sounds like them trying to read something into documents that simply isn't there.
If it's a genuine document, perhaps someone only corrected an error there. If you try to camouflage something, striking out the real term and inserting a camouflage term, doesn't make sense at all.
It demonstrates how desperate they are to prove their case in the light of not having anything worth showing.
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
I also thought what Hektor said. That it seems like nothing more than a correction of a word.
In that blogpost they cite 4 examples.
The First Document
For the first document the HC bloggers use a series of abbreviations which the layman doesn't know or understand and it doesn't help that the hyperlinks are mostly broken. It'd be better if they just cited the books they reference in full, without being cryptic and hyperlinking all over the place. Anyway, in consequential order they list the following citations for this first document: NOKW 1628 | TR.4/14, pp.17-20 | DEJ 7, Dok. 126, pp.389-391.
So what do these terms mean?
The first refers to the document dated December 7, 1941 which was filed as 'NOKW 1628', this refers to the 'Nuernberg Oberkommando der Wehrmacht' documents, hence 'NOKW' (see the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) catalog here). You can find all these documents under the NARA Record Group (RG) 238 'National Archives Collection of World War II War Crimes Records' Microfilm publication: T-1119 which consists of 47 rolls containing all of the NOKW files (see the list here) You can put in orders on the website to purchase digitial copies of these microfilm rolls, for a single roll it costs like $126 USD if I recall right.
The second abbreviation: 'TR.4/14, pp.17-20' I have no clue because the link is broken.
The third abbreviation: 'DEJ 7, Dok. 126, pp.389-391' refers to a published document collection entitled 'Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1933–1945' (link). The collection of volumes spans 16 volumes, and is also available in English under the title 'The Persecution and Murder of the European Jews by Nazi Germany, 1933–1945' (link). However, only volumes 1-5 and 12 have been published in English thus far. So to check this first document we'll have to refer to the German editions.
The document is printed as follows:
I won't post the whole document here, but I will upload the first page of the document:
Source: Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv (BA-MA), RH 23/72. Frame 123.
The relevant section is as follows:
You can indeed see that the word 'Exekutierung' was blacked out and replaced with 'Umsiedlung'. However, it's quite clear (in my opinion) that in the case of this document it has nothing to do with being a 'code word' and is actually just a mistake.
First of all, you can see that the word 'Exekutierungen' is used literally in the next sentence to refer to 'further executions', so why was it not blacked out a second time? How could the mistake be made again right after the first? Moreover, the way the HC bloggers present this (or rather don't present any text of this document) as if the word was replaced in order to hide the fact that it originally said 'Exekutierung', which is simply not the case at all. The word is clearly visible under the black smudging, and the proper word is written clear as day next to it as a mere correction. This makes no sense if the intention was to 'cover up' the usage of the word. The claim that Rudolf Mally had to "forensically examine" the document to uncover this very clear correction is hilarous when one can simply look at the piece of paper up close for oneself and see it clear as day. If the Germans wanted to hide it they simply would've rewritten the document. It was clearly not so important to them.
Secondly, the context of the words usage leads us to believe it was a mistake as we may speculate that the typist merely used the wrong word too early in typing out this report, and used it correctly the second time, hence why he didn't scratch it out again. Because he was already going to mention executions of Jews that fled, and of partisans, such people who might need to be executed for some infraction against the resettlement program it makes sense that a mistake like this could be made.
Moreover, the report mentions only 1 Jew needing to be executed, if the aim was to kill all Jews it makes little sense to specify that only one Jew had been shot on December 8th.
And it makes even less sense to specify that more executions of fleeing Jews are to be expected when your plan is supposedly to execute them all anyway. So obviously "more" are to be "expected"; yet the document says this as if one might not expect it, and I'd think this is because it wasn't a given, a foregone conclusion, but because under the specific circumstances it seemed likely.
Or maybe 2500 Jews were executed over the course of December 1-3rd, and the specifications of more potential executations to be "expected" is because the 2500 Jews previously mentioned were themselves a specific group of Jews which had fled and had become partisians or some kind? In this case, even if we accept the claims of the HC bloggers to be true in this instance, the document is only referring to a number of specific Jews which had fled.
The word 'Exekutierungen' is not found a lot throughout the printed volumes cited by the HC bloggers, but in one instance it's used quite openly and not covered up, which doesn't jive with their narrative. The document reads as follows:
The reference they give for this document is: AIPN, Zbiór zespołów szczątkowych jednostek SS i policji, Nr. 77, Bl. 10.
But the acronyn 'AIPN' doesn't appear in the abbreviations section of the book.
So in this case it appears we have a document where, for some reason, all of the Jews of a village were executed and the word 'Exekutierung' was not given the code word treatment for some odd reason. It cannot be that they were too stupid and 'forgot' to fix it, for why would it ever get to the point where they get so far as to write the wrong word in the first place?
Now, there is another document cited in the volume which adds some context:
So this accounts for why the 5 other Jews weren't executed, because according to this document they were kept alive for "economic and sanitary purposes".
How this can be explained from the revisionist side, I do not know because I don't have the requisite amount of knowledge to say, but on the face of it it looks to support the exterminationist argument.
However it should be said that the word 'Umsiedlung' is used plenty of times (in volume 7 26 times, but 7 times in editor notes. In volume 8 it's used 39 times, 2 times editor notes. The documents also contain resistance documents which sometimes use the word), and the only time in these two volumes of documents that 'Exekutierung' is used is in the two examples above, one of which I think is a mere mistake and thus not proof of 'Umsiedlung' being a codeword. Which means it has to be explained why in all these other documents the Jews are being evacuated, and in this one instance all the Jews in the town of Mikasewitschi (Mikaszewicze) were executed, was it because of diesease? Because of partisan activity? It would seem bold to assume either of these things as the document doesn't specify, but literally characterizes the report as "Execution report on the execution of Jews", implying as a whole, and indeed they were dealt with as a whole too.
I might check out the other three documents from the HC blog at a later time.
In that blogpost they cite 4 examples.
The First Document
For the first document the HC bloggers use a series of abbreviations which the layman doesn't know or understand and it doesn't help that the hyperlinks are mostly broken. It'd be better if they just cited the books they reference in full, without being cryptic and hyperlinking all over the place. Anyway, in consequential order they list the following citations for this first document: NOKW 1628 | TR.4/14, pp.17-20 | DEJ 7, Dok. 126, pp.389-391.
So what do these terms mean?
The first refers to the document dated December 7, 1941 which was filed as 'NOKW 1628', this refers to the 'Nuernberg Oberkommando der Wehrmacht' documents, hence 'NOKW' (see the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) catalog here). You can find all these documents under the NARA Record Group (RG) 238 'National Archives Collection of World War II War Crimes Records' Microfilm publication: T-1119 which consists of 47 rolls containing all of the NOKW files (see the list here) You can put in orders on the website to purchase digitial copies of these microfilm rolls, for a single roll it costs like $126 USD if I recall right.
The second abbreviation: 'TR.4/14, pp.17-20' I have no clue because the link is broken.
The third abbreviation: 'DEJ 7, Dok. 126, pp.389-391' refers to a published document collection entitled 'Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1933–1945' (link). The collection of volumes spans 16 volumes, and is also available in English under the title 'The Persecution and Murder of the European Jews by Nazi Germany, 1933–1945' (link). However, only volumes 1-5 and 12 have been published in English thus far. So to check this first document we'll have to refer to the German editions.
The document is printed as follows:
Original German
Die Ortskommandantur I/287 in Kertsch (Kerč) meldet am 7. Dezember 1941 die Erschießung von 2500 Juden
Tätigkeitsbericht der Ortskommandantur I/287 Kertsch, Tgb. Nr. 328, gez. Neumann, für den Zeitraum 28.11.–7.12.1941 an den Kommandanten des rückwärtigen Armeegebiets 553 vom 7.12.1941
Betrifft: Tätigkeitsbericht vom 28.11. bis 7.12.1941
Bezug: Kdt. rückw. A.Geb. 553, Qu., Tgb. Nr. 2891/41 v. 20.8.41.4
An Feldkommandantur 810 mit der Bitte um Weiterleitung an Kdt. rückw. A.Geb. 553.
Simferopol
1. Militärisches
Den Küstenschutz und die Sicherung der Stadt Kertsch hat ab 3.12. mittags das II./IR 42 übernommen, nachdem das IR 213 und sämtliche zugehörige Verbände der 73. ID herausgezogen wurden. Kertsch liegt nunmehr im Befehlsbereich der 46. ID. Die Ausrottung der Partisanen im Steinbruch südlich von Kertsch ist gegenwärtig dem Pi.Batl. 88 anvertraut. Die Tagstreifen und die Beaufsichtigung der eingesetzten Arbeitskommandos besorgen die vom XXXII. AK zugeteilten 20 Feldgendarmen. Die Wache für die Ortskommandantur stellt ab 5.12.41 das IR 42.
Am 5. und 6.12.41 wurde erhöhte Alarmbereitschaft durchgegeben, da Landungsversuche vermutet wurden.
Vereinzelte Flieger besuchen die Stadt, werfen ab und zu in geringer Anzahl Bomben und werden von der Flak unter Feuer genommen. Bei Tag wurden vereinzelt Fahrkolonnen mit Bordwaffen angegriffen; es gab etliche Verwundete, darunter einen Schwerverletzten mit Bauchschuß.
2. Politisches
An Volksdeutschen wurden weitere 2 Frauen und 1 Mann listenmäßig erfaßt und mit Ausweisen versehen. Es sind hiermit insgesamt 17 Volksdeutsche erfaßt, darunter 2 Männer.
Die Umsiedlung der Juden, etwa 2500 an der Zahl, wurde am 1., 2. und 3. Dezember vollzogen. Mit nachträglichen Exekutierungen ist zu rechnen, da ein Teil der jüdischen Bevölkerung flüchtete, sich versteckt hält und erst aufgegriffen werden muß.7 Am 1.12.41 wurden 3 überwiesene Partisanen durch die Geheime Feldpolizei öffentlich gehängt. Weitere 4 Partisanen sind bereits verhört und werden mit 1 Juden, der sich als Dolmetscher einschlich und gegen die Interessen der deutschen Wehrmacht übersetzte, sowie 1 Mann, der mit geladener Pistole aufgegriffen wurde und sich verdächtig herumtrieb, am 7. bzw. 8.12.41 erschossen.
Die Erfassung der ehemals zaristischen Offiziere ist vorgesehen.
3. Verwaltung
Der Verwaltungsapparat spielt sich allmählich ein. Der Bürgermeister arbeitet mit seinen Beigeordneten langsam, bedächtig und ängstlich, hat aber Erfolge zu buchen. Das Straßenbild ist nicht nur sauber, sondern auch bewegter geworden. Friseur- und Handwerkerläden sind bereits geöffnet. In einer Tee- und Kaffeestube werden bereits warme Getränke verabreicht; eine zweite ist im Erstehen. Das Fuhrwerkunternehmen der Stadt mit 45 Pferden und 3 Lkw hat den Betrieb aufgenommen. Von den Schulen der Stadt, die zumeist von Truppen und Dienststellen besetzt oder schwer beschädigt sind, wurden 3 für den in absehbarer Zeit einsetzenden Schulunterricht freigemacht. Die städtische Feuerwehr in der Stärke 1:388 wurde reorganisiert und konnte bereits 2 Brände löschen. Es steht ihr ein Lkw und 1 Spritzenwagen zur Verfügung; 2 weitere Wagen werden instand gesetzt. Die Errichtung eines städtischen Sammellagers für Lebensmittel und Einrichtungsgegenstände hat sich bewährt. Das Stadt-Krankenhaus konnte freigemacht und zur Aufnahme des städtischen Gesundheitsdienstes freigegeben werden. Ebenso konnte die Stadt-Apotheke wieder eröffnet werden. Kino und Theater könnten ungehindert den Betrieb aufnehmen, wenn die nötigen Strommengen sichergestellt werden könnten. Programme sind bereits ausgearbeitet. Den ärztlichen und zahnärztlichen Dienst für die Zivilbevölkerung versehen insgesamt 27 Ärzte und Ärztinnen, darunter 9 Juden, die vom Sonderkommando 10b vorläufig freigestellt wurden. Außerdem arbeiten im Lazarett der russischen Kriegsgefangenen 5 Militärärzte und 3 Feldscher. Der für den tierärztlichen Dienst verantwortliche Leiter des Stadt-Veterinäramtes Sirus Nikolaus erließ mit Genehmigung der OK einen Aufruf an die Bevölkerung zwecks Verhütung und Anmeldung von Seuchenkrankheiten, Fleischbeschau und dgl.
[…]Rudimentary English Translation
The local commandant's office I/287 in Kerč reports the shooting of 2500 Jews on 7 December 1941.
Activity report of the local commandant's office I/287 Kerch, Tgb. No. 328, gez. Neumann, for the period 28.11.-7.12.1941 to the commander of the rear army area 553 of 7.12.1941
Subject: Activity report from 28.11. to 7.12.1941
Reference: Kdt. rückw. A.Geb. 553, Qu., Tgb. No. 2891/41 dated 20.8.41.4
To Field Command Headquarters 810 with the request to forward it to Kdt. backward A.Geb. 553.
Simferopol
1. military matters
Coastal protection and securing of the city of Kerch has been taken over by II/IR 42 as of noon on 3.12, after IR 213 and all associated units of the 73rd ID have been withdrawn. Kerch is now under the command of the 46th ID. The extermination of the partisans in the quarry south of Kerch is currently entrusted to Pi.Batl. 88. The day patrols and the supervision of the deployed work detachments are carried out by the 20 field gendarmes assigned by the XXXII AK. As of 5.12.41, IR 42 provides the guard for the local command.
On 5 and 6.12.41, increased alert was announced, as landing attempts were suspected.
Isolated aircraft visited the city, occasionally dropping small numbers of bombs and being fired upon by the flak. During the day, isolated motorcades were attacked with on-board weapons; there were several wounded, including one seriously injured with a gunshot wound to the abdomen.
2. political
A further 2 women and 1 man of ethnic German origin were registered and issued with identity cards. This makes a total of 17 ethnic Germans, including 2 men.
The resettlement of the Jews, about 2500 in number, was carried out on 1, 2 and 3 December.6 Subsequent executions are to be expected, since part of the Jewish population fled, is in hiding and must first be apprehended.7 On 1.12.41 3 transferred partisans were publicly hanged by the Secret Field Police. A further 4 partisans had already been interrogated and were shot on 7 and 8.12.41 together with 1 Jew who sneaked in as an interpreter and translated against the interests of the German Wehrmacht, and 1 man who was picked up with a loaded pistol and was roaming around suspiciously.
The registration of the former Tsarist officers is planned.
3. administration
The administrative apparatus gradually settles down. The mayor and his aldermen work slowly, cautiously and anxiously, but have successes to report. The streetscape has not only become cleaner, but also more agile. Barber and craft shops are already open. One tea and coffee shop is already serving hot drinks; a second is in the making. The town's haulage company with 45 horses and 3 trucks has started operations. Of the town's schools, most of which are occupied or badly damaged by troops and services, 3 have been cleared for classes to begin in the foreseeable future. The municipal fire brigade, with a strength of 1:388, has been reorganised and has already been able to extinguish 2 fires. It has a truck and 1 fire engine at its disposal; 2 other trucks are being repaired. The establishment of a municipal collection centre for food and furnishings has proved successful. The city hospital could be cleared and released to accommodate the city health service. Likewise, the town pharmacy could be reopened. The cinema and theatre could start operating unhindered if the necessary power could be secured. Programmes have already been worked out. A total of 27 doctors are providing medical and dental services for the civilian population, including 9 Jews who were temporarily released from Sonderkommando 10b. In addition, 5 military doctors and 3 field surgeons work in the hospital for Russian prisoners of war. The head of the city veterinary office Sirus Nikolaus, responsible for the veterinary service, issued an appeal to the population with the approval of the OC for the prevention and registration of epidemic diseases, meat inspection and the like.
[...]
Partially printed in: Bert Hoppe and Hildrun Glass (eds.), Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1933–1945, Volume 7: Sowjetunion mit annektierten Gebieten I. Besetzte sowjetische Gebiete unter deutscher Militärverwaltung, Baltikum und Transnistrien (Munich: Oldenbourg Verlag, 2011), Doc. 126, pp. 389-391.
I won't post the whole document here, but I will upload the first page of the document:
Source: Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv (BA-MA), RH 23/72. Frame 123.
The relevant section is as follows:
German: An Volksdeutschen wurden weitere 2 Frauen und 1 Mann listenmäßig erfaßt und mit Ausweisen versehen. Es sind hiermit insgesamt 17 Volksdeutsche erfaßt, darunter 2 Männer.
Die Umsiedlung der Juden, etwa 2500 an der Zahl, wurde am 1., 2. und 3. Dezember vollzogen. Mit nachträglichen Exekutierungen ist zu rechnen, da ein Teil der jüdischen Bevölkerung flüchtete, sich versteckt hält und erst aufgegriffen werden muß.7 Am 1.12.41 wurden 3 überwiesene Partisanen durch die Geheime Feldpolizei öffentlich gehängt. Weitere 4 Partisanen sind bereits verhört und werden mit 1 Juden, der sich als Dolmetscher einschlich und gegen die Interessen der deutschen Wehrmacht übersetzte, sowie 1 Mann, der mit geladener Pistole aufgegriffen wurde und sich verdächtig herumtrieb, am 7. bzw. 8.12.41 erschossen.
English: A further 2 women and 1 man of ethnic German origin were registered and issued with identity cards. This makes a total of 17 ethnic Germans, including 2 men.
The resettlement of the Jews, about 2500 in number, was carried out on 1, 2 and 3 December.6 Subsequent executions are to be expected, since part of the Jewish population fled, is in hiding and must first be apprehended.7 On 1.12.41 3 transferred partisans were publicly hanged by the Secret Field Police. A further 4 partisans had already been interrogated and were shot on 7 and 8.12.41 together with 1 Jew who sneaked in as an interpreter and translated against the interests of the German Wehrmacht, and 1 man who was picked up with a loaded pistol and was roaming around suspiciously.
You can indeed see that the word 'Exekutierung' was blacked out and replaced with 'Umsiedlung'. However, it's quite clear (in my opinion) that in the case of this document it has nothing to do with being a 'code word' and is actually just a mistake.
First of all, you can see that the word 'Exekutierungen' is used literally in the next sentence to refer to 'further executions', so why was it not blacked out a second time? How could the mistake be made again right after the first? Moreover, the way the HC bloggers present this (or rather don't present any text of this document) as if the word was replaced in order to hide the fact that it originally said 'Exekutierung', which is simply not the case at all. The word is clearly visible under the black smudging, and the proper word is written clear as day next to it as a mere correction. This makes no sense if the intention was to 'cover up' the usage of the word. The claim that Rudolf Mally had to "forensically examine" the document to uncover this very clear correction is hilarous when one can simply look at the piece of paper up close for oneself and see it clear as day. If the Germans wanted to hide it they simply would've rewritten the document. It was clearly not so important to them.
Secondly, the context of the words usage leads us to believe it was a mistake as we may speculate that the typist merely used the wrong word too early in typing out this report, and used it correctly the second time, hence why he didn't scratch it out again. Because he was already going to mention executions of Jews that fled, and of partisans, such people who might need to be executed for some infraction against the resettlement program it makes sense that a mistake like this could be made.
Moreover, the report mentions only 1 Jew needing to be executed, if the aim was to kill all Jews it makes little sense to specify that only one Jew had been shot on December 8th.
And it makes even less sense to specify that more executions of fleeing Jews are to be expected when your plan is supposedly to execute them all anyway. So obviously "more" are to be "expected"; yet the document says this as if one might not expect it, and I'd think this is because it wasn't a given, a foregone conclusion, but because under the specific circumstances it seemed likely.
Or maybe 2500 Jews were executed over the course of December 1-3rd, and the specifications of more potential executations to be "expected" is because the 2500 Jews previously mentioned were themselves a specific group of Jews which had fled and had become partisians or some kind? In this case, even if we accept the claims of the HC bloggers to be true in this instance, the document is only referring to a number of specific Jews which had fled.
The word 'Exekutierungen' is not found a lot throughout the printed volumes cited by the HC bloggers, but in one instance it's used quite openly and not covered up, which doesn't jive with their narrative. The document reads as follows:
Original German
Der Chef der Sicherheitspolizei in Pinsk meldet am 8. August 1942 die Ermordung von Juden in Mikasewitschi (Mikaszewicze)
Schreiben des Leiters der KdS-Außenstelle Pinsk, gez. Rasp, an den Kommandeur der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD beim SSPF in Rowno, vom 8. 8. 1942 (Abschrift)
Betrifft: Vollzugsmeldung über die Exekutierung von Juden
Am 6. 8. 42 wurde in dem Dorfe Mikasewitschi, Gebiet Pinsk, die Exekutierung von Juden vorgenommen. In dem Dorfe befanden sich 425 Juden. Davon wurden exekutiert:
1. 102 Männer
2. 159 Frauen
3. 159 Kinder
420 Gesamtzahl.
Aus wirtschaftlichen u. sanitären Gründen wurden drei Ingenieure sowie ein Arzt u. eine Ärztin belassen.Rudimentary English Translation
The Chief of the Security Police in Pinsk reports the murder of Jews in Mikasewitschi (Mikaszewicze) on 8 August 1942.
Letter from the head of the KdS field office in Pinsk, gez. Rasp, to the Commander of the Security Police and the SD at the SSPF in Rowno, dated 8. 8. 1942 (copy)
Subject: Execution report on the execution of Jews
On 6. 8. 42 the execution of Jews was carried out in the village of Mikasewitschi, Pinsk region. There were 425 Jews in the village. Of these were executed:
1. 102 men
2. 159 women
3. 159 children
420 total number.
For economic and sanitary reasons, three engineers and one male and one female doctor were left behind.
Bert Hoppe (ed.), Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1933–1945, Volume 8: Sowjetunion mit annektierten Gebieten II. Generalkommissariat Weißruthenien und Reichskommissariat Ukraine (Oldenbourg: De Gruyter, 2015), Doc. 147, p. 351.
The reference they give for this document is: AIPN, Zbiór zespołów szczątkowych jednostek SS i policji, Nr. 77, Bl. 10.
But the acronyn 'AIPN' doesn't appear in the abbreviations section of the book.
So in this case it appears we have a document where, for some reason, all of the Jews of a village were executed and the word 'Exekutierung' was not given the code word treatment for some odd reason. It cannot be that they were too stupid and 'forgot' to fix it, for why would it ever get to the point where they get so far as to write the wrong word in the first place?
Now, there is another document cited in the volume which adds some context:
Original German
Der Leiter eines Sägewerks in Mikaševiči (Mikaszewicze) bittet am 6. August 1942, einer dort arbeitenden jüdischen Ärztin ihre Instrumente zurückzugeben
Schreiben (Nr. 507/5–5) des stellv. Direktors des Sägewerks, gez. Cybyl’s, an die Gebietsverwaltung Mikaševiči vom 6. 8. 1942
Die als Werksärztin tätige Jüdin Ėpštejn3 benutzte bei der Erfüllung ihrer Pflichten [medizinische] Instrumente, die ihr Eigentum waren und die sie zu Hause (im Getto) aufbewahrte.
Da das Werk dringend einen Arzt braucht, die Ärztin ihren Pflichten jedoch nicht ohne die Instrumente nachkommen kann und das Werk keine eigenen besitzt, bitte ich darum, die besagten Instrumente Ėpštejn wiederzugeben oder dem Werk zur zeitweiligen Nutzung zu überlassen.Rudimentary English Translation
The manager of a sawmill in Mikaševiči (Mikaszewicze) asks on 6 August 1942 that a Jewish doctor working there be given back her instruments.
Letter (no. 507/5-5) from the deputy director of the sawmill, gez. Cybyl's, to the Mikaševiči Regional Administration dated 6. 8. 1942.
The Jewess Ėpštejn who worked as a plant doctor used [medical] instruments which were her property and which she kept at home (in the ghetto) when performing her duties.
Since the factory is in urgent need of a doctor, but the doctor cannot fulfil her duties without the instruments and the factory does not have any of its own, I ask that the said instruments be returned to Ėpštejn or given to the factory for temporary use. [Handwritten note in the margin, 8. 8. 1942: "Ėpštejn is allowed to fetch her medical instruments. [Paraphrase illegible]."]
Bert Hoppe (ed.), Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1933–1945, Volume 8: Sowjetunion mit annektierten Gebieten II. Generalkommissariat Weißruthenien und Reichskommissariat Ukraine (Oldenbourg: De Gruyter, 2015), Doc. 144, p. 347.
So this accounts for why the 5 other Jews weren't executed, because according to this document they were kept alive for "economic and sanitary purposes".
How this can be explained from the revisionist side, I do not know because I don't have the requisite amount of knowledge to say, but on the face of it it looks to support the exterminationist argument.
However it should be said that the word 'Umsiedlung' is used plenty of times (in volume 7 26 times, but 7 times in editor notes. In volume 8 it's used 39 times, 2 times editor notes. The documents also contain resistance documents which sometimes use the word), and the only time in these two volumes of documents that 'Exekutierung' is used is in the two examples above, one of which I think is a mere mistake and thus not proof of 'Umsiedlung' being a codeword. Which means it has to be explained why in all these other documents the Jews are being evacuated, and in this one instance all the Jews in the town of Mikasewitschi (Mikaszewicze) were executed, was it because of diesease? Because of partisan activity? It would seem bold to assume either of these things as the document doesn't specify, but literally characterizes the report as "Execution report on the execution of Jews", implying as a whole, and indeed they were dealt with as a whole too.
I might check out the other three documents from the HC blog at a later time.
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
Code words? Sounds to me like they were fixing errors that they typed out.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
NOTE: I am taking a leave of absence from revisionism to focus on other things. At this point, the ball is in their court to show the alleged massive pits full of human remains at the so-called "extermination camps." After 8 decades they still refuse to do this. I wonder why...
— Herbert Spencer
NOTE: I am taking a leave of absence from revisionism to focus on other things. At this point, the ball is in their court to show the alleged massive pits full of human remains at the so-called "extermination camps." After 8 decades they still refuse to do this. I wonder why...
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
Otium wrote:I also thought what Hektor said. That it seems like nothing more than a correction of a word.
....I might check out the other three documents from the HC blog at a later time.
To which they may reply:"Not everyone was enlightened in the code language"... "The correction was done by a person that was".
The code-word idea doesn't really make sense at all. You'd need to have a system and organisation to a) encrypt it and b) decrypt it. You'd have to avoid confusion as well. The record keeping also indicates that they were convinced of 'doing the right thing'... The question is why. The "yeah, it's because they irrationally hated Jews" does not fly... There must have been reasons at hand that were self-evident for those involved.
The code-word issues as well as the 'irrational hate' issue both spawned from Exterminationist dishonesty, nothing else.
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
Mattogno in his Einsatzgruppen book writes on page 66 -- “Umsiedlung” is sometimes clearly used as a synonym for execution
Here he agrees with HC Blog's interpretation of the Strauch "pits at the resettlement site" document https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... -site.html
He can't find evidence of large scale resettlement but argues this can be gleaned from context, eg here describing an action at Brest
But the 'situation report' of November 8th is actually the most obvious example of resettlement as a coded term that I've come across
https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic. ... de#p822961
Here he agrees with HC Blog's interpretation of the Strauch "pits at the resettlement site" document https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... -site.html
He can't find evidence of large scale resettlement but argues this can be gleaned from context, eg here describing an action at Brest
But the 'situation report' of November 8th is actually the most obvious example of resettlement as a coded term that I've come across
https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic. ... de#p822961
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
Yeah that's a good point. There's no reason to assume anything is being "covered up". If anything was being "covered up", they would have just destroyed the document. Anything that is being crossed out and replaced with another word is much more likely to be mistake than "code words". The use of "code words" on a mass scale would just not work, thus a mistakes are more likely here.
Also, when a first posted this, I assumed that there was some sophisticated method of covering them up. But no, it looks like a crude crossing out and replacing it with another word. It's completely ridiculous to call that a "cover up". I gave the bloggers too much benefit of the doubt. Although even if it was a sophisticated method, that still wouldn't make it a cover up. I've used white out on certain words that I've wanted to write over a mistake on, which is "more sophisticated" than crossing out. That doesn't mean something nefarious is going on even in that kind of scenario.
It's no more "support for the exterminationist argument" than many other Einsatzgruppen reports that refer to executions of Jews. Apply the same criteria here as with the other reports. Nothing new here.
Also, when a first posted this, I assumed that there was some sophisticated method of covering them up. But no, it looks like a crude crossing out and replacing it with another word. It's completely ridiculous to call that a "cover up". I gave the bloggers too much benefit of the doubt. Although even if it was a sophisticated method, that still wouldn't make it a cover up. I've used white out on certain words that I've wanted to write over a mistake on, which is "more sophisticated" than crossing out. That doesn't mean something nefarious is going on even in that kind of scenario.
Otium wrote:How this can be explained from the revisionist side, I do not know because I don't have the requisite amount of knowledge to say, but on the face of it looks to support the exterminationist argument.
It's no more "support for the exterminationist argument" than many other Einsatzgruppen reports that refer to executions of Jews. Apply the same criteria here as with the other reports. Nothing new here.
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
fireofice wrote:Yeah that's a good point. There's no reason to assume anything is being "covered up". If anything was being "covered up", they would have just destroyed the document. Anything that is being crossed out and replaced with another word is much more likely to be mistake than "code words". The use of "code words" on a mass scale would just not work, thus a mistakes are more likely here.
Also, when a first posted this, I assumed that there was some sophisticated method of covering them up. But no, it looks like a crude crossing out and replacing it with another word. It's completely ridiculous to call that a "cover up". I gave the bloggers too much benefit of the doubt. Although even if it was a sophisticated method, that still wouldn't make it a cover up. I've used white out on certain words that I've wanted to write over a mistake on, which is "more sophisticated" than crossing out. That doesn't mean something nefarious is going on even in that kind of scenario.
....
If you have a top secret extermination program running, you likely won't establish any records whatsoever. Yet them Holocaustians claim that the Holocaust is the "best documented Genocide in human history". Are they hearing themselves? They claim everything is documented. Yet the vast majority of jew-related documents from the NS-era don't have anything to do with killing Jews (because of them being Jews).
The documents not only don't support their Holocaust Claims, they contradict them. They just refuse to look and reflect on the bigger pictures.
-
curioussoul
- Member
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2022 6:46 pm
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
Otium wrote:First of all, you can see that the word 'Exekutierungen' is used literally in the next sentence to refer to 'further executions', so why was it not blacked out a second time? How could the mistake be made again right after the first? Moreover, the way the HC bloggers present this (or rather don't present any text of this document) as if the word was replaced in order to hide the fact that it originally said 'Exekutierung', which is simply not the case at all. The word is clearly visible under the black smudging, and the proper word is written clear as day next to it as a mere correction. This makes no sense if the intention was to 'cover up' the usage of the word. The claim that Rudolf Mally had to "forensically examine" the document to uncover this very clear correction is hilarous when one can simply look at the piece of paper up close for oneself and see it clear as day. If the Germans wanted to hide it they simply would've rewritten the document. It was clearly not so important to them
Not to mention the fact that the word "Evakuieren" sounds similar to "Exekutierungen", which makes the mistake even more understandlabe.
There is only one document I know of that clearly uses the euphemism "Sonderbehandelt" to refer to executed peoples. It is cited in Mattognos Einsatzgruppen book, but I can't find it right now. Mattogno openly admits that this was a euphemism, but if I remember correctly it was used in a rather innocuous case.
But this all goes back to the completely unfounded codeword theory. It's simply not plausible that the Germans were able to "code" literally hundreds of thousands of documents with a mere handful of slipups over the course of years, when no one was even clued in on how the code system worked and no official document or recorded conversation ever delineated how this supposed code system actually worked. How was the bureaucracy supposed to process documents with undocumented coding, etc?
If the Germans were actually interested in faking documents to hide their genocide, they would have forged travel documents from the Reinhardt camps. Instead, it has been claimed that the Germans faked post cards from resettled Jews to fool a handful of Jews in Poland that their family members have "actually" resettled.
The entire narrative is just completely illogical.
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
-
Otium
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
bombsaway wrote:He can't find evidence of large scale resettlement but argues this can be gleaned from context, eg here describing an action at Brest
The evidence of resettlement is itself the deportation of Jews to various camps and ghettos which were estimated to exist at a number around 45,000. Being held in transit until the end of the war, which is to say being in various stages of resettlement doesn't require whatever you'd consider to be "proof of resettlement".
curioussoul wrote:Not to mention the fact that the word "Evakuieren" sounds similar to "Exekutierungen", which makes the mistake even more understandlabe.
Yes exactly, that's another good point.
curioussoul wrote:It's simply not plausible that the Germans were able to "code" literally hundreds of thousands of documents with a mere handful of slipups over the course of years...
Yes, and like I pointed out, if the code-words scheme was a systematized and well-known practise then it wouldn't have been possible to write 'Exekutierung' by accident in the first place.
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
Otium wrote:bombsaway wrote:He can't find evidence of large scale resettlement but argues this can be gleaned from context, eg here describing an action at Brest
The evidence of resettlement is itself the deportation of Jews to various camps and ghettos which were estimated to exist at a number around 45,000. Being held in transit until the end of the war, which is to say being in various stages of resettlement doesn't require whatever you'd consider to be "proof of resettlement".
The use of Nazi code words is not controversial for revisionists like Mattogno, though he offers no explanation for why resettlement would be used in place of killing. (see the 2 super blatant examples in my post above)
The best evidence of mass resettlement in Russia is the Korherr report, but this seems compromised. Korherr's original study found that 1.5 million deported Jews had received "special treatment", self-evidently a code word
https://www.ns-archiv.de/verfolgung/kor ... immler.php
To the
Inspector of Statistics, PG. Korherr
Berlin
The Reichsfuhrer SS has received your statistical report on "The Final Solution of the European Jewish Question". He wishes that "special treatment of the Jews" should not be mentioned anywhere. On page 9, point 4, it should read as follows:
"Transportation of Jews from the
Eastern Provinces to the Russian East:
They were smuggled
through the camps in the General Government .....
through the camps in the Warthegau ................." [1]
No other wording may be used. I am sending back the copy of the report already signed by the Reichsfuhrer SS with the request that page 9 be amended accordingly and that it be sent back.
SS Obersturmbannfuhrer
Himmler also wrote in another letter that the Korherr report would make "excellent camouflage" (you can ponder the meaning of this)
Finally the notion that 1.5 million deported Jews could simply be moved into camps and ghettos without leaving a trace of direct evidence (witness testimony or documents) doesn't make sense in the modern era and is disproven by the substantial surviving record of the much smaller resettlement in Transnistria, which I detailed in the other thread and can continue to detail if there is interest.
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
bombsaway wrote:The best evidence of mass resettlement in Russia is the Korherr report, but this seems compromised.
No, you have it completely backwards. From a previous post:
Lamprecht wrote:Remember the hierarchy of evidence. Here's a basic outline, in order of most definitive first:
1. Laws of nature – If someone contradicts the laws of nature, it did not happen. For something to have happened, it must first be possible. Simple
2. Common sense - If something makes absolutely no sense, it probably did not happen. For example, someone claims they avoided the gas chamber many times by being the 201st person in line but it only fit 200. That's just silly
3. Physical/material evidence - If someone says "Below my feet is a mass grave of 10,000 people" and then we dig and find nothing, it is not true. Even if 10 people agree with him, it just is not there
4. Documents - documents are generally more reliable than testimony, but even documents can be faked/forged: something the Soviets were notorious for. So when looking at them we must keep this in mind. Also, documents can be destroyed (both incriminating and exonerating) so relying solely on documents is problematic, but they do in general have more weight than testimony.
5. Neutral testimony - testimony of someone who has no skin in the game. A person who can not benefit or lose out no matter what they say. These people can lie, but are less likely to
6. Party testimony - a victim, a perpetrator, a prisoner, a vengeful enemy. These sorts of testimonies are the weakest forms of evidence imaginable. A victim or enemy may lie just for revenge. A perpetrator may lie just to seem innocent, and that may be denial or a "Yes it happened but I couldn’t stop it!" confession (whether you consider that a "confession" is a matter of semantics). A prisoner’s testimony is also very weak because he may just be saying whatever he thinks will get him out of jail.
We should never assume a testimony is false just because of who says it, but we should be very skeptical about testimony and make an honest effort to combine it with something more genuine, ideally physical evidence but if that is not possible then we should preferentially use documents.
The best evidence for resettlement is the lack of physical evidence for the alleged 'huge mass graves' claimed to exist at these supposed 'pure extermination camps'.
Additionally, there are plenty of documents supporting this interpretation.
Korherr's original study found that 1.5 million deported Jews had received "special treatment", self-evidently a code word
Korherr said "special treatment" did not mean killing. Also, there were Jews that we know were resettled that would only have fit into the "special treatment" category. So for your position to make sense, "special treatment" would have had to include resettlements along with gassings.
Himmler also wrote in another letter that the Korherr report would make "excellent camouflage" (you can ponder the meaning of this)
The report was for Hitler. Camouflage to trick Hitler into thinking Jews were not being killed, but instead were being gassed by the millions? Your conspiracy theory now is that Himmler is responsible for exterminating the Jews, and tricked Hitler into thinking it was a resettlement program?
Most likely, the numbers were just altered a bit to make his evacuation program look more effective than it was.
Finally the notion that 1.5 million deported Jews could simply be moved into camps and ghettos without leaving a trace of direct evidence (witness testimony or documents) doesn't make sense in the modern era
Actually it makes perfect sense. They were not dumped into pits at these camps, therefore they went somewhere else. The pits could not magically disappear. People can, however, travel to other places and then not mention it. Also, documents can be destroyed. People moving around without documentary evidence or any surviving testimony has happened quite often in history.
and is disproven by the substantial surviving record of the much smaller resettlement in Transnistria, which I detailed in the other thread and can continue to detail if there is interest.
How is the thesis that over 1 million Jews were not dumped into massive pits at Treblinka 2, Sobibor, and Belzec disproven by a small number of testimonies from Jews resettled into Transnistria? A resettlement that, notably, that you have dodged simple questions about. See:
At least how many of them "spoke profusely" about it? Provide a number
When did they "speak profusely" about it? Provide dates
Where did they "speak profusely" about it? Provide locations
To whom did they "speak profusely" about it, and why? Explain
What percent of those transited in this cohort "spoke profusely" about it? Provide an estimate
Can you provide a list of every single train stop they were subjected to when transferring to this location?
You have it completely backwards.
The way that you would disprove that the Jews left Belzec without being gassed and dumped into pits is by showing the alleged pits full of the remains of hundreds of thousands of gassed Jews.
As pointed out:
I find the following train of "logic" to be unsound:
1. Some Jews were resettled during WWII
2. We have post-war testimony about these Jews being resettled
3. There is no known post-war testimony of Jews claiming to have stopped at Belzec before being resettled
4. Therefore, 100s of thousands of Jews were dumped into enormous pits at Belzec (that cannot be shown to exist)
It's a completely ridiculous line of thinking.
It appears that your claim is that hundreds of thousands of Jews were gassed, dumped into pits, dug up, burned in giant outdoor pyres, and then dumped into pits at a specific site. This case for this hypothesis would be made by showing these alleged pits, which would necessarily exist. Claiming that this conspiracy theory must absolutely have happened because we do not have testimonies or travel itinerary documents fitting your particular demands is absurd. This is even more laughable after you posted a document contradicting your claim.
From another previous post:
Lamprecht wrote:I wanted to make a thread about a specific concept and probably will at a later date, and that concept is known as:
Falsifiability
Falsifiability means that for any hypothesis to have credence, it must be inherently disprovable.
In the case of
"These specific Jews who went to [specific location] 70+ years ago with [specific location 2] as an intermediate step"
it would be very difficult to prove if there are no relevant records and they were able to move around. But if that changes to
"They went to [specific location] and never left, and remain there to this day in some form"
it is now an easily testable theory. And that is precisely what is asserted by the "Holocaust" narrative. But the alleged pits are not shown to us. All we are given is pathetic excuses -- all the while those who speak out in Poland, Germany, France, etc are fined and imprisoned for it.
So when asked "Then where did they go?" it is perfectly valid to say "I do not know" - but it is invalid for someone to conclude "therefore, they are in these enormous pits, and no I don't have to show you the pits!"
First, they must show the alleged pits. Until then, they merely have a theory with an artificially contrived consensus based on legal [and social] penalties for those who publicly question it. It can be falsified in the same manner that it can be shown to be correct. They refuse to do such a thing despite having the resources and technology to do so. Therefore, their case is considerably weakened.
It can only be after these thorough archaeological excavations that the truth about these camps will be revealed, whether it is resettled "into mass graves" or "somewhere else." The image below is what we are told actually exists, today, under a layer of soil.
And if the investigations show that they did go "somewhere else" we can try to find out where. But we are unlikely to find new evidence 7+ decades after the fact (unless it was hidden rather than destroyed).
And in such a case, "Jews went wherever Jews are" still is not specific, but it would be perfectly accurate and valid. And I doubt many people would be interested in a more comprehensive answer after the "gassed and burned and dumped into huge pits" theory is completely discredited. Millions of pounds of physical evidence cannot vanish, unlike documents.
So if anyone has the right to ask the question "where did they go then?" it is the revisionists. The exterminationists claim to know where the 1.5+ million Treblinka 2, Sobibor, and Belzec victims went. Ask them to show you and they might provide a map with shapes on it they call "mass graves". Perfect, so they know exactly where they went down to the meter? Then they can show us a pit full of burnt human remains. If they can't do that, why believe them?
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
NOTE: I am taking a leave of absence from revisionism to focus on other things. At this point, the ball is in their court to show the alleged massive pits full of human remains at the so-called "extermination camps." After 8 decades they still refuse to do this. I wonder why...
— Herbert Spencer
NOTE: I am taking a leave of absence from revisionism to focus on other things. At this point, the ball is in their court to show the alleged massive pits full of human remains at the so-called "extermination camps." After 8 decades they still refuse to do this. I wonder why...
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
edit: misformat with quotes
I think we're talking past each other, and this is probably the reason why. I think any historical claim has got to be backed by evidence. If there is a pronounced lack of evidence, then that should be addressed. I have seen no arguments from revisionists about why there is a lot of direct evidence for small resettlements like in Transnistria but none for the largest (1.5 million Polish Jews sent to Russia). I'm unable to do a survey on the full literature concerning evidence of resettlement in Transnistria, but I've read multiple papers and book, so I've seen a lot of it.
I've seen no evidence the report was exclusively made for Hitler. In the letter to Brandt, Korherr says he is sending Hitler a "shortened version". The complete version went to Himmler. My conspiracy theory is that Himmler wanted that phrase inserted so he could present the report at a later date (after Germany was victorious probably) to show a war-time document evidencing mass resettlement.
Lamprecht wrote:The best evidence for resettlement is the lack of physical evidence for the alleged 'huge mass graves' claimed to exist
I think we're talking past each other, and this is probably the reason why. I think any historical claim has got to be backed by evidence. If there is a pronounced lack of evidence, then that should be addressed. I have seen no arguments from revisionists about why there is a lot of direct evidence for small resettlements like in Transnistria but none for the largest (1.5 million Polish Jews sent to Russia). I'm unable to do a survey on the full literature concerning evidence of resettlement in Transnistria, but I've read multiple papers and book, so I've seen a lot of it.
The report was for Hitler. Camouflage to trick Hitler into thinking Jews were not being killed, but instead were being gassed by the millions? Your conspiracy theory now is that Himmler is responsible for exterminating the Jews, and tricked Hitler into thinking it was a resettlement program?
Most likely, the numbers were just altered a bit to make his evacuation program look more effective than it was.
I've seen no evidence the report was exclusively made for Hitler. In the letter to Brandt, Korherr says he is sending Hitler a "shortened version". The complete version went to Himmler. My conspiracy theory is that Himmler wanted that phrase inserted so he could present the report at a later date (after Germany was victorious probably) to show a war-time document evidencing mass resettlement.
Re: Use of Code Words Proven?
bombsaway wrote:I think we're talking past each other, and this is probably the reason why. I think any historical claim has got to be backed by evidence. If there is a pronounced lack of evidence, then that should be addressed. I have seen no arguments from revisionists about why there is a lot of direct evidence for small resettlements like in Transnistria but none for the largest (1.5 million Polish Jews sent to Russia). I'm unable to do a survey on the full literature concerning evidence of resettlement in Transnistria, but I've read multiple papers and book, so I've seen a lot of it.
Again, you dodged simple questions about these claimed testimonies. So you don't seem very curious about why these exist but others do not. If you were, you would answer these question
Further, nobody is claiming to know exactly where the Jews went except for the exterminationists. Their hypothesis could be proven/disproven easily, but they refuse to. Or, rather, they can't do so, because their hypothesis is false.
There does not need to be any surviving documentary/testimonial evidence whatsoever for a population movement to have occurred for it to have actually happened. It is that simple.
If your position is that they were dumped into pits, why can't any evidence whatsoever be provided to support this position?
Because it does not exist. And the only explanation for that is that that they were not dumped into pits. It defies natural law for the remains of 100s of thousands to be dumped into pits and then all of that physical evidence magically disappears after being covered with a layer of dirt.
However, it does not defy natural law for people to travel within Europe without surviving documents detailing this population transfer in a way that satisfies you. It also does not defy natural law that people could travel within Europe without later mentioning, in recorded testimony, a particular stop on the way or anything else about this trip that was taken.
I've seen no evidence the report was exclusively made for Hitler. In the letter to Brandt, Korherr says he is sending Hitler a "shortened version". The complete version went to Himmler.
Can you make a list of people that you believe were the intended audience of the report(s)?
My conspiracy theory is that Himmler wanted that phrase inserted so he could present the report at a later date (after Germany was victorious probably) to show a war-time document evidencing mass resettlement.
Ok. So you believe that the utilization of "code words" in documents solely for the purpose of post-war deception was practiced?
You do also accept that these Eastern camps were described as being part of a program of resettlement in multiple documents, yes?
And you also accept that multiple documents described the "Final Solution" as a non-genocidal policy, and this was all done to deceive, correct?
And you think that the bodies were originally dumped into pits, and then later the rotting corpses were dug up and burned in giant outdoor pyres and then dumped back into pits to "hide the evidence" - yes?
So why wouldn't they have done the most obvious thing and developed fake train records describing a resettlement of Jews after arriving at these camps?
Instead we have all sorts of records of trains arriving, but virtually no records of trains leaving - empty or full.
As pointed out by Curioussoul:
"If the Germans were actually interested in faking documents to hide their genocide, they would have forged travel documents from the Reinhardt camps. Instead, it has been claimed that the Germans faked post cards from resettled Jews to fool a handful of Jews in Poland that their family members have "actually" resettled."
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
NOTE: I am taking a leave of absence from revisionism to focus on other things. At this point, the ball is in their court to show the alleged massive pits full of human remains at the so-called "extermination camps." After 8 decades they still refuse to do this. I wonder why...
— Herbert Spencer
NOTE: I am taking a leave of absence from revisionism to focus on other things. At this point, the ball is in their court to show the alleged massive pits full of human remains at the so-called "extermination camps." After 8 decades they still refuse to do this. I wonder why...
Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Euripides and 7 guests
