Website of Holocaust Documents

[fireofice]

Hans from the HC blog created a website of various holocaust documents:

https://holocausthistory.site/

Unfortunately, it seems likely that he will only be publishing documents that favor his view on the holocaust and not anything against it. A site like this would be much more useful if it published all relevant documents without regard for whose "side" it helps. Nevertheless, it should be of some use to us regardless.

[Archie]

It looks like there's not much commentary with the documents, so I assume it's intended to just be a place to host the documents for reference. He has them transcribed, so it should be searchable which would be potentially quite useful.

I have had a few ideas along these lines. It would be good to build a database of testimonies (those published as books are often still under copyright, unfortunately) which would allow searching by keyword. You might even be able to run them through plagiarism software (or similar) to find common language in the testimonies. Often you know there are many testimonies that hit on similar cliches but when you need examples it can be hard to remember where you read it when you want to compile a list.

I hope somebody is preserving and digitizing Mattogno's document collection. (But like I just said in a recent thread: "Don't always assume that things are fine and that somebody is taking care of things.")

[Callafangers]

I do appreciate these efforts by those like Hans who put these documents out there for all to see and review for themselves. This brings us closer to truth, whichever side you currently sit on, as it gives us the opportunity to discuss the most relevant questions, patterns, findings, etc., with much less reliance on inference and assumption. There is no doubt Hans is following the "Nuremberg method" of only presenting the documentation he (and the Nuremberg prosecution) finds to be 'relevant', which is par for the course for all of Holocaust historiography, given that Revisionists have been directly and/or indirectly banned from accessing archives in-person, and with limited access even online, today.

The table remains tilted favoring the Holohoax narrative, which is why Hans takes full advantage of this condition, highlighting the quantity of documentation presented in support of a 'Holocaust', deflecting from or diminishing the conditions under which it was gathered (i.e. how much against his position has been susceptible to alteration, destruction, etc.), and of course minimizing the glaring lack of physical evidence in every single one of his largest and/or most shocking atrocity claims.

We should trust the documents because, you know, Soviet judges, 'judicial notice', Iron Curtains, vast patterns of crazy/absurd atrocity lies by [mostly Jewish] witnesses, false exhibits, CIA deception schemes... all of this spells "honesty".

It is a fact that certain 'Holocaust' documents have appeared in multiple versions, of which all but one are necessarily falsified. The fact that this has ever happened at all is a strong indication that all documents must be deemed suspect until proven otherwise. This is why Revisionists (and logic) push for physical evidence as the primary arbiter on 'what really happened' -- and why exterminationists push away from physical evidence, primarily.

When reviewing any documents of the 'Holocaust', you must ask yourself:

• Do we have a complete and clear chain-of-custody on this document (i.e. some clear understanding of who exactly had access to it at any point, over time)?
• Are there any clear indicators of who has actually written or held this document (e.g. verifiable signatures, distinct handwriting)?
• Is the style, format, structure, etc. of this document fully consistent with what is seen among others from the same alleged author or organization/unit?
• Does the document actually and necessarily say what exterminationists claim (i.e. unambiguous, clear language, rather than presumption or inference)?
• Does the context (time, location, persons involved, etc.) support the exterminationist interpretation, above all others (once all others have been thoroughly considered)?
• Are there other documents which could provide important context to this current one which are strangely missing from the record (or which have significant problems, themselves)?
• Are the claims in the document verifiable by any other means (prioritizing physical evidence, then related documentation, and so on)?

Remember, the best lies are those which are aligned with as much factual information as possible. Thus, a certain quantity of documentation presented by exterminationists which aligns with their narrative (or even challenges certain peripheral Revisionist interpretations by that time) is insufficient to indicate their position aligns with all available evidence, which is what the truth must necessarily do.

The fact that exterminationists have always preferred sticking to presentations of documents from archives they control, rather than 'exposing the truth' to the world with comprehensive and widely-publicized excavations and the like, is (and always has been) very telling, in itself.

[Callafangers]

I have literally just started perusing these documents individually and the very first one I click on to expand and read in more detail fascinates me:

1944-01-05 Letter from Globocnik to Himmler on Operation Reinhard (Aktion Reinhard): “the documents of all other works in this matter have already been destroyed”
Introduction

In a letter dated January 5, 1944, the Higher SS and Police Leader Odilo Globocnik, addressed Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler regarding the economic settlement of Operation Reinhardt (Aktion Reinhard). The letter was submitted in response to Himmler’s order from September 22, 1943, which requested its completion by December 31, 1943. He outlined the two-part structure of the accounting of the “economic part of Operation Reinhardt… a) accounting and delivery of confiscated valuables and b) accounting of values generated from labor”. Globocnik also stressed that “With the entire accounting of Reinhardt, it must also be noted that their documents must be destroyed as soon as possible since the documents of all other works in this matter have already been destroyed.”

Do you know why this document fascinates me? It is because it serves as a documented proof of the extent that documents regarding this economic operation (explicitly written here in an economic context) were destroyed as a general practice.

This highlights the absurdity of the 'where did they go?' position and argument so often put forth by exterminationists about Jews transited via AR camps. "Where did they go?" is a very silly question when we know where the documents tracking their destinations went: directly into a furnace.

Germany destroyed their records, as often did the Soviets, just as we have every reason to believe was also done by other Allied powers (of 'inconvenient' German records). And with this massive inferno of documentation taking place, 'exterminationists' (who still control the archives) have the audacity to tell Revisionists (who are largely prohibited from the archives) they must document 'where Jews went', else they were 'gassed'.

[Hans]

The purpose of this site is to offer high-quality resources on the subject. "High quality" means providing the most relevant sources, the best available photos or scans, and the most reliable references, ideally linked to archives containing the originals. I am open to including materials that Holocaust deniers may claim support their views. Feel free to submit any sources you believe would be valuable additions (though I have huge to-do list already).

[Callafangers]

The purpose of this site is to offer high-quality resources on the subject. "High quality" means providing the most relevant sources, the best available photos or scans, and the most reliable references, ideally linked to archives containing the originals. I am open to including materials that Holocaust deniers may claim support their views. Feel free to submit any sources you believe would be valuable additions (though I have huge to-do list already).

Hans, I think it would add a lot of value to your website if you answer each of these questions for each document you upload there:

Do we have a complete and clear chain-of-custody on this document (i.e. some clear understanding of who exactly had access to it at any point, over time)?
Are there any clear indicators of who has actually written or held this document (e.g. verifiable signatures, distinct handwriting)?
Is the style, format, structure, etc. of this document fully consistent with what is seen among others from the same alleged author or organization/unit?
Does the document actually and necessarily say what exterminationists claim (i.e. unambiguous, clear language, rather than presumption or inference)?
Does the context (time, location, persons involved, etc.) support the exterminationist interpretation, above all others (once all others have been thoroughly considered)?
Are there other documents which could provide important context to this current one which are strangely missing from the record (or which have significant problems, themselves)?
Are the claims in the document verifiable by any other means (prioritizing physical evidence, then related documentation, and so on)?

[fireofice]

The purpose of this site is to offer high-quality resources on the subject. "High quality" means providing the most relevant sources, the best available photos or scans, and the most reliable references, ideally linked to archives containing the originals. I am open to including materials that Holocaust deniers may claim support their views. Feel free to submit any sources you believe would be valuable additions (though I have huge to-do list already).

Thanks Hans, I appreciate your effort to be as comprehensive as possible. I understand you're busy as well, so no pressure and take as long as you need.

As for documents, the main sources to find such materials would be Holocaust Handbooks, other books at armreg, the Holocaust Encyclopedia, and the codoh website. Although I'm sure you're already aware of these. You have already written some articles criticizing the holocaust handbooks and the Encyclopedia after all.
https://holocausthandbooks.com/
https://armreg.co.uk/
https://holocaustencyclopedia.com/
https://codoh.com/

This obviously isn't complete, but just a short list of a few suggestions.

Goebbels March 7, 1942 entry about sending the Jews to the East then Madagascar.
https://holocaustencyclopedia.com/histo ... oseph/541/

Hans Frank's entry about how the Jews can't be shot or poisoned.
https://holocaustencyclopedia.com/plan- ... -hans/528/

Various statements by Hitler here:
https://holocaustencyclopedia.com/plan- ... adolf/571/

It's possible I'll add more later.

[Archie]

The purpose of this site is to offer high-quality resources on the subject. "High quality" means providing the most relevant sources, the best available photos or scans, and the most reliable references, ideally linked to archives containing the originals. I am open to including materials that Holocaust deniers may claim support their views. Feel free to submit any sources you believe would be valuable additions (though I have huge to-do list already).

In terms of scope, will you be focusing on wartime German documents? Or will you be doing other stuff like British Foreign Office as well?

Here are a few things you can throw on the wish-list (no obligation of course).

1) NO-2366 (Konrad Morgen's 1944 brief against Koch and Hoven)

There is a scan of this on the Harvard site but it's not great. Especially since it's quite long. If you have a better one, I would appreciate it.
https://archive.codohforum.com/20230609 ... =2&t=14838

2) The documents from December 1942 regarding the order to reduce the death rates in the camps. Some of this is in the NMT volumes. But not the first document from Dec 28. Reitlinger cites this as PS-2172 but that isn't published anywhere from what I can tell. Mattogno seems to refer to in HH #22, pg. 56 and gives a reference "AGK, NTN, 94, pp. 142-143" where AGK = Archiwum Głównej Komisji Badania Zbrodni Przeciwko Narodowi Polskiemu Instytutu Pamieci Narodowej

3) Das Schwartze Korps - Do you have anything from this?

4) Euthanasia script, director Herman Schweninger
I have seen the scan of this from the T1021 microfilm. But I think there needs to be more context. It would be good to know where this came from and what the surrounding documentation was.

[Hans]

2) The documents from December 1942 regarding the order to reduce the death rates in the camps. Some of this is in the NMT volumes. But not the first document from Dec 28. Reitlinger cites this as PS-2172 but that isn't published anywhere from what I can tell. Mattogno seems to refer to in HH #22, pg. 56 and gives a reference "AGK, NTN, 94, pp. 142-143" where AGK = Archiwum Głównej Komisji Badania Zbrodni Przeciwko Narodowi Polskiemu Instytutu Pamieci Narodowej

Mattogno’s reference points to a crude Soviet-typed copy, definitely not suitable for presentation. I found another citation to the Thuringian State Main Archive (Thüringische Hauptstaatsarchiv), which may be an original or perhaps a copy of the Soviet version, I sent them an inquiry.

[Hans]

4) Euthanasia script, director Herman Schweninger
I have seen the scan of this from the T1021 microfilm. But I think there needs to be more context. It would be good to know where this came from and what the surrounding documentation was.

That’s already on the to-do list. In my opinion, the images in T1021 are of sufficiently high quality (yes, they’re black and white, but a color photo or scan wouldn’t add much value in this case). The only downside is the absence of a signature on the original, but given the content, it’s a must-have nonetheless.