Aktion 1005 Was Not To Destroy Remains?

[Stubble]

In another thread, Nessie dropped this jewel on me. I'm not even sure what to say.

Nessie, you are a silly, silly person sometimes. Never change, deal?

For posterity;

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderaktion_1005

The goal of the project was to hide or destroy any evidence of the mass murder that had taken place under Operation Reinhard

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/aktion-1005

Aktion 1005, also called Sonderaktion 1005 or Enterdungsaktion (“Exhumation action”), was an operation conducted by the Nazis during World War II, the aim of which was to hide traces of the widespread system of extermination and other places of mass murder that took place under the auspices of Aktion Reinhard.

https://academic.oup.com/hgs/article-ab ... ogin=false

Operation 1005 was instituted by the Nazis to wipe out the traces of the mass murders they had perpetrated in Eastern and Central Europe

Those are quotes from people who are not forensically aware. You cannot wipe out, hide or destroy a mass grave. It is not possible to return disturbed ground to how it was, before it was excavated. It is not possible to hide corpses that remain at the place where they were initially buried.

What the Nazis did, was prevent body counts, identification and establishing the cause of death, by exhuming and cremating the corpses.

Also, are there no bodies anywhere because of Aktion 1005?

No, Aktion 1005 was the alteration of the state of the corpses, from whole, which could possibly be counted, post mortemed and maybe even identified, to where none of that could happen.

Or in places where we don't find grave contents consistent with Kola, should we assume there was no mass burial?

Don't assume anything. If the evidence is of undisturbed ground, that has never been dug into, that is evidence to prove no mass graves. You don't have evidence like that.

Which is it buddy?

Of all the things you could have chosen to say, you chose to plant your flag on 'well, actually Aktion 1005 was just to keep people from identifying bodies, not finding them'.

It was not just to prevent identification. I think the most important part of the action, for the Nazis, was to prevent a body count.

If that's truly the case Nessie, can you point to where bodies have been found?

The 1945 and 2011 surveys found cremated remains and pits in the section of the camp where eyewitnesses state the main mass graves were located.

You are also going against your buddy Warnick, who goes so far as to say that teeth were broken on sheet metal to explain the lack of, well, millions of teeth, anywhere.

No, the evidence is that the Nazis did as much as possible to destroy the corpses, for the reasons I have given.

So, there you have it folks.

What do you guys think about this take on aktion 1005?

[Nessie]

What part of that exchange do you not understand?

Aktion 1005 was to prevent graves being opened up, the number of corpses inside them being counted, any corpses from being taken for a post-mortem to establish the cause of death and any corpse from being identified as a specific person.

https://wwv.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Micr ... 205721.pdf

"The destruction of the mass graves in Eastern Europe made it difficult to
determine the number of victims exterminated by the Nazis, and fueled the
flames of Holocaust denial."

I agree. If the 1945 excavations at the AR camps and Chelmno, had found hundreds of thousands of whole corpses in mass graves, which could be photographed, counted, and a few examined to establish CO poisoning as the cause of death, there would be no Holocaust denial. Once DNA testing was established, it may have also been possible to identify specific corpse identities.

[Nessie]

Does anyone think this is literally correct?

https://academic.oup.com/hgs/article-ab ... 157/755977

"Operation 1005 was instituted by the Nazis to wipe out the traces of the mass murders they had perpetrated in Eastern and Central Europe."

Does anyone think it is actually possible to wipe a mass grave from existence, leaving no trace, so it appears the ground has never been dug into and bodies buried there?

Or, is it just an expression, a choice of words, not to be taken literally?

[bombsaway]

The second grave, so-called "włocławska"
[...]Situated about 20 m east of the old forest track, the grave runs parallel to it. Its current length is marked with a stone wall and equals 185 m. In order to establish its actual run, transverse probes were put up, while in inaccessible places drills were made.
On the basis of the drills made, it was possible to state that the clearing where the grave is situated was originally longer: it stretched over 45 m further south. The grave had an irregular width, ranging from about 7 m in the southeastern part, through about 10 m in the middle part, to only 4 m in the northeastern edge. While the new layout was being uncovered, the existence of burned-out objects and ashes as well as crushed human bones both burned and unburned was stated.[...]

The third grave.
Located parallel to the forest wall. On the basis of probing surveys and drills, it was stated that it reaches the forest from the south (SE), insignificantly entering its area. It passes under the forest track, which during the war most likely in this part of the clearing ran along the then forest wall, situated further on than the present one. A stone wall (about 135 meters long), which was to determine the stretch of the grave, is narrower by 2 m than the actual width of the grave. Its total length equals 174 m, width about 8 m. The contents of the grave includes sandy soil with gravel, burn waste, ash, and crushed human bones.

The fourth grave.
It is represented by a 140-metre-long wall. Located between the third and the fifth graves; its presumed location does not correspond with the actual location. The fundamental fourth grave is located between the wall of the fourth non-existent grave and covers the whole fifth grave. Its actual width equals 10 m, while its length is 182 m. It is filled with gray sandy soil mixed with inclusions of burn waste, ash and crushed bones.

The fifth grave
The last grave, or rather a line of pits filled with ashes, was not commemorated with any walls; in the 1960s it was already not discernible on the surface. On the basis of the description by Judge W. Bednarz it appears that in 1945 the pits were examined by him.
The total length of these pits equals 161 m. The stretch is made up of 11 pits, each located about 2-3 m from another. The dimensions of the pits vary from 9x7.5 m to 15.50x8.50 m. They are filled with gray soil with a significant mixture of burn waste and crushed human bones. In the southern (SE) part of the grave the bones found in the pits used to be ground; those in further parts - crushed. According to W. Bednarz, the depth of the pits was about 4 m, and the width 8-10 m. Even now the flora on the pits is more luxuriant, making this stretch more visible on the surface.

You can look, eg at the Chelmno grave site. Revisionists hold that the bones were crushed as part of some formality I guess, that's just what you do when you cremate. There's no hygienic reason for it. The mixing with soil is seemingly inexplicable. The orthodox account would be that the bodies were destroyed and mixed with soil to prevent easy counting. You all can decide which narrative makes more sense.

[borjastick]

Here we go again the twisting and turning of those who seek to deceive.

If the mass murders had happened as claimed it is reasonable to expect that the Germans might have had the thought to cover up their deeds as it became clear things in the war were turning against them. But given the decline in their battlefront efforts and successes they would not have had the time to do the disappearing act as is claimed. There was simply neither the time, the labour and the equipment in a rapidly worsening war situation to do what is claimed. They might have had some success but nowhere nearly long enough to make all these millions of corpses disappear like a David Blaine trick.

It is another lie.

[Stubble]

Here we go again the twisting and turning of those who seek to deceive.

If the mass murders had happened as claimed it is reasonable to expect that the Germans might have had the thought to cover up their deeds as it became clear things in the war were turning against them. But given the decline in their battlefront efforts and successes they would not have had the time to do the disappearing act as is claimed. There was simply neither the time, the labour and the equipment in a rapidly worsening war situation to do what is claimed. They might have had some success but nowhere nearly long enough to make all these millions of corpses disappear like a David Blaine trick.

It is another lie.

Remarkably, Nessie and Bombsaway seem to be with you on the no disappearing bodies trick man.

Now, I'm told I'm making a strawman thinking that aktion 1005 was ever billed as a disappearing act...

/shrug

Now, even at Chelmno, all the remains are still present and not removed by being thrown into the stream.

/shrug

I just imagined being told that Aktion 1005 was used to obliterate all the evidence.

[bombsaway]

Here we go again the twisting and turning of those who seek to deceive.

If the mass murders had happened as claimed it is reasonable to expect that the Germans might have had the thought to cover up their deeds as it became clear things in the war were turning against them. But given the decline in their battlefront efforts and successes they would not have had the time to do the disappearing act as is claimed. There was simply neither the time, the labour and the equipment in a rapidly worsening war situation to do what is claimed. They might have had some success but nowhere nearly long enough to make all these millions of corpses disappear like a David Blaine trick.

It is another lie.

Remarkably, Nessie and Bombsaway seem to be with you on the no disappearing bodies trick man.

Now, I'm told I'm making a strawman thinking that aktion 1005 was ever billed as a disappearing act...

/shrug

Now, even at Chelmno, all the remains are still present and not removed by being thrown into the stream.

/shrug

I just imagined being told that Aktion 1005 was used to obliterate all the evidence.

The bodies were destroyed, because a body definitionally is an intact structure. Ashes =/= bodies, your argument here rests on silly semantic distinctions. This should be a clue you into the overall weakness of your case, that you have to resort to nitpicking language.

[borjastick]

Bombsaway is struggling now. Hilarious that someone who uses every semantic and trick in the book to try to justify six million people disappearing can accuse us of semantics.

'If you cannot show us where they went they must have died in the gas chambers etc'.

'If you cannot show us bodies they must have died'.

Honestly these people are pathetic.

[Stubble]

To the staff of the forum, I apologize for this very brief and not entirely useful post.

Bombsaway, I am going to come back to this thread after I compile a thorough post outlining why this is my position and why it is not 'nit picking language'.

In the mean time, something for you to consider is that the extreme lack of evidence is routinely dismissed by exterminationists with the rebut that all evidence was removed through Aktion 1005.

If you are now shifting the house of cards onto this new ground where you claim the evidence does exist and wasn't obliterated, I caution you that your position is going to rapidly become significantly more tenuous than it already was.

I'm going to go bury my head in research for a while. I'll be back in a couple of days.

[bombsaway]

To the staff of the forum, I apologize for this very brief and not entirely useful post.

Bombsaway, I am going to come back to this thread after I compile a thorough post outlining why this is my position and why it is not 'nit picking language'.

In the mean time, something for you to consider is that the extreme lack of evidence is routinely dismissed by exterminationists with the rebut that all evidence was removed through Aktion 1005.

If you are now shifting the house of cards onto this new ground where you claim the evidence does exist and wasn't obliterated, I caution you that your position is going to rapidly become significantly more tenuous than it already was.

I'm going to go bury my head in research for a while. I'll be back in a couple of days.

The evidence of killing hundreds of thousands was destroyed, at chelmno eg, because there is no reasonable way to tabulate bodies like they did at Katyn. You would have to dna test the ash exhaustively and tabulate the unique hits.

[TlsMS93]

One time cremation is to erase evidence, now it is to avoid official counting. The same as with Ziklon B, one time it is capsules, another time it is cylinders, another time it is showers.

[bombsaway]

One time cremation is to erase evidence, now it is to avoid official counting. The same as with Ziklon B, one time it is capsules, another time it is cylinders, another time it is showers.

Cremation does not erase physical matter, even hiding it doesn't. Under these terms, silly semantic games really, it's impossible to practically destroy bodies. Maybe if you threw the bodies into an open volcano?

[TlsMS93]

Cremation does not erase physical matter, even hiding it doesn't. Under these terms, silly semantic games really, it's impossible to practically destroy bodies. Maybe if you threw the bodies into an open volcano?

No, what is foolish is to expect to kill millions of people, bury them and then want to destroy them without any material at hand, after all they are physical bodies, aren't they? They require fuel to change the state of matter, making all the mess with soil disturbance and on top of that throwing the remains in the same graves and not trying to transport them to a nearby river or spread them to isolated places.

[bombsaway]

Cremation does not erase physical matter, even hiding it doesn't. Under these terms, silly semantic games really, it's impossible to practically destroy bodies. Maybe if you threw the bodies into an open volcano?

No, what is foolish is to expect to kill millions of people, bury them and then want to destroy them without any material at hand, after all they are physical bodies, aren't they? They require fuel to change the state of matter, making all the mess with soil disturbance and on top of that throwing the remains in the same graves and not trying to transport them to a nearby river or spread them to isolated places.

Why would they bother doing this if the evidence they did leave in the graves is not convincing in the least?

[TlsMS93]

Why would they bother doing this if the evidence they did leave in the graves is not convincing in the least?

They are enough for those who support all this, after all it is a crime in several countries to ask the questions we are asking. In fact, I maintain that if unrestricted freedom of expression were given, this Holocaust would soon become a laughing stock due to the absurdities they defend.