The question of the abundant "evidence" for genocide by bullets / Babi Yar etc.

[Otium]

HMS, Lamprecht:

documents 3, 8, 9, 13, 14, 19, 20 are not part of the einsatzgruppen reports and have not been  debunked or even explained by revisionists

I share your sentiment that some of these document's haven't been dealt with more in depth, but one must wonder why? Do they change very much? For someone like Mattogno not to address them, even though he cites the sources used by the HC bloggers indicates to me that they're not very important. Especially since he already deals with the death toll in the book, why spend time detailing the reliability of every single document that crosses your path that for one reason or another might be banal to the experienced researched. To you or I Gl0spana a document may seem more incriminating that it actually is because we lack the experience with the physical documentation.

You also do not know whether these documents have been dealt with in other areas of the book, it won't just come up by searching specifics. It might only be in passing. Regarding the USSR documents, they would be easy to miss because in the Holocaust Handbooks they're not cited in the same way, so clues from the text itself had to be searched to find a reference, and I did find those references albeit sparse for my liking but still useful.

For example, document 3 is dealt with, but it's not cited in the same way:

But the matter becomes even more confusing when one reads Dina Pronicheva’s account in Wiehn’s opus. Significant differences in her recorded statement at the Darmstadt Trial are added in parentheses, with the note S:

“On September 28, 1941, an order from the German authorities was posted throughout the city […] about 8 o’clock in the morning [S: at 8 o’clock] near Dyekhtyarevska and Melnik Streets [S: Dyakhterovskaya and Melnikov]. . .

Germar Rudolf (editor.), Dissecting the Holocaust (Castle Hill Publishers, November 2019), Pp. 519.

Document 8 I have inadvertently dealt with in this thread already. It claims there were 400,000 Jews in Kiev! A ridiculous number, an impossible number, as has been proven already and again is a discrepancy between Incident Report 106 and 97. The document is not incriminating, it's used only to provide figures for the Jews supposedly in the area. Document 9 was quoted in full by Mattogno on page 527 of 'Einsatzgruppen', and the contents mentioned on page 509 of 'Dissecing the Holocaust' although the document itself was not cited. Document 13 is addressed on page 511 in Mattogno, but only in passing because it's another document claiming that 35-40,000 Jews were killed, the veracity of this number itself gets the full attention of revisionists which is what's important; the number is untenable. Document 19 I can't find an explicit reference to, but you can search the Handbooks for the numbers cited, Terry and a number of 42,000 is addressed if you simply search volume 28 of the Holocaust Handbooks, although it may not be a reference to the same document. Document 20 is yet another document like that of no. 13. You can find references to Martin Luther though, some rather contradictory:

In the January 26, 1942, letter from the Chief of the Security Police and the Security Service (Heydrich) to Under Secretary of State Martin Luther in the Foreign Office, we read:

“Now that the fundamental line to be taken with regard to the practical final solution of the Jewish question has been determined and the authorities involved are in complete agreement, I would ask you […]”

and farther down:

“[…] to assign your official in charge of completing the outline requested by the Reich Marshal, in which the organizational, factual and material prerequisites for the practical implementation of the tasks involved in the solution are to be identified, to the required discussions of specific details. I intend to hold the first discussion of this kind on March 6, 1942 […].”

In other words, considerations of all the organizational, factual and material prerequisites for a practical implementation of the tasks involved in the solution were not even begun until about mid-March 1942.

Germar Rudolf (editor.), Dissecting the Holocaust (Castle Hill Publishers, November 2019), Pp. 533.

This is certainly odd considering the 'extermination of the Jews' is said to have already been well under way!

The fact remains, the majority of these documents have been addressed to varying degrees, you just haven't done your due diligence Gl0spana. I was able to find these references in less than an hour.

It should also be noted that it's tough to say whether any or all of these documents may have been addressed in other languages. For example, the study by Udo Walendy.

---

14 in particular describes the Jews getting tricked into believing in their resettlement and then being indiscriminately killed in a slaughter so ghastly in order to do it the executioners had to be numb with alcohol. Do you believe this happened?

"It is ordered that the Jews are to be "resettled". This is done in such a way that the Jews are ordered to gather in the following night with their best clothes and jewlry at collection places. No difference is made between classes, sex and age. They are then brought to a previously selected site outside the town. On the pretext that certain formalities are still to be fulfilled, they have to put aside their jewlry and clothes. They are taken off side the street and liquidated. The resulting situations are so shocking that they can not be described. The consequences for the German commandos are inevitable. In general, the execution can only be carried out under numbness with alcohol. A SD officer ordered to watch had to endure a nightmare of the most dreadful kind the following night according to his description."

And yet we have many documents attesting to the contrary. I suggest you read the chapter on 'resettlement' in Holocaust Handbook volume 28, which I linked to you above. This document also doesn't change the fact that "resettlement" was not a code word, you can read about this again, in Mattognos Einsatzgruppen to get a more nuanced view of how the word was used. For example:

“Umsiedlung” is sometimes clearly used as a synonym for execution, while on other occasions it means what it translates to: resettlement; in some cases it seems to be distinct from execution, as in this example:

“As a result of the measures taken by Einsatzkommando 6, the towns of Gorlovka and Makeyevka are now free of Jews. Some of them, remaining in Stalino, will be resettled as soon as the weather permits it. A total of 493 persons were executed here (including 80 political activists, 44 saboteurs and looters and 369 Jews).”

Here, by contrast, we appear to have the inexplicable use of the “camouflage” term “resettled” and the undisguised word “executed” in the same context.

Carlo Mattogno, The Einsatzgruppen in the Occupied Eastern Territories: Genesis, Missions and Actions (Castle Hill Publishers, December 2018), Pp. 66.

I would still like to see Mattogno address the document allegedly written by Erwin Stolze (document 14) more thoroughly.

---

How many of the above documents do you think have been fabricated in whole or part? The Germans were "bragging" about killing 30,000 people in two days?. Extrapolate that over 4 years and you get 18 million people

We cannot say, we can however say that the figures are inaccurate, which has been proven, and not simply by the lack of remains as revisionists have shown. If you read Mattogno's book on the Einsatzgruppen, you would know that the figures in the reports are unreliable because the Commanders wished to make the units look more efficient than they perhaps were:

Regarding the number of victims, over 40% of the approximately 728,000 killings listed in the Einsatzgruppen reports are not verifiable, and there is a serious possibility that many figures listed in these documents were exaggerated or even invented, as inflated numbers allowed the various commanders to receive kudos from Berlin as the destroyers of Bolshevism’s breeding ground, hence as heroes who had thus inflicted a severe blow on the enemy regime.

Carlo Mattogno, The Einsatzgruppen (Castle Hill Publishers, December 2018), Pp. 715.

You might say "well not all these are Einsatzgruppen reports", but do you know who else in the Third Reich would've gotten such remarkably similar numbers? And how they would've gotten them? No. You don't.

The Germans didn't kill 30,000 people in two days, there is no evidence and it's physically impossible. You cannot arbitrarily extrapolate the number over 4 years.

[Archie]

The Germans were "bragging" about killing 30,000 people in two days?

My point was that a body count given in a report does NOT necessarily correspond to reality. There can be some incentive to inflate figures to give the impression that you're kicking serious @ss out there.

For example, please see this article on the inaccurate body counts in Vietnam.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War_body_count_controversy

Or consider the Deir Yassin massacre where Jews slaughtered a bunch of Arab villagers. The Wikipedia article says that the Irgun (Jewish terrorist group) initially claimed to have killed 254 people. Yet "scholars" claim that this number is exaggerated.

Despite an original boast by the victors that 254 had been killed, modern scholarship puts the death toll at far fewer.

The current estimate is only 107, which is 58% lower than the number the Jews themselves said that they killed.

[Archie]

14 in particular describes the Jews getting tricked into believing in their resettlement and then being indiscriminately killed in a slaughter so ghastly in order to do it the executioners had to be numb with alcohol. Do you believe this happened?

"It is ordered that the Jews are to be "resettled". This is done in such a way that the Jews are ordered to gather in the following night with their best clothes and jewlry at collection places. No difference is made between classes, sex and age. They are then brought to a previously selected site outside the town. On the pretext that certain formalities are still to be fulfilled, they have to put aside their jewlry and clothes. They are taken off side the street and liquidated. The resulting situations are so shocking that they can not be described. The consequences for the German commandos are inevitable. In general, the execution can only be carried out under numbness with alcohol. A SD officer ordered to watch had to endure a nightmare of the most dreadful kind the following night according to his description."

There are a lot of things about this narrative that don't make sense to me. You tell all the Jews to congregate at a certain place and time and 34,000 of them show up. Okay. Now you have to execute them. You need to get them over to the ravine. What was the distance between the initial meeting point and the execution site? If it was far, how did they transport all of those people? A bus typically carries around 50 people. So 680 busloads? Or maybe it was close enough to walk. But then wouldn't they be able to hear all the gunfire from the first batch of executions? And wouldn't that prompt a big panic?

And then when you get to the execution site, if you have people lined up shoulder to shoulder, at let's say 3 people per meter, 34,000 people would be over 11 kilometers in total length. Say you do 40 batches over 2 days, that would be 850 people per batch and a line of perhaps 283 meters. This is still substantial. I would be curious to know how many executioners they supposedly had on hand to carry this operation out. You'd need a lot of them. Otherwise people would start scattering.

And if we examine some of the earliest reports of this massacre, we get even more questions.

From the 12/31/1941 JTA account.
https://www.jta.org/1941/12/31/archive/retreating-nazi-armies-intensify-anti-jewish-terror-in-ukraine

The report reveals that in addition to executing practically the entire Jewish male population of Kiev on the charge that the Jews who remained in the city were "Soviet spies and guerrillas," the Nazi military command ordered thousands of Jews confined in mined cemetery grounds. The victims, most of them women, were then blown up by the exploding mines. Those who survived were machine-gunned to death by the German soldiers. (Earlier reports estimated that 52,000 Jews were murdered in Kiev when the Nazis first occupied the city.)

Attributing their present retreat to "Jewish spies," the Nazi military forces, according to the report, issued an order in the middle of December requesting all the remaining Jews in Kiev to report to the occupation authorities on a certain date. Aware of the fact that the order meant a new Jewish massacre, many Jewish mothers killed their children and committed suicide, while elderly Jews threw themselves to death by jumping from open windows. For days, the report says, their bodies remained untouched on the sidewalks of the streets of the city. The pathetic scenes of Jewish women killing their own children and later taking their own lives have driven many Jews to insanity, and one can now see insane Jews running wild in the streets of Kiev, provoking compassion on the part of the Ukrainian population which is living under the same Nazi terror and is hoping for the day of liberation from the Nazi yoke.

Note that this report says that they were led to a cemetery and blown up with mines and then the survivors were machine-gunned. And it implies that there were still Jews in Kiev in mid December. And that another massacre was planned and they committed preemptive mass suicide.

Molotov's claims from 1/8/1942
https://www.jta.org/1942/01/08/archive/u-s-embassy-in-russia-studies-report-of-nazi-massacres-of-jews-russians-in-ukraine

Describing the massacre in Kiev (reported by the JTA on Nov. 16) and estimating that 52,000 victims were killed and tortured to death in that city alone in the course of a few days, Soviet Commissar Molotoff says in his note that the mass-execution of Jewish men, women and children there was carried out on the grounds of a Jewish cemetery where the victims were herded together. "All of the victims were stripped naked and beaten. The first group of people selected for shooting was forced to lie on the bottom of a ditch faces down, and were shot with automatic rifles. Then the Germans threw a little earth over them. The next group of people awaiting execution was put on top of them in a second layer and shot, and so on."

Here we get a quite different story about people being made to lie down on top of dead bodies. We are to believe 34,000 to 52,000 people were killed in this way? They never figured out something was a little fishy? Just tens of thousands of unrestrained people patiently waiting their turn to get shot? This was the clever ruse devised by the Germans?

[gl0spana]

So what's the conclusion here guys, are the Babi Yar documents mostly real or not? I think you've made the argument that it doesn't matter if they're real, because nothing in them is particularly incriminating. Is this correct? seeking clarification here.

Also I'm interested in what you guys think of PS-3257, the document I referenced in my topic post. I wonder why Mattogno chose to address only a small portion of this document:

I've searched mattogno's books for mention of PS-3257

He only mentions the bolded part of this excerpt, leaving out the rest of the document, which quite interestingly states that Jews were no danger to the German army and also that Jews who were assisting German war aims were widely killed. I am disappointed he didn't analyze this section - being diligent if nothing else, he probably read the full document.

Many cities had a percentage of Jews exceeding fifty percent. Only the rich Jews had fled from the German troops. The majority of Jews remained under German administration. The latter found the problem more complicated through the fact that these Jews represented almost the entire trade and even a part of the manpower in small and medium industries besides the business which had in part become superfluous as a direct or indirect result of the war. The elimination therefore necessarily had far-reaching economic consequences and even direct consequences for the armament industry (production for supplying the troops).

The attitude of the Jewish population was anxious-obliging from the beginning. They tried to avoid everything that might displease the German administration. That they hated the German administration and army inwardly goes without saying and cannot be surprising. However, there is no proof that Jewry as a whole or even to a greater part was implicated in acts of sabotage. Surely there were some terrorists or saboteurs among them just as among the Ukrainians. But it cannot be said that the Jews as such represented a danger to the German armed forces. The output produced by Jews who, of course, were prompted by nothing but the feeling of fear, was satisfactory to the troops and the German administration. The Jewish population remained temporarily unmolested shortly after the fighting. Only weeks, sometimes months later, specially detached formations of the order police executed a planned shooting of Jews. The action as a rule proceeded from east to west. It was done entirely in public with the use of the Ukrainian militia, and unfortunately in many instances also with members of the armed forces taking part voluntarily. The way these actions, which included men and old men, women, and children of all ages, were carried out was horrible. The great masses executed make this action more gigantic than any similar measure taken so far in the Soviet Union. So far about 150,000 to 200,000 Jews may have been executed in the part of the Ukraine belonging to the Reichskommissariat; no consideration was given to the interests of economy

[Hannover]

gl0spana:
Please stop the strawman arguments like:

I think you've made the argument that it doesn't matter if they're real, because nothing in them is particularly incriminating. Is this correct? seeking clarification here.

What's actually been said is that the "documents" you posted are necessarily bogus since there is no proof of their contents or what is claimed about them.

A for PS-3257, I have only seen an alleged "English translation" of an alleged German document that was never shown.
That creations was titled 'PS-3257' and presented at the notorious Nuremberg Show Trials.
http://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/docume ... S-3257#p.1

Please show us the original, actual, & authentic German document.

And of course, please show us the alleged immense human remains in support of the claims.

- Hannover

[Otium]

Also I'm interested in what you guys think of PS-3257, the document I referenced in my topic post. I wonder why Mattogno chose to address only a small portion of this document:

No conclusion can be drawn from this document alone. If you think this is a silver bullet then contact Rudolf or Mattogno and ask for a clarification. They're not adverse from responding to people. If this document, which you seem to think is very important, is what 'proves' the Holocaust then it must become a prime example of a document used by exterminationists.

The document itself doesn't state, from what you've quoted that the Jews were 'assisting' the Germans, it says they were 'anxiously-obliging' which is not the same as 'assisting' because that implies they were doing it voluntarily. They simply didn't want to be targeted if they kept their heads down, which if you were a Jew, would've been rather reasonable at that time, albeit futile because you were going to be deported anyway.

In any case, discontent with the Jews sprang from more than just rebelliousness or terrorism. The Jews were not liked throughout Europe, and especially not as representatives of Communism, the Germans hardly needed much more of a reason to treat them with suspicion.

The fact is that the document - if you're implying a policy of extermination - conflicts with other documents, like the one quoted above from Martin Luther, and also the many documents which refer to the 'Final Solution', not to mention the other documents in this same list that explicitly deny the wholesale killing of Jews as Lamprecht pointed out.

Your interpretation of this document Gl0spana is incongruent with these other documents, despite its rather murky origin. There is not likely to be any proof this document even exists in it's original form, it's essentially just testimony.

Saying that "The way these actions, which included men and old men, women, and children of all ages were carried out was horrible." doesn't imply anything about the intention of the killing, only it's nature which is but lightly addressed and not confirmed. If you search for the document in the Nuremberg transcripts they don't tell us anything about the document, or even who wrote it. It's simply referred to as a 'Letter from Armament Inspector in the Ukraine to General Thomas, Chief of the Industrial Armament Department'. The opinion of this seemingly anonymous person whose position in all of this is vague to say the least, is hardly worth very much. Not that you could even evaluate the weight of it's worth on this document alone. Which you cannot.

So it looks as if we're at an impasse. I do admit the document on its own does appear incriminating, but so does any document talking about the killing of anyone.

He only mentions the bolded part of this excerpt, leaving out the rest of the document [...] I am disappointed he didn't analyze this section - being diligent if nothing else, he probably read the full document.

So what? He doesn't need to analyse that section because he takes the conclusion, which contains the numbers that are the most important part of the document, and then scrutinises them along with all the other erroneous numbers. The first part of the document only matters if those last numbers from the section Mattogno did quote are accurate - and shocker - they're not. So why give a damn about the rest of the document? It's nonsensical. I imagine this is why Mattogno doesn't quote the whole thing because it doesn't substantially alter the claims made by the document. You can't just quote every single document in full within a book, otherwise it'd be monstrously long. You have to deal with the essential, most important claims, which is what Mattogno did and his conclusions refute the claims made by the documents.

This doesn't mean you or I cannot be disappointed that he didn't address it to the extent to which we'd both be satisfied, but it's irrelevant because he does ultimately address the claim and thereby the claims of the document itself.

[borjastick]

What was that quote

[b]'It happened so we know it was technically possible' Or something very similar. gl0splug is effectively saying that because it was written in some report, which may well have been fabricated after the war by the Russians, it must be true. No matter the lack of physical evidence. [/b]

Evidence, we don't need evidence, we have survivors... Ahhh where have I heard that before.

[Lamprecht]

So what's the conclusion here guys, are the Babi Yar documents mostly real or not? I think you've made the argument that it doesn't matter if they're real, because nothing in them is particularly incriminating. Is this correct? seeking clarification here.

Even if they're all real it doesn't support your silly "Holocaust" narrative and instead contradicts it. Every forum user here is entitled to their own unique opinions and thus conclusions. We also are allowed to have no conclusion and just theories or hypotheses.
Personally, I find it had to make a conclusion about the event when there has been no forensic evaluation of the alleged mass graves. These documents are not people independently reporting the same event, they are people reporting on something they heard happened from another source.

[Archie]

So what's the conclusion here guys, are the Babi Yar documents mostly real or not? I think you've made the argument that it doesn't matter if they're real, because nothing in them is particularly incriminating. Is this correct? seeking clarification here.

Speaking only for myself, I would not want to make any sort of definitive pronouncement on the authenticity of each of these documents.

I would sort them in three categories. Documents 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 12, 17, 18 are rather vague and I don't see them as very strong for your case. Documents 4, 7, 10, 11, 15, 16 are incriminating but they are USSR exhibits which to me makes them somewhat questionable. Then 8, 9, 13, 14, 19, 20 are other incriminating documents, although 14 doesn't give any numbers. The last one appears to have been an NMT document (NO-2657). Some of the facsimiles don't look very impressive (just regular typed pages). If they are authentic, we also have the question of numerical accuracy (see my earlier post).

One of the weakness here is that they failed to produce the actual key people involved to corroborate the information. With many of these Nuremberg documents (180-L, 501-PS, etc) the key people like Franz Stahlecker, Walter Rauff, August Becker, etc were never presented as witnesses either because they were dead or "missing" or they just didn't bother.

The best evidence that I've seen for "something" happening at Babi Yar is actually from the testimony of Alfred Rosenberg.
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/04-16-46.asp

I must say that the Police had their own jurisdiction, in which the Ministry for the Occupied Eastern Territories could not interfere. But I am unable to say here what measures Heydrich took. Yet, as may be seen from this, I could not assume that an order- which was attested to by the witness here yesterday-was given to Heydrich or Himmler by the Fuehrer. This report, and many other communications which came to my ears, regarding shootings of saboteurs and also shootings of Jews, pogroms by the local population in the Baltic States and in the Ukraine, I took as occurrences of this war. I heard that in Kiev a larger number of Jews had been shot, but that the greater part of the Jews had left Kiev; and the sum of these reports showed me, it is true, terrible harshness, especially some reports from the prison camps. But that there was an order for the individual annihilation of the entire Jewry, I could not assume and if, in our polemics, the extermination of Jewry was also talked about, I must say that this word, of course, must make a frightful impression in view of the testimonies we think are available now, but under conditions prevailing then, it was not. interpreted as an individual extermination, an individual annihilation of millions of Jews. I must also say that even the British Prime Minister, in an official speech in the House of Commons on 23 or 26 September 1943, spoke of the extermination in root and branch of Prussianism and of National Socialism. I happened to read these words from this speech. However, I did not assume that in saying this he meant the shooting of all Prussian officers and National Socialists.

He says his understanding was that there were anti-partisan killings and pogroms by the local populations and he "heard" about Jews getting shot at Kiev but he didn't take any of that to be part of any broad extermination program. This is basically my view. Some shootings but "The Holocaust" as it's been promoted is fake.

Also I'm interested in what you guys think of PS-3257, the document I referenced in my topic post.

This one was used at Nuremberg. Major Walsh quoted it at length is his presentation. There are some curiosities about it. First, we have to wonder why this document exists. It's supposed to be a secret letter from a guilt-ridden whistleblower that conveniently counters the German narrative on their policies in the East. The German narrative was to emphasize the partisan activity and also the pogroms by the local populations, as Rosenberg refers to. This letter contradicts the partisan argument by saying the Jews were on their best behavior etc. The letter writer also goes out of his way to say that most of the Jews did not flee ahead of the Wehrmacht (only the "rich" Jews). The Allied narrative was to downplay Jewish terrorism and the local population pogroms. The Nuremberg narrative was that the Germans orchestrated the pogroms and tried to make it look as though the initiative was taken locally. And some of the documents like 180-L actually say things like this (if I remember correctly). Is it just me or is this all a little too on the nose? And it's factually very questionable as there's good evidence partisan activity was significant. Stahlecker himself for example was killed by partisans.

Another thing that seems odd to me is the reference to eliminating the "superfluous eaters" based on "ideological theories as a matter of principle." That sounds almost like caricature.

[Otium]

Is it just me or is this all a little too on the nose? [...] Another thing that seems odd to me is the reference to eliminating the "superfluous eaters" based on "ideological theories as a matter of principle." That sounds almost like caricature.

I also think the document is incredibly 'on the nose'. While reading it I felt as if someone was staring directly at me, breaking the fourth wall and espousing the specific narrative that the establishment would want me to believe. It's the kind of thing they'd certainly like to hear from a German document but they couldn't pass it off on some big name, so in a sense, making it come from some anonymous whistle blower is a smart thing to do, the document becomes unfalsifiable. However, because it doesn't have the name of someone who is recognizable it also casts doubt on its authenticity because, who the hell is this guy to make these claims? Why should we take him seriously? This is obviously a massive red flag, at least to me, and it leads me to believe that it's fake, especially considering the sketchy nature of its background. However this can only be speculation, I'm not saying it is fake.

[gl0spana]

gl0spana:
Please stop the strawman arguments like:

I think you've made the argument that it doesn't matter if they're real, because nothing in them is particularly incriminating. Is this correct? seeking clarification here.  

What's actually been said is that the "documents" you posted are necessarily fake since there is no proof of their contents.
Especially the contents of many that have been shown to be impossible, absurdly so.

A for PS-3257, I have only seen an alleged "English translation" of an alleged German document that was never shown.
That creations was  titled 'PS-3257' and presented at the notorious Nuremberg Show Trials.
http://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/docume ... S-3257#p.1

Please show us the original, actual, & authentic German document.

And of course, please show us the alleged immense human remains in support of the claims.

- Hannover

Here it is: "report prepared by professor peter-heinz seraphim, regarding the solution of the "jewish problem" in ukraine, 02/12/1941"





https://documents.yadvashem.org/index.h ... Id=5727401


I admitted before that I cannot show you the alleged immense human remains at Belzec. The same applies to the alleged mass graves throughout the east. You can claim this as a victory if you want, though I laid out my arguments for why it doesn't matter in the previous thread and to be honest I don't have much to add. If that disqualifies me from further participation in this forum, so be it. 

So what? He doesn't need to analyse that section because he takes the conclusion, which contains the numbers that are the most important part of the document, and then scrutinises them along with all the other erroneous numbers. The first part of the document only matters if those last numbers from the section Mattogno did quote are accurate - and shocker - they're not. So why give a damn about the rest of the document? It's nonsensical. I imagine this is why Mattogno doesn't quote the whole thing because it doesn't substantially alter the claims made by the document. You can't just quote every single document in full within a book, otherwise it'd be monstrously long. You have to deal with the essential, most important claims, which is what Mattogno did and his conclusions refute the claims made by the documents.

This doesn't mean you or I cannot be disappointed that he didn't address it to the extent to which we'd both be satisfied, but it's irrelevant because he does ultimately address the claim and thereby the claims of the document itself.

Mattogno's omission is important because revisionists should be trying to combat the oppositions' strongest arguments - and this document is regularly cited and presented eg here:
https://www.historiography-project.com/ ... owning.php


The significance of this document is clearly not the death figure it provides. Many other Einsatzgruppen documents offer such high figures (eg OSR 88), and are not singled out like this. To quote Browning, the document shows “that those responsible for trying to mobilize the occupied territories for the economic war efforts felt that in fact labour was not a rarity but was being ignored, or for sacrifice to the ideological goal of murdering all the Jews.”

it is also referenced in the hc blog critique which mattogno answered, full quote here: 

 Lohse responded by banning further executions in Libau.[31] There then followed a complaint by the Quartermaster-General Riga, May, concerning the withdrawal of Jews from Wehrmacht workshops. Lohse responded by stating that "I request most emphatically that the liquidation of Jews employed as skilled workers in armament plants and repair workshops of the Wehrmacht who cannot be replaced at present by local personnel be prevented."[32] .The killing of Jewish workers also provoked some alarm in Ukraine. On the same as Lohse's request regarding skilled workers in the Ostland, the Arms inspector Seraphim expressed alarm at the killing of skilled Jews in Ukraine, noting that "The elimination therefore necessarily had far reaching economic consequences and even direct consequences for the armament industry." He explained further that "So far about 150,000 to 200,000 Jews may have been executed in the part of the Ukraine belonging to the Reichskommissariat; no consideration was given to the interests of economy."33] Despite these protests, however, it had been decided by December 18, 1941, that, with regard to the Jewish question, "In principle, economic considerations are not to be taken into account in the settlement of the problem."[34]

So they reference the figure killed but the main point is that the Nazis ideological goal of murdering Jews trumped their pressing military need for skilled workers. It is possible that they feared these skilled jews would engage in partisan type activities, but as "retaliatory measures" these killings make no sense. There were plenty of "useless" Jews that might be targeted instead.  These are the contents of PS-3257 that may be particularly incriminating, if the document is real that is. 

On the other hand, the Martin Luther document you present is completely vague about what the "practical final solution of the Jewish question" actually entails. It could mean resettling the Jews in other camps, setting them free, giving them farms, etc - or taking them out of the many ghettos they had been put in in 1941 and shooting them. 

There is much more detailed documentary evidence of the latter (very few, if any, german documents lay out specific 'post-ghetto' resettlement plans in this period). For example from here: 
https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... to_16.html

"On 9 November 1942, the leader of 10th company of SS-Polizeiregiment 15, Helmut Saur, reported that the men were employed for "guarding at the assembly point, securing the individual transports to the execution site, which was about 4 km outside Pinsk". He goes on that "10,000 people were executed. On 30 October, the ghetto was searched through for second time, on 31 October for the third time and on 1 November  for the fourth time. A total of about 15,000 Jews were brought to the assembly point. Sick Jews and some children left in the houses were immediately executed in the ghetto in the courtyard. In the ghetto, about 1,200 Jews were executed." (VEJ 8, document 219)."

Since you have addressed documents I have brought forward, I would be happy to address any others you have that you believe disprove a policy of genocide. Make a new thread for this?

Lastly I should clear up some things about the thread topic, The question of the abundant "evidence" for genocide by bullets

My goal is not to argue in this thread about these documents' legitimacy, rather that one of two things are probably true from a revisionist perspective

a) most of these "incriminating" documents are real and on the whole do not present anything suggestive of genocide

b) most of these documents are fake, and therefore you have to explain why so many exist, when so few were fabricated for mass gassings, something with 0 physical evidence and completely unprecedented in human history. The only explicit document is FG report. Why didn't they fabricate a similar amount of documents to evidence an altogether more unbelievable story? 

...incriminating documents would include jaeger report/stahlecker report/einsatzgruppen OSRs (eg #173) / Himmler on 1 August 1941 / himmler report 51 / lohse documents / "judenfrei" maps / taubner verdict, all of which have been cited as being of dubious provenance by metapedia at least

but there are many others at a similar level of incrimination, eg the letters of Eduard Strauch, who mattogno makes note of in his einsatzgruppen book and his "riposte", but again curiously, does not quote or explain what has interested anti-revisionists http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2008/05/eduard-strauch.html neither have his letters been confronted on this site. 

Needless to say, whether real or fabricated, these documents perhaps pose an insurmountable problem, owing mainly to just their sheer number. This is the point I was driving at it with my topic post, in addition to a (less important) critique of how revisionists consistently ignore many of the most damning einsatzgruppen documents. 

[Lamprecht]

gl0spana:

Here it is: "report prepared by professor peter-heinz seraphim, regarding the solution of the "jewish problem" in ukraine, 02/12/1941"

And why should we accept those numbers? Specifically:

"So far about 150,000 to 200,000 Jews may have been executed in the part of the Ukraine belonging to the Reichskommissariat"

How would Seraphim have been able to get these estimates? In this "report" you cite, he is protesting against mass shootings of Jews, claiming they are economically questionable.

I admitted before that I cannot show you the alleged immense human remains at Belzec.

Yet you claimed that they were found.

The same applies to the alleged mass graves throughout the east.

So we should just trust words written on a paper? People throwing numbers around they heard from someone else?
Because you refuse to trust words that have been typed on a paper when they contradict your "Holocaust" narrative.

You can claim this as a victory if you want, though I laid out my arguments for why it doesn't matter in the previous thread and to be honest I don't have much to add. If that disqualifies me from further participation in this forum, so be it.

It simple means that no tangible/physical/material evidence for these enormous pits full of human remains can be shown to exist, even though such evidence would exist in large quantities if the narrative was true.
Your argument was basically that people believe it anyway, so why do they have to prove it. Well, legally, they cannot publicly question these existence of these alleged huge mass graves. So, morally, they are obligated to actually show them to us.

Mattogno's omission is important because revisionists should be trying to combat the oppositions' strongest arguments

It's not a very strong argument. If this document is one of their strongest arguments, the exterminationist position is absurdly weak.

The significance of this document is clearly not the death figure it provides. Many other Einsatzgruppen documents offer such high figures (eg OSR 88), and are not singled out like this. To quote Browning, the document shows “that those responsible for trying to mobilize the occupied territories for the economic war efforts felt that in fact labour was not a rarity but was being ignored, or for sacrifice to the ideological goal of murdering all the Jews.”

And where exactly was this "Document 3257-PS" found? Can you provide evidence in favor of its legitimacy?

The claim in the document that these shootings were done in public indicates that it was not part of some sort of secret policy. Public executions are more indicative of reprisal measures.

the main point is that the Nazis ideological goal of murdering Jews trumped their pressing military need for skilled workers. It is possible that they feared these skilled jews would engage in partisan type activities, but as "retaliatory measures" these killings make no sense. There were plenty of "useless" Jews that might be targeted instead. These are the contents of PS-3257 that may be particularly incriminating, if the document is real that is.

Able-bodied Jews are not going to be any threat if they are imprisoned in labor camps.

According to the Fritz Reuter memo [17 March 1942] on a conversation he previous had with Hoefle, before being sent to Belzec the Jews were to be separated into those fit and unfit for work: http://archive.fo/g3FbN

Killing both skilled and unskilled Jews makes perfect sense in the context of retaliatory measures. Shooting Jews that can work (those that would be able to engage in terrorist attacks) would prevent additional partisan movements from forming. Shooting the so-called "useless eaters" would serve the same purpose, as the able-bodied Jews would come to the conclusion that the women, children, and elders of their communities would be executed if they engaged in these activities.

On the other hand, the Martin Luther document you present is completely vague about what the "practical final solution of the Jewish question" actually entails. It could mean resettling the Jews in other camps, setting them free, giving them farms, etc - or taking them out of the many ghettos they had been put in in 1941 and shooting them.

Here is text from a much longer memo by Martin Luther dated 21 August 1942 (NMT. vol. 13, 243-249; document NG-2586):

"The principle of the German Jewish policy after the seizure of power consisted in promoting with all means the Jewish emigration...

The present war gives Germany the opportunity and also the duty of solving the Jewish problem in Europe. In consideration of the favorable course of the war against France, D III proposed in July 1940 as a solution - the removal of all Jews from Europe and the demanding of the Island of Madagascar from France as a territory for the reception of the Jews... The Madagascar plan was enthusiastically accepted by the RSHA...

The Madagascar plan in fact had been outdated as the result of the political development.

The fact that the Führer intends to evacuate all Jews from Europe was communicated to me as early as August 1940 by Ambassador Abetz after an interview with the Führer (compare D III 2298).

Hence, the basic instruction of the Reich Foreign Minister, to promote the evacuation of the Jews in closest cooperation with the agencies of the Reichsführer-SS, is still in force and will therefore be observed by D III...

4. In his letter of June 24, 1940 - Pol XII 136 - SS Lieutenant General Heydrich informed the Reich Foreign Minister that the whole problem of the approximately three and a quarter million Jews in the areas under German control can no longer be solved by emigration - a territorial final solution would be necessary...

5. On the basis of the Führer's instruction mentioned under '4' (above), the evacuation of the Jews from Germany was begun...

The number of Jews deported in this way to the East did not suffice to cover the labor needs there. The RSHA therefore, acting on the instruction of the Reichsführer-SS, approached the Foreign Office to ask the Slovak Government to make 20,000 young, strong Slovak Jews from Slovakia available for deportation to the East...

The intended deportations are a further step forward on the way of the total solution and are in respect to other countries (Hungary) very important. The deportation to the Government General is a temporary measure. The Jews will be moved on further to the occupied Eastern Territories as soon as the technical conditions for it are given."

- Translation of Document No. NG-2586 (J), "Memorandum, from Luther, Under Secretary of State, Berlin, August 21, 1942"
https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/library/r ... tary-state

As for:

There is much more detailed documentary evidence of the latter

The documents that were incriminating would be the ones that were used in these show trials.

very few, if any, german documents lay out specific 'post-ghetto' resettlement plans in this period

Because this was postponed until after the war. The ghettos were set up haphazardly. The "Final Solution" was postponed until after the war. Everything they did for it -- pushing Jews east, putting them in camps, confining them into ghettos, etc -- was just a temporary measure until the war was over.

Since you have addressed documents I have brought forward, I would be happy to address any others you have that you believe disprove a policy of genocide. Make a new thread for this?

Why make a new thread?
You have ignored all sorts of documents that totally contradict your silly claims in previous threads, such as:

Why evacuate the Jews east at all?
viewtopic.php?p=97070#p97070

There are all sorts of documents describing the "Final Solution" as a non-genocidal policy. There are documents describing so-called "extermination camps" as something different. There are documents describing alleged homicidal gas chambers as mortuary cellars.
You ignore all of this. And you would be right to do so if the physical evidence was on your side. But it isn't.

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 fact of the matter is that physical evidence could be shown but it is not. This considerably weakens your case.

You can post documents that supposedly support your case (yet, even some in your original link contradicted it) and we can do the same. The testimony does not all go to one side either. That's why the physical/material evidence is so important here.

Your side could go to where they claim the huge mass graves are and show the world. But they do not do this; instead, they demand that we accept weaker forms of evidence instead - and often imprison those that refuse to. This is the behavior of a scam-artist.

My goal is not to argue in this thread about these documents' legitimacy, rather that one of two things are probably true from a revisionist perspective

a) most of these "incriminating" documents are real and on the whole do not present anything suggestive of genocide

I can take a piece of paper and type whatever I want on it. Even if what I type are lies, that doesn't make the document a forgery. The contents are simply wrong. Most of your documents are just reporting on events that they heard about from someone else; probably, the same 1 or 2 documents. It's nothing but hearsay. As I said before, this 'evidence' appears to be nothing more than mere repetitions of evidence of the same kind, and it is necessary to try to examine whether that kind is sufficient for any scientific/historical conclusion. Since the allegations could be validated by showing a more authoritative/reliable form of evidence (the alleged mass graves), I do not find your words typed on paper sufficient enough to make any conclusion, especially given that words typed on other papers suggest that your conclusion is incorrect.

b) most of these documents are fake, and therefore you have to explain why so many exist, when so few were fabricated for mass gassings, something with 0 physical evidence and completely unprecedented in human history. The only explicit document is FG report. Why didn't they fabricate a similar amount of documents to evidence an altogether more unbelievable story?

This has previously been answered in this very thread. There were all sorts of concentration camp survivors who claimed to have been "eyewitnesses" to the homicidal gassings. They also managed to get Hoess and others to "Confess" to it. Additionally, there were photographs of Zyklon-B canisters and so on.

The documents may very well not be "fake" because most are just hearsay, reporting on something that was reported by someone else. If you write a nonsense story about yourself being abducted by extraterrestrials, and then I write a report, after reading your story, describing your abduction by aliens, then my report is not "fake" it's just a bunch of nonsense that never happened.

With the alleged homicidal gassings at the camps, there is no element of truth to it at all. With mass shootings in the east, there actually were such shootings. The easiest way to make a document forgery (which the Soviets did on a massive scale both before- and after-WWII) is to take a totally real document, make an almost exact copy but replace just a few words or numbers around. With mass shootings in the east this would have been very easy to do because people were shot in the east during WWII. There wouldn't have been any such documents like this for gassings at Auschwitz, however.

Needless to say, whether real or fabricated, these documents perhaps pose an insurmountable problem, owing mainly to just their sheer number. This is the point I was driving at it with my topic post, in addition to a (less important) critique of how revisionists consistently ignore many of the most damning einsatzgruppen documents.

They do not pose any such problem. The documents are mostly just people reiterating what they heard from someone else. In the case of this supposed Kiev / Babi Yar shooting (the subject of this thread), the large number of documents saying mostly the same exact thing suggests that it was an extraordinary event, something that was not commonplace. And even then, as I pointed out, the ones that provide reasoning for the claimed shooting contradict your "Holocaust" narrative.

The "Insurmountable problem" is that your entire narrative can be easily proven in a week just by showing the alleged huge mass graves actually exist. Over 7 decades later, this has not been done.

You claim we ignore documents but you are the one ignoring the documents that contradict your narrative. We are not ignoring the documents, we are just demanding a form of evidence that cannot be so easily fabricated. If you were charged in a court of law of murdering someone and burying their body in a specific, known location, and words typed on papers describing your alleged crime were the strongest form of evidence presented, would you not demand that the prosecution actually go to the alleged gravesite and excavate it to show the body?
Maybe you wouldn't, but if you hired a lawyer, they certainly would.

[Hannover]

Well done Lamprecht.

So here we go again.
The claims about this highly questionable, no official government letterhead, no signature, fake 'translations', complete lack of provenance, "document" are nothing less than desperate.

We disingenuously see the English "annihilate" falsely being used for the German word ausmerzung ... whose synonym is ausrottung, which means 'to weed out'.
In 1993, Robert Wolfe, supervisory archivist for captured German records at the National Archives admitted that a more precise translation of ‘ausrottung’ would be extirpation or tearing up by the roots.
see:
"Ausrottung"/"ausrotten" explained:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2249
and: 'ausmerzung':
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2249&p=99845&hilit=ausmerzung#p99845

I challenge gl0spana to tell us what in this highly questionable, no official letterhead, no signature, fake 'translations', complete lack of provenance, "document" proves that Jews were murdered en masse, where that supposedly occurred, and where the necessary human remains are.
Babi Yar certainly wasn't such a place as Revisionists have easily proven,

gl0spana, is this seriously your best shot?.

I remind everyone again that gl0spana's

'holocau$t' Industry now claims that ca. 2,000,000 Jews were shot by the Einsatzgruppen into huge pits, the enormous mass graves & human remains are claimed to exist in specifically known places.
So, is that:
100 graves of 20,000?
200 graves of 10,000?
400 graves of 5,000?
500 graves of 4,000?
1000 graves of 2000?
2000 graves of 1000?

- Hannover

[Otium]

The significance of this document is clearly not the death figure it provides. Many other Einsatzgruppen documents offer such high figures (eg OSR 88), and are not singled out like this. To quote Browning, the document shows “that those responsible for trying to mobilize the occupied territories for the economic war efforts felt that in fact labour was not a rarity but was being ignored, or for sacrifice to the ideological goal of murdering all the Jews.” [...] So they reference the figure killed but the main point is that the Nazis ideological goal of murdering Jews trumped their pressing military need for skilled workers.

My point stands. The document only has value if the figures are accurate, if not it's pointless to even use the document because it's not trustworthy. The fact is the Einsatzgruppen documents have ridiculous figures that aren't reliable whatsoever, rendering the reports more than questionable:

I have moreover expounded a number of points proving the unacceptability of the figures quoted in the Einsatzgruppen reports. For example, in the summary of the activity of Einsatzgruppe A (October 16, 1941, to January 31, 1942) the number of Jews present in Latvia at the arrival of the German troops is 70,000, but the number of Jews shot is reported as being 71,184! Furthermore, another 3,750 Jews were alive in work camps. In Lithuania, there were 153,743 Jews, of which 136,421 were allegedly shot, whereas 34,500 were taken to the ghettos at Kaunas, Wilna, and Schaulen, but the total of those two figures is 170,921 Jews!

Germar Rudolf, Carlo Mattogno, Auschwitz Lies (Castle Hill Publishers, March 2017), Pp. 257.

There is no solid basis on which Seraphim makes his claims against the Einsatzgruppen excessively killing Jews that could be used for labour to aid the economy if the numbers killed do not support that contention - and there is no proof that they do, primarily because we lack physical evidence. The reports themselves do not point to Genocide.

It is purely off the word of Seraphim that these Jews, whoever they were, partisans and all, could be used for Labour. He said it had 'far reaching consequences' but he doesn't say the Einsatzgruppen were so hellbent on killing Jews that they didn't care it had a negative effect (so he claims) on the economy - or that the Einsatzgruppen were even cognisant that their activities were having such an effect. This means it could very well just have been an inadvertent consequence of the killings (and reprisal killings) of partisans that caused a problem for the armament industry. Browning's contention on the meaning of these reports is purely his own conjecture, supplementing the fact that the Einsatzgruppen were never ordered to "murder all Jews" with his own inference, which is that because the number of Jews allegedly killed was so large, this meant the killing of Jews took precedence over the economic necessities, but there is no actual proof of this. This is also why the number is so important.

On the other hand, the Martin Luther document you present is completely vague about what the "practical final solution of the Jewish question" actually entails. It could mean resettling the Jews in other camps, setting them free, giving them farms, etc - or taking them out of the many ghettos they had been put in in 1941 and shooting them.

Of course it's vague, because Martin Luther was suggesting the specifics be worked out at a conference, hence why the document is important and contradicts the Holocaust narrative. There was no practical solution, because it hadn't even been discussed let alone decided yet.

b) most of these documents are fake, and therefore you have to explain why so many exist, when so few were fabricated for mass gassings, something with 0 physical evidence and completely unprecedented in human history. The only explicit document is FG report. Why didn't they fabricate a similar amount of documents to evidence an altogether more unbelievable story?

What documents could be 'invented' to prove mass gassings that would trump the supposed existence of the Gas chambers themselves? No documents could possibly stand up to that kind of physical propaganda. The Soviets already had the alleged buildings, and nobody was able to prove that nobody was gassed in them until Leutcher and Rudolf (and others) came along to definitively prove it was an impossibility. By which time it was already cemented in the minds of the public that mass gassings took place, many erroneously believing the gas was secreted through fake shower heads. . . There was just no need to have fake documents for the alleged Gas Chambers.

Aktion Reinhardt and the Einsatzgruppen is another thing entirely, because of the decisive lack of physical evidence. The only convincing unfalsifiable means of proving any alleged 'Nazi atrocities' would be through documents. Documents do not prove anything without physical evidence, otherwise by the same logic we must take the various claims made by ancient texts (like the Bible or Koran) seriously. Such an argument is obviously fallacious. Similarly, you cannot prove someone committed a murder because they claim to have killed someone on social media, or even worse, you cannot accuse someone of having committed a murder because your friend told you X person killed someone, without a body there can't be a conviction.

[Hannover]

gl0spana said:

Since you have addressed documents I have brought forward, I would be happy to address any others you have that you believe disprove a policy of genocide.

That's pretty rich considering, as Lamprecht has stated, you have already dodged a veritable library of real documents which take down your unsupportable extermination claims.

In fact, from one of your very own threads; 'Challenge to Revisionists: Disprove the typewritten analysis for newly discovered Carbon Copy of Frank-Gricksh report', we have the Schlegelberg Document and the Luther Memo:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13756&p=100611&hilit=luther+hannover#p100611

The mentioned Schlegelberger Document along with the Luther Memorandum clarifies 'The Jewish Question", real & verifiable documents that make short work of the ridiculous 'extermination' claims:

"Mr Reich Minister Lammers informed me that the Führer had repeatedly declared to him that he wants to hear that the Solution of the Jewish Problem has been postponed until after the war is over. That being so, the current discussions are of purely theoretical value, in Mr Reich Minister Lammers' opinion. He will moreover take pains to ensure that, whatever else happens, no fundamental decisions are taken without his knowledge in consequence of a surprise briefing by any third party."

Document's origins: Schlegelberger's undated minute on Lammer's reference to Hitler's ruling is in German Federal Archives (BA) file R.22/52. It was sent to Staatssekretär Freisler and two other officials (bottom left). This document has been published in facsimile in David Irving's books Hitler's War, Goebbels. Mastermind of the Third Reich, and Nuremberg, the Last Battle. It was definitely dated March or April 1942. Lammers was in Berlin on April 26, 1942. See Scheel's report on a talk between Lammers and Meissner after the final session that day (T175/139/7479 et seq.)

In support of the Schlegelberger Document see the Luther Memorandum:
http://www.codoh.com/library/document/154/
Hitler, the 'Final Solution,' and the Luther Memorandum, A Response to Evans and Longerich
excerpt:

"On the occasion of a reception by the Reich Foreign Minister on 26 November 1941 the Bulgarian Foreign Minister Popoff touched on the problem of according like treatment to the Jews of European nationalities and pointed out the difficulties that the Bulgarians had in the application of their Jewish laws to Jews of foreign nationality."

"The Reich Foreign Minister answered that he thought this question brought by Mr. Popoff not uninteresting. Even now he could say one thing to him, that at the end of the war all Jews would have to leave Europe. This was the unalterable decision of the Fuehrer and also the only way to master this problem, as only a global and comprehensive solution could be applied and individual measures would not help very much."