pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Sun Jan 25, 2026 2:59 pm
Eight documents on Lublin/Majdanek from August 1944 by the Polish-Soviet Extraordinary Commission are published online here.
Majdanek concentration camp. Research. Documents. Memories
They come from different GARF page numbers than what is included in Mattogno's book on the camp.
I don't know if they contain info that's already known, or just the typical Polish-Soviet 1944 hallucinations.
Thanks, I wasn't able to find this on my own. Maybe the reason they haven't been published in plain English is because they are so conspicuously filled with lies or exaggerations. Even the people who compiled and edited this book had to add a lot of corrective footnotes for that reason.
These reports are not strictly the same as what Graf/Mattogno included. The technical reports on gassing and cremation are totally missing from this collection. I don't have much of consequence to say that hasn't already been said better by Graf/Mattogno. Still, here are my thoughts.
These reports are very propagandistic reading from top to bottom. Among many absurdities, they said moldy horse sausage was "considered a special delicacy" (p.311), and also "crushed glass was added to the food" to kill people (p.312), and "Infants were smashed against walls and trees, some were torn in half" (p.317). Obviously someone who makes up stories like this will still be making up stories when he talks about gas chambers and torture. None the less, this is the Holocaust Narrative, so we all pretend it must be taken seriously.
The first and only mention of photographs was made in the context of the gas chambers and crematorium (p.333). Are those photos available somewhere? More to the point, why didn't they take photos to prove what were claimed to be the bones "of hundreds of thousands of people" (p.319)?
An incredible claim was made about Zyklon B (p.334):
The "Zyklon" preparation, by its very nature, could only be used for suffocating people, and in no case for any disinfection purposes. The chemical expert analysis entirely confirms that the design of the gas chambers and the chemical devices found in them served exclusively one main purpose, which guided everything at Majdanek – the purpose of exterminating as many people as possible.
So the Soviet position was that a common disinfestant could never be used for disinfestation, and a place designed explicitly as a "disinfestation facility" did not even have a dual purpose of disinfestation but was instead exclusively used for murder. This is extremely far from the museum's current position.
A witness by the name of Tadeusz Budzyn described a strange process for the supposed "Harvest Festival". Whereas the official narrative is that the fence of Field V was cut open to walk the victims to the pits, Budzyn claimed the victims were sent through "a special trench" which went literally "under the barracks" in which they undressed. The trench was dug just "that moment". (p.343) Another witness by the name of Andrei Stanislavsky corroborated that there was a tunnel (p.352). The Soviets must have realized some time later that cutting a fence made more sense than digging a tunnel under a fence and a building.
One document includes a remarkable speech by the Jewish Zionist Emil Sommerstein, chairman of the newly formed Central Committee of the Jews in Poland. Sommerstein's idea was that the commission's findings at Majdanek should be used to propagandize the whole world. Here are a few sentences (pp.335-336):
What we have heard must be spoken about, it must be shouted on all the streets, at all the crossroads, to the whole world. [...] The description of Majdanek, like an injection, must be administered to all people against the German contagion. [...] But at Majdanek, all available material evidence must be preserved as a heritage of all mankind. Streams
of visitors should flock to these places, just as processions go to great world shrines.
Very prescient, if not causative. Sommerstein also helped question witnesses.
Numerous speakers spoke about Jewish victimhood or even the superior victimhood of Jews. This surprised me since I have often been told that the Soviets erased Jewish identity from the Holocaust.
I would like to hear what the editors of this book, or really anyone at all, think of the copious handwritten "corrections" made to witness testimonies. In some places whole questions and answers were crossed out. In others there are material rewordings. For example a witness claimed the victims of gassing had their "lungs burst", but someone downgraded this to say that their "lung tissue could not withstand" the gas (p.351). Every page of the report on witness testimony has a bunch of these corrections. Wasn't this an overt rewriting of history?
In the conclusion to the report on witness testimony, a handwritten correction changed the number of dead from 2,000,000 to 1,500,000 (p.362). There are some other changes similar to this, e.g. "more than" was downgraded to "approximately" (p.418).
Perhaps this entire commission could be summed up with one handwritten note which asked, "How does he know this?" but which was then subsequently crossed out (p.404).
I am retaining an English translation of these reports to reference and pull quotes from in the future.