Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Wed May 17, 2017 7:50 pm

I ran across this today, I've never seen it before.

While I was thumping a denier on the "Four Million at Auschwitz" I read this in a link I saved:

"An official United States government report issued by the Executive Office of the president of the United States, War Refugee Board, on the German camps at Auschwitz and Birkenau, sets forth the number of Jews gassed in Birkenau in the two year period between April 1942 and April 1944. The figure printed in this report is not a typographical error. The number is 1,765,000. (L-22)"

I'm surprised I've never noticed it, I've used this page for other things before but I've never noticed this phrase.

It's here:

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/chap_12.asp

The number is obviously too high but it shuts down the whole "Four Million at Auschwitz" oldie but goodie.

Anyway, I thought I'd pass it along. I don't remember ever seeing it before. Yes, I should be working right now....
:lol:

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Wed May 17, 2017 7:55 pm

I haven't gotten around to inviting my denier around. I will.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 3:16 am

Document L-22 (technically L-022) is the "Auschwitz Protocols".

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu May 18, 2017 5:14 pm

The number is from Vrba and Wetzler. Doesn't contain the Hungarian Jews and everything after April 1944. So theoretically compatible with the 4 million figure.

Could you clarify which argument you think this helps to rebut? I've yet to see the 4M used in connection with the IMT, the usual meme is the dumb plaque.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 5:24 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:The number is from Vrba and Wetzler. Doesn't contain the Hungarian Jews and everything after April 1944. So theoretically compatible with the 4 million figure.


Could you clarify which argument you think this helps to rebut? I've yet to see the 4M used in connection with the IMT, the usual meme is the dumb plaque.


The denier I am discussing this with thinks the four million refers only to Jews and that this is included in the mystical "6 million" figure. He also says that the IMT concluded that four million Jews died at Auschwitz. I've pointed out that the Soviets mentioned Jews in relation to Majdanek, not Auschwitz. I've also pointed out the number I listed above.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 5:25 pm

I've pointed out that the IMT did mention four million Jews but this was a death toll for all the camps and not just Auschwitz.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 5:26 pm

I don't think adding 330,000 to 1,765,000 gets us all that close to four million, that's 1,765,330.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Denying-History » Thu May 18, 2017 5:38 pm

That's 2,095,000 people Jeff. Anyway, I think the 300,000 figure is based on the difference of the recorded prisoners. That would be included in the 1.7 million figure.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 6:09 pm

Denying-History wrote:That's 2,095,000 people Jeff. Anyway, I think the 300,000 figure is based on the difference of the recorded prisoners. That would be included in the 1.7 million figure.


I'm using 330,000 missing Hungarians that never transited out.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Denying-History » Thu May 18, 2017 6:14 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Denying-History wrote:That's 2,095,000 people Jeff. Anyway, I think the 300,000 figure is based on the difference of the recorded prisoners. That would be included in the 1.7 million figure.


I'm using 330,000 missing Hungarians that never transited out.
Then as I said the number would have been 2,095,000, not 1,765,330. Although I guess you are right about it. I went back to Anatomy for the Nuremberg figure and it covers April 1942 and April 1944.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 6:19 pm

Denying-History wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Denying-History wrote:That's 2,095,000 people Jeff. Anyway, I think the 300,000 figure is based on the difference of the recorded prisoners. That would be included in the 1.7 million figure.


I'm using 330,000 missing Hungarians that never transited out.
Then as I said the number would have been 2,095,000, not 1,765,330. Although I guess you are right about it. I went back to Anatomy for the Nuremberg figure and it covers April 1942 and April 1944.


The number for the dead is too high based upon later research. I'm just surprised I missed it.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Denying-History » Thu May 18, 2017 6:22 pm

The number is way to high. Remember that Nuremberg calculated 5.7 million Jews died but some of their figures were too high.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 6:24 pm

Denying-History wrote:The number is way to high. Remember that Nuremberg calculated 5.7 million Jews died but some of their figures were too high.


Agreed, I thought I had a link to the specific number used but I don't.
The six million is based on Hoettel's affidavit on what Eichmann told him.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Denying-History » Thu May 18, 2017 6:25 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Denying-History wrote:The number is way to high. Remember that Nuremberg calculated 5.7 million Jews died but some of their figures were too high.


Agreed, I thought I had a link to the specific number used but I don't.
The six million is based on Hoettel's affidavit on what Eichmann told him.
I don't believe that Eichmann held the 6 million figure as being accurate. It's also based on Hoettel's memory.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 6:32 pm

Denying-History wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Denying-History wrote:The number is way to high. Remember that Nuremberg calculated 5.7 million Jews died but some of their figures were too high.


Agreed, I thought I had a link to the specific number used but I don't.
The six million is based on Hoettel's affidavit on what Eichmann told him.
I don't believe that Eichmann held the 6 million figure as being accurate. It's also based on Hoettel's memory.


I think so, too.
I still go with the most recent scholarship on this regarding Auschwitz, Van Pelt and Piper.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu May 18, 2017 6:46 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:I don't think adding 330,000 to 1,765,000 gets us all that close to four million, that's 1,765,330.

You have to add wrong estimates to wrong estimates, not right estimates to wrong estimates. So, let's say, 1,200,000 Hungarian Jews (cf. http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... z-and.html). That leaves about a million more which can be covered with misestimates for the other groups arriving that year (Lodz, labor camps etc.).

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 6:53 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:I don't think adding 330,000 to 1,765,000 gets us all that close to four million, that's 1,765,330.

You have to add wrong estimates to wrong estimates, not right estimates to wrong estimates. So, let's say, 1,200,000 Hungarian Jews (cf. http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... z-and.html). That leaves about a million more which can be covered with misestimates for the other groups arriving that year (Lodz, labor camps etc.).


Thanks, I'm admittedly influenced by what is recent, not what was believed in 1945. Deniers cling to these old estimates because it suits them to exaggerate.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu May 18, 2017 6:57 pm

Well, if you are discussing the narrative context of the 1940s you have to take the estimates of that time into account, not what "really was". We know that 1,765,000 figure was BS too after all.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 7:05 pm

Thanks again. If nothing else the IMT did give us a number, albeit before the Hungarian Action.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu May 18, 2017 7:28 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:Thanks again. If nothing else the IMT did give us a number, albeit before the Hungarian Action.

I don't think the IMT accepted the number. It's contained in one of the Nuremberg docs, yes, but, thankfully, not all the Nuremberg docs were accepted by the IMT (think Katyn).

That said, in the verdict the IMT cites (which is not the same as accepts; but the use is suggestive) Hoess' exaggerated estimate.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu May 18, 2017 7:36 pm

The verdict also made a booboo by placing the "soap experiments" in the persecution of Jews part, thus perpetuating the Jewish soap myth.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu May 18, 2017 9:17 pm

I've invited my denier here. We'll see how it goes.

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby BRoI » Fri May 19, 2017 12:15 am

Sergey_Romanov wrote:I don't think the IMT accepted the number. It's contained in one of the Nuremberg docs, yes, but, thankfully, not all the Nuremberg docs were accepted by the IMT (think Katyn).

The IMT took judicial notice of the fraudulent Katyn report USSR-54, it had to:

Charter of the International Military Tribunal
Article 21.

The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but shall take judicial notice thereof. It shall also take judicial notice of official governmental documents and reports of the United Nations, including the acts and documents of the committees set up in the various allied countries for the investigation of war crimes, and of records and findings of military or other Tribunals of any of the United Nations


Lawrence said whilst speaking of an unrelated document:

President wrote:If it is a document of which we can take judicial notice, it is sufficient for you to summarize it without reading it. ...

If we can take judicial notice of it, it need not be quoted.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/01-16-46.asp



Rudenko knew the score:

RUDENKO wrote:This document was presented by the Soviet Prosecution under the Document Number USSR-54 on 14 February 1946, and was admitted by the Tribunal; and, as provided by Article 21 of the Charter, it is not subject to argument.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/06-03-46.asp


Unfortunately for the Soviets—and the Americans who helped suppress the real story of Katyn by *losing* the van Vliet report—Stahmer kicked up such a fuss and subsequently made such a good case that the Russians were lying, the bench had no option but to sweep the matter entirely under the rug and make-like that matter was never mentioned in the indictment, or ever discussed at the trial.
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Fri May 19, 2017 5:11 am

The fact that this evidence was allowed to be thoroughly challenged shows that the IMT never accepted the Katyn report, just as I wrote. Look up the behind the scenes discussions. They rightly felt the Soviets were misusing the relevant articles. All the western judges were against Rudenko's interpretation. I may quote more from the Russian transcripts in Lebedeva's book later. Come to think of it, it may be a good idea for an HC post.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Fri May 19, 2017 5:55 am

Have looked it up. Nikitchenko represented the Soviet line which is now also accepted by the deniers, namely that the Art. 21 meant that the official reports are irrefutable. He was shot down first by Lawrence, who pointed out that nothing in Art. 21 says the evidence is irrefutable; then by Biddle, who added that the article only speaks of the way of introducing the evidence, nothing about its irrefutability. And finally by de Vabre, who pointed out that even well-known facts in general can turn out to be wrong. There were were more judges' opinions but this is sufficient for now.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Fri May 19, 2017 6:48 am

I should also note that the whole point of the discussion was Stahmer's request to introduce the Katyn witnesses. All the western judges were for allowing Stahmer's request. So far from sweeping Katyn under the rug, the judges decided to bring the Katyn discussion to the forefront, despite the Soviet whining. Had they agreed with Nikitchenko and Rudenko, you would have seen none of Stahmer's "fuss" in court. Your "hostile" interpretation doesn't withstand the primary evidence test ;)

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Fri May 19, 2017 3:36 pm

Thanks, Sergey.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sat May 20, 2017 7:20 am

Journal of Genocide Research
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1 ... 0903118987
The export of terror—on the impact of the Stalinist culture of terror on Soviet foreign policy during and after World War II
Claudia Weber


In this situation, the tribunal judges and their deputies met on March 12, 1946
behind closed doors to consult on the petition.37 Aware of the unease that the
representatives of the Western powers felt, Moscow was convinced that an agreement
would be reached to reject the petition. Yuri Pokrovsky began by explaining
why the Soviet prosecutors wanted the petition denied. Then Judge Nikitchenko
spoke and, rather than discussing the crime itself or the identity of the perpetrators,
posed a different question, namely, “whether it is permissible to subject to
examination documents that the Tribunal must officially take judicial notice of
without evidence according to Article 21 of the Statutes.”38 If, he asserted, the
tribunal were to permit such an examination, then the “deliberations on the
case pending and the charges raised therein” would be relegated to the background
and instead the court would question the veracity of the duly-recognized
governmental investigation reports. In order to prevent this from happening,
Nikitchenko advocated “that a fundamental decision be reached, namely, that
the petition be denied on the basis of Article 21.”39 This was the point at
which Moscow’s unique opportunity to “dispose of” Katyn on the basis of
Article 21 backfired. Both Geoffrey Lawrence, president of the tribunal and a
British citizen, and his American colleague Francis Biddle were not willing to
take up Nikitchenko’s suggestion and accept his interpretation of Article 21
without objecting. “By all due respect for the General,” Lawrence responded,
“I cannot subscribe to his interpretation of Article 21. Article 21 stipulates that
judicial notice shall be taken of such documents without provision of evidence
but that does not mean that they cannot be refuted by counter-evidence.”40
Each side adhered to a different interpretation of Article 21: whereas the
Soviets maintained that the veracity of official governmental reports was not to
be questioned, Lawrence and Biddle were of the opinion that, in principle,
such documents could be challenged. The conflict over the legal reading of the
article highlighted the clash between two contradictory cultures and legal
systems. For representatives of the Soviet Union like Rudenko, Pokrovsky, or
Nikitchenko, who had been educated politically in the Stalinist system, challenging
official state declarations was unthinkable. Biddle and Lawrence as well
as French Judge de Vabres, in contrast, could declare that “even generally
known facts that are taken notice of judicially without further evidence can be
untrue and so challenging them cannot be prohibited.”41 When British Judge
John Parker made the shrewd remark that “the indictment [did not have to]
include the issue of the executions in Katyn Forest. It was based on this issue,
and its reasoning referred to it. [. . .] If we refuse to allow the accused to call
witnesses in their defence, then we deny their right to defend themselves.”42
Pokrovsky and Nikitchenko faced a fiasco. At this point, at the very latest, both
must have realized that they were confronted with the resistance of all their
colleagues and that all further efforts to steer the debate in the direction they
desired were bound to fail. The only course of action that remained for the
Soviet representatives was to abstain when, subsequently, a vote was taken.
Stahmer’s petition was accepted with the votes of Lawrence, Biddle, and de Vrabes.

[...]

While the increasingly nervous members of the Vyshinsky Commission began
preparing their witnesses, Francis Biddle was also anything but idle. He assigned
Herbert Wechsler, an assistant attorney general in charge of the US War Division,
the task of writing an expert opinion that presented convincing legal arguments to
support the Western interpretation of Article 21 as well as the decision reached on
March 12. Biddle’s action underlined the fact that, in spring 1946, the American
delegation was determined to not only quash the Soviet scheme but also to win the
dispute over the interpretation of Article 21 and the Nuremberg statutes. In the
course of the controversy, it became apparent that the discussion of legal issues
was becoming a political power struggle. When the Tribunal judges met on
April 6 for the decisive deliberations on Rudenko’s petition, the conflict appeared
about to escalate. Francis Biddle presented Herbert Wechsler’s expert opinion and
rejected Rudenko’s petition, charging that it was defamatory and presumptuous.45
Moreover, Biddle further raised the ire of the Soviets by declaring that, in the
USA, the author of such a scandalous and vile product would be prosecuted for
contempt of court and that Rudenko should be “sent to prison immediately.”46
That Biddle’s suggestion that Wechsler’s text might be read during a public
session before arresting Rudenko was an obvious provocation addressed to the
Soviets, in case they refused to give up their resistance to the Tribunal’s decision.
It is hardly likely that Francis Biddle was mostly motivated in this conflict by a
desire to ascertain the truth about Katyn. The acerbic conflict that had been triggered
by Stahmer’s petition and the debate over the interpretation of Article 21
developed into a proxy war, behind which loomed the contours of the Cold
War. What is more, the way in which the conflict was ultimately resolved presaged
future strategies of dealing with crises in the Cold War. On the brink of further
escalation, a deal was negotiated that allowed both sides to save face. On the
one hand, Rudenko’s petition was denied without any explanation of the
reasons for the decision and without a discussion of the petition’s content in a
public session. On the other hand, it was agreed that Herbert Wechsler’s expert
opinion would enter the record of the Tribunal and not be made public. Nikitchenko
declared that the Soviet side would no longer discuss Article 21 but that he
would personally vote against the Tribunal’s decision.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 15032
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat May 20, 2017 12:54 pm

About a year and a half ago, in a thread in this subforum (I don't recall which one), Nick Terry and I discussed Article 21 in the light of Weber's claims about it. IIRC we found where documents he claimed to have been submitted under Article 21 were not so submitted and cases ("Treblinka steam" I think) where the tribunal heard evidence that countered documents accepted under Article 21, which aligns with Sergey's point and shows the tribunal operating, on issues other than Katyn, as Lawrence said, “Article 21 stipulates that judicial notice shall be taken of such documents without provision of evidence but that does not mean that they cannot be refuted by counter-evidence.”
"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: 1368
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Balsamo » Sun May 21, 2017 7:08 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:The number is from Vrba and Wetzler. Doesn't contain the Hungarian Jews and everything after April 1944. So theoretically compatible with the 4 million figure.


Could you clarify which argument you think this helps to rebut? I've yet to see the 4M used in connection with the IMT, the usual meme is the dumb plaque.


The denier I am discussing this with thinks the four million refers only to Jews and that this is included in the mystical "6 million" figure. He also says that the IMT concluded that four million Jews died at Auschwitz. I've pointed out that the Soviets mentioned Jews in relation to Majdanek, not Auschwitz. I've also pointed out the number I listed above.


Your Denier is mixing things up.
Usually, deniers refer to the Soviet Document, that is the Soviet War crimes report Commission on Auschwitz (6th May 1945). This one speaks of 4.000.000 people exterminated but does not mention "Jews".

But it contains the testimonies of both Schlomo Dragon and Henryk Tauber.
And Tauber declared:
I imagine that during the period in which I worked in the Krematorien as a member of the Sonderkommando, a total of about 2 million people were gassed. During my time in Auschwitz, I was able to talk to various prisoners who had worked in the Krematorien and the Bunkers before my arrival. They told me that I was not among the first to do this work, and that before I came another 2 million people had already been gassed in Bunkers 1 and 2 and Krematorium I.
(this one came from the deposition made on the 26th of may 1945 to polish judge Jan Sehn, it is unknown to me if he said the same thing to the Russians)

Nevertheless, this quote is not mentioned in the report which focus on the cremation capacity.
So it writes:

First, the Germans had two gas chambers two kilometres apart. They were two wooden barracks, each the same. People who arrived by train were taken to the barracks, undressed, and then driven into the gas chambers. SS men with gas masks threw Zyklon through the holes. The gassing lasted 15 - 20 minutes, after which the bodies were removed in little wagons and taken to the ditches and burnt there."
Later, four crematoria were in operation on the grounds of Birkenau camp; every one of them had one gas chamber. Crematoria nos. 3 and 3 were of the same type, and each had 15 crematory ovens while those of crematoria nos. 3 and 5 were of another type -- not as big, and of inferior technical quality, each with 8 crematory ovens. All the crematoria incinerated 10,000 - 12,000 bodies per day***.


I have found the document here: https://www.cwporter.com/ussr8.htm

But then of course, Tauber in his 4 million speaks of Jews.

So as the report on Auschwitz was indeed introduce by the Soviet prosecution at the IMT,
Wiki has an article on the Soviet extraodinary State commission which list the reports introduced:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_State_Commission#cite_note-NMT_XXIV-20

And, voila, here you get your deniers 4.000.000 Jews murdered at Auschwitz introduced by the IMT.

This will then becomes the famous "6.000.000 - 4.000.000 = 6.000.000"...




*** 10.000-12.000 all krema cremation capacity: I don't know where it comes from. Tauber mentions 2500 /day for Krema III.
In Reese, "Auschwitz a new history", p 241, there is a mention of a "Wenda's report" from January 1944 that states that " ten thousands people daily" were being murdered in "three large crematoria" and that nearly 650.000 Jews had already been murdered at the camp.
But the Auschwitz protocols mentioned here has a capacity of 6.000.
"The chamber is then opened, aired, and the "special squad" carts the bodies on flat trucks to the furnace rooms where the burning takes place. Crematoria III and IV work on nearly the same principle, but their capacity is only half as large. Thus the total capacity of the four cremating and gassing plants at BIRKENAU amount's to about 6,000 daily."

While the above mentioned Soviet ESC report wrote:
In crematorium no. 1, which existed for 24 months, 9,000 bodies could be burnt monthly, which means a total of 216,000 during the entire period of its existence;
The corresponding figures are:
- crematorium no .2: 19 months, 90,000 bodies per month, total figure 1,710,000 bodies;
- crematorium no. 3, 18 months, 90,000 bodies per month, total figure 1,620,000 bodies;
- crematorium no. 4: 17 months, 45,000 bodies per months, total figure 765,000 bodies;
- crematorium no. 5: 18 months, 45,000 bodies per month .
The total capacity of all five crematoria was 279,000 bodies per month, for a total figure of 5,121,000 for the entire period of its existence.

Noting that
The German fascist criminals must be brought to exact account

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5283
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Sun May 21, 2017 7:24 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:The number is from Vrba and Wetzler. Doesn't contain the Hungarian Jews and everything after April 1944. So theoretically compatible with the 4 million figure.


Could you clarify which argument you think this helps to rebut? I've yet to see the 4M used in connection with the IMT, the usual meme is the dumb plaque.


The denier I am discussing this with thinks the four million refers only to Jews and that this is included in the mystical "6 million" figure. He also says that the IMT concluded that four million Jews died at Auschwitz. I've pointed out that the Soviets mentioned Jews in relation to Majdanek, not Auschwitz. I've also pointed out the number I listed above.


Your Denier is mixing things up.
Usually, deniers refer to the Soviet Document, that is the Soviet War crimes report Commission on Auschwitz (6th May 1945). This one speaks of 4.000.000 people exterminated but does not mention "Jews".

But it contains the testimonies of both Schlomo Dragon and Henryk Tauber.
And Tauber declared:
I imagine that during the period in which I worked in the Krematorien as a member of the Sonderkommando, a total of about 2 million people were gassed. During my time in Auschwitz, I was able to talk to various prisoners who had worked in the Krematorien and the Bunkers before my arrival. They told me that I was not among the first to do this work, and that before I came another 2 million people had already been gassed in Bunkers 1 and 2 and Krematorium I.
(this one came from the deposition made on the 26th of may 1945 to polish judge Jan Sehn, it is unknown to me if he said the same thing to the Russians)

Nevertheless, this quote is not mentioned in the report which focus on the cremation capacity.
So it writes:

First, the Germans had two gas chambers two kilometres apart. They were two wooden barracks, each the same. People who arrived by train were taken to the barracks, undressed, and then driven into the gas chambers. SS men with gas masks threw Zyklon through the holes. The gassing lasted 15 - 20 minutes, after which the bodies were removed in little wagons and taken to the ditches and burnt there."
Later, four crematoria were in operation on the grounds of Birkenau camp; every one of them had one gas chamber. Crematoria nos. 3 and 3 were of the same type, and each had 15 crematory ovens while those of crematoria nos. 3 and 5 were of another type -- not as big, and of inferior technical quality, each with 8 crematory ovens. All the crematoria incinerated 10,000 - 12,000 bodies per day***.


I have found the document here: https://www.cwporter.com/ussr8.htm

But then of course, Tauber in his 4 million speaks of Jews.

So as the report on Auschwitz was indeed introduce by the Soviet prosecution at the IMT,
Wiki has an article on the Soviet extraodinary State commission which list the reports introduced:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_State_Commission#cite_note-NMT_XXIV-20

And, voila, here you get your deniers 4.000.000 Jews murdered at Auschwitz introduced by the IMT.

This will then becomes the famous "6.000.000 - 4.000.000 = 6.000.000"...




*** 10.000-12.000 all krema cremation capacity: I don't know where it comes from. Tauber mentions 2500 /day for Krema III.
In Reese, "Auschwitz a new history", p 241, there is a mention of a "Wenda's report" from January 1944 that states that " ten thousands people daily" were being murdered in "three large crematoria" and that nearly 650.000 Jews had already been murdered at the camp.
But the Auschwitz protocols mentioned here has a capacity of 6.000.
"The chamber is then opened, aired, and the "special squad" carts the bodies on flat trucks to the furnace rooms where the burning takes place. Crematoria III and IV work on nearly the same principle, but their capacity is only half as large. Thus the total capacity of the four cremating and gassing plants at BIRKENAU amount's to about 6,000 daily."

While the above mentioned Soviet ESC report wrote:
In crematorium no. 1, which existed for 24 months, 9,000 bodies could be burnt monthly, which means a total of 216,000 during the entire period of its existence;
The corresponding figures are:
- crematorium no .2: 19 months, 90,000 bodies per month, total figure 1,710,000 bodies;
- crematorium no. 3, 18 months, 90,000 bodies per month, total figure 1,620,000 bodies;
- crematorium no. 4: 17 months, 45,000 bodies per months, total figure 765,000 bodies;
- crematorium no. 5: 18 months, 45,000 bodies per month .
The total capacity of all five crematoria was 279,000 bodies per month, for a total figure of 5,121,000 for the entire period of its existence.

Noting that
The German fascist criminals must be brought to exact account


My denier is quite stupid, a white nationalist to his core. He also lacks the balls to come here. I'm already bored with him.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sun May 21, 2017 8:15 pm

One problem with using Tauber in this way: he meant Jews, but the report did not explicitly rely on him for the figure. So this is suggestive but no more than that.

Now in reality we know that the Soviets tried to fit their calculations to the survivors' estimates (and not to the most extreme ones too), but that's another issue.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1368
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Balsamo » Sun May 21, 2017 9:16 pm

Sergey Romanov:
Now in reality we know that the Soviets tried to fit their calculations to the survivors' estimates (and not to the most extreme ones too), but that's another issue.


Really? I would have thought it would have been the other way round..

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sun May 21, 2017 10:18 pm

I don't know why you would have thought this.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1368
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Balsamo » Wed May 24, 2017 10:10 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:I don't know why you would have thought this.


Sorry for the delay of the answer, Sergey.

Actually, just a feeling. It was either one way or the other, anyway.

It is pure speculation - in the real sense this time - as i don't have any clue on how the Special State Commission worked. I know what i have read: that they interrogated up to 3000 former inmates, among them two SK (were there more?).
So it may be that those inmates induced the Soviet Commission to adhere to 4 million figure, but i confess that i fail to see how it would have worked.
I mean, why would survivors chose this number? And indeed, where does it come from?

So in my speculation, i find it strange that Tauber, SK since 43, would propose such a surrealistic number while he was in a position, best placed among many others, to propose a plausible estimation.
This part of his testimony does not make a lot of sense as he estimated the killing capacity of the four crema + bunker II at two million (that is from spring 43 to the end) but then stated "only because he was told" that the two cottages as well as small krema I managed the same result the year before.

But he was preceded by the testimony of Shlomo Dragon stating that Bunker I (or was it the II?) had a killing capacity of over 2500 (that is more than the two much larger crema I and II). Now of course, such a gigantic capacity is a condition in order to sustain the 4.000.000 (well kind of, but anyway it would have needed at least that capacity to achieve it).
Regarding Shlomo Dragon later testimony (Greif), it is noticeable that he only worked at this bunker for one day - his first, and that he will not mention this capacity that IIRC is corroborated by no other SK.
So the same question applies, why would he make such a thing up?

Given that i have no answer to those question, one idea came to my mind.
The Special State commission had already inquired about Majdanek and concluded that over 1.000.000 had been killed there, i can imagine that when it discovered the huge death installations of Birkenau, let's say at least 4 times huger than those at Lublin, they kind of feel forced to multiply by the same amount the victims of Birkenau. I also guess that the Soviets got their copy of the polish reports (Wenda + protocols) just like the western allies.
In this hypothesis, the 4 millions would have been like part of a "working base" that only had to be confirmed by some witnesses.


In any case, the 4 million figures was kept, both by the Soviet commission and by the Poles.

As i said, those are pure speculation, and i still wonder what was the origin of this 4 million figure.
So to answer your question, i would say that the second hypothesis seems more evident than the first one.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Wed May 24, 2017 11:27 pm

It's not a pure speculation though. The outrageously exaggerated death tolls anywhere between 3 and 6 million were a rule (with rare exceptions) among the survivors who testified about the extermination in the early years (among some also later). The first Soviet commandment of Oswiecim (the town, not the camp) wrote in a letter to his wife that 11 million were killed there (he probably got that from a survivor, who else?).

Lots of these estimates came before the Soviet one. I have the internal Soviet report that arrived at the 4 million. The infamous coefficients that are used are arbitrary.

Look at the liberation reports:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... 67271.html

"According to the testimonies of the liberated, in 4.5 years up to 4.5 million people were exterminated. "

"In 4.5 years in these camps 4.5 million of people were exterminated."

"During the camp's existence 4.5 to 5 million people were exterminated"

So, given the arbitrariness of the coefficients, how did the Soviets arrive at their figure? Most plausibly they tried to take a conservative survivor estimate. and fit their calculations to it.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1368
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Balsamo » Thu May 25, 2017 12:55 am

Sergey_Romanov wrote:It's not a pure speculation though. The outrageously exaggerated death tolls anywhere between 3 and 6 million were a rule (with rare exceptions) among the survivors who testified about the extermination in the early years (among some also later). The first Soviet commandment of Oswiecim (the town, not the camp) wrote in a letter to his wife that 11 million were killed there (he probably got that from a survivor, who else?).

Lots of these estimates came before the Soviet one. I have the internal Soviet report that arrived at the 4 million. The infamous coefficients that are used are arbitrary.

Look at the liberation reports:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... 67271.html

"According to the testimonies of the liberated, in 4.5 years up to 4.5 million people were exterminated. "

"In 4.5 years in these camps 4.5 million of people were exterminated."

"During the camp's existence 4.5 to 5 million people were exterminated"

So, given the arbitrariness of the coefficients, how did the Soviets arrive at their figure? Most plausibly they tried to take a conservative survivor estimate. and fit their calculations to it.


I meant speculation on my part... ;)

Thanks for your link, but i notice that most of the letters /reports are from January 1945, that is immediately after the liberation of the camp. Do we have an idea who those witnesses propagating the 4.5 millions were?

What still surprise me is that there was supposed to be a inquiry, an investigation that should have corrected these first hand "information".
I mean, by May the 6th, they should have known that the four main crema were build in 1943, and many of the "fantasies" should have been corrected.
So, while i understand why those figures are mentioned in reports of January 45, i don't quite understand how they can still be taken into consideration 4 months later...

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Nuremberg and the number of Jewish dead at Auschwitz

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu May 25, 2017 3:42 am

> Do we have an idea who those witnesses propagating the 4.5 millions were?

Almost everybody? :D
"doctor Yakov Gordon from Vilnius, Prof. Steinberg from Paris, and doctor Epstein from Prague" are relatively well-known, stayed behind with the other inmates:

http://en.auschwitz.org/lekcja/11_wyzwo ... /s102.html

" I told a colleague, Doctor [Jakub] Gordon from Vilnius, about my intention. Without any hesitation he replied: ‘I will stay with you, too.’ There was another physician, Dr Samuel Steinberg from Paris. He reacted in the same way, and also stayed behind with us. … "

But again, in the testimonies that I read it's more of a rule than an exception.

That these are pre-report shows the chain of influence.

> by May the 6th, they should have known that the four main crema were build in 1943

Have you read the report? They knew it and much more.

> What still surprise me is that there was supposed to be a inquiry, an investigation that should have corrected these first hand "information".

Yes, but. First of all, they had no good means of establishing the number with the info at hand and most survivors were throwing millions at them. Plus: a big incentive to believe (for obvious reasons) and no huge reason to doubt.


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests