The Shrinking Heads?

[Hektor]

The Claim:

German authorities did not like the idea of German staff making stuff from corpses. They even wrote a memo to the department concerned. Shrunken heads are the example they gave.


main-qimg-262b6b72910a45ae3eac64e3e979d80f-lq.jpg

2 forgeries made by the Holocaust revisionist Carlos Whitlock Porter
in order to show that altering or forging such papers is a breeze :

https://postimg.cc/Xr12NHTy

Nuremberg version of that paper :

https://postimg.cc/RJv8J3G3

It's indeed rather easy to forge documents, if you have access to paper, type-writers, stamps, etc. Something that was in Allied hands in 1945. And the expertise to do this was there. Hence the probative value of having a type-written document equals zero.

With the 'shrunken head' being such a big item connected to 'war crimes' allegations, forging documents to 'further prove' this, is to be expected.

Those accepting anything on paper and think this proves something are hopelessly naive. But I guess one needs to resort to this, if one doesn't have real evidence for assertions.

[hermod]

It's indeed rather easy to forge documents, if you have access to paper, type-writers, stamps, etc. Something that was in Allied hands in 1945. And the expertise to do this was there. Hence the probative value of having a type-written document equals zero.

With the 'shrunken head' being such a big item connected to 'war crimes' allegations, forging documents to 'further prove' this, is to be expected.

Those accepting anything on paper and think this proves something are hopelessly naive. But I guess one needs to resort to this, if one doesn't have real evidence for assertions.

The fabrication of handwritten documents is not much harder with talented forgers on your team. Had the fake Hitler diaries been fabricated by Clifford Irving instead of Konrad Kujau and filled with exterminationist statements on the Holocaust, we'd probably be talking about the meaning of "quotes" from those papers with Holocaust believers on a daily basis.

https://postimg.cc/3WwdQ63y

It's indeed rather easy to forge documents, if you have access to paper, type-writers, stamps, etc. Something that was in Allied hands in 1945. And the expertise to do this was there. Hence the probative value of having a type-written document equals zero.

Especially when only photocopies of copies are available...

https://postimg.cc/w7Dccgpp

[Hektor]

.....
The fabrication of handwritten documents is not much harder with talented forgers on your team. Had the fake Hitler diaries been fabricated by Clifford Irving instead of Konrad Kujau and filled with exterminationist statements on the Holocaust, we'd probably be talking about the meaning of "quotes" from those papers with Holocaust believers on a daily basis.
...

And Kujau was one person doing that on 'private initiative'. Now imagine an intelligence services doing this that has (for this purpose) virtually unlimited resources at its disposal.

And yeah, if it affirms the Holocaust, it can't be wrong according to them. They at least won't make a statement that this a forgery and the content bogus, even if this is likely to be the case. With Holocaust allegations the perception of proper burden of proof has been shifted tremendously. And there is no defense against this, if you are the target for it.

Copies of copies and nobody wonders, if there were ever originals with this content. Indeed I think the 'copies of copies' type of evidence given in Nuremberg is highly underappreciated. And it may be worthwhile to collect examples of this publishing this in book form. With some documents it isn't actually clear why they used it and what they wanted to prove with this. I suspect the obnoxious stories and bombardment with this served the purpose was to make other less obnoxious stories sound more plausible. Shock and awe tactics. It's like overpricing something first and then settle for a lower, but still ridiculously high price.