Wikipedia pictures prove Babi Yar happened according to a believer

[borjastick]

So I was watching another one of the Youtube efforts by Simon Webb on his History Debunked channel. This was about how Ukrainian guards etc were up to their necks in the holocaust and so shouldn't be seen as the innocent party in the current conflict.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJDevsb ... p4eKtZf7Y-

The comments included one or two from a contributor called Robert Russell who claimed that there were plenty of other massacres, such as Babi Yar etc in the war all proven and the responsibility of the SS and German army. I tackled him on this saying that of course there is no evidence at all to prove Babi Yar and in fact subsequent expansion of the city into the ravine also proved nothing.

His response was this;

German photographers got all the evidence at the time, all the photos are on the internet to see, what more could you want, ukrainian waffen ss and auxiliary police were responsible along with the germans for Babyn Yar Massacre

He then stated that these pictures on google and wikipedia should come with an advisory! So I went to the wiki page for this amazing proof that I have wanted for so long and what did I find? Nothing. There are no pictures that prove anything at all in the claims about Babi Yar.

It is very odd that people like this Robert Russell state that there is proof on the internet. Do they think everyone will simply accept that claim as fact and never check anything?

[curioussoul]

I'm guessing they are referring to the "Haehle Photographs", but once again, no one is denying that executions took place at Babi Yar. Most likely, the victims numbered some 200. This is borne out by the fact that the very first German documents and third party reports about the massacre classify it as a retaliation against Jews/partisans setting fire to the beautiful and historical city center in Kiev, and specifically mentioned a few hundred victims.

This is furthermore proven by the fact that the Soviet excavations, which were carried out by German POW's, only uncovered some 120 victims or so. Even including the purportedly cremated victims, this would still mean that tens of thousands of corpses were still buried in the ground, which the Soviets for unknown reasons never bothered to unearth.

The aerial photographs of Babi Yar, which were taken by the Wehrmacht during the exact time when open-air cremations are claimed to have taken place on an enormous scale, prove that these outdoor cremations did not take place. Therefore, it's safe to assume that the corpses unearthed by the Soviets most likely belonged to the 200 or so victims.

As Mattogno has proven, the "33,000" number is most likely copied from a singular report and has no basis in factual reality.

[Hektor]

So I was watching another one of the Youtube efforts by Simon Webb on his History Debunked channel. This was about how Ukrainian guards etc were up to their necks in the holocaust and so shouldn't be seen as the innocent party in the current conflict.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJDevsb ... p4eKtZf7Y-

The comments included one or two from a contributor called Robert Russell who claimed that there were plenty of other massacres, such as Babi Yar etc in the war all proven and the responsibility of the SS and German army. I tackled him on this saying that of course there is no evidence at all to prove Babi Yar and in fact subsequent expansion of the city into the ravine also proved nothing.

....

So why no investigation then? (A real one not another mock one).
Why the need for violence against Holocaust Deniers?

Revisionists don't dispute the occurrence of executions(by SS (rather SD), Wehrmacht, auxiliaries).
What we say is that fiction has been added for atrocity propaganda purposes. And that there is no physical evidence for this at all.

[Eduardo]

Nobody denies the brutality of antipartisan warfare. But there is a justification for this and every army in the world has acted the same way. It is dishonest to accuse the germans when partisan warfare is in itself a war crime against any international convention.
Besides, much fiction has been added in order to increase the evilness of the germans. They think that the allied gang turns pure and innocent this way.

[Hektor]

Nobody denies the brutality of antipartisan warfare. But there is a justification for this and every army in the world has acted the same way. It is dishonest to accuse the germans when partisan warfare is in itself a war crime against any international convention.
Besides, much fiction has been added in order to increase the evilness of the germans. They think that the allied gang turns pure and innocent this way.

I recall decades ago, there was really not much talk about partisan warfare in any of the WW2 debates. This was something like a 'secret' only really ww2-boffins would know about. There was mentioning of the 'resistance' occasionally. But those chaps were shown more in a 'heroic' light. That they only 'blew up trains' or would defeat a German battalion single-handedly. To met it is now clear why this was sanitized and omitted. The reasoning is simple. They were pushing atrocity propaganda and 'execution of innocent civilians' was part of the narrative. Now if that was connected to suppression of partisan activity, this would look different from malicious killing of civilians. So rather omit the partisan part for now.

Lying by omission seems to be the main tactic in all this.

Turns out that virtually every 'German War Crime' or 'Nazi Atrocity" ever is somehow linked to the suppression of partisan activities via reprisals.
It was useful for the local leftists in formerly occupied countries, since those executed were often members or sympathizers of the Communist Party. The local Communists weren't exactly doing well in elections then, but by railing up the public they could easily score at least some points.

It was also a variety to the core Holocaust themes involving Jews and gas chambers. And it distracted from themes of Allied atrocities (or partisan atrocities) coming up. One would have to look into the media records at the time.

Meanwhile partisans were also romanticized painted as juvenile heroes that wanted to fight for freedom and the like. My take it that this also lead to the valorization of terrorism and terrorist groups. The 70s had the RAF in Germany and several other similar groups in Italy and France. At the same time you had the 'march through the institutions' by formerly leftist, or leftist-influenced students into positions within education, media and bureaucracy. They picked up any Anti-Nazi-Themes that were useful for them moralizing their own ideas. And this is at the core of the present day ideological orientations within society.

[Eduardo]

Nobody denies the brutality of antipartisan warfare. But there is a justification for this and every army in the world has acted the same way. It is dishonest to accuse the germans when partisan warfare is in itself a war crime against any international convention.
Besides, much fiction has been added in order to increase the evilness of the germans. They think that the allied gang turns pure and innocent this way.

I recall decades ago, there was really not much talk about partisan warfare in any of the WW2 debates. This was something like a 'secret' only really ww2-boffins would know about. There was mentioning of the 'resistance' occasionally. But those chaps were shown more in a 'heroic' light. That they only 'blew up trains' or would defeat a German battalion single-handedly. To met it is now clear why this was sanitized and omitted. The reasoning is simple. They were pushing atrocity propaganda and 'execution of innocent civilians' was part of the narrative. Now if that was connected to suppression of partisan activity, this would look different from malicious killing of civilians. So rather omit the partisan part for now.

Lying by omission seems to be the main tactic in all this.

Turns out that virtually every 'German War Crime' or 'Nazi Atrocity" ever is somehow linked to the suppression of partisan activities via reprisals.
It was useful for the local leftists in formerly occupied countries, since those executed were often members or sympathizers of the Communist Party. The local Communists weren't exactly doing well in elections then, but by railing up the public they could easily score at least some points.

It was also a variety to the core Holocaust themes involving Jews and gas chambers. And it distracted from themes of Allied atrocities (or partisan atrocities) coming up. One would have to look into the media records at the time.

Meanwhile partisans were also romanticized painted as juvenile heroes that wanted to fight for freedom and the like. My take it that this also lead to the valorization of terrorism and terrorist groups. The 70s had the RAF in Germany and several other similar groups in Italy and France. At the same time you had the 'march through the institutions' by formerly leftist, or leftist-influenced students into positions within education, media and bureaucracy. They picked up any Anti-Nazi-Themes that were useful for them moralizing their own ideas. And this is at the core of the present day ideological orientations within society.

Yes. ETA in Spain were also the good guys fighting for democracy and against Franco. Dont forget these freedom fighter since they were much more lethal than RAF in Germany. The scheme was: given Franco was a fascist, a bomb can blow a coffe shop in order to bring democracy back.
I totally agree with Hektor: every political force in the post1945 scene got some benefit from the antiNazi narrative. That is the reason because any non-believer should be hardly punished.