German Labour camps - shocking truth decrypts / Jew transits

[Hannover]

A heated discussion here. Let's get to it, chim-pa. I challenge you to produce outbound train records from any of the alleged 'death camps'. No dodging.

- Hannover

[astro3]

It may be helpful to see how the 'big number' of 1274166 is dealt with in the Korherr Report (http://holocaustcontroversies.yuku.com/ ... err-Report). This report is closely linked to the 'Hoefl telegram' because they both reckon numbers up to the very end of 1942.

Its section 5 would have to be the one which deals with the so-called ‘Action Reinhardt’ camps: entitled, ‘V. THE EVACUATION OF THE JEWS’ This section does not deal with concentration camps – its section 7 did that: finding for example that there had been ‘73,417 interments of Jews … from the taking over of power to 31.12.1942’ in all of the 16 concentration camps.

This section 5 of the Korherr Report described the big ‘total’ number which appear in the ‘Hoftle telegram’ as concerning the transfer of Jews: “All evacuations on the territory of the Reich and including the eastern territories … from October 1939 or later until 31.12.1942 resulted in the following numbers:”
4. Transportation of Jews from the eastern provinces to the Russian East: 1 449 692 "
The following numbers were sifted through the camps in the General Government 1 274 166 Jews
through the camps in the Warthegau... .. 145 301 Jews

Though these two numbers don’t exactly add up, we seem to have here a breakdown into two main categories, of all ‘transportation of Jews’ that Korherr knew about, Eastwards.
(Wiki seems to err in saying, of the ‘Hofle telegram’ "these figures were quoted verbatim in the Korherr Report, with the exception of the "71355", which was given as "713555" by Korherr." Korherr did not quote that figure did he? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%B6fle_Telegram)

[Bob]

Though these two numbers don’t exactly add up, we seem to have here a breakdown into two main categories, of all ‘transportation of Jews’ that Korherr knew about, Eastwards.
(Wiki seems to err in saying, of the ‘Hofle telegram’ "these figures were quoted verbatim in the Korherr Report, with the exception of the "71355", which was given as "713555" by Korherr." Korherr did not quote that figure did he? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%B6fle_Telegram)

Right, this number is not in the Korherr report.

It may be helpful to see how the 'big number' of 1274166 is dealt with in the Korherr Report (http://holocaustcontroversies.yuku.com/ ... err-Report).

My translation of the document transcribed under

It looks like that this translation of the Korherr report is - with a few exceptions - identical to the translation from this link to deathcamps.org.

[astro3]

In that case, what is Majdanek doing in the Hofle telegram? It was clearly mentioned in section 7 of the Korherr Report ('Lublin') as being a concentration or labour camp. It was residential. Korherr''s 'big number' total of 1,274,166 comes in his section 5 for the Eastward motion of Jews, through the 'Aktion Reinhart' camps. These were transit camps. The other three given in the Hofle telegram presumably belong to this group - B,S & T, i.e. Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka. According to Korherr's statistics, you cannot include the Majdanek total - 24 or 26 thousand arrivals, up to 31.12.42 - and have it add up to his Big number 1,274,166. It doesn't make sense.

[Bob]

In that case, what is Majdanek doing in the Hofle telegram? It was clearly mentioned in section 7 of the Korherr Report ('Lublin') as being a concentration or labour camp. It was residential. Korherr''s 'big number' total of 1,274,166 comes in his section 5 for the Eastward motion of Jews, through the 'Aktion Reinhart' camps. These were transit camps. The other three given in the Hofle telegram presumably belong to this group - B,S & T, i.e. Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka. According to Korherr's statistics, you cannot include the Majdanek total - 24 or 26 thousand arrivals, up to 31.12.42 - and have it add up to his Big number 1,274,166. It doesn't make sense.

Auschwitz was mentioned together with Lublin (Majdanek) in the section VII without being called transit camp, but as known and accepted by exterminationists, Auschwitz served also as a transit camp.[1] When some camp is called concentration camp or labour camp does not exclude other activities. This also doesn´t means that this camp will be now called transit camp because some people were sifted through during some period of its existence. I see no problem with the fact that people mentioned in the telegram were transited or evacuated from Lublin to the east. Mattogno/Graf:[2]

“The figure 170,742 includes the 35,810 deportees to the Lublin district, the 68,808 evacuees who went directly to the eastern territories (Minsk, Riga, Kaunas, Raasiku, Maly Trostinec, Baranovii) we have already discussed, another (170,642 – 35,810 – 68,808 – 19,433 =) 46,591 Jews from Bialystok district, 8,500 of whom were deported to with the remaining 38,091 deported to the East without transiting through the “extermination camps” at Belzec, Sobibór, Treblinka, Majdanek, or Chelmno.” (my emphasis)

Again:[3]

“Majdanek: No documents refer to any transfers to the eastern areas originating from Majdanek in 1943.”

i.e. - some other document from different period exists otherwise there would have been something like - no documents for any transfers to the east exist for Majdanek.

Again:[4]

“Any German, Austrian, Czech, or Slovak Jews who may possibly have been moved to the eastern areas from Majdanek had likewise spent time in the ghettos or work camps of the Lublin district, and the figures for Sobibór and Treblinka would have been reduced accordingly.”

And finally:[5]

The reason why “Lublin” (i.e., Majdanek) is mentioned together with those three camps in Höfle’s telegram must be, according to the revisionist way of understanding evidence[6], because that camp, on top of its other tasks, also functioned temporarily as a transit camp, as was also the case with Auschwitz. Consequently, the Jews “who were housed in the Lublin concentration camp in the course of the evacuation proceedings,” who, according to Korherr’s explanation, were not included in his statistics, must have been Jewish prisoners who stayed for a short while unregistered in Majdanek and were transported further on to the eastern regions or to the numerous labor camps in the Lublin District. In that case it follows that a special section existed in the Majdanek camp – as was the case in Auschwitz – where these transiting prisoners were housed temporarily. There is need for more research in this regard.

Peoples were transited through Majdanek like in the case of Auschwitz, i see no problem.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes

[1]Debórah Dwork, Robert Jan van Pelt, Auschwitz 1270 to the present, W.W. Norton & Company Inc. 2002, p. 291.
[2]Carlo Mattogno, Jürgen Graf, Sobibór: Holocaust Propaganda and Reality, The Barnes Review, 2010, p. 318.
[3]Ibid., p. 351.
[4]Ibid., p. 349.
[5]Jürgen Graf, Carlo Mattogno, Concentration Camp Majdanek: A Historical &Technical Study, The Barnes Review, 3rd Edition, 2012, p. 269.
[6]This means, that according to holocaust logic, these people were gassed in Majdanek upon arrival without being registered.

[astro3]

Phew! This is getting rather complicated. Has our careful logician Bob missed the central point, that the 1.2 million total in the Korherr Report of jews transported "from the eastern provinces to the Russian East ... sifted through the camps in the General Government" simply cannot pop up again in the Hotle telegram, because the Korherr Report's total did not include the Majdanek total, that being in its section 7? Yes, I think he has... If that exact number of Korherr recurs (1 274 166) it means Hotle has just fiddled the maths - and that is all.

Let's examine the view of Mattogno and Kues (with which Bob is agreeing but I'm not):

The reason why “Lublin” (i.e., Majdanek) is mentioned together with those three camps in Höfle’s telegram must be, according to the revisionist way of understanding evidence, because that camp, on top of its other tasks, also functioned temporarily as a transit camp, as was also the case with Auschwitz. Consequently, the Jews “who were housed in the Lublin concentration camp in the course of the evacuation proceedings,” who, according to Korherr’s explanation, were not included in his statistics, must have been Jewish prisoners who stayed for a short while unregistered in Majdanek and were transported further on to the eastern regions or to the numerous labor camps in the Lublin District. In that case it follows that a special section existed in the Majdanek camp – as was the case in Auschwitz – where these transiting prisoners were housed temporarily. There is need for more research in this regard.

Korherr has 23,409 men and 2,849 women arriving ('internments') up to 31.12.42, totalling 26,258, whereas the telegram to Hotle had 'L24735', i.e. 24,735 arriving at Majdanek/Lublin. These two differ by fifteen hundred. Mattogno and Kues seem to be suggesting that these are two different totals for the same place over the same period, one 'internments' and the other just moving-through....

Korherr's stats carefully add up: he has 4 categories for counting male inmates: arrivals (23,409) releases (4,509) deaths (14,217) and number at 31.12.42 (4,683). These figures add up and indicate a dreadful mortality for that year, BUT are they compatible with a huge 24,735 persons just breezing through the camp and escaping from these careful stats of Korherr?

As Bob might want to point out, Korherr's Section 7 does say, 'Not included are the Jews accommodated in the concentration camps Auschwitz and Lublin within the scope of the evacuation action.' BUT there is a basic logistical flaw in the argument here: those passing though are NOT COUNTED. Korherr has counted all those registered who came and went. You can't have it both ways. If a huge number pass thru the Lublin/Treblinka camp on their Eastward sojourn, and are unregistered, then you cannot have Hotle claiming to know their number. Whichever way you look at it, the Hotle numbers - somehow connected with the Korherr Report - don't add up.


If these (in the Hotle telegram) were all unregistered then who could possibly have counted them? (

[Bob]

Phew! This is getting rather complicated. Has our careful logician Bob [...]

Is it only my impression or for some reason are you a bit biting towards me?

Phew! This is getting rather complicated. Has our careful logician Bob missed the central point, that the 1.2 million total in the Korherr Report of jews transported "from the eastern provinces to the Russian East ... sifted through the camps in the General Government" simply cannot pop up again in the Hotle telegram, because the Korherr Report's total did not include the Majdanek total, that being in its section 7? Yes, I think he has... If that exact number of Korherr recurs (1 274 166) it means Hotle has just fiddled the maths - and that is all.

But figure included in the section VII. is different figure and not the same figure included in total 1,274,166, what we have here are two different figures.

Korherr has 23,409 men and 2,849 women arriving ('internments') up to 31.12.42, totalling 26,258, whereas the telegram to Hotle had 'L24735', i.e. 24,735 arriving at Majdanek/Lublin. They differ by fifteen hundred. Mattogno and Kues seem to be suggesting that these are two different totals for the same place over the same period, one 'internments' and the other just moving-through....

I already corrected you about the number 24,735, and pointed out that this is your error, correct number is 24,733.

Here is what Graf/Mattogno say about this:[1]

“Let me first clarify the following questions: Are the 26,258 Jews who reached Majdanek up to the end of 1942 according to Korherr, and the 24,733 Jews deported to the Lublin concentration camp up to the same point in time according to Höfle, the very same deportees? And does the difference of 1,525 persons simply result from an inaccuracy in the records which can be understood in view of the circumstances prevailing at that time? The answer must be “no,” both from the point of view of the orthodox “Holocaust” historians and also from the point of view of the revisionists. Lublin is cited by Höfle together with Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka, which points to the fact that the Jews deported to all those four concentration camps belonged to the same category. Hence there could have been no reason to treat them differently in Lublin than in Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka.”

[...]

“Both according to the orthodox and the revisionist versions of events, the conclusion thus arises that the 24,733 Jews mentioned in Höfle’s telegram and the 26,258 Jews mentioned in the Korherr report were different groups of prisoners, and the former are actually the same as the Jews who were “housed in the Lublin concentration camp during the evacuation proceedings” and were “not included” in his statistics.”

So, these 24,733 people “accommodated in the concentration camps [...] Lublin within the scope of the evacuation action.” are not included because exactly these 24,733 people are listed by Höfle together with Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka as Jews evacuated during the evacuation action, the same total figure of 1,274,166 is then used by Korherr too. Their math is correct as they are not using figure 26,258, but figure 24,733, figure 26,258 is different group of peoples which does not belong to category of the evacuated.

Korherr's stats carefully add up: he has 4 categories for counting male inmates: arrivals (23,409) releases (4,509) deaths (14,217) and number at 31.12.42 (4,683). These figures add up and indicate a dreadful mortality for that year, BUT are they compatible with a huge 24,735 persons just breezing through the camp and escaping from these careful stats of Korherr?

They did not escape his careful attention, he explicitly stated that these evacuated peoples are not included.

As Bob might want to point out, Korherr's Section 7 does say, 'Not included are the Jews accommodated in the concentration camps Auschwitz and Lublin within the scope of the evacuation action.' BUT there is a basic logistical flaw in the argument here: those passing though are NOT COUNTED. Korherr has counted all those registered who came and went. You can't have it both ways. If a huge number pass thru the Lublin/Treblinka camp on their Eastward sojourn, and are unregistered, then you cannot have Hotle claiming to know their number. Whichever way you look at it, the Hotle numbers - somehow connected with the Korherr Report - don't add up.

Who said that they are not counted? “Unregistered” does not mean “not counted” and “registered” does not mean “counted.” These peoples were counted of course, but not registered in the camp, the goal was not to register them in the camp, only to count them or to make some statistics, that´s all, the goal was not to accommodate them in the camp as a regular prisoners of the camp, but to bring them to the camp for some period, count them before they will be evacuated and then evacuate them to the east. The same goes for Auschwitz, peoples waited there in the transit camp, they were not registered, but counted of course. I see no flaw in these numbers.

According to your logic, all figures for Lublin, Belzec, Sobibór and Treblinka are simply sucked out of a finger by Höfle and then simply adopted as true by Korherr and others, because according to you, when somebody is not registered in the camp, you consider him as “not counted”?

If these (in the Hotle telegram) were all unregistered then who could possibly have counted them?

I really see no problem, they simply counted them - one, two, three, four...- but they did not register them, obviously no personal prisoners card were made, no unique number and etc., this was useless when these peoples are going to leave the transit camp next day, or next week - whatever - and they will never return back.

*note for readers - in my notes I forgot to add Thomas Kues as one of the authors of the book about Sobibór, my apologies.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes

[1]Jürgen Graf, Carlo Mattogno, Concentration Camp Majdanek: A Historical &Technical Study, The Barnes Review, 3rd Edition, 2012, pp. 268ff., pp. 269ff.

[Hannover]

Phew! This is getting rather complicated.

To say the least. Can one or both of you summarize your positions.

Thanks, Hannover

[astro3]

Sure, my position is given in a note David Irving kindly posted on his site yesterday
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Hoefle_T ... 041212.htm
'Enigma of the Hofle Telegram'* - any comments appreciated!

NB The online Mattogno-Graf book on Majdanek doesn't have a page 268 http://vho.org/GB/Books/ccm/

* [text added by Moderator 12/5/12]

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Enigma of the ‘Höfle Telegram’

In 2001, Steve Tyas wrote about the ‘Höfle telegram’ he had discovered, in the Public Record Office archives released in the mid-1990s, after fifty years of secrecy. Entitled, ‘A New Document on the Deportation and Murder of Jews during "Einsatz Reinhardt" 1942’ it appeared in Holocaust and Genocide studies. His article kept mantrically repeating the words ‘extermination,’ ‘murder’ ‘death’ as if wishing to ignore the simple meaning of that decrypt-message. The only possible basis for interpreting this terse message I suggest is in relation to the Korherr Report: both use the same date 31.12.42 for their statistics and both have the same big total 1 274 166 – as Jews who had been moved Eastward (or exterminated, according to your theoretical bias) by that date.

The brief message was:

Einsatz REINHARDT. SS und Pol.fuehrer LUBLIN sends the Befehlshaber der Sipo KRAKAU a report on Einsatz REINHARDT for the 14 days up to 31.1.42. Increase to 31.12.42: L127621, B 0, Ss515, T 10335, altogether 23611. Totals on 31.12.42: L24735, B 434508, S 101370, T 71355: altogether 1274166.

David Irving has averred that this telegram has a “keystone importance in the architecture of the entire revisionist debate,” being “ a pivotal document in the history of where the real Holocaust operations were taking place.” Wow! But he has been rather brief in explaining how he reached such a conclusion.

Both the Korherr Report and the Hofle Telegram used language of movement: arrival and increases, deportation and evacuation. One requires a ‘dictionary from Hell’ to transcribe that into the language of mass murder.

The ‘Korherr Report’ was a statistical review of how Jews were moving around Europe, compiled by the 3rd Reich statistician Robert Korherr. Its figures covered the year 1942, and finished on 31st December of that year. The 5th section of his Report is about the transit camps, so-called ‘Aktion Reinhardt,’ while the 7th section is about the labour-concentration camps. (view it online at ‘holocaustcontroversies’.) The latter were residential, the former were not, or only for extremely brief periods. So the Reich statisticians counted the number of persons (under the main headings of Russians, Poles and Jews) dwelling in the latter camps, whereas they did not for the former, that would not have made sense.

Section 5: ‘THE EVACUATION OF THE JEWS ... All evacuations on the territory of the Reich and including the eastern territories … from October 1939 or later until 31.12.1942 resulted in the following numbers:”
4. Transportation of Jews from the eastern provinces to the Russian East: 1 449 692 "
The following numbers were sifted through the camps in the General Government 1 274 166 Jews

through the camps in the Warthegau... .. 145 301 Jews

No breakdown was given for that number of Jews ‘sifted through the camps in the General Government’ – which the telegram sent by Höfle (early in January 1943) did.

The four letters of Höfle Telegram supposedly allude to three Action Reinhard camps (Sobibor, Belzec and Treblinka) plus one labour-camp Majdanek. They will add up if one adds an extra order of magnitude to the Treblinka total – and that means you accept something like five thousand arrivals per day to this rather small camp, over a six-month period. (It’s agreed that the Treblinka camp only got going in midsummer 1942) There were twenty to thirty German guards running the camp, plus a hundred Ukrainians – who were not over-friendly towards Germans.

I am somewhat hesitant about adding in that extras order of magnitude, to get the numbers to ‘add up’ – partly because the Korherr Report obtained its large total without including the Majdanek labour-camp (at Lublin, and here alluded to as ‘L’) That was counted in Korherr’s section 7, about the German concentration or labour-camps, and he has twenty-six thousand arrivals (‘internments’) coming to Majdanek – whereas Höfle Telegram gives twenty-four thousand as arriving at Majdanek. So there is a bit of a logistical problem about what the Höfle Telegram was adding up, which doesn’t look quite the same as what Korherr was adding up, to get the same 1.2 million figure.

But, to those who do want to (a) put in that extra order of magnitude, and (b) claim it alludes to mass-murder – which Steve Tyas did, and Irving seems to be following, I suggest the following: the more huge the number you want to have arriving at Treblinka, with so small a staff looking after them – the harder it is to conceive that the Nazis were doing anything unpleasant to them. Even just frisking the deported Jews of jewellery etc becomes hard to imagine.

The Revisionist view is merely that, on that Eastern border of what was then Poland the railway gauge changed, and the ‘Aktion Reinhardt’ camps were around that boundary. While changing trains they came to Treblinka to be cleaned up and deloused – that’s all.

If you still want to believe in seven or eight hundred thousand Jews arriving and being exterminated, let me remind you of the five ‘nots.’ There is not any known reason why Nazis would have wanted to exterminate Jews – au contraire they were regarded as valuable industrial workers, according to the British intelligence decrypts. There is not a single dead body or remains found at Treblinka, with any sign of some extermination procedure. The odd Jew was shot while trying to escape, that’s all you’ll ever get from the historical record. There is not any degree of consensus as to what was the means of extermination allegedly used at Treblinka: steam? Diesel exhaust? Do me a favour... There are not any Nazi documents located showing any intention to exterminate, au contraire the documents such as those we’re here looking at emphasise ‘evacuation,’ transport etc. There are not any photographs of an alleged extermination procedure.

As evidence for an exterminationist meaning to the Höfle Telegram, Irving cited : “In July 1942 Höfle made all his men engaged in Reinhardt sign a confidentiality document under pain of death, about precisely what it was they were doing. I have it here. “ Translating that document (with kind permission from Mr Irving):

Commitment Slip



1. I know, and have today been cautioned, that I will be punished with the death penalty if I misappropriate Jewish property of any kind.

2. I must maintain absolute secrecy about all the required measures to be carried out during the evacuation of Jews, even with my comrades.

3. I undertake to apply myself with all my ability and strength to the rapid and smooth implementation of these measures. Signed:

<![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]>

That is a statement about properly looking after Jews while they were being ‘evacuated.’ The second part prevents gossip about so-and-so who has some expensive jewellery. I suggest there is no hidden, fiendish meaning in this text.

It might be time to face the simple fact, that the ‘Endlosung der Judenfrage’ ie the goal or end-solution to the Jewish question (possibly not the ‘final solution’) was designed to be what the German documents say it was, an export/or evacuation program. It may have gone horribly wrong – but, that’s a different matter.

(signed) N Kastro

[Bob]

Sure, my position is given in a note David Irving kindly posted on his site yesterday
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Hoefle_T ... 041212.htm
'Enigma of the Hofle Telegram' - any comments appreciated!

I have no problem with the parts which refer to deportation and etc. and these documents have nothing to with alleged extermination, quite the contrary, they support revisionists, but I disagree with alleged errors or strange math in the documents when you again repeated your problems with the documents, these things had been addressed and explained in this thread, there are no problems. I am missing your comments or counter arguments or some response to my comments, I noticed you usually ignore them and then you begin with some new subject, but I expect some response from my “opponent” to be sure that we reached some conclusion and not to ignore what i am saying and then act as if nothing has happened, I think this is a bad approach.

I am also missing your explanation of your typos and errors when you interpreted the telegram and changed some things, but in this case I consider your silence as an admission that you simply did some mistakes, no problem, we are all humans.

Finally, I suspect you that you in fact don´t read my comments at all, because in your article, you included the later brief English version of the telegram message again (why not the original German version?), but it contains the same errors pointed out to you a few days ago and for some strange reason you corrected only one grammar error, i.e. “Einsatz” instead of former “Einsats.” Here again your errors which will be now more exposed thanks to publication of your article by Irving:

L127621 - Wrong - L12761 is correct
Ss515 - Wrong - S515 is correct
L24735 - Wrong - L24733 is correct.

Of course, I also expect response from other users, for example Hannover praised astro3 for his good work regarding alleged two decrypted versions of the telegram, I also praise everybody who is doing own research, but as shown, this case was not true, so maybe Hannover can present his opinions, we are here because of debate and to reach some definite conclusions based on evidence and arguments.

[Hannover]

Bob:
I certainly did praise astro3 for these decrypts. But let's look explicitly at my praise.
me:

There has been discussion about the hidden / destroyed outbound records from the labor camps. This confirms the fact that there must have been outbound records as we now have irrefutable proof of masses of Jews being transported OUT of Auschwitz.

my quote of astro3:

... therefore it is clear that the majority of the departures are Jews.

me:

Indeed.

Could your views change the assessment that is clear in the quote of astro3?
However, I agree that astro3 should address any criticisms of his posts.

Thanks, Hannover

[Bob]

No no Hannover, I referred to this comment from astro3, which is about two alleged versions of the same document, then you said “Nice work from astro3 as usual.” so I understand to it as you agreed with astro3 about it.

[Hannover]

No no Hannover, I referred to this comment from astro3, which is about two alleged versions of the same document, then you said “Nice work from astro3 as usual.” so I understand to it as you agreed with astro3 about it.

It is/was my assumption that astro3 was taking that info. directly from the decrypts. I saw no reason to believe that the numbers were "alleged".

I do think it would be best to see a succinct summary of the differences in opinion between you and astro3, perhaps a 'He thinks ___', I think ___' arrangement.

- Hannover

[Bob]

No no Hannover, I referred to this comment from astro3, which is about two alleged versions of the same document, then you said “Nice work from astro3 as usual.” so I understand to it as you agreed with astro3 about it.

It is/was my assumption that astro3 was taking that info. directly from the decrypts. I saw no reason to believe that the numbers were "alleged".

I do think it would be best to see a succinct summary of the differences in opinion between you and astro3, perhaps a 'He thinks ___', I think ___' arrangement.

- Hannover

We are still not on the same line, I didn´t said that some numbers are "alleged", this is not in my quote. Astro3´s comment was about two alleged versions of the same document, i.e. - Höfle telegram. Not about numbers.

Differences - Astro has problem with two versions of this telegram and with numbers and math in telegram and Korherr report which uses it.

There aren´t two versions as shown, and numbers match up, that´s all.

[PotPie]

...
Terry's Axiom: 'the majority of deportees arriving at Auchwitz were gassed on arrival and never were registered in the camp; therefore, they did not show up in the prisoner returns.' (p388)
I've got two unicorns in my back garden, they don't show up to normal eyesight.
....

Yes, how does he know that non-registered deportees were actually gassed? Argument by ignorance?

The primary source for that is (Marxist) Danuta Czech's Kalendarium.