Wednesday, November 13, 2024

Still Waiting: Where Did The Jews "Evacuated to The East" Go?

It's been a while since I published Seriously Now, Where Did The Jews "Evacuated to The East" Go?  - and honestly, I consider it the clinical precise knockout for any so-called "transit camp hypothesis". So here is the question to those who believe the Nazis did not seize the opportunity of a brutal war to make their wet dreams come true. If I were you, I’d be asking a very serious question about those 2.3 million Jews who were "evacuated to the East" according to the Korherr report. Where did they go? 

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2020/02/seriously-now-where-did-jews-evacuated.html


Option A) They were shipped off to the swamps and forests of the Reichskommissariats Ostland and Ukraine. Just imagine - over 2 million "state enemies" casually relocated into hostile, partisan-infested territory, where German forces were chronically understaffed and barely holding control. What could possibly go wrong?

Or maybe...

Option B) Over 2 Million "dangerous elements" were cozily settled in the German army’s rear - right between unstable frontline, partisan warfare, hungry locals and overstretched supply lines. Doesn’t that just scream military brilliance?

By the way, the correct answer in the sample solution is "neither option is true." For further details, refer to the original post.

 

Monday, November 11, 2024

Review of Holocaust Handbooks Volume 23 - Carlo Mattogno, Chelmno (Part I - Method)

Part I - Method


Nearly two-thirds of the Holocaust Handbooks - based on page volume and principal authorship - can be credited to a single figure. If this weren't bad enough, it's none other than Carlo Mattogno, a prime example in the "How Not To Do History" playbook. It's truly comforting to know that the bulk of revisionist historiography rests on him.

Take Holocaust Handbook no. 23 on the Chełmno (Kulmhof) extermination camp, for instance. It's one of Mattogno's worst contributions, though the competition is fierce. In this work, a lack of proper historical method combines with near-total avoidance of research of the subject and unfortunate timing. 

Mattogno sums up his approach in a single statement, which begs to be quoted in its full beauty:

"As there are no documents which can be used as a basis of comparison, this means that for Chełmno the testimonies cannot constitute historical sources, so that there cannot even exist a genuine historiography for this camp."

(Mattogno, Chelmno, p.9)

There's more than half a million words of witness accounts, hundreds of wartime documents, photos, and archaeological studies on the camp. Among all events of mass violence in human history, the extermination camp Chełmno (Kulmhof) is relatively well documented. But why let overwhelming evidence get in the way?

Saturday, October 05, 2024

Lampshades and shrunken heads: an update

Somebody has called our attention to some relatively new items at the website of the Buchenwald Memorial, namely, a dossier about the artefacts allegedly made from human bodies.

Some notable new information:

- a small lampshade, thought to have been a fake for decades (after a forensic test claimed it could not have been made from human skin) has been retested in 2023 and was proven to have been produced from human skin after all;

- a piece of the lampshade in Pister's office has been found and ordered to be tested, the results are pending (our previous conclusion was that it's unlikely to be human skin, but the test results can refute it, of course);

- some barely known shrunken head imitation has finally been shown to be a fake in 2023 (this has nothing to do with the original shrunken heads found in Buchenwald, of course);

- a pocket knife case alleged to have been made from human skin has been ordered to be tested, with results pending;

- three tattooed skin pieces were tested, with the expert concluding two of them were of human origin, the third probably not (possibly pig skin), albeit the Memorial disagrees with the latter conclusion since this piece is also documented to have come from the camp pathology department; and indeed, pigs don't have tattoos in the first place.

The article "Nazi shrunken heads, human skin lampshades, human soap, textiles from human hair? Sorting out the truth from the legends" has been updated accordingly.

Friday, June 28, 2024

Reality Check and Cutting Through 'Uncensored and Unconstrained' Nonsense in CODOH's "Holocaust Encyclopedia": Burmeister, Walter

There is literally nothing that the denier's "Holocaust Encyclopedia" does not get wrong in the entry "Burmeister, Walter". 

Starting with the identity: 

 "Walter Burmeister (14 Nov. 1894 – 23 Feb. 1980), SS Oberscharführer"

Walter Burmeister born 14 November 1894 was a school teacher / inspector and not member of the Nazi paramilitary forces. He had no involvement with Kulmhof / Chełmno extermination camp.

Denazification file of Walter Burmeister (born 14 November 1894),
LA-NRW Abteilung Rheinland, NW 1039-B/3939

The Walter Burmeister associated with Kulmhof was born on 2 May 1906. This mistaken identity has been plagiarized from a Wikipedia entry that erroneously combined the biographies of two Burmeisters.  The notion that a school inspector would be drafted to drive a gas van should raise immediate red flags.

Saturday, June 22, 2024

Rebuttal of Alvarez of Gas Vans: Misreading the Fine Print

 Rebuttal of Alvarez on Gas Vans


 
Footnote Fun
 
For those who appreaciate deciphering these results of meticulous research, footnotes are an art form on its right. For others, like the Holocaust denier Santiago Alvarez, it's an opportunity to dig themselves deeper into misinformation. Case in point: he stumbled over the footnotes of the book Nazi Mass Murder by Kogon, Langbein, Rückerl (see Alvarez, The Gas Vans. A Critical Investigation, page 149).

Alvarez states that the former member of Sonderkommando Kulmhof Walter Burmeister was interrogated "after the war in Poland". However, here's the kicker: Burmeister was not interrogated by the Poles. He spent in British internement / near Flensburg after war:
 
"When I was wounded shortly before the end of the war (on May 2, 1945), I was admitted to a Flensburg hospital. As a former member of the SS – I was an Unterscharführer at the time – I was sent to the internment camp at Neuengamme. I was interned there for 2 1/2 years. After my release, I took up residence in the Flensburg district. For several years, I have been self-employed in Flensburg and own a plumbing and installation business here."
https://holocausthistory.site/testimony-of-burmeister-walter-on-kulmhof-extermination-camp/

This interrogation in question took place in West-Germany, not in the late 40s, but more than a full decade later, on 23 March 1961. This mistake now turns Alvarez' timeline into a muddled mess. 
 

Wednesday, April 24, 2024

Sonderkommando Lange shown on footage in 1939/1940?

Recently, a documentary about the Nazi extermination camp Kulmhof was shared (Polish and English) on YouTube. In addition to current footage of the former Nazi extermination camp, the documentary also features contemporary photographs from a permanent exhibition. At minute 1:43, a German officer and three soldiers with a motorcycle sidecar can be seen in front of a building.

 



The English caption reads:

"Members of the Sonderkommando Lange in front of one of the buildings of the psychiatric hospital in Dziekanka in Gniezno, December 1939 - January 1940."

The photograph is thus a unique piece of contemporary history, depicting the mobile Sonderkommando Lange (i.e. before Kulmhof) during an operation.

If it shows what the caption suggests...

Saturday, March 30, 2024

New Website holocausthistory.site Launched

I'm thrilled to announce the launch of a new website aimed at serving as a platform to display evidence of Nazi atrocities. While still under construction, visitors can catch a glimpse of its future direction. 

One of the advantages, albeit requiring additional time and effort, is its complete configurability and extensibility to accommodate any conceivable functionality that may emerge in the future. 

There is is no strict topic limitation, however, the start will be made on Kulmhof / Chelmno extermination camp and gas vans in general, as I have some high quality material on these topics that will give the site some outstanding content.

This website serves as a complementary resource to HolocaustControversies, focusing on documenting historical evidence without engaging in discussions regarding Holocaust denial.

Feel free to have a look at https://holocausthistory.site/.


Saturday, March 09, 2024

Carlo Mattogno and the Franke-Gricksch Report

Carlo Mattogno is an Italian Holocaust denier and a revisionist historian who is known for promoting discredited and fringe views regarding the Holocaust.
 
Statement by ChatGPT 3.5 on the question "who is Carlo Mattogno". Given such precision like a skilled archer hitting the bullseye, what can potentially go wrong to let some AI chatbot assist to write a blog posting. Maybe it can help me to understand why Mattogno writes "in general, I only consider in my books what has been published in paper form" (Mattogno, Deliveries of Coke, Wood and Zyklon B to Auschwitz: Neither Proof Nor Trace for the Holocaust, p. 107). 

Where I would have simply thought "well, maybe because you are afraid to face your critics", we get a more sophisticated analysis by the chatbot (one that only our own Nick Terry would consider inadequate and add minimum 10 - 15  more elaborated bullet points on the fly):

Mattogno's preference for critiques in paper form rather than internet articles or blogs could be influenced by several factors, although it's speculative to pinpoint his exact motivations. Some possible reasons might include:

  1. Credibility Concerns: Mattogno may perceive printed materials as having more credibility than online content. Traditional publishing in reputable journals or books often involves peer review and editorial scrutiny, which could be seen as a more rigorous validation process compared to self-published internet articles or blogs.

  2. Selective Engagement: Requiring critiques in a specific format may allow Mattogno to choose which criticisms to engage with. This could be a way of avoiding less formal or rigorously researched critiques that may be more common in online spaces.

  3. Appeal to Authority: Insisting on critiques in print form might be an attempt to lend an air of legitimacy to his work by associating it with established academic practices. This could be an effort to position his views as scholarly and deserving of consideration.

  4. Control of Narrative: Printed materials are typically less transient than online content. By limiting critiques to traditional publications, Mattogno might seek to control the narrative around his work, as print materials often have a more enduring presence and may be considered more carefully curated.

(Point 4. I don't understand even after translating into my native tongue German - and several times back and forth again hoping something gets added in translation.)

Mattogno's approach of "only considering in my books what has been published in paper form" led to an awkard situation. To most academics, especially those in the vast landscape of Holocaust history, he's seen as such a lackluster researcher that many refuse to dignify his work with a response. It's like setting up for a showdown, but no one bothers to show up. Some avoid it because they don't want to waste a bullet, while the other guy steers clear just because his choice of weapon is not met. Nobody? Well, not quite nobody! A small group of indomitable bloggers remains, standing at high noon armed with arguments as sharp as Gallic swords...or something. 

Anyway, rules are made to be broken. In 2019, I published Nazi Document on Mass Extermination of Jews in Auschwitz-Birkenau: The Franke-Gricksch Report and Mattogno explains that "in this case I make an exception". An exception to a rule that does not make sense in the first place. Most of Holocaust denial activities take place online. Almost all of Holocaust denial debunking takes place online (unless David Irving goes on trial). If we publish all blog postings with books on demand, then they are suddenly qualified to get considered? 

On the other hand, the rule reduces workload. Mattogno does not have to write another 50,000 pages which nobody except us will really read anyway. We do not have to produce a couple of postings. Win-Win. Personally, I think we should keep this working model. 

But now that there is an exeption, I just have to reply. It's almost pathological. My apologies, but I cannot let Mattogno's unsubstantiated assertions go unchallenged.

Friday, March 08, 2024

Kaltenbrunner on Aktion 1005: "...to avoid that another group of persons gains insight into the operation of the Sonderkommando."

On February 3, 1944, Eichmann's office dispatched a letter, signed by the head of the RSHA, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, to Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler. The letter requested a decision on how to handle the SS and police personnel responsible for the escape of Jewish prisoners from Sonderkommando 1005 at Fort Kauen.

Kaltenbrunner proposed "the matter should be concluded within our jurisdiction" instead of involving the SS and police court "to avoid another group of persons gaining insight into the operation of the Sonderkommando". 

By the way, I have yet to come across any explanation from Holocaust deniers regarding the true nature of Aktion 1005. It remains a top-secret operation involving the clearance of mass graves containing evidence of Nazi atrocities. 

If any deniers possess information on an alternative interpretation, I invite them to share their insights in the comments along with supporting evidence.

DOCUMENT