Chronology of the Holocaust

[bombsaway]

https://soviethistory.msu.edu/1943-2/ho ... f-ostland/

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/ka ... ation-camp

But, apparently I'm missing something.

Again, reading is welcome.

Yes from your first link, "evacuation to the east" for non-working Jews, this even more poorly evidenced as the Jews deported to the Russian East in Reinhardt. Actually you see the opposite. The non-working Jews, like children, where transportation records exist, were sent west, to Auschwitz.

Kaiserwald from your second link was a labor camp, no evidence of non-working Jews there.

The Ostland ghettos are kind of interesting to look at because actually you see lots of non-working Jews maintained there, but only for a time. They eventually "disappear", one way or another. It's best to zero in on specific ghettos and work camps, I don't like to make unevidenced general statements here, it's a possible route of inquiry for us, but will be a diversion from T4 and Poland.

[Stubble]

To be honest, this specifically isn't a point of history to which I have paid a whole lot of attention. There are so many other rabbit trails in so many other directions I have given time to. This specific line is not one that I have followed.

I will investigate this and chew on it for a while.

Suggested reading is welcome.

The connection to T4 is crucial for Holocaust historians, it's not just about the methods. It's a dry run in terms of secrecy and deception employed, that was particularly interesting for me, I don't know if this aspect has been remarked upon. Basically they were doing it to their own citizens so secrecy was a huge concern, even though it was perhaps more justifiable as euthanasia (I don't agree with this but many revisionists do). Revisionist don't question many of the T4 claims, perhaps the poison gas aspect of it, but that's pretty obvious when you look at the record, which we will do


Here's some links about secrecy

https://www.google.com/books/edition/De ... frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Hi ... frontcover

Kaiser's koffee kafe 'eh?

Yea, I've been meaning to look into aktion t4 as well to see how much exactly is true and how much is propaganda, but I swear to god if you start talking about flying unicorn gas vans...

Again, something happened. I have noticed not only is this used to 'illustrate a dry run' by orthodox historians, but it also affords other convenient plot devices, like 'bringing homicidal gas chambers back to German soil'.

See, you get to say, 'well, they weren't gassed at Bergen Belsan, no, see, what they did was, they signed them out and drove them to tiergarten street and gassed them there.'

From what I understand, and again, I do have more due diligence to tend to here specifically as well, but from what I understand, the 'euthanasia' program used lethal injection.

I know that's going to raise a ruckus. I know you are going to show me pieces of paper with rubber stamps. I know you are going to tell me to look into it closer. I know you are going to tell me gas Van's are real. I know you are going to call me a euthanasia program denier.

Point is, from what I can gather, the instrument was a syringe.

[bombsaway]

Point is, from what I can gather, the instrument was a syringe.

The use of gas is evidenced in documents and witnesses, revisionists don't have any contentions with the death tolls, eg the document stating 70,000 disinfected https://www.google.com/books/edition/Ha ... frontcover

So they agree with the death toll but not the method used (certainly injections were done so this not to say patients were exclusively gassed). Such practice seems ahistorical, and it seems to me to be ignoring evidence 'just cuz' . History is conducted on basis of evidence not what is convenient for a given narrative

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... arbon.html

AI analysis

Let me analyze these documents carefully and explain their significance regarding the gassing of patients:
Key pieces of evidence from these documents that indicate patient gassing:

Direct reference to gassing patients in Document #1 (Film script from 1942):
"In a hermetically sealed room the patient is exposed to the effects of carbon monoxide gas" and describes how the gas is "completely odourless and initially robs the patient of their powers of judgement, and then their consciousness."
The systematic ordering and tracking of carbon monoxide gas bottles between various Nazi organizations:


Multiple letters between IG Farben and the Criminal Technical Institute about CO gas bottle deliveries
Specific technical details about the bottles (40L capacity, pressure ratings)
Regular ordering patterns suggesting ongoing use
Use of code names and careful paperwork tracking


Connection to known Nazi euthanasia locations and personnel:


Friedrich Lorent was involved in the Nazi euthanasia program
Communication with Werner Blankenburg of Hitler's Chancellery, who was involved in the T4 program
Letters mention "Tiergartenstrasse 4" - the headquarters of the Nazi euthanasia program


Technical specifications matching known euthanasia facilities:


The bottles were designed for carbon monoxide specifically
The pressure and volume specifications match those found at killing centers
Use of "Jennerwein und Brenner" as owners on the bottles (documented code names)

These documents are significant because they provide direct documentary evidence of:

The intent to use CO gas for killing patients
The systematic nature of the gassing operation through detailed logistics
The involvement of major Nazi organizations (IG Farben, Criminal Technical Institute, Hitler's Chancellery)
The technical specifications of the actual killing method

This collection of documents helps establish the organized, bureaucratic nature of the Nazi euthanasia gassing program through original German records, rather than just post-war testimony.

[Stubble]

Point is, from what I can gather, the instrument was a syringe.

The use of gas is evidenced in documents and witnesses, revisionists don't have any contentions with the death tolls, eg the document stating 70,000 disinfected https://www.google.com/books/edition/Ha ... frontcover

So they agree with the death toll but not the method used (certainly injections were done so this not to say patients were exclusively gassed). Such practice seems ahistorical, and it seems to me to be ignoring evidence 'just cuz' . History is conducted on basis of evidence not what is convenient for a given narrative

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... arbon.html

AI analysis

Let me analyze these documents carefully and explain their significance regarding the gassing of patients:
Key pieces of evidence from these documents that indicate patient gassing:

Direct reference to gassing patients in Document #1 (Film script from 1942):
"In a hermetically sealed room the patient is exposed to the effects of carbon monoxide gas" and describes how the gas is "completely odourless and initially robs the patient of their powers of judgement, and then their consciousness."
The systematic ordering and tracking of carbon monoxide gas bottles between various Nazi organizations:


Multiple letters between IG Farben and the Criminal Technical Institute about CO gas bottle deliveries
Specific technical details about the bottles (40L capacity, pressure ratings)
Regular ordering patterns suggesting ongoing use
Use of code names and careful paperwork tracking


Connection to known Nazi euthanasia locations and personnel:


Friedrich Lorent was involved in the Nazi euthanasia program
Communication with Werner Blankenburg of Hitler's Chancellery, who was involved in the T4 program
Letters mention "Tiergartenstrasse 4" - the headquarters of the Nazi euthanasia program


Technical specifications matching known euthanasia facilities:


The bottles were designed for carbon monoxide specifically
The pressure and volume specifications match those found at killing centers
Use of "Jennerwein und Brenner" as owners on the bottles (documented code names)

These documents are significant because they provide direct documentary evidence of:

The intent to use CO gas for killing patients
The systematic nature of the gassing operation through detailed logistics
The involvement of major Nazi organizations (IG Farben, Criminal Technical Institute, Hitler's Chancellery)
The technical specifications of the actual killing method

This collection of documents helps establish the organized, bureaucratic nature of the Nazi euthanasia gassing program through original German records, rather than just post-war testimony.

No Sir, this sticking point is not 'just 'cause'.

The use of gas in this context, to me at least, doesn't make a damn lick of sense. Sure opens a hell of a lot of doors on the other side of the fence though.

So far as what everyone else thinks, that's as may be. As for me, I'm looking at this under a fucking microscope for as long as it takes to but together in my mind what happened.

And if I find a rusted out gas van in a basement on tiergarten street before they nail my coffin shut, I'll cut the damn thing up with a right angle disc grinder and eat the fucking thing on camera.

[bombsaway]

No Sir, this sticking point is not 'just 'cause'.

The use of gas in this context, to me at least, doesn't make a damn lick of sense. Sure opens a hell of a lot of doors on the other side of the fence though.

Why doesn't gas make sense but lethal injections do? It will seem like just cuz to me until you provide rationale here.

[Stubble]

No Sir, this sticking point is not 'just 'cause'.

The use of gas in this context, to me at least, doesn't make a damn lick of sense. Sure opens a hell of a lot of doors on the other side of the fence though.

Why doesn't gas make sense but lethal injections do? It will seem like just cuz to me until you provide rationale here.

Do we use gas at the animal shelter to euthanize puppies and kittens? Why not?

But, for some reason, it just makes perfect sense to use gas on people, right?

Now when we get to talking about that fucking submarine engine later, I'm going to build a stronger case, but for now, let's just say, I don't fucking believe it, and if you think that's contrarian, so be it.

At some point, I might end up having to eat a gas van on camera, so, you've got that at least.

[bombsaway]

Do we use gas at the animal shelter to euthanize puppies and kittens? Why not?

But, for some reason, it just makes perfect sense to use gas on people, right?

It is used for humans though, outside of Nazi Germany, so . . .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_chamber

[Stubble]

Do we use gas at the animal shelter to euthanize puppies and kittens? Why not?

But, for some reason, it just makes perfect sense to use gas on people, right?

It is used for humans though, outside of Nazi Germany, so . . .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_chamber

Not for euthanasia it's not....and why not.

Beyond that, what do you know about Hitler and poison gas?

You really think that guy, the devil incarnate, that ate vegetables because they grow back, that guy, just sat down one day and said 'you know what, instead of euthanizing these people with a syringe, we should kill them with poison gas'...

[bombsaway]

Not for euthanasia it's not....and why not.

Beyond that, what do you know about Hitler and poison gas?

You really think that guy, the devil incarnate, that ate vegetables because they grow back, that guy, just sat down one day and said 'you know what, instead of euthanizing these people with a syringe, we should kill them with poison gas'...

What's the relevance of use for involuntary euthanasia? Involuntary euthanasia as practiced in NS Germany is basically exclusive to NS Germany, so I wouldn't expect other examples. I might say the purpose is patients may be resistant to getting injections. I don't know here but it seems like a reasonable speculation.

There's no evidence Hitler was involved in any of the specifics, this is a strawman lol, though I can't tell because you're a pretty jokey guy.

[Stubble]

Not for euthanasia it's not....and why not.

Beyond that, what do you know about Hitler and poison gas?

You really think that guy, the devil incarnate, that ate vegetables because they grow back, that guy, just sat down one day and said 'you know what, instead of euthanizing these people with a syringe, we should kill them with poison gas'...

What's the relevance of use for involuntary euthanasia? Involuntary euthanasia as practiced in NS Germany is basically exclusive to NS Germany, so I wouldn't expect other examples. I might say the purpose is patients may be resistant to getting injections. I don't know here but it seems like a reasonable speculation.

There's no evidence Hitler was involved any of the specifics, this is a strawman lol, though I can't tell because you're a pretty jokey guy.

I'm serious as a fucking heart attack, there is no doubt in my mind if Adolf Hitler found out someone was killing people with gas, he would have had them hung by the neck with piano wire without giving them the courtesy of an adequate drop.

It was personal with that man and gas.

[bombsaway]

I'm serious as a fucking heart attack, there is no doubt in my mind if Adolf Hitler found out someone was killing people with gas, he would have had them hung by the neck with piano wire without giving them the courtesy of an adequate drop.

It was personal with that man and gas.

Is this your sole argument that poison gas wasn't used for euthanization? I think this is an entirely speculative point.

I looked for all mentions of poison gas by him and found this from mein kampf Volume 2.

English (James Murphy translation, 1939):
“If at the beginning of the War, and during the War, twelve or fifteen thousand of these Hebrew corrupters of the people had been held under poison gas, just as hundreds of thousands of our very best German workers from all walks of life and professions had to endure in the field, then the millions of sacrifices made at the front would not have been in vain. On the contrary, if twelve thousand of these malefactors had been eliminated in time, the lives of a million decent men, who would now be living to the general benefit, might have been saved.”

Original German (1943 edition):
“Wenn man zu Beginn und während des Krieges statt unserer deutschen Lanzenträger zehntausend dieser hebräischen Volksverderber unter Giftgas gehalten hätte, [...] dann wären nicht umsonst die Millionenopfer an der Front gefallen.”

So I don't know, I don't see it. You can take a comment like this as a joke of some kind, but I think if he was as serious as you say he was about no gas, he wouldn't even be joking about it.

From my perspective it seems like it would be hugely hypocritical for historians to discount all the evidence of poison gas being used for euthanasia by NS Germany, based on this, while believing whole heartedly in lethal injections.

So from my perspective, this all seems like 'just cuz'. It seems like you are very resistant to the idea of NS Germany using poison gas, this a strong bias, but if you're engaging in proper historical work you have to have grounding in evidence and non-speculative theories, otherwise biases will lead you astray.

[Stubble]

I'm serious as a fucking heart attack, there is no doubt in my mind if Adolf Hitler found out someone was killing people with gas, he would have had them hung by the neck with piano wire without giving them the courtesy of an adequate drop.

It was personal with that man and gas.

Is this your sole argument that poison gas wasn't used for euthanization? I think this is an entirely speculative point.

I looked for all mentions of poison gas by him and found this from mein kampf.

English (James Murphy translation, 1939):
“If at the beginning of the War, and during the War, twelve or fifteen thousand of these Hebrew corrupters of the people had been held under poison gas, just as hundreds of thousands of our very best German workers from all walks of life and professions had to endure in the field, then the millions of sacrifices made at the front would not have been in vain. On the contrary, if twelve thousand of these malefactors had been eliminated in time, the lives of a million decent men, who would now be living to the general benefit, might have been saved.”

Original German (1943 edition):
“Wenn man zu Beginn und während des Krieges statt unserer deutschen Lanzenträger zehntausend dieser hebräischen Volksverderber unter Giftgas gehalten hätte, [...] dann wären nicht umsonst die Millionenopfer an der Front gefallen.”

So I don't know, I don't see it. You can take a comment like this as a joke of some kind, but I think if he was as serious as you say he was about no gas, he wouldn't even be joking about it.

From my perspective it seems like it would be hugely hypocritical for historians to discount all the evidence of poison gas being used for euthanasia by NS Germany, based on this, while believing whole heartedly in lethal injections.

So from my perspective, this all seems like 'just cuz'. It seems like you are very resistant to the idea of NS Germany using poison gas, this a strong bias, but if you're engaging in proper historical work you have to have grounding in evidence and non-speculative theories, otherwise biases will lead you astray.

No sir, it's not 'my sole argument'. My first argument is that it doesn't make any damn sense. It is my last argument, at least for the evening however.

Hitler was not a fan of gas as a killing method. At all. He certainly had his quirks, and that was one of them.

Again, I've got more due diligence for tiergarten street. I need to cut the truth from the lie. Here we are 80+ years after the fact, and I'm tilting at this windmill. I assure you though, quixotic as it may be, I must do it. I've got a series of other homework assignments as well however, and this one specifically with t4, it always gets shuffled to the bottom of the pile without completion. Life, also, it seems, has a habit of never stopping.

Maybe this whole personal quest of mine is tilting at windmills, and I suppose that could be true. For me, personally, I need to separate the truth from the lie. In my defense, if it hadn't been for the lies in the first place, or if the truth were not so hidden about the war in general, I wouldn't be in this predicament.

/shrug

I'm going to go close my eyes for a while while time passes.

[bombsaway]

No sir, it's not 'my sole argument'. My first argument is that it doesn't make any damn sense. It is my last argument, at least for the evening however.

It seems like your argument was it didn't make sense because it didn't have a use profile, but it does. If it didn't make sense, as you say, I don't think it would been used so consistently, in so many different places. I think executions are more analogous than voluntary euthanasia, where lethal injections are used most consistently. You have to expand a lot here for me to follow your logic.

I appreciate you taking your time with this, it's good to give information time to digest and I hope you are finding some value in it, it seems like you are.

[Stubble]

Alright, last post for the night on my end, this time I'm sure of it.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/did-hitle ... s-warfare/

In this article, find that it is very important for Adolf Hitler to be not only the devil incarnate, but also a liar, because otherwise, he would have hung anybody who gassed someone with piano wire without giving them the courtesy of an adequate drop.

Now, no, this isn't my sole argument. A syringe full of air costs nothing and is perfectly suitable for euthanasia. Personally, I think the Germans used a cocktail, but, air would suffice in a pinch.

Gassing on the other hand, well, it introduces a series of problems. Then, as we move on, when we get to the cyanide gas, well, that's a myth.

We know that the euthanasia program was being propagandized. It is my opinion that the gas story was propaganda, as it was completely unnecessary. Just like the gas vans.

Sure drummed up unrest, fear and anger in the people though.

[Nessie]

Gassing is the least hands on and visible form of killing. It allows multiple people to be killed at the same time, with the fewest number of staff and there is an obvious deception, getting people to undress for a shower, which also removes a task for the staff. That there was a wholesale transfer of T4 staff to AR is a direct chronological link between the two operations. That Hitler signed the order allowing euthanasia of the disabled, chronologically links him to AR. There is also the chronological link between senior Nazis and doctors working on T4 and Action 13f14, the euthanasia of concentration camp prisoners, by gassing. Those actions in 1941 are directly linked to AR. It is the people who worked on the actions who provide the strongest link as they moved between Actions and AR camps.

I see most revisionists as accepting the evidence for T4, but then they refuse to accept the evidence for AR, which makes little sense. Why accept the use of bottled CO in a secured, as tight room inside a hospital, but not the construction of secured gas tight rooms and an engine to produce CO, in an AR camp? Or, a gas van at Chelmno? Indeed, T4, 13f14, AR and Chelmno were separate, but chronologically interlinked operations.