Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Monstrous » Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:27 am

Holocaust Believers have attempted to lure Monstrous to debate the Einsatzgruppen in a thread called "Deniers say the dumbest things: the open-air shootings". Obviously this is an inappropriate title intended to demean Monstrous and misleadingly frame the discussion. However, Monstrous is in a forgiving mood and may graciously deign to enlighten the Believers in this thread.

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Balsamo wrote:
Why cannot you forge a report and copy it a hundred times using a mimeograph? If the Germans could copy documents, then the Soviets could also.


Because before you do, you have to be sure that all the copies have been found and under control. Otherwise, you'd expose yourself to be caught red handed if one of the existing copies appear. And I doubt that the Soviets would have been stupid enough to copy a forgery of 3300 pages 65 times.

One indeed has the nettlesome problem of contemporary “traces” of these reports in other people’s files, etc. Browning explains, e.g., how “In accordance with Heydrich’s orders, on October 30, 1941, Heinrich Müller of the Gestapo sent Foreign Minister Ribbentrop the first five “activity and situation reports” (Tãgigkeits- und Lageberichten) of the Sipo-SD Einsatzgruppen” (The Origins of the Final Solution, p 399).

And how “On November 26 Heydrich personally sent Ribbentrop a copy of the next report, for the entire month of October.” (p 401) This report openly declared that “The male Jews over 16, with the exception of doctors and Jewish Council elders, are being executed. This measure is still partly in progress. After the conclusion of the action, there will be only 500 Jewish women and children present in the Ostland”; it also stated hat in Belorussia “For its part the Einsatzgruppe of the Sipo-SD proceeds all the more intensively against the Jews,” citing many executions including of Jewish women. The report also declared that around the Dnieper, “The territory newly occupied by the commandos was made free of Jews.”

Now, with this background in mind, we can read in Browning (pp 401-402) that “the information in the single Foreign Office copy was widely disseminated and understood. The first five [TuLBs] were not sent directly to Ribbentrop but to the SS and police liaison desk known as D II under Undersecretary Martin Luther. . . . [T]he reports were next sent on to the neighboring Jewish desk, D III, of Franz Rademacher. The first five reports were summarized by Rademacher’s assistant, Frtiz Gebhard von Hahn. He noted, ‘An exact overview of the Jews liquidated in all three Reichskommissariaten cannot be obtained from the reports’ . . . Undersecretary Luther himself wrote a summary of the sixth [TuLB No. 6, mentioned above] report, noting that in the Ostland all male Jews over 16 other than doctors and council members would be executed, and that at the conclusion of the action only 500 Jewish women and children would be left alive. He also noted that 33,000 Jews in Kiev, 3,000 in Vitebsk and 5,000 east of the Dnieper had been shot. The summary was initialed by State Secretary Weizsaecker the day it was written.” (page 402)

So - following along - presumably, in DenierLand, not only the TuLBs were fabricated/edited by the Moscow Forgery Factories but also the Foreign Office summary based on them. Perhaps the Soviet forgery operation fabricated/edited the entire corpus of Third Reich records - or at least any that are inescapably embarrassing to odious liars like Monstrous - who now gets to provide us with sources for the Moscow Forgery Factories (names, dates, orders, drafts and final versions, proof of their work) and write a concise summary of their activities.


Monstrous fails to see the alleged problem. The EG reports, the summaries, and the circulation list were likely all forged. There were some real EG reports and summaries but these were likely intended only for a small circle - those directly involved in the anti-partisan warfare and higher officials like Himmler.

It makes absolutely no sense to Monstrous that such reports should have been sent to, for example, the Gautleiter of Vienna, Baldur von Schirach, as claimed. Utterly incomprehensible for both revealing secret military statistics to non-military individuals and revealing the hyper secret Holocaust to non-involved persons. Supposedly so ultra, uber top secret that Himmler did not dare send a message to Höss ordering him to start the genocide but instead only gave a verbal order to Höss in a personal meeting.

In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust but Monstrous is supposed to believe that for some inexplicable reason these documents instead listed explicit numbers of murdered Jews? Why? Why did these documents not follow the usual Holocaust "practice" and stated that the EG groups helped resettle Jews ("code word" for genociding them)?

The obvioud explanation is, of course, that the Soviets forged the documents. The wide circulation lists were like the forged Posen speeches intended to implicate the whole upper German leadership in the Holocaust. The Posen speeches and the EG documents are complementary parts of the same nefarious forgery.

The forgers likely captured the very limited number of real Einsatzgruppen reports and summaries in the Berlin archives and destroyed those documents that were not compatible with the forgery. Or they were similarly destroyed when the prosecution carefully combed through the German archives during the Nuremberg trials.

This would still leave the risk of a few contradictory original documents appearing somewhere as well contradictions appearing between the many different forged documents (liars tend to have trouble keeping all their lies consistent if spouting many lies). SUCH CONTRADICTIONS HAVE INDEED APPEARED BUT THEY ARE SIMPLY IGNORED. See for example the enormous number of contradictions in EG reports reported here:
http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/ ... part_1.php
Last edited by Monstrous on Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:50 am, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Monstrous » Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:36 am

Monstrous also have some questions. See this link and the section there on the Einsatzgruppen:
http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/ ... ystery.php

In this section are listed nine major problem with the EG supposedly destroying the corpses. Do the Believers have any answers to these problems?

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1362
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Balsamo » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:14 pm

Or maybe Monstrous should inform himself on subjects he does not know much about.

User avatar
NathanC
Poster
Posts: 473
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:19 am

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby NathanC » Thu Jul 30, 2015 1:43 pm

In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust but Monstrous is supposed to believe that for some inexplicable reason these documents instead listed explicit numbers of murdered Jews? Why? Why did these documents not follow the usual Holocaust "practice" and stated that the EG groups helped resettle Jews ("code word" for genociding them)?


That's because you're stupid. The euphemism for deporting Jews to the AR camps in Poland was resettlement to the "occupied soviet territories" (ex. Korherr report). Obviously, since the EG killings were happening In the occupied Soviet territories, there's literally nowhere else to resettle them to. There was never any point to hiding it because such a lie would be so transparent.

I'm with Balsamo. All your questions would be answered if you had the patience and honesty to try and look them up.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:07 pm

Monstrous wrote:Holocaust Believers have attempted to lure Monstrous to debate the Einsatzgruppen in a thread called "Deniers say the dumbest things: the open-air shootings". Obviously this is an inappropriate title intended to demean Monstrous and misleadingly frame the discussion. However, Monstrous is in a forgiving mood and may graciously deign to enlighten the Believers in this thread.

Do you always write about yourself in the third person? Called illeism, this can be a dangerous condition.

I assure you, the Dumb Denier thread existed before I knew of you - you're far from the first. But, no, it wasn't an attempt to demean or frame the discussion - rather, it was to avoid proliferation of multiple threads on the same topic. Also, "Holocaust Believers" didn't ask you a thing; I did.

The point, however, is for you to prove your claims, so I really don't give a {!#%@} what thread you use, so long as you don't litter up Posen. Starting this thread - judging from your post - hasn't helped you come up with a damned worthwhile point.

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Balsamo wrote:
Why cannot you forge a report and copy it a hundred times using a mimeograph? If the Germans could copy documents, then the Soviets could also.


Because before you do, you have to be sure that all the copies have been found and under control. Otherwise, you'd expose yourself to be caught red handed if one of the existing copies appear. And I doubt that the Soviets would have been stupid enough to copy a forgery of 3300 pages 65 times.

One indeed has the nettlesome problem of contemporary “traces” of these reports in other people’s files, etc. Browning explains, e.g., how “In accordance with Heydrich’s orders, on October 30, 1941, Heinrich Müller of the Gestapo sent Foreign Minister Ribbentrop the first five “activity and situation reports” (Tãgigkeits- und Lageberichten) of the Sipo-SD Einsatzgruppen” (The Origins of the Final Solution, p 399).

And how “On November 26 Heydrich personally sent Ribbentrop a copy of the next report, for the entire month of October.” (p 401) This report openly declared that “The male Jews over 16, with the exception of doctors and Jewish Council elders, are being executed. This measure is still partly in progress. After the conclusion of the action, there will be only 500 Jewish women and children present in the Ostland”; it also stated hat in Belorussia “For its part the Einsatzgruppe of the Sipo-SD proceeds all the more intensively against the Jews,” citing many executions including of Jewish women. The report also declared that around the Dnieper, “The territory newly occupied by the commandos was made free of Jews.”

Now, with this background in mind, we can read in Browning (pp 401-402) that “the information in the single Foreign Office copy was widely disseminated and understood. The first five [TuLBs] were not sent directly to Ribbentrop but to the SS and police liaison desk known as D II under Undersecretary Martin Luther. . . . [T]he reports were next sent on to the neighboring Jewish desk, D III, of Franz Rademacher. The first five reports were summarized by Rademacher’s assistant, Frtiz Gebhard von Hahn. He noted, ‘An exact overview of the Jews liquidated in all three Reichskommissariaten cannot be obtained from the reports’ . . . Undersecretary Luther himself wrote a summary of the sixth [TuLB No. 6, mentioned above] report, noting that in the Ostland all male Jews over 16 other than doctors and council members would be executed, and that at the conclusion of the action only 500 Jewish women and children would be left alive. He also noted that 33,000 Jews in Kiev, 3,000 in Vitebsk and 5,000 east of the Dnieper had been shot. The summary was initialed by State Secretary Weizsaecker the day it was written.” (page 402)

So - following along - presumably, in DenierLand, not only the TuLBs were fabricated/edited by the Moscow Forgery Factories but also the Foreign Office summary based on them. Perhaps the Soviet forgery operation fabricated/edited the entire corpus of Third Reich records - or at least any that are inescapably embarrassing to odious liars like Monstrous - who now gets to provide us with sources for the Moscow Forgery Factories (names, dates, orders, drafts and final versions, proof of their work) and write a concise summary of their activities.

Monstrous wrote:Monstrous fails to see the alleged problem.

First, this is getting creepier by the sentence. Second, I don't doubt that you do fail to understand. You've demonstrated your intellectual challenges at length in the Posen thread. What I explained in my post isn't a subtle point, but it does seem beyond your comprehension.

Monstrous wrote:The EG reports, the summaries, and the circulation list were likely all forged.

We're not talking about a list. We are talking about a TuLB, which was submitted to the Foreign Office, and then we are talking about a summary of that TuLB, citing information regarding the mass murder of Jews which was included in the supposed forgery. "The summary was initialed by State Secretary Weizsaecker the day it was written.” Now, try re-reading what I used from Browning again and see if any of what you write here is remotely relevant.

Further, this is where you prove that the Soviets forged or edited the reports. Not where you talk about what things "were likely." We want proof.

Monstrous wrote:There were some real EG reports and summaries but these were likely intended only for a small circle - those directly involved in the anti-partisan warfare and higher officials like Himmler.

Sources? How many? Covering what? When filed? Distributed to whom? Include citations.

Monstrous wrote:It makes absolutely no sense to Monstrous that such reports should have been sent to, for example, the Gautleiter of Vienna, Baldur von Schirach, as claimed. Utterly incomprehensible for both revealing secret military statistics to non-military individuals and revealing the hyper secret Holocaust to non-involved persons. Supposedly so ultra, uber top secret that Himmler did not dare send a message to Höss ordering him to start the genocide but instead only gave a verbal order to Höss in a personal meeting.

Nope, without citations and explanations I am afraid you don't even get to sit at the grown-ups table.

This is where you get to make a case, with sources, not tell us what doesn't add up, to you. As we've just seen, you have limited comprehension capabilities to begin with. We don't care what you don't understand - we want sources and proofs. Citations for all your claims. You aren't giving us any of that.

Monstrous wrote:In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust but Monstrous is supposed to believe that for some inexplicable reason these documents instead listed explicit numbers of murdered Jews? Why? Why did these documents not follow the usual Holocaust "practice" and stated that the EG groups helped resettle Jews ("code word" for genociding them)?

Pray tell what the {!#%@} you're talking about. Again, no one here can read your mind, and given the third person disorder, I would guess no one even wants to try. In the Posen thread, you've been schooled repeatedly on the use of explicit language. Sometimes leaders of the Third Reich were explicit - sometimes they resorted to bureaucratic usages - sometimes they used euphemisms or code words. So what? Again, the EG reports, forged? - proof and sources. Not your wittering on issues you're ignorant about.

Monstrous wrote:The obvioud explanation is, of course, that the Soviets forged the documents.

This isn't an obvious answer. In the first place, you've not successfully defined a problem. You've just shared with us 1) your inability to understand and 2) your disdain for being specific and using citations. In the second place, you don't get to magically conjure up Moscow Forgery Factories out of thin air because it is supposedly an obvious thing. You need to give us positive proof, with sources, as to what you say happened.

Monstrous wrote:The wide circulation lists were like the forged Posen speeches intended to implicate the whole upper German leadership in the Holocaust. The Posen speeches and the EG documents are complementary parts of the same nefarious forgery.

They date from different times, were generated under different conditions, originated from a different level of personnel, and had different purposes. Instead of puking out all sorts of stream of consciousness drivel, tell us you theory about the EG reports, with sources. Sigh.

Monstrous wrote:The forgers likely captured the very limited number of real Einsatzgruppen reports and summaries in the Berlin archives and destroyed those documents that were not compatible with the forgery. Or they were similarly destroyed when the prosecution carefully combed through the German archives during the Nuremberg trials.

"Likely" is not proof. Tell us what is wrong with the accounts in Headland and Earl. You seriously need to educate yourself about this topic - for sure before firing off claims about it, which you're unable to explain and support.

Your reasoning, btw, is circular: you are arguing that because the documents are forged, therefore it is likely that thus and such happened to forge them. But you were asked to provide a proof for your claim of forgery. You've done nothing of the sort. Deniers say the dumbest {!#%@} about the Einsatzgruppen and other police extermination units.

Monstrous wrote:This would still leave the risk of a few contradictory original documents appearing somewhere as well contradictions appearing between the many different forged documents (liars tend to have trouble keeping all their lies consistent if spouting many lies). SUCH CONTRADICTIONS HAVE INDEED APPEARED BUT THEY ARE SIMPLY IGNORED. See for example the enormous number of contradictions in EG reports reported here:
http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/ ... part_1.php

The opposite is more likely - since you want to speculate about what might happen on Uranus. "Stories" that are too tight and too slick to be true usually aren't. But this is all speculation.

So you've got nothing? That is basically what you've told us.

PS - Monstrous is a {!#%@} waste of time. If Monstrous wishes to discuss nine contradictions or problems, he can summarize them and explain them to us. Monstrous made a claim regarding a topic about which Monstrous is apparently clueless. Monstrous needs to study up.

Come to think of it, Monstrous's post could be exhibit A in the Dumb Deniers thread . . .
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:47 pm

In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust but Monstrous is supposed to believe that for some inexplicable reason these documents instead listed explicit numbers of murdered Jews? Why? Why did these documents not follow the usual Holocaust "practice" and stated that the EG groups helped resettle Jews ("code word" for genociding them)?


Jeff has a logical explanation for this, the Nazis folded the EZG killings into antipartisan warfare, they were considered as much a part of the war effort as any other behind the lines activity in the east. Thus explicit and plain language could be used. However they also used code words, se for instance a report on the "resettlement" of Jews in a pit outside Riga I believe.

In Poland they were killing Jews who could not work, and some camouflage was needed. Different Objectives and attitudes in the different territories. As far as the EZG's were concerned they were killing partisan supporters, even though most Jews were not communist and large scale Jewish involvement in the partisan movement did not begin until 1942 as a result of the EZG killings.

Do Statmech and Balsamo have any opinions on Jeff's theories re this point?

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1176
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Mary Q Contrary » Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:28 pm

NathanC wrote:
In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust but Monstrous is supposed to believe that for some inexplicable reason these documents instead listed explicit numbers of murdered Jews? Why? Why did these documents not follow the usual Holocaust "practice" and stated that the EG groups helped resettle Jews ("code word" for genociding them)?


That's because you're stupid. The euphemism for deporting Jews to the AR camps in Poland was resettlement to the "occupied soviet territories" (ex. Korherr report). Obviously, since the EG killings were happening In the occupied Soviet territories, there's literally nowhere else to resettle them to. There was never any point to hiding it because such a lie would be so transparent.

I'm with Balsamo. All your questions would be answered if you had the patience and honesty to try and look them up.

This is one of the most ridiculous explanations for a holocaust contradiction that I've ever heard. Do you have any source for this or did you just make it up on the fly?
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:42 pm

It makes total sense. The lie of resettlement would sound absurd if used in the USSR. It was used at times and the results were comical. Go look for the HC article "Pits at a 'resettlement' site" and see what I mean.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1362
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Balsamo » Thu Jul 30, 2015 7:04 pm

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
NathanC wrote:
In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust but Monstrous is supposed to believe that for some inexplicable reason these documents instead listed explicit numbers of murdered Jews? Why? Why did these documents not follow the usual Holocaust "practice" and stated that the EG groups helped resettle Jews ("code word" for genociding them)?


That's because you're stupid. The euphemism for deporting Jews to the AR camps in Poland was resettlement to the "occupied soviet territories" (ex. Korherr report). Obviously, since the EG killings were happening In the occupied Soviet territories, there's literally nowhere else to resettle them to. There was never any point to hiding it because such a lie would be so transparent.

I'm with Balsamo. All your questions would be answered if you had the patience and honesty to try and look them up.

This is one of the most ridiculous explanations for a holocaust contradiction that I've ever heard. Do you have any source for this or did you just make it up on the fly?


No it is not ridiculous at all. It is maybe a little simplified, and of course it requires a little bit of knowledge and personal thinking to understand.
I spoke a lot about the subject in the two FS thread as well as in the Wannsee thread.
To sum up, the killing of the Jews of the territories conquered in the East during and after Barbarossa has been decided in a different logic than the extermination that was coming. It was indeed a police operation planned before the invasion. A Furher's befehl had been issued, as well as other befehl known as the "criminal orders". Those orders were quite explicit on how the ideological enemies had to be treated, no euphemism needed.
Those killings involved not only the EG, but also local militia, and in some cases the military (Waffen SS or Wehrmacht.)
It is a part of the total war wanted by Hitler, and offered the opportunity to kill many Jews of all ages and sex (starting in August 41), but it was presented as a police operation against Partisans (even though 90% of the victims were Jews).

Such an operation could not be kept secret anyway, due to the involvement I mentioned, but were seen as acceptable in the context of the total war.
Now some historians have proposed the idea that Heydrich decided to publish the report to some circles in order to prepare them (members of the circles) for what was coming next, that is the mass murder of the non-belligerent Jews, but I am quite skeptic on that.

The a different type of reports, by the way, one for each level so to speak: The Jager report (Einsatzkommando 3) was only written in 5 copies (and yes could have thus been falsified), then you had the general report of the EG in this case EG A, at the final level, the General report which was proudly presented by the French revisionist Reynouard (there is a thread about that on this forum) which were the compilation of ALL the reports from the EG. This one was published at 65 copies in 1942. And it is 3300 pages long.
The main reason why Verbeke and Reynouard are proud to present this report they claimed to have found is that according to them:
- It was never used by Historians
And more importantly:
- It was not used during the EG trial!!!
- And the death toll contained in the General report is less that the one established by the Historians.
Nevertheless, this death toll is about 466.000 people, victims of the so called war against Partisans.

So the question would be why created such a massive fraud if it was not meant to be used at the IMT?

Monstrous:
It makes absolutely no sense to Monstrous that such reports should have been sent to, for example, the Gautleiter of Vienna, Baldur von Schirach, as claimed. Utterly incomprehensible for both revealing secret military statistics to non-military individuals and revealing the hyper secret Holocaust to non-involved persons. Supposedly so ultra, uber top secret that Himmler did not dare send a message to Höss ordering him to start the genocide but instead only gave a verbal order to Höss in a personal meeting
.

Poor Monstrous should now have a small idea of what is talking about. He´ll be glad to learn that Schirach was not only a Gauleiter of Vienna, but more importantly, a Reichsleiter (which was the highest rank you could have within the NSDAP). But you were right, the Reichsleiter could only rely on the Wehrmacht report to assess the military situation, but situation regarding the war against partisan was given by the RSHA. Hoess had nothing to do with the actions of the EG in the East, and by that time he was not involved in any mass murder of Jews. And When the time will come, there would not be the same Jews.


Monstrous:
In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust


Have you read one of these reports?
Here is one example:
In that video, go to minutes 39.22
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-IriHWM_AQ

Here is how our fellows deniers reacts:
Next comes a new text on the screen (39.22):
"On 19 October 1941…in Mogilev… 3.726 Jews of both sex and of all ages were liquidated!"
translated by Vince for his french public by “ 3.726 Jews are killed because of “anti-German activities” (no mentions of “both sex and all ages”…and he adds “Not because they were Jews”…

At your appreciation.

There were no code language at all but plenty of so-called justification.
The Romanian army did also some mass killing and did not even care of hiding the bodies.
And as mad as it seems, there were not even legal burden to deal with. In the Germans mind, the USSR being a criminal regime, and not a signatory of the international convention, they were legally free to lead the war as they wished. This fact, beside a shared perception of the threat posed by the Jews in the east, greatly helped the Army collaboration in some of the shootings.
As said those killing being organized behind the front line, there were not even a policy of resettlement possible. Poland was already saturated with Jews, so saturated that it prevented the deportations of the German Jews and other central European Jews there.

Of course, the Polish Jews were not any longer part of the war, you could therefore not rely on a "war against partisan" gambit, but there were still significant impetus to convince the local leader to adopt extreme measures, the most often mentioned being Health issues, the lack of food, black market, etc. To make thing fast here, mass murder could be implemented but required much more secrecy and discretion. You could just not killed them on spot like the eastern territories.

The need for secrecy will of course be even more essential when it will come to deal with the German and western Jews.

Here I speak in my name, as some difference of interpretation between me and other members are quite obvious :D

The less justifications and pretexts, the less consensus, the more secrecy, the less documents.

Now as for the impossibility to dispose the corpses stupidity defended by the Deniers.
I just have two question:
- How many German soldiers died on the eastern front?
- How many corpses have been found?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:21 pm

Leaving aside some points of contention here - I really am trying to focus at this point on the claim that the Soviets fabricated the reports - I will jump to this:
Balsamo wrote:The Jager report (Einsatzkommando 3) was only written in 5 copies (and yes could have thus been falsified),

There is no evidence nonetheless for the Jäger report having been fabricated - and it is corroborated by ground-level studies of individual massacres. Since the Jäger report was used by Stahlecker in preparation of his reports, the claim of a forged Jäger report now needs evidence that the Stahlecker report was also fabricated. Recall that Nick Terry wrote that the Jäger report must be "subsumed" under the Stahlecker report.

Balsamo wrote:then you had the general report of the EG in this case EG A, at the final level, the General report which was proudly presented by the French revisionist Reynouard (there is a thread about that on this forum) which were the compilation of ALL the reports from the EG. This one was published at 65 copies in 1942. And it is 3300 pages long.
The main reason why Verbeke and Reynouard are proud to present this report they claimed to have found is that according to them:
- It was never used by Historians
And more importantly:
- It was not used during the EG trial!!!
- And the death toll contained in the General report is less that the one established by the Historians.
Nevertheless, this death toll is about 466.000 people, victims of the so called war against Partisans.

I was lost in the Breakthrough thread, and I'm lost again here: what report are you discussing here? I haven't watched the video as you said it was in French, and you know about my capabilities in French . . .
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1362
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Balsamo » Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:28 pm

Statmec,

This post was not meant for you... :lol:

Anyway/:
There is no evidence nonetheless for the Jäger report having been fabricated - and it is corroborated by ground-level studies of individual massacres. Since the Jäger report was used by Stahlecker in preparation of his reports, the claim of a forged Jäger report now needs evidence that the Stahlecker report was also fabricated. Recall the Nick Terry wrote that the Jäger report must be "subsumed" under the Stahlecker report.


No there isn't of course, the only thing I meant that a report with only 5 copies could eventually be faked, provided those were under control, that is theoretically only, contrary to a wide spread one. I am trying to adopt a step by step approach with monstrous, here.

I was lost in the Breakthrough thread, and I'm lost again here: what report are you discussing here? I haven't watched the video as you said it was in French, and you know about my capabilities in French


You are not the only one, a usual when quoting Deniers, but that is what THEY SAID and the reason THEY ARE PROUD.
But I love the argument that the general reports was not used at the IMT, why losing his time to forge a document like this if it was not to be used.
I was only quoting Verbeke and Reynouard, here. I am out of that crap.
But as Monstrous seems to only read authentic Denier's writings, so be it.

EDIT: Oups, I forgot to answer the question: The report presented in the Denier's video of course. 8-)

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:32 pm

Jeff is under the impression that the topic of EZG killings is solved and done. Jeff takes due efforts to commend balsamo

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1362
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Balsamo » Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:47 pm

:evil:
Monstrous, Get out of Jeff's body, now!
:twisted:

Hope it works.
;)

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:51 pm

Bob dole is sending his regards to Jeff as well.

The difference in camouflage is basically the difference between the perception of soviet and polish jews

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:18 am

Balsamo wrote:EDIT: Oups, I forgot to answer the question: The report presented in the Denier's video of course. 8-)

But I didn't watch the video, as it's in French! LOL, so when they say the "general report," what report do they mean?
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Monstrous » Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:10 pm

Monstrous is disappointed with the feeble rejoinders his arguments and the non-answers to many. Having attempted to sift through the garbage of non-arguments he has tentatively identified some attempts at concrete counter-arguments. These which will be dismissed below:.

Balsamo wrote: it was presented as a police operation against Partisans (even though 90% of the victims were Jews).

Such an operation could not be kept secret anyway, due to the involvement I mentioned, but were seen as acceptable in the context of the total war.

That is incorrect. The alleged murdered Jews in the EG reports were were largely not presented or concealed as due to anti-partisan warfare.

Balsamo wrote:Now some historians have proposed the idea that Heydrich decided to publish the report to some circles in order to prepare them (members of the circles) for what was coming next, that is the mass murder of the non-belligerent Jews, but I am quite skeptic on that.

Prepare? How? The EG reports would have had an opposite effect. Disseminating important military information to non-military persons without a need to know and spreading Holocaust knowledge to large circles with the risk of this being transmitted to the Allies or causing unrest and dissension among German leaders.
Balsamo wrote:The a different type of reports, by the way, one for each level so to speak: The Jager report (Einsatzkommando 3) was only written in 5 copies (and yes could have thus been falsified), then you had the general report of the EG in this case EG A, at the final level, the General report which was proudly presented by the French revisionist Reynouard (there is a thread about that on this forum) which were the compilation of ALL the reports from the EG. This one was published at 65 copies in 1942. And it is 3300 pages long.
The main reason why Verbeke and Reynouard are proud to present this report they claimed to have found is that according to them:
- It was never used by Historians
And more importantly:
- It was not used during the EG trial!!!
- And the death toll contained in the General report is less that the one established by the Historians.
Nevertheless, this death toll is about 466.000 people, victims of the so called war against Partisans.

So the question would be why created such a massive fraud if it was not meant to be used at the IMT?

For starters, I question that this until now strangely unused report is authentic. What is its alleged provenance? That there is alleged to have been 65 copies at one point proves nothing even if correct. Could all have been printed for a small fraction of the cost of a Soviet tank or aircraft.
Balsamo wrote:Poor Monstrous should now have a small idea of what is talking about. He´ll be glad to learn that Schirach was not only a Gauleiter of Vienna, but more importantly, a Reichsleiter (which was the highest rank you could have within the NSDAP). But you were right, the Reichsleiter could only rely on the Wehrmacht report to assess the military situation, but situation regarding the war against partisan was given by the RSHA. Hoess had nothing to do with the actions of the EG in the East, and by that time he was not involved in any mass murder of Jews. And When the time will come, there would not be the same Jews.

Schirach was Reichsleiter for youth eduction. He has absolutely no need for sensitive information from the Eastern front or the EG reports.


Monstrous:
In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust

Balsamo wrote:Have you read one of these reports?
Here is one example:
In that video, go to minutes 39.22
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-IriHWM_AQ

Here is how our fellows deniers reacts:
Next comes a new text on the screen (39.22):
"On 19 October 1941…in Mogilev… 3.726 Jews of both sex and of all ages were liquidated!"
translated by Vince for his french public by “ 3.726 Jews are killed because of “anti-German activities” (no mentions of “both sex and all ages”…and he adds “Not because they were Jews”…

At your appreciation.

There were no code language at all but plenty of so-called justification.
The Romanian army did also some mass killing and did not even care of hiding the bodies.
And as mad as it seems, there were not even legal burden to deal with. In the Germans mind, the USSR being a criminal regime, and not a signatory of the international convention, they were legally free to lead the war as they wished. This fact, beside a shared perception of the threat posed by the Jews in the east, greatly helped the Army collaboration in some of the shootings.
As said those killing being organized behind the front line, there were not even a policy of resettlement possible. Poland was already saturated with Jews, so saturated that it prevented the deportations of the German Jews and other central European Jews there.

Of course, the Polish Jews were not any longer part of the war, you could therefore not rely on a "war against partisan" gambit, but there were still significant impetus to convince the local leader to adopt extreme measures, the most often mentioned being Health issues, the lack of food, black market, etc. To make thing fast here, mass murder could be implemented but required much more secrecy and discretion. You could just not killed them on spot like the eastern territories.

The need for secrecy will of course be even more essential when it will come to deal with the German and western Jews.

Here I speak in my name, as some difference of interpretation between me and other members are quite obvious :D

The less justifications and pretexts, the less consensus, the more secrecy, the less documents.

There were no code words and no justifications in most EG reports. Just alleged numbers of Jews killed without explanation for why. See for example the examples here:
http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/ ... part_1.php


Balsamo wrote:Now as for the impossibility to dispose the corpses stupidity defended by the Deniers.
I just have two question:
- How many German soldiers died on the eastern front?
- How many corpses have been found?

Dishonest comparison. The EG allegedly committed large local massacres creating a problem with how dispose of the massive amounts of bodies. The corpses of German soldiers where taken back to Germany whenever possible. In other cases they were dispersed over wide areas as they were killed in the fighting.

I consider all the points in my original post to still be valid.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:16 pm

Monstrous fails to understand what he's being asked. No one is trying to refute his non-arguments. Monstrous was asked to provide his case, with evidence, for forgery of the Einsatzgruppen reports. Monstrous suffers from the delusion that "sources" like

- "were likely all forged"
- "were likely intended"
- "makes absolutely no sense to Monstrous"
- "Monstrous is supposed to believe that for some inexplicable reason"
- "obvioud explanation is"
- "complementary parts of the same nefarious forgery"
- "likely captured the very limited number of real Einsatzgruppen reports"
- "Or they were similarly destroyed"

constitute a case and prove something. They don't. Other than that Monstrous mistakes speculation about likelihoods and probablities and could haves for the real thing. Reasserting a claim umpteen times does not prove it and does not negate the need to evidence. Monstrous will continue to be disappointed until he provides what he was asked for.
Monstrous wrote:That is incorrect. The alleged murdered Jews in the EG reports were were largely not presented or concealed as due to anti-partisan warfare.

Monstrous is wrong. Throughout the Einsatzgruppen reports, as in the TULB I cited above and as in the Jäger report summarized here, there are many references to exterminating Jews - including women and children and the elderly, entire communities - and making territory judenrein. There's a reason no one knows the expression partisanenrein. That reason is the events that occurred during the war. Further, on trial before the NMT, Einsatzgruppen leaders were forced to admit, on cross-examination, that they targeted Jews for murder. Which raises another question - why on earth, when on trial for their lives, didn't these Einsatzgruppen leaders deny the existence of the various EG reports and cite their being forged rather than try explaining them away?

Monstrous wrote:There were no code words and no justifications in most EG reports. Just alleged numbers of Jews killed without explanation for why.

In the first place, he who ordered the submission of the reports didn't need regular updates on why Jews were being massacred; he wanted progress reports - and that is what he was given. Second, there are indeed passages in the reports where it is explained why - to make territory free of Jews, because Jews supposedly opposed the Germans, and so on. It does not appear that Monstrous has read the various reports at all. Has he? Or just "Revisionist" commentary on the reports?

Monstrous wrote:I consider all the points in my original post to still be valid.

Monstrous is free to consider anything he wishes. He hasn't provided a scintilla of proof for his claim of Soviet forgery. We don't have a date when the reports are forged, we don't have names of forgers and places for the forgery, we have no orders - verbal or written - for the forgery operation, we don't have an explanation of how/where/when the reports were disseminated, we have no explanation for the obvious problem of "traces" of the reports in other archives and files.

I consider Monstrous to be an inept clown who can't even answer a straightforward question - support a claim with sources and explanation, not vague hypotheses about what might have happened.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:32 pm

Monstrous is reminded of testimony given by Deserted members of the EZG squads to swiss military intelligence
Unless he is inclined to respond to Jeff's point with unproven allegations of swiss torture.

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1176
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Mary Q Contrary » Fri Jul 31, 2015 9:40 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Mary Q Contrary wrote:
NathanC wrote:
In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust but Monstrous is supposed to believe that for some inexplicable reason these documents instead listed explicit numbers of murdered Jews? Why? Why did these documents not follow the usual Holocaust "practice" and stated that the EG groups helped resettle Jews ("code word" for genociding them)?


That's because you're stupid. The euphemism for deporting Jews to the AR camps in Poland was resettlement to the "occupied soviet territories" (ex. Korherr report). Obviously, since the EG killings were happening In the occupied Soviet territories, there's literally nowhere else to resettle them to. There was never any point to hiding it because such a lie would be so transparent.

I'm with Balsamo. All your questions would be answered if you had the patience and honesty to try and look them up.

This is one of the most ridiculous explanations for a holocaust contradiction that I've ever heard. Do you have any source for this or did you just make it up on the fly?


No it is not ridiculous at all. It is maybe a little simplified, and of course it requires a little bit of knowledge and personal thinking to understand.

"personal thinking to understand" I believe the word is conjecture but carry on....

I spoke a lot about the subject in the two FS thread as well as in the Wannsee thread.
To sum up, the killing of the Jews of the territories conquered in the East during and after Barbarossa has been decided in a different logic than the extermination that was coming. It was indeed a police operation planned before the invasion. A Furher's befehl had been issued, as well as other befehl known as the "criminal orders". Those orders were quite explicit on how the ideological enemies had to be treated, no euphemism needed.
Those killings involved not only the EG, but also local militia, and in some cases the military (Waffen SS or Wehrmacht.)
It is a part of the total war wanted by Hitler, and offered the opportunity to kill many Jews of all ages and sex (starting in August 41), but it was presented as a police operation against Partisans (even though 90% of the victims were Jews).

Such an operation could not be kept secret anyway, due to the involvement I mentioned, but were seen as acceptable in the context of the total war.
Now some historians have proposed the idea that Heydrich decided to publish the report to some circles in order to prepare them (members of the circles) for what was coming next, that is the mass murder of the non-belligerent Jews, but I am quite skeptic on that.

The a different type of reports, by the way, one for each level so to speak: The Jager report (Einsatzkommando 3) was only written in 5 copies (and yes could have thus been falsified), then you had the general report of the EG in this case EG A, at the final level, the General report which was proudly presented by the French revisionist Reynouard (there is a thread about that on this forum) which were the compilation of ALL the reports from the EG. This one was published at 65 copies in 1942. And it is 3300 pages long.
The main reason why Verbeke and Reynouard are proud to present this report they claimed to have found is that according to them:
- It was never used by Historians
And more importantly:
- It was not used during the EG trial!!!
- And the death toll contained in the General report is less that the one established by the Historians.
Nevertheless, this death toll is about 466.000 people, victims of the so called war against Partisans.

So the question would be why created such a massive fraud if it was not meant to be used at the IMT?

Monstrous:
It makes absolutely no sense to Monstrous that such reports should have been sent to, for example, the Gautleiter of Vienna, Baldur von Schirach, as claimed. Utterly incomprehensible for both revealing secret military statistics to non-military individuals and revealing the hyper secret Holocaust to non-involved persons. Supposedly so ultra, uber top secret that Himmler did not dare send a message to Höss ordering him to start the genocide but instead only gave a verbal order to Höss in a personal meeting
.

Poor Monstrous should now have a small idea of what is talking about. He´ll be glad to learn that Schirach was not only a Gauleiter of Vienna, but more importantly, a Reichsleiter (which was the highest rank you could have within the NSDAP). But you were right, the Reichsleiter could only rely on the Wehrmacht report to assess the military situation, but situation regarding the war against partisan was given by the RSHA. Hoess had nothing to do with the actions of the EG in the East, and by that time he was not involved in any mass murder of Jews. And When the time will come, there would not be the same Jews.


Monstrous:
In all other top secret German documents only used alleged"code words" were used for the Holocaust


Have you read one of these reports?
Here is one example:
In that video, go to minutes 39.22
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-IriHWM_AQ

Here is how our fellows deniers reacts:
Next comes a new text on the screen (39.22):
"On 19 October 1941…in Mogilev… 3.726 Jews of both sex and of all ages were liquidated!"
translated by Vince for his french public by “ 3.726 Jews are killed because of “anti-German activities” (no mentions of “both sex and all ages”…and he adds “Not because they were Jews”…

At your appreciation.

There were no code language at all but plenty of so-called justification.
The Romanian army did also some mass killing and did not even care of hiding the bodies.
And as mad as it seems, there were not even legal burden to deal with. In the Germans mind, the USSR being a criminal regime, and not a signatory of the international convention, they were legally free to lead the war as they wished. This fact, beside a shared perception of the threat posed by the Jews in the east, greatly helped the Army collaboration in some of the shootings.
As said those killing being organized behind the front line, there were not even a policy of resettlement possible. Poland was already saturated with Jews, so saturated that it prevented the deportations of the German Jews and other central European Jews there.

Of course, the Polish Jews were not any longer part of the war, you could therefore not rely on a "war against partisan" gambit, but there were still significant impetus to convince the local leader to adopt extreme measures, the most often mentioned being Health issues, the lack of food, black market, etc. To make thing fast here, mass murder could be implemented but required much more secrecy and discretion. You could just not killed them on spot like the eastern territories.

The need for secrecy will of course be even more essential when it will come to deal with the German and western Jews.

Here I speak in my name, as some difference of interpretation between me and other members are quite obvious :D

The less justifications and pretexts, the less consensus, the more secrecy, the less documents.

Your command of the English language becomes more limited when you try to BS. What it sounds like you and Jeff are saying is that people in Poland cared more their Jews than the people in the Soviet Union did. So when the Germans murdered all the Jews in Poland, they had to conceal the murders from the locals and hide behind the facade of "resettlement in the East." But when they got around to killing all the Soviet Jews, nobody cared so the Germans could be open and there were so many Jews being killed that concealment would have been impossible anyway.

First of all, there were more Polish Jews murdered than Soviet Jews. Since the Germans could conceal the murder of Polish Jews, they would have had no problem concealing the murders of Soviet Jews. So that argument is a fail. Second, concealing the murder of Polish Jews by saying they were resettled in the East isn't a very good alibi when you openly talk about murdering the Jews "in the East."

So your conjecture about the difference between Polish Jews and Soviet Jews isn't convincing. Do you have any evidence (and when I say evidence I mean testimony or confessions because that's the only type of evidence that exists for the Holocaust) that euphemisms were necessary when dealing with Polish Jews but not with Soviet Jews?

As an aside, where is this "Poland" that you are talking about? That country didn't exist between 1939 and 1945 and when it was revived after 1945 it wasn't in the same place that it was prior to 1939.

Now as for the impossibility to dispose the corpses stupidity defended by the Deniers.
I just have two question:
- How many German soldiers died on the eastern front?
- How many corpses have been found?

Your using the well known Believer tactic known as "dropping the variable." I understand why you are doing it: it's the only way your Holocaust will work. You can't compare the number of Germans killed on the eastern front to the number of Jews killed by the EG because the EG killings are limited to specific locations while the Germans killed in action were spread out over the entire eastern front. The number of men in the EG who were killing all the Jews was far fewer than the number of men in the Soviet military who were killing German soldiers. The Soviet Army was engaged in killing German soldiers for a longer period of time than the EG was engaged in killing Jews. You need to make comparisons based on all the variables, not just one.
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Fri Jul 31, 2015 11:10 pm

Jeff_36 is disappointed with Mary in that she seems unable to understand the difference between the situation as pertains to attitudes towards Jews in the occupied soviet territories and the attitude towards polish jews

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Aug 01, 2015 2:15 am

Mary, do you agree with Monstrous that the Ereignismeldungen and other reports of the EGs were fabricated/edited by the Soviets? If yes, does the implication follow, as Monstrous tells us, that the EGs were only battling partisans and not engaged in mass murder of Jews in the occupied Soviet Union?

I'm not asking yet about why these reports exist in the form that they do or about how they fit in or not with other documents - only about whether they are authentic and whether they report on the units' actual mass killings of Jews.

If you agree with Monstrous, please be so kind as to help him find some evidence for the claim of forgery. He's floundering here.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

Xcalibur
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Xcalibur » Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:45 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Mary, do you agree with Monstrous that the Ereignismeldungen and other reports of the EGs were fabricated/edited by the Soviets? If yes, does the implication follow, as Monstrous tells us, that the EGs were only battling partisans and not engaged in mass murder of Jews in the occupied Soviet Union?

I'm not asking yet about why these reports exist in the form that they do or about how they fit in or not with other documents - only about whether they are authentic and whether they report on the units' actual mass killings of Jews.

If you agree with Monstrous, please be so kind as to help him find some evidence for the claim of forgery. He's floundering here.



Agreed, his claim, his proof. He got nuthin' coming from this side until he puts up. If all he's got is what he put up, it'it's time to go back to mommie's basement and re-start playing games on the computer.

Or, put in a pedestrian way that Monstrous just may be understand: Put the {!#%@} up or shut the the {!#%@} up, douchebag.

Let's see one licensed forensic document examiner back that claim. Eh? I've been waiting 12 {!#%@} years for JUST one of you twats to come up with an independently substantiated piece of evidence regarding forgery of these docos. Silence again? Color me unsurprised that there's nothing new here.

And, as long as we're talking about waiting for {!#%@}, where's the {!#%@}' Fish "Reporr"? I know," he's busy elsewhere", counting white lines in Polish parking lots .

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Sat Aug 01, 2015 4:13 am

You should know that you along with SM and myself have been defamed on the nu cesspit lately. see my latest posts in your nazi zombie cannibalism thread

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:06 am

Jeff_36 wrote:You should know that you along with SM and myself have been defamed on the nu cesspit lately. see my latest posts in your nazi zombie cannibalism thread

Ok, I checked for that. That's just old stuff from June, besides which DasPrussian took matters over . . . Traynor keeps finding himself in the grips of delusions of adequacy. But, deep down inside, even Traynor doesn't take anything he himself says seriously - a more pompous buffoon I've never encountered. DasPrussian and Duke both have quite the way with words. Ok, I am en route, using free airport WiFi for this silliness - and will be on a quite long flight soon . . . dare I hope that Monstrous and Maryzilla take Xcalibur's polite encouragement to heart and produce something worth reading?

PS - I still have no clue what Einsatzgruppen report Balsamo wrote about!

PSS - Hey Traynor, if you're reading this, grow a pair and join SSF . . . Monstrous has about run his course as a chew toy (aka our own Tom Dalton).
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:42 pm

The bottom line : in the ussr the killing fell under anti partisan activity and could be justified from the perspective of the criminal war that the Germans were waging in the east.

In Poland they were killing jews who could not work. This was not an action connected to the war itself and needed to be kept quiet.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Aug 01, 2015 7:34 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:The bottom line : in the ussr the killing fell under anti partisan activity and could be justified from the perspective of the criminal war that the Germans were waging in the east.

Justified to whom? Have you read the reports? Have you read the NMT trial materials? Look again at the Jäger report and what I posted about it in Balsamo's breakthrough thread and explain how Jäger's efforts fell under fighting partisans and were justified that way. Or do the same thing for the whole body of the EG reports.

Jeff_36 wrote:In Poland they were killing jews who could not work. This was not an action connected to the war itself and needed to be kept quiet.

In the occupied Soviet Union they were slaughtering, by August 1942, entire Jewish communities and making territory Jew free. They were not failing to try to keep this quiet either.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

Xcalibur
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Xcalibur » Sat Aug 01, 2015 8:07 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:The bottom line : in the ussr the killing fell under anti partisan activity and could be justified from the perspective of the criminal war that the Germans were waging in the east.

Justified to whom? Have you read the reports? Have you read the NMT trial materials? Look again at the Jäger report and what I posted about it in Balsamo's breakthrough thread and explain how Jäger's efforts fell under fighting partisans and were justified that way. Or do the same thing for the whole body of the EG reports.

Jeff_36 wrote:In Poland they were killing jews who could not work. This was not an action connected to the war itself and needed to be kept quiet.

In the occupied Soviet Union they were slaughtering, by August 1942, entire Jewish communities and making territory Jew free. They were not failing to try to keep this quiet either.


Seems to me there are two separate issues here: The first to what extent Nazi officialdom instituted secrecy policy as to documents relating to anti Jewish measures in the East. The second issue is to what extent did knowledge of those measures extend beyond the Nazi officialdom directly involved. Lowry in Hitler's Furies makes it very clear that there was widespread knowledge of exactly what was gong on as regards Nazi Jewish policy in Poland.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1362
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Balsamo » Sat Aug 01, 2015 8:58 pm

Well don't know why I am losing my time with both of you.

So your conjecture about the difference between Polish Jews and Soviet Jews isn't convincing. Do you have any evidence (and when I say evidence I mean testimony or confessions because that's the only type of evidence that exists for the Holocaust) that euphemisms were necessary when dealing with Polish Jews but not with Soviet Jews?


Well here is an example of "Meldung" from the EG and EK, in this case the EG A. ( visible on the video at 1.31)

" Von Tislit aus wurden drei Groß Säuberungsaktionen durchgefuhrt und zwar wurden:
- In Garsden: 201 personen
- In Krittingen : 214 personen
- In Polangers: 111 personen.

In Garsden: Unterschtutsen die Juden bevolkerung die russische Grenzwacht bei der Abwehr des Deutsche Angriff..."

It says basically that a purge was undertaken in those three places, and that in the case of the Garsden, 201 people were executed because the Jewish population took the defense of some Russian frontier patrols...That is a very good reason to kill 201 Jews.

Most of the killing reports follows the same pattern. Except that the number of persons shot would increase and included women and children as well as elderly...But the reason would be more or less the same, some times reduced to just "anti-German activities".
In some cases, those actions, as I said, were not done by the sole EK's, but would also involved local militias and the Wehrmacht.

Like in this example I have already given, I will quote in full:

" On the 19th of October 1941, a large scale operation against the Jews was carried out in Mogilev with the aid of the Police Regiment "Mitte". Through this, 3726 Jews of both sex and all ages were liquidated. These measures were necessary because since the town of Mogilev was occupied by the German troops, the Jews (verb missing) the authority of the occupying forces and in spite of the measures already taken against them, they not only failed to desist in these actions, but continued their anti German activities (sabotage, support of partisans, refusal to work, etc.) ... to such an extent (...)it could no longer be tolerated."


Here you have all sort of Justifications on why the Jews had to be killed.
Now in Poland, and by that I mean the territories which were polish before September 1939,

After an interruption, I see that Statmec is asking a very pertinent question:
Justified to whom? Have you read the reports? Have you read the NMT trial materials? Look again at the Jäger report and what I posted about it in Balsamo's breakthrough thread and explain how Jäger's efforts fell under fighting partisans and were justified that way. Or do the same thing for the whole body of the EG reports.


To whom? Indeed... The Jager's report and brutal and as a matter of fact does not give any justification, and this is what is interesting, that is how those data are treated and digested to end up with bogus justifications, like in the two example I gave.

I still have no clue what Einsatzgruppen report Balsamo wrote about!


Well I was counting on you and Nick to enlighten me. ;)
Apparently, It is presented as a General report written in Berlin well into 1942, based on all the local EG reports. A summary and a detail account of what had been going on since the start of the campaign.
What can be seen in the video is:
MICROCOPY T175, Roll 233,
And the next screen shows:
Ereignismeldung UdSSR, n 14, Berlin 6 juli 1942.

Most are translated in English. And yes, even Babi Yar is presented with a justification: the death of a General, the need to destroy buildings to prevent the fire from spreading and the lack of lodging, so it was necessary to kill the Jews to get their flats...that kind of justifications.

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 872
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol
Contact:

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby nickterry » Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:53 pm

Balsamo wrote:Apparently, It is presented as a General report written in Berlin well into 1942, based on all the local EG reports. A summary and a detail account of what had been going on since the start of the campaign.
What can be seen in the video is:
MICROCOPY T175, Roll 233,
And the next screen shows:
Ereignismeldung UdSSR, n 14, Berlin 6 juli 1942.


Yeah, so the same Einsatzgruppen reports that have been known since the successor Nuremberg trials, i.e. the Ereignismeldungen UdSSR. NARA microfilms T175 rolls 233-235, with the successor Meldungen aus den besetzten Ostgebieten on rolls 235-236. The quote you have re the Mogilev action where 3726 Jews were killed I recognise from transcribing relevant parts of the Ereignismeldungen. Oh look here it is:

„Am 19.10.41 wurde mit Unterstützung durch das Pol.-Regt. Mitte in Mogilew eine Judenaktion grösseren Ausmasses durchgeführt, bei der 3 726 Juden beiderlei Geschlechts und jeden Alters liquidiert wurden. Diese Massnahme war erforderlich, weil die Juden seit Besetzung der Stadt Mogilew durch deutsche Truppen die Belange der Besatzungsbehörden und trotz der gegen sie bereits durchgeführten Massnahmen von diesem Treiben nicht nur Abstand nahmen, sondern ihre deutschfeindliche Betätigung (Sabotage, Unterstützung von Partisanen, Arbeitsverweigerung usw.) in einem Umfange und mit einer Beharrlichkeit fortsetzten, dass es im Interesse der Befriedung der rückwärtigen Gebiete nicht länger geduldet werden konnte. Am 23.10.41 wurden in Bekämpfung der Partisanen und zwecks weiterer Verhinderung von Sabotageakten weitere 279 Juden beiderlei Geschlechts aus Mogilew und Umgebung liquidiert.“
EM Nr. 133, 24.11.41, NA T175/234/2723189

I've not watched the Reynouard video, but gather from your descriptions that it was trying to claim some novelty in citing reports that are extremely well known from the literature, obviously historians have since the 1980s especially been exploring the sources region by region, and using other documents to complement and corroborate what the Ereignismeldungen say. Most of all they worked out some time ago that many of the actions were claimed by HSSPFs as they were the work of the Ordnungspolizei or brigades of the Kommandostab RFSS (especially SS Cavalry Brigade and 1st SS Infantry Brigade), or were carried out by the Wehrmacht (especially 707. Infanteriedivision in Weissruthenien).

24 years ago in his chapter of Dimension des Voelkermords, Gerd Robel did a simple addition of the headline (unit-wide) bodycounts reported in the Ereignismeldungen and then used the 2nd Stahlecker report for Einsatzgruppe A - the four groups did not provide consistent data, changes of command eg in Einsatzgruppe C mean there are no group-wide bodycounts for this unit whereas there are for B and D; while A reported its headline bodycounts separately in the two Stahlecker reports. Robel's total was plus/minus half a million.

The figure omits e.g. the Rumbula actions which were 'booked' by HSSPF Ostland, and quite a lot of major actions in Ukraine that were carried out by the Orpo. The way the reports are couched, it is also debatable whether some of the actions recorded as carried out with Orpo assistance were included in group-level 'headline' bodycounts; only with Babi Yar can we say for sure that Blobel's Sonderkommando 4a claimed the bodycount for its own. Meanwhile, other Kommando leaders proved to be 'weak' and were sent home around that time. When Blobel went home himself in January 1942, he evidently created enough disruption that nobody reported the liquidation of the Kharkov ghetto - or if it was reported through channels then it was edited out of the Ereignismeldungen. We also know that while the Jaeger report included the killings of Reich Jews at Kovno, this fact was omitted from the RSHA-edited and circulated Einsatzgruppen reports.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:56 pm

I never stated that they were justified objectively. Rather that the Germans would have considered it an anti partisan action and would not have felt the need to conceal it. That is one way to explain the lack of camouflage IMO.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4183
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Jeff_36 » Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:59 pm

Seems to me there are two separate issues here: The first to what extent Nazi officialdom instituted secrecy policy as to documents relating to anti Jewish measures in the East. The second issue is to what extent did knowledge of those measures extend beyond the Nazi officialdom directly involved. Lowry in Hitler's Furies makes it very clear that there was widespread knowledge of exactly what was gong on as regards Nazi Jewish policy in Poland.


X puts his finger right on the pulse. My thesis is just one possible explanation as to the difference in cover between Poland and the USSR.

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1176
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Mary Q Contrary » Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:47 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Mary, do you agree with Monstrous that the Ereignismeldungen and other reports of the EGs were fabricated/edited by the Soviets?

No, I don't think there is enough proof to say for sure that they were all fabricated. They might've been. We know that the Soviets made a tremendous effort to introduce completely fabricated evidence at Nuremberg. Hell, the AMERICANS introduced BS evidence at Nuremberg. Any Soviet sources must be verified or treated as suspect. But, no, we can't say the EG reports are on the same level of worthlessness as the Soviet Katyn investigation or the American's shrunken heads or all the evidence for the gas chambers that was presented at Nuremberg. Needless to say, any evidence presented at subsequent trials must be verified by outside interests before their authenticity can be established.

If yes, does the implication follow, as Monstrous tells us, that the EGs were only battling partisans and not engaged in mass murder of Jews in the occupied Soviet Union?

No, the implication does not follow that the EG was only battling partisans and not engaged in mass murder of Jews whether or not the EG reports are fabricated. The EG was battling partisans and in that battle large number of Jews were murdered. But that fact doesn't follow from the EG reports being fabricated or authentic.

I'm not asking yet about why these reports exist in the form that they do or about how they fit in or not with other documents - only about whether they are authentic and whether they report on the units' actual mass killings of Jews.

If you agree with Monstrous, please be so kind as to help him find some evidence for the claim of forgery. He's floundering here.

He's not floundering. He doesn't trust Soviet sources that have not been authenticated. No responsible researcher would. The inability to explain the difference between the super double secrecy of the Holocaust of the Polish Jews and the shout it from the mountaintops Holocaust of the Russian Jews points to the possibility of the evidence for the Holocaust of the Russian Jews being fabricated. But it's not certain. It is certain that the EG reports are inaccurate but not that they are forgeries.
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 02, 2015 9:37 am

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Mary, do you agree with Monstrous that the Ereignismeldungen and other reports of the EGs were fabricated/edited by the Soviets?

No, I don't think there is enough proof to say for sure that they were all fabricated. They might've been. We know that the Soviets made a tremendous effort to introduce completely fabricated evidence at Nuremberg. Hell, the AMERICANS introduced BS evidence at Nuremberg. Any Soviet sources must be verified or treated as suspect. But, no, we can't say the EG reports are on the same level of worthlessness as the Soviet Katyn investigation or the American's shrunken heads or all the evidence for the gas chambers that was presented at Nuremberg. Needless to say, any evidence presented at subsequent trials must be verified by outside interests before their authenticity can be established.

Have these reports not been authenticated, then, neither at the NMT trial nor afterwards? Were the reports that came into evidence at NMT trial 9 documents that came from the Soviets, then, thus raising the concerns you mention (see below - which will explain how you are trying to sidestep the core issue for Monstrous)? Will you explain to us the mistakes made by the NMT and scholars in authenticating the EG reports - errors and omissions that leave the reports open to suspicion?

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
If yes, does the implication follow, as Monstrous tells us, that the EGs were only battling partisans and not engaged in mass murder of Jews in the occupied Soviet Union?

No, the implication does not follow that the EG was only battling partisans and not engaged in mass murder of Jews whether or not the EG reports are fabricated. The EG was battling partisans and in that battle large number of Jews were murdered. But that fact doesn't follow from the EG reports being fabricated or authentic.

Were Jews murdered by the EGs apart from the war against partisans? Could you give us examples of how units of Einsatzgruppen A waged war during this time period against partisans in the Baltics, a region that wa made virtually judenrein in summer-fall 1941, and, in this context, can you account specifically for the % of Jews murdered in the Baltics at that time who were victims of anti-partisan operations? An accounting for why whole communities of Jews were slaughtered during fall 1941 and of Jäger's explanations for his anti-Jewish operations is needed, as well. I know that this is a lot to ask someone who's not read about this history but you've more or less brought the need for this accounting on yourself with your reply.

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
I'm not asking yet about why these reports exist in the form that they do or about how they fit in or not with other documents - only about whether they are authentic and whether they report on the units' actual mass killings of Jews.

If you agree with Monstrous, please be so kind as to help him find some evidence for the claim of forgery. He's floundering here.

He's not floundering. He doesn't trust Soviet sources that have not been authenticated.

But Monstrous wasn't asked about Soviet sources or whether he trusts Soviet sources. He was asked to support a claim he made, a forthright and direct claim that the reports of the Einsatzgruppen had been fabricated/edited by the Soviets. Monstrous didn't just say that one needs to be careful with sources coming from the Soviets. He said that the Soviets had doctored these reports, as we have them today. So, yes, as Xcalibur reiterated, Monstrous has given us nothing so far to support his claim. That is floundering. You've only made matters worse because you've acknowledged suspicions about the Soviets for documents found and introduced by the Americans - and with not a scintilla of reasoning for why you would make such a leap.

Mary Q Contrary wrote:No responsible researcher would. The inability to explain the difference between the super double secrecy of the Holocaust of the Polish Jews and the shout it from the mountaintops Holocaust of the Russian Jews points to the possibility of the evidence for the Holocaust of the Russian Jews being fabricated. But it's not certain. It is certain that the EG reports are inaccurate but not that they are forgeries.

I don't buy Jeff's or Balsamo's arguments, as I've said. Their explanations don't make sense to me, either, and Balsamo seems to have been flat-out wrong to cite reports that were supposedly hitherto unknown. Balsamo writes this:
Apparently, It is presented as a General report written in Berlin well into 1942, based on all the local EG reports. A summary and a detail account of what had been going on since the start of the campaign.
What can be seen in the video is:
MICROCOPY T175, Roll 233,
And the next screen shows:
Ereignismeldung UdSSR, n 14, Berlin 6 juli 1942.

Surely, the correct date is 6 July 1941, which was when no. 14 was dated; excerpts from that report are reprinted in Arad/Krakowski/Spector, The Einsatzgruppen Reports, 1989, starting p 10. I finally took the time, as Nick Terry did, to search for the Mogilev example which Balsamo cites. Again, we seem to be looking at another long-known document in the series of reports, no. 133:
On October 19, 1941, a large-scale operation against the Jews was carried out in Mogilev with the aid of the Police Regiment 'Center.' 3,726 Jews of both sexes and all ages were liquidated by this action. These measures were necessary because, ever since the town of Mogilev was occupied by German troops, the Jews ignored the authority of the Occupying forces. In spite of previous measures taken against them, they not only failed to desist but continued their anti-German activities (sabotage, support of partisans, refusal to work, etc.) to such an extent and with such persistance that, in the interests of establishing order in the rear areas, it could no longer be tolerated.

This report, like no. 14, is reprinted in part in Arad et al, starting p 230. Both these reports are excerpted online at Nizkor and IIRC by HEART and by the Jewish Virtual Library. I have no idea where the idea came from that these are new or little used sources.

The reports formed the center of the prosecution's case at the NMT trial of Einsatzgruppen leaders; they have been used extensively by scholars; we have debated them at length in various HD forums, etc.

From this thread, I am developing the growing sense that people weighing in, including you, Monstrous, Balsamo, and Jeff, haven't read the widely available excerpts of the reports of the Einsatzgruppen and haven't read relevant secondary literature (such as Arad's introduction to the his selection from the reports, Hilary Earl's study of the NMT trial, Ronald Headland's book on the reports themselves, or other such works). I will be posting my take on some of the questions raised in the thread in a day or two - including why I don't agree with Balsamo or Jeff. Some of it will be familiar to you, as I will crib from where I've previously explained to you some of the basics about the EGs and how they "fit in" with the Final Solution, which much of the discussion in this thread seems to ignore.

By the way, Nick Terry has the advantage over all of us of having done primary research in aspects of this history including working in relevant archives. You know this because he's schooled you in the past on the same question you're now raising. That said, here is what Monstrous needs to deal with, in addition to providing evidence that the EG reports, used at the NMT and afterwards, came from the Soviets and were fabricated/edited by them. You will notice that Nick Terry gives many different examples of the very serious problem of “other traces” which I raised with Monstrous and which he failed to reply to:
Holocaust deniers claim there was never any Nazi policy to exterminate the Jews. They claim that no documents exist that are both unambiguous as to such a policy and unquestionably authentic. However, such documents do indeed exist: the Einsatzgruppen (Operational Group) reports filed by the units operating in the Soviet Union that carried out this extermination policy in the occupied areas. This series of questions and answers will demonstrate that the Ereignismeldungen (EM) are authentic and that the Einsatzgruppen demonstrably mass-murdered over a million Jews.

The Ereignismeldungen were located in American captured documents (not British, Soviet, or French), in 1946. Benjamin Ferencz, one of the prosecutors on Case IX, describes the find in his memoirs, and has given interviews about it to historians.

Questions and Answers
1) Do multiple copies exist?

Yes. As we will see.

2) Are these multiple copies in different spheres of influence?

Yes. The Soviets had some copies of the Ereignismeldungen which are housed in the substantial file that also includes other Einsatzgruppen-related material (RGVA 500-1-25). Moreover there are fragments of Ereignismeldungen in a number of other files: I have seen them in Wehrmacht Propaganda department files, Labour Ministry files, and in separate RSHA files. These tend to be of the intelligence (SD) portions, but the RSHA also circulated parts of the executive (Stapo) reports to interested parties, notably IV A 1 (anticommunism) where these dealt with antipartisan warfare.

3) Do summaries at a higher level exist?

Yes. As is also well-known to historians, there are the Taetigkeits- und Lageberichte (TuLBs) der Einsatzgruppen, which were the summaries of the EMs, these contain summary data compiled from the Ereignismeldungen and which were then circulated to non-SS agencies such as the Foreign Office. These repeat bodycounts, intelligence details, etc and are very long. The published collection of these reports runs to several 100 pages just reproducing the TuLBs.

4) Are these summaries archived in different spheres of influence?

Yes. The TuLBs exist in complete sets both in US-captured materials (originally, Foreign Office files) as well as the Soviet RGVA 500-1-25 file. The Foreign Office copies include marginalia by civil servants. Indeed, one tried to add up the executions mentioned in one of the reports. You can search for the Soviet copies in the USHMM finding guide. Go to: http://www.ushmm.org/research/co...ng_aid.php and search for "Einsatzgruppen." RG-11.001M.01 lists the material held by the Soviet archives.

5) Do ground-level Einsatzgruppe reports exist?

Yes. The Ereignismeldungen were compiled from individual Taetigkeits- und Lageberichte sent out by the Einsatzgruppen. A number survive. As with the TuLBs compiled by the RSHA there are verbatim and paraphrased passages relating both to executive actions and to intelligence reportage, so that the same incident might be referred to in 2 or 3 reports.

6) Are these ground level reports archived in different spheres of influence?

Yes. In US possession and never used for a war-crimes trial by the Allies postwar, there were 2 TuLBs for Einsatzgruppe B for August/September 1942. These have the same format as was standard for the EMs and also include the running bodycount total, which is consistent with the last running body count total in the EMs, from March 1942. Also in US possession are a number of TuLBs submitted by Einsatzgruppe D to 11th Army. In East Bloc possession, there are more TuLBs for Einsatzgruppe B from both 1941 and from 1942-3. These are actually scattered across Moscow, the AGK in Poland, and the NARB in Minsk. But they are all consistent numerically, thematically and with other sources.

7). Was the authenticity of the EMs ever confirmed by someone after the war?

Yes. This was done in Case IX, the Einsatzgruppen trial. People who had handled them said that these reports were genuine.

8) Do the EMs get the names right?

Yes. The reports begin with a summary of where which Kommando was and who was in command. The names of Einsatzkommando leaders as well as the infrequent mentions of junior officers buried in the main body of the reports can all be confirmed from personnel files. There are also a separate set of personnel orders from the RSHA detailing transfers which fell into US hands.

9) Did the Ereignismeldungen report on both intelligence and on executive actions?

Yes. The Ereignismeldungen consisted of two kinds of reportage from each Einsatzgruppe. The first was an intelligence (SD-III) report; the second was an executive (Stapo-IV) report. That is why they were known as Taetigkeits- (Stapo) und Lageberichte (SD).

The chances that the SD sections of these reports were fabricated ought to be given as zero, because they echo so many other reports and indeed incorporate sometimes verbatim sections of other Wehrmacht and economic staff reports. The SD liked to receive reports under the counter and synthesise them into its analyses. This is what they did also with the Meldungen aus dem Reich for the home front.

Moreover they describe the situation in the occupied territories in general: food situation, establishing collaboration, how many inhabitants there were in particular towns - all things that can easily be corroborated elsewhere. Every corroboration of a fact or observation mentioned in the intelligence sections of the reports confirms the authenticity of the Ereignismeldungen as a whole. Clearly, these reports were not invented out of whole cloth and fabricated from total nonexistence.

10) Ah, you might reply, but this does not preclude the possibility that someone manipulated the executive (Stapo) sections of the reports where all the details of mass executions are recorded.

No. The reports are ordered by Einsatzgruppe, not by intelligence and executive categories. If the sections were separate then it would have been easier for someone to have inserted manipulated sections. But they are not, so that it would have been necessary to retype them entirely.

The executive action sections of the Ereignismeldungen describe both antipartisan warfare as well as mass executions of Jews. This creates the same problem discussed above. Inserting a fictitious mass execution requires retyping the report, since the references are buried within a larger discussion of executive activity known as 'Polizeiliche Taetigkeit'. By the autumn of 1941, Einsatzgruppe B reported having executed 1500 partisans by itself, as a separate category to any other target group.

Furthermore, the executive action sections of the Ereignismeldungen dealing with antipartisan warfare can be corroborated from Wehrmacht sources. Army-Einsatzgruppen cooperation was the subject of an entire chapter of Helmut Krausnick's 1981 monograph on the Einsatzgruppen. The chapter had 700 footnotes and did not locate all of the relevant Wehrmacht documents that are extant indicating the activities of the Einsatzgruppen in combating partisans and Soviet resistance networks. There are quite a few reports from individual SD Kommandos cc'ed to the Army regarding antipartisan operations and found in Army files. This further corroborates the authenticity of the Ereignismeldungen as a whole.

11) Was there a successor series to the Ereignismeldungen?

Yes. After EM 195 in April 1942, the RSHA switched to compiling fortnightly Meldungen aus den besetzten Ostgebieten (MadbO), which are less forthcoming on anti-Jewish actions but continue to detail both Polizeiliche Taetigkeit as well as intelligence. They are not completely silent about the executions of Jews, however. There are quite a few four-figure body counts given.

12) Do the MadbOs exist in multiple copies?

Yes. A full set was captured by the Americans and fragmentary copies were captured by the Soviets. Copies were circulated to civilian agencies including the Foreign Office, Labour Ministry, Economics Ministry, Economics Staff East, Wehrmacht Propaganda office, and the Quartermaster-General's office. All of these institutions' files were captured by the Americans.

13) Do the MadbOs match the reports in Einsatzgruppe B's TuLBs from 1942-43?

Yes. By late 1942-3 there were no more Judenaktionen, however the Einsatzgruppen continued to function as executioners during antipartisan operations. These reports match up, not only between the RSHA-compiled reports and the Einsatzgruppe B set of TuLBs, but with Wehrmacht documentation. For example, the Wehrmacht filed a detailed report relating to Operation 'Kugelblitz' in early 1943 during which the SD executed over 900 partisan suspects (note, not proven partisans). The incident is also detailed in the TuLB for March 1943, by which time Einsatzgruppe B reported 140,000 executions.

This is after no fewer than seven TuLBs gave consistent escalating body counts (where consecutive, the numbers match). These seven surviving reports are scattered across no fewer than four countries: Russia, Belarus, Poland and the US.

14) Are mass executions of Jews recorded in the Ereignismeldungen in 1941-42 discussed in Wehrmacht sources?

Yes. These range from the report filed by the 454th Security Division confirming the extent of Babi Yar in September 1941 to reports filed by Wirtschaftskommando Borissow confirming an action in Tolochin, northeastern Belarus, during March 1942. Most extensive are the reports from the rear area commands of 11th Army regarding Einsatzgruppe D's 90,000 body count. There are easily as many documents from the Wehrmacht as there were mass executions.3 Fairly extensive are the reports from Army Group Centre and its subordinate commands relating to Bialystok, Vilna, Brest, Baranovichi, Slonim, Minsk, Borisov, Bobruisk, Roslavl, Beshenkovichi, Vitebsk, Smolensk, and Velizh.4

15) Are mass executions of Jews recorded in the Ereignismeldungen in 1941-42 discussed in Ostministerium sources?

Yes. Ministerial-level sources fell into US hands and contain a number of protest reports from ground-level officials concerned about decorum. Most regional reports fell into Soviet hands. These match up with the entire picture, since for example, the Gebietskommissar Glebokie was visited by a detachment from Einsatzkommando 9, who, having run out of Jews to kill in their own fiefdom in the military zone, were 'borrowed' to wipe out 20,000 Jews in the neighbouring civilian zone to their west. The document in question can be found in NARB in Minsk, while the troop leader filed a request for a Bandenkampfabzeichen which repeats the names of the towns visited, this can be found in the AGK in Warsaw, while the overall Einsatzgruppe B report for the end of August 1942 can be found in NARA and the BA, i.e. was in American hands. The number reported executed by the end of August 1942 was 126,000, up from 91,000 at the end of March 1942. 5

18) Are there sources from Waffen-SS and Order Police (Orpo) units who supported the Einsatzgruppen?

Yes. Though not that common, there are a fair number of such sources. Reports from the SS Cavalry Brigade and 1st SS Infantry Brigade fell into US hands if they were from regimental level, while brigade level reports ended up in Prague where the Waffen-SS archive was moved at the end of the war. There are cross-matches between these sources and the Ereignismeldungen. For the Orpo, there exists the extant and complete war diary for Police Battalion 322, again found in the Prague archive, and this matches details from the Ereignismeldungen. There are other scattered documents from the Orpo in Wehrmacht files and of course there are the Police Decodes intercepted by the British, which count as external corroboration of the Waffen-SS and Police reports, thus are indirect to the Einsatzgruppen.

19. Were there witnesses?

Yes. They are divided into the following: (a) German bystanders from the Wehrmacht, (b) Russian bystanders, (c) rare Jewish survivors, (d) the members of the Einsatzgruppen themselves. At a rough estimate these would total at least several thousand witnesses. Of particular interest are numerous German bystander witnesses who would have to be bribed or coerced into giving completely false testimony, by the BRD no less, and not by the Allies immediately postwar, if what they were saying was completely untrue.

20) Do witnesses independently identify dates and the extent of specific mass executions?

Yes. Soviet witnesses were interrogated about events from 1943-45, well before the Ereignismeldungen were located by the Americans. Soviet witnesses also give for example the dates of certain actions which are not given precisely in the EMs, but which are given in Wehrmacht sources captured by the Americans (e.g: Klimovichi). Since the Soviets lacked a full set of the EM reports there are a number of actions which were only recorded documentarily by reports in exclusive US possession.

The possibility that the Soviets communicated sufficient results of their investigations to the US in order that the documents could be fabricated Stateside is zero. While a number of Soviet investigative reports were published during the war and submitted at Nuremberg, there is no evidence of the transmission of the remainder of the reports to the west until after the US restituted the captured German records to the Federal Republic of Germany. By this date (the early 1960s) all the Einsatzgruppen reports had been in the public domain for a while and been used by Poliakov, Reitlinger, and Hilberg.

Moreover, the Soviet investigations included details on actions in towns which weren't mentioned in the Ereignismeldungen at all, sometimes carried out by other units, sometimes clearly by individual troops of an Einsatzkommando stationed in the nearby regional headquarters. A number of these actions not mentioned in the Ereignismeldungen are also corroborated from Wehrmacht documents directly or indirectly.

21) Were mass graves exhumed after the war?

Yes. Contrary to popular belief, Sonderkommando 1005 only visited a fraction of the sites, notably the larger cities, but even in these cases, a mass-grave sized pit with ashes must be considered corroboration of the document and the witnesses. There were no such exhumations and incinerations by the Germans in among other cities: Smolensk, Kharkov, Pinsk, Rovno, Bryansk, Orel, the Crimea as a whole, and pretty much every smaller town. There mass graves were located, exhumed and in some cases autopsied. Probably better than two-thirds of the mass graves were found intact after the war. A number have been re-exhumed or relocated since the end of the Cold War, notably at Marijampole in Lithuania (contrary to claims by Germar Rudolf based on a premature news story), in Galicia and the western Ukraine, and in Belarus, though given the extent of the mass graves there is no plan to re-examine all of them: this would satisfy the curiosity of only a tiny minority who would refuse to believe it anyway, so would be a complete waste of time and effort.

There are now memorials by almost all major sites just as there are also memorials identifying the locations of villages wiped off the face of the map and not rebuilt after the war, and memorials for smaller mass graves of those executed in reprisals.

22) Are there indicators demonstrating that the Einsatzgruppen systematically executed all Jews?

Yes. The indicators are primarily that where the Einsatzgruppen carried out Judenaktionen, they executed the entire Jewish population of a locality to make it 'judenfrei'. Comparison with prewar census data (now available for every town in the USSR as of 1939, and for the 1931 Polish census) confirms this. There are also reports from Wehrmacht and civilian agencies giving either the precise number of Jews left alive as of certain dates or declaring the district 'judenfrei'. These as usual can be found in documents captured by the US and by the Soviets, independently of each other. (There are also a plethora of documents, again from both east and west, discussing the distribution of Jewish property, ranging from the sale of 'Jewish cows' to the division of household contents among the Slavic population through to the administering of formerly Jewish-owned houses to the relocation of refugees in former ghettos.)

Direct orders indicating that the Einsatzgruppen were to expand the circle of victims can be found in the Einsatzbefehle 1-14 issued in 1941 by Heydrich, copies of which can be found in both US and Soviet possession, though the Soviets have the full set. There is also an order from early 1942 defining who is to be excluded from liquidation, namely those of working age. Wehrmacht orders indicate that the SD was charged with the solution of the 'Jewish Question' and that the troops were not to interfere or to take pictures, though they did so anyway. These orders are however not necessary to prove a genocidal outcome since the repetitious use of the term 'judenfrei' after detailing mass executions suffices to demonstrate this.

23) How many monographs and articles have been researched and written on different aspects of the Einsatzgruppen since 1945?

At least 200 separate bibliographic items (books and articles) including case studies of all individual Einsatzgruppen, the role of the military, assistance from the Orpo and Waffen-SS, assistance from collaborator auxiliaries and the local population, the reactions of the bystander local population and Jewish population, postwar prosecution, and so on.

This count excludes the discussion of the Einsatzgruppen in standard/general works such as Hilberg, whose 1985 edition covers the topic in 123 pages with 459 footnotes. This one chapter examines substantially more evidence than the entirety of revisionists have managed on the same subject since the 1960s.

24) What would be required for the Ereignismeldungen to be faked or manipulated?

Primarily, a vast conspiracy between the USA and USSR at a time of worsening east-west relations. This is on the face of it absurd. The Soviets had not been invited to participate in the successor trials to the IMT. Extradition requests made by them were not honoured. The Truman doctrine was announced six months before the start of the Einsatzgruppen trial, case IX, in September 1947. By the time it ended in April 1948, the Berlin blockade was two months away.

Direct cooperation and information exchange would have been necessary to harmonise the documentation in each others' respective possession and to agree on the precise formatting of fabricated/manipulated documents so both appeared identical, no matter if viewed in NARA in College Park or in Osobyi archive in Moscow or in NARB in Minsk sixty years later. Indeed coordination would also involve the Poles as well as regional archives across Poland, Belarus, Lithuania, Latvia and the Ukraine.

This direct cooperation would have been necessary to ensure that the 194 Ereignismeldungen, 7 TuLBs der Einsatzgruppen and 12 or so TuLBs of Einsatzgruppe B all matched up, never mind matching with other corroborative documentation, which posed even greater problems.

Then of course there is the necessary arm-twisting/coercion/torture/bribery necessary to convince the German witnesses to endorse the authenticity of the reports, to testify to their actions during Case IX, to testify to their actions in dozens of trials carried out in the BRD, to testify to what they saw as bystanders in the same trials, and to maintain the silence of released prisoners after the end of their sentences. Everyone from Case IX was out by 1958 while the majority of BRD trials gave out low sentences.

For what? The Americans ended their trials program by 1949, releasing all prisoners by 1958. The Ereignismeldungen were only significantly used in one American trial involving just 23 defendants. The Soviets did not acknowledge the scale of the Holocaust on their territory at any time during the existence of the USSR. They barely touched the documents in their possession so that many were first made public in the 1990s.

All in all, the scenario necessary is simply absurd.

I'll ignore anything less than a 24 point rebuttal.

Nick Terry, from THHP

Like Nick Terry, I feel that vague suspicions and "likely's" and "probably's" don't get you to the table in this discussion. Waving around a big red flag saying that the Soviets were dishonest bastards is not a serious evaluation of reports that made their way into the historical record in the first instance through the Americans.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sun Aug 02, 2015 2:26 pm, edited 4 times in total.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 02, 2015 10:19 am

Furhter, on the problem of "traces" (supporting/corroborating sources), here is an actual "Revisionist Breakthrough," IMO, a well-stated argument that will need refutation:
. . . most of my research depends on the scientific work produced by German scholars such as Wolfgang Curilla, Krausnick & Wilhelm (1981), and many others (see my Bibliography for details). . . . JG admits that he has not read some of these books. Nevertheless, JG does not hesitate to condemn them as the "works of dogmatic and bigoted court historians", who violate "every principle of scientific historiography", etc.

This is totally unfair. Curilla and others base their research on contemporary German police reports, contemporary diaries etc., and on an enormous amount of German witnesses, who were present and who took part in the crimes etc. They deal with these documents in a critical fashion, as one should. In the opinion of JG, however, all this "evidence for the Holocaust was fabricated by West German justice."

. . . [T[he historical context [includes] numerous similar events in the second half of 1941: the murder of the Jews of Lubny in October, the children of Bjelaja-Zerkow in August, the naked women of Libau in December etc. etc. The work of an Italian scholar enables us to follow in the bloody tracks of the German police, day by day, from one place to another, with the purpose of making the land "free from Jews". The proof is largely provided by their own reports (http://www.ordnungspolizei.org/ (new window)), occasionally confirmed by the independent evidence of local witnesses, in rare cases even photographs. . . .

Hans Frank and many, many others also refer to the shooting of Jews in this period (see e.g. Dieter Schenk, Der Lemberger Professorenmord und der Holocaust in Ostgalizien, passim).

In spite of all this, JG claims that there is no German documentation for the murder of Jewish women and children. But, in truth, there are hundreds of documents. Within easy reach is the report of Karl Jäger, 1 December 1941. See the recent book by Wolfram Wette: Karl Jäger. Mörder der litauischen Juden, Frankfurt a. M. 2011. The systematic murder of Jewish men, women and children in Lithuania started already in July 1941. By 1 December the toll of victims had reached 137.346. Jäger, commander of Einsatzkommando 3 (EG A) wrote:
"Ich kann heute feststellen, dass das Ziel, das Judenproblem für Litauen zu lösen, von EK. 3 erreicht worden ist. In Litauen gibt es keine Juden mehr, ausser den Arbeitsjuden incl. ihrer Familien,...". (Wette, op. cit. p. 243).

Jäger committed suicide in his cell in 1959. He did not deny the crimes in Lithuania, only his own personal responsibility. He put the blame on one of his subordinates, Joachim Hamann, whose name has now become insolubly associated with the notoriously efficient "Rollkommando Hamann". Hamann, an ardent antisemite, took his own life in July 1945. In 1990, to be sure, Professor Robert Faurisson, made a feeble attempt to question Jäger´s report (Ecrits revisionnistes, III, p. 1028): According to Faurisson, it reported the execution of "plusieurs centaines de milliers de juifs " - which is not the case - and "les sources dont il s´inspire sont inconnues" - which is also not the case (see Wette, op. cit., passim). Faurisson moreover refers to the standard work on the Einsatzgruppen of Krausnick and Wilhelm from 1981. He tells us that it contains 688 pages, which is true (and irrelevant here), but that "les auteurs ne produisent un ordre ou un plan d´extermination des juifs soviétiques" - which is a gross distortion (op. cit., p. 1028). Typically, on the basis of a few insignificant errors, the value of the work of these two eminent German scholars as a whole is flatly rejected (op. cit.,p. 1029). . . .

To sum up: Jürgen Graf´s "letter of contempt" confirms what I have already concluded above about the method of deniers: The trick is simply to ignore or distort the evidence available. You slander scholars who stick to the available evidence and to the historical context. Compared to a giant like Hilberg, who, like all scholars, made errors, JG turns out to be a dwarf. So it seems fair to conclude, as I did, that "Denial is Chutzpah".

What about Mr Graf himself? Graf has a rare command of many languages, to my ear he even speaks Danish admirably well. He is a prolific writer and translator. He fights for his beliefs. As such, he probably deserves credit for having removed many popular misconceptions about the Holocaust. It is a sad truth that competent scholars, fearing public exposure, perhaps, often fail to take steps to correct popular misconceptions that flourish in the media. . With all his abilities, it is a great pity that Graf has little or no training as a scholar. For serious scholarship he only has contempt, as a dilettant often has.

Most of all, however, JG reminds us of a Christian fundamentalist. No rational argument will persuade such Biblical fundamentalists to admit that the earth is not in the center of the universe, or that Jesus is not sitting up there on a cloud just waiting for the right moment to fly down followed by his apostles to take revenge. It is, perhaps, for that reason, that JG concludes his letter of contempt by confessing to the world that he does not endorse my humble views about the Buddhist and Hellenistic origins of early Christianity.

Christian Lindtner
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 02, 2015 10:28 am

And here is an example of early partisan activity (fall 1941) supposedly being fought by German special units, in this case EG-C:

In November 1941, Soviet Communist partisan leader Terentii Novak sent an emissary into the Rovno (Ukraine) ghetto to warn the Jews there of Communist intelligence showing an impending German plan to commit a mass murder of the Rovno Jews. The intent was both to warn to Jews and to stir them to oppose German interests by rebelling against the German occupation.

To meet these goals, the partisans met with leaders of the Rovno Jews. The Jewish leadership - of whom Maryzilla, Monstrous, and even to some degree Jeff seem to be equating with partisans - took the position that the Jews would not fight the Germans, even to defend themselves. The partisan emissaries reported to Novak that the Jewish elders had asked them "Why are you striking such fear in the hearts of us unfortunates? Our people have angered the Lord our God and He has sent Hitler as retribution for our sins. It is wrong to struggle against the will of the Highest One."

The partisan agents having been rebuffed by the Jewish elders, commander Novak himself subsequently met with a young Jewish woman favorable to the partisans; she told him that no one in Rovno's Jewish community would support the partisans and resist the Germans.

Everywhere he turned, Novak was met with refusals - with disbelief, with fear of the consequences of resistance, or with the conviction that Novak was a provocateur. Eventually, some Jews threatened to denounce Novak to the police if he would not leave them alone. Novak then gave up his effort to enlist Jews in a rebellion against the Germans and left Rovno.

(from Jeffrey Burds, Holocaust in Rovno: The Massacre at Sosenki Forest, November 1941, pages 41-42)

During fall 1941 in the Rovno area, then local Jews and their leaders opposed the nascent partisan movement.

Nonetheless, the report of Einsatzgruppe C dated 8 December 1941 described laconically what happened in Rovno within days of Novak's departure from the city:
Since November 6 and 7, 1941, an action against the Jews that had been prepared for some time was carried out in Rovno, where about 15,000 Jews were shot. According to the orders of Higher SS and Police Chiefs, the organization of this action was in the hands of the German Order Police. Aussenkommando Rovno of Einsatzkommando 5 participated substantially in carrying out this Aktion.


Previous to this, in keeping with the Nazi fantasy view of the role of Jews, on which depends the argument that the EG's were actually fighting partisans when they slaughtered masses of Jews, and in contrast to the specific evidence provided by partisan commander Novak, Einsatzgruppe C, the unit in this region, made the delusional and self-serving report that
It need not be particularly stressed that Communist agitators received very warm support from the Jews. Under the prevailing conditions, it is important to stop the activity of the Jews in Volhynia and to remove thereby the most fertile soil from Bolshevism. The extermination of the Jews, who are, without any doubt, useless as workers and more harmful as the carriers of the bacillae of Communism, was necessary.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Monstrous » Sun Aug 02, 2015 11:37 am

Monstrous wrote:That is incorrect. The alleged murdered Jews in the EG reports were were largely not presented or concealed as due to anti-partisan warfare.

Monstrous is wrong. Throughout the Einsatzgruppen reports, as in the TULB I cited above and as in the Jäger report summarized here, there are many references to exterminating Jews - including women and children and the elderly, entire communities - and making territory judenrein. There's a reason no one knows the expression partisanenrein. That reason is the events that occurred during the war. Further, on trial before the NMT, Einsatzgruppen leaders were forced to admit, on cross-examination, that they targeted Jews for murder. Which raises another question - why on earth, when on trial for their lives, didn't these Einsatzgruppen leaders deny the existence of the various EG reports and cite their being forged rather than try explaining them away?

Who are you referring to? Already mentioned reasons such as torture and being bribed with immunity if testifying for the prosecution in the Posen speech thread...

User avatar
Monstrous
Regular Poster
Posts: 745
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:05 pm

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Monstrous » Sun Aug 02, 2015 11:43 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Monstrous wrote:I consider all the points in my original post to still be valid.

Monstrous is free to consider anything he wishes. He hasn't provided a scintilla of proof for his claim of Soviet forgery. We don't have a date when the reports are forged, we don't have names of forgers and places for the forgery, we have no orders - verbal or written - for the forgery operation, we don't have an explanation of how/where/when the reports were disseminated, we have no explanation for the obvious problem of "traces" of the reports in other archives and files.

I consider Monstrous to be an inept clown who can't even answer a straightforward question - support a claim with sources and explanation, not vague hypotheses about what might have happened.

Regardless, we know that for example the Babi Yar massacre and the EG reports on that massacre is a hoax and a forgery based on air photos...

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 02, 2015 11:51 am

Some comments on the Einsatzgruppen:

Discussion of secrecy/openness of the EG reports: Some of the discussion in the thread is very confusing to me because the statements are so vague and without good support. Let’s be clear that the EG reports were stamped stamped Geheime Reichssache! and some also stamped with a note to file securely - Lagezimmer. A facsimile of each case is shown in Arad/Krakowski/Spector, pages unnumbered (no. 19 for both stamps, no. 45 for just the state secret stamp). Where Maryzilla glosses discussion of language used in the reports as follows, we are getting very far afield, although I do feel that the way the question of secrecy has been written about in the thread is confusing: “nobody cared so the Germans could be open and there were so many Jews being killed that concealment would have been impossible anyway.” Again, these reports had limited circulation within the police and bureaucracy. Participants in and witnesses to the shooting in the east were not enjoined not to talk about the actions, photos were prohibited, the killings were clearly not conceived to be "ok for public consumption," thus they weren't made public at all. Yet word leaked on account of the number of people involved and the conditions of the shootings. Not as policy but against policy.

Partisan warfare: The EGs had number of tasks (below) but they were not constituted to wage war against partisans nor to wage war at all. They were behind-the-lines, mainly rear-area special squads - at the start of the war entering territory before the Soviets had formed effective partisan forces. The EG force numbered only about 3,000 men, deployed from the Baltics to the Crimea. Each EG thus had 600-900 men. The EGs were broken down into smaller units - Einsatzkommandos, Teilkommandos, Sonderkommandos, Rollkommandos, etc - which were very small units (e.g., Hamann’s Rollkommando in Lithuania numbered about a dozen men IIRC). Insofar as security and pacification support were needed in the rear, these units could help by targeting and eliminating opponents and perceived opponents, but not by carrying on anti-partisan warfare with just 3,000 men spread the length of the front.

Basic orders, mission: The EGs were engaged in eliminating opponents and potential opponents of the German occupation, a continuation of the mission of earlier EG work in Poland and elsewhere. Heydrich’s orders make this clear, including, e.g., officials, radical elements, propagandists, snipers, assassins, Communist operatives. Reports (EG reports, Stahlecker’s, etc) make clear that the mission grew to include solving the Jewish problem in the east by means annihilation actions (paraphrasing Stahlecker) or meeting the goal of a radical solution to the Jewish problem by killing all Jews (paraphrasing Lange).

Precedents and where the Einsatzgruppen fit in: The Einsatzgruppen operating in the USSR were not the first use of such special units.

Precedents for the operation and reporting of the EGs in the USSR included (Maryzilla will find much of what follows familiar - I hope she will not again reply asking me how this background explains gas chambers):

(1) Einsatzgruppen formed to intervene in the Sudetenland crisis, where two EGs were formed in case of an attack on Germany; no attack forthcoming, they were assigned to operate within Czechoslovakia, confiscating documents and arresting up to 6000 Czechs, in Aktion Gitter, targeting people who might oppose the German occupation; these were mostly leftists and Germans who'd fled to Prague, that is, Czechs thought possibly to be politically dangerous to Reich ambitions in Czechoslovakia. Several thousand such people were arrested with many expelled from the country and many sent to concentration camps. The second commander of the security police concerned, installed I believe in spring 1939, was named Walter Stahlecker.

(2) Einsatzgruppen were also formed for the invasion of Poland in fall 1939, where 7 EGs with 2700 men operated at the outset. In September Heydrich stated the goal that "the leading elements of Polish society should be rendered harmless" and clarified in October that to do this his men were carrying out a "liquidation of leading Poles" that should conclude by November. The formal mission of the EGs was to act against "elements hostile to the Reich and anti-German in enemy territory behind the front line." Heydrich described their mission as "extremely radical" and said that they would "render impotent" the "leading stratum in Poland." Before the attack, Germans estimated that up to 30,000 Poles would be arrested and sent to concentration camps. In the line with this, the EGs took action against intellectual leaders, Catholic clergy, aristocrats, and Jews thought to represent the possible leaders of opposition to the German occupation and whose names had been listed by the SD. Already in Poland the lines between saboteur/partisan/Franc-Tireur and intellectual/clergy/Jew were being blurred by the Nazis. The EG leaders were given some latitude on exact liquidation methods, which did not stop with arresting those on the "enemies" lists; many suspects were shot on the spot, without investigation, let alone arrest and trial.

Often, the EGs they worked with the Selbstschutz, armed units recruited from among local ethnic Germans. Using the Bromberg incident as pretext, they carried out a far-ranging action in October called the Intelligentsia Operation, murdering 1000s of teachers, officials, clergy, landowners, members of nationalist groups, and Jews - but also including asocials, prostitutes, and Gypsies. They also supported Wachsturmbann Eimann in murdering almost 8000 so-called incurables taken from mental hospitals in a Polish extension of T-4. The actions of Heydrich's EGs in Poland were so egregious that Wehrmacht leaders (yes, Blaskowitz among them) protested the atrocities - taking their complaints to von Brauchitsch and directly to Himmler as well. EGs also operated in the Balkans in spring 1941, arresting emigres, saboteurs, terrorists, Communists, and Jews.

To the USSR . . . for Operation Barbarossa, four Einsastzgruppen were formed; the framework for the invasion of the USSR and the war was laid down by Hitler himself in early spring when he told his generals that the war would be a clash between two ideologies requiring the annihilation of the leadership of the USSR, defined as the Judeo-Bolshevik intelligentsia (in order to crush the USSR and take over its western areas). As early as February 1941 Keitel (head of the Wehrmacht High Command) was describing the role of Himmler's units as exercising "special responsibilities in the zone of army operations" that came "at the Fuhrer's request" to help prepare the country for German rule.

The other aspect in background of the mission of the EGs was the military's concerns not to be implicated in the "radical" nature of the special tasks targeting leadership groups and others in the Soviet Union; therefore, formal agreements between Heydrich and the military leadership were reached. These agreements set down guidelines for the EGs in the campaign against the USSR. The March draft agreement discussed "identification and combating of subversive activities against the Reich" and that Heydrich would have authority to order "executive measures against the civilian population," although, again, latitude would be given to commanders of the EGs as to precise methods for carrying out these measures. The EGs would act in the rear areas on their own responsibility but with support from the Wehrmacht. Relevant planning documents include a request from Goering for Heydrich to list targeted groups of victims so that the army leaders would "understand who they will be putting up against the wall." The final agreement between Himmler and the army was signed in April.

Heydrich briefed EG leaders (Walter Stahlecker, mentioned above, being the leader of EG-A for the Baltics) in two meetings in June. Postwar testimony is unclear on how the targeted groups were described. Heydrich also wrote a summary of his orders, which described the EGs task as "politically pacifying" occupied territory by means of "ruthless severity"; he singled out some Jews as a special group to be targeted, naming "all Jews in the service of the Party and state" (this imprecisely defined group would be broader than on face value given Nazi ideological perceptions of their opponents, including the Jews and their concept of Judeo-Bolshevism - but it is not yet targeting all Jews or even all male Jews). Heydrich wrote of the targeted potential enemies (including Comintern officials, CPSU officials, even lower level CPSU operatives, people's commissars, demagogues, saboteurs and partisans, radical elements) being "eliminated."

The special tasks of the EGs in Operation Barbarossa, as in Poland but more radically in Barbarossa, were to eliminate groups of people who presented real and potential or suspected threats to the German occupation, and these groups included Jews, with the question of which Jews expanding through time. I have written a recent previous post on the way in which these political special tasks assigned the EGs were carried out and expanded once the invasion took place and operations began.

Last, we know from an intercepted radio telegram that, in addition to the other high-ranking recipients of the Ereignismeldungen, there was one I neglected to mention. As Gestapo chief Muller put it, "Regular reports on the work of the Einsatzgrupen in the east are to be sent to the Fuhrer." 

These regular reports which Muller referred to were the very reports that detail the killings of Jews - according to the Eriegnismeldungen - as Jews, intellectual Jews, Jewish activists, wandering Jews, rebellious Jews, partisans, Gypsies, communists, politruks and commissars, Asiatics, saboteurs, agitators, neglected juveniles, unreliable elements, racially inferior elements, asocials, hostile elements, undesirable elements, suspicious persons, criminals, delinquents, propagandists, spies and informers, mentally inferior persons and mental patients, pests, civilians, and arsonists, among others. In any event, Jews were singled out and targeted, with large losses of life. The reports containing these descriptions were the same ones used to convict the leaders of the EGs for 1 million murders in the east - 95% of the victims being Jews. And the National Socialist party and state leadership were reading about these "achievements" practically in real time.

The structure of the reports was common but inclusion of details such as dates and numbers varied according to the unit reporting, ranging from EG-A, highly specific, to EG-D, more general. There are gaps in some of the reporting. The reporting had begun with the EG’s in Poland, for which Heydrich had laid down guidelines such as headcount of Jews, etc. In 1941 Heyrdich also specified that data on POWs, including “special handling,” be presented in the reports. A large intelligence component was demanded, and Headland even describes the expectation for the reports as “a thorough and accurate account of intelligence information and executions.” (p 35) According the Headland, Heydrich was not always satisfied with the submissions.

With this background in mind, I really don’t see what Jeff and Balsamo are arguing. The EGs operated, under cover of the attack on the USSR, to eliminate perceived opponents of the Germans, including Jews, and ultimately to racially cleanse territory by means of executions. They operated at the outset from 22 June 1941 - months before a central “principle decision” (Gerlach) was taken for the Final Solution. The Germans had no central command for anti-Jewish operations at this time and certainly not one that managed the entire FS through the coming months and years. Heydrich’s EG teams operated separately to Greiser’s extermination camp which began its work in December 1941, Globocnik’s camps the first of which was being built that same fall, the WVHA camps that began exterminating Jews in 1942, and so on.

The desideratum for the reporting was not distinctions between Soviet or Polish Jews (in fact, many Polish Jews were being executed by the EGs), but the continuation of earlier SD/Gestapo reporting and the far-flung and dispersed nature of the activities. At the time, the radicalism of the “solution” of the Jewish problem was escalating, in the context of the war, and the methods of summer-fall 1941 would be supplemented later with new methods and new norms.

Defense in the NMT trial: The EG leaders offered the following defenses during their trial by the NMT. They pleaded that the numbers killed were an exaggeration - and had been exaggerated in the reports. Quoting Headland, “The defense claimed that the various stages in the reporting process had provided opportunities for increasing the numbers.” (Ohlendorf was in a bit of a jam on this because he’d offered a figure to British investigators, taking them utterly by surprise, as well as iin testimony before the IMT - and during the NMT trial now had to explain his own latter-day figure! Ohlendorf accused other EG leaders, Heydrich, Müller, and others in the RSHA of pumping the figures and estimated inflation by a factor of 2. The problem here - the EG leaders were trying to save their own necks - is that by arguing that higher officials wanted bigger numbers, they are pointing to a policy of extermination. The defense of superior orders was used by many of the defendants in the case - along with the defense that someone else had given the execution orders.)

Ohlendorf had also testified, in January 1946, about the reporting requirements to the IMT, months before the reports were discovered. Ohlendorf stressed on the stand that many top leaders were kept informed of the murders and in doing so mentioned the existence of the reports themselves.

OTOH some of the defendants (e.g., Blume) claimed that they were scrupulous in their reporting. The defense even submitted Himmler’s Posen speech (4 October 1943) which spoke of the need for truthful and accurate reporting within the SS.

The defendants also discussed errors in the reports (which exist), arguing that because the reports had errors they could not be used to determine the guilt of individuals. To take one example, defendant Haensch claimed that reports implying he was in charge of SK 4b when it killed 3,401 people were in error since he’d been in Berlin during the time in question. Six used a similar argument with regard to his leadership of Vorkommando Moscow In effect, they argued, continuing with Ohlendorf’s theme, these were just reports, not proofs of real actions the defendants had undertaken.

Another argument offered was that the reports were being used by the prosecution out of context - a variation on the “there was a war going on” defense.

Yet, as Headland points out, where the defense felt that the reports could help an individual client, the defense offered portions of the reports as the basis for exoneration.

The court did not accept the defense’s arguments.

Headland, pp 170-174; Earl, pp 72, 162-163, 261

What is interesting here for present purposes, of course, is that the defendants didn’t plead forgery.

We can discuss further the authentication of the reports when Monstrous and Maryzilla finally make a concrete statement -other than expressing doubt - about this topic. The thread has really gotten off topic - the request to Monstrous was not to delve into why’s and wherefore’s of how the reports were phrased or questions about specific elements of the reports’ content - but to show the evidence for Soviet forgery.

I suggest that Monstrous re-read Xcalibur's post and deal with it.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sun Aug 02, 2015 2:31 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 02, 2015 11:54 am

Monstrous wrote:
Monstrous wrote:That is incorrect. The alleged murdered Jews in the EG reports were were largely not presented or concealed as due to anti-partisan warfare.

Monstrous is wrong. Throughout the Einsatzgruppen reports, as in the TULB I cited above and as in the Jäger report summarized here, there are many references to exterminating Jews - including women and children and the elderly, entire communities - and making territory judenrein. There's a reason no one knows the expression partisanenrein. That reason is the events that occurred during the war. Further, on trial before the NMT, Einsatzgruppen leaders were forced to admit, on cross-examination, that they targeted Jews for murder. Which raises another question - why on earth, when on trial for their lives, didn't these Einsatzgruppen leaders deny the existence of the various EG reports and cite their being forged rather than try explaining them away?

Who are you referring to? Already mentioned reasons such as torture and being bribed with immunity if testifying for the prosecution in the Posen speech thread...

You now have to give specific examples of torture of the EG defendants (who, what, when, where, how) that led to their using the defenses they used in NMT trial 9. Also same for bribes of immunity. Sigh.

I am referring first and foremost to NMT trial 9, and the defenses offered by the EG leaders on trial, but secondarily to Ohlendorf's IMT testimony, as discussed above. Not a one of these men was a witness for the prosecution - again, they were on trial for their lives, charged with crimes against humanity (genocide) and also the mass murder of POWs and civilians.

Incredible it is, given your wittering on the Posen thread, that these defendants offered excerpts from Himmler's Posen speech text as part of the defense (Headland, p 171) supposedly proving superior orders and reporting requirements in that context.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sun Aug 02, 2015 2:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 14960
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Monstrous on the Einsatzgruppen

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 02, 2015 11:55 am

Monstrous wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Monstrous wrote:I consider all the points in my original post to still be valid.

Monstrous is free to consider anything he wishes. He hasn't provided a scintilla of proof for his claim of Soviet forgery. We don't have a date when the reports are forged, we don't have names of forgers and places for the forgery, we have no orders - verbal or written - for the forgery operation, we don't have an explanation of how/where/when the reports were disseminated, we have no explanation for the obvious problem of "traces" of the reports in other archives and files.

I consider Monstrous to be an inept clown who can't even answer a straightforward question - support a claim with sources and explanation, not vague hypotheses about what might have happened.

Regardless, we know that for example the Babi Yar massacre and the EG reports on that massacre is a hoax and a forgery based on air photos...

Sigh. Prove it. By "prove it" I do not mean post a shitload of unrelated links. I mean, make a case and support it.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests