The CODOH Revisionist Forum

One thing to note is that there almost certainly was euthanasia carried out against mentally ill people in this hospital. Einsatzgruppen reports mention them being there and carrying out such actions. Although they describe the actions in question as the patients being shot and not gassed. Why they would want to lie about the method of killing is a mystery to me. It makes even less sense that they would lie about the killing method and then record it. And it was apparently recorded with the permission of Nebe, so it wasn't some secret recording someone was doing without permission. That makes absolutely no sense at all.

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... ng_23.html

They very well may have left some of their vehicles there, which would have made it easy for the Allies to stage a "gassing" scene.

Also Hans has helpfully given us a list of scenarios for the footage, all of which have drawbacks and "evidence" which conflicts with it. Some have more drawbacks than others, but they all have them. I think this along with the Einsatzgruppen reports describing a conflicting killing method is good evidence for the inauthenticity of the footage.

pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Sat Aug 09, 2025 8:18 pm First post here, but have been reading the HH series and orthodox books for a couple years now. So a total novice at this.

Hello pilgrimofdark, welcome to the forum! You're off to a solid start, I would say, e.g.:

pilgrimofdark wrote:The HC Blog link to the book with the "modern" photo isn't working, but here is a working link and the ISBN for the book. It's in Russian so I can't read it.

Working archive link: https://web.archive.org/web/20170102153 ... ____2_2010
ISBN: 9789856891123

I tried the HC blog link myself and kind of threw my hands up when it did not work, so I appreciate that you were able to locate this.

Here's my best effort at capturing additional detail/resolution of the image in question:

The local newspaper Mogilev Online took some photos of the area in 2023.
https://mogilev.online/2023/03/31/stari ... psihi.html

There is now a silhouette-shaped monument in place next to the window where the Nuremberg film takes place. I will resist the urge to post more photos here, but if you look at the close-ups of the monument you can match some of the brickwork up to the film. The bloggers might find this to be a better quality comparison than the book photo.

Looking into it more, it appears that the mainstream narrative does claim that at least some of them were shot, see Mattogno's Einsatzgruppen book on p. 315. So it may be that the Einsatzgruppen report only mentioned the shootings, but not the gassings for some reason. Still pretty strange. Although Hans seems to think that it's mentioning gassed victims as "shot" when he says: "in the light of the above cited testimonies this was apparently meant to obfuscate the actual killing method" which I find implausible. So it's possible we still have the same problem here.

Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Sun Aug 10, 2025 3:44 am The local newspaper Mogilev Online took some photos of the area in 2023.
https://mogilev.online/2023/03/31/stari ... psihi.html

Good find, much better images.

Updated Location in Wetzelrad's post below. Edited to remove my incorrect location.

Here's a citation to the book since the HC link is dead:
Litin, Alexander, and Ida Shenderovich, eds. History of Mogilev Jewry: Documents and People. Vol. 2. AmeliaPrint Mogilev, 2010. Originally published as История Могилевского Еврейства (Часть Вторая). https://амелияпринт.бел/book-hist-10.html.

This seems to be the timeline of the film itself.

Location where film was found: Berlin apartment of Arthur Nebe
Current location of film: lost/unknown

1945, summer: OSS agent Stuart Schulberg, a screenwriter and film producer, is dispatched to Europe by John Ford, Commander of the OSS Field Photographic Branch, to hunt for Nazi films for use at Nuremburg trial.
1945, November 29: Schulberg's film Nazi Concentration Camps is shown in courtroom, DOES NOT included Mogilev gassing.
1945, December 13: Schulberg's film The Nazi Plan is shown in courtroom, DOES NOT include Mogilev gassing.

1946: Schulberg and editor/OSS agent Joseph Zigman are engaged to make the official film about the Nuremberg trial.

1947: Schulberg is cutting together the film Nuremberg: Its Lesson for Today.
1947: Dr. Rudolf Goldschmidt, "a representative of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer in Germany" finds the film in the Berlin apartment of Arthur Nebe, where Goldschmidt is living.
1947: Goldschmidt turns it over to Schulberg.

1947: Or maybe agent Schulberg finds it himself: "Stuart Schulberg located a historic piece of film in the Berlin apartment of a Nazi SS officer named Nebe, showing the experimental gassing of human beings in a small outbuilding on the outskirts of Mogilev, Poland."

1948: Nuremberg: Its Lesson for Today is completed and shown in West Berlin. Mogilev gassing footage appears for first time. "Schulberg chose to include that footage in the film, even though it had not been shown at the trial."

All quotes from: https://www.nurembergfilm.org/the-films/

So an MGM representative hands a film reel over to an OSS film editor, scenes are spliced together somewhere along the line, then the original disappears.

pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Sun Aug 10, 2025 5:57 pm General Google Maps location:
Gu "Rnpts Psikhicheskogo Zdorov'ya" / ГУ "РНПЦ психического здоровья"

It's hard to tell exactly where the building from the film is/was located on the campus.

That's not it. It took some work but I found the exact building. Turns out the Russian web is better for finding Russian things. Yandex even has panorama photos of the building from the roads nearby, at multiple dates.

Mogilev Regional Psychiatric Hospital
Coordinates: 53.928359, 30.314022
https://yandex.com/maps/-/CHhOQN7d
https://maps.app.goo.gl/XQCF9rSgbhPSMN2J8

The gassing experiment portrayed in the film was on the south side of the building, at the fifth window. That wall faces ~4 degrees west of due south. You can see just from looking at the aerial that it's plausible for the sun to leave long shadows on the wall. But what about the film? I've drawn in the approximate location of the camera, the cars, and the light source.


The light source clearly comes from a westerly angle. Using this tool we can see what the sun position should be. This is for September 15th.


The numbers indicate the time of day at that angle. So the film may be compatible with an evening sun, but not a morning sun. According to Widmann this experiment took place in the morning, so this can't be it. But if anyone wants to check other testimonies for an indication of time of day that may be helpful.

Separately, I'm interested to hear any hypotheses on the arrangement of camera, light source, and man. They may be elevated, perhaps standing on a platform?

Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Mon Aug 11, 2025 3:22 am
The numbers indicate the time of day at that angle. So the film may be compatible with an evening sun, but not a morning sun. According to Widmann this experiment took place in the morning, so this can't be it. But if anyone wants to check other testimonies for an indication of time of day that may be helpful.

This is very significant. If I recall correctly, we already have Widmann saying it wasn't a brick building (he says it was wooden with white plaster and a straw roof), and now as you show he says it was in the morning which it simply could not have been. This is no small find -- the key witness testimony is explicitly and incontrovertibly at odds with what the film shows.

This is strong evidence of it being a propaganda film (as if this isn't already clear enough at face value ).

This fits the same pattern of other instances where Holocaust 'witnesses' get exposed -- they make a claim that they [or those incentivizing them to make the claim] did not realize at the time was testable, which as a result eventually gets exposed as false. We see it with the Birkenau 'chambers'. We've seen it with all of the absurd 'gassing' tales (surviving gassings, timelines, mechanisms) and other absurd murder methods (electrocution, trap floors, lime trains of death, steam chambers, brain bashers, etc.).

The truth, uh... finds a way.

I updated my previous post to remove the incorrect location. I spent half a day tracking down the wrong location

Here's an active link to the book HC had cited. Much faster to flip through it.

https://cdnpdf.com/pdf-54768-istorija-m ... enderovich

It has another photo of the brick wall and memorial (p. 197).

In 2009, next to the psychiatric hospital building, a memorial sign was installed in memory of the deceased patients. Sculptor Alexander Minkov

I colorized the photos, one basic and one high contrast.

Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Mon Aug 11, 2025 3:22 amSeparately, I'm interested to hear any hypotheses on the arrangement of camera, light source, and man. They may be elevated, perhaps standing on a platform?

The more I look at it, the less I'm convinced the "SS Officer" isn't some sort of prop. Its shoulders seem to be at the level of its temples, and the entire torso seems too long. Its hat seems to cover the entire head and neck down to the shoulders. Definitely standing on something or a very tall prop on which the clothes are placed.

The pipe shadows look darker than the SS officer, so there could be 2 light sources. One on the pipes towards the wall, a further one on the SS officer. The pipes running along the ground cast no equivalent shadows as those on the brick wall.

The shadows under the car are also not as elongated to the east as the pipes. The stakes in the ground cast no shadows at all.

pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Tue Aug 12, 2025 3:13 am I updated my previous post to remove the incorrect location. I spent half a day tracking down the wrong location

That's okay. We might need to look at some of these other psychiatric hospitals in the future, because there are many gassing allegations out there.

pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Tue Aug 12, 2025 3:13 am The more I look at it, the less I'm convinced the "SS Officer" isn't some sort of prop. Its shoulders seem to be at the level of its temples, and the entire torso seems too long. Its hat seems to cover the entire head and neck down to the shoulders. Definitely standing on something or a very tall prop on which the clothes are placed.

The pipe shadows look darker than the SS officer, so there could be 2 light sources. One on the pipes towards the wall, a further one on the SS officer. The pipes running along the ground cast no equivalent shadows as those on the brick wall.

The shadows under the car are also not as elongated to the east as the pipes. The stakes in the ground cast no shadows at all.

Well, part of the reason for the weird lighting may indeed be that sunlight is shining through trees. Some of the dark patches on the wall could be consistent with tree shade.

If it isn't sunlight, then the floodlight must be elevated, because the shadows of the pipes fall downward. It's only because of the shadow of the man that you (or at least I) got the impression of a ground level light source, pointing level or upward. In actuality it seems to be exclusively downward.

Possibly that pipe shadow under the car is from a section of pipe far to its left.

My biggest question is what casts that long, flat, diagonal shadow below the man's shadow? It's not obvious to me. Perhaps it will require 3D modelling to puzzle out.

pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Sat Aug 09, 2025 8:18 pm Mattogno writes about this [...]

The first thing to note is that the three scenes have no relation to each other. They do not contain any common detail that would indicate that they were taken at the same location or during the same time period. They are obviously completely different scenes that have been artificially spliced together. In order to create the impression of a continuity, the middle scene of the emaciated persons was inserted between two scenes with vehicles.

Then he will not be happy to be proven wrong on this point. From my analysis, the other two scenes from the Mogilev Psychiatric Hospital are from the same location, so they could plausibly be sequential. (This makes sense, of course. Even if the film is a kind of forgery, the forger would have no reason to stop at using the south wall of the building.)

Here is what the north wall of the building looks like, from the film and from 2023.


The quality of the film does not allow me to state conclusively that all the details here match up, but it makes sense. It's a lone entryway to a brick building of similar construction. It's the correct shape. The ledge where the brick sticks out at a diagonal is there. There seems to be 21 bricks from the ledge to the top of the door, in both. The heavy shadow indicates it's the north side of the building. The road continues around the building. Clearly the building has had a lot of work since then, but it matches as well as can be expected.

And here is a still from the scene of the cart in motion.


The fence here looks similar to the fence on the right in the previous scene (not pictured, see film). The wagon also looks to be the same, although the men on it are not. It could have been filmed from just east of the building.

[EDIT: The wagon, however, is travelling east, not west. This is the wrong direction to end up in front of the building, especially because the other hospital buildings all seem to be to the building's east. Placing this shot's location could be important.]

I think this demonstrates sufficiently that these three scenes were intended to go together. However, these three are presumably not sequential with the two preceding scenes, that of a meeting with Hitler and some random log buildings.

In connection with the above, let me quote a different point made by Mattogno.

It is not likely that, nineteen years after the alleged event, Widmann could have remembered the details he described in his 1960 testimony. The most obvious explanation is that he, too, was shown the photographic sequences of the film and did nothing more than put these images into his own words and pass them off as his memories, but this did not prevent him from making some mistakes.

The Einsatzgruppen in the Occupied Eastern Territories (2024) by Carlo Mattogno, p.317

I had exactly the same impression. When I read Widmann's testimony it seems as if he describes what is shown in the video and little to nothing else. Here are some example quotes, borrowing liberally from sources mentioned upthread.

On the afternoon of this day, Nebe had the window bricked up and two openings for the gas pipe prepared.
[separate interrogation]
The window of this room was walled up, two holes were spared to introduce the sockets for the gas-tubes.

The video does show a window that was bricked up with two gas pipes in it.

There were initially no patients in the laboratory. They were carted in shortly afterwards using a horse-drawn cart. I can only remember one such horse-drawn cart; there may have been room for about 5 or at most 6 patients on this horse-drawn cart, who were brought into the laboratory.
[separate interrogation]
Then the mentally ill were led into the room. I cannot tell how many. They were brought with a panje wagon, I estimate it had room for 5 to 8 persons.

Why yes, the video does have a scene showing exactly 5 people on a cart with room for 1-3 more. In another scene, 4 are visible on the cart. We cannot tell how many total there were by watching the video because they are not pictured.

With the help of a Russian male doctor and two female doctors a room was selected in the asylum [...]

The video shows a male and a female, described by the USHMM as "purportedly Soviet doctors". Could someone watching this extrapolate the existence of a third doctor?

Nebe subsequently had another hose connected to a personnel van belonging to the ordinary police.
[separate interrogation]
Thereupon a truck engine was connected to the second introduction socket and started up.

Again, two pipes connected to two vehicles is exactly what we see in the film.

As I already made clear, the building was covered with white plaster and had a foundation block.

The building was predominantly exposed brick, but we do see a section in the video where plastered brick appears. Did Widmann remember that detail and mistakenly apply it to the whole building?

Moreover, one of the two hoses we had brought with us was much thicker than the other one.

In the video, the section of pipe coming out of the back of the truck is noticably thinner than the pipe it runs in to. The hoses don't appear to be identical, either.

[...] a room was selected in the asylum, it was a small lab close to the entrance door. [...] Nebe observed the process in the room through a little window and noticed after 5 to 8 minutes that there was no effect.
[separate interrogation]
Nebe went into the building where one could see into the laboratory through a glass window in the door.

He offers only these two details about the arrangement of the inside of the building, which was not visible on film. An interior window and the room's proximity to the entrance. Possibly he was told about the "little window" from the interrogation of Andreas von Amburger who described it as "specially placed slits". Hans Metzner quotes him saying that in 1945.

So in net, Widmann says almost nothing about this event that isn't already visible in the 1947 propaganda film, plus one detail that could have been copied from a prior witness.

That was all in January 1960. It wasn't until 1962 that Widmann, in response to being shown stills from the film, denied their content by volunteering several new details. I realize it's a strange contradiction to say that he first recited the details he saw in the video, then denied the veracity of stills taken from that video, but that is how his testimony appears to me. He seems to have been a cooperative witness in 1960. Perhaps something changed by 1962.

An emaciated man gets off a cart, a blanket is put over him, end of clip.
What is the connection between the obligatory male nudity and the Rube Goldberg contraption ('gas chamber')?
Oh wait, now I get it, we just saw a gassing victim.

Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Tue Aug 12, 2025 3:51 am Well, part of the reason for the weird lighting may indeed be that sunlight is shining through trees. Some of the dark patches on the wall could be consistent with tree shade.

If it isn't sunlight, then the floodlight must be elevated, because the shadows of the pipes fall downward. It's only because of the shadow of the man that you (or at least I) got the impression of a ground level light source, pointing level or upward. In actuality it seems to be exclusively downward.

Possibly that pipe shadow under the car is from a section of pipe far to its left.

My biggest question is what casts that long, flat, diagonal shadow below the man's shadow? It's not obvious to me. Perhaps it will require 3D modelling to puzzle out.

This is how my brain is trying to explain what I'm seeing, based on what has been discussed so far.

Three light sources.

Sun
Time of day: early afternoon.
Position: High in the sky, slightly to south.
Comments: Shadow of car is cast directly underneath the car. Stakes in ground cast no elongated shadows. Diffuse shadows from tree branches/leaves on wall.

Left artificial light
Position: slightly above pipes, relatively close, possibly on stand on elevated platform.
Comments: dark, crisp shadows of pipes on wall. Is that the light source and stand to the far left? Right pipe shadow overlaps shadow of SS man.

Center artificial light
Position: slightly below and behind SS man, and slightly to the left.
Comments: shadow of SS man cast higher on wall. Clearer shadows on bottom left of SS man than upper right. Washed out light on bottom left partially blocked by platform/ramp. Perspective shift of object's shadow? SS man is not obstructing shadows cast by pipes.

Also, I found the Kultur auf Trümmern book HC cited regarding information about Rudolf Goldschmidt and there's some relevant information about him and contacts between American and Soviet film distribution. Maybe I'll AI translate some of that material because he is claimed to have discovered the Mogilev footage.