Why are (Bialystok) Jews Deported to Treblinka listed as "executed" by Himmler?

[HistorySpeaks]

One Holocaust document used to debunk denial is Himmler's 29 December 1942 report to Hitler. Himmler asserts that between August and November of 1942, in various regions of the German-occupied Soviet Union/Eastern Europe, 363,211 Jews were killed.

While most of these Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen, some of them (from Bialystok) were deported to Treblinka.

If Treblinka was just a "transit camp," why are Jews deported there listed as "executed" by Himmler?

See: https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... 63211.html.

[Otium]

The document is clear, they're listed as "bandits", no evidence of anything connected to some plan or policy to "exterminate" Jews.

Mattogno deals with this document, and concludes as such:

The figures reported in the report dated 29 December 1942 are, therefore, for the most part, greatly exaggerated and in some cases probably invented from whole cloth.

Carlo Mattogno, The Einsatzgruppen in the Occupied Eastern Territories: Genesis, Missions and Actions, Part 1: The Einsatzgruppen (Uckfield: Castle Hill Publishers, 2022), p. 259.

See section 5.2., pg. 250 ff.

The factual bankruptcy of the HC bloggers on this document has also been, as one would expect, dealt with in the detailed two volume refutation by Mattogno, Kues and Graf entitled The “Extermination Camps” of “Aktion Reinhardt” (eg. pgs. 368f., 487)

[HistorySpeaks]

The document is clear, they're listed as "bandits", no evidence of anything connected to some plan or policy to "exterminate" Jews.

Mattogno deals with this document, and concludes as such:

The figures reported in the report dated 29 December 1942 are, therefore, for the most part, greatly exaggerated and in some cases probably invented from whole cloth.

Carlo Mattogno, The Einsatzgruppen in the Occupied Eastern Territories: Genesis, Missions and Actions, Part 1: The Einsatzgruppen (Uckfield: Castle Hill Publishers, 2022), p. 259.

See section 5.2., pg. 250 ff.

The factual bankruptcy of the HC bloggers on this document has also been, as one would expect, dealt with in the detailed two volume refutation by Mattogno, Kues and Graf entitled The “Extermination Camps” of “Aktion Reinhardt” (eg. pgs. 368f., 487)

"Bandits" is obviously a sham, given the size of the numbers of Jews executed. And you still have the problem as to why, if Treblinka was a transit camp, the (Bialystok) Jews sent there are listed as having been "executed."

[Otium]

"Bandits" is obviously a sham, given the size of the numbers of Jews executed.

Pure supposition. Your method is to take what the "Nazis" say when it suits you, and dismiss what they say when it doesn't. Your claim also makes no sense, the document, according to the link you posted was "circulated only on the highest state level between few people", and "typed specifically for their eyes only". For such "shams" to be included in such a document when it ought to simply say exactly what Jews were "murdered" because of their so-called "plan" is nonsense.

[HistorySpeaks]

"Bandits" is obviously a sham, given the size of the numbers of Jews executed.

Pure supposition. Your method is to take what the "Nazis" say when it suits you, and dismiss what they say when it doesn't.

Like this Himmler Report, The Einsatzgruppen Reports also (sometimes, not always) give reasons for killing Jews. But they also describe how the Einsatzgruppen shot numbers of Jews constituting the overwhelming majority of Jews in the occupied soviet union. Common sense requires us to reject the idea that all these Jewish women, children, old people, and kids were "bandits".

[Hektor]

"Bandits" is obviously a sham, given the size of the numbers of Jews executed.

Pure supposition. Your method is to take what the "Nazis" say when it suits you, and dismiss what they say when it doesn't.

Like this Himmler Report, The Einsatzgruppen Reports also (sometimes, not always) give reasons for killing Jews. But they also describe how the Einsatzgruppen shot numbers of Jews constituting the overwhelming majority of Jews in the occupied soviet union. Common sense requires us to reject the idea that all these Jewish women, children, old people, and kids were "bandits".

Actually women, kids older people were just as involved in partisan warfare than men of military age. Not always possible to pin point who did what, though. But even that won't prove they were executed nor the figures.

You should post the document and then point to what you find incriminating.
How did you authenticate the documents?
E.g.





I notice that only one of the pages has a signature.... Supposedly Heinrich Himmler, but has that document been scrutinized?
That page - and that's where executions are listen - doesn't have a signature.
So how did you make sure that it is real or does even belong there? Was that just assumed that such documents, last in possession of some agency of the Allies, were real? If that's the case, whom are you trying to fool. Nowadays school kids can fake such documents. Don't you think the Allies, who had huge intelligence agencies with forgers at their disposal could have done the same?

Such massive amounts of executions would have left tons of traces in terms of human remains. Where are they? Were they investigated by any independent source? Is it documented somewhere?

[Lamprecht]

Such massive amounts of executions would have left tons of traces in terms of human remains. Where are they? Were they investigated by any independent source? Is it documented somewhere?

This is really the most important point. Anyone could write anything on a piece of paper. In fact, the same untrue statement(s) could be written on a large number of different documents. That doesn't make them true. OP is like a person claiming to have a map to buried treasure, but for some reason cannot show us this treasure is actually buried anywhere. Why would anyone choose to believe in it?

[HistorySpeaks]

Do you guys actually believe that casualty estimates for other wars and genocides are arrived at by digging up all victims and doing a forensic analysis of the remains? You should deny all other genocides and wars, etc, if this is your epistemic standard.

[Otium]

Do you guys actually believe that casualty estimates for other wars and genocides are arrived at by digging up all victims and doing a forensic analysis of the remains? You should deny all other genocides and wars, etc, if this is your epistemic standard.

Might not be a bad idea. We've seen the problem displayed with folks like you who make wildly irrational and ridiculous claims based on dubious population estimates which will forever be contentious. In the case of the Holocaust, you claim to know these people are in mass graves, and where they are. So yes, you should do a forensic analysis instead of inferring from documents like the one above which does nothing to prove your allegations.

[Lamprecht]

Are you disputing that the alleged huge mass graves at Treblinka 2, Sobibor, and Belzec have been proven to exist in exactly known locations?

Do you guys actually believe that casualty estimates for other wars and genocides are arrived at by digging up all victims and doing a forensic analysis of the remains? You should deny all other genocides and wars, etc, if this is your epistemic standard.

[Archie]

Do you guys actually believe that casualty estimates for other wars and genocides are arrived at by digging up all victims and doing a forensic analysis of the remains? You should deny all other genocides and wars, etc, if this is your epistemic standard.

The holocaust is distinctive in that it's claimed not only that six million Jews died, but that perhaps four to five million of the six million were executed by the state, mostly by gassing and shooting, and that most of these executions occurred at precise locations, principally a handful of "death camps" plus Babi Yar and other massacre sites. In that were true we should absolutely expect to see remains. Yet there were minimal remains at these sites and we are told this is because the Nazis burned all the bodies. The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia is an example where it was alleged that huge numbers were executed en masse. And sure enough in that case they did find an enormous number of mass graves.

[HistorySpeaks]

Do you guys actually believe that casualty estimates for other wars and genocides are arrived at by digging up all victims and doing a forensic analysis of the remains? You should deny all other genocides and wars, etc, if this is your epistemic standard.

The holocaust is distinctive in that it's claimed not only that six million Jews died, but that perhaps four to five million of the six million were executed by the state, mostly by gassing and shooting, and that most of these executions occurred at precise locations, principally a handful of "death camps" plus Babi Yar and other massacre sites. In that were true we should absolutely expect to see remains. Yet there were minimal remains at these sites and we are told this is because the Nazis burned all the bodies. The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia is an example where it was alleged that huge numbers were executed en masse. And sure enough in that case they did find an enormous number of mass graves.

From the seminal study of Khmer Rouge mass graves (Craig Etcheson, 1999):

In some cases, information about victim counts at particular sites comes from people who participated in mass grave exhumations at those sites. Often these verbally reported numbers can subsequently be verified by hard skull-counts in adjacent memorials, as well as by local records kept of the exhumations. In some cases, documents have been identified which recorded the actual executions themselves, compiled by the perpetrators. In other cases, experienced investigators who have seen hundreds or thousands of mass grave pits make the estimates themselves based on the number, type and size of the mass graves. In yet other cases, as previously mentioned, the victim counts are based on actual perpetrator testimony, and the perpetrators certainly do not have a motive to inflate the numbers.

https://www.mekong.net/cambodia/toll.htm

[The_Problem]

One Holocaust document used to debunk denial is Himmler's 29 December 1942 report to Hitler. Himmler asserts that between August and November of 1942, in various regions of the German-occupied Soviet Union/Eastern Europe, 363,211 Jews were killed.

While most of these Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen, some of them (from Bialystok) were deported to Treblinka.

If Treblinka was just a "transit camp," why are Jews deported there listed as "executed" by Himmler?

See: https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... 63211.html.

From the top:

This site is responded to almost "exclusively" by those who know that the holocaust-myth is a lie, this includes yourself no doubt. The motive is to detract from any would-be learner of these facts finding their way to this site away from it by trying to portray a debate in which a no-nothing of these matters might be swayed by seemingly good argumentation which in reality is no such thing. More promising in this tactic is low-hanging fruit or areas where the waters are muddied and nowhere is the water more muddy for the Holocaust myth than matters re:Einsatzgruppen shootings (atleast for newbs).

The first thing to notice is the source linked at the bottom of your post: "holocaust controversies". This a website set up by demonstrable and outed professional liars. They have been knocked out on every article they have ever posted, To be clear, they were dropped by the mainstream for their unprofessional attitude and for deliberately lying about the enemy (the revisionists/correctionists/deniers) and being easily bustable thus dishonouring the mainstream and making them look bad (this "ARC" controversy is well-renowned). Whilst the tactic of the orthodox is to censor, persecute, prosecute and associate the correctionists with "conspiracy theory" (in reality the opposite is true), the tactic of the "rogue-liars" (HC) is to try to use the platform of censorship and persecution created by the orthodox to launch one-shot attempts to detract would-be learners from revisionism before they can see through it. In other words to stop them from reading a holocaust handbook. The whole holocaust controversies website is dedicated to this purpose. It has been argued elsewhere that holocaust controversies is run by a group of "neo-nazi's" by their own side at times, with the motive that they produce ridiculous counters to revisionism deliberately to be "busted" and thus bring revisionism to the surface and circumvent the international censor. This however is refuted by the kind of question posed here by lie-poster "history-speaks" because of it's specific and technical nature beyond an entry-level. Another more plausible line is that they operate secretly in the employ of the orthodox who publicly deplore them, but privately want them to address revisionist issues best they can- so that they can distance themselves from them when they get busted, but cite them when their is any pseudo-success.

After being ditched by the orthodoxy, they produced their website which contributed nothing of any real note other than trying to regurgitate the refuted and admitted lies of human soap and shrunken heads etc, but then produced a 500 page online monograph trying to refute Mattogno et al's Aktion Reinhardt series of books. This was met by a systematic destruction of this work by the Mattogno and his peers which used to serve as a holocaust handbook (HH) in it’s own right until recently replaced as the holocaust controversies (HC) crowd are now defunct. This was the thought to be the end of HC until they tried to derail Mattogno’s Einsatzgeruppen book being released in English which spells pretty much the final nail in the coffin for the holocaust myth. They produced a series on online articles, including the very one linked in OP’s post (2019). The 2nd edition was recently released of the book which ironed out any inconveniences either actual or ridiculous brought up by HC. Seeing defeat on the wall they seem to have admitted defeat and shut up shop even before the new edition came out, rogue resistance to revisionist/denial collapsing merely a few years after the 2017 collapse of all official anti-revisionist efforts themselves.

So that’s what we’re dealing with on that front.

Now, writing directly to “HistorySpeaks”- we should address the reference to “Treblinka”. Assuming that everything in your post is real and this Himmler document alone supports an extra 363k killings on top of the 500k gathered from the entire Einsatz reports concerning this area (more on this later)- for argument purposes- then we can safely say that nothing happened to them! To be clear, only a portion of these Jews were from Bialystok as the area in question was much broader, but the camp Treblinka has been proven beyond any mode of doubt to have been (a) a transit camp on an official greater-Reich border, (b) a stop-over delousing facility where train-gauge changed over, (c) a place where demonstrably the propaganda that people were killed has been falsified and (d) that is can be demonstrated that nobody was buried or burned there compatible with even the most reserved holocaust-myth claims. This has not only been demonstrated but done so in such a way that removes any possibility that it could be wrong- even in theory. A fact even demonstrated by the demolition of HC on the point. The post made a mistake referring to Treblinka, whereas review of Mattogno’s Einsatzgruppen book requires a very high level of verbal intelligence (something holocaust believers who might learn otherwise generally lack), learning that Treblinka is a lie is possibly the simplest fact to digest of the whole holocaust mythological structure.
See the HH “Treblinka” book.
https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/08-t.pdf

So this leaves us with Einsatzgruppen shootings. We go to the guts of why this post was made, it is the 2nd edition of Mattogno’s Einsatzgruppen book- the reason why this alt “History Speaks” came here.
https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/39-te.pdf

We use “select all” or “control A” to highlight all the text and then “control f” to search for terms and enter “Bialystok”. In the past I would devote more time to addressing issues but having already written much a summary will suffice. Moving through the references to it we see the first 3 of 81 references are in the contents. The next 3 show that refuted lie-scholar “Goldhagen” given reference to Police batallions killing only a few jews not noteworthy here- and this with Goldhagen being notorious for some extreme holocaust propaganda! Reference 7-12 cover the Einsatzgruppen reports themselves showing that with reference to Bialystok not many jews were shot really at all, but the most important part to learn is that in stark reference to what OP is trying to make- the EM reports describe in detail the setting up of Jewish towns and cities! How can that be reconciled with the myth?

Eg:
EM 91 “The resettlement of 20,000 Jews is to begin already this month. The intention is to turn Pruzhany into a purely Jewish city.”

EM 122 ““The evacuation of the Jews out of Bialystok to Pruzhany is progressing.”

Then from reference 12 we find the meat. On page 244 of Mattogno we find that among the EM reports the are of Ukraine, Białystok, Army Group Rear Area South, and Rear Area Eleventh Army altogether covered by Einzatzgruppe C (95k) and D (92k) made up 187k claimed killings. So even if the cited Himmler document were real- we’re dealing with a small part of a small part of that figure anyway, but as noted in Mattogno- Hilberg “adds on” the 300k extra that the Himmler document cites to the EM report figures.

From reference 15-18 we can read incongruencies in the figures.

From ref 19 we start to address the Himmler report itself.

Then what do you know- from ref 24 on it’s eureka. We find that..
“According to Kruglov, the 70,948 executed persons mentioned in the Himmler
report with reference to November 1942 concerned the Białystok District.” P.258

And then…
“Regarding the 16,300 Jews deported to Treblinka, there is only a single list
compiled by Arad, but on what basis he compiled it is unknown; there is certainly
no documentary basis (Arad 1987, p. 397). But even supposing that all this were
true, the deportees would only have amounted to 25,300 victims, and there would
still be a deficit of 45,700 victims to reach the total of 70,948 mentioned in the
Himmler report.” P.258

And then…

“At any rate, trying to fit the Jews deported from the Białystok District into
“Meldung No. 51,” which refers to “Successes in fighting partisans,” is even
more nonsensical. Point 2 of the report regards “partisans supporters and suspected partisans” and is subdivided into three headings: “a) arrested,” “b) executed,”
“c) Jews executed”: it is obvious that these refer to Jews shot. Lumping the Jews
“deported” from the Białystok District together with the Jews “executed” would
therefore require considering the “deported” Jews as having been killed, regard less of whether or not they were killed immediately upon arrival (which the au thors of “Meldung No. 51” could not have known)… This is obviously absurd, all
the more so since, according to Czech, at least 1,618 of these presumed “executed
Jews” were regularly registered at Auschwitz and admitted to the camp alive and
kicking!
As if that were not enough, from the orthodox point of view, the Jews deport ed to Auschwitz and Treblinka in November 1942 from the Białystok District are
counted twice in the statistics: as victims of the Einsatzgruppen and associated
units, and as gassing victims of Auschwitz and Treblinka. ” P.258-259

So we see there is something “wrong” with the orthodoxy and what “History Speaks” is trying to allude to here. It is not right to say that “all documents are fabricated” since Mattogno himself treats them on their merits. Suffice to say earlier revisionist such as Butz saw this documentation purely produced in whole for the show-trials- modern day analogies to the medieval witch-trials. Others should decide the value of such documents and their fraudulent interpretations but in terms of the former I would recommend the revisionist Carlos Porter’s address on the matter of document forgery.

[The_Problem]

Do you guys actually believe that casualty estimates for other wars and genocides are arrived at by digging up all victims and doing a forensic analysis of the remains? You should deny all other genocides and wars, etc, if this is your epistemic standard.

The holocaust is distinctive in that it's claimed not only that six million Jews died, but that perhaps four to five million of the six million were executed by the state, mostly by gassing and shooting, and that most of these executions occurred at precise locations, principally a handful of "death camps" plus Babi Yar and other massacre sites. In that were true we should absolutely expect to see remains. Yet there were minimal remains at these sites and we are told this is because the Nazis burned all the bodies. The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia is an example where it was alleged that huge numbers were executed en masse. And sure enough in that case they did find an enormous number of mass graves.

From the seminal study of Khmer Rouge mass graves (Craig Etcheson, 1999):

In some cases, information about victim counts at particular sites comes from people who participated in mass grave exhumations at those sites. Often these verbally reported numbers can subsequently be verified by hard skull-counts in adjacent memorials, as well as by local records kept of the exhumations. In some cases, documents have been identified which recorded the actual executions themselves, compiled by the perpetrators. In other cases, experienced investigators who have seen hundreds or thousands of mass grave pits make the estimates themselves based on the number, type and size of the mass graves. In yet other cases, as previously mentioned, the victim counts are based on actual perpetrator testimony, and the perpetrators certainly do not have a motive to inflate the numbers.

https://www.mekong.net/cambodia/toll.htm

Narrowly on this matter- I would simply conclude that the matter of these other "genocides" may or may not be real. They probably were not carried out "as" genocides" by their perpetrators but have been subsequently "classified" as genocides in post-WW2 times. The prevailing definition technically seems to be more than 10% of the population of a ppl regardless of intentionalism.

The main point being in terms of only the German Holocaust of Jews and some of the allegations against the Japanese (i.e. WW2 allegations) are demonstrably false on facts and evidence whereas to my knowledge these other cases are not so. I would digress on what constitutes a "genocide" mainly. the only real genocides I know of in history are:

(a) religious genocides
(b) the genocide of the Germans.

The first category might contain real items, Christians and muslims have conducted genocides arguably in antiquity against others but these fall under the same umbrella as your notions of Khmer rouge etc. But others are purely mythical, namely the jewish genoicdes which are written into scripture.

On (b)- What about their genocide- the biggest real genocide the world has seen, do you deny THAT genocide? [think].. Or what about the subsequent genocide of the Indo-European people or "caucasian" as a whole through extended means? Do you deny that genocide?

[EtienneSC]

Do you guys actually believe that casualty estimates for other wars and genocides are arrived at by digging up all victims and doing a forensic analysis of the remains? You should deny all other genocides and wars, etc, if this is your epistemic standard.

In other wars, there are propaganda estimates of enemy military casualties, which typically greatly exceed subsequent verifiable figures based on muster rolls and pay records from the other side. Civilian casualties are often exaggerated too to portray the enemy in a savage light. WW2 is not alone in that. What is epistemically unique about the Holocaust is the exclusion of detailed and documented revisionist studies from mainstream consideration so long after the actual events.

That said, this document is interesting, as it is (purportedly) of German origin and official in nature. It seems to confirm the Einsatzgruppen records, which Mattogno claims are not cited in other German documents. EM 51 stands out as it accounts for around 40% of total Jewish deaths (see Mattogno, page 242). It seems possible that these document pages have been retyped. It passed through Soviet hands and we know pressure was applied to people in the Einsatzgruppen trial (the trial lawyer Benjamin Ferenc said as much) based on it, so there is a pattern of abusive behaviour following from it.

Thus it is reasonable to look for confirmation of its contents, e.g. how does it relate to orders given, contemporary diaries and other records, military regulations and training, military law, church doctrine, post-war investigations and recollections. I daresay a picture can be built up around this document, the Posen and Sondhoven speeches and so on, but such a picture is liable to confirmation bias.

(Incidentally, I see A. Mathis has updated the HC Blog twice in June 2022.)