Quantcast
Channel: Holocaust Controversies
Viewing all 610 articles
Browse latest View live

Book chapter "Holocaust denial in the age of web 2.0" by Nicholas Terry Available Online

$
0
0
The multi-author book Holocaust and Genocide Denial: A Contextual Perspective edited by Paul Behrens, Olaf Jensen and Nicholas Terry (2017) is a more recent publication on the development, incidence and encountering of Genocide Denial in general and Holocaust Denial specifically. The chapter Holocaust denial in the age of web 2.0 by Holocaust Controversies' Nick Terry is online available at google books. Its conclusion points out these seven reasons which "can be adduced for the decline of Holocaust denial":
1 Consistent social disapproval
2 Its political ineffectiveness
3 The cease of finding other ways of expressing anti-Semitism or delegitimising Israel
4 Loss 'market share' to other conspiracy theories
5 Inability to cope with the volume of recent Holocaust research
6 Lack of novelty
7 The ageing of the 'movement'
(Behrens et al., Holocaust and Genocide Denial: A Contextual Perspective, p. 53)

Correction Corner #7: false Stuckart quote about the "extermination of Jews".

$
0
0
Sometimes the following alleged quote is ascribed to Wilhelm Stuckart (a Wannsee conference participant):
Die Judenvernichtung findet ihre Rechtfertigung daher nicht nur in der Andersartigkeit, sondern auch in der Anderswertigkeit des Judentums. 
The extermination of the Jews is therefore justified not only by the otherness, but also by the different value of the Jewry.
This allegedly comes from Stuckart's and Schiedermair's book Rassen- und Erbpflege in der Gesetzgebung des Reiches, 3rd edition, 1942.

The citation or a mention of it appears e.g. in Christian Gerlach's The Extermination of the European Jews, 2016, p. 146 (with a reference to U. Herbert, Best: Biographische Studien über Radikalismus, Weltanschauung und Vernunft 1903-1989, 1996, p. 286); in Hans-Christian Jasch's Staatssekretär Wilhelm Stuckart und die Judenpolitik, 2012, p. 364 and in the article "Civil service lawyers and the Holocaust" in A. Steinweis, R. Rachlin (eds.), The Law in Nazi Germany: Ideology, Opportunism, and the Perversion of Justice, 2013, p. 52 (both times with a reference to D. Majer, Grundlagen des nationalsozialistischen Rechtssystems, 1987, pp. 142ff.; in the first source Jasch points out that this sentence is not found in the 2nd and the 4th editions); in Mark Roseman, "Beyond Conviction? ...", in F. Biess, M. Roseman, H. Schissler (eds.), Conflict, Catastrophe and Continuity: Essays on Modern German History, 2007, p. 95 (with a reference to Herbert, 1996);  et cetera.

However Horst Dreier points out (among other places, in Die deutsche Staatsrechtslehre in der Zeit des Nationalsozialismus, 2001, p. 40n150 and in Staatsrecht in Demokratie und Diktatur, 2016, p. 217n150) that the word "Judenvernichtung" (extermination of Jews) does not appear in the 3rd edition (or in the whole 3rd Reich literature on the constitutional law that he had read). Rather, the following does appear there:
Die Judenvorschriften finden ihre Rechtfertigung daher nicht nur in der Andersartigkeit, sondern auch in der Anderswertigkeit des Judentums. 
The Jewish regulations are therefore justified not only by the otherness, but also by the different value of the Jewry.
The third edition of Stuckart's and Schiedermair's book is available online, so we can see that Dreier is correct:

Herbert corrected the quote in the 2016 edition of his book (p. 306).

Sonderkommando Kulmhof in German Documents - Farewell (1943)

$
0
0
Mass Killing Unit of Warthegau

Sonderkommando Lange in German Documents:

Sonderkommando Kulmhof in German Documents:
Part V: Funding

Until 31 December 1942, the Sonderkommando Kulmhof had systematically murdered about 4,400 Sinti and Roma and 145,301 Jews  (Document 234). The Jews of the Warthegau had been wiped out except for the "labour ghetto" in Litzmannstadt and Jews loaned to outside work-sites. Since life as a Sonderkommando member was comparable pleasant and beneficial - with bonus payments, free tabacco and alcohol, no front duty, absence of military discipline, access to cheap goods from the rich warehouses of the Litzmannstadt Ghetto Administration - and facing the prospect of front-line service, the Kulmhof commandant Hans Bothmann seemed to have stretched the dismantling and closing of the camp over the whole Winter 1942/43. [1]

As the days of the camp were finally numbered on 5 March 1943, the Reichsgauleiter Arthur Greiser personally thanked the men for their work in the name of the Führer (see ref. 2), announced a four weeks extra holidays, which they could spent as guests on his estates including a "substantial aid which is intended to make their holidays more beautiful" (Document 233). Furthermore, he invited the whole commando to a comrades' evening in the restaurant "Riga" in Warthbrücken. The party of 92 persons included Sonderkommando men, the Gauleiter and staff, the Higher SS and Police Leader Wilhelm Koppe, the Litzmannstadt Stapo head Otto Bradfisch, [2]  quite possibly also the Inspecteur of the Security Police and Service Ernst Damzog or staff member and Sonderkommando 1005 staff.

The bill for the dinner and about 90 liters of beer was forwarded by the commando's finance officer Wilhelm Görlich to the Inspector of the Security Police and Service, who passed it on to the Gauleiter's office "with the request for payment from the funds determined for the Jews' action", i.e. at the end the Litzmannstadt Ghetto Administration had to pay for Greiser's farewell party from special account 12300. (Documents 232 & 238).

The dissolution of the Sonderkommando was envisaged for 31 March 1943. According to a letter of Greiser to the Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler, the Sonderkommando men made a "donation of 15,150 RM in cash...in favour of the children of murdered Volksdeutsche", which "means that each of these 85 men of the Sonderkommando has raised about 180 RM" (corresponding to 2-3 weeks of bonus payments) and have "expressed their wish to continue to be deployed as a unit as far as possible under their Hauptsturmführer Bothmann". (Document 233). The "wish" was granted by Himmler as they were to be assigned as field police unit to the 7. SS-Freiwilligen-Division "Prinz Eugen" employed in the warfare in Yugoslavia (Document 235-236).

The Kulmhof palace was blown up in early April 1943 by the remaining Sonderkommando men and Blobel's staff (see here) and since 11 April 1943 the local gendarmarie was responsible for the site (Document 240). The finances of the Sonderkommando were settled by 13 May 1943 (Document 239). Presumaby around late April 1943, the former Sonderkommando members had to summon at the RSHA in Berlin to receive their marching orders to join the 7. SS-Freiwilligen-Division "Prinz Eugen". The head of the security police and SD Ernst Kaltenbrunner expressed again thanks "in the name of the Führer" for their work in Kulmhof [3] and, according to Himmler's order, was to "urge them to rule off the time of their Sonderkommando and not to speak of it even suggestively" (Document 237).

Footnotes

 [1] interrogation of Walter Burm. of 24 March 1961, BArch B 162/3248, p. 88: 'Today one can honestly say that Bothmann quite prelonged the dismantling of the commando at the end. We had no interest either to quickly come away, quite possibly to the front.'

[2] interrogation of Erich Rom. of 29 June 1960, BArch B 162/3245, p. 50-51: 'In March or April the extermination camp Kulmhof was dissolved. For this reason the Gauleiter Greiser organized a farewell party in a hotel in Eichstädt. Greiser joined the party with about 5-6 SS officers...Greiser hold a speech during the party...After the name Koppe is told me, I explain that a higher SS leader with oak leaves on his collar tab also joined the party. As it was said during the party, this was supposed to be the Higher SS and Police Leader Koppe.';

interrogation of Theodor Malz. of 27 June 1960, BArch B 162/3245, p. 59-60: 'Shortly before the dissolution of the extermination camp in April, at the end of March 1943 the Gauleiter Greiser appeared with his staff (about 15 higher SS leaders) in Kulmhof. All members of the SS Sonderkommando and guard commando had to line up and Greiser gave a speech. He explained that the end of the extermination camp Kulmhof is near and he expressed his thanks in the name of the Führer for the work done in Kulmhof. Furthermore, he explained that everybody receives four weeks of special holidays, which he offered to spent on his estates for free...The farewell party took place in a hotel in Warthbrücken, in a big hall of this hotel. After just a short time, everybody was drunken and slept at the tables. The party ended at 1 or 2 o'clock in the night. I remember that SS-Untersturmführer Plate had a dispute with a member of Greiser's staff and both pulled their pistols. The dispute was settled by others present. I don't know what it was about. It should be mentioned that Greiser and Bothman gave speeches during the party. I don't remember what they said. I still remember that the head of the Gestapo Litzmannstadt Dr. Bradfisch was present at the party...';

[3] interrogation of Theodor Malz. of 27 June 1960, BArch B 162/3245, p.60: 'Then we all had to summon at the RSHA in Berlin on a certain day at SS-Obergruppenführer Kaltenbrunner. He thanked us in a speech again in the name of the Führer for the work done in Kulmhof.'



Contemporary German Documents


232.) Bill of the restaurant "Riga" in Warthbrücken to Sonderkommando Kulmhof of 8 March 1943:

DOCUMENT
TRANSCRIPTION
Gaststätte "Riga"      Warthbrücken, den 8.3.1943.
Gustav Richter
....

RM. 237.89 bez. am 18.6.1943 mit Verrechnungscheck Nr. 394090

Rechnung

an das Sonderkommando der SS - Kulmhof vom Kameradschaftsabend am 5.3.43. - in der Gaststätte "Riga" - Warthbrücken

92 Mann Abendessen, Localmiete, wegen Ausfall RM.192.75.-

10 Fl. Sodawasser  2.20.-

83 1 Liter u. 25 0,3 Liter Bier   42.94.-
                                RM .237.89.-

Zweihundertsiebenunddreissig & 89 Pfg.

Festgestellt:
[Unterschrift]
Polizeisekretär
1.4.43


Warthbrücken 8.3.43.-


Geheim!

An die Reichsstatthalterbehörde,
hier,

mit der Bitte um Bezahlung aus den für die Judenaktion bestimmen Fonds.

Posen, den 20.4.43

[Unterschrift]
TRANSLATION
Restaurant "Riga"       Warthbrücken, 8 March 1943.
Gustav Richter
....
RM. 237.89 paid on 18.6.1943 with clearing account no. 394090

Bill

to the Sonderkommando of the SS Kulmhof for the comrades' evening on 5 March 1943 in the restaurant "Riga" Warthbrücken

92 man dinner, local rent, due to shortfall RM 192.75

10 bottles soda water 2.20.-

83 1 liter and 25 0.3 liter beer 42.94.-
                                 RM 237.89.-

Two hundred and thirty seven & 89 penny

checked:
[Signature]
Polizeisekretär
1 April 1943

Warthbrücken 8 March 43.-


Secret!

To the authority of the Reichsstatthalter,
 
with the request for payment from funds determined for the Jews' action.

Posen, 20 April 1943

[Signature]
(APL/221/29676, p.23, cf. YVA/O.53/83/299)


233.) Letter of Arthur Greiser to Heinrich Himmler of 19 March 1943:

TRANSCRIPTION
An Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler, Berlin SW 11.
                                 Prinz-Albrecht-Straße 8.

Reichsführer!

Ich habe vor einigen Tagen das frühere Kommando Lange, das heute unter dem Befehl des SS-Hauptsturmführers Kriminalkommissar Bothmann steht und als Sonderkommando in Kulmhof, Kreis Warthbrücken, seine Tätigkeit mit Ende d.Mts. einstellt, besucht und dabei eine Haltung der Männer des Sonderkommandos vorgefunden, die ich nicht verfehlen möchte, Ihnen, Reichsführer-SS, zur gefl. Kenntnis zu bringen. Die Männer haben nicht nur treu und brav und in jeder Beziehung konsquent die ihnen übertragene schwere Pflicht erfüllt, sondern darüber hinaus auch noch haltungsmäßig bestes Soldatentum repräsentiert.

So haben sie mir z.B. auf einem Kameradschaftsabend, zu dem ich sie eingeladen hatte, eine Spende von 15.150,- RM in bar übergeben, die sie am gleichen Tage spontan veranlaßt haben. Es bedeutet, daß jeder dieser 85 Männer des Sonderkommandos rund 180 RM aufgebracht hat. Ich habe das Geld dem Fonds zu Gunsten der Kinder ermordeter Volksdeutscher überwiesen, falls Sie, Reichsführer, nicht einen anderen oder besseren Verwendungszweck wünschen.

Die Männer haben mir weiterhin ihren Wunsch zum Ausdruck gebracht, unter ihrem Hauptsturmführer Bothmann möglichst geschlossen weiterhin eingesetzt zu werden. Ich habe den Männern versprochen, Ihnen, Reichsführer, diesen Wunsch zu übermitteln.

Ich bitte Sie, mir auch noch zu genehmigen, daß ich die Männer bei dem ihnen zustehenden Urlaub zum Teil als meine Gäste auf meine Landesgüter einladen und ihnen außerdem eine namenhafte Beihilfe gewähre, die ihnen den Urlaub verschönern soll.

Heil Hitler!

[Unterschrift]
TRANSLATION
To Reichsführer SS Heinrich Himmler, Berlin SW 11.
                                 
Prince-Albrecht-Strasse 8.

Reichsführer!


A few days ago, I have visited the former Kommando Lange, which today is under the command of the SS-Hauptsturmführer Kriminalkommissar Bothmann and will cease its activities as Sonderkommando Kulmhof, Kreis Warthbrücken at the end of the month.
I experienced an attitude of the men of the Sonderkommando, which I do not want to miss to bring to your, Reichsführer-SS, knowledge. The men were not only loyal and well-behaved and in every respect consistent in fullfilling the heavy duty they have been assigned to, but also represented in their attitude the best soldierdom.

For example, on a comrade 's eveningto which I had invited them, they have given me a donation of 15,150 RM in cash, which they spontaneously collected on the same day. This means that each of these 85 men of the Sonderkommando has raised about 180 RM. I have paid the money to the fund in favour of the children of murdered Volksdeutsche, if you, the Reichsführer, do not wish for a different or better use. The men have also expressed their wish to continue to be deployed as a unit as far as possible under their Hauptsturmführer Bothmann.

I have promised the men to convey to you, Reichsführer, this wish.
I also ask you to allow me to invite the men on their vacation as my guests to my estates, and also to grant them a substantial aid which is intended to make their holidays more beautiful.

Heil Hitler!

[Signature]
(BArch B 162/601, unpaginated)


234.) Extract from the statistical report of Richard Korherr of 23 March 1943 (with corrections of April 1943):

DOCUMENT


TRANSCRIPTION
-9-

V. DIE EVAKUIERUNG DER JUDEN

Die Evakuierung der Juden löste, wenigstens im Reichsgebiet,
die Auswanderung der Juden ab. Sie wurde seit dem Verbot der
jüdischen Auswanderung ab Herbst 1941 in großem Stile vor-
bereitet und im Jahre 1942 im gesamten Reichsgebiet weit-
gehend durchgeführt. In der Bilanz des Judentums erscheint
sie als "Abwanderung".
Bis 1.1.1943 wanderten nach den Zusammenstellungen des
Reichssicherheitshauptamtes ab:

aus dem Altreich mit Sudetenland 100 516 Juden
aus der Ostmark 47 555 "
aus dem Protektorat 69 677 "
Zusammen 217 748 Juden

In diesen Zahlen sind auch die ins Altresghetto Theresien-
stadt evakuierten Juden enthalten.

Die gesamten Evakuierungen ergaben im Reichsgebiet einschl.
Ostgebieten und darüber hinaus im deutschen Macht- und Ein-
flußbereich in Europa von Oktober 1939 oder später bis zum
31.12.1942 folgende Zahlen:

1. Evakuierung von Juden aus Baden
und der Pfalz nach Frankreich....... 6 504 Juden
2. Evakuierung von Juden aus dem Reichs-
gebiet einschl.Protektorat und
Bezirk Bialystok nach Osten......... 170 642 "
3. Evakuierung von Juden aus dem Reichs-
gebiet und dem Protektorat
nach Theresienstadt................. 87 193
4. Transportierung von Juden aus den
Ostprovinzen nach dem russischen
Osten: ............................1 449 692 "
Es wurden durchgeschleust
durch die Lager im General-
gouvernement..................... 1 274 166 Juden
durch die Lager im Warthegau..... 145 301 Juden
5. Evakuierung aus anderen
Ländern, nämlich:
Frankreich (soweit vor dem
10.11.1942 besetzt)............... 41 911 Juden
Niederlande........................ 38 571 "
Belgien............................ 16 886 "
Norwegen........................... 532 "

-10-

Slowakei................. 56 691 Juden
Kroatien................. 4 927 "
------------------------------

Evakuierungen insgesamt(einschl.
Theresienstadt und einschl.
Sonderbehandlung)............ 1 873 549 Juden
ohne Theresienstadt.......... 1 786 356 "

6. Dazu kommt noch nach den Angaben
des Reichssicherheitshauptamtes
die Evakuierung von.......... 633 300 Juden
in den russischen Gebieten
einschl.der früheren baltischen
Länder seit Beginn des Ost-
feldzuges.

In den obigen Zahlen sind nicht enthalten die Insassen
der Ghettos und der Konzentrationslager.
Die Evakuierungen aus der Slowakei und aus Kroatien
wurden von diesen Staaten selbst in Angriff genommen.


TRANSLATION

V. THE EVACUATION OF THE JEWS

The evacuation of the Jews replaced the emigration of the Jews, at least on the territory of the Reich. It was extensively prepared since the prohibition of Jewish emigration in the autumn of 1941 and to a large extent carried out throughout the Reich territory in the year 1942. In the balance of Jewry it is referred to as "off-going".
Until 1.1.1943, according to the records of the Reichssicherheitshauptamt, the following numbers went off:

From the Old Reich with Sudetenland 100 516 Jews
From the Ostmark 47 555 "
From the Protectorate 69 677 "
Sum 217 748 Jews

In these numbers the Jews evacuated to the old-age ghetto Theresienstadt are also included.

All evacuations on the territory of the Reich and including the eastern territories and further in the German area of power and influence in Europe from October 1939 or later until 31.12.1942 resulted in the following numbers:

1. Evacuation of Jews from Baden
and the Palatinate to France ....... 6 504 Jews
2. Evacuation of Jews from the Reich territory incl. the Protectorate and
Bialystok district to the East...... 170 642 "
3. Evacuation of Jews from the Reich area and the Protectorate
to Theresienstadt................. 87 193
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
5. Evacuation from other countries, namely:
France (insofar as occupied
before 10.11.1942 )............... 41 911 Jews
Netherlands........................ 38 571 "
Belgium............................ 16 886 "
Norway ........................... 532 "
Slovakia................. 56 691 Jews
Croatia ................ 4 927 "
------------------------------

Evacuations total (incl. Theresienstadt and incl.
special treatment)........... 1 873 549 Jews
w./o Theresienstadt.......... 1 786 356 "

6. In addition, according to data from the Reichssicherheitshauptamt there is the evacuation of... 633 300 Jews
in the Russian territories incl. the former Baltic countries since the beginning of the
Eastern Campaign.
The above numbers do not include the inmates of ghettos and concentration camps.
The evacuations from Slovakia and Croatia were carried out by these states themselves.
(Images and transcription from ns-archiv; Roberto Mühlenkamp's translation posted here)


235.) Letter of Heinrich Himmler to Arthur Greiser of 27 March 1943:

TRANSCRIPTION
Feldkommandostelle, 27. März 1943

Tgb.Nr.39/96/43


Lieber Parteigenosse Greiser !

Ich danke Ihnen für ihre Zeilen vom 19.3.1943 und ganz besonders dafür, daß Sie die Männer des Sonderkommandos besucht und daß Sie sich ihrer so netter Weise angenommen haben. Über die Anerkennung, die Sie den Männern ausgesprochen haben, freue ich mich sehr.

Ich will gern den Wunsch erfüllen und die Männer bei einer neuen Verwendung geschlossen und ihrem Kommandeur, SS-Hauptsturmführer Bothmann einsetzen.

Mit der Zuweisung der ausgezeichneten Spende in Höhe von RM 15.150.- für die Kinder ermordeter Volksdeutscher bin ich gern einverstanden.

Mit nochmals bestem Dank für ihre freundliche Unterstützung grüße ich Sie sehr herzlich

Heil Hitler!

Ihr
TRANSLATION
Field command post, 27 March 1943

Journal no. 39/96/43


Dear party member Greiser!

I thank you for your writing of 19 March 1943, and especially for visiting the men of the Sonderkommando, and for taking care of them so kindly.I am very happy about the acknowledgement you have given to the men.

I would like to fulfill the wish and will deploy them to a new use under their commander SS-Hauptsturmführer Bothmann.

With the allocation of the excellent donation of RM 15,150.- for the children of murdered Volksdeutsche I gladly agree.

Thank you very much for your kind support and I cordially greet you

Heil Hitler!

yours
(BArch B 162/601, unpaginated)


236.) Letter from Rudolf Brandt to Hans Jüttner of 29 March 1943:

TRANSCRIPTION
Der Reichsführer-SS                   Feldkommandanturstelle, 29.3.1943
Persönlicher Stab

Tg.Nr. 39/110/43g.
Bra/V.

An
SS-Gruppenführer Jüttner
Berlin

Lieber Gruppenführer !

Ein Kommando von 85 Männern unter dem Befehl des Hauptsturmführers Bothmann beendet im Laufe dieses Monats seinen Einsatz. Im Anschluß daran gehen die Männer in Urlaub; entweder 3 oder 4 Wochen. Die genaue Zeit können Sie sicher von SS-Gruppenführer Dr. Kaltenbrunnner erfahren, der bereits darüber unterrichtet ist, daß die Männer dieses Kommandos unter dem Befehl des SS-Hauptsturmführers Bothmann geschlossen weiter eingesetzt werden sollen, und zwar bei der SS-Freiwilligen-Division "Prinz Eugen".

Der Reichsführer-SS wird sicherlich in den nächsten Tagen mit SS-Gruppenführer Phleps besprechen, dass für diese 85 Männer eine entsprechende Anzahl von Männern der Division wahrscheinlich an die Bosniaken-Division abgegeben werden sollen.

Heil Hitler !

[Unterschrift]
SS-Obersturmbannführer
TRANSLATION
Reichsführer SS                           Field Command Post, 29 March 1943
Personal staff

Journal no. 39/110 / 43g.
Bra/V.

To
SS-Gruppenführer Jüttner 
Berlin

Dear Gruppenführer!

A Kommando of 85 men under the command of the Hauptsturmführer Bothmann ends its service in the course of the month. After this the men go on holiday; either for 3 or 4 weeks. You can surely obtain the exact time from SS-Gruppenführer Dr. Kaltenbrunnner, who has already been informed that the men of this command are to be used as a unit under the command of SS-Hauptsturmführer, Bothmann, in the SS Volunteer Division "Prinz Eugen".

The Reichsführer SS will no doubt discuss with SS-Gruppenführer Phleps in the next few days that for these 85 men a corresponding number of men are to be given to the division, likely to the Bosniak Division.

Heil Hitler !

[Signature]
SS-Obersturmbannführer
(BArch B 162/601, unpaginated)


237.) Letter of Rudolf Brandt to Ernst Kaltenbrunner of 29 March 1943:

TRANSCRIPTION
Der Reichsführer-SS                       Feld-Kommandostelle, 29.3.1943
Persönlicher Stab
Tgb.Nr. 39/110/43g.
Bra/V.                                      Geheim

An SS-Gruppenführer Dr. Kaltenbrunner
Berlin

Lieber Gruppenführer !

Anliegend übersende ich Ihnen Abschrift eines Briefes, den Gauleiter und Reichstatthalter Greiser am 19.3.1943 an den Reichsführer-SS geschrieben hat.

Die Verwendung der 85 Männer unter SS-Hauptsturmführer Bothmann nach ihrem Urlaub wünscht der Reichsführer-SS geschlossen bei der SS-Freiwilligen-Division "Prinz Eugen".

Der Reichsführer bittet Sie, die Männer vor ihrem Einsatz noch einmal zusammenzunehmen und sie eindringlich zu verpflichten, unter die Zeit ihres Sonderkommandos einen Strich zu setzen und auch nicht andeutungsweise davon zu reden.

Der Chef des SS-Führungshauptamtes, SS-Gruppenführer Jüttner, hat von mir lediglich die Mitteilung erhalten, daß im Laufe des April 85 Männer mit ihrem Kommandeur geschlossen der SS-Freiwilligen-Division "Prinz Eugen" zugeführt werden können.

Heil Hitler !

Ihr

gez. Brandt
SS-Obersturmbannführer
TRANSLATION
The Reichsführer SS                          Field Command Post, 29 March 1943
Personal staff

Journal no.
39/110 / 43g.
Bra/V.
                                   
Secret

To
SS-Gruppenführer Dr. Kaltenbrunner

Berlin


Dear Gruppenführer!


I would like to send you a copy of a letter written by the Gauleiter and
Reichstatthalter Greiser to the Reichsführer-SS on 19 March 1943.

The Reichsführer-SS wishes the
use of the 85 men under SS-Hauptsturmführer Bothmann as a unit after their holiday in the SS volunteer division "Prinz Eugen".

The Reichsführer will ask you to gather the men before their engagement and urge them to rule off the time of their Sonderkommando and not to speak of it even suggestively.


The head of the SS Leadership Office, SS-Gruppenführer Jüttner, has merely received from me the notification that in the course of April 85 men with their commander can be assigned as a unit to the SS volunteer division "Prinz Eugen".


Heil Hitler!


yours

signed Brandt

SS-Obersturmbannführer
(BArch B 162/601, unpaginated)


238.) Letter of Hans Bothmann to the Inspekteur der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD Posen of 1 April 1943:

DOCUMENT
TRANSCRIPTION
SS-Sonderkommando                 Kulmhof, den 1. April 1943

Einschreiben

An den
Inspekteur der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD
z.Hd.v. SS-O'stuf, Baumann
in Posen.

Betrifft: Kameradschaftsabend anläßlich des Gauleiterbesuches.
Bezug: Mündl. Anordnung des Gauleiters
Anlagen: 1

In der Anlage überreiche ich eine Rechnung über einen Kameradschaftsabend, zu welchem das SS-Sonderkommando durch den Gauleiter Greiser eingeladen wurde. Der Gauleiter hat gebeten, ihm die Rechnung zur Begleichung vorzulegen.
Ich bitte deshalb, diesen dem Gauinspekteur Geißler zuzuleiten.

[Unterschrift]
SS-Hauptsturmführer u. Kriminalkommissar

Gö.
TRANSLATION
SS Sonderkommando Kulmhof, 1 April 1943

Registered letter

To the Inspector of the Security Police and SD

To attention of SS-O'stuf, Baumann in Posen.

Subject: Comrade's evening on the occasion of the Gauleiter's visit.
Reference: Oral order of the Gauleiter
Attachments: 1

In the enclosure, I hand over the bill of an comrade's evening, to which the SS Sonderkommando was invited by the Gauleiter Greiser. The Gauleiter has asked to submit the bill to him. I therefore ask this to be communicated to the Gauinspekteur Geissler.

[Signature]
SS-Hauptsturmführer and Kriminalkommissar

Gö.
(APL/221/29676, p.26, cf. YVA/O.53/83/298)


239.) Letter of the Secret State Police to the Litzmannstadt Ghetto Administration of 19 May 1943:
DOCUMENT
TRANSCRIPTION
Geheime Staatspolizei                                             Litzmannstadt, den 19. Mai 1943
Staatspolizeileitstelle Litzmannstadt
B.-Nr. - L I -

An den
Herrn Oberbürgermeister
- Gettoverwaltung -

Litzmannstadt
weitergereicht.

Wie aus dem Vermerk des KOS. Plate hervorgeht, ist der Betrag von dem SS-Sonderkommando Kulmhof zu bezahlen. Das SS-Sonderkommando Kulmhof hat am 13.5.1943 mit der Gettoverwaltung bereits abgerechnet. Ich bitte daher, die Rechnung von dort aus zu begleichen.

Im Auftrage:
[Unterschrift]
TRANSLATION
Secret State Police                                             Litzmannstadt, 19 May 1943
State Police Office Litzmannstadt
B.-Nr. - L I -

To the
Mr. Major
- Ghetto Administration-
Litzmannstadt
passed on.

As follows from the note of KOS Plate the amount is to be paid by the SS-Sonderkommando Kulmhof. The SS Sonderkommando Kulmhof has settled its account with the Ghetto Administration already on 13 May 1943. Therefore I request you to pay the bill.

by order:
[signature]
(APL/221/29676, p.277)


240.) Letter of Sonderkommando Kulmhof to the Litzmannstadt State Police of 24 May 1943:

DOCUMENT
TRANSCRIPTION
Abschrift

SS-Sonderkommando                       Posen, den 24.5.1943.

An
Stapo Litzmannstadt
z.Hd.v.Pol.Ob.Insp. Lenk
in Litzmannstadt

Anliegend übersende ich zwei Rechnungen mit der Bitte um weitere Veranlassung. Gleichzeitig übersende ich verschiedene Fernsprechrechnungen. Ich mache jedoch darauf aufmerksam, dass diese nicht mehr vom SK. zu bezahlen sind. Ab 11.4.1943 muss die Gendarmerie die Rechnungen zahlen.

gez.: Unterschrift

SS-U'Stuf

F.d.R.dA.
Kanzleiangestellte.

TRANSLATION
Copy

SS-Sonderkommando                       Posen, 24 May 1943.

To
State Police Litzmannstadt
to the attention of Pol.Ob.Insp. Lenk
in Litzmannstadt

Enclosed I sent you two bills with the request for further action. At the same time I sent you various telephone bills. However, I call to your attention that these are not to be paid by the SK. Since 11 April 1943, the gendarmarie has to pay the bills.

signed: signature
SS-U'Stuf

For the correctness of the copy
office employee
(APL/221/29676 p.220)

Georg Leibbrandt and the Killing of Jews in the USSR: A Case Study of Mattogno's Methods

$
0
0
Georg Leibbrandt was one of two members of the Reich Ministry for the Occupied Eastern Territories (RMfdbO) who attended the Wannsee conference. Mattogno has discussed him on numerous occasions, most recently in the Italian edition of volume 1 of his forthcoming Einsatzgruppen Handbook where Mattogno cites him seven times, six of which are duplicated from his response of 2013 to our White Paper. The one new reference in the Italian edition is the false claim, as shown below, that Leibbrandt regarded Soviet Jews as only a political and partisan enemy rather than a race that had to be eliminated on biological grounds. The six recycled references entail a misrepresentation of Leibbrandt's correspondence with Hinrich Lohse of the Reichskommissariat Ostland in the Autumn of 1941 as supporting resettlement of Jews eastwards. An analysis of Leibbrandt's involvement in anti-Jewish policy can therefore form a useful case study of how Mattogno manipulates sources on German perpetrators.

A telling feature of Mattogno's writing is his lack of interest in how the racial ideology of senior Nazis influenced their actions, despite this being a major theme of current historiography.[1] Leibbrandt had written in 1937 that the Russian Revolution of 1917 had been founded on the fact that Jewry was "the bearer of the Asiatic-Nomadic desert mentality", which had mingled with the "Mongolian-Asiatic instincts" that were already in Russian blood.[2] This deep racism made Leibbrandt a willing participant in the escalation during 1941 of German plans to kill Jews. Mattogno's avoidance of this background enables him to make the spurious claim that Leibbrandt's view of Jews was compatible with Churchill's, in which there was a split between "international Jews", who were conspiratorial and bent on world domination, and national Jews, who were loyal to their countries.[3] In reality, Leibbrandt made no such distinction.

Leibbrandt had recommended as early as May 29, 1941 that "it is probably advisable to leave to the population itself to settle its accounts with the Jewish-Bolshevik oppressors initially, and then after gaining more detailed knowledge to deal with the remaining oppressors."[4] His recommendations escalated to a clear genocidal motive by September 13, 1941, when he responded to Stalin's deportation of the Volga Germans by stating that "Jewry in the areas located in the German field of power. . . will be repaid manyfold for the crime."[5] Leibbrandt had a strong emotional connection to the Volga Germans because his academic career had been largely devoted to studying them. Moreover, his boss Rosenberg expressed similar sentiments in his diary the day before, leading to his infamous comments of November 18 that there should be "a biological eradication of the entire Jewry of Europe" by measures that would "expel them over the Urals or eradicate them in some other way."[6] Mattogno cites Rosenberg's comments in his Italian Einsatzgruppen book but fails to explain why Rosenberg would use the term "biological eradication" for an expulsion rather than than death.[7]

In October, Leibbrandt acquired knowledge of gassing plans for Riga because he was the direct superior of Wetzel, who wrote a draft on October 25 concerning Brack's readiness to supply gassing technology for Riga. There is written proof that Leibbrandt oversaw Wetzel's correspondence with Brack and Lohse because Wetzel submitted a memo to Leibbrandt on November 12, 1941, which mentioned letters Wetzel had written to Brack, Lohse and Koch the day before (NO-2094). Wetzel also testified on September 20, 1961, that Leibbrandt had dictated the October draft (BArch B 162/20424, pp.216ff). Moreover, Wetzel's draft enables us to infer that he, Lohse and Leibbrandt were aware of the Vilnius executions of July 1941, and also a genocidal policy of separating Jews by sex to prevent reproduction, which has implications for the fate of non-working Jews.

Mattogno's silence on Leibbrandt's connection to gassing plans is twinned with his misrepresentation of Leibbrandt's message to Lohse of November 9, 1941, that Reich Jews would be sent "farther east" than Riga.[8] Mattogno ties it to a proposal to send Jews to Pleskau[9], but this overlooks the fact that Pleskau was itself a killing site (examined, for example, in this postwar legal investigation, and the site of the discovery of human remains of women and children) and it ignores the fact that sending work Jews to Pleskau would still have been perfectly compatible with Wetzel's draft, which stated that:
Re: Solution of the Jewish Question  
1. To the Reich Commissar for the East  
Re: Your report of October 4, 1941 in respect to the Solution of the Jewish Question.
Referring to my letter of 18 October 1941, you are informed that Oberdienstleiter Brack of the Chancellery of the Fuehrer has declared himself ready to collaborate in the manufacture of the necessary shelters, as well as the gassing apparatus. At the present time the apparatus in question are not on hand in the Reich in sufficient number; they will first have to be manufactured. Since in Brack's opinion the manufacture of the apparatus in the Reich will cause more difficulty than if manufactured on the spot, Brack deems it most expedient to send his people direct to Riga, especially his chemist Dr. Kallmeyer, who will have everything further done there. Oberdienstleiter Brack points out that the process in question is not without danger, so that special protective measures are necessary. Under these circumstances I beg you to turn to Oberdienstleiter Brack, in the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, through your Higher SS and Police Leader and to request the dispatch of the chemist Dr. Kallmeyer as well as of further aides. I draw attention to the fact that Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, the referent for Jewish questions in the RSHA, is in agreement with this process. On information from Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, camps for Jews are to be set up in Riga and Minsk to which Jews from the old Reich territory may possibly be sent. At the present time, Jews being deported from the old Reich are to be sent to Litzmannstadt [Lodz], but also to other camps, to be later used as labor (Arbeitseinsatz) the East so far as they are able to work.  
As affairs now stand, there are no objections against doing away with those Jews who are unable to work with the Brack remedy. In this way occurrences would no longer be possible such as those which, according to a report presently before me, took place at the shooting of Jews in Vilna [Vilnyus] and which, considering that the shootings were public, were hardly excusable. Those able to work, on the other hand, will be transported to the East for labor service. It is self-understood that among the Jews capable of work, men and women are to be kept separate. 
I beg you to advise me regarding your further steps.[10]
Leibbrandt's "farther east" was simply a euphemism for this process of selection. Lohse's understanding of this fact is shown by two orders he issued banning executions in specific circumstances whilst agreeing with an overall policy of killing Jews eventually. On November 15, he stated that"I have forbidden the unauthorized ("wild") executions of Jews in Libau because the manner in which they were carried out was irresponsible." He then asked Leibbrandt whether "your inquiry of October 31 should be interpreted as a directive to liquidate all the Jews in Ostland? Is this to be done regardless of age, sex, and economic requirements (for instance, the Wehrmacht's demand for skilled workers in the armament industry)?"[11] Mattogno perversely interprets this as proof that Lohse was unaware of plans to kill any categories of Jews, when infact the wording and context clearly show that he was referring to whether the current plan to kill unfit Jews had also been expanded to include all ages, sexes and levels of fitness for work. A handwitten note on the same document acknowledges that a general shared principle of extermination was already understood to exist ("the cleansing of Ostland of Jews is a most important task") but also assumed that "its solution, however, must be in accord with the requirements of war production." The next sentence, "So far I have not been able to find such a directive either in the regulations concerning the Jewish question in the "Brown Portfolio" (Braune Mappe) or in any other decree", shows that the writer had been unable to find a directive to kill all Jews regardless of age, sex or fitness, but this is compatible with an understanding that selections would be carried out in accordance with Wetzel's draft, whereas Mattogno misinterprets as stating that policy had not changed since the Braune Mappe.[12]

On December 2, following complaints from the Wehrmacht, Lohse ordered that:
The Chief Quartermaster (Chefintendant) of the Wehrmacht Command in Ostland has lodged a complaint that armament plants and repair workshops have been deprived of Jewish skilled workers through their liquidation, and that they cannot be replaced there at the present time.
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.  
Agreement on which of the Jewish workers are to be considered irreplaceable will be reached with the Gebietskommissare (Department of Social Administration).
Provision is to be made as quickly as possible for the training of suitable local personnel as skilled workers.  
The same applies to Jewish workers in enterprises which do not serve the purpose of the Wehrmacht directly, but have important tasks to carry out within the framework of the war economy.[13]
Lohse's order was just a temporary ban until replacements for skilled Jewish workers could be found. He did not disagree with the principle of liquidating these Jews after that period. His understanding of policy towards unfit Jews must therefore have been to accept their extermination. However, even this was not sufficient for Leibbrandt's colleague Braeutigam, who notified Lohse on December 18 that "In principle, economic considerations are not to be taken into account in the settlement of the problem."[14] Mattogno even here contends that Braeutigam was referring to the process of deporting Jews farther east rather than killing them:
This does not necessarily refer to an extermination, but rather to an exclusion of the Jews from the economic life of the state.[15]
Several conclusions about Mattogno's working methods can be deduced from the above. He fails to treat Leibbrandt's correspondence with Lohse as part of a whole chain of documents, despite its accessibility in that form (such as online at both the Nuremberg site and in YVA O.53/132). He ignores the totality of the evidence in the secondary literature he uses, such as Angrick and Klein, whilst the academic literature on Leibbrandt's career (cited above) is never utilized. Mattogno ignores chronological sequences and the need to treat documents relating to a particular locality as a connected totality whose connections have to be explained. His structuring of the evidence is deliberately perverse, as though intended to mislead by mixing up timelines and ripping documents from their contexts.

Most notably of all, Mattogno frequently makes the least rational inference about the meaning of a phrase in its context, such as Leiibbrandt's "farther east" or Braeutigam's "economic considerations are not to be taken into account in the settlement of the problem," whilst clearly exterminatory phrases such as "a biological eradication of the entire Jewry of Europe" (eine biologischen Ausmerzung des gesamten Judentums in Europe) are parsed in an outrageously perverse manner that insults the intelligence of those whom he wishes to persuade.             

[1] See, for example, Michael Wildt, An Uncompromising Generation: The Nazi Leadership of the Reich Security Main Office (George L. Mosse Series) (Madison, 2009).
[2] Cited in Samuel Zinner, 'New Archival Discoveries on Wannsee Conference Participant Georg Leibbrandt and “SS-Mann” Karl Stumpp (Draft)', paper presented at the German Studies Association Conference, New Orleans, 20.9.2003, p.12, n.4, accessed on 19.3.2018 at http://www.leibbrandt.com/leibbrandt_archive/dr_georg_leibbrandt/Dr_G_leibbrandt2012-libre.pdf.
[3] Carlo Mattogno, Gli Einsatzgruppen nei territori orientali occupati (Genoa, 2016), p.105.
[4] Cited in Christoph Dieckmann, 'Lithuania in Summer 1941: The German Invasion and the Kaunas Pogrom', in Elazar Barkan, Elizabeth A. Cole and Kai Struve (eds), Shared History – Divided Memory: Jews and Others in Soviet-Occupied Poland, 1939–1941 (Leipzig, 2007), p.366.
[5] Cited in Eric J. Schmaltz and Samuel D. Sinner, 'The Nazi Ethnographic Research of Georg Leibbrandt and Karl Stumpp in Ukraine, and Its North American Legacy', Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 14 (1), March 2000, pp.28–64, here p.42.
[6] Cited by Christopher R. Browning, 'Evidence for the Implementation of the Final Solution', expert witness document, David Irving v Penguin Books and Deborah Lipstadt (2000), accessed on 19.3.2018 at https://www.hdot.org/browning/#note_browning_5110_n85.
[7] Carlo Mattogno, Jürgen Graf, Thomas Kues, The “Extermination Camps” of “Aktion Reinhardt”—An Analysis and Refutation of Factitious “Evidence,” Deceptions and Flawed Argumentation of the “Holocaust Controversies” Bloggers, Holocaust Handbooks, 2013 [hereafter MGK, Extermination Camps], p.282. Mattogno, Gli Einsatzgruppen, p.123.
[8] Mattogno Extermination Camps, p.336, citing GARF, 7445-2-145, p.45. Document is online: Leibbrandt an Lohse 9.11.41, YVA O.53/132, p.53.
[9] MGK, Extermination Camps, p.336; Mattogno, Gli Einsatzgruppen, p.72.
[10] Wetzel an Lohse, 25.10.41 (draft), NO-365. Photostat here. English version here. Translation accessed on 20.3.2018 at: https://www.historiography-project.com/nmt/nmt01/NO-365/index.php.
[11] Leibbrandt an Lohse, betr: Judenexekutionen, 31.10.41, IMT XXXII, pp.435-436; Lohse an Leibbrandt, betr: Judenexekutionen, 15.11.41, 3663-PS, IMT XXXII, p.436. Translation accessed 20.3.2018 at http://www.yadvashem.org/docs/letters-concerning-final-solution.html.
[12] MGK, Extermination Camps, p.228; Mattogno, Gli Einsatzgruppen, p.124.
[13] Lohse an Jeckeln, 2.12.41, 3664-PS. Scan in YVA O.18/203, translation accessed 19.3.2018 at http://www.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft%20Word%20-%205106.pdf.
[14] Braeutigam an Lohse, 18.12.41, betr: Judenfrage, 3666-PS, IMT XXXII, p.437. English translation accessed 19.3.2018 at http://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/documents/4388-letter-to-the-reich?q=PS-3666#p.1.
[15] MGK, Extermination Camps, p.228; Mattogno, Gli Einsatzgruppen, p.124.

Killing of Jews and Krymchaks in Karasubazar, Crimea

$
0
0
A report by Ortskommandantur II/937 on February 14, 1942, included a survey showing that, of 8,789 people counted in Karasubazar (today Bilohirsk), only one was a Jew and one a Krymchak (NOKW-1688, BArch B 162/657, p.76). Other documents show how the killing of the rest had occurred in stages.

On December 14, 1941, Ortskommandantur Karasubasar Stab Wachbatl. (B) 49 had reported that 76 Jewish men, women (referred to as "Weiber") and children had been taken to a field four days previously and not seen again (BArch B 162/657, p.163); a Soviet Commission report from 1944 shown here collected testimonies about the shooting of the adult Jews and poisoning of the children; killings at this location were also noted in the West German indictment against Johannes Schlupper, 1971. A Soviet testimony from 1973 is shown here. On January 2, 1942, EM 150 recorded Karasubazar as one of the locations in western Crimea that was "free of Jews" due to 17,645 having been liquidated in the region between November 16 and December 15, 1941.

The Krymchaks (numbering 468) were killed in two gas vans on January 17-18, 1942, according to the testimonies given here and here.

How the Fate of the Krymchaks Refutes Mattogno

$
0
0
Mattogno claims repeatedly that Soviet Jews were shot for security reasons rather than on racial grounds. In Treblinka, for example, he and Graf paraphrased Mayer's formulation to claim that "the massacres of the eastern Jews was not part of a comprehensive plan of extermination, but occurred as the result of the inexorable radicalization of the war in the east and because the eastern Jews were classified by the SS as carriers of Bolshevism." However, Kiril Feferman's work has shown how German killing policies for Krymchaks directly reflected changes in racial policy. To demonstrate this, I will discuss two documents in my possession. Feferman originally cited these documents from different archives than those from which my copies are sourced, so the references below are mine, not his.

On November 16, 1941, Ortskommandur I/287 (Feodosia) stated that Krymchaks were excluded from registration measures because they were "racially flawless" ("rassisch einwandfreie")[BArch B 162/657, p.134; cf. Feferman, p.283]. On May 15, 1942, the population report included in Meldung aus den besetzten Ostgebieten, no. 3 (p.19) stated that unlike other Jews, Krymchaks were "passive towards Bolshevism" [T175/R235/2724401; cf, Feferman, p.284].

These two sources show that Krymchaks were not viewed by all local commands as a security problem nor as pro-Bolshevik. This difference in perspective was based on how race was defined and understood differently in relation to Krymchaks depending on the point of view of the particular Nazi. Opinion on the ground was therefore not fully in agreement with Himmler's decision of December 1941 to treat Krymchaks as identical to other Jews. Despite this fact, German forces and other auxiliaries implemented his wishes by killing 2,504 Krymchaks by December 15 (EM 150). A further 468 were killed in two gas vans in Karasubazar on January 17-18, 1942, according to the testimonies given here and here.

They were killed purely because they were Jews, and for no other reason, as shown by the fact that the local command in Feodosia was content to keep them alive beforehand, and they survived in Karasubazar a month longer than the other Jews, whose fate was decided earlier. Once again, this shows that Jews generally were exterminated mainly because they were Jews.

Evidence of Extermination in Pyatigorsk, North Caucacus

$
0
0
Back in 2011, Roberto included this image of a child called Svetlana in his excellent article The Atrocities committed by German-Fascists in the USSR (1). By comparing the image with this Yad Vashem page, I was able to establish that her full name was Svetlana Rudinskaya, she was killed on December 31, 1942 (or the following day), at the Mashuk Mountain overlooking Pyatigorsk in Stavropol Krai of the North Caucacus, and her body was exhumed on January 13, 1943.

The killing of the Jews of Pyatigorsk began on September 6-8, 1941, at the glass factory of Mineralnye Vody, according to the testimony of Pfeifer at his Soviet trial in 1968 (The Complete Black Book of Soviet Jewry). This was followed in October by murders in gas vans, according to testimonies here. The final action of the New Year was just prior to the German retreat and seems to have targeted professionals, including ethnic Russians.

Did Wisliceny claim that the Mufti visited Auschwitz and was one of the initiators of the Final Solution?

$
0
0
The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Mohammed Amin al-Husseini was without a doubt a vicious Nazi collaborator. On 28.11.1941 he met with Hitler who personally promised the following to him:
Germany’s goal would then be solely the extermination of the Jewry living in the Arab sphere under the protection of British power. In that hour the Mufti would be the most competent spokesman for the Arab world. It would then be his task to set off the Arab operation secretly prepared by him.
Das deutsche Ziel würde dann lediglich die Vernichtung des im arabischen Raum unter der Protektion der britischen Macht lebenden Judentums sein. In dieser Stunde würde dann auch der Mufti der berufenste Sprecher der arabischen Welt sein. Es würde ihm obliegen, die von ihm insgeheim vorbereitete arabische Aktion auszulösen.
In 1943 he was trying to block the transfer of 4000 Jewish children from Bulgaria to Palestine, suggesting to Ribbentrop they should be sent to Poland instead. In 1944 he was calling onto Arabs to "kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history and religion. This serves your honor, God is with you".

According to his own memoir (published in Damascus) he was privy to the information about the extermination of Jews. He tells about a meeting with Himmler in the summer of 1943 during which he was told by the latter:
up to now we have exterminated around three million of them.
In the memoir the Mufti feigns surprise at this revelation. He admits though:
Their losses in the course of the Second World War represented more than thirty percent of the total number of their people...
So at least he was not a Holocaust denier. Now, all this aside, let's look at some widespread claims about the Mufti.

Joseph B. Schechtman, The Mufti and the Fuehrer: the rise and fall of Haj Amin el-Husseini, 1965, pp. 159-160:
There also is direct evidence as to the Mufti’s influence in the implementation of the physical destruction of Eu­ropean Jewry.
In June 1944, Dieter Wisliceny told Dr. Rudolf Kastner, representative of the Budapest rescue council, that he was convinced that the Mufti had "played a role in the deci­sion to exterminate the European Jews.""The importance of this role," he insisted, “must not be disregarded… . The Mufti had repeatedly suggested to the various authorities with whom he was maintaining contact, above all to Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, the extermination of European Jewry. He considered this as a comfortable solution of the Palestine problem."
Wisliceny was even more explicit in his conversation with Engineer Endre Steiner of Bratislava:
"The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and advisor of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan, …He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say that, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz.”
Benjamin Netanyahu on 21.10.2015:
[Netanyahu] quoted parts of the testimony given by Adolf Eichmann's deputy Dieter Wisliceny at the Nuremberg trials. Wisliceny said that "the mufti played an important role in the Final Solution and was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jews."
The extremist anti-Muslim hatemonger Pamela Geller on the same date:
Here at Atlas I have been calling attention to this for years. SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dieter Wisliceny, a close collaborator of Adolf Eichmann, testified that “the grand mufti, who had been in Berlin since 1941, played a role in the decision of the German government to exterminate the European Jews the importance of which must not be disregarded. He had repeatedly suggested to the various authorities with whom he had been in contact, above all before Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, the extermination of European jury. He considers this as a comfortable solution of the Palestine problem. In his messages broadcast from Berlin, he surpassed us in anti-Jewish attacks. He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and has constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard say that, accompanied by Eichmann, he has visited incognito the gas chamber it Auschwitz.” The statement referred to in the affidavit was made by Eichmann in his office in Budapest on June 4, 1944; the confirmation by Wisliceny was given some days later also in Budapest.
Further, according to testimony at the Nuremberg trials, “[T]he mufti was a bitter arch enemy of the Jews and had always been the protagonist of the idea of their annihilation. This idea the mufti had always advanced in his conversations with Eichmann.”
The historian Wolfgang G. Schwanitz on 04.11.2015:
Eichmann’s aide Dieter Wisliceny testified at the Nuremberg trials, “The mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry ... He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chambers of Auschwitz.”
None of the words attributed to Wisliceny here actually come directly from him (and also not from any of his Nuremberg testimonies).

The statement "The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and advisor of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan" comes, as Schechtman correctly states, from an affidavit by the architect Endre Steiner (made in Bratislava on 12.02.1946; see the Eichmann trial exhibit T/1117).

Thus, contrary to Netanyahu, Geller and Schwanitz, it does not come from a Wisliceny testimony.

It is important to note that the affidavit was read by Wisliceny, who, while in Nuremberg, wrote on the bottom of the document on 05.03.1946:
I have read these statements, they’re correct contentwise with the exception of Eichmann being born in Palestine and the Mufti being Himmler’s “constant collaborator”. I never used this formulation.
Hence, despite bungling the sourcing, the above persons could argue that they are not entirely wrong in attributing the statement to Wisliceny. What value is to be attributed to this remark is another issue. One could argue that Wisliceny confirmed the point cited above by not contesting it, while refuting the key point about his alleged claim of the Mufti being Himmler's "constant collaborator", though of course even then the possibility would remain that he simply forgot or did not bother to correct it. So it's not entirely the same as Wisliceny directly making the claim, but a case could be made for using this citation (as long as the words are not attributed directly to Wisliceny).

As a side note, Geller's quote about "a bitter arch enemy of the Jews" also comes from the Steiner affidavit.

The second part of the quote Schechtman provides - "He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say that, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz" - does not come from the Steiner affidavit. It comes from an affidavit (apparently made in January of 1946) by Rudolf Kastner (published e.g. in the documentary appendix to D. Dalin, J. F. Rothmann, Icon of Evil: Hitler's Mufti and the Rise of Radical Islam, 2009):
Some days later, SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dieter Wisliceny, a close collaborator of Eichmann, confidentially confirmed to me the above statement of his chief, and added:
"According to my opinion, the Grand Mufti, who has been in Berlin since 1941, played a role in the decision of the German Government to exterminate the European Jews, the importance of which must not be disregarded. He had repeatedly suggested to the various authorities with whom he has been in contact, above all before Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, the extermination of European Jewry. He considered this as a comfortable solution of the Palestine problem. In his messages broadcast from Berlin, he surpassed us in anti-Jewish attacks. He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and has constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard say that, accompanied by Eichmann, he has visited incognito the gas chambers of Auschwitz."
Therefore it is, again, hearsay, so attributing it directly to Wisliceny is simply wrong.

Schechtman glued the Kastner hearsay quote onto the Steiner hearsay quote, thus falsely attributing it to Steiner. Schwanitz glued the Kastner and the Steiner hearsay quotes together and falsely attributed them directly to Wisliceny, something he allegedly testified about during the Nuremberg trials. Geller attributed the whole quote to something that Wisliceny "testified" about, implying that it happened during the Nuremberg trial, and again ascribing it directly to him. While, as already mentioned, the second part of the Netanyahu quote comes from the Steiner affidavit, the first part ("the mufti played an important role in the Final Solution") is clearly based on the Kastner affidavit.

So did Wisliceny claim that the Mufti visited Auschwitz and was one of the initiators of the Final Solution?

First of all, if he did,  we certainly do not have his direct words.

If one chose to believe Steiner and Kastner, he did make such remarks during the war. But the usual grain of salt rule about hearsay applies, also if Wisliceny generally confirmed one of the affidavits.

As to the value of the claims: no historian seems to mention any post-war statement by Wisliceny about the Mufti's alleged visit to Auschwitz. Indeed, on 26.07.1946 Wisliceny composed a handwritten report on Mufti's alleged activities in regard to the "Jewish question" and not once mentioned any such visit. Hence, even if one were to accept that he made such a claim to Kastner during the war, the claim is still obviously extremely doubtful. However, Michael Sells points out:
Kastner never explained or defended the allegations in K-W, and he ignored them completely within the dozens of other reports, affidavits, and testimonies he authored on his dealings with Eichmann, Wisliceny, and other Nazi officials - including a comprehensive 300-page report he drafted on behalf of the Budapest rescue group and presented to the World Jewish Congress in 1946.
The claims in the Steiner affidavit should be seen in the immediate historical context of that time, provided by Sells in his article "Fabricating Palestinian responsibility for the Nazi genocide", especially in the light of who obtained Wisliceny's "confirmation" on Steiner's affidavit and for what purposes. In addition to that, had Mufti been such an important figure in the Final Solution, it would certainly be surprising that in Wisliceny's detailed testimony on the development of the Nazi anti-Jewish policy the Mufti is only mentioned as someone who allegedly intervened with Himmler against some transport of Jewish kids to Palestine in late 1942.

But even that aside, in general, Wisliceny is not that much trusted by the historians. Thus, Bettina Stangneth characterized his Mufti claims as "colorful ... stories" and himself as a man "who would have sold anyone down the river in order to escape the hangman's noose".

All this extra-evidence taken together, it is very doubtful that Wisliceny actually did utter such claims at the time, as described in the affidavits.

Rubin and Schwanitz can't tell Ukraine from East Prussia.

$
0
0
While researching the topic of the Mufti's collaboration with the Nazis I stumbled upon a really embarrassing series of mistakes in Barry Rubin's and Wolfgang G. Schwanitz's Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East (Yale University Press, 2014).

The authors zealously struggle to pin as many crimes on the Mufti (surely an execrable Nazi collaborator) as they can get away with, specifically they try to show the plausibility of him having visited some extermination camps including Auschwitz (even though there is no credible evidence of such a visit). And so they write on p. 164:
The Hungarian Jewish leader Rudolf Kastner testified that Wisliceny told him in 1944 - when he would have had no motive to make such a story up - about al-Husaini’s visit to the Auschwitz gas chambers. The story seems credible, especially after the discovery of pages in Himmler’s office calendar that prove beyond reasonable doubt that the two men met in the Ukrainian town of Zhitomir, near Auschwitz (see Figure 22). And al-Husaini was traveling back and forth through Poland in June and July 1943.
And on pp. 184-5:
It was at the site of such an extermination campaign, in the village of Zhitomir, just east of Kiev, where Himmler and al-Husaini met on July 4, 1943. The previous year Jews in the area had been wiped out by the Germans. Now the village had been renamed Hochwald and was the site of Himmler’s field headquarters. He traveled there on his own private train named “Heinrich,” after himself, managed by an SS officer, Josef Tiefenbacher.
The story of this meeting between Himmler and al-Husaini can only be told now, using materials from Russian archives. Al-Husaini mentions it vaguely in his memoirs. Along the way, al-Husaini visited some places in Poland and the USSR that the Germans had captured. There is an interesting mystery here. Simon Wiesenthal, who conducted the most thorough contemporary research on al-Husaini’s wartime activities, thought the grand mufti had visited Auschwitz or other German death camps in May. It is also possible, however, that al-Husaini did so, accompanied by Eichmann and his aide Alois Brunner, on his way to Zhitomir. Also conveniently located for a possible visit along the route were the Treblinka and Majdanek concentration camps.
OK, the first glaring problem is that Wiesenthal never sourced his claims about the Mufti's alleged visits to Auschwitz and Majdanek (or his claim that he "let himself be introduced to the camp guards and complimented the most able SS men"). So he would be useless as a source already on this basis. But he was also known as a serial exaggerator (see the excellent biography by Tom Segev, Simon Wiesenthal: The Life and Legends) who did not hesitate to make up facts when it suited him:
Yehuda Bauer, an Israeli Holocaust scholar who chairs the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, said he warned his friend Wiesenthal, who died in 2005, about spreading the false notion that the Holocaust claimed 11 million victims – 6 million Jews and 5 million non-Jews.
“I said to him, ‘Simon, you are telling a lie,’” Bauer recalled in an interview Tuesday. “He said, ‘Sometimes you need to do that to get the results for things you think are essential.’”
One would expect any conscientious researcher to mention this. Instead these authors, not content with Wiesenthal's claims about Auschwitz and Majdanek, also throw Treblinka into the mix (p. 189: "the Oybin and Zhitomir meeting schedules make Simon Wiesenthal’s findings on al-Husaini’s visits en route to the death camps of Auschwitz, Maidanek, and Treblinka all the more plausible").

That aside, let's list further problems with these paragraphs.

1. Zhitomir is not (and was not) a village but a city. And has been a city since the Kievan Rus.

2. Zhitomir is about 700 km from Auschwitz as the bird flies and more by road. Not anywhere "near" Auschwitz.

3. Himmler and the Mufti did, indeed, meet at Hochwald. But Hochwald, contrary to what the authors state, was Himmler's field residence in East Prussia near Pozezdrze. The village was called Großgarten from 1938 to 1945, and indeed in the schedule that the authors helpfully publish on p. 186 we see arrival in Großgarten.

Pozezrdze is 650+ km away from Zhitomir and 480+ km from Auschwitz.

So much for the authors' geographic argument.

Now, the source of the mistake seems to be clear - the schedule mentions a trip to Hegewaldheim, and Himmler's residence in Zhitomir was called Hegewald. But "Hegewald" was also the initial name of his Großgarten residence (from a nearby forest) and the name was transferred to the Zhitomir residence on 15.07.1942, whereas the Großgarten residence was renamed into Hochwald (P. Witte et al., Der Dienstkalender Heinrich Himmlers 1941/42, 1999, p. 36). Hegewaldheim (named after the same forest) on the other hand was a nearby resort with a lakeside restaurant (which still seems to exist in the village Żabinka) where Himmler liked to spend time with his guests. The authors wrongly claim that "Himmler's home" was at Hegewaldheim (p. 189).

Some of this may be somewhat confusing, but that's not an excuse since the authors themselves correctly called the residence that the Mufti visited "Hochwald" - and that was solely the name of the East Prussian residence, something which they should have known.

A very clear example of superficial, subpar scholarship.

What Did Reginald Paget Deny and Accept?

$
0
0
Manstein's defence attorney Reginald Paget has been used by deniers, such as Mattogno and Graf here, to support their claim that there was no extermination policy in the Crimea. Below I will show that Paget's opening speech to the Manstein trial regarding extermination policy was far less convenient to modern deniers than they assume. On the one hand, Manstein supported denial to the extent of claiming that killing numbers in Operational Situation Reports were massively exaggerated and that the SD did not have the manpower or time to carry out that volume of killing. He also denied that the Wehrmacht shot Jews because they were Jews rather than because of partisan warfare. On the other hand, however, Paget accepted that the SD had received "an assignment to exterminate the Jews" and that "resettlement" was a camouflage term for execution.

The crucial passage of Paget's speech was made on Day 24 of the Manstein trial. It can be found online at TR.4/24 at p.1586 of the transcript (page 26 of the file):


It can be seen from this that Paget accepted that the SD had been given an "assignment to exterminate the Jews" but claimed that, for logistical and psychological reasons, it was not fulfilled. Conversely, the top of the same page shows Paget conceding the execution of Jews at the Bachtschisseraj civilian prisoner camp in July 1942 (recorded in this document) but denying that they were drowned. He also conceded that "resettlement" was a "camouflage" term for executions. It can also been seen on the previous page (p.25 of TR.4/24) that Paget accepted the execution of 2,500 Jews at Kersch. This had been recorded in a document where, as the court proved by forensic analysis, execution had been crossed out and replaced by "resettled." Paget therefore also conceded, by accepting that document, that resettlement was used as camouflage language.

Paget's claims about the survival of large numbers of Jews in Simferopol and the logistical impossibility of killing such large numbers with the available personnel have already been refuted in excellent pieces by Roberto here and Hans here. My next article will refute his claim that Manstein was not culpable of Nazi crimes against Jews.

Wehrmacht Involvement in Extermination Actions in the Crimea

$
0
0
The Wehrmacht's role in the extermination of Jews in Crimea can be summarized in three forms of evidence. Firstly, Manstein gave an order on November 20, 1941, that was clearly incendiary, filled with biological racism and indicating a willingness to condone mass killing on racial grounds. Secondly, the fourteen command HQ[1]subordinated to Korueck 553 (11th Army Rear Army Command) issued killing reports that showed a willingness not just to hand over Jews to the SD but also to kill them using their own military police. Thirdly, documents and testimonies describe the involvement of the command HQ and their soldiers in providing transport and manpower to the Einsatzkommandos.

Manstein's order is so crucial that it is necessary to quote a long extract before noting its key phrases:
Jewry constitutes the middle man between the enemy in the rear and the still fighting remainder of the Red Armed Forces and the Red leadership. More strongly than in Europe, it holds all the key positions in the political leadership and administration, controls trades and guilds and further forms the nucleus for all unrest and possible uprisings.
The Jewish-Bolshevist system must be exterminated once and for all. Never again must it encroach upon our European living space.
The German soldier has therefore not only the task of crushing the military potential of this system. He comes also as the bearer of a racial concept and as the avenger of all the cruelties which have been perpetrated on him and on the German people.
The fight behind the lines is not yet being taken seriously enough. Active cooperation of all soldiers must be demanded in the disarming of the population, the control and arrest of all roving soldiers and civilians and the removal of Bolshevist symbols.

Every instance of sabotage must be punished immediately with the severest measures and all signs thereof must be reported.

The food situation at home makes it essential that the troops should as far as possible be fed o the land and that furthermore the largest possible stocks be placed at the disposal of the homeland. Particularly in enemy cities a large part of the population will have to go hungry. Nevertheless nothing which the homeland has sacrificed itself to contribute may, out of a misguided sense of humanity, be given to Prisoners or to the population-so long as they are not in the service of the German Wehrmacht.

The soldier must appreciate the necessity for harsh punishment of Jewry, the spiritual bearer of the Bolshevist terror. This is also necessary in order to nip in the bud all uprisings which are mostly attributable to Jews.[2]
The term "bearer of a racial concept" could not be clearer that this was a war of extermination on racial grounds. The clause "in enemy cities a large part of the population will have to go hungry" shows awareness of the Hungerplan that was intended to starve 30 million people across the USSR. The phrase "the necessity for harsh punishment of Jewry" can only make sense if the punishment was to be collective death, and this was to be inflicted on "Jewry" not merely "Judeo-Bolsheviks" or partisans. 


Collaboration between the military and SD commenced immediately in the Crimea, a trend continued from the 11th Army's campaign farther west. On November 11, 1941, Korueck 553 Quartiermeister Friedrich Benecke informed FK 810 Pallmann that the Feldgendarmerie (FG, Military Police) were to shoot persons themselves after screening by the Geheime Feldpolizei (GFP, the Secret Field Police) and only hand over Jews to the SD in doubtful cases.[3] Three days later, OK I/853 was able to report that 11,000 Jews "are being executed by the SD" in Simferopol, although the bulk of these killings had not yet taken place.[4]Most of these Jews died between December 9-13, 1941, as per the account given by Angrick which was posted to the HC blog in 2006 by Roberto Muehlenkamp.[5]According to Operational Situation Report 150, most of Crimea's large urban districts were "free of Jews" by the beginning of 1942:

Simferopol, Yevpatoria, Alushta, Krasubasar, Kerch, and Feodosia and other districts of western Crimea are free of Jews. From November 16 to December 15, 1941, 17,645 Jews, 2,504 Krimchaks, 824 Gypsies, and 212 Communists and partisans have been shot. Altogether, 75,881 persons have been executed.

Rumors about executions in other areas complicated the action in Simferopol. Reports about actions against Jews gradually filter down from fleeing Jews, Russians, and also from the loose talk of German soldiers.[6]
The crucial role of the military in the Simferopol extermination was explained in the Manstein trial by the commander of SK 11b, Braune. The 11th Army had demanded that the area be cleared of Jews by Christmas 1941, but Braune had not been able to redeploy in Crimea all the transport and men he had recently used in Odessa. The 11th Army had provided the necessary trucks and personnel to rectify this shortage. Braune also stated that "resettled" was a euphemism for execution.[7]The Manstein prosecution then gave a detailed account of a report for November 26-27 showing the participation of Feldgendarmerie under the command of Major Erxleben.[8]

The reliance of Einsatzgruppe D on the military to cordon off the shooting areas and sometimes supply logistical assistance at other sites is shown in several sources. Operational Situation Report 193 gives a very detailed account of four raids in Feodosia, each of which was assisted by at least 350 soldiers.[9] Two earlier reports stated that 2320 soldiers, 55 Military Police and 20 Secret Field Police had been made available to the SD for an action against "unreliable elements", including "Jews".[10] Feldgendarmen assisted on 18.1.42 at Pervomaiskoye[11], an action that involved a gas van,[12] and on 25.1.42 at Sarabus-Spath.[13] Feldgendarmerie also carried out shootings, on the initiative of their HQ, in rural areas in regional hunts, such as the killing of three men and two women in the Fraydorf agricultural area.[14]

In Kertsch, the military actively requested killings. On November 27, OK I (V)/287 noted that the 11th army had requested that "the liquidation of the Jews will have to be expedited due to the jeopardized food position."[15]In the same person's subsequent report of 7.12.41, in which 2,500 Jews had been killed between December 1-3, the word 'execution' was crossed out and 'resettled' inserted.[16]A similar substitution was also made to reports by the OK in Bakhchisary[17]and Yewpatoria.[18]

On days 9-14 of the Manstein trial, numerous Nuremberg documents were submitted as exhibits that established the extent of the killing of Jews, Gypsies and "insane" persons carried out in Crimea between December 1941 and July 1942. On 14.12.41, Ortskommandantur Karasubasar Stab Wachbatl. (B) 49 reported that 76 Jewish men, women (referred to as "Weiber") and children had been taken to a field four days previously and not seen again.[19] A population count in that same location, reported on 14.2.42, found only one Jew and one Krymchak remaining in the town from a population of 8,789.[20]On 1.1.42, OK II/939 reported 443 Jews killed in Dshankoj.[21]On 15.2.42, FK 810 reported the killing in Ikor of a woman, a three-year-old child and a new-born child.[22]On 18.2.42, Operational Situation Report 170 noted that "From 9th January to 15th February, more than 300 Jews were apprehended in Simferopol and executed. By this, the number of people executed in Simferopol increased to almost 10,000 Jews, about 300 more than the number of Jews registered."[23]

Killings continued through March. Operational Situation Report 184 detailed the killing of 2,100 persons, of which 678 were Jews and 810 'asocials,' primary mentally ill and Gypsies.[24]On 13.3.42, FK 810 reported that the command HQ had handed over to the SD 98 Jews from Schaumian and 6 Jews from Kurulu-Keneges.[25] On 16.4.42, Ohlendorf's deputy Seibert informed army intelligence that:

(1). The Crimea is freed of Jews. Only occasionally some small groups turn up, especially in the northern areas. In cases where single Jews have been able to camouflage themselves by means of forged papers, etc., they will, nevertheless, be recognized sooner or later, as experience has taught. The population, which in the majority has welcomed the measures taken against the Jews, is assisting in this task by making denunciations. This is only natural considering the fact that the Crimea has been a special domain of Jewry. About the development and the influence of Jewry in the Crimea a detailed report is attached."[26]

On 30.6.42 Ortskommandantur I/287 Kertsch stated that the city was free of Jews.[27] Sixteen days later, the OK Bakhchisarai informed Korück 553 that 1029 Jews from camp Tole had been "drowned [versenkt]" at Bakhchisarai.[28]On 10.6.42, the mother of Hans Heinrich Eggebrecht, a member of FGA 683, wrote to her other son: 

But thank God he has not been ordered to participate in the ‘cleansing action’ in Kerch (nicht mit in Kertsch zur ‘Säuberungsaktion’eingesetzt). It was already terrible enough in Simferopol.[29] 

The placing of ‘Säuberungsaktion’ in quotes suggests she knew of its sinister meaning.

In conclusion therefore, the support given by the Wehrmacht to the extermination actions in Crimea, both in terms of instigating and participating in executions and in providing personnel for such matters as round-ups and the cording-off of killing sites, is displayed extensively and irrefutably in German documents.             



[1] Eleven Ortskommandanturen (OK) and three Feldkommandanturen (FK); cf. Kiril Feferman, The Holocaust in the Crimea and the North Caucasus (Jerusalem, 2016), p.114. 
[2]4064-PS, YVA P.13/136, pp.52-55, here p.53; IMT XXXIV, pp.129-132, here p.130; translation in the the trial of German Army Field Marshal Erich von Manstein, British Military Court, Hamburg [hereafter Manstein], 27.8.49, YVA TR.4/5, pp.3-5, here p.4; cf. Feferman, pp.112-114.
[3] Nuremberg document L-007, English translation in Manstein, 8.9.49, TR.4/13, p.66.
[4] Ortskommandatur I/853 (Hpt. Kleiner) to Korueck 553, 14.11.41, NOKW-1573, BArch B 162/657, pp.131-133, here p.132. Translation in NMT, X, pp.1258-1259 and in Manstein, 8.9.49, TR.4/13, p.46.
[5]http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/10/thats-why-it-is-denial-not-revisionism.html.
[6]EM 150, 2.1.42, NOKW-1727, p.20, BArch B 162/442, p.221.
[7]Manstein, 7.9.49, TR.4/12, pp.64-69. On the role of Feldgendarmerie in Simferopol, see Feferman, pp.133-139, especially p.136.
[8] MAR-1324, Manstein, 8.9.49, TR.4/13, pp.47-48.
[9]EM 193, 17.4.42, NO-3281, pp.12-18, T2724271-T2724277; English translation in Manstein, 8.9.49, TR.4/13, pp.40-44.
[10] AOK 11 War Diary (signed Major Helmut Oppermann), 31.1.42, NOKW-1741 and Braune report, 12.1.42, NOKW-1863, both cited in Manstein, 8.9.49, TR.4/13, pp.38-39.
[11] 3./Feldgend., Abt., (mot) 683, 2.2.42, NOKW-1283, BArch B/162/1182, p.17, scan of YVA M.29.FR/118 online at Untold Stories.
[12]Testimony of Stepan Beznos, 27.5.44, scan of GARF 7021-9-194, p.89, online at Untold Stories.[13] 3./Feldgend., Abt., (mot) 683, 2.2.42, NOKW-1283, 2.2.42; English translation in Manstein, 8.9.49, TR.4/13, pp.68-70.
[14] 3./Feldgend., Abt., (mot) 683, 11.2.42, NOKW-1656, BArch B 162/276, p.137, translation in Feferman, p.118.
[15] NOKW-1651, 27.11.41, BArch B 162/657, p.141, translation in Manstein, 5.9.49, TR.4/10, pp.58-59, and 8.9.49, TR.4/13, p.50.
[16] NOKW-1628, 7.12.41, BArch B 162/657, p.153, translation in Manstein, 7.10.49, TR.4/24, p.25; forensic analysis of this document by Rudolf Mally, who established that "Exekutierung" had been crossed out and "Umsiedlung" substituted. See TR.4/14, pp.17-20, and VEJ 7, Dok. 126, pp.389-391, especially note 5.
[17] Ortskommandantur Bachtschissaray, 14.12.41, BArch B 162/657, p.166; another copy, YVA M.29.FR/41 online at Untold Stories; testimony of Paul Zapp, Munich, 8.1.68 at same link.
[18] OK I (V)/277 to Korueck 553, NOKW 1727, 21.12.41, BArch B 162/657, p.166; English translation at NMT, XI, p.311 and MansteinTR.4/14, p.20. 
[19]BArch B 162/657, p.163.
[20] OK II/937 to Korueck 553, 14.2.42, NOKW-1688, BArch B 162/657, p.76; partial English translation in Manstein, 8.9.49, TR.4/13, p.71.
[21] Scan of YVA M.29.FR/40 online at Untold Stories, English translation in Manstein transcript, 6.9.49, p.723, TR.4/11, p.13.
[22] NOKW-2256, 15.2.42, BArch B 162/657, p.81; translation in Manstein, 9.9.42, TR.4/14, pp.29-30.
[23]EM 170, NO-3339, p.19, BArch B 162/444, p.384; English translation in Manstein, 8.9.49, TR.4/13, p.54.
[24]EM 184, 23.3.42, p.10, T2724048.
[25] FK 810 TB 27.2-13.3.42, 13.3.42, NOKW-1689, BArch B 162/657, pp.103-107, here p.107; English translation in Manstein, 8.9.49, TR.4/13, pp.72-73; FK (V) Yevpatoria, 16.3.42, p.2, NOKW-1851, scan from YVA M.29.FR/40 onlineat Untold Stories.
[26]NMT, X, p.143; Manstein, 6.9.49, TR.4/11,p.730.
[27] NOKW-1819, 30.6.42, English translation in Manstein, 9.9.49, TR.4/14, pp.21-22.
[28]II/576 (V) Bakhchisarai to Korueck 553, 16.7.42, YVA M.29.FR/1152, scan online at Untold Stories; English translation in Manstein, TR.4/59, p.21
[29] Claudia Maurer Zenck, 'Eggebrechts Militärzeit auf der Krim, Online-Publikation Hamburg, (March) 2010, online, pp.20-21; English translation in Boris von Haken, 'How Do We Know What We Know about Hans Heinrich Eggebrecht?', German Studies Review, 35/2, 2012, p.307.

How many people were killed at Ponary?

$
0
0
In the community Rudamina, in the small forest Paneriai[1],near the railway station of Paneriai, a neighborhood of Vilnius, the largest killing site in Lithuania during its occupation by Nazi Germany was located. Known as Ponary to Poles and as Paneriai to Lithuanians[2],the place was mainly used for killing Jews from the Vilna Ghetto, but Jews from other places, non-Jewish civilians and Soviet prisoners of war were also shot there. In this article the Polish name Ponary will be used.




How many people were killed at this place is not known to this day. The Soviet commissions who investigated the killings in July and August 1944[3] estimated the number of victims at about 100,000, mostly on the basis of eyewitness accounts. This number is also mentioned as the maximum number of victims by Yad Vashem[4] and by several historians.[5] According to the inscription placed on the existing monument in Ponary, about 70,000 Jews were killed there between 1941 and 1944, while according to other data the figure was about 59,000.[6] Estimates of the number of non-Jewish Poles killed at Ponary range from about 2,000 to about 20,000.[7] Several internet sources also mention 8,000 Soviet POWs killed at Ponary, but the source of this claim is uncertain.[8]

At the other end there is our old friend Carlo Mattogno, who argues that the number of Jews killed at Ponary could not have been higher than 34,320.[9] This is less than half the highest estimate of the number of Jewish victims, but still higher than the minimum number of victims (about 30,000) estimated at by the Würzburg Landgericht (Court of Assizes) at the 1950 trial of Martin Weiss and August Hering.[10]

What does the available evidence tell us about the number of people murdered at Ponary?

In the surviving Operational Situation Reports USSR (Ereignismeldungen UdSSR) of the Einsatzgruppen, the following entries regarding executions of Vilnius Jews can be found:

Operational Situation Report USSR No. 17 dated 7 July 1941[11]:
Police Matters The Lithuanian police branches in Vilnius, subordinated to the Einsatzkommando, were given the task of drawing up current lists of names of Jews in Vilnius; first intelligentsia, political activists, and wealthy Jews. Subsequently, searches and arrests were made and 54 Jews were liquidated on July 4, and 93 were liquidated on July 5. Sizeable property belonging to Jews were secured. With the help of Lithuanian police officials, a search was started for Communists and NKVD agents, most of whom, however, are said to have fled.

Operational Situation Report USSR No. 21 dated 13 July 1941[12]:
In Vilnius by July 8th the local Einsatzkommando liquidated 321 Jews. The Lithuanian Ordnungsdienst which was placed under the Einsatzkommando after the Lithuanian political police had been dissolved was instructed to take part in the liquidation of the Jews. 150 Lithuanian officials were assigned to this task. They arrested the Jews and put them into concentration camps where they were subjected the same day to Special Treatment. This work has now begun, and thus about 500 Jews, saboteurs amongst them, are liquidated daily.

Operational Situation Report USSR No. 24 dated 16 July 1941[13]:
Because of a short surprise fire fight against the Vilnius Security Police Headquarters a special liquidation was carried out in excess of daily liquidation quotas.

At that time the Vilnius area was being handled by Einsatzkommando (EK) 9 of Einsatzgruppe B, under the command of SS-Obersturmbannführer Dr. Alfred Filbert. [14] On 9 August 1941 EK3 under the command of SS-Standartenfuehrer Karl Jäger[15] took over. For the time during which EK9 was in charge, Filbert’s assistant Gerhard Oskar Paul Schneider reported that about 5,000 people had been executed until 20 July 1941.[16] This order of magnitude is in line with the estimate by who was probably the most important contemporary eyewitness to the killings at Ponary, Kazimierz Sakowicz. In the diary of his observations at Ponary between 1941 and 1943, Sakowicz estimated that by the end of July 1941 about 5,000 people had been shot at that killing site.[17]

Who was Kazimierz Sakowicz, and how did he become a witness to the mass killings at Ponary? Historian Rachel Margolis, who essentially contributed to "deciphering" Sakowicz’s handwritten text and wrote the foreword to the first published English translation of the diary, tells his story based on information provided by Sakowicz’s relatives.[18]

Kazimierz Sakowicz was born in (then Polish) Wilno (today Vilnius) in 1894 and studied law in Moscow. After returning to Wilno he served on the staff of various journals and later opened a print shop. In 1939, when Wilno and the surrounding region were occupied by Soviet troops and handed over to Lithuania, Sakowicz had to close his print shop and find cheaper lodgings. He moved to a frame cottage in Ponary, a suburb of Wilno. From there he rode his bicycle back into town, taking odd jobs to support his family. The cottage was located in the woods, adjacent to an area where, during the period of Soviet control of Lithuania (1940-41), a fuel storage facility to serve the nearby airbase had been under construction. Large circular pits had been excavated for fuel tanks. The pits were connected by ditches in which pipes were to be laid. But the facility was never completed. Instead, the Nazis, who occupied Wilno on June 24, 1941, used the pits and ditches for the killing of Jews and other undesirables, mostly the former.

On July 11, 1941, the first day of mass executions, Sakowicz and his wife heard the sounds of gunfire at the airbase. He immediately recognized the importance of recording the ongoing events, and from then on never missed anything that occurred at Ponary. From a hiding place in his attic he observed the executions taking place at one of the pits. He also made inquiries among his neighbors and talked with railroad employees, farmers who bought the victims' clothes, and the Lithuanian killers, or "Ponary riflemen'', themselves. He counted the number of people brought to the execution site, noted the numbers on the trucks and automobiles that carried the victims, and described the clothing the victims wore.

Sakowicz's diary ends on November 6, 1943. According to a relative he continued writing until early July 1944, but that part of his diary was never found. Sakowicz was discovered in the woods on July 5, 1944, mortally wounded, next to his bicycle. His grave is located in the Rossa Cemetery in Vilnius, among graves of the fallen soldiers of the Polish Underground (Armia Krajowa).

According to Yitzhak Arad, who wrote the preface to the English edition of the Ponary diary, Sakowicz was a Polish nationalist, who despised the Lithuanians and also had no sympathies for the Soviet Union in general and the local Soviet partisans in particular. Indeed this is what becomes apparent from Sakowicz’s diary entries. It is not clear whether Sakowicz had anti-Semitic bias, but such are suggested by his occasional scorn at the conduct of the Jewish victims, the way they went unresisting to their deaths and begged for mercy, in contrast to his proud description of the demeanor of the Polish victims, who he saw as behaving honorably in the face of death.

Sakowicz’s total of about 5,000 for the period until the end of July 1941 tallies with Schneider’s figure for the period until about 20 July 1941. Not included in Schneider’s figure are the killings mentioned by Sakowicz in his diary entries for 1-2, 6, 8 and 11 August 1941. In the first three of these entries Sakowicz provided estimates of the number of people killed (600 on 1-2 August, 300 on 6 August and 200 on 8 August), whereas no number is given for 11 August. In his entry of 26 August 1941, Sakowicz wrote that there had been 10 executions in that month of August (on the 1st, 2nd, 6th, 8th, 11th, 16th, 19th, 22nd, 23rd, and 26th), in which 2,000 Jews had been killed. His figures for 1-2, 6, 8, 16, 19, 22, 23 and 26 August add up to 1,600, which suggests that the number killed on 11 August was in the order of 400. Although Jäger’s EK3 took over the Vilna area on 9 August 1941, the Jäger Report states that the first killings in ''Wilna Stadt'' took place in the period from 12 August to 1 September 1941. Jäger’s figure for that period (461) matches the sum (500) of Sakowicz’s figures for the August days 16 (200), 19 (100), 22 (100), 23 (12) and 26 (88). This suggests that the shootings on 11 August were still carried out by EK9, or that the executioners on that day were Lithuanians acting on their own initiative.

As concerns the EK3 period until the date of the Jäger Report (1 December 1941), Sakowicz’s entries are compared in Table 1 below with the dates and figures given in the Jäger Report. The comparison shows a coincidence regarding the dates and other details[19], and sometimes though not always as concerns the numbers where such are provided by Sakowicz.[20]There are several explanations for what discrepancies (sometimes lower, sometimes higher) there are between Sakowicz’s figures and those of Jäger:

• Sakowicz could only estimate the number of victims, whereas Jäger’s executioners obviously counted them.
• Sakowicz didn’t keep his diary in strict chronological order, with some entries obviously having been made some time after the date they refer to.[21] He may thus have mixed up events on several days.
• Some of Sakowicz’s entries may have been based not on personal observation but on information he obtained from others.

Table 1 – Mass killings at the Ponary killing site near Vilnius, Lithuania, 22 June to 1 December 1941

Sakowicz’s figures for the killings for which he provided figures add up to 14,200, as shown in Table 1. The numbers in the Jäger Report for killings in "Wilna-Stadt" between 12.08 and 25.11.1941 add up to 21,273. [22] Adding the about 5,000 killed in July 1941 according to both Sakowicz and Schneider, and another 1,500 for the killings on 1-2, 6, 8 and 11 August 1941 mentioned by Sakowicz, yields a total of 27,773 people killed at Ponary until the date of the Jäger Report, 1 December 1941.

After 1 December 1941 executions at Ponary were more sporadic and, with one exception mentioned below, on a much smaller scale. I’m not aware of documentary sources that would allow for establishing numbers regarding these executions. However, the executions were monitored by two observers, Sakowicz and an inhabitant of the Vilna ghetto, Hermann Kruk, who kept a diary that recorded events in Vilna from the beginning of the German occupation until 14 July 1943, after which date he was deported to a labor camp in Estonia, where he perished.[23] Unlike Sakowicz, who directly witnessed most of the killings he described, Kruk recorded what he had learned from sources inside the ghetto, including some direct witnesses, about the killings he described in his diary.

Sakowicz and Kruk are the primary sources whose information I compared in the Table 2 below. Additionally I used two secondary sources, the notes of the editor of Sakowicz’s Ponary Diary, Yithzak Arad, and Tadeusz Piotrowski’s list of executions at Ponary in which the victims were non-Jewish Poles, according to Polish Underground reports from 1942-1944.[24]

Table 2 – Mass killings at the Ponary killing site near Vilnius, Lithuania, 2 December 1941 - 3 November 1943

The principal source among the above is Sakowicz’s diary, not only because he was a direct eyewitness to most killings he described and recorded most though not all of them (the latter he expressly stated on at least on one occasion, in his first entry for July 1942), but also because his entries cover a longer period than Kruk’s; after the latter’s deportation to Estonia, Sakowicz was the only day-by-day source left. Sakowicz’s entries moreover contain information about the counted or estimated number of victims, or at least information that allows for making an estimate based on default assumptions regarding the occupancy of vehicles, which in turn are based on figures stated in other entries (e.g. 8 victims at most in a "car", which might be a small van, 20 victims at most in a smaller truck, 50 in one of the large Deutsche Reichsbahn trucks that appeared for the first time on 27.9.1943, following the liquidation of the Vilna ghetto).

The sum of daily killing numbers stated by or inferred from Sakowicz’s diary entries is 6,595, which added to the 27,773 killed before 1 December 1941 yields a total of 34,368 killed at Ponary until 3 November 1943, the date of the last killing recorded by Sakowicz. Kruk’s figures for the 1 December 1941 – 3 November 1943 period add up to 4,179 (the difference being also but not only due to Kruk’s diary ending on 14 July 1943). Piotrowski’s total of 1,105 refers only to non-Jewish Poles shot at Ponary. If one adds up the highest figure claimed by any of the four sources for each of the listed days, the sum is 9,402. This can safely be considered the absolute maximum number of deaths at Ponary in the 2 December 1941 – 3 November 1943 period, also because my default assumptions regarding Sakowicz’s diary entries may be on the high side. Adding this number to the 27,773 killed until 1 December 1941 yields 37,175 as the maximum number of deaths at Ponary during the whole period from the beginning of the German occupation until 3 November 1943.

The by far largest mass killing of the 2 December 1941 – 3 November 1943 period didn’t involve Jews from the Vilna ghetto. The victims were Jews from four ghettos in eastern Lithuania near the border with Belorussia—Swieciany, Mikhalishki, Oszmiany, and Soly. They were told that they would be moved to Wilno, Kovno, and several labor camps, but instead they ended up at Ponary, where 3,800 – 4,000 were killed on 5 April 1943. The massacre figures prominently in the diaries of both Sakowicz and Kruk. Sakowicz called the day "Judgment Day" and described the killing at great length. While not an eyewitness like Sakowicz, Kruk nevertheless recorded in several entries the shock that the Vilna ghetto’s inhabitants felt upon learning about the massacre.[25]

Another peak of killing in this period occurred after the liquidation of the Vilna ghetto on 24 September 1943. According to Arad, after that liquidation there were about 3,500 Jews left in Vilna, 2,500 working for the German military in two labor camps, plus about 1,000 hidden in the ghetto or elsewhere in the city. Most of the latter were tracked down and shot within the following months, and the number of the former was apparently also reduced. Sakowicz’s entries for the period from 24 September to 3 November 1943 suggest that over 1,800 Jews were killed in that period. [26]

For the period after Sakowicz’s last entry and the re-conquest of the city by the Soviet army on 13 July 1943, sources that would allow for a count of victims are hard to come by. The following killings are mentioned:

1. About 100 non-Jewish Poles killed on April 18-20, 1944, according to Polish Underground reports. [27]

2. The killing of about 95 Jews employed in disinterring and cremating the victims of Ponary (25 of the 40 who attempted to escape through a tunnel, plus 70 from the Kailis camp sent to replace them).[28]

3. The murder of hundreds of Jews discovered in hiding places in Wilno after the liquidation of the ghetto and of elements of the non-Jewish population hostile to the Germans.[29]

4. The murder of the last 2,000 – 2,200 Jews of the Vilna ghetto on July 3-4, 1944.[30] According to the report by the Soviet commission that investigated Ponary in July 1944 up to 4,000 people perished in that final massacre. [31] The Soviet commission that opened the mass graves (or some of them) in August 1944 extracted 515 corpses, some of which could be identified. [32] Of the Jews working for the Wehrmacht in the Heeres-Kraftfahrzeug-Parks (HKP) 562, about 150 survived thanks to the initiative of Wehrmacht Major Karl Plagge, while about 200 were gunned down in the HKP’s yard. [33]

Assuming about 1,000 deaths for items 1, 2 and 3 (a figure very much on the high side) [34] and the highest (probably exaggerated) number for the massacre on 3-4 July 1944, the death toll of Ponary during the post-Sakowicz period would be about 5,000. Adding these to the above-mentioned 37,175 yields a total of about 42,175 people killed at Ponary.

This number should be seen as a maximum for several reasons. First of all, the figures that make up this number, as concerns the period after the date of Jäger’s report, were deliberately assumed to be the highest figures available in related sources. Second, it is unlikely that Schneider (EK9) and Jäger (EK3) underreported the numbers killed between June and December 1941. It is equally unlikely that mass killing by EK3 of Jews from outside the "Wilna-Stadt" area was carried out at Ponary.[35] As concerns the period between 1 December 1941 and 3 November 1943, there is no reason to assume that there were major killings not recorded by Sakowicz and/or Kruk and/or the Polish Underground.[36] As concerns the post-Sakowicz period, there is no evidence to suggest that any mass killings other than those mentioned above took place.

The maximum total estimated here is somewhat higher than the above-mentioned figures of Mattogno and the Würzburg Court of Assizes at the 1950 trial of Martin Weiss and August Hering, but much lower than the other figures mentioned at the beginning of this article.

The highest of these exaggerated figures, the about 100,000 estimated by the Soviet investigation commissions in July and August 1944, is the one that is easiest to understand. The Soviets didn’t have the diaries of Sakowicz and Kruk at their disposal, and the investigation reports don’t mention the Jäger Report, which suggests that it was not known to the investigators at the time. The mass graves, in most of which only cremation remains were found, were more than large enough to take in 100,000 bodies.[37] And the testimonies by some of the few forced laborers employed in cremation who had managed to escape suggested such order of magnitude.[38]

What is more difficult to understand is why later researchers, who were aware of the Jäger Report and the diaries of Sakowicz and Kruk, assumed numbers so much higher than those that become apparent from German documents and the day-by-day chronicling of executions. Rather than reconstruct the tally of the documented/reported killings as was done in this article, these researchers based their estimates, as concerns the Jewish victims, on conjectures about the number of Jews in Vilna on the eve of the German occupation. For instance, in his introductory note preceding Sakowicz’s first entries, Yitzhak Arad reasoned as follows:[39]
We do not have precise figures for the population and ethnic composition of Wilno on the eve of the German invasion. The last prewar census was conducted in 1931, when the city was under Polish rule. It listed 195,000 residents of the city, including 128,000 Poles (65.6 percent), 54,600 Jews (28 percent), and 2,000 Lithuanians (1 percent). The remaining 10,000 (5 percent) were Belorussians, Russians, Ukrainians, and others. This enumeration distorted the true picture. Because Wilno was a bone of contention between Poland and Lithuania, the Polish authorities wanted to show that the Lithuanians constituted a negligible minority in the city by inflating the number of Poles. According to Lithuanian documents submitted to the Germans after the German occupation, Lithuanians constituted 30 percent of the population and Jews nearly 40 percent; the balance were Poles, Belorussians, Russians, and others. There is no doubt that these numbers overstated the number of Lithuanians in the city. But both the Polish and Lithuanian figures yield an estimate of some 60,000 Jews in Wilno on the eve of the German invasion, including refugees from Poland. The Germans entered Wilno on June 24, 1941, two days after the start of the invasion. In those two days about 3,000 Jews managed to be evacuated or flee to the Soviet hinterland, leaving about 57,000 Jews in the German-controlled city.

As total number of Vilna Jews killed by the Germans cannot have exceeded 37,000[40], the number of Jews in Vilna on the eve of the German invasion was either much lower than 60,000, or then a far higher number than assumed by Arad managed to get away before the German occupation.

Arad is not alone with his overestimate of Vilna’s Jewish population prior to the German occupation. Hermann Kruk, in his entry under May 7, 1942, made the following calculations (which find no support in his day-by-day chronicling of events in Vilnius, at least as concerns the pre-ghetto deaths):
29,000 Jews entered Vilna Ghetto 1, and 11,000 Jews went to Ghetto 2. Altogether, 40,000 Jews. Relying on our estimate of a [round figure] of 60,000 Jews in Vilna, only 39,000 [?] entered the ghetto, which means that the Snatchers and all others dragged off or annihilated 21,000 Jews before the Jews went into the ghetto.[41] […] Thus the sad balance is: In both ghettos, there were about 40,000 Jews. On January 1, there was only one ghetto. According to the bread cards distributed, there were in this ghetto 12,600 Jews. Thus, altogether: Before the ghetto, as we have indicated, the number of those destroyed was: 21,000 Jews During the ghetto period: 26,447 Jews With a trembling hand, I calculate: 47,447 Jews.[42]

The Vilna ghetto was established on 6 September 1941.[43] According to the Schneider, Jäger and Sakowicz, the number of people (including non-Jews) killed at Ponary before 6 September 1941 was 10,661 (thereof 4,161 by EK3, 4,144 of them Jews). Between 12 September and 25 November 1941 EK3 killed 17,112 people in "Wilna-Stadt", thereof 17,090 Jews.

Proportionately more exaggerated than the estimates of Jewish deaths by Arad and Kruk are estimates whereby about 20,000 non-Jewish Poles were killed at Ponary.[44] The executions of non-Jewish Poles reported by the Polish Underground claimed at total of about 1,200 victims.[45] Even assuming that these reports don’t cover all executions, a total figure above 2,000 seems highly improbable.

As concerns other victims of Ponary including Soviet prisoners of war, Sakowicz’s diary entries suggest a death toll in the low hundreds at most. Considering what is known about the fate of Soviet PoWs in German captivity elsewhere[46], one would expect most out-of-hand killings of such prisoners at Ponary to have taken place in 1941. The number of non-Jews killed by EK3 in "Wilna-Stadt" was 39 according to the Jäger Report, thereof 9 Soviet prisoners of war (6 on 19 November and 3 on 20 November 1941). Like in many other camps throughout Eastern Europe and in the Reich, Soviet PoWs died like flies, mostly from starvation, disease and exposure, in camps on Lithuanian territory[47], including the camp at "N. Wilna", mentioned in the letter sent by the Health Administration of Wilna County to the Regional Commissioner Wilna Land dated 30 July 1942. But there is no indication that EK3 "shared" the Ponary killing site with units in charge of shooting political commissars and other categories of Soviet PoWs singled out for liquidation. There is also no hard evidence that such killings took place on a significant scale after the date of the Jäger Report.[48]

But then, what do numbers mean? Historical accuracy matters, and getting the numbers as right as possible is part of historical accuracy. However, numbers alone cannot convey the abysmal horrors of the Ponary killing site. The words of witnesses like Sakowicz and Kruk are much better tools in this respect. The two entries in Sakowicz’s diary that impressed me the most are the following:

October 28, 1943 (excerpt):
Twice a motorcycle with a sidecar arrived, bringing Jewish women who lay in the sidecar like meat, and on them a Lithuanian sat as if on a pillow. What is going on? It turns out that when the Jewish women were detained, they jumped from the car onto the pavement. In Dolna, 2 Jewish women lay with broken legs. They were all collected by the motorcycle, and the wailing women were thrown into the sidecar like meat. And because they weren’t meat and there wasn’t enough room, he sat on them, since in any case they would be shot soon. At the base shooting finishes off the wounded.

November 3, 1943:
After a long intermission again a truck full of Jews, mainly children and women. They were shot in the pit near Rudzinski’s. The victims had already undressed in the truck and were naked—to the pit. The Lithuanians shot from above, as if at pheasants. Near the pit a barrel with chloride stands now. Now the barrel always stands ready. The badly wounded, pretending to be killed, have chlorine poured on them. The Lithuanians say that the Jews often begin to jump up when the chlorine is shoveled on them. But those who “jump up” are finished off.

That was Ponary.

Thanks to my fellow bloggers Nick Terry and Sergey Romanov for the copies of Kruk’s and Sakowicz’s diaries they made available to me.

Notes

[1] The location is thus described in letter sent by the Health Administration of Wilna County to the Regional Commissioner Wilna Land dated 30 July 1942, LCVA (Lietuvos Centrinis Valstybės Archyvas = Lithuanian Central State Archives) R613/1/10, fl. 70 (facsimile, transcription and translation). The letter mentioned "several round-shaped burial places with a diameter of 30 m", which were under the constant vigilance and control of the German Security Police. Regarding these mass graves see the article Mattogno on the Mass Graves at Ponary (Part 3).
[2] Piotr Niwiński, Ponary. The Place of "Human Slaughter" (brochure in Polish, Lithuanian and English).
[3] Regarding the July 1944 investigation see Зверства немецко-Фашистских Захбатчиков. Документы. Выпуск 15 (Atrocities by German fascist invaders. Documents, Issue 15), Moscow, 1945, pp. 38-40; this collection can be downloaded here. Regarding the August 1944 investigation see A(lexey) Yakovlev, The Tragedy of Lithuania: 1941-1944. New documents on crimes of Lithuanian collaborators during the Second World War (hereinafter "Tragedy"), a document collection that is available online in the Russian original (Трагедия Литвы: 1941–1944 годы). The report in question is reproduced on pp. 34-42 of the collection’s English translation, pp. 50-63 of the Russian text. Regarding the dating of the report see the article Mattogno on the Mass Graves at Ponary (Part 1).
[4] YV page about Ponary
[5] See Tadeusz Piotrowski, Poland’s Holocaust. Ethnic Strife, Collaboration with Occupying Forces and Genocide in the Second Republic, 1918-1947, 1998 McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, pp. 175-176: "Of the approximately 170,000 Jews murdered in the General Commissariat of Lithuania throughout the war, about 60,000 died at Ponary. According to István Deák, from 70,000 to 100,000 people, including Jews and Poles, died there between 1941 and 1943. According to Roman Korab-Żebryk, the Ypatingas Būrys show more than 100,000 people in Ponary over three years. Longin Tomaszewski uses the same estimate and adds that of these 75 percent were Jews and the rest consisted of Soviet and Polish POWs, Tatars, Gypsies, Belorussians and even some Lithuanians. The Soviet POWs were all Polish citizens. His estimate for ethnic Poles is ‘several thousand’. Zdiszław A Siemaszko states that among the victims were approximately 1,700 Poles, including many AK members."
[6] Niwiński, as above, p. 25.
[7] As above.
[8] The Wikipedia page Ponary massacre refers to Piotrowski, as above p. 168 and to Kazimierz Sakowicz, Yitzhak Arad, Ponary Diary, 1941–1943: A Bystander's Account of a Mass Murder, Yale University Press, 2005. However, none of these sources provides a figure on the number of Soviet POWs killed at Ponary. In their respective prefaces to Ponary Diary Rachel Margolis mentions "the murders of some 50,000 to 60,000 Jewish men, women, and children by the Nazis and their Lithuanian collaborators" and Yithak Arad speaks of "the mass murder of some 50,000 to 60,000 men, women, and children", the vast majority Jews plus a few thousand "Poles, Communist cadres, Soviet prisoners of war, and some anti-German Lithuanians".
[9] Carlo Mattogno, Gli Einsatzgruppen Nei Territori Orientali Occupati. Parte II: L’"Azione 1005" (2017 Effepi Edizioni, Genova), pp. 272-273.
[10] LG Würzburg vom 3.2.1950, Ks 15/49, published in Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, Bd. VI, Lfd.Nr.192. Weiss was given a life sentence for accessoriness to murder in "at least thirty thousand cases".
[11]English translation in Arad, Yitzak, Shmuel Krakowski and Shmuel Spector, editors, The Einsatzgruppen Reports. New York: Holocaust Library. 1989. pp. 13 – 15.
[12]English translation in Arad et al, as above pp. 22 – 24.
[13]English translation in Arad et al, as above pp. 29 – 33.
[14] LG Berlin vom 22.6.1962, 3 PKs 1/62, published in Justiz und NS-Verbrechen, Bd.XVIII, Lfd. Nr. 540. Filbert, who commanded Einsatzkommando 9 from June to October 1941, was sentenced to lifetime imprisonment on account of, among others, mass killings at Ponary committed by his unit and its Lithuanian auxiliaries.
[15] The date is stated on the first page of the Jäger Report.
[16] LG Berlin vom 22.6.1962. According to the court’s findings of fact there had been shootings at Ponary from about 4 to 20 July 1941. The court also mentioned that Schneider tended to round upwards the figures he reported, and assumed that at least 4,000 had been killed in this period.
[17]Ponary Diary, pp. 13-14 entry under July 23, 1941. Sakowicz estimated that 4,675 people had been killed in 17 daily executions of 250-300 people each, all but one of them males. Additionally a few or a few dozen people were brought daily by car, "probably Communist big-shots", so that altogether about 5,000 people had been shot.
[18]Ponary Diary, Foreword, pp. ix – xi.
[19] The mass execution on 2 September 1941, which claimed at least 4,000 lives according to Sakowicz and 3,700 according to Jäger, was "a punishment for the bogus shooting at German soldiers in Wilno on Sunday, August 31", according to Sakowicz’s entry for that day. The Jäger Report stated that it was a "special action" because Jews had fired on German soldiers ("Sonderaktion, weil von Juden auf deutsche Soldaten geschossen wurde"). On 25 October the procession of the death candidates "was made up exclusively of women old and young, children in carriages, suckling babies" according to Sakowicz; this observation dovetails with the entry in the Jäger Report for the same day, according to which the executed were 1,766 women and 812 children. In the execution contingent on 27 August "nearly all" were men according to Sakowicz, and men made up the overwhelming majority of those killed on that day according to Jäger (946 men, 184 women and 73 children).
[20] Figures roughly match for the period from 12.8. to 1.9.1941 (500 according to Sakowicz, 461 according to Jäger, thereof 425 male Jews, 19 Jewesses, 8 male and 9 female Communists; the number of females shot in this period was 28 according to both Sakowicz and Jäger, except that the latter mentioned 19 Jewesses and 9 female Communists, the two categories not being however mutually exclusive), 2.9.1941 (about 4,000 is Sakowicz’s lowest figure, Jäger mentions 3,700). For 12 September 1941 Sakowicz’s figure is considerably lower (2,000) than Jäger’s (3,334 due to an addition mistake, the correct addition yields 3,434). The same goes for 21 October 1941 (1,000 according to Sakowicz, 2,367 according to Jäger). For the period from 17 to 19 November 1941 the figure of Jewish women alone provided by Sakowicz (200) is higher than Jäger’s total of Jewish men, women and children recorded under 19 November (76+77+18 = 171). For the period from 21 to 25 November 1941 Sakowicz provided no information of the number killed, but his description of events ("nine trucks" on the latter date) suggests a higher number of victims than that recorded by Jäger for this period (1 Pole and 63 Jews, thereof 9 men, 46 women and 8 children).
[21] For instance, in his first entry for October 1941 Sakowicz mentioned that there had been shootings on October 2, 3, 16, 21, 25 and 27. Yet Sakowicz later mentioned another execution, on 30.10.1941, which had not been mentioned in his first October 1941 entry.
[22] With the correction for 12.9.1941 mentioned above. Of these 21,234 were Jews and 39 were non-Jews.
[23] Kruk’s diary, originally written in Yiddish, was published in English translation under the title The Last Days of the Jerusalem of Lithiania. Chronicles from the Vilna Ghetto and the Camps, 1939–1944 (2002 Yale University Press, New Haven and London).
[24]Poland’s Holocaust, p. 167.
[25]Ponary Diary, pp. 67-69 (Arad’s introductory notes) and pp. 70-83 (Sakowicz’s account). Under April 5 1943 Kruk wrote: "The tale spreads from ear to ear that the trains from Oszmiana and Swieciany were taken, along with the Jewish police, to . . Ponar." Later under the same date he wrote: "Everything we have written above is no rumor. Now it is clear: instead of going to Kovno, the trains from Oszmiana and Swieciany went to Ponar . . . 83 cars with more than 4,000 Jewish victims were taken there" (Last Days, p. 500). The number 4,000 also appears later in the entry for that day. Under April 10 1943 Kruk wrote: "As we know now, about 3,800 Jews have been killed." He also mentioned having learned about a Gestapo report whereby 5,000 had been killed on 5 April, and wondered why the Gestapo had exaggerated the number (Last Days, p. 510). The massacre is also mentioned in Christian Gerlach, Kalkulierte Morde. Die deutsche Wirtschafts- und Vernichtungspolitik in Weißrußland 1941 bis 1944 (Hamburger Edition, 2000), p. 735. In the related footnote Gerlach mentions, among other sources, a report by the Commander of Security Police and Security Service of Lithuania for April 1943.
[26]Ponary Diary, pp. 117-141.
[27]Poland’s Holocaust, p. 167.
[28]Ponary Diary (Arad), p. 144.
[29] As above.
[30] As above.
[31]Зверства немецко-Фашистских Захбатчиков, p. 40.
[32]Tragedy, p. 40.
[33]"Die Pflicht des Majors", article in Spiegel magazine, 30.04.2001 (online).
[34] An unnamed witness quoted in the "Special Report of the 8th Department of the 4th Office of NKGB USSR on Atrocities in Ponary" dated 14 August 1944 (reproduced in Tragedy, pp. 18-31) claimed that in the last week of March 1944 alone 450 Jews, 50 gypsies and 15 Poles had been shot at Ponary. According to the same witness, the Germans supervising the cremation had told the workers that there were about 80,000 bodies lying in the soil of Ponary, thereof 55,000 Jews.
[35] The "Teilkommando des EK3 in Wilna" also committed massacres at Nemencing (20.9.1941), Novo-Wilejka (22.9.1941), Riesa (24.9.1941), Jahiunai (25.9.1941), Eysisky (27.9.1941), Trakai (30.9.1941), Semiliski (6.10.1941) and Svenciany (9.10.1941). However, later reports by district medical officers about mass graves in their areas show that these killings were done and the victims were buried on site. Mass graves at Trakai and Semiliski are mentioned in the letter that the District Medical Officer of Trakai sent to the Regional Commissioner Vilna Land in Vilna on 8.7.1942 (LCVA R 613/1/10 fl. 69+RS; facsimile, transcription and translation). Mass graves at Nemencing (Nemenčinė), Riesa (Rieše) and Jahuinai (Jašiunai) are described in the already mentioned letter sent by the Health Administration of Wilna County to the Regional Commissioner Wilna Land dated 30 July 1942 (see note 1). The mass grave at Mickūnai mentioned in the same letter probably corresponds to the massacre at Novo-Wilejka mentioned in the Jäger Report. Mickūnai is just 7.5 km by car from Naujoji Vilnia (=Novo-Wilejka), according to Google Maps.
[36] A further indication supporting my death toll estimate for the whole period covered by the Ponary Diary can be found in Kruk’s entry under November 16, 1942. Kruk quotes an illegal Polish newspaper, according to which out of 55,000 Jews in Vilna 40,000 had been killed and only 12,000 remained (Last Days, pp. 413-414). It stands to reason that this Polish source would have exaggerated rather than understated the number of victims.
[37] See my article Mattogno on the Mass Graves at Ponary (Part 2).
[38] As already mentioned, one of these witnesses spoke of about 80,000 corpses. Another witness, Matvei Fedorovich Zeidel, whose deposition is quoted in the report of the August 1944 commission, claimed that until April 1944, when he and others had managed to escape, 80-90,000 corpses had been cremated (Tragedy, p. 38).
[39]Ponary Diary, pp. 3-4.
[40] From the aforementioned total of 42,175 at least the about 4,000 victims of the massacre on 5 April 1943 (who were not from Vilna) and the 1,205 non-Jews killed at Ponary according to Polish Underground Reports must be deducted.
[41]Last Days, p. 284.
[42] As above, p. 286.
[43] As above, p. 96.
[44] Niwiński, as above, p. 25.
[45]Poland’s Holocaust, p. 167.
[46] Regarding Belorussia see Gerlach, Kalkulierte Morde, pp. 834-859 (translation available here).
[47] See my article The Jäger Report (7)
[48] The witness Zeidel, whose testimony is quoted in the report of the August 1944 Soviet investigating commission, stated the following: "About 2,000 more corpses were laid on another fire, generally Red Army men and officers, and also 500 corpses of monks and priests." (Tragedy, p. 38). This would mean that 1,500 of the corpses were Soviet PoWs. However, such order of magnitude is not borne out by Sakowicz’s diary entries, and Zeidel’s having mentioned 80-90,000 corpses destroyed until April 1944 speaks against the reiliability of his estimates in general.

"Is genocide necessarily evil?"

$
0
0
Someone on Quora asked this question.

My answer is rendered below.




Of course it is.

Genocide is the worst thing human beings can do to each other bar nuclear war (which can also be considered the most extreme form of genocide).

Now, whoever wrote the Bible, or at least some books of the Old Testament, obviously thought that genocide was perfectly OK, even compliance with a divine command, when perpetrated against peoples other than their own and followers of other religions. Here are some excerpts from Steven Pinker’s reflections about the Hebrew Bible on pp. 7 ff. of The Better Angels of Our Nature:
Like the works of Homer, the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) was set in the late 2nd millennium BCE but written more than five hundred years later. But unlike the works of Homer, the Bible is revered today by billions of people who call it the source of their moral values. The world’s bestselling publication, the Good Book has been translated into three thousand languages and has been placed in the nightstands of hotels all over the world. Orthodox Jews kiss it with their prayer shawls; witnesses in American courts bind their oaths by placing their hand on it. Even the president touches it when taking the oath of office. Yet for all this reverence, the Bible is one long celebration of violence.

[…]

No sooner do men and women begin to multiply than God decides they are sinful and that the suitable punishment is genocide [the Genesis flood][…]

The next major figure in the Bible is Abraham, the spiritual ancestor of Jews, Christians and Muslims. Abraham has a nephew, Lot, who settles in Sodom. Because the residents engage in anal sex and comparable sins, God immolates every man, woman, and child in a divine napalm attack. Lots’s wife, for the crime of turning around to look at the inferno, is put to death as well.

[…]

Jacob’s descendants, the Israelites, find their way to Egypt and become too numerous for the Pharaoh’s liking, so he enslaves them and orders that all the boys be killed at birth. Moses escapes the mass infanticide and grows up to challenge the Pharaoh to let his people go. God, who is omnipotent, could have softened Pharaoh’s heart, but he hardens it instead, which gives him a reason to afflict every Egyptian with painful boils and other miseries before killing every one of their firstborn sons. (The word Passover alludes to the executioner angel’s passing over the households with Israelite firstborns.) God follows this massacre with another one when he drowns the Egyptian army as they pursue the Israelites across the Red Sea.

[…]

As the Israelites proceed towards the promised land, they meet up with the Midianites. Following orders from God, they slay the males, burn their city, plunder the livestock, and take the women and children captive. When they return to Moses, he is enraged because they spared the women, some of whom had led the Israelites to worship rival gods. So he tells his soldiers to complete the genocide and to reward themselves with nubile sex slaves they may rape at their pleasure: ‘Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.’

In Deuteronomy 20 and 21, God gives the Israelites a blanket policy for dealing with cities that don’t accept them as overlords: smite the males with the edge of the sword and abduct the cattle, women and children. Of course, a man with a beautiful new captive faces a problem: since he has just murdered her parents and brothers, she may not be in the mood for love. God anticipates this nuisance and offers the following solution: the captor should shave her head, pare her nails, and imprison her in his house for a month while she cries her eyes out. Then he may go in and rape her.

With a designated list of other enemies (Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites), the genocide has to be total: ‘Thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: But thou shalt utterly destroy them … as the Lord thy God has commanded thee.’

Joshua puts this directive into practice when he invades Canaan and sacks the city of Jericho. After the walls came tumbling down, his soldiers ‘utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of their sword.’ More earth is scorched as Joshua ‘smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded.’

[…]

Israel’s first king, Saul, establishes a small empire, which gives him the opportunity to settle an old score. Centuries earlier, during the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt, the Amalekites had harassed them, and God commanded the Israelites to ‘wipe out the name of Amalek.’ So when the judge Samuel anoints Saul as a king, he reminds Saul of the divine decree: ‘Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.’ Saul carries out the order, but Samuel is furious to learn that he has spared their king, Agag. So Samuel ‘hewed Agag to pieces before the Lord.’

[…]

When David becomes king, he keeps up his hard-earned reputation for killing by the tens of thousands. After his general Joab ‘wasted the country of the children of Ammon,’ David ‘brought out the people that were in it, and cut them with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes,’ Finally he manages to do something that God considers immoral: he orders a census. To punish David for this lapse, God kills seventy thousand of his citizens.

[…]

The Bible depicts a world that, seen through modern eyes, is staggering in its savagery. People enslave, rape, and murder members of their immediate families. Warlords slaughter civilians indiscriminately, including the children. Women are bought, sold, and plundered like sex toys. And Yahweh tortures and massacres people by the hundreds of thousands for trivial disobedience or for no reason at all. These atrocities are neither isolated nor obscure, They implicate all the major characters of the Old Testament, the ones that Sunday-school children draw with crayons. And they fall into a continuous plotline that stretches for millennia, from Adam and Eve through Noah, the patriarchs, Moses, Joshua, the judges, Saul, David, Solomon, and beyond. According to the biblical scholar Raymund Schwager, the Hebrew Bible ‘contains over six hundred passages that explicitly talk about nations, kings, or individuals attacking, destroying and killing others. … Aside from the approximately one thousand verses in which Yahweh himself appears as the direct executioner of violent punishments, and the many texts in which the Lord delivers the criminal to the punisher’s sword, in over one hundred passages Yahweh expressly gives the command to kill people. Matthew White, a self-described atrocitologist who keeps a database with the estimated death tolls of history’s major wars, massacres, and genocides, counts about 1.2 million deaths from mass killing that are specifically enumerated in the Bible. (He excludes the half million casualties in the war between Judah and Israel described in 2 Chronicles 13 because he considers the body count historically implausible.) The victims of the Noachian flood would add another 20 million or so to the total.

In this article, Holocaust denier Carlo Mattogno is quoted as follows:
An Italian writer troubled himself to count the number of persons exterminated according to the Bible by virtue of the “cherem”: 2,120,182. The biblical Jehudim were therefore real forerunners of the Einsatzgruppen, actually even worse, because besides men, women and children, they even exterminated the animals! Is pointing this out “anti-Semitic” too?

The tone, context and author of this comment are despicable, for sure. But it cannot be gainsaid that, for instance, the following passages of Deuteronomy 20:
13“When the LORD your God gives it into your hand, you shall strike all the men in it with the edge of the sword. 14“Only the women and the children and the animals and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall use the spoil of your enemies which the LORD your God has given you. 15“Thus you shall do to all the cities that are very far from you, which are not of the cities of these nations nearby. 16“Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes. 17“But you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, as the LORD your God has commanded you, 18 so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against the LORD your God.

read very much like Heinrich Himmler’s words in his Posen speech of 6 October 1943:
I ask you that what I tell you in this circle you will really only hear and never talk about it. The question came up to us: What do to with the women and children? I decided to find a very clear solution also in this respect. This because I didn’t consider myself entitled to exterminate the men, that is, to kill them or to have them killed, and to let the children grow up as avengers against our sons and grandsons. The difficult decision had to be taken to make this people disappear from the earth. For the organization that had to carry out the task if was the most difficult we had so far. It has been carried out without, as I consider myself entitled to say, our men and our leaders having taken harm to their spirit and soul. The path between the possibilities existing here, to either become crude and heartless and no longer to respect human life or to become weak and collapse to the point of nervous breakdowns, the path between this Scylla and Charybdis is horrendously narrow.

The key difference is that the genocide Himmler referred to is an indisputable historical fact. The atrocity accounts exulted in the Bible reveal their authors’ frame of mind and, as Pinker points out, offer a window into the lives and values of Near Eastern civilizations at the time the Old Testament writings were finalized, in the 5th century BCE. But the accounts are mostly myths. Pinker again (Better Angels, p. 13):
The good news, of course, is that most of this never happened. Not only is there no evidence that Yahweh inundated the planet and incinerated its cities, but the patriarchs, exodus, conquest, and Jewish empire are almost certainly fictions. Historians have found no mention in Egyptian writings of the departure of a million slaves (which could hardly have escaped the Egyptians’ notice); nor have archaeologists found evidence in the ruins of Jericho or neighboring cities of a sacking around 1200 BCE. And if there was a Davidic empire stretching from the Euphrates to the Red Sea around the turn of the 1st millennium BCE, no one else at the time seemed to have noticed it.

On the other hand, the genocidal parts of the Old Testament’s creed have troubled at least one Holocaust scholar, Yehuda Bauer. In his book Rethinking the Holocaust (p. 41), Bauer wrote these memorable words:
As a Jew, I must live with the fact that the civilization I inherited ... encompasses the call for genocide in its canon.

The following statements in the same book also have my entire sympathy:

No gradation of human suffering is possible. A soldier who lost a leg and a lung at Verdun suffered. How can one measure his suffering against the horrors that Japanese civilians endured at Hiroshima? How can one measure the suffering of a Rom woman at Auschwitz, who saw her husband and children die in front of her eyes, against the suffering of a Jewish woman at the same camp who underwent the same experience? Extreme forms of human suffering are not comparable, and one should never say that one form of mass murder is "less terrible," or even "better," than another.

The videos below (which contain extremely graphic images) may help to bring home Bauer’s point.

Verdun- Shell Shock

WHAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T REMEMBER ABOUT WWI IS THAT IT WAS SHOCKINGLY GRUESOME

Harrowing Accounts from Hiroshima Survivors

Nagasaki - The Forgotten Bomb (Full Documentary)

A (not so) short debunking of the "Holocaust Deprogramming Course".

$
0
0
The archived website.

The first sentence (after the title) is a lie:
"Free yourself from a lifetime of Holo-brainwashing about “Six Million” Jews “gassed” in “Gas Chambers Disguised as Shower Rooms”"
The claim is not that 6 million Jews were gassed. Only about a half or so of all Holocaust victims were gassed, the rest were murdered through mass shootings, starvation, death marches and so on.

There. We are done. The author of the site did not even bother to learn the basic claim that he has set out to debunk. He doesn't have the slightest clue. Dismissed.

But just for fun, let's go further.

"1. The only thing at Auschwitz resembling a human gas chamber was constructed in 1946 by Stalin."
It's a lie. The small gas chamber in the Auschwitz main camp is a reconstruction. Initially it was a morgue (in a crematorium) that was occassionally used for small-scale gassings, then, after the gassings were moved to Auschwitz-Birkenau (where the actual mass extermination of Jews took place) it was converted into an air-raid shelter. After the war the Poles (not "Stalin") tried to reconstruct the original state by removing the dividing walls of the air-shelter and re-opening the Zyklon B introduction holes. This is all explained in this debunking of David Cole.

When the author writes about someone "constructing" the gas chamber, the impression is that the whole building was built anew, which is a lie. In fact a chemical analysis found HCN traces in the morgue walls.
"2. Not a single diagnosis of death by cyanide poisoning is on record for any German labour camp."
Where would have such a diagnosis come from, considering that as a rule most bodies of the gassed were incinerated? And while some gassings took place in some of the labor camps, the mass murder by gas was mostly confined to extermination camps.
"3. No trace whatever remains of the millions of bodies allegedly gassed in the German labour camps."
A lie, see Mass Graves at Nazi Extermination Camps.
"4. None of the war generals after the war who wrote their memoirs made any allusion to human gas chambers or indeed to any intention to exterminate an ethnic group."
See: Gas chambers not mentioned in the memoirs of Churchill, Eisenhower, de Gaulle?
"5. The Red Cross made normal, routine visits to Auschwitz during the war, and its published reports made no allusion to any ongoing human gassing there."
A lie: the only time the Red Cross tried to inspect Auschwitz, it was not allowed to.

Why would that be? What did they have to hide?

See:
The Red Cross inspected the death camps?
Kollerstrom's Deception on the Visit of the International Committee of the Red Cross to Auschwitz
Kollerstrom and the 1948 Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on the Holocaust
"6. No authentic documents attesting to “The Holocaust” exist anywhere."
A lie. For starters:
Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Sonderkommando Kulmhof in German Documents - The Extermination of 100,000 Jews
The Kinna Report - German Document on the Killing of Unfit Jews in Auschwitz
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
Evidence on the Babi Yar Massacre 29 & 30 September 1941: Contemporary Sources
The Jäger Report
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
More Than 100 Nazi Extermination Remarks, 1939-1944
More Nazi Mass Murder Statements
"7. The Bad Arolsen archives list everyone who lived and died in all the German labour camps. The question naturally arises as to what is the total number recorded in this tremendous archive. Clearly the managers of this archive are not at liberty to tell of this or they would be jailed for so awful a crime."
A lie. Most of the people who were murdered in the camps never became their inmates, so they were never entered into the camp registry system in the first place, and most of the extermination camps were not even officially concentration camps (e.g. Treblinka, Belzec, Sobibor, Chelmno). Bad Arolsen only has very incomplete records regarding the registered prisoners which have no relation to the total death toll.

See: The Red Cross stats canard.
"Do you build a hospital next (30 metres) to a gas chamber? Does the Camp Commander live 400 yards from the gas chamber?"
As told previously, officially it was a morgue that was only occasionally used for small-scale gassings. The industrial-scale extermination happened later - in Auschwitz-Birkenau.
"But did you know that the Jewish workers were compensated for their labor with scrip printed specifically for their use in stores, canteens and even brothels?"
All workers were compensated, and you can see such ersatz money in the museums and online. The author tries to present it as some sort of hidden knowledge.

Obviously, increasing the workers' efficiency was one of the Nazi goals. There is no contradiction with extermination of the Jews who were found unfit for labor.
"In fact, a very high percentage of the Jewish inmates were not able to work, and were nevertheless not killed. For example, an internal German telex message dated Sept. 4, 1943, from the chief of the Labor Allocation department of the SS Economic and Administrative Main Office (WVHA), reported that of 25,000 Jews held in Auschwitz, only 3,581 were able to work, and that all of the remaining Jewish inmates — some 21,500, or about 86 percent — were unable to work."
Nope. See: Holocaust deniers, Gerhard Maurer and Jews unfit for work in Auschwitz.

Short explanation: the number omitted the Polish Jews, who constituted the majority. Most Jews residing in Auschwitz were able to work. Those few who could not were not permanently disabled but rather required a short re-convalescence period, see Small children and people unfit for work in Auschwitz?
"This is also confirmed in a secret report dated April 5, 1944, on “security measures in Auschwitz” by Oswald Pohl, head of the SS concentration camp system, to SS chief Heinrich Himmler. Pohl reported that there was a total of 67,000 inmates in the entire Auschwitz camp complex, of whom 18,000 were hospitalized or disabled. In the Auschwitz II camp (Birkenau), supposedly the main extermination center, there were 36,000 inmates, mostly female, of whom “approximately 15,000 are unable to work.”
Nope. As explained in the article linked to above, Pohl never wrote that those 18,000 were Jews.

Once again, deniers invent a contradiction where there is none.
"The evidence shows that Auschwitz-Birkenau was established primarily as a camp for Jews who were not able to work, including the sick and elderly, as well as for those who were temporarily awaiting assignment to other camps."
Actually Birkenau was established as a camp for Soviet POWs. As for the Jews not able to work, the evidence shows most of them were murdered in Birkenau without becoming its inmates.
"Jewish scholar Arno Mayer, a professor of history at Princeton University, acknowledges in his 1988 book about the “final solution” that more Jews perished at Auschwitz as a result of typhus and other “natural” causes than were executed."
Arno Mayer is not an authority or an expert on Auschwitz in any way, shape or form. Also see
Deceit & Misrepresentation. The Techniques of Holocaust Denial. The Mayer Gambit.
"Inmates Released"
See the corresponding section of A short debunking of Mark Weber's "Auschwitz: Myths and Facts".
"A FACTUAL LIST OF FACILITIES AVAILABLE TO PRISONERS AT THE ALLEGED DEATH CAMP OF AUSCHWITZ IN POLAND"
Fully explained/debunked at Auschwitz swimming pool, hospital etc. 
"Supposedly the most dreaded of German camps, Auschwitz was visited monthly by International Red Cross inspection teams who were allowed to speak to prisoner representatives alone, in order to hear first-hand of any mistreatment, chicanery, interruption of mail and parcel delivery, health concerns, food and ration matters etc."
A lie already debunked above.

The only time the Red Cross tried to inspect Auschwitz, it was not allowed to.

Why would that be? What did they have to hide?

See:
The Red Cross inspected the death camps?
Kollerstrom's Deception on the Visit of the International Committee of the Red Cross to Auschwitz
Kollerstrom and the 1948 Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on the Holocaust
"In a 1650 page Red Cross report there was never a mention of gas chambers."
Actually there was. Quoting from "Kollerstrom and the 1948 Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on the Holocaust":
Kollerstrom claims that "in all its 1,600 pages the Report never hints at any human gas chambers" (Breaking the Spell, p. 218). Leaving aside that this point lacks relevance, as the report is not a historical study of German camps, it is not even correct:
"At 7 a.m. the first group of one hundred women arrived - it was a terrible and pathetic sight to see these poor creatures, famished, dirty, frightened and suspicious - they could not believe they were to be set free, and took me for an agent of the SS, sent to fetch them for the gas chamber."
(Report of the International Committee Of The Red Cross On Its Activities During The Second World War, Volume 1, p. 625)
"He forced the Red Cross to produce their WWII records, they showed approximately 280,000 total dead for all the camps."
A lie, see: The Red Cross stats canard.
"Camp dental facilities, attended by camp inmate dentists and nurses to deal with the inmates’ dental problems – before the war there 43% of Germany’s dentists were Jewish."
The author then posts a photo of an alleged dentist in Auschwitz. Predictably, the photo is none of the sort - it is actually a dentist from the non-extermination transit camp Westerbork.
"Dr. Carl Clauberg – Famous Berlin surgeon who handled difficult cases."
Clauberg's work in Auschwitz consisted of experimenting on making women (specifically, Jewish women) sterile.
"On weekends at the camp cinema, mainly cultural and non-political films were shown. One ex-occupant recalled how: “There was a library with newspapers. A violin quartet came to play in the barracks. They even ‘made a movie’ in the camp. Some evenings they brought in German movies…”"
Another lie. This claim is taken from Kollestrom's book, who quotes from Reynouard's video, who in turns quotes from a random youtube video "Holohoax survivors who tell truth".

The video however clearly states at 3:38 that this pertains to Buchenwald, a non-extermination camp.
"When the evil Nazis were not too busy murdering everybody, they also found time to build dining halls for the prisoners. Above, the dining hall at Auschwitz III, where the “big” gas chambers were supposed to be. Photograph from 1942."
An outright lie, since Auschwitz III (Monowitz) was a labor camp without gas chambers.
"The camp choir, recruited from the workers at the IG Farben factory at Auschwitz. All well-fed."
And none of them Jewish. The photo was Dürrfeld's defense exhibit #1348 and he commented on it  on 16.04.1948 during the IG Farben (trial transcript, p. 11634):
"This picture shows the choir of the Ukrainian women under the leadership of a Ukrainian musician."
The denier has lied by omission.
"A stage performance at Auschwitz, dated by the German Federal Archive Service as “1941/1944."
Once again, a photo from the non-extermination camp Monowitz, Dürrfeld's exhibit #1347. Irrelevant.
"A camp library where inmates could borrow books from forty-five thousand volumes available."
As already explained here, the photo does not come from Auschwitz but rather was made in Pforzheim in 1918! As explained at the same link, there were several libraries in various part of the Auschwitz complex, but none with "forty-five thousand volumes", which is just another lie.

The rest of the points have been commented on at:Auschwitz swimming pool, hospital etc.
and Small children and people unfit for work in Auschwitz? 
"PHOTOS SHOWING HEALTHY CAMP INMATES"
Determining the health of inmates from photos must be a special denier skill.
"Obese Jewish Prisoner, Dachau"
When did the prisoner arrive? Did he have time to starve? Lying by omission.
"Zyklon-B was used at the labour camps, not as a method of extermination but for the sake of maintaining hygiene among the inmates."
As a matter of fact it was used for both.

Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
"New arrivals would strip off their clothes and throw them into the Gaskammer, then have a shower and if lice was suspected they would have their hair shaved."
Right, those Jews deemed fit for work. What happened to the rest?

For example, about 430000 Jews were deported to Auschwitz from Hungary in the spring-summer of 1944. About 110000 of them were selected for labor and transferred to various camps. About 320000 of them were found not fit for labor. Deniers should be able to explain the fate of these 320000 Jews unfit for labor in 1944. What happened to them? Where did they go? What's the evidence for this?
"The concept people call “Holocaust-Denial” means an affirmation concerning the manner in which normal hygiene technology worked, namely the opposite of what was affirmed at Nuremberg in 1946 – by US/UK military “intelligence” – whereby merely producing a can of Zyklon was taken as evidence of mass human gassing."
A mere pile of Zyklon B cans does not, of course, prove that there were homicidal gassings.

On the other hand, the documents showing that the morgues of the crematoria were officially designated as gas chambers/cellars (as described by numerous witnesses) and proving that they were not delousing installations do establish this.
"Not only are the delousing chambers too small for the imagined Holocaust gas chamber story, but their delicate apparatus would easily have been smashed to bits by desperate, dying humans."
Since no one has claimed that these delousing chambers were used for mass extermination, what was the point again?
"All documentation relating to “gassing equipment” which has been found in camp records refers specifically to the delousing chambers"
A lie, as pointed out above.
"There are also invoices for airtight doors, gas masks, Zyklon-B, extractor fans, clothing racks, and other supplies essential to delousing procedures."
For the crematoria morgues, which were not delousing installations.
"The autoclaves were remarkably efficient, and were obviously the source of far-fetched allegations in some Holocaust storyteller books of “executions in steam chambers” which occasionally make the rounds."
Autoclaves had nothing to do with the steam chamber rumors, since the latter were concerning the Reinhardt camps, not Auschwitz.
"Surviving bills of lading for Zyklon-B, which are available for public inspection at the National Archives in the United States, show very clearly that Zyklon-B was shipped to all camps, and not just to the alleged gas chamber camps. The bills of lading in the US National Archives run from February16 to May 31, 1944, and reveal that the cases of cyanide crystals (Zyklon) are numbered in sequence (Nos. 50,053 to 50,210); each shipment consisted of thirteen cases, totaling 195 kg; and identical shipments—six each—went to Auschwitz and Oranienburg concentration camps. Oranienburg is situated in Germany, and not even the wildest Holocaust exaggeration has ever claimed that there was a homicidal gas chamber at that camp."
As before, the mere presence of Zyklon B alone is not incriminating, but the argument is bogus anyway, since Oranienburg was the seat of the Concentration Camp Inspectorate and thus was a logical place to store Zyklon B cans for further distribution to other camps.
"THE “HOMICIDAL GAS CHAMBER” SHOWN AT AUSCHWITZ WAS NEVER A GAS CHAMBER
...
Existing blueprints show that the alleged gas chamber was in fact a morgue that was later converted into an air raid shelter."
Correct, but they don't disprove its occasional use as a gas chamber.
"On the blueprints, the alleged gas chambers are designated as ‘morgues’."
And in the documents the Birkenau crematoria morgues are explicitly called "gas chamber", "gas cellar", "gassing cellar".
"He discovered that the four openings in the roof of Krema I, as well as the only door leading directly into the ‘gas chamber’, did not exist at the time of the alleged mass gassings and therefore could only have been pierced through the roof of Krema I since the liberation of the camp."
He could not have "discovered" that. There is evidence to suggest that initially there were fewer openings in the roof (3 or 2), but the deniers can't prove that there were none.
"Krema I is presented to tourists as being “partially” reconstructed, but it is in fact nothing more than a gross deception."
However the author presents no evidence for his claim. He only repeats the usual braindead memes like the "flimsy doors" and the "fake chimney".

More on the gas chamber of Krema I and its attempted reconstruction:

Debunking David Cole's Auschwitz video
Detached Krema I chimney?
Flimsy gas chamber door with a window?
"If the gas chamber was shut down in 1942/43, and not converted back into a gas chamber until after the war by the Soviets, then where were the people gassed during 1943/44?"
Like in the first sentence of his website, the author exposes himself as a complete idiot who knows nothing about the history of Auschwitz. Obviously they were gassed in Birkenau in 1942-1944.
"The ovens are only a few a feet away from the alleged gas chamber room. The heat of the ovens were only separated from the room alleged to be a gas chamber by a brick wall. The active ingredient of Zyklon-B is hydrocyanic acid which becomes explosive upon vaporization."
Only up to a certain concentration, which would unlikely to have been reached with homicidal gassings (which theoretically require lower concentrations than delousing gassings - though even those would not have reached the explosive concentrations).
"In reality the room next to the crematory alleged to be a gas chamber was never a gas chamber. It was a morgue."
It was a morgue that was occasionally used as a makeshift gas chamber before the gassings moved to Birkenau.
"The fact it was never a gas chamber has been admitted by the Auschwitz museum. Dr. Franciszek Piper, former senior curator and director of the Auschwitz State Museum admitted on videotape that the holes in the ceiling that were purportedly used to throw Zyklon-B into the rooms used for “homicidal gas chambers” were added AFTER the war, as was the chimney that is built near to, but NOT even attached to, the supposed “gas chamber” building, a building that was in actuality used as a air raid shelter – to PROTECT the inmates from the Allied bombings."
Chimney and holes have been commented on above, and the author's claim about Piper (who has never been a "director" of the Auschwitz State Museum) admitting that "it was never a gas chamber" is a bald-faced lie. Obviously Piper has never, ever stated anything like that. Also see: Debunking David Cole's Auschwitz video

On the Dachau gas chamber see: Dachau gas chamber; the Broszat letter.
"As a young officer, Gerhart Schirmer was captured in 1945 by the Russians and held in Sachsenhausen which the Russians continued to use as a prison. Although the War and Nazism were over, Schirmer and a few fellow-prisoners were forced to construct a gas chamber and execution room, to show the world what the Nazis had done."
While Schirmer did make such a claim, it was false - in fact, the gas chamber in Sachsenhausen existed, the equipment had been removed before the Allies arrived and was stored in the camp. After the Soviets arrived, they found the equipment and the gas chamber with the plastered over holes where the equipment used to be. They honestly described this state of things in their report (which is how we know the Soviets did not lie on this point - they could have said they found the gas chamber intact), and later the equipment was installed again. It is probably this reinstallation of the equipment in the existing building that was described by Schirmer as the constriction of a fake gas chamber, though it was nothing of the sort.

See G. Morsch, "Tötungen durch Giftgas im Konzentrationslager Sachsenhausen" in G. Morsch, B. Perz (Hrsg.), Neue Studien zu nationalsozialistischen Massentötungen durch Giftgas. Historische Bedeutung, technische Entwicklung, revisionistische Leugnung, 2012 (2. Aufl.), pp. 275-6.
"Engineer’s Deathbed Confession: We Built Morgues, not Gas Chambers"
All we have is Lüftl's credibility to go on that he actually interviewed Schreiber, but he has none.

Assuming Schreiber (who became the chief engineer of Huta in Kattowitz only in November 1943, long after the crematoria were finished) did say this, his claim is simply refuted by the documents mentioned above - that call those morgues gas cellars/gassing cellars.
"In the famous Ernst Zündel court trial of 1985, expert witness Raul Hilberg was at a loss:
“Can you give me one scientific report that shows the existence of gas chambers anywhere in Nazi-occupied territory?” defence counsel Doug Christie asked Hilberg in a day-long rapid fire of cross-examination.  “I am at a loss,” Hilberg replied.  “You are (at a loss) because you can’t,” Christie said."
That's a strawman demand since the issue of gas chambers is first of all historical. A scientific report can show the presence of HCN traces on the walls of the gas chambers or the presence of the holes in its roof but you have to have actual historical evidence to make the claim, which is why Hilberg couldn't name any purely scientific report for gassings - such one is barely possible. It's basic stuff, really.
"During this trial, not a single eyewitness for the plaintiff could be found."
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
"Also during the trial an alleged “eyewitness” to the gas chamber at Auschwitz was asked to point on a map where the gas chamber was located. He was unable to point to where the mythical gas chamber was located on the map since there had been no gas chamber in reality."
The transcript file is 5060 pages long and the author apparently expects us to go through them all to find the alleged place where the witness allegedly couldn't find something, instead of simply giving us the page number. A brilliant example of "scholarship".

Obviously, even if the witness were unable, after decades, to pinpoint some location on a map, it doesn't follow in any way, shape or form that there were no gas chambers. Why do deniers use such poor logic?
"However the boiling point of the hydrogen cyanide (HCN) in Zyklon-B is 26°C, the evaporation of HCN from Zyklon-B is too slow to kill humans in gas chambers in the way it has been alleged if the gas chamber temperature is below 26°C."
Actually HCN doesn't have to boil to evaporate relatively quickly, and the with hundreds, if not thousands humans in the chamber the temperature there would have quickly reached 30+°C all on its own, as confirmed even by the denier Mattogno (Auschwiz: The Case for Sanity, 2010, vol. 1, p. 117):
"The experience obtained in Germany in connection with the disinfestation of military barracks performed on a large scale in 1940 and 1941 at temperatures between minus 4 and plus 8°C showed in fact that “in all cases, the essential phase of the gas release is complete after one or, at the most, two hours” (Peters/Rasch, p. 136). No doubt, a temperature of 27°C or higher would have sped up the evaporation of the hydrogen cyanide, but would this have necessitated the installation of a heating device? As I have shown elsewhere (1994b, p. 65), the body of an adult standing on his feet generates 1.72 kcal per minute (Flury/Zernik, p. 29); 1,800 bodies would thus generate 3,096 kcal per minute. The latent heat of evaporation of hydrogen cyanide is -6.67 kcal per mol; as its molecular weight is 27.03, the heat required for the evaporation of 6 kg of hydrogen cyanide would be (6,000×6.67)÷27.03 = 1,480 kcal, less than half of the heat generated by 1,800 bodies within 1 minute."
Of course, if needed, the gas chambers could always be preheated with braziers.
"None of these requirements were found by Fred Leuchter, Germar Rudolf, Robert Faurisson, Walter Lüftl, Fredrick Töben, John Ball, Carlo Mattogno, Jürgen Graf, Ernst Zündel, David McCalden, David Cole and others who have carried out a technical inspection of the alleged “gas chambers” – which are admitted as never being a gas chamber."
And none of them are in any way experts on gas chambers, including Leuchter.
"Dr. Charles P. Larson made those autopsies to find proof of gassings but found nothing."
See: The Larson canard.
"The corpses would have been bright cherry RED."
First of all, witnesses rarely describe body color at all. That would not have been the most important detail to mention compared to, you know, the fact of the mass murder.

Second, witnesses do mention red discoloration. One of the most important Auschwitz witnesses, Henryk Tauber, described the gassed corpses (HCN) thus:
"We found heaps of naked bodies, doubled up. They were pinkish, and in places red. Some were covered with greenish marks and saliva ran from their mouths."
S. I. Pilunov described the corpses of the gas van victims in Belorussia on 20.05.1944 (Prestupleniya nemetsko-fashiststkikh okkupantov v Belorussii. 1941-1944, 1965, p. 172):
"The skin on the corpses had a pronounced red color, such that happens after a long stay in the bath."
Some other witnesses describe different shades, such as Wilhelm Pfannenstiel, who said that the Belzec gassing victims showed “a bluish puffiness about the face”.

The reason for the differing descriptions is simple - the so-called characteristic skin color with poisonings applies to individual cases, normally without additional physical injuries and with enough oxygen, i.e. the discoloration strongly depends on the circumstances of death.

It does not necessarily apply to the cases of mass gassings with obvious lack of oxygen and numerous physical injuries involved. Both in Auschwitz and in the Reinhardt camps many victims must have died from pure asphyxiation. Indeed, that is exactly the cause of death claimed by Pfannenstiel - not the engine exhaust.

Skin discoloration would thus vary from gassing to gassing, depending on many factors. But to stay with Auschwitz, a description of cyanide poisonings says:
"In most cases, cyanide poisoning causes a deceptively healthy pink to red skin color. However, if a physical injury or lack of oxygen is involved, the skin color may be bluish. Reddening of the eyes and pupil dilation are symptoms of cyanide poisoning. Cyanosis (blue discoloration of the skin) tends to be associated with severe cyanide poisonings."
Needless to say, mass gassings in Auschwitz involved physical injuries, lack of oxygen and severe cyanide poisoning.
"It was claimed at Nuremberg that 4 million had been disposed of in the Auschwitz camp crematoria."
That is a deceptively misleading claim. It was so claimed by the Soviets (more or less, they were vague on the use of the pyres), but the judgment did not repeat the claim.
"It takes 2-3 hours to cremate a human body even with the most modern crematoria."
Once again a misleadingly deceptive claim. It takes so long for the whole procedure, starting from a cold oven (which needs lots of time and fuel to be heated up) and including a period of time to let the bones whiten since they would look good that way in the urn.

This is not in any way applicable to the way things were done in the wartime camps. This is described in more detail in the debunking of Steve Anderson.
"The camps had between four and twelve ovens each giving 17,520 to 52,560 bodies per year maximum at each camp"
Birkenau had 46 muffles (though not the whole time) and had to dispose of about 500,000 bodies or so (the rest were burned in open air). Here are the oven capacities. Do the math.
"There is also the problem of fuel as each body would need about 40-50 kilograms of coke to burn"
Incorrect for the continuous burnings. Thus, the magistrate of Wiesbaden wrote to the firm Topf & Söhne (who had constructed the Auschwitz ovens) on 19.12.1949 (ThHStAW, Bestand Topf u. Söhne, 231, Bl. 35):
"It is hereby confirmed that Mr. chief engineer Klettner carried out the planned conversion of the cremation furnace in 2 1/2 weeks, taking into account improvements according to your latest experiences.
Mr. Klettner demonstrated the furnace in operation and handed it over after three days of trial operation with a total of 16 cremations to our complete satisfaction today.
The performance of the oven, especially in terms of fuel consumption, exceeded all expectations. On the third day after the commissioning, cremation times of 40 minutes were already being achieved without any fuel consumption except for the required heating up [of the oven].
You are free to show the oven to the interested parties after a prior notification.
Publication of the above letter without prior permission on this side is not permitted."
"It is claimed that 60-70,000 people were cremated every day."
A lie, it is not so claimed.
"The operating documents of Auschwitz concentration camp released from the Soviet archives reveal that the entire quantity of coke which was supplied for the crematoria throughout the entire period of the war was only 2,188 tons of coke which is enough to cremate only 60-70,000."
Not with continuous incineration, and no, we don't have the complete coke documents.
"Furthermore detailed aerial photographs of Auschwitz which were taken by American, British and South African planes show no signs of huge mountains of coke or huge mass graves or pits and no lines of people waiting outside a gas chamber."
They did not have to show any mountains of coke, but the rest of what they show is incriminating:

The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Photographs as Evidence for Mass Extermination
John Ball's Air Photo Evidence on Auschwitz
"Cremation specialists have confirmed that thousands of corpses could not possibly have been cremated every day throughout the spring and summer of 1944 at Auschwitz, as has often been alleged."
No specialists on mass cremations in crematoria have made such a claim. Modern crematoria's modus operandi (individual cremations) is not applicable, as already pointed out above.
"If these crematories operated at a theoretical rate of a maximum output 24 hours a day, 7 days a week without any down time and at constant pace which is an impossible situation it would have taken at least 35 years at an impossible minimum to cremate six million persons."
Since it is not claimed that 6 million corpses were cremated at all, much less in the crematoria, the author is showing his idiotic ignorance once again. The number of the corpses incinerated in the camp crematoria doesn't reach even a million. Most Holocaust victims' corpses were actually incinerated in open air, many are still buried.
"Based on his own experience, Lagacé testified that it would only have been possible to cremate a maximum of 184 bodies a day at Birkenau."
That's 4 corpses in one muffle in 1 day, or 1 corpse in 6 hours - a ridiculously low number even by denier standards, showing that Lagace is just another fraud.
"Auschwitz survivor Mr. Lieberman confirmed under oath in an affidavit submitted to the Nuremberg trials, that Auschwitz’s “four ovens” could cremate four hundred corpses in just five minutes."
What the deceptive author doesn't mention is that it was merely hearsay not taken seriously by any historian, see Survivor Lieberman and the Auschwitz ovens.
"More nonsense from Nuremberg. This time involving the cremating of 80,000 corpses in “two old ovens”"
The author's link no longer works, but the reference is probably to a doubly mangled claim by a newspaper to the testimony of Charles Sigismund Bendel during the Belsen trial.

On 01.10.1945 Bendel testified:
"Two days later, when I was attached to the day group, I saw a gas chamber in action. On that occasion it was the ghetto at Lodz - 80000 people were gassed."
Bendel's words obviously don't mean that the 80,000 were gassed in one go - it was a continuous operation that took more than 3 weeks.

But some newspapers misunderstood his claim, so headlines like "80,000 Lodz Jews Killed in One Night at Oswiecim, Jewish Doctor Testifies" appeared.  Associated Press compounded on the mistake by thinking that Bendel was talking about Belsen -
"In Lueneburg, Germany, a Jewish physician, testifying at the trial of 45 men and women for war crimes at the Belsen and Oswiecim concentration camps, said that 80,000 Jews, representing the entire ghetto of Lodz, Poland, had been gassed or burned to death in one night at the Belsen camp."
"To this day you will see inside the Majdanek Museum a building where piles of shoes, stored in large wire-mesh containers, are exhibited. A sign at the building’s entrance states that these shoes belonged “to victims of ‘Operation Reinhardt,’” which according to the orthodox Holocaust narrative was the code name for the wholesale slaughter of European Jews by National Socialist Germany. Many visitors will therefore take that exhibit as proof for mass murder. A museum geared toward informing visitors rather than propagandizing them would explain that these are shoes taken from the camp’s shoemaker workshop (Schumacher-Werkstätte) right across from the building where they are displayed today, and that those shoes were collected from many sources and brought to Majdanek in order to be refurbished and reused, and that this large workshop also manufactured new shoes."
Sure, those 820000 pairs of shoes were mostly from the Aktion Reinhardt victims murdered in Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, not in Majdanek itself. And?
"From 1942, until the end of World War Two, the United States Airforce performed low flying, low-speed photography of all the alleged “death camps” to obtain evidence of what was going on. This followed Jewish claims in the West that a mass murder was occurring. All these photographs were released in 1979 when they were declassified. None of these photographs show any sign of mass murder or disposal of millions of bodies."
On the contrary, the photos are highly incriminating:
The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Photographs as Evidence for Mass Extermination
John Ball's Air Photo Evidence on Auschwitz
"The official Auschwitz camp death certificates revealed that the death toll for all inmates Jews and non-Jews at Auschwitz between May 1940 through to December 1944 was 74,000 of which roughly only 30,000 were Jews."
This only concerns the registered inmates. Since nobody has claimed that most of Auschwitz victims were its inmates, this is irrelevant to the total death toll of the camp.

On the British decrypts see Auschwitz decodes.
"After WWII the Red Cross maintained that the estimated 270,000 deaths inside the camps resulted from malnourishment and disease of which 40% were Jews. "
A lie already addressed above.
"For over a century, the Jewish World Almanac has been widely regarded as the most authentic source for the world’s Jewish population numbers."
Another lie, since the World Almanac wasn't Jewish and so was not regarded "as the most authentic source for the world’s Jewish population numbers". See: The World Almanac canard.
"It is highly significant that among this enormous collection of secret German records, not a single one provides any evidence of mass killing, or even refers to a German wartime policy or program of “extermination.”"
Another lie, already addressed above.
"HIMMLER – “REDUCE DEATHS AT ALL COSTS”"
"The German SS arrested Buchenwald Commandant, Karl Koch in 1943 for mistreating and even executing some prisoners. After an investigation Koch was found guilty by SS Judge Konrad Morgen and shot. Does this sound like a policy of “extermination?”"
Certainly - the camps had to be orderly and efficient as far as slave labor was concerned. This doesn't have to do anything with extermination of those found unfit for labor.
"The International Red Cross, including a number of officials from the U.S., Britain, France, and Switzerland, inspected the German concentration camps throughout the war. The Red Cross had unrestricted access each month to every German concentration camp including Auschwitz."
A lie, already debunked above.
"The Germans captured 150,000 British soldiers. 150 of those men were engineers who worked at Auschwitz-Birkenau to maintain the manufacturing plants that processed Silesian coal to make gasoline for the German Army. The Germans were using a coal gasification formula developed in 1915 in Russia. These 150 men obviously had daily access throughout the camps but to date neither a Nuremberg prosecutor nor a Holohoax researcher has cited their testimony."
Another lie. E562 was working not in Birkenau but in Libiaż.
"A FACTUAL APPRAISAL OF THE ‘HOLOCAUST’ BY THE RED CROSS"
Already addressed above.
"THE BRITISH INTELLIGENCE DECRYPTS"
See Auschwitz decodes.
"Allies communicated with Germany and determined there were no murders."
A lie.
"If Germans were mass-murdering inmates they would not have answered Allied questions and not have evacuated inmates."
It does not follow. Germany always pretended it treated its inmates humanely, so there was no reason for it not to have replied in the positive.

More specifically, when it was clear that the war was lost Himmler was hoping for some sort of a truce with the Allies and was holding onto some inmates, including Jews, as pawns (meanwhile apparently giving contradictory orders pertaining to different groups of prisoners).

So the reply was in any case expected - and of course it didn't entirely correspond to the reality, for while there were no killings of whole large camps, there were death marches.

Anyway, the whole issue of this particular "communication" between the Allies and the Germans revolved around one specific topic - whether the inmates of the camps would be killed during the evacuation or not. The Allies did not doubt the general extermination policy for a second.

E.g. already after sending his expectation to the Germans that inmates will be kept alive on 22.01.1945 (8 p.m.), Stettinius sent the following to Harriman (9 p.m.):
"In line with record of their past cruelties it is feared that, prior to retreat, the Germans will massacre Jewish and other survivors in Auschwitz (Oswiecim) and Birkenau near Kattowitz and other camps in that area. Please suggest to Soviet authorities the urgency of addressing suitable warnings to Germans in those localities by radio and pamphlets. It is felt, due to nearness of Soviet forces, that such warnings from them would be helpful and effective. Please also take up with Soviet authorities feasibility of their taking direct measures for the protection of inmates of camps.
Board is anxious to hear, as indication whether Germans previous to retreat continue their policy of exterminating remaining Jews, whether 60,000 to 80,000 Jews reported in Lodz a few months ago were found alive. Kindly inquire and cable results."
It was thus a matter of intimidating the Germans into keeping the inmates alive. Also, at this point nobody thought of bombing the camps that were to be evacuated in a few days, obviously.
"60,000 PRISONERS CHOSE TO GO WEST WITH THE RETREATING GERMAN SS IN JANUARY OF 1945"
A bald-faced lie. Obviously they did not choose. The author predictably misuses Elie Wiesel's choice of words in his novel-memoir "Night" to claim that the Nazis gave some choice to the prisoners, but obviously Wiesel claims no such thing.

The so-called choice that the Wiesel family had was to stay in the camp pretending to be severely ill (and risk being murdered by the SS) or go on an evacuation transport risk dying on the way or on

The "choice" was not offered to them by the SS but rather was due to the possibility of staying "in the infirmary, where, thanks to my doctor, he [Shlomo Wiesel] could enter as either a patient or a medic." (Elie himself was already in the hospital at the time).

That's it. The so-called choice option by the SS is a lie.

See the quote from "Night"here.
"JEWISH EMIGRATION"
The numbers cited are obvious exaggerations from random testimonial sources without any documentary corroboration, something a denier would dismiss if the claim was about extermination of Jews.
"There were approximately 3 million Jews in German-occupied Europe."
According to the SS statistician Richard Korherr  on 31.12.1939 there were 3,12 million Jews in the "Reich area" which included the "Old Reich", Sudetenland, Austria, Bohemia and Moravia, Eastern territories and Generalgouvernement.

This alone is more than the author's ridiculous number, and most of the occupied Europe (and USSR) has not yet been conquered. There needs to be no further comment on this, except to refer to the exhaustive demographic study that established between 5 and 6 million Jewish victims in the occupied territories and this automatically further refuted the deceptive assertions of the author.

This also applies to his next lie: "THE JEWS WERE STILL ALIVE".
"On May 20th, 1945 the New York Times reported that more than 6,000,000 labour camp inmates had been “liberated” from German concentration camps."
Not, however, "6 million Jews".
"The leading Austrian Social Democrat, Dr. Benedikt Kautsky — himself a Jew — who spent the years from 1938 to 1945 in concentration camps, three of these in Auschwitz, said:"
A fake quote: Was the Auschwitz Survivor Benedikt Kautsky a Holocaust Denier?
"An Austrian woman, Maria Vanherwaarden" ... "A Jewish woman named Marika Frank"
See Survivors did not see or hear about gas chambers?
"TESTIMONY OF GERMANS WHO WERE STATIONED AT AUSCHWITZ"
"Richard Baer"
To rebut the nonsense by the author I will quote from my article:
"That's how denial works - one troglodyte quotes another troglodyte, taking it all on pure faith. No matter that Baer was Auschwitz I commandant in 1944, when, indeed, there was no gas chamber in that camp. No matter that his pre-trial interrogations are publicly available (e.g., on Frankfurt Trial DVD). No matter that Baer never denied the existence of gas chambers in Auschwitz complex, but rather correctly stated that he, as a commandant of the main camp in 1944, had nothing to do with gassings, because gassings were performed in Birkenau (22.12.1960):
Ich bin nur Lagerkommandant im Lager Auschwitz I gewesen. Mit den Teillagern, in denen Vergasungen stattfanden, hatte ich nichts zu tun. Ich habe auch keinen Einfluss auf die Vergasungen selbst gehabt. Die Vergasungen fanden im Lager II statt. Dieses Lager unterstand nicht mir, sondern dem Hauptsturmfuehrer Kramer. Er war zu meiner Zeit Kommandant des Lagers II.
Forget all that. Better let's dream up the story about a brave commandant who was murdered for refusing to repeat the myths. This is much more fun for us, troglodytes!
"Thies Christophersen"
Fully discredited, see Rassinier denied Auschwitz gas chambers. Or was that Thies Christophersen?
"Dr. Wilhelm Stäglich"
Stäglich was stationed in a village about 10 km Auschwitz (as the bird flies) and claims to have visited the camp 3 or 4 times but as he admits in his writings, he never even saw the cremation ovens (Kritik, 1978, Nr. 23, p. 68) and makes a point of calling the Birkenau crematoria "alleged" in his book, so he probably only visited the main camp, not the extermination area, and at any rate did not approach the extermination installations. His testimony as a "witness" is therefore irrelevant.

His book is just another serving of denier myths and misinterpretations.
"None of the Western Allies ( Britain, Canada, USA, Australia, France etc. ) liberated any camps that had gas chambers, or other systems of mass murder in them."
A lie, Western Allies did liberate several camps with homicidal gas chambers, see Death camps found only by the Soviets?
"In 1945, he directed a propaganda film Death Mills (Die Todesmühlen in German), for the Psychological Warfare Dept. of the US Department of War. Intended to be shown first to German audiences, its purpose was to indoctrinate them to believe that the wildest “atrocities” imaginable had been committed by the National Socialist regime and the SS.
Within a week of the capture of Buchenwald, the famous Hollywood director Billy Wilder was in the camp making a film of propaganda lies that still circulate to this day. An inadvertent shot of Wilder on the set at Buchenwald is shown above. The film, complete with props, claimed that the Nazis made soap from the fat of (Jewish only of course) prisoners, made lampshades from the skin of prisoners, and shrunk the heads of prisoners like in the Amazon. Even the Holohoax establishment now admits these were all lies."
No such claims are made in Wilder's Death Mills, certainly not the one about Jewish soap.

There is evidence that at least 1 human lampshade was made in Buchenwald.
Shrunken heads were real and are not doubted by historians, so it's another denier lie,
"At the main Nuremberg trial, the Soviets blamed the Germans for perpetrating the Katyn massacre, and the British, French and Americans, let them do it."
A deceptively misleading statement - while the Soviets tried pinning blame for Katyn on the Germans during the Nuremberg trial, the Western Allies did not let the Soviets misuse the trial rules and let the defendants introduce their own evidence, debunking the Soviet evidence. As a result, the Nuremberg judgment does not mention Katyn at all.
"The Germans who had “confessed” to the Katyn massacre in 1945 had been tortured into making their statements."
There were no such Germans save for Arno Dühre, whose false confession wasn't widely known even in the USSR (he wasn't executed). He renounced it upon his released from a Soviet camp.
"Two of the liars who signed this report were:
“Member of the Special State Commission, Academic N. N. Burdenko”“Member of the Special State Commission, Mythropolitos Nikolai”
The official Soviet report on Auschwitz was listed at Nuremberg as 008-USSR. Two of the men who signed this report were:
“The Academic N. N. Burdenko”“The Mytropolitos Nikolaus”"
It is not clear what this is supposed to prove. The metropolitan Nikolai was obviously a figurehead. Burdenko was the head of the commission and there are reasons to think he sincerely believed in the German guilt at Katyn. But all that aside, it's not like the historians are using the Soviet report as some kind of a primary source on Auschwitz. What exactly is the point of this idiotic exercise?
"According to Judge Edward L. Van Roden’s book American Atrocities in Germany, out of 139 cases of treatment of alleged German “war criminals” that were investigated by the commission (who were put on trial by the American Military Tribunal in Dachau after World War II), 137 were tortured by having their testicles crushed."
A lie. There was no such book. It was an article with Van Roden's byline but not actually written by him. The 137 crushed pairs of testicles is a hoax, see 137 Crushed Lies, or Why Denial Is Beyond Repair
"How many people know that at Nuremberg the Germans were accused of, along with killing about six million Jews:
● vaporizing 20,000 Jews near Auschwitz with “atomic energy”;"
No such official accusation was made, see Nazi Atomic Bombs.
"killing 840,000 Russian POW’s at Sachsenhausen concentration camp (in one month, with special pedal-driven brain-bashing machines, no less), then disposing of them in mobile [sic] crematoria;"
Mobile crematoria obviously did exist, but the rest is indeed rubbish from a disturbed mind. Just a bad apple, you can always find some.
"torturing and killing Jewish prisoners to the tempo of a specially composed “Tango of Death” in Lvov;"
A fact that the author has done nothing to rebut.

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa5048
https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa10008
"steaming Jews to death like lobsters at Treblinka;"
No such eyewitness testimony or confession, probably just a misinterpretation of gas chambers by a far-away observer (imagine all the "steam" coming out of a hot gas chamber on a cold winter day - this could have led to the mistaken impression).

See The Revisionist Fabrication of the Myth of an Original Treblinka "Steam Narrative"
"electrocuting them en masse at Belzec;"
A rumor, no such actual eyewitness testimony or confession.
"making not only lampshades"
There is evidence that at least 1 human lampshade was made in Buchenwald.
"and soap"
The Nuremberg accusation was about a real case, the actual use of human soap at the Danzig Anatomical Institute.
"but also handbags, driving gloves, book bindings, saddles, riding breeches, gloves, house slippers, etc. from the remains of their victims;"
This is based on a testimony of a single witness, who was indeed not very credible. This stuff happens.
"killing prisoners and concentration camp inmates for everything from having armpit hair to soiled underclothing?"
Such abuse sometimes happened.
"The German policeman, Gestapo agent, Dr. Wilhelm Hoettl, was the prime Prosecution witness at the Allies’ Nuremberg Tribunal and as such is the source of the allegation that the Germans murdered six million Jews during the course of the Second World War. Hoettl’s claim was accepted at the Allies’ Nuremberg trial on face value, and without any further attempt undertaken of an independent, objective, forensic examination of the charge, that the the Germans had committed a crime of such mass-murder."
Actually Hoettl's claim was supported by the sum of the presented evidence. Nowadays we don't have to rely on such claims, there are studies like this one showing on the documentary basis that between 5 and 6 million Jews did die.
"No comprehensive analysis or expertise on weapons of the most monstrous crime in the history of mankind was undertaken on the premises that housed these murderous rooms and the ruins of which still remain."
This is not true - the Polish investigators did investigate the camp area and combed through the documents, finding many criminal traces. Many decades later Pressac retraced their steps. Nowadays we know in impressive, though not exhaustive or always non-contradictory, detail about how the main gas chambers functioned.
"Many of the leading scholars of the Holocaust have stated on record, that the actual evidence to prove the Nazis operated homicidal gas chambers, is virtually non-existent."
This has already been shown not to be true above.
"... Lachout..."
The author fell for a fake denier document, see The Lachout document.
"No evidence is more supportive of the Holocaust hoax than the statements or “confessions” of Rudolf Hoess, the former camp commandant of Auschwitz-Birkenau."
Nonsense. There are numerous statements about the gassings in Auschwitz, many of them as detailed as Höss'. Here is a small sample of evidence.
"In his memoirs written during the final months of his life while in Polish captivity awaiting his execution, former Auschwitz commander Rudolf Hoess wrote that he had been severely mistreated by his British captors right after the end of the war."
Correct. In the same memoir he reduced the death toll to about 1 million, contrary to expectations of his Polish captors. That is how we know that his memoir is reliable. Dismiss his initial confession, and we are still left with his memoir.
"The American Senator, Joseph McCarthy, in a statement given to the American Press on May 20th, 1949, drew attention to the following cases of torture to secure such confessions."
The allegations by McCarthy and others were investigated during the Malmedy hearings and while cases of misconduct were found, most of the atrocity claims were found to be groundless.

Also see 137 Crushed Lies, or Why Denial Is Beyond Repair.

In any case these allegations stem from the investigations conducted directly after the war, where the atmosphere was still heated. Whereas in West Germany many trials were conducted in the 1960s with the accused richly describing both the big picture and the details of the extermination process - and not a single allegation of torture or coercion can be thrown at this series of trials.
"BRITISH INTELLIGENCE SCEPTICAL OF GASSING STORY"
Sure, they were for a time. And?
"Britain’s Political Warfare Executive and its predecessor first deployed stories of homicidal gassing as part of propaganda efforts in two areas unconnected to treatment of Jews."
Whatever the PWE actions were, the information about the euthanasia gas chambers preceded them, see American Knowledge of Grafeneck in 1940. Also see Contemporary German Documents on Carbon Monoxide Gas and Bottles Employed for the Nazi Euthanasia

"WHY WAS THE HOLOCAST HOAX INVENTED?"
There was no hoax, so it was not invented.
"The origin of much of the Holocaust hoax lies with the Soviet Union’s desire to create atrocity propaganda against Germany, in retaliation for the latter’s exposure of Communist atrocities. In 1940, the Soviet Union’s secret police murdered thousands of Polish officers and intelligentsia and buried the bodies in the Katyn Forest. The Germans discovered the mass graves in 1943, and and exposed it to the world’s attention making much propaganda of the incident. Desperate for revenge, the Soviets invented much of the initial propaganda about the Holocaust at the end of the war, including obtaining “confessions” from Germans for all sorts of crimes—including the massacre at Katyn."
A lie - the anti-Soviet Polish Government-in-Exile published the information about the Holocaust already in late 1942. See see The Mass Extermination of Jews in German Occupied Poland.
"BRITISH MINISTRY OF INFORMATION SAID IN 1944 THAT HOLOCAUST ATROCITY PROPOGANDA MUST BE CREATED TO DISTRACT FROM USSR MASSACRES"
A lie, it said no such thing. It didn't mention the Holocaust (i.e. extermination of Jews) and it didn't say anything about inventing stuff. See Alleged lies by the British government.
Of course by 1944 the basic facts of the Holocaust were well-known anyway.
"THE GAS CHAMBERS OF WORLD WAR ONE"
And?
"WINSTON CHURCHILL AND EISENHOWER NEVER MENTIONED THE ALLEGED HOLOCAUST"
See Gas chambers not mentioned in the memoirs of Churchill, Eisenhower, de Gaulle?
"THE BALFOUR DECLARATION, WORLD WAR ONE AND 6 MILLION JEWS""THE KABALISTIC ORIGINS OF THE SIX MILLION FIGURE"
See The First Holocaust canard.
"Samuel in August 1933 talks of a planned annihilation and extermination of Jews underway in 1933 and of the war that must be waged against Germany to stop it."
Smart people could see what the Nazi policies ultimately could lead to.
"Documents captured by the Allies after the war, prove that “The Final Solution of the Jewish Question” (“Endlösung der Judenfrage”) was a phrase used by the National Socialists regarding the “auswanderung” (emigration) and “evakuierung” (evacuation) of Jews in occupied Europe. The term “Endlösung der Judenfrage” (Final Solution of the Jewish Question) along with the words “auswanderung” (emigration) and “evakuierung” (evacuation) appear in a July 1941 letter written by Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring. The term “Endlösung der Judenfrage” (Final Solution of the Jewish Question) appears in a February 1942 letter written by SS-Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich."
The phrase "the Final Solution" underwent an evolution of meaning alongside with the changes in the policy. It did mean a territorial solution at one time, but as it became clear that such is not practically possible, it came to mean murder.
"“GERMANY MUST PERISH!” – THEODORE N. KAUFMAN"
Irrelevant random book by a nutjob.
"800 Jews Lived Through “Holocaust” In A Berlin Hospital
800 German Jews spent all their war time in a Jewish Hospital in Berlin. Something strange while an “extermination plan” was supposedly running to kill all of them."
Nothing strange, as they were either part-Jews or spouses of "Aryans" so there were some exceptions made until the further clarification of the policies (which were always vague when it came to such cases, lots of discussions were held on this very issue). The absolute majority of Jews were deported and murdered.

Daniel Silver explains in Refuge in Hell: How Berlin's Jewish Hospital Outlasted the Nazis, 2003, p. 49:
"If the debate within Nazi circles had been resolved in favor of a ruthless elimination of everyone in Germany who could not prove unblemished Aryan ancestry, the hospital could not have remained in existence long enough to be saved by Germany's loss of the war. Fortunately, however, the outcome of the Nazis' uncertainty over mixed marriages and ancestry approached, but never reached, a decision in favor of total elimination. Hitler hesitated to take a step that could turn a sizeable portion of the population against the regime while the war was going badly. He deferred action until things improved, which never happened. As a consequence, a minimal Jewish presence remained in Germany until the end of the war."
"Synagogue Allowed In Berlin During The War"
Here is the actual story:
"Nazi thugs demolished the original interior during the pogrom of November 1938. However, like several of Berlin’s surviving synagogues, it escaped torching because of its proximity to neighbouring apartment houses. Services were still being held here as late as 1940, at which point the German military confiscated and desecrated the building, turning it into a stable and warehouse."
"And, we must not fail to mention the 150,000 (probably more) Jews and mischlinge (“mixed”; part-Jewish) who served in the German military."
Those were almost totally Mischlinge (and those who were Jewish were excluded from the Wehrmacht early on).
"Anti-Partisan Warfare—The Real Purpose of the Einsatzgruppen"
It was certainly one of the tasks. One other task was murdering Jews as Jews. E.g. the Jäger report reports the murder of 137,346 people, "Of these, a total of 135,391 (98.50%) were Jews and 2,056 (1.50%) were non-Jews (communists, partisans, prisoners of war, mentally disabled people and others)."

A further updated report claims 138,272 killings broken down into "A) 136,421 Jews, B) 1,064 communists, C) 56 partisans, D) 653 mental patients, E) 44 Poles, 28 Russian prisoners of war, 5 Gypsies, 1 Armenian. Total 138,272, thereof 55,556 women, 34,464 children".

Enough said.
"The authenticity question surrounding the Ereignismeldungen and TuLBs..."
There are actually none. See The Einsatzgruppen reports (Ereignismeldungen)
"The Wildly Varying Numbers of Einsatzgruppen “Victims”"
Sometimes all the shootings by mobile units (which included the Order Police) are erroneously subsumed under the title of "EG shootings", hence the contradictions.
"THE ALLEGED BABI YAR MASSACRE DEBUNKED"
A lie, the Babiy Yar massacre is thoroughly documented in numerous contemporary sources and has never been debunked.

See Evidence on the Babi Yar Massacre 29 & 30 September 1941: Contemporary Sources
"The Babi Yar Massacre in Kiev: Wartime Aerial Photography Exposes the Lie"
It does no such thing, see the claim debunked here.
"A REFUTATION OF FALSE CLAIMS BY DAVID IRVING AND DAVID COLE REGARDING MASS KILLINGS IN THE REINHARDT TRANSIT CAMPS"
Nobody has been able to refute the murders in the Reinhardt camps or point out the alternative fate of the Jews deported there. This is the end of the denial.

Here is a very simple Challenge to Supporters of the Revisionist Transit Camp Theory.
"Revisionist documentary producer Eric Hunt wrote a comprehensive response to the baseless and dishonest claims made by David Cole in his book “Republican Party Animal” regarding the Aktion Reinhardt camps."
Except Eric Hunt has since denounced Holocaust denial and accepted that these camps were places of extermination.
"THE  N.A.F.H.  CRIME  SCENE  INVESTIGATION  CHALLENGE TM"
This clown has been refuted and disposed of a long time ago.

How about taking the Challenge to Supporters of the Revisionist Transit Camp Theory instead?

Should be easy to find a single name for 1000$?
"THE SOVIET AND AMERICAN DOCUMENTARY FORGERY FACTORIES"
"One of the most ambitious Soviet productions concerned the writings of Dr. Josef Goebbels."
Since the diaries are fully authentic, as is acknowledged even by Irving, who is always happy to call an incriminating document a fake, what was the point again?
"On the American side:"
The author lists some random diaries not having much to do with the Holocaust or offering much evidence for his claims. Whatever. No evidence is offered that Holocaust-related documents have been forged.
"TRENT PARK EAVESDROPPING – MORE FABRICATED ATROCITY PROPAGANDA"
No evidence of fabrication. The author points out some garbled information but this only shows the incorrect knowledge some of these people possessed, not that anything has been fabricated.
"HOLOCAUST PROPAGANDA LIES ABOUT DR. JOSEF MENGELE"
Obviously throughout the years there have been some dodgy claims and exaggerations, but that doesn't mean that the core of the survivor testimony about him is not true.
"AUSCHWITZ TATTOO HOAX""there is not the slightest proof that the National Socialists tattooed anyone, ever, at Auschwitz or anywhere else"
Yeah, and the Earth is flat. The author has just exposed himself as a rabid cuckoo clown even by denier standards. Of course, deniers like Mattogno and Rudolf would never deny the tattooing, since it's so well-documented. And yes, it was Jews (except the so-called transit ones), Roma and the Soviet POWs that got tattooed, not the "Aryan" prisoners. C'mon, it's the basics.

See: Tattoo Denial
"SOAP AND LAMPSHADES"
See the complete treatment at Nazi shrunken heads, human skin lampshades, human soap, textiles from human hair? Sorting out the truth from the legends.
"MOST OUTRAGEOUS TALES OF THE HOLOHOAX"
See Fake, unreliable or mistaken witnesses.
"Scratched Walls"
See Scratched gas chamber walls?
"But there is not one bullet mark to be found on the wall anywhere"
Because this wall is a reconstruction of the original Black Wall which was torn down in early 1944, see Auschwitz 1940-1945. Węzłowe zagadnienia z dziejów obozu, vol. III, 1995, p. 71n222). Duh.
"Vrba... poetic licence"
See Hilberg and famous witnesses shown to be liars, impostors during the Zündel trial?
"Bruno Baum"
See Bruno Baum admitted that false propaganda was created in Auschwitz?
"ELIE WIESEL: A PROMINENT FALSE WITNESS"
See:
Lying about Elie Wiesel.
Elie Wiesel did not mention gas chambers?
More Wiesel stuff.
"THE BBC’S OSKAR GROENING “I SAW THE GAS CHAMBERS” LIE"
Gröning testified about the gas chambers:
"A new shipment had arrived. I had been assigned to ramp duty, and it was my job to guard the luggage. The Jews had already been taken away. The ground in front of me was littered with junk, left-over belongings. Suddenly I heard a baby crying. The child was lying on the ramp, wrapped in rags. A mother had left it behind, perhaps because she knew that women with infants were sent to the gas chambers immediately. I saw another SS soldier grab the baby by the legs. The crying had bothered him. He smashed the baby's head against the iron side of a truck until it was silent."
"It's a significant moment in the life of Oskar Gröning, an explosion, almost as if someone had stuck a needle into an over-inflated balloon. Gröning says: "I know a little more about that; we should discuss it some time." The fellow collector gives him a book, "The Auschwitz Lie," by old Nazi Thies Christophersen. Gröning returns the book, including a few pages of his own words, his answer to Christophersen.
...
"I saw everything," he writes. "The gas chambers, the cremations, the selection process. One and a half million Jews were murdered in Auschwitz. I was there.""
...
"Gröning wants to know what this means. Someone says: "Jews have arrived, and they are now being admitted to the camp. If they're lucky, that is."
"What does that mean?" asks Gröning.
"It means that some of them will be exterminated," says another man."
...
"One night he wakes up to the sound of whistles. Jews have broken out. He runs through the dark until he reaches a farm, where he sees corpses littering the ground. He watches as naked people are herded into the farmhouse and sees a senior officer shut the door, pull a gas mask over his head, open a can and pour the contents into a hatch. Then he hears screams. The screams turn into a thundering noise, the thundering becomes humming, and then it is quiet.
He returns to his barrack with another man. The other man says: I know a shortcut. Along the way, the other man tells Gröning what happens when corpses are burned on grates. They bodies straighten and the men's penises become erect, he says.
The shortcut takes the two men past a pyre where corpses are just being cremated. Gröning moves closer to see what happens when human beings burn."
Gröning maintained his testimony up to the end. His case proves that the German justice doesn't reward former Nazis for their gas chamber testimonies, quite the contrary.
"THE ANNE FRANK DIARY FRAUD"
Another lie, see Anne Frank diary.
"ATROCITY PROPAGANDA: ALLIED PHOTO FORGERIES OF “GERMAN ATROCITIES”"
See Fake Holocaust photos?
"The so-called “torch-men order” (Fackelmännerbefehl) is the command No. 0428, issued November 17th, 1941 by Stalin. It declares that Russian partisans in German uniforms, particularly those of the Waffen-SS, were to destroy all settlements within a swathe of about 40 – 60 km depth from the main battle lines and to ruthlessly kill the civilian population."
The version with the "Russian partisans in German uniforms" is a fake, see Blame it on the Germans …
"what it actually shows is NKVD ... officers murdering civilians"
Another bald-faced lie. Actually the photo shows the women from the Mizoch ghetto being shot by the Nazis.
"Soviet Troops killing Ukrainians in Vinnitsa"
Actually the photo depicts a Jewish man being shot in Vinnitsa by the Nazis.
"HOLOCAUST DENIAL LAWS"
We are against the denial laws, but the truth is that most deniers are just inveterate liars, including the author of this screed, as just has been amply demonstrated. Also, laws exist forbidding denial of Communist crimes and the Armenian genocide. So?

Debunking the YouTube denial.

$
0
0
This post will be updated from time to time with short debunkings of the more or less popular denier videos from YouTube.

For standalone posts debunking the denier videos see:

Debunking Denierbud's One Third of the Holocaust series.

Debunking Denierbud's "Auschwitz - The Surprising Hidden Truth"

Also, this post, while not directly addressing Denierbud's Buchenwald series, directly debunks his core thesis: Nazi shrunken heads, human skin lampshades, human soap, textiles from human hair? Sorting out the truth from the legends.

Debunking David Cole's Auschwitz video

Eric Hunt's videos won't be bothered with since Eric has since abandoned and denounced denial in no uncertain terms: Eric Hunt is No Longer a Holocaust Denier. And obviously, if his own videos no longer convince him, there's no need to waste time.

Short debunking of Steven Anderson's video "The Holocaust Hoax Exposed"

The French denier Vincent Reynouard and his clownish denial innovations

Is The French Holocaust Denier Thierry Gosselin As Dense As a Black Hole?


1. Debunking of the video "Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told."
2. Debunking of the video "Jewish Holocaust lies exposed"
3. Debunking of the video "10 Hard Facts About the Holocaust"
4. Debunking of the video "Holocaust Myths"
5. Debunking of the video "Europa The Last Battle Holocaust Segment #8"


1. Debunking of the video "Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told."

We treat only the Holocaust denial part here, if it is not credible, the rest falls apart on its own.

The Nuremberg Danzig soap has never been debunked. It was not mass-produced but some human soap was indeed made. It was obviously not the "Jewish soap", which is a myth. This claim is fully treated here.

The shrunken heads are supported by documentary evidence, as elucidated here.

So are the tattoos, which were gathered from corpses for research on criminality, as explained here.

The existence of the extermination decision is documented in Goebbels' diary entry describing Hitler's speech in a small circle of high-ranking officials on 12.12.41:
"Regarding the Jewish question, the Führer is determined to clear the table. He warned the Jews that if they were to cause another world war, it would lead to their own destruction.
Those were not empty words. Now the world war has come. The destruction of the Jews must be its necessary consequence. We cannot be sentimental about it. It is not for us to feel sympathy for the Jews. We should have sympathy rather with our own German people. If the German people have to sacrifice 160,000 victims in yet another campaign in the east, then those responsible for this bloody conflict will have to pay for it with their lives."
See here for more documents on the extermination intent.

The author then raises a strawman as well as a false dichotomy. First he implies that the only evidence that should count is autopsy reports, photos or footage.

He then "forgets" about the documentary evidence e.g.:
Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers

Then he implies that the only gassing witnesses that count testified at Nuremberg (and yes, Nuremberg witnesses could be cross-examined).

The fact is that there were many dozens of trials having to do specifically with gassings, and hundreds about the Holocaust in general (which is not reducible to gassings). Of them many took place in West Germany, so the "Soviets" part was just another strawman.

The "Auschwitz had lots of non-extermination stuff" idiocy is debunked here. Also this.

David Cole now admits that Nazis gassed and shot Jews on a massive scale which debunks the film right there and then. Some of Cole's nitpicks about the small Auschwitz gas chamber are treated here and here.

Also see Debunking David Cole's Auschwitz video.

All Cole debunked were misconceptions about the small gas chamber (which was not in the extermination camp Birkenau in the first place and in which only a few gassings happened).

Sure, the Soviets tried to reconstruct the small gas chamber (after the crematorium morgue had been converted into an air-raid shelter) and partially botched the job, big deal. This doesn't refute the small gas chamber in the slightest, nor, of course, the big gas chambers at Birkenau.

He is of course wrong about there being only witness evidence:

Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
"Separate accommodation" in Auschwitz: a code word for extrajudicial executions
The Kinna Report - German Document on the Killing of Unfit Jews in Auschwitz

Aerial photos do show smoke.

The cyanide residue has been found, Leuchter has been exposed as a fraud.

The alleged photo fakery is dealt with here.

The "300,000 dead" argument is a lie, only registered inmates were meant in that footage, very obviously (the "official" figure was 4,000,000 after all).

The plaque argument is debunked here.

The First Holocaust nonsense is debunked here.

There are laws against denying the Communist crimes, the Armenian genocide and the law in Turkey that bans the assertion of the Armenian genocide, so the claim about the Holocaust being the only such event is another lie.

Of course, the author never ever deals with the extensive documentary evidence for the Holocaust, you're totally silent about the massacres of Jews like Babiy Yar  or other mobile killing units massacres.

Here is just a very small sample of documentary evidence:

Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Sonderkommando Kulmhof in German Documents - The Extermination of 100,000 Jews
The Kinna Report - German Document on the Killing of Unfit Jews in Auschwitz
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
Evidence on the Babi Yar Massacre 29 & 30 September 1941: Contemporary Sources
The Jäger Report
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
More Than 100 Nazi Extermination Remarks, 1939-1944
More Nazi Mass Murder Statements

This "chapter" of the film fell apart like a cheap suit, this means the rest of it is just as deceptive and not credible.

2. Debunking of the video "Jewish Holocaust lies exposed"

This 6:54 long video has since been blocked. It's a typical "video list" Gish gallop.

World Almanac claim debunked here.

Pre-Holocaust Holocaust debunked here.

Claim about Weissmandl and "6 million":

1. It is somewhat ironic how the obviously anti-Zionist author of the video quotes the anti-Zionist Weissmandel as a hoaxer.

2. Tom Segev expresses doubts about Weissmandl's claims in The Seventh Million, p. 92:
"Later he published a terrible indictment of the Zionist movement. The Zionists have abandoned him and his people because they were ultraorthodox non-Zionists, he charged, as if Gisi Fleischmann had not been his partner. He based his arguments on letters he quoted from memory; they are unavailable in any archives. They may have been lost or spirited away, or they may never have been written."
3. Indeed, this letter purports to have been written on May 15, 1944 "in a cave near Lublin", and presents the Hungarian deportations as if they're in full swing. And yet May 15 was the day the first Hungarian transports left Hungary. They arrived in Auschwitz only on May 16. Clearly the text as quoted cannot be authentic.

4. Let's assume for the sake of the argument that the alleged letter is genuine. Then it's just another example of cherrypicking - among a large set of letters of course you can find any number. It only becomes "meaningful" if you ignore all the other numbers you omitted.

Ehrenburg's quote is from December 1944, late enough to make such an estimate as the absolute bulk of the Holocaust victims have been dead by then.

Auschwitz plaque nonsense debunked here.

Listed estimated death tolls come from random mostly unauthoritative sources and mean exactly nothing for the evidence-based historiography. You can find extremely diverging estimates of Stalin's victims, does that mean Stalin wasn't a criminal? Also see here.

The list is topped off with the lie about what the Red Cross allegedly claims, debunked here.

So just another useless YouTube video full of denier lies.

3. Debunking of the video "10 Hard Facts About the Holocaust"

6 minutes.

Claim #1: refuted here.

Claim #2: refuted here.

Claim #3: refuted here.

Claim #4: addressed here and here.

Claim #5: refuted here.

Claim #6: refuted here.

Claim #7: the truth does not fear an honest investigation; Holocaust deniers are, en masse, not honest and engage in pure propaganda. And propaganda can destroy the truth. Hence the anti-HD laws (which I don't support). Also, to take another example, Turkey has a law against the affirmation of the Armenian genocide, while several countries have laws against the denial of the Armenian genocide. None of this is relevant to whether the Armenian genocide happened. Same applies to the laws against denial of Communist crimes - do they mean there were no Communist crimes?

Claim #8: refuted here.

Claim #9: the claims were mere rumors without any serious support, except the one about shrunken heads  those were indeed made in Buchenwald (not from Jews).

I didn't quite get what the claim #10 was. Was it about the Holocaust being a dogma? But if so, why do most deniers whom I send these links which lead to sourced, informative articles refuse to tackle the arguments in them and instead engage in character assassination, ad hominems and insults?

4. Debunking of the video "Holocaust Myths"

21 minutes, apparently by Jim Rizoli.

Claim about revised Auschwitz death toll debunked here. (Note that finding some random book that took it seriously does not prove anything.)

Claim about no German records of a homicidal gas chamber program: obvious lie debunked at
Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau

Claim about Auschwitz gastight doors: the doors for the homicidal gas chambers were the same doors used for Zyklon B delousing gas chambers, so they obviously were gastight by definition. Less cyanide is used for short-period homicidal gassings than for multi-hour delousings.

Krema I is not in its original state so the claims about its doors are meaningless.

The claim about "combined strength" of thousands of people pushing on the doors is a macabre absurdity. Thousands of people were never near the door. Maybe a few naked, confused people at the door, and they're dead pretty soon. Addressed in detail here.

See more here.

None of the experts who have honestly studied Auschwitz have ever denied the gassings. Only the dishonest ignoramuses like Lindsey made such claims. Why is Lindsey dishonest?

1. He claimed that the underground were "cool", not mentioning that they were preheated before gassings, and that the heat of hundreds or thousands of bodies would generate enormous amounts of heat too (he was forced to admit it later). He also did not mention the Nazi wartime studies showing that HCN evaporates readily even at cold temperatures.

2. He used the dishonest flimsy doors argument mentioned above.

3. The "skin absorption" argument has been debunked even by a denier star Fritz Berg:
"Faurisson has repeatedly overstated the danger of HCN absorption through the skin. Although skin certainly does absorb HCN, it does so rather slowly. According to a source which Faurisson has himself used, 10 minutes are required to overcome a man with a gas mask whose skin is exposed to a concentration of 2% HCN in air."

“It should also be remembered that a man may be overcome by the absorption of hydrocyanic acid gas through the skin; a concentration of 2 percent hydrocyanic acid being sufficient to thus overcome a man in about 10 minutes. Therefore, even if one wears a gas mask, exposure to concentrations of hydrocyanic acid gas of 1 percent by volume or greater should be made only in case of necessity and then for a period not longer than 1 minute at a time. In general, places containing this gas should be well ventilated with fresh air before the wearer of the mask enters, thus reducing the concentration of hydrocyanic acid gas to low fractional percentages.” (See: The Gas Mask, Technical Manual No. 3-205, War Department, Washington, October 9, 1941, p. 144, NA RG 407, Records of the Adjutant General's Office, 1917 TM 3-205.)
The typical lethal concentration for an execution chamber and for delousing is only 0.1% HCN in air, in other words, the lethal gas need only be one-twentieth as strong as the gas discussed in Faurisson's reference. If one applies a rule of thumb or reciprocity known sometimes as Henderson's Rule, one would need twenty times as long to cause the same toxic effect. In other words, approximately 200 minutes or three hours of exposure to 0.1% HCN would be needed to overcome a worker wearing a gas mask but whose skin is exposed. It is almost inconceivable, however, that workers removing corpses would be exposed to anything near these concentrations after the doors were opened."
The letter from some Roubeix guy doesn't cite any arguments and can be instantly dismissed.

Fred Leuchter has been thoroughly debunked.

Now to the issues of ventilation. Note that the gas chambers were not planned as such from the beginning. It has been shown by Pressac that they were at first planned as morgues and converted into gas chambers pretty late in the planning. Hence the things that might seem incongruous, like undressing room having more air exchanges per hour than the gas chamber.

The problem for the deniers is that we do know that a gas chamber existed there, in Leichenkeller 1. It was described as a "gas cellar" (Gaskeller) and a "gassing cellar" (Vergasungskeller):

The denier explanations have been pretty varied - some claim, without any evidence, that it was an air-raid shelter but this cannot be since no such air-raid shelter would be described as a Vergasungskeller (it would be Gasschutzkeller or something similar).

Another explanation, promoted by Mattogno among others, is that they tried to install a delousing chamber in Leichenkeller 1. But if so, then the deniers admit that the ventilation system in the morgue was sufficient for handling of Zyklon B, and moreover the undressing room still had a slightly more powerful ventilation as the delousing chamber in this case too. So it's hardly an issue only for the homicidal chamber.

(More on the "delousing chamber" argument why it is wrong see here.)

Long story short: ventilation existed, it was sufficient.

And it was not a delousing chamber since Auschwitz had dedicated delousing chambers elsewhere, and the facilities were not on the list of the delousing installations.

Skin color of corpses has been dealt with here.

The denier then distorts a witnesses quote about faces. He was obviously using metaphoric language to describe people becoming a mound of dead flesh. Obvious from the context. So the denier is simply dishonest.

The denier then distorts yet another witnesses' quote, claiming he claimed skin turned into glue. He of course claimed no such thing. Rather he referred to difficulty of detaching corpses from one another - which would be an obvious effect of rigor mortis, among other things.

The denier then jumps to crematoria capacities but, of course, compares apples and oranges - modern crematoria, or more specifically the modern cremation procedures prescribed by law cannot be compared to the procedures employed in the wartime Nazi camps. This is explained at length here.

Due to the differences in procedure the Nazis were able to achieve the average capacities that were much larger than the modern crematoria as numerous documents attest.

I'm afraid I'll take the word of the Nazi cremation specialists over that of some amateur deniers who lie about other matters as well. But even Mattogno had to concede that in Gusen cremations took much shorter than than 1 hour.

As for coke in Gusen, this has no bearing on Auschwitz at all. A Nazi engineer calculated the needed amounts of coke for the ovens as they were used in Auschwitz for a 12-hour period, based on the information from the oven manufacturer. He noted that through continuous use (bei Dauerbetrieb) the amounts of coke needed are significantly smaller. Indeed, the continuous cremation differs starkly from many individual cremations (with their heating down and heating up cycles).

For example the magistrate of Wiesbaden wrote to the firm Topf & Söhne (who had constructed the Auschwitz ovens) on 19.12.1949 (ThHStAW, Bestand Topf u. Söhne, 231, Bl. 35):
"It is hereby confirmed that Mr. chief engineer Klettner carried out the planned conversion of the cremation furnace in 2 1/2 weeks, taking into account improvements according to your latest experiences.
Mr. Klettner demonstrated the furnace in operation and handed it over after three days of trial operation with a total of 16 cremations to our complete satisfaction today.
The performance of the oven, especially in terms of fuel consumption, exceeded all expectations. On the third day after the commissioning, cremation times of 40 minutes were already being achieved without any fuel consumption except for the required heating up [of the oven].
You are free to show the oven to the interested parties after a prior notification.
Publication of the above letter without prior permission on this side is not permitted."
Chimney fires are of course possible and have nothing whatsoever to do with coke but rather with the soot accumulating in the chimneys (the more, the more actively the ovens are used). Duh.

As for the photos, the first question is whether the smoke from chimneys would be observable on the aerial photos at all. Second issue is whether the crematoria smoked continuously during the operation or only in certain periods (that they did smoke we know from photos showing soot on chimneys).

Third issue is whether they were taken in the periods of crematoria inactivity (which could be on a particular day without any transports, on the days where crematoria were inactive because of repairs; and possibly every day for a few hours for the oven maintenance) or when the open-air incineration pits were used instead (clearly visible on the photos). Merely throwing out "peak extermination activity" doesn't mean anything. One has to go through the photos day by day and see what happened on those days. One will find that on several of those dates there is no evidence of transports, and on three dates the corpses were burned in the incineration pits, the smoke being clearly visible.  On May 31 one chimney can seen to be "glowing" from the inside.

This issue is further examined here.

The refractory brick stuff is an old canard. A German researcher found that refractory bricks fail after a certain number of cremation cycles. That makes sense. But this only refers to individual cremations in civil crematoria with heating and cooling cycles, obviously not to continuous multiple cremations as practiced in Auschwitz, where one cremation cycle meant hundreds of bodies, not 1. More about that here.

Conclusion: the author is an ignorant liar repeating debunked claims.

5. Debunking of the video "Europa The Last Battle Holocaust Segment #8"

This video is peak Gish gallop. I did not bother to go through each frame.

The author begins by outright lying that the majority of partisans were Jews and that Jews were shot as partisans and not Jews. After this everything else he says can be ignored.

Just for the fun of it I skimmed through the rest. He lies about Jews declaring war on Germany (they didn't; a tabloid "fake news" headline is not evidence of an actual war declaration) and this allegedly giving a legal right to Germany to put Jews into camps (it didn't).

People in labor camps were dying in great numbers due to systemic mistreatment (that is, even ignoring the extermination for a sec) long before the end of the war and the bombing of the infrastructure (see e.g. Wachsmann's KL).

The video gathers random internet memes without factchecking them.

E.g. the Zündel trial memes handled here and here.

He outright lies about no documents referring to policy of extermination - see here, here, here just for starters.

He outright lies about the Red Cross, which was not able to visit all camps and certainly not any extermination camps. He fabricates the alleged Red Cross quote about the alleged interrogations of detainees about the gas chambers.

He repeats the ignorant "flimsy door" non-argument.

He relies on the fraud Leuchter and on the dishonest Lüftl.

He relies on an outright and long-ago debunked fake "Lachout document".

He relied on Cole, who has been totally debunked.

He repeats the Buchenwald photo nonsense.

And uses some random online photo fakes.

He distorts Bruno Baum's claim.

He relies on the fraud Krege who made lots of claims about GPR tests at Treblinka but has failed to publish his results in 18 years. Leading deniers reject his hoax contention that the soil was not disturbed at all - after all, they claim that there was a transit camp there (with at least several of thousands of Jews buried). I.e. Krege is an outright liar.

He brings up the braindead Larson canard.

From the existence of the Prussian Blue in the delousing chambers does not follow the necessity of such in the homicidal chambers - completely different modes of operation.

He lies about a court's decision about the Anne Frank diary - never happened; he lied about significant portions of the diary being written in ballpoint pen or about BKA concluding so; he lied about the handwriting not matching; on the contrary, the diary was fully forensically tested and found genuine.

He repeats the usual nonsensical "leisure stuff means no extermination" idiocy.

He lies about the non-existent Red Cross death stats - Red Cross never gave any such numbers.

He repeats the zombie argument about the Auschwitz plaque and the total Holocaust death toll, showing that he has not mastered the basic arithmetic.

He repeats the decrypts nonsense.

He repeats the "pre-Holocaust 6m" non sequitur that makes zero sense.

He carps on some fake witnesses as if it proved anything.

He repeats the debunked "Wiesel-impostor" nonsense.

As well as the "witnesses that saw no gas chambers" nonsense.

Since I was just skimming, I've probably missed a lot of stuff and could probably double the above list.

It is clear that the author of the video is nothing but a fabricator and/or a mindless regurgitator of other denier lies who has merely amassed as many internet memes (debunked here) as possible but has never done any real research.

Dirlewanger on Poisoning of Jews Towards SS Investigator

$
0
0
In 1942, the SS Main Office "investigated" charges launched by the SD and the SS and Police court Cracow against Oskar Dirlewanger, the commander of the infamous SS penal unit Sonderkommando Dirlewanger, which included racial defilement, abuse of his own men, extortion, illegal hunting, illegal confiscations, illegal arrests and illegal killings in the Generalgouverment. 

During his interrogation of 1 September 1942, Dirlewanger explained to the SS court martial officer (Gerichtsoffizier) that the SD could not cope with the killing of the Jews caught violating Nazi regulations and that therefore in November 1941, the SS and Police Leader of the Lublin district Odilo Globocnik ordered they are to be handed over to Dirlewanger for execution. Initially, the Jews were just shot, but later they had to undress in a cellar under the pretense vaccination against typhus and were killed by injection of the poison strychnine. Their gold teeth were broken out to be used for the SS dental station and the clothes were provided to Russian POWs.

It is noteworthy that Dirlewanger tried within his sphere of influence and on a small scale what were to be basic elements of large scale Nazi mass extermination sites: disguise, poison and robbing of dead people.

"10. Poisoning of Jews

On the occasion of a comrade evening at Brigf. Globocnik around November 1941, the commander of the SD, SS-Sturmbannführer Müller, complained to the Brigadeführer that his officials were overburdened. According to another decree of the Generalgouverneur, Jews who were walking without an armband or who used the railway without permission or left the house without permission should be executed. Every day 50 Jews were brought to him and his officials were to write a record of each and would no longer be able to cope with their work. Then the Brigf. called me and in the presence of Sturmbannführer Müller, he ordered that the SD should transfer these Jews to me. I would know what to do with them. I confirmed that.

Initially, I had these Jews shot. But later, I was sorry that this ruined their clothes and that I could not use them to dress the POWs in a camp. Besides, I had noticed that the Jews carried a great deal of gold in their mouths, while for my SS men only Krupp steel was available for dental repairs. I wanted to remedy these mistakes by having the Jews injected strychnine, which should result in immediate death.

I got the Jews into the basement and ordered them to undress. I told them they would be vaccinated against typhus. They were then injected with strychnine by the SS doctor and the teeth were broken out by SS-O'Scha Schur (sp?), the head of the SS and police hospital. The Jews died from the injection. They were buried the next day.

This helped the imprisoned Russians to work in the winter, and also provided the dental station at the SS and police hospital with gold. The clothes were picked up from me by SS-H'Stuf. Streibel, the camp leader of the prisoners' of war camp in Drawniki."
(interrogation of Dirlewanger of 1 September 1942, BArch R 58/7633, p.52-53, my translation; cf. Pauer-Studer, Velleman, "Weil ich nun mal ein Gereichtigkeitsfanatiker bin": Der Fall des SS-Richters Konrad Morgen, p. 109 on google books)

Paul Craig Roberts Crosses the Line

$
0
0
If you've never heard of Paul Craig Roberts, don't feel bad. As a public figure, he seems to have hit his high water mark during the Reagan Adminstration as an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, where he stridently defended supply-side economic policy. Since 2001, he has been a rather loud voice among the 9/11 truth movement, which dovetails nicely with his Buchanan-esque paleoconservative views of Israel. Perhaps unsurprisingly, his writings over the last decade or so have walked a very fine line between perhaps overly vehement but otherwise justifiable attacks on Israel's role in American foreign policy to overtly anti-Semitic rhetoric. I want to be clear before continuing that I don't know whether Roberts is an anti-Semite and am not saying that he is. But with his latest column, he has crossed over a divide -- whether he knows it or not -- into plain Holocaust denial. And for this, he needs to answer.

Roberts's column posted on May 3, entitled "Morality, Truth, Facts Have Exited From The Dying West," begins by addressing remarks made Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in a speech to the Palestinian National Council on April 30 -- or more correctly addressing the response by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who called Abbas's remarks Holocaust denial. To be clear, I don’t know what Abbas actually said, but if the reporting is correct, then his remarks were at the very least insensitive and overly general regarding the causes of European anti-Semitism and its relationship with Zionism. That Abbas has a history of overt Holocaust denial (having written a doctoral dissertation several decades ago that minimized the death toll) didn't help Abbas's case here. For what it's worth, he has since apologized.

Roberts first expresses agreement with Abbas's remark that European anti-Semitism was not Christian in origin but rather an outgrowth of Jewish control over money lending (again, a bit of an overgeneralization), but in the fourth paragraph, he really hits his stride:
What was the Holocaust? According to zionists, the Holocaust was National Socialist Germany’s elimination of 6 million Jews by first gassing them and then cremating the bodies. It is unclear how Germany managed this feat when all of its limited and dwindling resources were employed, unsuccessfully as it turns out, on the Russian front.
The first problem, obviously, is that the definition he provides is not one limited to only "zionists" [sic]. More importantly, as noted in numerous blog posts here, no responsible historian claims that the Nazis gassed six million Jews. Fewer than three million deaths of Jews during the war can be attributed conclusively to gassing; at least an equal number were shot by Einsatzgruppen in the Soviet Union, were starved or died from disease in ghettos or non-death camps, or were murdered by Axis allies.

His third point is also a bit of a groaner, although if we could extend the benefit of the doubt to him regarding good faith, we might say it's a decent question. Enough ink has been spilled on the topic of the changing nature of Nazi Jewish policy during the Barbarossa campaign, so I won't reinvent that wheel here except to note that Roberts seems woefully under-read on this topic. Anyone with more than a miniseries-level knowledge of the Holocaust would consider the whole paragraph an exercise in either total ignorance of historical facts or evidence of bad faith.

Roberts continues:
Photos demonstrating the Holocaust include dead skeletal-like bodies. But these are not people gassed and cremated. These are deaths from typhus and starvation. The disintegrating German state had no food or medicines for Germans and often not for its own soldiers. Concentration camp inmates were on the bottom of the totem pole.
True enough, the bodies in German camps found by American and British liberators were of Jews who died of disease and starvation. To his credit, Roberts does not try to claim that these dead Jews are not the responsibility of the German state. But that's a less interesting point than feeling the need to point this fact out at all. Where have I seen this before? Oh yes! That Roberts deploys an opening gambit of virtually every Holocaust denier I've encountered over the last 20 years is probably not a vote in his favor here.

The next few paragraphs is really where the rubber meets the road, so I want to drill down on these a bit. He begins, "We know very little about the Holocaust, because no one is allowed to study it."

Actually, we know a tremendous amount about the Holocaust and what we know about it we know because people have routinely been able to study it. This might seem axiomatic, but apparently it isn't, since it's another commonly used opening gambit used by deniers. More on this below.

Roberts continues, "Anyone in Europe who studies it and makes the slightest correction to the zionist narrative is arrested and imprisoned as a Holocaust denier."

Putting aside the point addressed above about a "zionist narrative," Roberts is simply wrong. Assuming by "zionist narrative," he means that European Jews were deliberately murdered in numbers of approximately six million by the Nazis, using methods including poison gas, then perhaps he isn't aware that this account is routinely modified on the basis of newly available evidence. Interestingly, one of the things that has happened is that the death toll estimated by historians has tended to go up, not down. Gerald Reitlinger (a European) estimated the number of deaths as falling in range of 4.3 million to 4.7 million in 1953; Raul Hilberg (another European, albeit eventually a naturalized American) estimated the number at 5.1 million in 1961. These numbers, by the way, were already at odds with numbers estimated by, e.g., the Anglo-American Commission of Inquiry tasked with estimating this number. Reitlinger wasn't prosecuted for estimating a number fully 1.5 million smaller than the "official" estimate.

Roberts again: "There is no doubt that many Jews were killed, but there are different views about the various means employed and the extent to which the process was organized or haphazard. Before differences could be resolved and sorted out, the subject was put off limits."

Compare Mark Weber's writing from "The Holocaust: Let's Hear Both Sides": "They ["revisionists"] do not dispute the fact that large numbers of Jews were deported to concentration camps and ghettos, or that many Jews died or were killed during the Second World War."

Regarding the means employed, to be clear, there are not different views, at least among anyone who has taken the time to explore the issue. Regarding whether the process was organized or haphazard, thereby hangs a tale -- one told here and elsewhere repeatedly, despite Roberts's assurance that such a discussion is "off limits."

Two points bear mention here. The first is the intentionalist-functionalist debate, which I wrote about here. If it interests you, you can read about it further, but suffice it to say that it was perhaps the major point of dispute among historians for a couple of decades, and nobody went to prison.

The second point is the Historikerstreit, or "historians' fight" of the 1980s and 1990s, during which conservative German scholars openly questioned the extent to which the Holocaust might have been a natural reaction on the part of the Nazis to Bolshevist terror, which was believed by many people, not just Nazis, to be specifically Jewish in origin (owing to the Jewish backgrounds of many early Bolsheviks). None of these historians were punished either. Many of them wrote canonical works in the historiography of the Third Reich (e.g., Ernst Nolte) that remain important.

Not to put too fine a point on this issue, but I've spent the last two years researching fairly intensively the Holocaust in the Baltic States and eastern Poland. Trust me when I tell you that no small amount of the work in this area has examined the extent to which Jews living in these regions might have provoked the anger of the populations by embracing the Soviets when the Red Army occupied these regions between September 1939 and June 1941. This point is examined because it's an important one -- if one of the goals of history is to assure that, by understanding history, we can avoid it being repeated in its worst aspects, then understanding the motivations of the murderers of Europe's Jews is an important part of the process.

None of the historians who have examined this question -- difficult as it is to examine -- have been prosecuted, much less imprisoned. Where "historians" have been imprisoned is when they have publicly stated their conviction that the Holocaust was essentially a hoax -- that the number of victims have been irresponsibly inflated and especially that no gassings were committed. As wrongheaded and counterproductive as I might think these laws are, it's worth noting that these are the people who have been prosecuted -- not radical functionalists like Götz Aly, not conservative revisionists seeking to draw an equivalence between the Holocaust and Stalinist mass killing like Nolte, and not nationalist historians like Mark Paul, whose work seeks to contextualize the mass killing of Jews within the behavior of certain sectors of the Jewish population. Also worth noting is that the people who are prosecuted are often not prosecuted for denying the Holocaust per se but for inciting racial hatred -- which is a crime in more countries than it is not. Given that the Venn diagram for Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites is pretty much a perfect circle, this fact ought not surprise us.

Roberts writes the following next:
For example, suppose a scholar in Germany discovers a previously unknown document that proves that National Socialist Germany exterminated 3 million Jews. This discovery of proof of the Holocaust would be rewarded with the arrest and imprisonment of the scholar for reporting the document, because it conflicts with the official zionist declaration of 6 million. The document would be branded a falsification and discarded. The scholar’s career would be ruined.
I hope the examples of Reitlinger and Hilberg above have disproved this point. But I do believe that, were a document found smeared with Hitler's DNA and reading, "Kill the Jews, use gas chambers, and stop when you hit six million," some people would find issue with its veracity. It's fair to question the motives of people willing to seize on the smallest bit of exculpatory evidence and ignore the mountain of evidence proving the Holocaust.

The last paragraph from Roberts worth addressing is this:
The Holocaust is not a subject that can be studied or investigated. It is an occurrence handed down by zionists that cannot be examined or modified and certainly not questioned. We must take it on faith alone. If a scholar does not, he is a Holocaust denier and, if European or captured in Europe, he is imprisoned.
Well, by now, he's basically repeating himself, but a final point does emerge here in referring to "scholars" as the people being imprisoned for denying the Holocaust. With the exception of David Irving, whose early work on World War II could be considered genuinely valuable, if biased, none of the people prosecuted for doing so have been scholars -- not even close. The number of Holocaust deniers with advanced history degrees numbers zero -- the ones who did have them are either dead (Harry Elmer Barnes) or no longer deniers (Mark Weber), and they were always the minority. There's a reason for that fact.

The rest of Roberts's essay is par for his particular course, and I won't address it here. In the interest of fairness, I intend to draw Roberts's attention to this piece; should he respond, I'll note it here.

The Final Solution and the German Press: 1. September-October 1941

$
0
0
On September 10-12, 1941, several German language newspapers across Nazi-occupied Europe announced that Stalin was going to exterminate the Volga Germans after deporting them to Siberia. This announcement played an important role in making loyal Nazis more willing to contemplate a fatal deportation of Jews, especially when viewed as a justifiable form of vengeance and as a fulfillment of Hitler's Reichstag prophecy of January 30, 1939, that a world war would result in the extermination of Jews. The following article analyzes that process with links to primary sources.

A military newspaper made the extermination theme explicit in the title of its article, 'Ausrottung von 400000 Deutschstämmigen [Extermination of 400,000 ethnic Germans].' This quoted a statement by the Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung which claimed that deported Volga Germans were to be liquidated but that this in turn would lead to the liquidation of the perpetrators. The article also connected the deportation to Kaufman's proposal to sterilize all Germans in his book Germany Must Perish, which was portrayed as reflecting Roosevelt's intentions.[1] A newspaper published for Nazis stationed in Holland, Deutsche Zeitung in den Niederlanden, stated that Stalin's "resettlement" [umsiedlung] was infact a scheduled extermination ["planmässige Ausrottung"].[2]

These articles reflected thinking in the Eastern Ministry. Rosenberg stated in his diary that "Stalin now was also going to expel the remaining 400,000 Volga Germans to Siberia, that is, to murder them" and predicted that Jews in central Europe would pay the price.[3] His subordinate Leibbrandt, who headed the Eastern Ministry's Political unit, echoed this the next day by declaring that "Jewry in the areas located in the German field of power. . . will be repaid manyfold for the crime."[4] Leibbrandt had a strong emotional connection to the Volga Germans because his academic career had been largely devoted to studying them.

Hitler acceded to Rosenberg's request to deport Reich Jews as a reprisal measure on September 14, according to Braeutigam's contemporary record.[5] Initially, however, Hitler had been hesitant; the representative for the Eastern Ministry in Hitler`s headquarters, Koeppen, wrote that the Envoy von Steengracht (representative of the Foreign Office in the headquarters of the Führer) had told him that Hitler was considering the question of postponing possible "Pressalien" (i.e. Repressalien; reprisals) against the German Jews "for [the] eventuality of an American entry into the war."[6] Conversely, Hitler had radicalized his own language on September 12 when, during his launch of the campaign for winter work relief, he stated that Jewish capitalism and Bolshevism sought to exterminate the German people and that the enemy were beasts, not humans.[7] Given that this reflected a radicalization in his beliefs about the time period in which he wished to carry out the extermination of Jews, the period September 10-14 was an especially pivotal moment in making the Final Solution an immediate priority.

The fate intended for deported Reich Jews became clear in Heydrich's statements during the following weeks. On October 2, Heydrich ruled out the resettlement in the East of Czechs who were hostile to Germany because "they would form a leadership class in the East, which would be directed against us." He stated that these people should be "put up against the wall."[8] If Heydrich had this view of a category of Czechs, it follows that he had the same fate in mind for Jews. Two days later, Heydrich met Meyer, Leibbrandt, Schlotterer and Ehlich and complained that demands for Jewish labour would prevent a "total resettlement of the Jews out of the territories occupied by us."[9] These statements can only be reconciled if Heydrich's "total resettlement" was a euphemism for killing the Jews within the territories occupied by the Germans, because the statement of two days earlier had ruled out the resettlement of hostile populations in colonies in the East, and Jews were intrinsically a hostile population in the Nazi worldview. This was reflected, as shown below, by Heydrich's statement at Wannsee on January 20, 1942, that any remnant of Jewry had to be "treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history)."[10] It is also confirmed by the fact that Heydrich blocked the emigration of Spanish Jews residing in France to Spanish Morocco because, in Heydrich's words, "these Jews would also be too much out of the direct reach of the measures for a basic solution to the Jewish question to be enacted after the war."[11]

Heydrich's meaning was spelled out on October 10 in Prague when he noted that Hitler wanted "the Jews to be removed from German space if possible by the end of the year" and that "SS Brigadeführer Nebe and Rasch could also take Jews into the camps for Communist prisoners within the area of military operations. Heydrich stated that transport would not be an issue.[12] The implication was that Jews would be selected for killing at these camps, as they fulfilled the criteria for "special treatment" that Heydrich had been spelling out in his special orders since July 17.[13]

These discussions took place at a time when the content of exterminatory antisemitic propaganada and Hitler's private utterances was becoming more extreme. On October 21 and 25, Hitler connected deportation to extermination when he stated that "By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea" and "That race of criminals has on its conscience the two million dead of the first World War, and now already hundreds of thousands more. Let nobody tell me that all the same we can't park them in the marshy parts of Russia! Who's worrying about our troops? It's not a bad idea, by the way, that public rumour attributes to us a plan to exterminate the Jews. Terror is a salutary thing."[14] On the same day as the latter statement, Hitler told Ciano that the Soviets had probably suffered ten million deaths so far, of which three million were prisoners[15], and Leibbrandt's subordinate Wetzel drafted a recommendation to kill non-working Jews in Riga and Minsk using a gassing apparatus:
Re: Solution of the Jewish Question

1. To the Reich Commissar for the East

Re: Your report of October 4, 1941 in respect to the Solution of the Jewish Question.

Referring to my letter of 18 October 1941, you are informed that Oberdienstleiter Brack of the Chancellery of the Fuehrer has declared himself ready to collaborate in the manufacture of the necessary shelters, as well as the gassing apparatus. At the present time the apparatus in question are not on hand in the Reich in sufficient number; they will first have to be manufactured. Since in Brack's opinion the manufacture of the apparatus in the Reich will cause more difficulty than if manufactured on the spot, Brack deems it most expedient to send his people direct to Riga, especially his chemist Dr. Kallmeyer, who will have everything further done there. Oberdienstleiter Brack points out that the process in question is not without danger, so that special protective measures are necessary. Under these circumstances I beg you to turn to Oberdienstleiter Brack, in the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, through your Higher SS and Police Leader and to request the dispatch of the chemist Dr. Kallmeyer as well as of further aides. I draw attention to the fact that Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, the referent for Jewish questions in the RSHA, is in agreement with this process. On information from Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, camps for Jews are to be set up in Riga and Minsk to which Jews from the old Reich territory may possibly be sent. At the present time, Jews being deported from the old Reich are to be sent to Litzmannstadt [Lodz], but also to other camps, to be later used as labor (Arbeitseinsatz) the East so far as they are able to work.

As affairs now stand, there are no objections against doing away with those Jews who are unable to work with the Brack remedy. In this way occurrences would no longer be possible such as those which, according to a report presently before me, took place at the shooting of Jews in Vilna [Vilnius] and which, considering that the shootings were public, were hardly excusable. Those able to work, on the other hand, will be transported to the East for labor service. It is self-understood that among the Jews capable of work, men and women are to be kept separate.

I beg you to advise me regarding your further steps.[16]
Wetzel testified on September 20, 1961, that Leibbrandt had dictated this draft.[17] On November 12, 1941 he submitted a memo to Leibbrandt which mentioned letters Wetzel had written to Brack, Lohse and Koch the day before.[18] The draft of October 25 was therefore part of on-going correspondence that continued into the first half of November. Moreover, Wetzel's draft enables us to infer that he, Lohse and Leibbrandt were aware of the Vilnius executions of July 1941, and also a genocidal policy of separating Jews by sex to prevent reproduction, which has implications for the fate of non-working Jews.

German newspapers caught the mood that fueled these developments, and published inflammatory speeches by Hitler and others. On October 9, one newspaper published an order to the troops from Hitler issued seven days earlier stating that the Bolshevik and capitalist systems were the responsibility of "Jews and only Jews [Juden und nur Juden]."[19]

On October 28, the same newspaper connected Antonescu's fatal deportation of Rumanian Jews to ghettoes bordering the Bug River to Hitler's Reichstag prophecy. This was a key indicator of how Germans by this time understood the deportation of Jews in terms of their extermination.[20] A German diplomatic document, probably by Richter, dated October 17, 1941, had stated regarding Antonescu's policy that the "Purpose of the action is the liquidation of these Jews."[21]




[1]'Ausrottung von 400000 Deutschstämmigen', Feldzeitung von der Maas bis an die Memel, published by Prop.-Kompanie Feldpostnummer 17001, (Pk 501 - 16. Armee),  Nr. 228 (12.9.41), https://tinyurl.com/y9ybql8n.
[2]"Verschleppung der Wolgadeutschen Abtransport nach Sibirien — Das Märchen von der „fünften Kolonne”". Deutsche Zeitung in den Niederlanden. Nr. 98, Amsterdam, 10.9.41, p.2, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:011119670:mpeg21:a0041.
[3] Alfred Rosenberg Tagebuch 12.9.41, on-line: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Rosenberg/Alfred-Rosenberg-Diary.pdf.
[4] Cited in Eric J. Schmaltz and Samuel D. Sinner, 'The Nazi Ethnographic Research of Georg Leibbrandt and Karl Stumpp in Ukraine, and Its North American Legacy', Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 14 (1), March 2000, pp.28–64, here p.42.
[5] Peter Longerich, Holocaust, p.267, citing H. D. Heilmann, ‘Aus dem Kriegstagebuch des Diplomaten Otto Bräutigam’, in Götz Aly et al., eds, Biedermann und Schreibtischtäter. Materialien zur deutschen Täter-Biographie. Institut für Sozialforschung Hamburg. Beiträge zur nationalsozialistischen Gesundheits- und Sozialpolitik 4 (1987), p.144.
[6]Published in Martin Vogt (ed.), Herbst 1941 im „Führerhauptquartier“. Berichte Werner Koeppens an seinen Minister Alfred Rosenberg. Koblenz: Bundesarchiv, 2002, pp.34-35.
[7]'Verschworene Einheit: Aufruf des Führers zum Kriegswinterhilfswerk', Deutsche Zeitung im Ostland, Nr. 40 (13.9.41), p.1. https://tinyurl.com/ya9gj3nj.
[8] Ansprache Heydrichs über die NS-Ziele im Protektorat, in: Herder-Institut (Hrsg.): Dokumente und Materialien zur ostmitteleuropäischen Geschichte. Themenmodul "Protektorat Böhmen und Mähren", bearb. von Stefan Lehr (Münster). URL: https://www.herder-institut.de/resolve/qid/2943.html.
[9] Niederschrift (III B El/Ma) einer Besprechung zwischen Heydrich, Gauleiter Meyer, Min.Dir. Schlotterer, Dr. Leibbrandt und Dr. Ehlich vom  4.10.1941. NO-1020, VEJ 7, p.153 (Dok. 199).
[10]Besprechungsprotokoll, Am Grossen Wannsee Nr. 56-58, 20 Jan. 1942, Berlin, 20.1.42, TR.3/74, p.8; English translation athttp://www.yadvashem.org/docs/wannsee-conference-protocol.html, discussed in more detail in the next section.
[11] Christopher R. Browning, Evidence for the Implementation of the Final Solution, Part III, citing Luther memoranda, 13 and 17.10.41, in:  Political Archives of the German Foreign Office, Pol. Abt.. III 246, https://www.phdn.org/archives/www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/browning3.htm.
[12]Notizen aus der Besprechung am 10.10.41 über die Lösung der Judenfragen, T/294, pp. 2 and 6; partial English translation in Longerich, Holocaust, p.271.
[13] Richtlinien für die in die Stalags abzustellenden Kommandos des Chefs der Sicherheitspolizei und den SD, 17.7.41, 502-PS, p.4, YVA O.18/104; English translation in NCA III, pp.422-425, here p.424.
[14]Hitler's Table Talk, 1941-1944: His Private Conversations, translated by Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens, 3rd edition, New York: 2000, p.79 and p.87, online at: https://archive.org/stream/HitlerTableTalk/Hitler%20TableTalk_djvu.txt.
[15] Aufzeichnung des Gesandten Schmidt über die Unterredung zwischen Adolf Hitler und dem Grafen Ciano, 25.10.41, Akten zur deutschen auswärtigen Politik: 1918 - 1945 aus dem Archiv des Auswärtigen Amtes; D,13, 2, pp. 563-570, here 565; English translation in Documents on German Foreign Policy, Series D, Volume XIII, Washington: 1954, pp.687- 697, here 690-691.
[16]Wetzel draft an Lohse, 25.10.41, facsimile and English translation at M.9/350, pp.4-7, NO-365.
[17] BArch B 162/20424, pp.216ff.
[18]Wetzel an Leibbrandt, 12.11.41, NO-2094.
[19]'Tagesbefehl des Führers', Deutsche Zeitung in den Niederlanden , Nr. 127 ( 9.10.41), p.1, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:011119699:mpeg21:a0007.
[20]'An der Klagemauer', Deutsche Zeitung in den Niederlanden, Nr. 146 (28.10.41), p.1, https://www.delpher.nl/nl/kranten/view?coll=ddd&identifier=ddd:011120241:mpeg21:a0009.

Stefan Molyneux Is Holocaust Denier-Adjacent

$
0
0
You probably missed, but there was a bit of a dust-up a couple of days ago on Twitter. What happened was that, about a month ago, New Atheist Sam Harris hosted Christian Picciolini on his podcast. Picciolini is a former leader of the Hammerskins skinhead group who reformed several years ago and now does the lecture circuit talking about how to prevent/undo the damage done by such groups. During the Q&A section of podcast, Picciolini stated his belief that Stefan Molyneux, the very popular Irish-Canadian YouTube (on who much more here). Now, weeks later, Harris announced that he had expunged all mention of Molyneux from his podcast, apparently because Molyneux lodged a complaint with Harris. For his own part, Picciolini took to Twitter to complain and offered some evidence.

So what's the deal here? Is Stefan Molyneux a Holocaust denier?

No, but he is Holocaust denier-adjacent.

This is a blog about Holocaust denial, so I won't bore you here by providing you with some definition of denial and showing you that Molyneux doesn’t exactly fit the bill. But what is this adjacency of which I speak? It boils down to a few key points.

1) Molyneux frequently engages in anti-Semitic rhetoric that, at the very least, seeks to "explain" anti-Semitism by identifying Jews behaving badly. For instance, while I certainly have issues with some of the content from its editor, this video provides some good examples. Among other topics, Molyneux details how communism generally and Bolshevism specifically were really Jewish movements. To be clear, it's true that the number of Jews among the Bolsheviks was larger than their proportion in the general population. It's also true that, by WWII, most of them were gone -- Kaganovich and Livtnov* being the notable exceptions. It's moreover true that other political parties in revolutionary Russia and had far higher proportions of Jewish members: specifically the Mensheviks, the General Jewish Workers' Association (the Bund), and the Zionist parties. The latter two were, in fact, entirely Jewish. Why so many Jews in left-wing parties? The answer is a pretty simple one. Left-wing politics seek to disturb pre-existing hierarchies. Jews were near the bottom of the Tsarist hierarchy. Do the math.

2) Molyneux has hosted Holocaust deniers on his show. In particular, Molyneux has hosted Chuck Johnson (discussed by our own Sergey Romanov here) and "Styxhexenhammer666," on whom see this RationalWiki article. Maybe Molyneux hosted these guys before they became deniers? One of Sergey's archived links is from January 2017; Molyneux last hosted Johnson one month earlier. But Molyneux also tweeted out a statement supportive of Johnson six months after that. With Styxhexenhammer, Molyneux has hosted him more than once since his denial statements.

3) He seems to buy every other Jewish conspiracy theory. OK, not the really dumb ones like blood libels, but he's constantly bleating about "cultural Marxism," and there's a good case to be made that this is really just an anti-Semitic dog whistle. Is it possible that Molyneux doesn't realize that it is? Sure, it's possible -- it's just not likely.

All of that makes him denier-adjacent, in my opinion. Others might call aspects of Molyneux's shtick "soft denial." That works too.

But is he a racist? Oh, you betcha.

======
* Litvinov gets an asterisk in this case due to his removal from office by Stalin, purportedly because he was Jewish and therefore an inappropriate representative of the Soviet foreign ministry and signing a non-aggression pact with the Nazis. He eventually returned to the foreign ministry. Yes, Lenin was apparently one-quarter Jewish by ancestry; no, he did not identify as Jewish, nor was he raised Jewish. No, Stalin was not Jewish. Nor was Beria.

The Final Solution and the German Press: 2. Winter 1941-1942

$
0
0
Continued from Part 1.

On November 16, Goebbels wrote a piece for Das Reich which stated that "The Jews are receiving a penalty that is certainly hard, but more than deserved. World Jewry erred in adding up the forces available to it for this war, and now is gradually experiencing the destructon that it planned for us, and would have carried out without a second thought if it had possessed the ability. It is perishing according its own law: "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."[1]

On November 18, three days after a meeting with Himmler, Rosenberg gave a briefing to the German press in which he stated that:
In the east some six million Jews still live, and this question can only be solved in a biological eradication of the entire Jewry of Europe. The Jewish question is only solved for Germany when the last Jew has left German territory, and for Europe when not a single Jew lives on the European continent up to the Urals. ...for this reason it is necessary to expel them over the Urals or eradicate them in some other way.[2]
On November 28, Hitler told the Mufti that "Germany's objective would then be solely the destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere under the protection of British power." Germany had therefore abandoned any intention to allow Jews who emigrated to North Africa to survive.[3] Three days later, Hitler stated in his table talk:
Now, he who destroys life is himself risking death. That's the secret of what is happening to the Jews. Whose fault is it when a cat devours a mouse? The fault of the mouse, who has never done any harm to a cat?
This destructive role of the Jew has in a way a providential explanation. If nature wanted the Jew to be the ferment that causes peoples to decay, thus providing these peoples with an opportunity for a healthy reaction, in that case people like St.Paul and Trotsky are, from our point of view, the most valuable.
By the fact of their presence, they provoke the defensive reaction of the attacked organism. Dietrich Eckart once told me that in all his life he had known just one good Jew : Otto Weininger, who killed himself on the day when he realised that the Jew lives upon the decay of peoples.
It is remarkable that the half-caste Jew, to the second or third generation, has a tendency to start flirting again with pure Jews. But from the seventh generation onwards, it seems the purity of the Aryan blood is restored. In the long run nature eliminates the noxious elements.
One may be repelled by this law of nature which demands that all living things should mutually devour one another. The fly is snapped up by a dragon-fly, which itself is swallowed by a bird, which itself falls victim to a larger bird. This last, as it grows old, becomes a prey to microbes, which end by getting the better of it. These microbes, in their turn, find their predestined ends.
If we had more powerful microscopes, we would discover new worlds. In the absolute, moreover, nothing is either great or small. Things are big or little by the standard one selects.
What is certain, in any case, is that one cannot change anything in all that. Even a man who takes his own life returns finally to nature—body, soul and mind.
The toad knows nothing of his previous existence as a tadpole, and our own memory serves us no better as regards our own previous state. That's why I have the feeling that it's useful to know the laws of nature—for that enables us to obey them.
To act otherwise would be to rise in revolt against Heaven. If I can accept a divine Commandment, it's this one: "Thou shalt preserve the species."[4]
On December 14, Rosenberg made a note concerning a meeting with Hitler in which they had decided to modify a forthcoming speech in the light of the declaration of war against the USA:
With regard to the Jewish question, I said that my remarks about the New York Jews would perhaps have to be changed now, after the decision. My position was that the extermination of the Jews should not be mentioned. The Fuhrer agreed. He said they had brought the war down on us, they had started all the destruction, so it should come as no surprise if they became its first victims.

The Fuehrer further said that he did not deeem it necessary to order forth the other nations to contribute as yet, since they can produce therein a legal claim for later. He does that from time to time in single negotiations. I told him that I, too, had written that down as a question. I would comply with these instructions to edit more carefully the corresponding paragraphs in my speech. The Fuehrer agreed throughout that I had touched upon the Asiatic conflict.[5]
The note indicates that the extermination was to be Europe-wide by showing that the speech had intended to appeal to other nations to participate. Hitler had chosen instead to cajole those nations in individual meetings. Evidence that this was the moment when Hitler announced ‘the decision’ also comes from the speech Goebbels described as having been made to the top echelons of the Nazi party by Hitler on December 12, 1941:
With regard to the Jewish Question, the Führer is determined to make a clean sweep of it. He prophesied that, if they brought about another world war, they would experience their annihilation. That was no empty talk. The world war is here [this was the week Germany declared war on the United States]. The annihilation of Jewry must be the necessary consequence. The question is to be viewed without any sentimentality. We’re not there to have sympathy with the Jews, but only sympathy with our own German people. If the German people has again now sacrificed around 160,000 dead in the eastern campaign, the originators of this bloody conflict will have to pay for it with their lives.[6]
The number of deaths that Goebbels anticipated must have been high because, in the East, the Nazis usually applied a 100:1 reprisal ratio to Jews for German deaths. Hans Frank reflected the meaning of ‘the decision’ in a speech in Krakow on December 16, 1941, when he noted that "We cannot shoot or poison those 3,500,000 Jews, but we shall nevertheless be able to take measures, which will lead, somehow, to their annihilation."[7] The documents therefore converge on an extermination decision having been finalized in the days following Pearl Harbour. However, Rosenberg’s previous speech of November 18 had anticipated the decision, whilst leaving open the possibility that Jews may still be killed by expulsion into an inhospitable climate rather than by shooting or gassing.

The details of the implementation of the "decision" began to take shape at Wannsee on January 20, 1942. There are four features of the Wannsee Protocol that can be highlighted. Firstly, the Protocol[8] was silent on the fate of non-working Jews. Given that the document claims to be concerned with resettlement, this is a case where silence implies intent to kill. Secondly, the fate of the working Jews also makes this inference the only plausible one:
Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labour in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.

The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history.)
There was a clear implication that the only way to guarantee no Jewish revival was to kill the remnant. Moreover, "treated accordingly" converges with the meaning of Sonderbehandlung that Heydrich had been using since 1939. Fourthly, exterminatory knowledge was indicated by the sentence, "SS-Gruppenführer Hofmann advocates the opinion that sterilization will have to be widely used, since the person of mixed blood who is given the choice whether he will be evacuated or sterilized would rather undergo sterilization." This clearly implies a shared knowledge that evacuation was a fatal measure. Finally, it is crucial that "State Secretary Dr. Bühler stated that the General Government would welcome it if the final solution of this problem could be begun in the General Government, since on the one hand transportation does not play such a large role here nor would problems of labor supply hamper this action." This shows that a proposal was already in the air that the final solution regarding Jews from the General Governement was to take place within the General Governement. Frank and Bühler had a growing awareness that their Jews could be eliminated without leaving Poland.

After Wannsee, the rhetoric of the leadership intensified to prepare its audience for deportations. In his Old Fighters’ speech of February 24, 1942, Hitler declared that "through this war, Aryan humankind will not be annihilated, but the Jew will be exterminated."[9] This was repeated the following day in at least one newspaper under the title "Preparation of the Final Settlement with the Conspirators."[10]

At the Final Solution conference of March 6, 1942, it was stated that it had come down from the "highest quarter” (Hitler) that “it was in no way tenable to keep the half-Jews permanently alive." It was thus clearly known that full Jews were slated to die.[11] On the same date, Goebbels stated that "Everywhere the Jews are busy inciting and stirring up trouble. It is therefore desirable that many of them must pay with their lives for this. Anyway, I am of the opinion that the greater the number of Jews liquidated, the more consolidated will be the situation in Europe after this war. One must have no mistaken sentimentality about it. The Jews are Europe's misfortune. They must somehow be eliminated, otherwise we are in danger of being eliminated by them." Goebbels had, earlier in the entry, reported German deaths in the East as 199,448 up to February 20, with 708,351 wounded and 44,352 missing; thus East and west were linked in his desire for vengeance[12]


[1]Die Juden sind schuld!"Das eherne Herz: Reden und Aufsätze aus den Jahren 1941/42 von
Joseph Goebbels
, Munich, 1943, p. 85; English translation by Randall Bytwerk at Calvin
College German Propaganda Archive:
http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goeb1.htm.
[2] Christopher R. Browning, Evidence for the Implementation of the Final Solution, citing Rosenberg, 18.11.1941, in Political Archives of the Foreign Office, Pol. XIII, VAA Berichte, online at: https://www.phdn.org/archives/www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/browning3.htm.
[3]Aufzeichnung des Gesandten Schmidt über die Unterredung zwischen Adolf Hitler und dem Großmufti von Jerusalem Hadji Mohammed Amin el Hussein, Akten zur deutschen auswärtigen Politik: 1918 - 1945  aus dem Archiv des Auswärtigen Amtes; D,13, 2, pp. 718-721, here 720-721 and at https://www.ns-archiv.de/verfolgung/antisemitismus/mufti/in_berlin.php.
[4]Hitler's Table Talk, 1.12.41, pp.140-141. Thomas Dalton quotes one paragraph from this statement but omits the rest: https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/2/1/1918.
[5]Rosenberg, Vermerk über die Unterredung beim Führer, 14.12.41, O.18/252, 1517-PS, IMT XXVII, p.270ff.. English translation NMT IV, pp.55-58, here pp.55-56.
[6]TBJG II/2, pp.487-500 (13.12.1941),  here pp.498-499.  Online: https://tinyurl.com/y7o8g5jk.
[7]Extracts from Sitzung der Regierung des Generalgouvernements, 16.12.41, 2233-PS, M.9/255 and IMT XXIX, pp.498-505, here p.503; English translation in NCA II, p.634.
[8]Besprechungsprotokoll, Am Grossen Wannsee Nr. 56-58, 20 Jan. 1942, Berlin, 20.1.42, TR.3/74, p.8; English translation at http://www.yadvashem.org/docs/wannsee-conference-protocol.html, discussed in more detail in the next section. 
[9] Max Domarus, Hitler. Reden und Proklamationen 1932-1945. 2 Bde. Wiesbaden, 1973, II, p.1844; cf Aly, Endlösung, p.404; Richard J Evans, David Irving, Hitler and Holocaust Denial, electronic edition, 2000.
[10]'Vorbereitung der endgültigen Abrechnung mit den Verschwörern'. Deutsche Zeitung in den Niederlanden', Nr. 262 (25.2.42), p.1, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:011119969:mpeg21:a0001.
[11] Besprechungsniederschrift der Besprechung über die Endlösung der Judenfrage, 6.3.1942, NG-2586 (H); T/100.
[12]TBJG II/3, pp.420-427  (6.3.42), here 421 and 425-426; English translation in Louis Lochner (ed.), The Goebbels Diaries, pp.131-134 (6.3.42).

Viewing all 610 articles
Browse latest View live