Exterminationist tactics - a brief analysis

[Numar Patru]

You alternatively, cannot say the opposite, that these Jews certainly all avoided the Reinhardt network.

I don’t think I said or even implied that. Rather, it’s my belief that the vast majority of Jews in the Kresy in June 1941 were submitted to Aktion Reinhard. Beyond what happened in those camps, we clearly disagree on who these Jews were, their number, and where they lived before September 1, 1939.

[Nessie]

And you, what evidence do you have of millions of deaths? Transport list is not acceptable.

What evidence do you have of millions still alive in 1944? Transport lists are not acceptable as evidence, according to you, so will need to look elsewhere for your evidence. You could use witness evidence, since you say you have millions of them. I have dozens of witnesses to millions being killed in various camps. I have the archaeological evidence of large areas of disturbed ground containing cremate remains, which accounts for where the dead ended up. You don't have a huge system of camps across Eastern Europe, accommodating millions of Jewish men, women and children. I have many Nazi admissions to the killing of large numbers of people. You have no Nazis who claim to have been a part of the department responsible for the accommodation of millions till the end of the war. I have Allied soldiers liberating and displace persons agencies, reporting only finding a few hundred thousand Jews. You have neither saying they were overwhelmed with millions of Jews. I have the majority of occupied countries in Europe reporting massive drops in their Jewish population and many never returning. You only have Denmark, whose Jews escaped to Sweden and Finland who refused to cooperate with deportations, so they remained in their homes.

When I turn the tables on you and demand evidence, it is clear that you have sweet FA compared to me.

[SanityCheck]

You alternatively, cannot say the opposite, that these Jews certainly all avoided the Reinhardt network.

I don’t think I said or even implied that. Rather, it’s my belief that the vast majority of Jews in the Kresy in June 1941 were submitted to Aktion Reinhard. Beyond what happened in those camps, we clearly disagree on who these Jews were, their number, and where they lived before September 1, 1939.

Significantly less than half of the Jews in eastern Poland as of June/July 1941 (i.e. falling under German rule) were deported westwards to Belzec, Treblinka, Auschwitz and Sobibor. The rest were shot on the spot, meaning a death toll well in excess of Belzec and approaching that of Treblinka just for eastern Poland. Over 100,000 were so killed in eastern Galicia by shooting actions in 1943, after Belzec had closed down because the mass graves had filled up.

And this is why the semi-advanced level in the mainstream discusses Ponary, Janowska, Rivne, Bronnaia Gora, Slonim, Pinsk and the Pripyat marshes action of Fegelein's boys, among other places. Gee, almost like we can be specific and precise like proper historians and geographers whereas the other side... can't.

[Numar Patru]

Lol

[HansHill]

Those are the rules of informed evidence based discussion. Otherwise you're a crank or falling for crank tactics.

What utter rubbish did I just read? Where to even start with this train wreck

I'll begin with your brazen attempt to discard contemporaneous Jewish reports because they make uncomfortable claims that Orthodoxy cannot account for, which is utterly laughable. If I were to search your post history, I'm almost certain to find you making the reverse arguments whereever and whenever suited, that is, to discard local sources in lieu of Israeli sources (which is a whole continent away) if that were to better support Orthodoxy.

The boldness to then reprimand Graf for being a naughty boy is especially tone deaf, given everything we know about the sins of Orthodoxy and its ridiculous fast and loose approach to gathering evidence (Buchenwald, anyone?)

Your ridiculous appeals to both modern research methods and authority do absolutely nothing to sweeten the deal, in fact only sours everything - because your very next step is to deus ex machina these unaccounted for Jews up a chimney somewhere, or BBQed to ash.

Whichever way you dice it, Orthodoxy has unsquarable circles to pencil out, and I'm not even talking about your missing Prussian Blue, your missing holes, your diesel exhaust fiasco or your BBQ pits - you simply and utterly, cannot account for entire populations of Jews popping up to say hello across two continents, playing Where's Waldostein in the immediate post-war years, causing all sorts of problems for anybody who bothers to notice.

Once again, your brazen attempt to simply poof them up a chimney and out of sight simply to help balance your fraudulent accounting, is so utterly brazen and tonedeaf for all to see.

Finally until you have a viable murder weapon, any attempt by Orthodoxy to reprimand Revisionism citing "modern research methods" falls completely flat.

Get your act together, Orthodoxy.

[Nessie]

...discard contemporaneous Jewish reports because they make uncomfortable claims that Orthodoxy cannot account for, which is utterly laughable...

You quoted;

"1945: Per WJC - 475,000 - 525,000 alive and present Polish Jews, incl 80,000 currenlty in Poland"

In 1939 there had been 3.3 million Polish Jews alive. How do you account for that massive drop in the Polish Jewish population? What caused it?

[SanityCheck]

Those are the rules of informed evidence based discussion. Otherwise you're a crank or falling for crank tactics.

What utter rubbish did I just read? Where to even start with this train wreck

I'll begin with your brazen attempt to discard contemporaneous Jewish reports because they make uncomfortable claims that Orthodoxy cannot account for, which is utterly laughable. If I were to search your post history, I'm almost certain to find you making the reverse arguments whereever and whenever suited, that is, to discard local sources in lieu of Israeli sources (which is a whole continent away) if that were to better support Orthodoxy.

Did you miss where I pointed out, several times in fact, that the IJA report, proceeding from a prewar population of 3 million Jews in Poland, arrived at a figure of 2.775-2.8 million Jews dying in Poland? Which number is of course entirely compatible with the current documented deportations to the key extermination camps in Poland.

The IJA report overestimates other countries, but for mid-1945 it was a good faith effort. It is however an *estimate* and this is why I endorse death tolls of 5.1-5.3 million Jews in Axis hands (not just the Nazis; the IJA was also ecumenical like that).

The estimate of Polish Jewish survivors from the IJA remains just that, an estimate, and while the press reports it cites in the footnotes correlate with archival materials for some cases, there are now more hard documents, headcounts and sources, which mean the numbers given in the IJA report for refugees are likely lower. But it's fine if someone provides other sources, not just headline guesstimates but breakdowns and documents, which show they got it right all along. You just can't go around citing an estimate from North America of what was happening in the Soviet Union and ignore Soviet (and other country's) sources entirely, not in the 21st Century.

The boldness to then reprimand Graf for being a naughty boy is especially tone deaf, given everything we know about the sins of Orthodoxy and its ridiculous fast and loose approach to gathering evidence (Buchenwald, anyone?)

Graf screwed up in several ways in section 10.3 by conventional standards, applied to any topic. Firstly, he claimed that a North American academic, Eugene Kulischer, had reliable statistics, to tout a claim of 500,000 Jews fleeing east in 1939 from Poland. But Kulischer was simply presenting an estimate; others existed at the time, and his book is a secondary source, contemporary literature but still secondary and not primary.

Secondly, Graf ignored the entire gamut of literature on the themes in question up to 2010, which as should be clear from Numar Patru's posts, include a summary piece in English by Grzegorz Hryciuk, a noted specialist in Polish historical demography, from 2007 or so.

You further compound the errors made by Graf, by conflating historians and social scientists with war crimes investigators. Historians and social scientists can and do criticise war crimes investigators, courts, previous historians and social scientists, as well as amateur writers, cranks, conspiracy theorists and politicians.

Your ridiculous appeals to both modern research methods and authority do absolutely nothing to sweeten the deal, in fact only sours everything - because your very next step is to deus ex machina these unaccounted for Jews up a chimney somewhere, or BBQed to ash.

Whichever way you dice it, Orthodoxy has unsquarable circles to pencil out, and I'm not even talking about your missing Prussian Blue, your missing holes, your diesel exhaust fiasco or your BBQ pits - you simply and utterly, cannot account for entire populations of Jews popping up to say hello across two continents, playing Where's Waldostein in the immediate post-war years, causing all sorts of problems for anybody who bothers to notice.

Once again, your brazen attempt to simply poof them up a chimney and out of sight simply to help balance your fraudulent accounting, is so utterly brazen and tonedeaf for all to see.

Finally until you have a viable murder weapon, any attempt by Orthodoxy to reprimand Revisionism citing "modern research methods" falls completely flat.

Get your act together, Orthodoxy.

None of this even vaguely addresses the points made. For starters, you've obviously not read the literatures I've referenced nor comprehended how the sources they discuss do in fact refute your clutching at straws to claim 'entire populations of Jews popping up to say hello across two continents'. I could synthesise these works and their sources and prove this, but for the purposes of this discussion, I don't have to. All I need do is point out you're not even engaging with the literature or how it's evolved and show no awareness of the full range of sources to reconstruct survivor movements and numbers. Because Graf *also* showed no awareness or engagement with these sources and literature.

Back to the (e)library for you. I even gave links to some open access studies and referenced other articles which can be googled to find them open access.

You posted some newspaper articles from the 1940s with ridiculous numbers that are not substantiated by other sources. Only cranks do that. So every time you repeat such a trick, it will behove others to point out that you're acting like a crank. Don't be a crank. That should be one of your New Year's Resolutions.

[Hektor]

Those are the rules of informed evidence based discussion. Otherwise you're a crank or falling for crank tactics.

What utter rubbish did I just read? Where to even start with this train wreck

I'll begin with your brazen attempt to discard contemporaneous Jewish reports because they make uncomfortable claims that Orthodoxy cannot account for, which is utterly laughable. If I were to search your post history, I'm almost certain to find you making the reverse arguments whereever and whenever suited, that is, to discard local sources in lieu of Israeli sources (which is a whole continent away) if that were to better support Orthodoxy.

Did you miss where I pointed out, several times in fact, that the IJA report, proceeding from a prewar population of 3 million Jews in Poland, arrived at a figure of 2.775-2.8 million Jews dying in Poland? Which number is of course entirely compatible with the current documented deportations to the key extermination camps in Poland.
.....

Oh, the post and pre-war statistics argument. Can you think of any serious problems with that problem? Or did no exterminationist feel compelled to deal with the serious issues of that sort of argument...?


The statistics argument goes like this: We guesstimate 3 million Jews in Poland prior to WW2... there were only a handful registered as Jews after WW2, hence they must mostly have 'perished' in the Holocaust. Now there is a long list of problems with that sort of argument, but I virtually see them addressed ever by exterminationists historians or those promoting their positions....

[Nessie]

....

Oh, the post and pre-war statistics argument. Can you think of any serious problems with that problem? Or did no exterminationist feel compelled to deal with the serious issues of that sort of argument...?


The statistics argument goes like this: We guesstimate 3 million Jews in Poland prior to WW2... there were only a handful registered as Jews after WW2, hence they must mostly have 'perished' in the Holocaust. Now there is a long list of problems with that sort of argument, but I virtually see them addressed ever by exterminationists historians or those promoting their positions....

After the argument from incredulity and ignorance, strawman arguments are the next most commonly revisionist used logical fallacy.

Historians do not use arguments. They use evidence. Evidence from census and population records establishes that the 1939 Polish Jewish population was c3.3 million. Evidence is then provided, mainly from the Nazis, that the Polish Jewish population dropped significantly during the war. Evidence from Polish authorities and displace persons agencies then established the population was c500,000 in the immediate postwar.

The historians do not argue hence they mostly perished in the Holocaust, they gather evidence to establish what happened. The evidence, from Polish and Nazi sources, witnesses and documents, is that they died from various causes, including murder.

That means the evidence of the pre, post and wartime population becomes circumstantial evidence. The evidence of the population drop corroborates the evidence of murders and other deaths.

The obviousness of the need for evidence, how to gather and establish what corroborates, is so clear to historians, that they do not think to have to "address" it. But, revisionists do, constantly, need evidencing explained to them and what evidence trumps their arguments.

[TlsMS93]

....

Oh, the post and pre-war statistics argument. Can you think of any serious problems with that problem? Or did no exterminationist feel compelled to deal with the serious issues of that sort of argument...?


The statistics argument goes like this: We guesstimate 3 million Jews in Poland prior to WW2... there were only a handful registered as Jews after WW2, hence they must mostly have 'perished' in the Holocaust. Now there is a long list of problems with that sort of argument, but I virtually see them addressed ever by exterminationists historians or those promoting their positions....

After the argument from incredulity and ignorance, strawman arguments are the next most commonly revisionist used logical fallacy.

Historians do not use arguments. They use evidence. Evidence from census and population records establishes that the 1939 Polish Jewish population was c3.3 million. Evidence is then provided, mainly from the Nazis, that the Polish Jewish population dropped significantly during the war. Evidence from Polish authorities and displace persons agencies then established the population was c500,000 in the immediate postwar.

The historians do not argue hence they mostly perished in the Holocaust, they gather evidence to establish what happened. The evidence, from Polish and Nazi sources, witnesses and documents, is that they died from various causes, including murder.

That means the evidence of the pre, post and wartime population becomes circumstantial evidence. The evidence of the population drop corroborates the evidence of murders and other deaths.

The obviousness of the need for evidence, how to gather and establish what corroborates, is so clear to historians, that they do not think to have to "address" it. But, revisionists do, constantly, need evidencing explained to them and what evidence trumps their arguments.

14 million Germans in Central and Eastern Europe were expelled. So they all died? Prove that they didn't? There was a census in Germany and it proves that they were welcomed there. And in the USSR, this transparency also occurred? The elephant in the room is always ignored.

[Stubble]

He's gonna call that a non sequitur.

Merry Christmas Eve all.

Personally, it is my opinion that missing and dead are two different things.

I'll pen a more thorough rebuttal later.

[Nessie]

....

Oh, the post and pre-war statistics argument. Can you think of any serious problems with that problem? Or did no exterminationist feel compelled to deal with the serious issues of that sort of argument...?


The statistics argument goes like this: We guesstimate 3 million Jews in Poland prior to WW2... there were only a handful registered as Jews after WW2, hence they must mostly have 'perished' in the Holocaust. Now there is a long list of problems with that sort of argument, but I virtually see them addressed ever by exterminationists historians or those promoting their positions....

After the argument from incredulity and ignorance, strawman arguments are the next most commonly revisionist used logical fallacy.

Historians do not use arguments. They use evidence. Evidence from census and population records establishes that the 1939 Polish Jewish population was c3.3 million. Evidence is then provided, mainly from the Nazis, that the Polish Jewish population dropped significantly during the war. Evidence from Polish authorities and displace persons agencies then established the population was c500,000 in the immediate postwar.

The historians do not argue hence they mostly perished in the Holocaust, they gather evidence to establish what happened. The evidence, from Polish and Nazi sources, witnesses and documents, is that they died from various causes, including murder.

That means the evidence of the pre, post and wartime population becomes circumstantial evidence. The evidence of the population drop corroborates the evidence of murders and other deaths.

The obviousness of the need for evidence, how to gather and establish what corroborates, is so clear to historians, that they do not think to have to "address" it. But, revisionists do, constantly, need evidencing explained to them and what evidence trumps their arguments.

14 million Germans in Central and Eastern Europe were expelled. So they all died? Prove that they didn't? There was a census in Germany and it proves that they were welcomed there. And in the USSR, this transparency also occurred? The elephant in the room is always ignored.

Again, the evidence tells us what happened. There is evidence of millions of displaced people, not just Germans, and they can be tracked, often returning home, or at least back to their country of origin, as confirmed by those countries. Regarding Germans, the East German leadership was particularly kean to not see their population skip to the West! The evidence of their existence, proves they did not die. People leave records.

What is missing from the millions of displaced persons, is millions of Jews. That is the elephant in the room. There is no evidence of millions of Jews in Nazi captivity in 1944, liberated in 1945 and as displace persons returning home or leaving Europe. The record trail for millions of Jews, ended during the war, at a few specific camps.

[Hektor]

....

14 million Germans in Central and Eastern Europe were expelled. So they all died? Prove that they didn't? There was a census in Germany and it proves that they were welcomed there. And in the USSR, this transparency also occurred? The elephant in the room is always ignored.

Yes, that would be the equivalent argument. Yet nobody suggested that ever. Just if a single country got a discrepancy in stats concerning Jews before and after major events, then that somehow proves that they must have been genocided....Special pleading and other fallacious arguments...

[Nessie]

....

14 million Germans in Central and Eastern Europe were expelled. So they all died? Prove that they didn't? There was a census in Germany and it proves that they were welcomed there. And in the USSR, this transparency also occurred? The elephant in the room is always ignored.

Yes, that would be the equivalent argument. Yet nobody suggested that ever. Just if a single country got a discrepancy in stats concerning Jews before and after major events, then that somehow proves that they must have been genocided....Special pleading and other fallacious arguments...

Proof that an event took place, is achieved with evidence. That evidence comes from various sources; witnesses, documents, archaeology, imagery, physical and circumstances. Argument is not evidence, an event cannot be argued to have happened, it has to be evidenced. It is rare one piece of evidence, on its own, is enough to prove an event. Normally, the event, or in the case of the Holocaust, numerous events, across many countries, over a period of years, is proved by multiple sources of evidence, that are independent of each other, and corroborate.

Historians do not use population statistics as proof of mass murder. At most, it is part of the circumstantial evidence, it is indirect evidence that acts as a verification for the direct evidence of mass killings.

[Stubble]

A pile of shaved hair and bins of used footwear are not proof of homicidal gassings, yet, this is shown to a great number of people as evidence.

With the lack of direct evidence of homicidal gassing, I find the claim dubious at best.

When we get to talking about the 'holocaust of bullets', it would behoove me to point out that anti terrorist operations and pogroms are also not evidence of a campaign to exterminate a group of people.

The 'evidence' for a systematic state sponsored mass killing program to exterminate the jewish people is some guys basically playing jenga with words and a bunch of propaganda presented as fact.

I will look further into belzec and into the pripyat marshes.

From where I'm standing right now, it doesn't look like the narrative I have been presented. It simply doesn't.

As horrible as the entire situation was should be bad enough, but, to misframe everything and to present it as it is put up currently is tantamount to blood libel against Germany. The difference is, Sait Simon of Trent likely earned his veneration...