1943: Schindler said "No general order to exterminate J

[michael mills]

Xanthro wrote:

First, there is no proof it is even Schindler to begin with. It's Mr. X.

The conclusion that "Herr X" was Schindler is one reached by the two authors, Goetz Aly and Christian Gerlach, and I think they are right.

In the report by the two Hungarian Zionist leaders, Kasztner and Springmann, "Herr X" is described as an Austrian industrialist, the manager of a factory in occupied Poland, who had high-level contacts, who had Jewish forced labourers working for him, and who was bribing the brutal commandant of a concentration camp close to his factory.

On the basis of those points, all of which point to Schindler, Aly and Gerlach conclude that "Herr X" was indeed Schindler, who is known from other sources, eg post-war statements by Springmann, to have visited Budapest, although erroneously dated to the beginning of 1943.

Aly and Gerlach found three copies of the Kasztner/Springmann report. Two are in the Yad Vashem Archives, document M 2/596, folios 115-120, titled "Bekenntnisse des Herrn X", Budapest, November 1943, and document 06/315. The second of those documents bears the handwritten note "Meeting btw. Oskar Schindler and Dr Kastner Joel Brand" (Brand has been confused with Springmann).

The third copy of the report is a copy of the second YVA document, and is in the Schindler estate.

On the basis of the above, we can be 99% certain that "Herr X" was Schindler.

[michael mills]

Christopher Perrien wrote:

Any way the way the info from this Nov 1943 docuement that these two authors present, by the way it reads and sounds , seems like bogus (false) bullshit to me.

The concept of "bogus (false) bullshit" is an intriguing one.

"Bogus bullshit" is presumably the opposite of "genuine bullshit".

Since "genuine bullshit" is something that is obviously false, then "bogus bullshit" must be something that appears to be false but is actually true.

But I am unsure what Christopher Perrien is implying. Is it that he thinks the document is phoney, ie that Aly and Gerlach fabricated it? Or is it that he thinks the document is genuine, but that Schindler gave false information to Kasztner and Springmann?

major episodes? I say the camps ran at increasing death rates after Nov 43.

I invite Christopher Perrien to provide the backing for his statement.

I grossed up the median figure of 3.75 million by 600,000 to take account of the two major episodes causing mass Jewish mortality in 1944, the Hungarian deportation and the liquidation of the Lodz Ghetto, to arrive at a toal of around 4.35 Jewish dead by war's end. Even if we accept the lower SS figure given by Schindler, 400,000 as at November 1943, the grossing up process yields 4.6 million Jewish dead.

Christopher Perrien states his belief that the total of Jewish dead reached around 5.75 million by war's end. The difference between 4.6 million and 5.7 million is 1.1 million, who according to Christopher Perrien died between November 1943 and the end of the war. I invoite him to identify who those 1.1 million Jews were, and where they came from. Obviously they do not include the Jews from Hungary or the Lodz Ghetto, since they are included in my figure.

[Hans]

Note that Schindler considers a figure of four to four and one-half million Jews killed by November 1943 an exaggeration.

Michael,

why can we rule out that Schindler wasn't talking about the Polish Jews, which was the issue of the previous conversation?

And what SS leader were this that could and would give him an overview over the number of killed Jews?

Elsewhere you argued that it is unlikely that Eichmann passed on the 6 Million to Höttl for that it was classified piece of information. On the other hand, you see no problem in the claim that SS leader gave Schindler the 4 Million.

Elsewhere you argued there is no reason to suppose that Eichmann would have known the total figure. On the other hand, you see no problem in assuming that nameless SS leader knew the total. Aren't you applying double standard, one for evidence for 4 Million deaths and one for evidence for 5,6 Million deaths?

[Hans]

Another interesting piece from the Schindler, Kaztner and Springmann meeting:

[on the question if Jewish children are still alive]
- Children, only very few. They are indeed exterminated. I believe about 90 % of the children 0 - 14 years were shot or gassed. [...]

- We hear Auschwitz is an extermination camp?

- That can be for elderly and children. I have heard that Jews are gassed and burned there. They have developed a scientific system to avoid Katyns.

My translation.

[michael mills]

Hans wrote:

Another interesting piece from the Schindler, Kaztner and Springmann meeting:

Indeed it is interesting, and that was the section of the report that I was going to address next.

My comments about that section are:

1. The killing of an estimated 90% of Jewish children under the age of 14 is consistent with what Schindler had earlier said about an authorisation to kill Jews who were "useless". Under that definition, Jewish children under 14 were "useless" since they could not generally be used for hard physical labour but consumed food food. Killing children under 14, but preserving Jews over that age who could work, was "rational" in the sense in which I have used that word.

2. When Schindler said of the Jewish children "diese werden tatsaechlich ausgerottet" = "they are genuinely being exterminated", he was implying that "extermination" was not an accurate description of what was being inflicted on Jews of working age, since the latter were to a certain extent being preserved for labour, in accordance with Himmler's order to which he had earlier referred.

3. Schindler's response to the question whether Auschwitz was a "Vernichtungslager" was not definite. It implies that Auschwitz is not in essence an extermination camp, but may have that function in relation to the old and children, who could not work and thus by definition were useless. Schindler's answer was consistent with the underlying function of Auschwitz, which was as a place of forced labour, although it did have an exterminatory function in relation to those who were or became unable to work.

4. Schindler's information that Jews were being gassed at Auschwitz shows that he did not offend against the third major thesis of the Holocaust Canon, namely that gassing was the major method of killing Jews. But to my mind that is not really important, since that thesis is far less significant than the two that he contested.

[michael mills]

Hans wrote:

Elsewhere you argued there is no reason to suppose that Eichmann would have known the total figure. On the other hand, you see no problem in assuming that nameless SS leader knew the total. Aren't you applying double standard, one for evidence for 4 Million deaths and one for evidence for 5,6 Million deaths?

I see a clear difference between the two cases. Schindler reports some boasts that he had heard from SS-leaders, who were competing with each other to eliminate dangerous and useless Jews. He does not say or imply that those SS-leaders had official knowledge of a figure, and rightly dismisses their boasts as exaggerations.

As I pointed out, the World Jewish Congress, after weighing up all the evidence, of which there was a lot, calculated a significantly lower total than the SS boasts reported by Schindler, at round about the same time.

The case with Eichmann is quite different. There people like Hoess and Hoettl claimed that Eichmann, because of his position, had access to the official total of Jews killed, and had actually told them. I pointed out that Eichmann's limited role would not have given him such access, although he could be expected to know the official total of those deported by his office. Eichmann may well have heard rumours, just as Schindler did, but that is not the point; Hoess and Hoettl claimed that Eichmann knew the real, genuine, official total.

why can we rule out that Schindler wasn't talking about the Polish Jews, which was the issue of the previous conversation?

Because Schindler is answering the question "Wie hoch schaetzen Sie die Zahl der seit Ausbruch des Krieges ermordeten Juden". That seems to me an all-embracing question, not one limited to Poland.

[ChristopherPerrien]

- I do not believe, goes the answer, that there was a general order. Rather, I presume that each individual SS-leader wanted to outdo the others with numbers of those destroyed. None of them wanted to put his career on the line. But the initiative did not come from them. A higher authority has commissioned them, probably to destroy dangerous or useless Jews. They have executed this commission with the brutality to which they were already used to at home. [.....]

I take to this to mean that there was not an order to kill all Jews immediately. It mentioned "useless Jews", I guesss this means all of the Jews who could not work. Dangerous Jews would be Jews that could work
but would not , hence rebellious i.e. dangerous. Now of course any SS leader could also say that any Jew capable of work is also dangerous , this would give them free reign to kill all Jews ( ones that could work and ones that could not). But why just kill Jews who could work when they can be used to further the nazi war-effort or to make money. The plan for such Jews was to slowly work them to death, getting a profit out of them as they slowly worked and starved to death. They is why there is no one all encompassing order because "big" plans like that are not that simple . However if as is stated this order was passed down from a higher autrority like Himmler , this in and of itself would make it a general order because Himmler was the second in command of the Reich and First in command of the SS.- (Kill all the Jews that can't or won't work , and work the others to death). "A higher authority has commisioned them" to me thats implies there was a general order to "deal"with the Jews, but not one to just kill all on sight so to speak. The paragragh cited seems to convey this to me while contradicting itself.

Now as far as these guys "worried " about their carreers. I find this amusing since I would imagine they would be much more worried about their lives if they dis-obeyed or did not perform up to the expectations of
their commander- Himmler. That paragragh contradicts itself in this respect becuase it talks of these guys carreers yet at the end it talks of the brutality at home so why were they more worried about their carreers than their lives.

I find it disturbing that this "Herr X" would states things in this way as it reflects a mis-understanding of the SS system. Not exactly what I would expect from someone running a slave-labor factory directly tied to the SS system of forced Jewish labor.

Sorry about the bogus bs remark, but it still seems false to think that this statment disavows the " tenant of the Holocaust?" that there was a general order in the nature of killing all Jews as fast as possible , as the whole idea of the "Final Solution" was bigger and more sinister than that .
Although-(Kill all the Jews that can't or won't work , and work the others to death), sums it up pretty good.

I will get back with you about:Christopher Perrien states his belief that the total of Jewish dead reached around 5.75 million by war's end. The difference between 4.6 million and 5.7 million is 1.1 million, i will have to go dig some, Since this is more a numeric question
than an opinion question about what someone said to two others wrote down by two others and then translated on this forum: Actually I have seen this Herr X meeting mention in some of my books, with the attendant authenticity arguements I will try to find that too because the debate that is occuring here seems very similar.[/quote]