Update: The SS versus the Civil Administration in the area of Einsatzgruppe A

A key issue in the history of Nazi occupation policies in the USSR is identifying the point at which each SS unit was instructed, or allowed to, kill all Jewish men, women and children in its area. In the Critique here, I noted the document of Einsatzgruppe A leader Stahlecker of 6.8.41 [see VEJ 7, pp. 511-514 (Dok. 181)] that took issue with the guidelines issued by Der Reichskommissar für das Ostland, Lohse, which Stahlecker felt did not allow the SS to exploit "the radical possibilities for dealing with the Jewish Problem" that had "emerged for the first time in the Ostland," in light of "general orders from above that cannot be discussed in writing." I have also blogged this year on disputes between EK 3 leader Jaeger and the civil administrator Gewecke in Schaulen regarding the desire of the SS to kill Jewish workers and their families. Below I discuss a further important document, namely Operational Situation Report [hereafter EM] 53, and specifically an important passage written by Einsatzgruppe A (presumably Stahlecker).

Nazi Policy as Revealed in Axis Propaganda Sources

This list is not meant to be exhaustive; it complements my other lists, taken from other types of sources, here and here. However, even if these open sources were the only information we had on Nazi policy, they would be overwhelming proof to any objective observer that a genocide was taking place.

29.6.41: "many Jews in Belgrade were shot yesterday for sabotage" [JTA citing Belgrade radio].

2.10.41: "the Jewish problem should be solved without any sentimentality [Voelkischer Beobachter, cited in JTA]."

16.11.41: Goebbels: "every Jew is our enemy, irrespective of the fact whether he is rotting in a ghetto in Poland, or continues his parasitic existence in Germany, or conducts war propaganda in New York and Washington [Das Reich, cited in JTA]." Full text here.

The Rothstein canard

In a vain attempt to find a single Jewish prisoner transited through Belzec, Treblinka, Chelmno or Sobibor to the "Russian East" the Holocaust deniers turned to the electronic Holocaust names databases. In "Gassed at Treblinka and deceased in Minsk" Jean-Marie Boisdefeu claimed to have found one such person:

Finally, a taker

Yesterday I received the following e-mail message, in response to my 2011 Challenge to Supporters of the Revisionist Transit Camp Theory:

I, Jake O'connor, hereby accept your Challenge to Supporters of the Revisionist Transit Camp Theory as stated on the Holocaust Controversies blog site under [url of Challenge blog], and undertake to, within 365 days after this date, provide proof of at least one person identified by name who was transited through either of the camps Chełmno, Bełżec, Sobibór or Treblinka to the Nazi-occupied Soviet territories in 1942/43, in the manner more precisely described in the Challenge, to the Arbiter(s) chosen by me from among those mentioned in the Challenge. You will be immediately notified of the Arbiter(s) identity and the proof submitted to such Arbiter(s).»
I do not have a website/blog and have not engaged in online discussion about the holocaust before, but I can answer this challenge and as soon as they activate my RODOH account I'll post about it.

So Mr. Jake O’Connor thinks he can accomplish what no "Revisionist", including our usual customers Mattogno and Graf, has been able to accomplish in almost 72 years since the end of World War II. He thinks he can provide proof that at least one named Jewish individual was transported to Chełmno, Bełżec, Sobibór or Treblinka in the years 1942 or 1943, and then taken from there to a destination in the Reichskommissariat Ostland, the Reichskommissariat Ukraine or the Soviet territories under German military administration. He has undertaken to, until 25.03.2018, submit such proof to the Arbiter(s) chosen by him from among those mentioned in the Challenge.

Well then, good luck, Jake. And please send me the link to that RODOH post you’re announcing.

Update, 28.03.2017: Jake O'Connor's submission and my reply thereto can be read here.

Public Announcements in France in 1942

On 27.9.42, Vichy leader Pierre Laval told Paris radio that Jews who entered France before 1936 and "who wish to emigrate to places other than Germany" would be denied exit visas, even though they may already hold visas to countries such as the USA. His reasons were "because they might take up arms against Germany, which would be contrary to the Armistice agreement," and "there is a suspicion that they would work against the interests of the French Government as soon as they reached another country" (JTA, 28.9.42, and Jewish News, 14, 27.10.42, p.1). The second reason echoed that given by Lecca here for the change in Nazi policy regarding Jewish emigration.

On 22.10.42, the Nazi agency Transocean stated that Jewish children were to be held as hostages: "Vichy may not allow these children to leave unless inimical propaganda against France and Germany ceases in America (JTA, 23.10.42)." However, it was already known that Jewish children were being deported separately from their parents (JTA, 28.9.42).

"...it would be better if Jewish families did not leave Europe"

The quote in the title comes from Radu Lecca, who was interviewed for a Nazi newspaper, Der Neue Tag, published in Prague on January 3, 1942. Lecca confirms that the Nazis no longer wish to expel Jews from Europe because they would spread propaganda. Resettlement had thus been abandoned as Nazi policy. The quote was reproduced in Jewish News, No. 7; 19 May, 1942. Readers can click the scan below to enlarge the image.

Why Did The Einsatzgruppen Reports Give False Reasons for Shooting Jews?

The reasons given in the Einsatzgruppen Reports [hereafter EMs] are sometimes used by Mattogno et al to deny that Jews were shot "because they were Jews." For example, on page 226 of this screed, Mattogno responds to the extermination remarks of Thomas in EM 133 [here] by stating that "The extermination was therefore motivated by the fact that the Jews were considered a "breeding ground [Nährboden]" and "germ bearers [Bakterienträger]” of Bolshevism." Mattogno simply takes Nazi excuses and pretexts at face value. Below I show a rational method for analyzing such pretexts.

Gassing Statements made by Robert Barth of Einsatzgruppe D in 1943 and 1946

For several years, I have been intrigued by the revelation by Richard Breitman [Official Secrets, here, p.190] that gas van information may have been given to the British as early as November 1943 by an Austrian Einsatzgruppe D officer named Robert Barth, even though Barth did not give the testimony used at Nuremberg [NO-3663] until the Autumn of 1946. This would be powerful independent evidence of gas vans because it could not be accused of being contaminated by sources that did not surface until 1944-1945. Hans' excellent series on gas vans prompted me to dig further. I conclude that it is highly probable that Barth did discuss gas vans with the British before the end of 1943.

Heydrich's Plans in early October, 1941

We cannot say for certain whether Hitler had decided by early October 1941 to exterminate Europe's Jews in death camps. We can be sure, however, that Heydrich wished to exterminate them on German-controlled soil. Here's how. On October 2, 1941, Heydrich ruled out the resettlement to the East of Czechs who were hostile to Germany because "they would form a leadership class in the East, which would be directed against us [denn aussiedeln kann ich sie nicht, weil sie drüben im Osten eine Führerschicht bilden würden, die sich gegen uns richtet]." He stated that these people should be "put up against the wall [sie endgültig an die Wand zu stellen]." However, two days later, Heydrich met Meyer, Leibbrandt, Schlotterer and Ehlich and moaned that demands for Jewish labour would prevent a "total resettlement of the Jews out of the territories occupied by us [NO-1020, in VEJ 7, p.153: "Dies würde aber den Plan einer totalen Aussiedlung der Juden aus den von uns besetzten Gebieten zunichte machen]."

These statements can only be reconciled if Heydrich's "totalen Aussiedlung der Juden aus den von uns besetzten Gebieten zunichte machen" is a euphemism for killing the Jews within the territories occupied by the Germans, because the statement of two days earlier had ruled out the resettlement of hostile populations in colonies in the East, and Jews were intrinsically a hostile population in the Nazi worldview, as shown by Heydrich's statement at Wannsee that any remnant of Jewry had to be "treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history)." This is also confirmed by the fact that Heydrich blocked the emigration of Spanish Jews residing in France to Spanish Morocco because, in Heydrich's words, "these Jews would also be too much out of the direct reach of the measures for a basic solution to the Jewish question to be enacted after the war [see Browning's footnote 17 here]." Heydrich's plan was therefore clear; the only question is whether or not Hitler shared it by that date; and if not, how long did it take for Hitler to give the green light?

Evidence on the Babi Yar Massacre 29 & 30 September 1941: Testimonies

Part I: Contemporary Sources
German Sources (20 documents + 13 photographs)
Diaries of Local Population (2)
Swiss (3), Soviet (6), Polish (1), US Sources (1)

Part II: Testimonies 

German Military, Paramilitary & Ukrainian Police Forces (29)

German Civilians (1)

Local Population and Prisoners (32)

NB: Many of the Russian testimonies have not been translated into English, however a decent understanding is obtained from machine translators such as google translate.