Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

For more adversarial interactions
Online
User avatar
Callafangers
Administrator
Posts: 1322
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2024 6:25 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by Callafangers »

SanityCheck wrote:Bombsaway has already noted how this 'security logic' and excuse-making totally undermines the resettlement thesis - if a closed ghetto could continue to be a security threat, then essentially no pattern of relocating Jews made the slightest sense from a security perspective, much less moving the Jews of Poland a few hundred miles east into Soviet territory. Killing them would be the only certain security solution.
Since you've just been spanked regarding Pinsk as a supposed 'harmless ghetto targeted totally without military rationale', we move onto the question of whether resettlement itself remained feasible.

Again, you hand-wave critical context: the fact of proximity to partisan activity (Pripyat marshes), scale of threat/liability (clearly substantial at Pinsk ghetto, as just shown), and the actual security (or security-feasibility) of this ghetto itself, which obviously was compromised given multiple escapes and effective coordination of terrorist plots.

You have also dodged another critical detail: the Pinsk ghetto executions do not say "resettlement" -- they say "executions". Why?
Forensics lack both graves and chambers—the liar's ink stains history's page.
S
SanityCheck
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2024 8:26 pm

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by SanityCheck »

Callafangers wrote: Sun Sep 20, 2026 9:20 pm
SanityCheck wrote:Bombsaway has already noted how this 'security logic' and excuse-making totally undermines the resettlement thesis - if a closed ghetto could continue to be a security threat, then essentially no pattern of relocating Jews made the slightest sense from a security perspective, much less moving the Jews of Poland a few hundred miles east into Soviet territory. Killing them would be the only certain security solution.
Since you've just been spanked regarding Pinsk as a supposed 'harmless ghetto targeted totally without military rationale', we move onto the question of whether resettlement itself remained feasible.

Again, you hand-wave critical context: the fact of proximity to partisan activity (Pripyat marshes), scale of threat/liability (clearly substantial at Pinsk ghetto, as just shown), and the actual security (or security-feasibility) of this ghetto itself, which obviously was compromised given multiple escapes and effective coordination of terrorist plots.

You have also dodged another critical detail: the Pinsk ghetto executions do not say "resettlement" -- they say "executions". Why?
Nothing you've posted indicates any connection between the internal Jewish ghetto resistance plans (which mirror similar groups in Warsaw, Bialystok, Wilno and other big ghettos) and the actual Soviet partisan movement in the Polesie in autumn 1942.

Himmler's order claimed to have received 'news' that the Pinsk ghetto was 'the centre for the movement of gangs in the region':
The Headquarters of the Wehrmacht informs me that the region of Brest-Gomel suffers increasingly from gang attacks, which bring into question the need for additional troops.

On the basis of the news, which has been reported to me, one must regard in the Ghetto of Pinsk the center for the movement of the gangs in the region of the Pripet marshes.
There is no trace of this 'news' in the German files. Himmler's files on antipartisan warfare do include correspondence about protecting the Brest-Gomel rail line, and later search-and-destroy operations mounted by the SS-Police to locate partisan units, but nothing on a link between the Pinsk ghetto and the actually existing Soviet partisan movement at this time. There isn't anything in the Meldungen aus den besetzten Ostgebieten, despite extensive reporting on the growth of Soviet partisan activities and other Soviet resistance activities (parachutists, espionage networks rolled up, urban undergrounds, etc).

Himmler trumped up a putative threat to override Wehrmacht objections to eliminating the entire workforce of the Pinsk ghetto made at the start of the autumn 1942. He did so not long after parrying similar preserve-the-workforce objections from the Wehrmacht in the Government-General (which cost General von Gienanth his job), and after economic objections to deporting the remaining Reich Jews employed in factory work were overridden.

'Security' was the trump card. But it wasn't played everywhere; the fact that Himmler had to issue a direct, explicit order was unusual for the 'second sweep'.

Meanwhile, in July 1942, Himmler told Berger this much more simple line:

“The occupied Eastern territories will be freed of Jews (judenfrei). The Führer has laid upon my shoulders the execution of this very difficult order. Moreover, no one can relieve me of this responsibility.” (VEJ 7/242)

Nothing here about either resettlement or execution, just that the besetzte Ostgebieten would become judenfrei. Nor any justification given.

And even earlier, on December 18, 1941, Himmler noted during a meeting with Hitler the remark 'Judenfrage/als Partisanen auszurotten'. Since partisans were to be executed, the extirpate here meant exterminate. Himmler's Sütterlin handwriting was distinctive and hardly easily forged, so however one interprets this - as applying across Europe after Hitler's basic decision, or an affirmation of the evolved policy in the occupied Soviet Union - it still covers waaaay more than the Pinsk ghetto.

Which explains why 133 other ghettos in Wolhynien were also wiped out without any consideration of whether they did or didn't have any internal Jewish resistance groups, or links to Soviet partisans outside the towns.
Online
User avatar
Callafangers
Administrator
Posts: 1322
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2024 6:25 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by Callafangers »

SanityCheck wrote: Sun Sep 20, 2026 9:42 pmNothing you've posted indicates any connection between the internal Jewish ghetto resistance plans (which mirror similar groups in Warsaw, Bialystok, Wilno and other big ghettos) and the actual Soviet partisan movement in the Polesie in autumn 1942.
Let me stop you right there -- it isn't necessary that I draw this connection. Jewish partisan groups existed (sometimes at odds with Soviet partisans). Jews also joined Soviet partisan groups. The point you're missing (?) is that the points I have listed show "plans to escape the forest to join the partisans", terrorist plots (explicit plans already underway to burn down the city, plans to kill the German commissioner), and more. All of this is sound rationale for Germany to interpret this as a connection (or at the very least, plausible alliance) with nearby [Soviet] partisan groups. You are clinging to 'they didn't mention the trains' but this is not helpful nor convincing for your position.
Forensics lack both graves and chambers—the liar's ink stains history's page.
User avatar
HansHill
Posts: 1598
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2024 3:06 pm
Location: Arlen, TX

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by HansHill »

SanityCheck wrote: Sun Sep 20, 2026 9:08 pm Bombsaway has already noted how this 'security logic' and excuse-making totally undermines the resettlement thesis - if a closed ghetto could continue to be a security threat, then essentially no pattern of relocating Jews made the slightest sense from a security perspective, much less moving the Jews of Poland a few hundred miles east into Soviet territory. Killing them would be the only certain security solution.

So congratulations, your antisemitism and repetition of Himmler and Hitler's mantras just blew up revisionism. Again.
No, it doesn't at all. You / Bombsaway have lazily baked-in an unsupported premise that Germany foresaw itself bogged down in a long-war. This was not the case during the first ~year of Barbarossa. All of Bombsaway's spoofery ignores the reality that Germany expected a short, decisive campaign in the East, after which her security problems would be far less complex and dangerous. Arguing that wartime "security logic" prohibits a policy of sustained, longterm, postwar, and peacetime resettlement is disingenuous.
Online
b
bombsaway
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2024 2:23 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by bombsaway »

HansHill wrote: Mon Sep 21, 2026 4:19 pm
SanityCheck wrote: Sun Sep 20, 2026 9:08 pm Bombsaway has already noted how this 'security logic' and excuse-making totally undermines the resettlement thesis - if a closed ghetto could continue to be a security threat, then essentially no pattern of relocating Jews made the slightest sense from a security perspective, much less moving the Jews of Poland a few hundred miles east into Soviet territory. Killing them would be the only certain security solution.

So congratulations, your antisemitism and repetition of Himmler and Hitler's mantras just blew up revisionism. Again.
No, it doesn't at all. You / Bombsaway have lazily baked-in an unsupported premise that Germany foresaw itself bogged down in a long-war. This was not the case during the first ~year of Barbarossa. All of Bombsaway's spoofery ignores the reality that Germany expected a short, decisive campaign in the East, after which her security problems would be far less complex and dangerous. Arguing that wartime "security logic" prohibits a policy of sustained, longterm, postwar, and peacetime resettlement is disingenuous.
Wait are you saying the planned "general resettlement" of the Jews in Wolhynien was an anti-partisan operation? Or it became one? There still hasn't been an answer from revisionists about what was meant by "general resettlement", which is a problem. Since there's no evidence that would shed light on such a question, revisionists have been allowed to freely speculate, but still can't come up with a good answer.

There's something very wrong with your movement when basic questions about documented mass events are utterly avoided. This post very well may be referenced in my essay but I want to again give revisionists a chance to answer.
Online
User avatar
Callafangers
Administrator
Posts: 1322
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2024 6:25 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by Callafangers »

bombsaway wrote: Mon Sep 21, 2026 5:39 pmThere still hasn't been an answer from revisionists about what was meant by "general resettlement", which is a problem.
This cuts the other way -- that it is "general resettlement" works directly against your assumption that more specifics are needed. Jews were not being sent exactly "to [X location] in the East"; they were being sent generally to the East, which reflects a documented pattern: transports sent further into the East, sifting out work-abled Jews along the route for appropriate employers and labor camps (including some lighter labor) along the way. Those who made it far enough were simply pushed across the front in some cases, as stated by Himmler. Others ended up in the forests, then if found by the Soviet Army, likely sent directly to the front to fight (and die) against Germany -- this is also documented.
Forensics lack both graves and chambers—the liar's ink stains history's page.
Online
b
bombsaway
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2024 2:23 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by bombsaway »

The idea of pushing tens of thousands of people (let alone the recorded population of 320k) across the front lines is pretty inconceivable and would have constituted a serious military event requiring corridors or some such, heavy Wehrmacht involvement, coordination with the Soviets, but if you're going with that, I'll record it and see if it is the final word here among the other forum goers. Not sure about the relevant Himmler quote here, can you provide? I don't know how they could get into forests - I assume you aren't saying the Germans would simply free them. We're pretty much left with put into camps nearer to the front lines, which the raises the question, were these camps secure?
Online
User avatar
Callafangers
Administrator
Posts: 1322
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2024 6:25 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by Callafangers »

bombsaway wrote: Mon Sep 21, 2026 8:50 pm The idea of pushing tens of thousands of people (let alone the recorded population of 320k) across the front lines is pretty inconceivable
Already a strawman, right out the gate. Par for the course for bombsaway. Neither of us find it 'conceivable' that 100% of Jews being discussed would have made it that far.
[EDIT: '320k' is also bogus, see: https://wiki.codohforum.com/pages/index ... _(NO-1128) ]
bombsaway wrote:and would have constituted a serious military event requiring corridors or some such
And yet we know this happened (per Himmler) and all we have is his passing statement on the matter.
bombsaway wrote:heavy Wehrmacht involvement, coordination with the Soviets
Absolutely would not require these things. "Get off the train, best of luck" is what it would require.
bombsaway wrote:We're pretty much left with put into camps nearer to the front lines, which the raises the question, were these camps secure?
More deception. Nobody is saying "camps", only you.

On pushing over frontlines:
Archie's earlier excerpt from Himmler's transcript of his meeting with Mussolini in October 1942 exemplifies this (I made a slight correction to the last sentence):
The Jews would be taken out of all of Germany, the General Government and all the countries occupied by us, because everywhere they were the carriers of sabotage, espionage, resistance and gang formation. In Russia we had to shoot a considerable number of Jews, both men and women, because even women and adolescent children there were carriers of information for the partisans. The Duce stressed on his own initiative that this was the only possible solution. I told the Duce that we were taking the Jews who were politically compromised to concentration camps, that we were using other Jews to build roads in the East, although the mortality rate was very high because the Jews had never worked in their lives. The oldest Jews were being housed in old people's homes in Berlin, Munich and Vienna. The other old Jews would have been placed in the small town of Theresienstadt, a retirement ghetto for German Jews, where they would continue to receive their pensions and benefits and could live their lives as they wished, although they fought among themselves there in the most lively way. We had tried to drive another group of Jews across the front lines to the Russians in the East, but the Russians often shot at these groups of Jews and clearly didn't like them either.
Here is the correct archival URL to this report (Archie had indicated page 229 but the archive has these pages in reverse order for some reason in its browser view, so it is p. 977, then move upward/backwards to progress through the pages):
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/2738638 ... ctPage=977


From the above, we see that as of late 1942:
  • Himmler is able to speak openly with Mussolini about killing a large number of Jews (including women and adolescent children) -- Mussolini insists it's the 'only possible solution'
  • Despite Mussolini's openness to Jewish extermination, Himmler describes to Mussolini what actions were actually being taken regarding Jews. These included:
    • Sending Jews to concentration camps
    • Sending Jews to build roads
    • Sending the oldest Jews into old people's homes in Germany/Austria
    • Other elderly Jews to Theresienstadt
    • Other Jews (in the East) driven across the front lines to the Russians
In addition to this, everything aligns with Wannsee which says Jews shall go to work in the East; Goebbels also puts them in the East (and in "quarantine"), the official documented policy is that they are to be sent East for the duration of the war (Luther memo, Schlegelberger letter), all aligning with the NSDAP program and Hitler's prophecy, etc.
Forensics lack both graves and chambers—the liar's ink stains history's page.
Online
b
bombsaway
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2024 2:23 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by bombsaway »

So you believe the intention was bring these Jews near to the front lines and free them? If they don't cross the front lines, perhaps out of fear of being shot at by the Soviets as Himmler states, it would be allowing them to join or support the partisans nearer to militarily critical areas.

the discussion around Leningrad illuminates the issues with doing something like this
Possibilities for the treatment of the civilian population of Petersburg

1.) The city remains encircled and all starve to death.

2.) The civilian population is let out through our lines and pushed away into our rear area.

3.) The civilian population is pushed off through a corridor behind the Russian front


3)
Advantages:
a.) Increased relief as under 2.)a.).
b.) The basis for world press is weakened as under 2.)b.).
c.) Our troops are not so strongly affected psychologically as in possibility 2.).
d.) We get rid of the Communist elements.
e.) The food situation in the rear area is not affected hereby.
f.) German, Finnish and maybe also valuable Russian elements can be pulled out.
g.) If the Russians don’t take the people of Petersburg, we will have a good propaganda tool against the Soviet regime in our hands.

Disadvantages:
a.) On the march a great many people will perish and the enemy press will take advantage of the hunger march for propaganda purposes.
b.) For the escorting troops this hunger march will be a strong psychological burden.

Pre-condition:
a.) The Russians must declare themselves prepared to take the population.
b.) The marching off must be carried out: North of the Neva towards Schlüsselburg, there across a pontoon bridge, then
along Lake Ladoga, so that as few forces as possible are required for the escort.
so we see here that an escort and Soviet cooperation are required, and that's for a population that wasn't an uber security threat where even children were shot for being potential carriers of information.

Other than Germans freeing them, I'm not sure where they would be sent if not camps. I guess they could have been placed in ghettos, but all known ghettos were closed down and this would reignite all the security concerns you've been talking about.
Last edited by bombsaway on Mon Sep 21, 2026 9:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Online
User avatar
Callafangers
Administrator
Posts: 1322
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2024 6:25 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by Callafangers »

bombsaway wrote: Mon Sep 21, 2026 9:16 pm So you believe the intention was bring these Jews near to the front lines and free them? If they don't cross the front lines, perhaps out of fear of being shot at by the Soviets as Himmler states, it would be allowing them to join or support the partisans nearer to militarily critical areas.
Himmler's words, not mine.
bombsaway wrote:the discussion around Leningrad illuminates the issues with doing something like this
[...]

Pre-condition:
a.) The Russians must declare themselves prepared to take the population.
b.) The marching off must be carried out: North of the Neva towards Schlüsselburg, there across a pontoon bridge, then
along Lake Ladoga, so that as few forces as possible are required for the escort.
so we see here that an escort and Soviet cooperation are required
No. Himmler's description of pushing Jews into Russia makes clear that there was no concern of whether the Russians 'declared themselves prepared' for the Jews; quite the opposite (they shot at them). Your counterexample is invalid.
bombsaway wrote:Other than Germans freeing them, I'm not sure where they would be sent if not camps. I guess they could have been placed in ghettos, but all known ghettos were closed down and this would reignited all the security concerns you've been talking about.
You're assuming concentration of some kind (camps, ghettos). That's just your assumption, over and over again. Guess all you want, no one cares.
Forensics lack both graves and chambers—the liar's ink stains history's page.
Online
b
bombsaway
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2024 2:23 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by bombsaway »

concentration is not assumed, rather the binary is were they confined /guarded -- or not?

I would say it is unthinkable that they would let Jews go under these circumstances, and I don't even believe the security threat stuff was taken seriously. This is just looking at the evidence. Wherever Germans held dominion, the available evidence points to Jews being increasingly confined, and with Eastern European Jews that seems absolute.
Online
User avatar
Callafangers
Administrator
Posts: 1322
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2024 6:25 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by Callafangers »

bombsaway wrote: Mon Sep 21, 2026 9:36 pm concentration is not assumed, rather the binary is were they confined /guarded -- or not?

I would say it is unthinkable that they would let Jews go under these circumstances...
Say it's "unthinkable" bombsaway, say it all you want. It is just you saying it. I cannot emphasize this enough: your opinion earns zero shekels here. No value whatsoever.
bombsaway wrote:Wherever Germans held dominion, the available evidence points to Jews being increasingly confined, and with Eastern European Jews that seems absolute.
This was generally due to concern about Jews' (and partisans) access to Germans in civilian areas, which is not an issue beyond the front lines, since it then becomes them versus the entire Wehrmacht formation -- an utter suicide mission. Partisans/Jews are a problem when they infest civilian areas (the rear), not when the stupidly attempt to take on the entire Wehrmacht, its massive troop formations, and airtight surveillance.

Once pushed over the frontlines, Jews are essentially a non-issue for Germany, other than propaganda risks and the like.
Forensics lack both graves and chambers—the liar's ink stains history's page.
Online
b
bombsaway
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2024 2:23 am

Re: Revisionist arguments about the shootings are "essentially numerical"?

Post by bombsaway »

I'm just trying to get clarity on your point here. The only kind of resettlement you've defended so far is being pushed across the front line - therefore we would have to say that this is what you think the Germans intended to do with most of the population of Wolhynien

that's fine, but just own it.
Post Reply