Best stand-alone evidence?

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jan 07, 2018 10:01 pm

. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Oozy_Substance
Poster
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:48 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Oozy_Substance » Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:25 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Franke-Gricksch report on Auschwitz


I was always bothered by this report.
It feels "too good to be true."

1) It describes gassing in Auschwitz
2) It directly says the "re-settlement program" is actually an extermination program
3) It mentions this is an order from Hitler himself

In other words it's the best stand-alone evidence there is.
Yet Holocaust Controversies does not even have an article on it. It is only mentioned here as being quoted by Pressac.

Now I've read what deniers have to say about this report. They claim it's a forgery and they say not even anti-deniers bring it up, which might be true, because I don't see it discussed often.
They also claim the document has some errors in German, but I guess this is meaningless.

Plus, it seems that this report is an extract out of a diary and in 2010, allegedly, the full section of the diary from which it was extracted was revealed. Here it is.

The report itself does not appear here, although it is not clear to me if this diary section truly should include the report in it. These two pieces of text may be not related to each other.

What is your opinion on that?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:39 am

IIRC we have only the English language translation, the original German document having been lost.

as you noted, FG report is on Hans' Auschwitz evidence list at HC - without being "flagged"

Nick Terry, who has studied Auschwitz, noted it here as a "prominent official document"

Fleming discusses the FG report here

Sydnor discusses the FG report here

Roberto Muehlenkamp weighs in about the FG report, inter aiia, on AHF

IIRC Ivring's website had a discussion of the two documents; someone else better versed in Auschwitz archival matters than I (Nick Terry or Hans or Sergey Romanov, for example) might turn up here to discuss authenticity issues
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Oozy_Substance
Poster
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:48 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Oozy_Substance » Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:49 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:IIRC we have only the English language translation, the original German document having been lost.


Quoting Dr. Terry from this link he says "such as the 2nd Franke-Gricksch report".

So there are indeed two F-G reports?
Because what deniers say that the "long" report is the real report, and the "short" report, which includes references to gassing, and supposed to be an extract out of the "long" report, is fake.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:02 am

I am referring to the so-called Lipman version, and goofed citing Nick's comment, which referred to the 2nd document - the Lipman typescript is in German with an English header. It's the original German version that we don't have, only Lipman's typescript. I should have had my morning tea before typing and checked notes/links closer - and typed "we have only a typescript of the German document." Sorry!
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Oozy_Substance
Poster
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:48 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Oozy_Substance » Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:29 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:I am referring to the so-called Lipman version, and goofed citing Nick's comment, which referred to the 2nd document - the Lipman typescript is in German with an English header. It's the original German version that we don't have, only Lipman's typescript. I should have had my morning tea before typing and checked notes/links closer - and typed "we have only a typescript of the German document." Sorry!


Uhmm.. this is very confusing, epsecially because I have no idea who Lipman is. lol.

I found a post by BroI in CODOH where he posted translation of the "long" F-G report.

But it seems even the long report admits the extermination of Jews, as Broi himself emphasized in the text :

one realise the alternative with which we are faced: either this generation of ours succeeds in clearing up the Jewish problem completely and to its last consequences or, if their liquidation is not completely achieved, the Jewish people will rise again after this wave of oppression. Some individual cases may appear hard or even brutal but seeing these people in large masses and knowing how dangerous their passive attitude is to the life of the nations, one comes to the conclusion that this problem has to be cleared up completely to free the world once and for all of this pestilence.


Now I am even more confused.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:47 am

Oozy_Substance wrote:Uhmm.. this is very confusing, epsecially because I have no idea who Lipman is. lol.

Lipman was the typist of the FG report cited by Pressac. His signature is on the typescript. Pressac, p 238

Oozy_Substance wrote:I found a post by BroI in CODOH . . . Now I am even more confused.

IIRC that passage is from the 2nd report, the one referenced by Nick Terry and shown here.

I recall reading something from Sergey Romanov on the authenticity of the FG report but my bookmark to this turns up dead.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Oozy_Substance
Poster
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:48 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Oozy_Substance » Mon Jan 08, 2018 9:30 am

Just to put things in line. The 1st F-G report is the "short" one (the one that speaks of gassing) and the 2nd F-G report is the "long" one, right?

Now I am not really sure what is the relations between these two reports.
If the 1st/short one is supposed to be a paragraph within the 2nd/long one, why isn't it there? Was it omitted? Or maybe the two documents are not related to begin with?

Deniers may say that the 1st/short report not being included in the 2nd/long report is a proof of it being a fabrication.

I therefore won't include the F-G report in my "evidence knapsack" for deniers until I sort this out.

What do you think?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jan 08, 2018 9:59 am

Oozy_Substance wrote:Just to put things in line. The 1st F-G report is the "short" one (the one that speaks of gassing) and the 2nd F-G report is the "long" one, right?

That is my understanding.

Oozy_Substance wrote:Now I am not really sure what is the relations between these two reports.
If the 1st/short one is supposed to be a paragraph within the 2nd/long one, why isn't it there? Was it omitted? Or maybe the two documents are not related to begin with?

I don't know the relationship between the two documents. I believe deniers simply say that the "short" document is a forgery.

Oozy_Substance wrote:I therefore won't include the F-G report in my "evidence knapsack" for deniers until I sort this out.

What do you think?

Yeah, hang on . . . I thought I had something evaluating Renk's article but I can't find that, either.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Oozy_Substance
Poster
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:48 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Oozy_Substance » Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:35 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Oozy_Substance wrote:Just to put things in line. The 1st F-G report is the "short" one (the one that speaks of gassing) and the 2nd F-G report is the "long" one, right?

That is my understanding.

Oozy_Substance wrote:Now I am not really sure what is the relations between these two reports.
If the 1st/short one is supposed to be a paragraph within the 2nd/long one, why isn't it there? Was it omitted? Or maybe the two documents are not related to begin with?

I don't know the relationship between the two documents. I believe deniers simply say that the "short" document is a forgery.

Oozy_Substance wrote:I therefore won't include the F-G report in my "evidence knapsack" for deniers until I sort this out.

What do you think?

Yeah, hang on . . . I thought I had something evaluating Renk's article but I can't find that, either.


I searched for "Franke-Gricksch" and "Sergey Romanov" on google and found the following :

http://sergeyromanovwatch.blogspot.com/2013/?m=0

Sergery Romanov Watch ? lol !!

Who did it?

Anyway the format is barely readable ...

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby BRoI » Mon Jan 08, 2018 12:15 pm

Sender Jaari: And in another statement by you, made at another place, you said you visited Treblinka in 1942. Which year is correct?
Rudolf Hoess: 1941 is correct. If I said 1942, it was incorrect.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1757
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Denying-History » Mon Jan 08, 2018 2:08 pm

Oozy_Substance wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Oozy_Substance wrote:Just to put things in line. The 1st F-G report is the "short" one (the one that speaks of gassing) and the 2nd F-G report is the "long" one, right?

That is my understanding.

Oozy_Substance wrote:Now I am not really sure what is the relations between these two reports.
If the 1st/short one is supposed to be a paragraph within the 2nd/long one, why isn't it there? Was it omitted? Or maybe the two documents are not related to begin with?

I don't know the relationship between the two documents. I believe deniers simply say that the "short" document is a forgery.

Oozy_Substance wrote:I therefore won't include the F-G report in my "evidence knapsack" for deniers until I sort this out.

What do you think?

Yeah, hang on . . . I thought I had something evaluating Renk's article but I can't find that, either.


I searched for "Franke-Gricksch" and "Sergey Romanov" on google and found the following :

http://sergeyromanovwatch.blogspot.com/2013/?m=0

Sergery Romanov Watch ? lol !!

Who did it?

Anyway the format is barely readable ...


I believe it was "Blogbuster" hard to tell what ones he ran. Anyway if you are wondering where the Drama started see Sergeys writings on Heart:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/p/miscellaneous.html
« Lies written in ink cannot disguise facts written in blood. »
- Lu Xun

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jan 08, 2018 2:59 pm

Yes, that is one from Blogbuster (Carmelo Lisciotto) when he was stalking non deniers.

BRoI’s link is to the same AHF thread I linked to above for Roberto Muehlenkamp’s comments - I agree that the thread is worth reading all the way through - which I did again today and saw recent posts from Sergey Romanov and BRoI of which I was unaware. Roberto replied to Mills, as did Hans, eons before the more recent posts. That said, I still cannot find comments I am sure I’ve read somewhere from Sergey Romanov ... those at the end of the thread are not the ones I think I’ve read but are likely similar
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jan 09, 2018 5:21 pm

Oozy, I checked around on Franke-Gricksch - no one seems to have taken Renk’s revisionist article seriously enough to do a rebuttal; probably the best material countering the revisionist arguments you cite will be the posts from Roberto, Hans and Sergey in the AHF thread which BRoI and I linked to.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

Hans
Poster
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Hans » Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:39 am

Oozy_Substance wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Franke-Gricksch report on Auschwitz


I was always bothered by this report.
It feels "too good to be true."

1) It describes gassing in Auschwitz
2) It directly says the "re-settlement program" is actually an extermination program
3) It mentions this is an order from Hitler himself

In other words it's the best stand-alone evidence there is.
Yet Holocaust Controversies does not even have an article on it. It is only mentioned here as being quoted by Pressac.

Now I've read what deniers have to say about this report. They claim it's a forgery and they say not even anti-deniers bring it up, which might be true, because I don't see it discussed often.
They also claim the document has some errors in German, but I guess this is meaningless.

Plus, it seems that this report is an extract out of a diary and in 2010, allegedly, the full section of the diary from which it was extracted was revealed. Here it is.

The report itself does not appear here, although it is not clear to me if this diary section truly should include the report in it. These two pieces of text may be not related to each other.

What is your opinion on that?


The document typed by Lipman is probably a (bit sloppy) copy of the authentic report of Franke-Gricksch on Auschwitz (for reasons discussed in the AHF thread), but the lack of the original poses a challenge to establish this with certainty and beyond any reasonable doubt. A least that's why I personally did not feature it yet at the HC blog as "smoking gun". If the original comes to light one day, that would make it easier...

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:58 am

It's easy to pack it into one tweet.

There were between 5 and 6 million Jewish victims: https://www.degruyter.com/view/product/220100
Gas chambers are documented: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ts-on.html
So is the extermination intent: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... .html#docs

Voila, you've proven the Holocaust twitter-style.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:02 am

Oozy_Substance wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Franke-Gricksch report on Auschwitz


I was always bothered by this report.
It feels "too good to be true."

1) It describes gassing in Auschwitz
2) It directly says the "re-settlement program" is actually an extermination program
3) It mentions this is an order from Hitler himself

In other words it's the best stand-alone evidence there is.
Yet Holocaust Controversies does not even have an article on it. It is only mentioned here as being quoted by Pressac.

Now I've read what deniers have to say about this report. They claim it's a forgery and they say not even anti-deniers bring it up, which might be true, because I don't see it discussed often.
They also claim the document has some errors in German, but I guess this is meaningless.

Plus, it seems that this report is an extract out of a diary and in 2010, allegedly, the full section of the diary from which it was extracted was revealed. Here it is.

The report itself does not appear here, although it is not clear to me if this diary section truly should include the report in it. These two pieces of text may be not related to each other.

What is your opinion on that?

As someone who thinks the shorter F-G report is probably genuine, it is impossible to prove this beyond the reasonable doubt, so it's useless as far as the deniers are concerned.

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby BRoI » Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:39 am

Just inform the deniers that there's nothing suspicious about US prosecutors having lost the "short F-G report". US prosecutors/war crimes investigators lost very many important proofs of Nazi war crimes:

1. Himmler's 14th or 18th April 1945 order to Dachau/Flossenbuerg
2. Arthur Nebe's film footage of the Mogilev gassing
3. Eleonore Hodys's 1944 statement mentioning Auschwitz gassings

Will add others when I remember them

EDIT:

Image
The Evening Leader (Corning, NY), October 7, 1948
Sender Jaari: And in another statement by you, made at another place, you said you visited Treblinka in 1942. Which year is correct?
Rudolf Hoess: 1941 is correct. If I said 1942, it was incorrect.

User avatar
Oozy_Substance
Poster
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:48 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Oozy_Substance » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:21 am

I don't know if it's because that I am not a native English speaker, but I never seem to get BroI's tone.. if he is being cynical or straight serious.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6815
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:30 am

Oozy_Substance wrote:I don't know if it's because that I am not a native English speaker, but I never seem to get BroI's tone.. if he is being cynical or straight serious.



He’s trying to score points, that’s all. That seems to be his only purpose here.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:30 pm

Thanks Hans and Sergey. I am guessing that whatever I read a few years back (written by Sergey) was so convincing to me that I remembered Franke-Gricksche I as virtually unassailable (and Renk's article to have been dealt with).

Oozy: in this case, sarcasm would be the operative concept. (Sorry for leading you on a wild goose chase.)
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6815
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:34 pm

Does anyone have a copy of the original German and translation of Erhard Wetzel’s “Stellungnahme und Gedanken zum Generalplan Ost des Reichsführers SS (Opinion and thoughts on the master plan for the East of the Reichsführer SS")? It’s referred to in several places, I came back to it while re-reading Browning’s “Origins.”

The date I have for it is April 27th, 1942.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6815
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:35 pm

I came across references to it but no text in a lot of different sources. A Polish author published it in 1962.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6815
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu Jan 11, 2018 3:17 pm

This is why I think it’s important:

Browning writes:

“It was perfectly clear to Wetzel, however, that with the “Final Solution” the Jews were already being “liquidated”
and therefore the resettlement of of the Jews referred to in the Plan was “superfluous.” It was also clear that the Germans could not liquidate either the Poles or the Russians as they could the Jews.”

Browning, page 241

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jan 11, 2018 3:45 pm

http://www.ifz-muenchen.de/heftarchiv/1958_3.pdf pp 297-324 German only; discussed in HC White Paper, p 133
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6815
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu Jan 11, 2018 4:05 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:http://www.ifz-muenchen.de/heftarchiv/1958_3.pdf pp 297-324 German only; discussed in HC White Paper, p 133


Thanks, I’ve seen it quoted and referred to any other places, Mazowar’s “Hitler’s Empire” comes to mind. Reading Browning again reminded me of it.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4552
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Jeff_36 » Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:24 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:that one I can't dredge up . . . Jeff_36! Help!

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... -bene.html

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:23 am

APMA-B Garrison Trial, Vol 38, p 117, radiogram of 2 October 1942 from Liebehenschel (office DI of WVHA) with approval for "a trip by a 5-t. truck with trailer to Dessau for the purpose of delivering material for resettlement of Jews." [Photo 32 in Pressac; in F Piper, Jews in Aushcwitz, pp 318-319]

(Well, not quite stand-alone, you need to know that Dessau was a producer of Zyklon B and supplied the chemical to Auschwitz.)
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6815
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Sat Jan 20, 2018 6:56 am

Oozy, I have Alfred Rosenberg’s speech to a group of reporters in November 18th, 1941:

In the east some six million Jews still live and this question can only be solved in a biological eradication of the entire Jewry of Europe.


This is from Browning, Page 404. Looking to grab the source, I also remember seeing in Mazowar’s “Hitler’s Empire” and in a few other places. I don’t have the original but maybe someone else does.

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol
Contact:

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby nickterry » Sat Jan 20, 2018 10:34 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:Does anyone have a copy of the original German and translation of Erhard Wetzel’s “Stellungnahme und Gedanken zum Generalplan Ost des Reichsführers SS (Opinion and thoughts on the master plan for the East of the Reichsführer SS")? It’s referred to in several places, I came back to it while re-reading Browning’s “Origins.”

The date I have for it is April 27th, 1942.


StatMech posted a link to a published transcription in VfZ. There's no full translation into English as far as I am aware.

While it's not online, the 'Stellungnahme' can also be found in the trial records of Josef Buhler, Hans Frank's deputy, in Poland - the file reference would be AIPN NTN 252, i.e. the archive of the Institute of National Memory in Poland. This is a photocopy and marked as Nuremberg document NG-2325. It's likely to have been used in the RuSHA trial, one of the 12 successor Nuremberg trials.

I can't say I've seen any citations to the archival filing of the original document - but it should have one, probably in the RKFDV records. Nearly everyone cites it from Heiber or a further reproduction in a collection edited by Czeslaw Madajczyk, Vom Generalplan Ost.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sat Jan 20, 2018 5:43 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:APMA-B Garrison Trial, Vol 38, p 117, radiogram of 2 October 1942 from Liebehenschel (office DI of WVHA) with approval for "a trip by a 5-t. truck with trailer to Dessau for the purpose of delivering material for resettlement of Jews." [Photo 32 in Pressac; in F Piper, Jews in Aushcwitz, pp 318-319]

(Well, not quite stand-alone, you need to know that Dessau was a producer of Zyklon B and supplied the chemical to Auschwitz.)

This will be countered as being for delousing.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Jan 20, 2018 5:55 pm

It has been IIRC (Mattogno?) but "resettlement of Jews" is such an odd phrase to use for delousing, by contrast earlier truck trips were noted as being for fighting the (typhus) epidemic and disinfecting the camp - summer 1942.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sat Jan 20, 2018 6:02 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:It has been IIRC (Mattogno?) but "resettlement of Jews" is such an odd phrase to use for delousing, by contrast earlier truck trips were noted as being for fighting the (typhus) epidemic and disinfecting the camp - summer 1942.

IMHO no more than Entwesungsanlage für Sonderbehandlung as a ref to the Central Sauna. Which we do not see as a criminal trace.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18088
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jan 21, 2018 12:35 pm

I went back through the various docs on the truck to Dessau doc, plus what I have on the July-September 1942 typhus epidemic - and, yeah, I think the doc can be interpreted either way and the case for its being about the gas chambers relies on a web of other evidence (e.g., what does "resettlement of Jews" refer to), so, true, far from a slam dunk. Sorry for a "false positive," Oozy.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Best stand-alone evidence?

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:07 pm

The Dessau SB doc is also not a slam-dunk since without Mulka's testimony it could be interpreted to refer to SB in an expanded sense (which would include delousing).


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Balmoral95, Jeffk 1970, Tallboy and 2 guests