British Intelligence - war-time knowledge

[Archie]

Now. Bombsaway. This guy is on record multiple times in May 1944 saying that six million Jews HAD died. Past tense. With earlier examples that say X million Jews in peril or whatever you can maybe wriggle out of it by saying it's generic and not that relevant. But do you honestly not see the problem here? Do you really not see why it's a problem for them to be using the number in the middle of the war?

A reasonable estimate based on pre-war populations was 6-7 million Jews under Nazi control. And they believed (as did British intelligence) that they were all being killed. So that's where you get the number.

But some people did think 5 million were being killed, eg this from 1943 https://www.google.com/books/edition/Se ... frontcover IF you spent as much time looking for 6 million as 5 million, and found much more that would be one thing. But there's nothing systematic about what you're doing, it is silliness.

Hey someone used 6 million except talking about survivors? Any connection there?

https://www.nytimes.com/1918/10/18/arch ... -help.html

Bombs, can you explain the basis for your conclusion that British intelligence was convinced of the Holocaust during the war?

[Nessie]

David Irving made claims about what British Intelligence knew.

"Irving's evidence of the truth of his claims

https://uniset.ca/other/cs5/2000AERD523.html

"8.34 When asked in cross-examination whether it is his position that the existence of gas chambers was propaganda devised by British intelligence, Irving replied that British intelligence had repeatedly procured the broadcasting into Nazi Germany of information about the gas chambers at a time when they were not operating. He went to claim that there is any amount of evidence that the gas chambers were invented by British propaganda.

8.35 Invited to accept that the source for the information about the gas chambers was a document sent to London by Riegner of the Geneva office of the World Jewish Congress in August 1942, Irving responded that British intelligence had been making claims about cyanide gas chambers before that document arrived. He did, however, accept that the message from Geneva was authentic. In any event, said Irving, it was clear from associated Foreign Office memoranda that the credibility of the claim in Regnier's message was doubted. Irving added that it has in any event been established that the person who Regnier claimed was the source of the information did not exist or at least was not a credible source. But the principal basis upon which Irving sought to justify his claim that the gas chambers were a mendacious invention by British propaganda was that about one year later, a senior Foreign Office official named Cavendish-Bentinck, commented on a report of Poles being put to death in gas chambers that he did not believe that there is any evidence that this was being done. Despite that, according to Irving British Intelligence put out through the BBC from late 1941 stories about the liquidation of Jews in the gas chambers. Irving was unable to produce transcripts of the broadcasts. He referred to diary entries by Mann and Ringelblum but agreed that he was unable to make the link between those entries referring to BBC broadcasts and British Intelligence."

There is a regularly posted video on X, of a Cavendish-Bentinck and quoting him saying in 1943, that;



“We’ve had a good run for our money with this gas chamber story we have been putting about, but don’t we run the risk that eventually we are going to be found out?”

So, British Intelligence knew about gassings in 1942, but were far from convinced they were true.

[Nessie]

The earliest British intelligence reports of mass killings were from 1941;

https://archive.ph/VQvlG#selection-467.0-471.101

"Then came the summer of 1941 and the German invasion of the Soviet Union. Now the content of the coded messages used by the German commanders of the SS and police units that followed the front-line troops was shockingly different from routine intelligence about troop movements: July 18 -- ''1,153 Jewish looters shot;'' Aug. 27 -- ''Regiment South shot 914 Jews; the special action staff with police battalion 320 shot 4,200 Jews;'' Aug. 31 -- ''2,200 Jews shot.''
Those messages, many historians now believe, were a shorthand about the beginnings of the Holocaust."

"...282 pages of radio intercepts from SS and police commanders in Belarus and Ukraine were among the documents. Taken together with earlier British research, he said, they establish that the British knew that Jews were being targeted for atrocities as early as September 1941 -- more than a year before Britain or the United States publicly acknowledged the plight of the European Jews."

A study on what the intelligence services picked up about the Holocaust, during the war, here. It is 172 pages long.

https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/document ... opping.pdf

[bombsaway]

Now. Bombsaway. This guy is on record multiple times in May 1944 saying that six million Jews HAD died. Past tense. With earlier examples that say X million Jews in peril or whatever you can maybe wriggle out of it by saying it's generic and not that relevant. But do you honestly not see the problem here? Do you really not see why it's a problem for them to be using the number in the middle of the war?

A reasonable estimate based on pre-war populations was 6-7 million Jews under Nazi control. And they believed (as did British intelligence) that they were all being killed. So that's where you get the number.

But some people did think 5 million were being killed, eg this from 1943 https://www.google.com/books/edition/Se ... frontcover IF you spent as much time looking for 6 million as 5 million, and found much more that would be one thing. But there's nothing systematic about what you're doing, it is silliness.

Hey someone used 6 million except talking about survivors? Any connection there?

https://www.nytimes.com/1918/10/18/arch ... -help.html

Bombs, can you explain the basis for your conclusion that British intelligence was convinced of the Holocaust during the war?

I'll amend the bolded statement to this, that was a mistake:

"On the other hand we do know that the Germans are out to destroy Jews of any age unless they are fit for manual labour."
https://fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Cavend ... tinck.html

I'd say uniform mass killing of non-employable Jews counts as Holocaust. They were getting this information from radio intercepts of SS police killing activities in the USSR as well as the "eavesdropped recordings" you can read about in Soldaten and Tapping Hitler's Generals. There was comparatively little gas chamber evidence (and no direct evidence I believe!)at this time which is why Bentinck didn't want to say that was happening.

Document 86
CSDIC (UK) SR-REPORT, SRGG 209 [TNA, WO 208/4165]
GEORG NEUFFER–Generalmajor (GOC, 20th Flak Division)–Captured 9
May 43 in Tunisia.
GERHARD BASSENGE–Generalmajor (GOC, Air Defences
Tunis/Bizerta)–Captured 9 May 43 in Tunisia.
Information received: 10 July 43
NEUFFER: What will they say when they find our graves in POLAND?
The OGPU213 can’t have done anything worse than that. I myself have
seen a convey at LUDOWICE(?)214 near MINSK; I must say it was
frightful, a horrible sight. There were lorries full of men, women and
children–quite small children. It is ghastly, this picture. The women, the
little children who were, of course, absolutely unsuspecting–frightful! Of
course, I didn’t watch while they were being murdered. German police
stood about with tommy-guns, and–do you know what they had there?
Lithuanians, or fellows like that, in the brown uniform,215 did it. The
German Jews were also sent to the MINSK district, and were gradually
killed off, so far as they survived the other treatment. By treatment I
mean housing and food and so on. It was done like this: when Jews were
taken away from FRANKFURT–they were only notified immediately
beforehand–they were allowed to take only a little with them, a hundred
marks, otherwise nothing, and then the hundred marks would be
demanded from them at the station to pay the fare.216 But these things are
so well known–if that ever gets known in the world at large–that’s why I
was so surprised that we got so frightfully worked up over the KATYN
case!217
BASSENGE: Yes.
NEUFFER: For that’s a trifle in comparison to what we have done there.

[borjastick]

In both Bletchley Park and the country mansion the Brits held the captured German officers in, which was itself bugged with recording equipment, not one reference to mass murder or gassing or the extermination of dem joos.

[Nessie]

In both Bletchley Park and the country mansion the Brits held the captured German officers in, which was itself bugged with recording equipment, not one reference to mass murder or gassing or the extermination of dem joos.

Were any of those officers in AR, or the Einsatzgruppen?

[Nessie]

German POWs, secretly recorded by British intelligence, admitted to mass shootings;

https://www.thejc.com/news/secret-recor ... d-vgbt31l1

"Nazi prisoners describe how Jews were forced to dig their own mass graves before firing squads would arrive and shoot them"

Senior Nazis were secretly recorded at Trent Park.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/arti ... caust.html

"Yet these unguarded, seemingly-private conversations do not protect the honour of the German officer corps, since it is obvious that almost all of them knew of the Holocaust, right to the top of the High Command.

General Von Thoma, who commanded a panzer division in Russia before being captured at El Alamein, told the pro-Nazi General Ludwig Cruwell in January 1943: "I am actually ashamed to be an officer."

He related how he had spoken to the Army Chief of Staff, General Franz Halder, about the atrocities, only to be told: "That's a political matter, that's nothing to do with me."

So he put his protests in writing to Army commanderin-chief General Walther von Brauchitz, who said: "Do you want me to take it further? If you want me to take it further, anything might happen."

Thoma said of those who believed the Fuhrer was ignorant of what was happening: "Of course, he knows all about it. Secretly, he's delighted. Of course, people can't make a row - they would simply be arrested and beaten if they did."

The kind of things that were happening to Poles, Russians and especially Jews were common currency in the 'private' conversations at Trent Park.

In December 1944, Generalleutnant Heinrich Kittel, commander of 462 Volksgrenadier division, told General-major Paul von Felbert, commandant of Feldkommandantur 560: "The things I've experienced! In Latvia, near Dvinsk, there were mass executions of Jews carried out by the SS.

"There were about 15 SS men and perhaps 60 Latvians, known to be the most brutal people in the world. I was lying in bed one Sunday morning when I kept hearing two salvos followed by small-arms fire."

On investigating, Kittel found "men, women and children - they were counted off and stripped naked. The executioners first laid all the clothes in one pile. Then 20 women had to take up their position - naked - on the edge of the trench. They were shot and fell down into it."

"How was it done?" asked Felbert.

"They faced the trench," Kittel replied. "And then 20 Latvians came up behind and simply fired once through the back of their heads, and they fell down forwards into the trench like ninepins."

Kittel gave an order forbidding such executions from taking place "outside, where people can look on. If you shoot people in the wood or somewhere where no one can see," he told the SS men, "that's your own affair. But I absolutely forbid another day's shooting here. We draw our drinking water from deep springs; we're getting nothing but corpse water there."

"What did they do to the children?" asked Felbert. Kittel - who sounded "very excited" at this point, according to the transcriber - answered: "They seized three-year-old children by the hair, held them up and shot them with a pistol and then threw them in. I saw that for myself. One could watch it."

Another general, General-leutnant Hans Schaeffer, commander of the 244 Infantry division, asked Kittel: "Did they weep? Have the people any idea what's in store for them?"

"They know perfectly well," replied Kittel. "They are apathetic. I'm not sensitive myself, but such things turn my stomach."

Later on, however, Kittel mused: "If one were to destroy all the Jews of the world simultaneously, there wouldn't remain a single accuser," and "Those Jews are the pest of the east!"

"What happened to the young, pretty girls?" asked Felbert, when the subject turned to concentration camps. "Were they formed into a harem?"

"I didn't bother about that," Kittel answered. "I only found that they did become more reasonable. The women question is a very shady chapter. You've no idea what mean and stupid things are done."

In another conversation later that same day, Kittel told Schaefer about Auschwitz: "In Upper Silesia, they simply slaughtered the people systematically. They were gassed in a big hall. There's the greatest secrecy about all those things."

Later still, he said: "I'm going to hold my tongue about what I do know of these things." He little suspected that his every word was being recorded, transcribed and translated.

The following February, General major Johannes Bruhn, Commander of the 533 Volksgrenadier Division, discussed the Holocaust with Felbert, saying: "I must assume, after all I have read about the Fuhrer, that he knew all about it."

"Of course he knew all about it," replied Felbert. "He's the man who is responsible. He even discussed it with Himmler."

"Yes," said Bruhn. "That man doesn't care a hoot if your relatives are annihilated."

"That man doesn't care a damn," agreed Felbert.

The following month, Bruhn - one of the few generals to emerge with credit from these conversations - said he believed that Germany did not deserve victory any longer, "after the amount of human blood we've shed knowingly and as a result of our delusions and blood lust. We've deserved our fate."

In reply, General-leutnant Fritz von Broich said: "We shot women as if they had been cattle. There was a large quarry where 10,000 men, women and children were shot. They were still lying in the quarry. We drove out on purpose to see it. It was the most bestial thing I ever saw."

It was then that General von Choltitz, the "saviour" of Paris, spoke of the time he was in the Crimea and was told by the CO of the airfield from where he was flying: "Good Lord, I'm not supposed to tell, but they've been shooting Jews here for days now." Choltitz estimated that 36,000 Jews from Sebastapol alone were shot.

"Let me tell you," General Count Edwin von Rothkirch und Trach told General Bernhard Ramcke on March 13, 1945, "the gassings are by no means the worst."

"What happened?" asked Ramke. "To start with, people dug their own graves, then the firing squad arrived with tommy-guns and shot them down. Many of them weren't dead, and a layer of earth was shovelled in between. They had packers there who packed the bodies in, because they fell in too soon. The SS did that.

"I knew an SS leader there quite well, and he said: 'Would you like to photograph a shooting? They are always shot in the morning - but if you like, we still have some and we can shoot them in the afternoon sometime.'"

Three days later, at Trent Park, Colonel Dr Friedrich Von der Heydte told Colonel Eberhard Wildermuth about the Theresienstadt concentration camp in Czechoslovakia: "Half a million people have been put to death there for certain. I know that all the Jews from Bavaria were taken there. Yet the camp never became over-crowded. They gassed mental defectives, too."

"Yes, I know," replied Wildermuth. "I got to know that for a fact in the case of Nuremberg - my brother is a doctor at an institution there. The people knew where they were being taken."

"We must uphold the principle of only having carried out orders," suggested General-leutnant Ferdinand Heim. "We must stick to that principle if we are to create a more or less effective defence."

As the war progressed, the Trent Park internees divided between Nazis and anti-Nazis. Some of the Nazis' fanaticism was undimmed by the way the war was going.

"What do I care about Good Friday?" asked General-major Wilhelm Ullersperger, who had been captured during the Ardennes offensive in the last days of 1944. "Because a filthy Jew was hanged umpteen years ago?"

General-major Walther Bruns recalled the attitude of the members of the firing squad who killed thousands of Jews in Riga: "All those cynical remarks! If only I had seen those tommy-gunners, who were relieved every hour because of over-exertion, carry out their task with distaste, but not with nasty remarks like: 'Here comes a Jewish beauty!'

"I can still see it all in my memory - a pretty woman in a flame-coloured chemise. Talk about keeping the race pure. At Riga, they first slept with them and then shot them to prevent them from talking."

Meanwhile, Colonel Erwin Josting of the Luftwaffe recalled an Austrian friend being asked by a lieutenant: "Would you like to watch? An amusing show is going on down here; umpteen Jews are being killed off."

Josting continued: "The barn was full of women and children. Petrol was poured over them and they were burned alive. You can't imagine what their screams were like."

[bombsaway]

In both Bletchley Park and the country mansion the Brits held the captured German officers in, which was itself bugged with recording equipment, not one reference to mass murder or gassing or the extermination of dem joos.

I don't know how you could possibly read the conversation I just posted and not see any reference to mass murder of Jews.

[borjastick]

Complete bollocks from both of you. A per normal.

Shooting a few jews here and there who were almost certainly partisans and fair game under the rules at the time does not make a holocaust.

Fireside chats about what some people thought he may or may not have known is tittle tattle at best.

You two need to grow up by about ten years or more.

You aren't winning and er will never win.

There were never any millions mass murdered and the sooner you grow a pair, even one each, and accept it the better off you will be.

You need to start preparing for ICC court case against the israelis committing war crimes and atrocities. Soon you'll forget about the fake holocaust and be more concerned with the future or lack of for israel. As the meme shows Nazi flag/israeli flag 'Different falg, same old shit'.

[Nessie]

Complete bollocks from both of you. A per normal.

We are providing evidence that the British knew about shootings in 1941 and gassings in 1942, but they were disinclined to believe the reports of gassing and mass murders, until, by 1945, ample evidence had been gathered to prove millions of arrested Jews had been killed.

Shooting a few jews here and there who were almost certainly partisans and fair game under the rules at the time does not make a holocaust.

In 1941, the shootings did not make a Holocaust. You fail to deal with why the Nazis listed Jews separately from partisans and they would declare areas Jew free, but not partisan free.

Fireside chats about what some people thought he may or may not have known is tittle tattle at best.

It is testimonial evidence of Nazis admitting to what they knew.

You two need to grow up by about ten years or more.

You aren't winning and er will never win.

There were never any millions mass murdered and the sooner you grow a pair, even one each, and accept it the better off you will be.

You need to start preparing for ICC court case against the israelis committing war crimes and atrocities. Soon you'll forget about the fake holocaust and be more concerned with the future or lack of for israel. As the meme shows Nazi flag/israeli flag 'Different falg, same old shit'.

Have you got any evidence to contribute to the debate?

[Archie]

It seems we have some contradictions here that we will need to resolve.

1) International Zionist groups not only "knew" about the Holocaust, they were able to calculate, as early as 1944, that six million Jews had been killed.

2) British and American diplomatic and intelligence circles do not seem to been convinced, with many being openly skeptical of Jewish claims of extermination. Even the more sympathetic reactions were usually vague.

3) Jews themselves were unaware to the extermination plan throughout the war and continued to fall for the fake shower trick for over three years. This would imply that although the Zionist orgs "knew" in 1942, they were unable to inform their own people. This includes the Hungarian Jews in 1944.

[Archie]

So, British Intelligence knew about gassings in 1942, but were far from convinced they were true.

Nessie, this is an odd statement coming from a renowned expert in philosophy and logic such as yourself. As you well know, in epistemology, "knowledge" is most often defined as something like "justified, true belief." If they did not think it was true, then it is strange to call it knowledge. Perhaps you could say that they should have known and were too blind to see, but I think an objective review of the "information" available to them leaves little mystery as to why these Jewish atrocity stories were so often disregarded.

Did the British "know" about human corpse factories in 1917?

[HansHill]

So, British Intelligence knew about gassings in 1942, but were far from convinced they were true.

renowned expert

I would close my account and never come back.

[Archie]

I'll amend the bolded statement to this, that was a mistake:

"On the other hand we do know that the Germans are out to destroy Jews of any age unless they are fit for manual labour."
https://fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Cavend ... tinck.html

That's cherry-picked. That's the only sentence in the entire document that sounds favorable to your position. The rest of it doesn't.

Now, as far as this one sentence, today with our Holocaust goggles on "destroy Jews" might sound like he "knew" about the Holocaust. But within the same document, it seems this guy simultaneously did not believe the gas chamber stories and in fact admits to amplifying gas chamber stories he knew to be false for propaganda purposes. So then he obviously cannot be saying here that he thinks the German government was executing Jews by the millions in gas chambers.

What then does he mean by "destroy the Jews"? Most likely this is a much more general statement about harsh conditions, perhaps some degree of violence, but more probably just an indifference to Jewish welfare and survival. This goes back to the problems I have mentioned before about the common approach to documents on the Holocaust side. For instance, many people might reasonably say right now that the Israelis are "out to destroy" the Palestinians, but there is a range of possibilities for what statements like this might mean and only with the Holocaust do we interpret this sort of thing to mean literal execution of nearly all Jews.

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=340

Here is how I would describe Holocaust hermeneutics, in brief.

• Take the Holocaust story, more or less, as given (the six million, the final solution, the gas chambers, etc). All documents are to be interpreted a priori under the assumption that this underlying story is true.
• Create strong priors among the public using psychological warfare techniques ("priming")
• Cherry-pick through all the documents (millions of pages) looking for favored "keywords" (e.g. ausrottung) that activate the priming.

In criminal law, there are protections in the rules of evidence to limit the use of prejudicial material. This often overlaps with "character evidence," i.e., where the prosecution attacks your character in general rather than present specific proof of an actual crime. Judges will often exclude evidence that is deemed to be overly prejudicial if the risk of biasing the jury would be too high relative to the probative value. This is to force the prosecution to provide evidence for the actual crime alleged rather just trying to generally bias the jury against the defendant.

Quite a few of the common Holocaust prooftexts rely on highly prejudicial language and word associations.

For the many documents that contradict the story, they have a few escape tricks that make the story essentially unfalsifiable.

• Assuming code language and euphemism (but NEVER hyperbole)
• Playing games with the timeline (see for example discussions of the final solution or the Birkenau crematoria construction)
• Playing games with who was or wasn't in the loop
• Drawing distinctions between groups of Jews. Labor vs unemployable is a big one. German Jews vs Eastern Jews is another.
• Positing ever more disorganized and improvised scenarios to explain why there is so much missing documentation

[Nessie]

So, British Intelligence knew about gassings in 1942, but were far from convinced they were true.

Nessie, this is an odd statement coming from a renowned expert in philosophy and logic such as yourself. As you well know, in epistemology, "knowledge" is most often defined as something like "justified, true belief." If they did not think it was true, then it is strange to call it knowledge. Perhaps you could say that they should have known and were too blind to see, but I think an objective review of the "information" available to them leaves little mystery as to why these Jewish atrocity stories were so often disregarded.

Did the British "know" about human corpse factories in 1917?

That you are reduced to nit picking, shows you have little to contribute.

So, British Intelligence were aware of the reports of gassings in 1942, but were far from convinced they were true.