The Question of Conspiracy

[Stubble]

I beg your pardon? Go consult a book about majdanek published before 1970 even. I'm not even going to push it to the 1980's.

Now, read it.

Now, how did that become 'history'.

This, should be, case in point. You firmly deny the importance of this issue, and likely any other I bring up.

[bombsaway]

I beg your pardon? Go consult a book about majdanek published before 1970 even. I'm not even going to push it to the 1980's.

Now, read it.

Now, how did that become 'history'.

This, should be, case in point. You firmly deny the importance of this issue, and likely any other I bring up.

I have. Hilberg's Destruction is the foundational text from 61 and it gave a death toll of 50k for Majdanek. Reitlinger's 'Final Solution' from 1953, considered the first in depth historical study, gave a similar number.

The faulty methodologies employed by the Soviets in establishing death tolls are important to look at, but they're not evidence of the conspiracy you believe in. They also announced millions of Germans had died in Barbarossa.

Katyn is your best comparison for a 'fabricated' event, but even here they didn't fabricate documents, successfully and suppress and coerce witnesses, and they didn't even destroy their own documentation concerning their culpability for the event.

[Stubble]

'Faulty methodology'. That's rich.

[bombsaway]

'Faulty methodology'. That's rich.

That's not speculation on my part. They justified the 1.5 mil figure -- based on shoes being found there, and cremation capacity. Witness testimony and documents don't support the 1.5 mil figure. You should find it strange that they support the orthodox figures for Chelmno/Reinhard camps/Auschwitz. Majdanek actually provides circumstantial evidence for "no conspiracy", based on the lack of fabricated evidence.

[Stubble]

What?

Dude.

I'm not even sure where to start unpacking this.

[Archie]

I beg your pardon? Go consult a book about majdanek published before 1970 even. I'm not even going to push it to the 1980's.

Now, read it.

Now, how did that become 'history'.

This, should be, case in point. You firmly deny the importance of this issue, and likely any other I bring up.

I have. Hilberg's Destruction is the foundational text from 61 and it gave a death toll of 50k for Majdanek. Reitlinger's 'Final Solution' from 1953, considered the first in depth historical study, gave a similar number.

The faulty methodologies employed by the Soviets in establishing death tolls are important to look at, but they're not evidence of the conspiracy you believe in. They also announced millions of Germans had died in Barbarossa.

Katyn is your best comparison for a 'fabricated' event, but even here they didn't fabricate documents, successfully and suppress and coerce witnesses, and they didn't even destroy their own documentation concerning their culpability for the event.

The main reason that Hilberg and Reitlinger had lower numbers is because they focused on Jewish deportation statistics and realized that the Soviet numbers were totally impossible. The Soviets and Poles had a somewhat broader narrative with millions of Gentiles also being exterminated, but H & R were very Jew-focused.

"Faulty methodology" LMAO

The Soviet numbers for ALL the camps they liberated were wildly inflated. Auschwitz, Majdanek, Treblinka, Chelmno. 840K at Sachsenhausen. It's a consistent pattern and the reason for it is obviously that it was a war and they were lying for propaganda purposes. You are getting hung (or more precisely pretending to get hung up) on the BS rationale they give for their numbers in their own reports, but that is giving them way too much credit.

At Madjanek we absolutely do have evidence of a Soviet hoax. The "gas chambers" at the Bath & Disinfection are a complete joke. As is the Zyklon chute over the laundry room photo which they distributed to the Western press.

Katyn is your best comparison for a 'fabricated' event, but even here they didn't fabricate documents, successfully and suppress and coerce witnesses

Yes they did. Go read USSR-54 and the accounts of the Soviet Katyn commission in the newspapers in early 1944. They claimed to have found documents on the bodies dated AFTER Barbarossa which would point to German guilt. These must have been forgeries. And there were many false witness statements collected, some of whom had earlier been witnesses for the Germans but who were somehow persuaded to do a complete 180.

[Stubble]

I beg your pardon? Go consult a book about majdanek published before 1970 even. I'm not even going to push it to the 1980's.

Now, read it.

Now, how did that become 'history'.

This, should be, case in point. You firmly deny the importance of this issue, and likely any other I bring up.

I have. Hilberg's Destruction is the foundational text from 61 and it gave a death toll of 50k for Majdanek. Reitlinger's 'Final Solution' from 1953, considered the first in depth historical study, gave a similar number.

The faulty methodologies employed by the Soviets in establishing death tolls are important to look at, but they're not evidence of the conspiracy you believe in. They also announced millions of Germans had died in Barbarossa.

Katyn is your best comparison for a 'fabricated' event, but even here they didn't fabricate documents, successfully and suppress and coerce witnesses, and they didn't even destroy their own documentation concerning their culpability for the event.

The main reason that Hilberg and Reitlinger had lower numbers is because they focused on Jewish deportation statistics and realized that the Soviet numbers were totally impossible. The Soviets and Poles had a somewhat broader narrative with millions of Gentiles also being exterminated, but H & R were very Jew-focused.

"Faulty methodology" LMAO

The Soviet numbers for ALL the camps they liberated were wildly inflated. Auschwitz, Majdanek, Treblinka, Chelmno. 840K at Sachsenhausen. It's a consistent pattern and the reason for it is obviously that it was a war and they were lying for propaganda purposes. You are getting hung (or more precisely pretending to get hung up) on the BS rationale they give for their numbers in their own reports, but that is giving them way too much credit.

At Madjanek we absolutely do have evidence of a Soviet hoax. The "gas chambers" at the Bath & Disinfection are a complete joke. As is the Zyklon chute over the laundry room photo which they distributed to the Western press.

Katyn is your best comparison for a 'fabricated' event, but even here they didn't fabricate documents, successfully and suppress and coerce witnesses

Yes they did. Go read USSR-54 and the accounts of the Soviet Katyn commission in the newspapers in early 1944. They claimed to have found documents on the bodies dated AFTER Barbarossa which would point to German guilt. These must have been forgeries. And there were many false witness statements collected, some of whom had earlier been witnesses for the Germans but who were somehow persuaded to do a complete 180.

In defense of the Soviets (a phrase I never thought I would in my life utter), that particular ventilation shaft did in fact exist.

Of course, they misrepresented it in a photograph, but, it was there.

The rest of the holes, not so much.

[bombsaway]

Yes they did. Go read USSR-54 and the accounts of the Soviet Katyn commission in the newspapers in early 1944. They claimed to have found documents on the bodies dated AFTER Barbarossa which would point to German guilt. These must have been forgeries. And there were many false witness statements collected, some of whom had earlier been witnesses for the Germans but who were somehow persuaded to do a complete 180.

Did they coerce any eyewitness testimonies? Quote some. And present the forged documents as well. I'll wait.

[Archie]

Yes they did. Go read USSR-54 and the accounts of the Soviet Katyn commission in the newspapers in early 1944. They claimed to have found documents on the bodies dated AFTER Barbarossa which would point to German guilt. These must have been forgeries. And there were many false witness statements collected, some of whom had earlier been witnesses for the Germans but who were somehow persuaded to do a complete 180.

Did they coerce any eyewitness testimonies? Quote some. And present the forged documents as well. I'll wait.

The Soviet Katyn commission was an outright hoax.

From W.H. Lawrence's account of the Katyn commission,

The Soviets presented documentary evidence that the prisoners had been alive after March, 1940, and let us read a letter from a Polish prisoner, Stanislaus Kuchinski, written but never mailed to his wife in Warsaw on June 20, 1941, just two days before the German invasion of the Soviet Union began. (NYT, 27 Jan 1944, pg. 3)

These documents must necessarily have been forgeries.

As for witnesses, USSR-54 says they collected statements from over 100 witnesses (perjurers). Here is a translation of the full report. You should read it.
https://jrbooksonline.com/cwporter/k1.htm

"In the mill, during the second half of March 1943, I once talked to a German driver who spoke a little Russian. After it came out that he was carrying meal for a division in the village of Savenky and would be coming back to Smolensk the next day, I asked him to take him with me in order that I might have the opportunity to buy fats. In so doing, I was calculating that riding in a German truck would eliminate the risk of my being stopped at a checkpoint.
"The German driver agreed for a sum of money. We left the same day at about 10:00 P.M., taking the Smolensk-Vitebsk highway.
"There were two of us in the truck: me and the German driver. It was a bright night; the moon was shining, but the fog hindered visibility. About 2223 kilometres from Smolensk, there was a curve at a destroyed bridge with a rather steep embankment. We left the highway and travelled down the embankment; then a truck suddenly appeared out of the fog. Either our brakes were not very good or the driver was not very experienced; we could not brake the truck, and, since the road was rather narrow, we had a collision with the truck coming in the opposite direction. The collision was not a bad one, since the driver of the oncoming truck succeeded in swerving out of the way, as a result only scraping the sides of both trucks. The oncoming truck turned over however, and fell down the embankment. Our truck stayed where it was. The driver and I got out of the driver's seat and went to the overturned truck.
"I immediately smelt a very strong stench of corpses, which probably came from the truck. I came closer, and saw that the truck was loaded with a cargo covered with tarpaulins and tied down with ropes. The ropes broke due to the fall, and part of the cargo fell out. It was a cruel cargo.
"They were human corpses in military uniforms. As I remember, 67 men, including a German driver and 2 Germans armed with machine guns, stood around the truck. The others were Russian prisoners of war, since they spoke Russian and were clothed correspondingly.
"The Germans began to curse my driver, then they tried to get the truck back up onto its wheels again. After two minutes, another two trucks arrived at the scene of the accident and stopped there. From these trucks came a group of Germans and Russian prisoners of war, a total of 10 men, and came up to us. Using our combined strength, we began to lift the truck. I took the opportunity and quietly asked one of the Russian prisoners of war: 'What's that?' Just as quietly, he answered: 'I don't know how many nights we've already spent transporting corpses into the Katyn forest'."
"The overturned truck was still not upright when a German non-commissioned officer approached me and my driver, and ordered us to drive on immediately.
"Since we had not suffered any real damage during the collision, my driver turned the truck back onto the highway and then drove on.
"As we drove past the two trucks that had arrived later and were covered with tarpaulins, I smelt a fearful stench of corpses."

SUKHACHEV's testimony is confirmed by the testimony of Yegorov Vladimir Afanasievich, who served in the police during the occupation.

Yegorow testified that, at the end of March and the early days of April 1943, as he guarded the bridges in the line of duty at the intersection of the Moscow-Minsk and Smolensk-Vitebsk highways, he repeatedly observed large trucks covered with tarpaulins, exuding the stench of corpses, passing in the direction of Smolensk. Several persons, some of who carried weapons and doubtlessly were German, always sat in the truck cabins and on top of the tarpaulins.

Witnesses inventing elaborate but false stories like the above were either coerced or were willful participants in the Soviet hoax. I would also suggest you read the parts in the report about the witness Kiselev who gave statements to the Germans that incriminated the Soviets but then recanted in Soviet custody and gave false testimony in the Soviets' favor. There is no innocuous way for you to spin that.

[Archie]

Btw, what are you even trying to argue here, bombs? You don't think the Germans did Katyn, do you? If they didn't, then the Soviet report MUST be a fraud. They did not "accidentally" frame the Germans for something they themselves did. I don't understand what you are arguing.

[bombsaway]

Btw, what are you even trying to argue here, bombs? You don't think the Germans did Katyn, do you? If they didn't, then the Soviet report MUST be a fraud. They did not "accidentally" frame the Germans for something they themselves did. I don't understand what you are arguing.

Compare the evidence of for Nazi's doing Katyn to the evidence for extermination of Jews at Chelmno. Which is stronger? Provide an approximate factor for the strength of evidence of one to another, eg the evidence for Chelmno is 2 times as strong. This is subjective of course, but useful as a thought experiment for you. Probably you won't answer this but I'll wait for a little and then run it through Grok. I think this will make my point clear.

[Archie]

Btw, what are you even trying to argue here, bombs? You don't think the Germans did Katyn, do you? If they didn't, then the Soviet report MUST be a fraud. They did not "accidentally" frame the Germans for something they themselves did. I don't understand what you are arguing.

Compare the evidence of for Nazi's doing Katyn to the evidence for extermination of Jews at Chelmno. Which is stronger? Provide an approximate factor for the strength of evidence of one to another, eg the evidence for Chelmno is 2 times as strong. This is subjective of course, but useful as a thought experiment for you. Probably you won't answer this but I'll wait for a little and then run it through Grok. I think this will make my point clear.

With Katyn, there's no question about the killings themselves. The dispute is/was solely over who did it. That's a separate issue. At Katyn, we have

1) A full excavation, with a precise body count. Many individual victims identified.
2) Dozens of photos indicating the exact cause of death (bullet to the back of the head)

There's nothing like this for Chelmno. The evidence for Katyn is vastly stronger.

[bombsaway]

Btw, what are you even trying to argue here, bombs? You don't think the Germans did Katyn, do you? If they didn't, then the Soviet report MUST be a fraud. They did not "accidentally" frame the Germans for something they themselves did. I don't understand what you are arguing.

Compare the evidence of for Nazi's doing Katyn to the evidence for extermination of Jews at Chelmno. Which is stronger? Provide an approximate factor for the strength of evidence of one to another, eg the evidence for Chelmno is 2 times as strong. This is subjective of course, but useful as a thought experiment for you. Probably you won't answer this but I'll wait for a little and then run it through Grok. I think this will make my point clear.

With Katyn, there's no question about the killings themselves. The dispute is/was solely over who did it. That's a separate issue. At Katyn, we have

1) A full excavation, with a precise body count. Many individual victims identified.
2) Dozens of photos indicating the exact cause of death (bullet to the back of the head)

There's nothing like this for Chelmno. The evidence for Katyn is vastly stronger.

Specifically, since we're assessing the USSR's ability to fabricate evidence, narrow this to just the witnesses and documents. If you don't want to that's fine, but it's what I meant. I was asking specifically about the case for Nazi culpability, not whether Poles were shot there or not.

[Stubble]

Some food for thought.

[Archie]

Compare the evidence of for Nazi's doing Katyn to the evidence for extermination of Jews at Chelmno. Which is stronger? Provide an approximate factor for the strength of evidence of one to another, eg the evidence for Chelmno is 2 times as strong. This is subjective of course, but useful as a thought experiment for you. Probably you won't answer this but I'll wait for a little and then run it through Grok. I think this will make my point clear.

With Katyn, there's no question about the killings themselves. The dispute is/was solely over who did it. That's a separate issue. At Katyn, we have

1) A full excavation, with a precise body count. Many individual victims identified.
2) Dozens of photos indicating the exact cause of death (bullet to the back of the head)

There's nothing like this for Chelmno. The evidence for Katyn is vastly stronger.

Specifically, since we're assessing the USSR's ability to fabricate evidence, narrow this to just the witnesses and documents. If you don't want to that's fine, but it's what I meant. I was asking specifically about the case for Nazi culpability, not whether Poles were shot there or not.

Your stipulations are contrived, as usual.

And I already did post about false documents and testimonies at Katyn. You were going to explain to us how all of that happened innocently.

The Soviets also lied about the forensics, claiming that the condition of the bodies indicated that they could not have died in the spring of 1940.