Aktion 1005 Was Not To Destroy Remains?

[bombsaway]

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.

As I said before, it's next to impossible to tabulate bodies if they're destroyed. I think few would deny that body destruction was taking place at these camps, which is what is evidenced. There's a lot of ash, but even that is hard to quantify due to being mixed with sand.

Carting this stuff out of the camp without people noticing would be difficult - the smell alone. At Auschwitz, the river where most ash was dumped was within camp grounds, making the task of discretely disposing of remains easier.

[TlsMS93]

As I said before, it's next to impossible to tabulate bodies if they're destroyed. I think few would deny that body destruction was taking place at these camps, which is what is evidenced. There's a lot of ash, but even that is hard to quantify due to being mixed with sand.

Carting this stuff out of the camp without people noticing would be difficult - the smell alone. At Auschwitz, the river where most ash was dumped was within camp grounds, making the task of discretely disposing of remains easier.

The Western Bug River is a mere 2 km from Treblinka. So that doesn't add up.

[Wetzelrad]

Yeah, this is just baffling. It's yet another example of internet debaters coming up with their own version of the Holocaust to cope with the illogic of the mainstream position. They're forced to disagree even with Raul Hilberg in this case, who wrote:

During the final days of the second sweep, the SS and Police were beset by a weighty problem. The SS (and also the civil administration) was worried about the secrecy of the vast operation that was now coming to an end. Although photography control in the German ranks was now complete, Hungarian and Slovak officers had taken pictures of a number of ‘‘executions.’’ The photographs were presumed to have reached America. This was considered especially ‘‘embarrassing’’ (peinlich), but nothing could be done about the matter. Even greater fears of discovery were generated as a result of the Red Army’s steady westward advance. The occupied territories were full of mass graves, and Himmler was determined to leave no graves.

In June 1942, Himmler ordered the commander of Sonderkommando 4a, Standartenführer Paul Blobel, ‘‘to erase the traces of Einsatzgruppen executions in the East.’’ Blobel formed a special Kommando with the code designation 1005.

The Destruction of the European Jews (2003) by Raul Hilberg, p.406

There is absolutely nothing here about an attempt to frustrate attempts to count or identify bodies. The only purpose given is to hide the alleged crime and avoid detection. Apparently bombsaway and Nessie find Hilberg's understanding of Aktion 1005 to be illogical, an opinion I very much share!

[Archie]

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.

As I said before, it's next to impossible to tabulate bodies if they're destroyed. I think few would deny that body destruction was taking place at these camps, which is what is evidenced. There's a lot of ash, but even that is hard to quantify due to being mixed with sand.

Carting this stuff out of the camp without people noticing would be difficult - the smell alone. At Auschwitz, the river where most ash was dumped was within camp grounds, making the task of discretely disposing of remains easier.

If the goal of cremating bodies was to "cover up the crimes" it ultimately had the precise opposite effect since Jews use the "impossibility of tabulation" as a wildcard to make up whatever numbers they want.

[Stubble]

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.

As I said before, it's next to impossible to tabulate bodies if they're destroyed. I think few would deny that body destruction was taking place at these camps, which is what is evidenced. There's a lot of ash, but even that is hard to quantify due to being mixed with sand.

Carting this stuff out of the camp without people noticing would be difficult - the smell alone. At Auschwitz, the river where most ash was dumped was within camp grounds, making the task of discretely disposing of remains easier.

If the goal of cremating bodies was to "cover up the crimes" it ultimately had the precise opposite effect since Jews use the "impossibility of tabulation" as a wildcard to make up whatever numbers they want.

Just 1 number Archie, 6,000,000...

[bombsaway]

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.

As I said before, it's next to impossible to tabulate bodies if they're destroyed. I think few would deny that body destruction was taking place at these camps, which is what is evidenced. There's a lot of ash, but even that is hard to quantify due to being mixed with sand.

Carting this stuff out of the camp without people noticing would be difficult - the smell alone. At Auschwitz, the river where most ash was dumped was within camp grounds, making the task of discretely disposing of remains easier.

If the goal of cremating bodies was to "cover up the crimes" it ultimately had the precise opposite effect since Jews use the "impossibility of tabulation" as a wildcard to make up whatever numbers they want.

Why do you say Jews? Wasn't it the Soviets that started it, and there's many non-Jewish historians that say the same thing too. Probably more non Jewish than Jewish

[Nessie]

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.

The language used by the sites quoted in the OP, have clearly created a false impression with those who are not forensically aware. If a buried corpse is subsequently "destroyed", "hidden", "wiped out" or "erased", it does not vanish. It leaves behind forensic traces of the grave it was buried in and, if the corpse is cremated, the cremains.

All the mass graves dug by the Nazis, and the corpses they cremated, are still at the AR camps and Chelmno. Preventing body counts, is one of the ways the Nazis "erased" evidence. Stopping any corpse from being examined to establish the cause of death, is a way that the Nazi "hid" the crime of mass gassings. Cremating corpses, so that none could be individually identified, is how the Nazis "destroyed" evidence.

All Stubble is doing in this thread, is revealing how forensically unaware he is, as well as his poor grasp of evidencing and English comprehension. He has clearly taken the sources quoted literally and thinks that somehow, the Nazis made millions of corpses vanish and the ground they were buried in, return to its undisturbed state, before it was dug into.

[Nessie]

...
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.

The site investigations have found evidence of an extensive cover-up, whereby evidence was destroyed. At A-B cremated remains were spread over fields and dumped into rivers, leaving limited traces. Soil disturbances and buried cremated remains have been found at the AR camps and Chelmno, leaving more evidence of traces, because of the way the cremains were mixed back into the ground within the area of the camp.

That destruction of evidence, is in itself, evidence of a criminal act. Courts are allowed to infer criminality, by anyone who does anything to hide, destroy or otherwise tamper with evidence. If, as some suggest, the Nazis had only buried people who had died on the trains, or from disease inside the AR camps and the vast majority had survived and left the camps, they why not leave marked graves, to prove no mass deaths? Why, instead, was there months of corpse cremations and exhumations?

[Nessie]

Yeah, this is just baffling. It's yet another example of internet debaters coming up with their own version of the Holocaust to cope with the illogic of the mainstream position. They're forced to disagree even with Raul Hilberg in this case, who wrote:

During the final days of the second sweep, the SS and Police were beset by a weighty problem. The SS (and also the civil administration) was worried about the secrecy of the vast operation that was now coming to an end. Although photography control in the German ranks was now complete, Hungarian and Slovak officers had taken pictures of a number of ‘‘executions.’’ The photographs were presumed to have reached America. This was considered especially ‘‘embarrassing’’ (peinlich), but nothing could be done about the matter. Even greater fears of discovery were generated as a result of the Red Army’s steady westward advance. The occupied territories were full of mass graves, and Himmler was determined to leave no graves.

In June 1942, Himmler ordered the commander of Sonderkommando 4a, Standartenführer Paul Blobel, ‘‘to erase the traces of Einsatzgruppen executions in the East.’’ Blobel formed a special Kommando with the code designation 1005.

The Destruction of the European Jews (2003) by Raul Hilberg, p.406

There is absolutely nothing here about an attempt to frustrate attempts to count or identify bodies. The only purpose given is to hide the alleged crime and avoid detection. Apparently bombsaway and Nessie find Hilberg's understanding of Aktion 1005 to be illogical, an opinion I very much share!

Wrong. When I read Hilberg stating "leave no mass graves", or Himmler ordering "erase the traces", I do not take that literally. It is physically and forensically impossible, to return a mass grave to its original state. They are referring to the cover-up of the murders, by the use of cremation. That neither Hilberg, nor Himmler go into detail about the way cremations would cover up the murders, is either because to them, it is blindingly obvious, or they lack forensic awareness, or they do not think the how, is that important.

It has clearly never dawned on so-called revisionists, how cremations would serve to cover up the murders. I suspect that they also took the words of Hilberg, and Himmler, literally, causing them to become confused. It is obviously news to them, that the cremations served to cover up the murders by preventing body counts, identification and establishing the cause of death.

[Nessie]

...

If the goal of cremating bodies was to "cover up the crimes" it ultimately had the precise opposite effect since Jews use the "impossibility of tabulation" as a wildcard to make up whatever numbers they want.

In fact, historians have used documents, to tabulate death tolls, since they cannot count the corpses. The Nazis were more thorough about destroying corpses than they were documents. The bureaucracy of identifying, registering, arresting, transporting, and accommodating millions of Jews in ghettos and camps, left behind an enormous volume of records, spread all across Europe. For example, there are records in the Netherlands, of how many Jews were arrested, sent to Westerbork and then transported to Sobibor. There are Nazi transport records and camp records of how many Dutch Jews were transported to and accommodated at Auschwitz. Numbers have not been made up, they are based on documents, most of which come from Nazi sources. That the corpses at Sobibor were exhumed and cremated, means that it is impossible to determine how many Dutch Jews died and were buried there, from remains at the camp.

[HansHill]

...since Jews use the "impossibility of tabulation" as a wildcard to make up whatever numbers they want.

Why do you say Jews?

+$1 in the Bombsaway Is Not White jar

[TlsMS93]

The only conclusion is that, in view of the discoveries of contamination of the water table, they decided to exhume the graves and the few thousand who died on the way and were buried there correspond to the amount of wood destroyed on the perimeter of the camp.

If the Nazis wanted to exterminate the Jews, they would not have buried almost a million of them only to then go to the trouble of exhuming and cremating the remains in an improvised manner without the corresponding logistics and material. You can conclude that they were crazy for being Nazis, but crazy people do not sustain a war against the rest of the world for almost 6 years.

You only rely on the Höfle telegram, that is the same as shooting an arrow and then painting the target around it.

I only know that the Western Bug River was a mere 2 km away and they preferred to keep the ashes on site. If they wanted to exterminate themselves, they would not have done this. If they did, it was because they concluded that this was enough to prevent any subsequent contamination.

[Nessie]

The only conclusion is that, in view of the discoveries of contamination of the water table, they decided to exhume the graves and the few thousand who died on the way and were buried there correspond to the amount of wood destroyed on the perimeter of the camp.

That conclusion is not evidence based. It is purely what you want to believe happened.

If the Nazis wanted to exterminate the Jews, they would not have buried almost a million of them only to then go to the trouble of exhuming and cremating the remains in an improvised manner without the corresponding logistics and material. You can conclude that they were crazy for being Nazis, but crazy people do not sustain a war against the rest of the world for almost 6 years.

There are evidenced reasons why the Nazis started to exhume the graves. The prime objective was to destroy as much of the evidence as possible, making any future investigation harder.

You only rely on the Höfle telegram, that is the same as shooting an arrow and then painting the target around it.

No, Holfe is corroborated by transport, ghetto and other Nazi records, such as the Ganzemueller Letter.

I only know that the Western Bug River was a mere 2 km away and they preferred to keep the ashes on site. If they wanted to exterminate themselves, they would not have done this. If they did, it was because they concluded that this was enough to prevent any subsequent contamination.

It does not really matter, what you think. Evidence is the key to establishing what happened.

[bombsaway]

...since Jews use the "impossibility of tabulation" as a wildcard to make up whatever numbers they want.

Why do you say Jews?

+$1 in the Bombsaway Is Not White jar

Since revisionists speculate so much about the underlying motives and psychology of the 'promoters' I think it's fair to point out the obsession you guys clearly have with Jews -- the speculation about me is just another example of this. You know there are more evolved anti semites like Richard Spencer who have rightly pointed this out as a pathology. He's crazy, don't get me wrong, but I do wonder how it feels to be thought of as a bumpkin by so many people in your camp.

[Wahrheitssucher]

Why do you say Jews?

+$1 in the ‘Bombsaway Is Not White’ jar

Since revisionists speculate so much about the underlying motives and psychology of the 'promoters' I think it's fair to point out the obsession you guys clearly have with Jews…

This seems to me to be akin to your denial of the significance that certain jews have with the ‘six million’ number.

Accurately pointing out that someone or some collective self-identifies as jewish can not fairly be designated a psychological “obsession”, Bombsaway.
Someone is either self-identifying that way or they are not. It’s a simple binary.

In contrast, believing, defending and promoting the ‘holocaust’ or ‘shoah’ narrative can definitely be fairly designated as a ‘jewish’ psychological obsession.
Do you agree?
If you do, I assume you will also accept that ascertaining whether someone is doing that BECAUSE of such an abstract self-identification is a fair question?