A honest question!

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

#16

Post by michael mills » 24 May 2002, 02:04

Mr Muehlenkamp wrote:
This is not true. Train schedules allow for a very detailed reconstruction of transports from many places to Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka during 1942, for example from the Warsaw and Czestochowa regions to Treblinka. On the basis of such documentary evidence, Israeli historian Yitzhak Arad managed to reconstruct the origins and dates of deportation of ca. 830,000 people taken to Treblinka and hundreds of thousands taken to the other two camps.
Mr Muehlenkamp,

If you believe that there is a complete set of preserved train schedules detailing all or even most of the transports of Jews to the three camps at Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka during the whole period of their operation, then please post them, or at least tell us where they are.

The tables published by Arad in his book on the three camps were not the result of research into primary source by him. He derived the data from the work of other historians, in particular Tatiana Berenstein. The sources used by those authors are not made clear in every case.

The item of data most likely to be accurate is the dates of the deportations from the various localities listed. The source of that data is probably the recollection of survivors, and also reports by the Polish underground, which was observing what was going on, and also apparently got information from the Ukrainian guards.

The numbers deported is less likely to be accurate, except in cases where a German record has survived, eg the Stroop Report giving the numbers deported from the Warsaw Ghetto. In most cases, the numbers given by the sources used by Arad must have been estimates, probably by observers such as the Polish underground. Some of the estimates may have been quite accurate, others less so. Experience shows that estimates made of large numbers of people, eg of participants in a street march, can vary enormously form one observer to another, unless they are counted one by one.

The data on the destinations of the transports is probably conjectural in many cases. Observers might see Jews being rounded up in a particular locality and despatched on a train, but they would not necessarily know where the train was going. In some cases, agents of the Polish underground followed transports, especially those leaving Warsaw, and observed where they ended up. However, even then the agents sometimes got it wrong, as for example in the report of the "delayed-action gas" that is apparently a delousing procedure observed in a transit camp wrongly identified as Treblinka II, the extermination camp.

It is entirely possible, even likely, that many of the transports observed leaving particular destinations on particular dates and presumed to have gone to one of the three camps did not in fact end up there but went to other destinations.

An example is the 19 transports from the Netherlands in the first half of 1943 that are presumed to have gone to Sobibor. German records show the destination of those transports as Chelm, a town on the Bug river, on the eastern border of the Generalgouvernement with Reichskommissariat Ukraine. Now, a number of Dutch Jews did end up in Sobibor, and were among the surviving escapees. At the time they arrived at Sobibor, the camp was being converted into a centre for processing captured Soviet ammunition, and it is likely that they were required as a work-force, being preferred to Polish Jews as they could no so easily escape, not knowing the language or the country. However, it is quite possible that part of the deportees from the Netherlands continued their journey into the Ukraine, and that their destination and fate remain unknown. Certainly contemporary reports tell of Jews from the West arriving in Ukraine.

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#17

Post by Roberto » 24 May 2002, 12:43

Michael Mills wrote:If you believe that there is a complete set of preserved train schedules detailing all or even most of the transports of Jews to the three camps at Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka during the whole period of their operation, then please post them, or at least tell us where they are.
I didn’t say there is a complete set of train records. I said that train schedules allow for a very detailed reconstruction of transports from many places to Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka during 1942, which is not wrong even though train schedules are in fact incomplete and establishing the numbers requires complementary assessment of other data. What is wrong is the statement that
Michael Mills wrote:There are train schedules covering a short period at the beginning of 1943, showing trains taking Jews to the above camps, and to other destinations.
On page 468 of Dimensionen des Völkermords, for instance, Frank Golczewski tells us that, for the “first phase” of the exterminations at Treblinka between July and December 1942, 135 transports can be traced. Golczewski points out that especially the transports from Czestochowa can be very well reconstructed on hand of special train schedules of the Reichsbahn that were recovered after the war.

Regarding the size of transports and the resulting number of deportees, there are German documents that allow for a quantification where the transportation documents are silent or not available. Beside the mentioned Stroop Report, there is this letter transcribed in the judgment of the Düsseldorf County Court at the first Treblinka trial:
Geheim

Sehr geehrter Pg. Wolff!

Unter Bezugnahme auf unser Ferngespräch vom 16.7.1942 teile ich Ihnen folgende Meldung meiner Generaldirektion der Ostbahnen (Gedob) in Krakau zu Ihrer gefälligen Unterrichtung mit:
“Seit dem 22.7. fährt täglich ein Zug mit je 5 000 Juden von Warschau über Malkinia nach Treblinka, ausserdem zweimal wöchentlich ein Zug mit 5 000 Juden von Przemysl nach Belzec. Gedob steht in ständiger Fühlung mit dem Sicherheitsdienst in Krakau. Dieser ist damit einverstanden, dass die Transporte von Warschau über Lublin nach Sobibor (bei Lublin) so lange ruhen, wie die Umbauarbeiten auf dieser Strecke diese Transporte unmöglich machen (ungefähr Oktober 1942)”
Die Züge wurden mit dem Befehlshaber der Sicherheitspolizei im Generalgouvernement vereinbart. SS- und Polizeiführer des Distrikts Lublin, SS-Brigadeführer Globocnik, ist verständigt.

Heil Hitler!
Ihr ergebener
gez. Ganzenmüller


My translation:
Secret

Dear Party Comrade Wolff!

With reference to our phone conversation on 16.7.1942 I hereby transcribe the following report of our Gerneral Direction of Eastern Railways (Gedob) in Cracow for your information:
“Since 22.7. a train with 5 000 Jews goes daily from Warsaw via Malkinia to Treblinka. Furthermore there is a train with 5 000 Jews going from Przemysl to Belzec twice a week. Gedob is constantly in touch with the security service in Cracow, who agrees that the transports from Warsaw via Lublin to Sobibor (near Lublin) rest as long as the conversion works on this line make transports impossible (until October 1942)”
The trains are agreed with the commander of the Security Police in the General Government. The Head of SS and Police for the Lublin district, SS-Brigadeführer Globocnik, has been informed.

Heil Hitler!
Your truly
signed Ganzenmüller
At the pace described in Ganzenmüller’s letter to Wolff, more than 800,000 Jews would have been transported to Treblinka until the end of 1942. This was not so because on the one hand there were also transports from other districts such as Radom and Czestochowa, which made for the arrival of up to three transports a day at Treblinka, while on the other hand there was an interruption or slowing down of the killing process for several weeks while new gas chambers were built. Hence the totals recorded by Höfle at the end of the year 1942 were somewhat different from what would have resulted from a steady flow of transports at the pace mentioned in Ganzenmüller’s letter to Wolff:
13/15. OLQ de OMQ 1005 83 234 250

State Secret!

To the Senior Commander of the Security Police [and the Security Service], for the attention of SS Obersturmbannfuhrer HEIM, CRACOW.

Subject: fortnightly report Einsatz REINHART.
Reference: radio telegram therefrom.


recorded arrivals until December 31, 42,

L [Lublin] 12,761,
B [Belzec] 0,
S [Sobibor] 515,
T [Treblinka] 10 335 [,]

together 23 611

sum total…[as per] December 31, 42,

L 24 733,
B 434 508,
S 101 370,
T 71 355, read: 713 555]

together 1 274 166

SS and Police Leader Lublin, HOFLE, Sturmbannfuhrer
Michael Mills wrote:The tables published by Arad in his book on the three camps were not the result of research into primary source by him. He derived the data from the work of other historians, in particular Tatiana Berenstein. The sources used by those authors are not made clear in every case.
This is what Arad himself tells us about his sources:
The exact number of Jews who were deported to the Operation Reinhard death camps is difficult to determine because of the prevailing conditions at the time and the method employed by the Nazi extermination machine in expelling the victims to BeIzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka. The number of Jews who lived in the towns and townships of Poland before the war is known from the population census carried out there in 1931. Some demographic changes took place during the years 1931-1939, but these did not basically alter the number of Jews living there on the eve of the German occupation.
Substantial demographic changes did occur during the war, during the years 1939-1942, until the onset of the deportations to the death camps. In these years, tens of thousands of Jews escaped from one place to seek refuge in another. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were expelled and resettled, sent to labor camps, or concentrated in larger ghettos. Thousands of Jews were murdered in shooting Aktionen in the vicinity of their homes-before, during, and after the deportations to the death camps. Thus, on the eve of the expulsions, there were many small localities in which Jews no longer lived and other localities in which the number of Jews was much higher than before the war.
The deportation method, as carried out by the German authorities in the General Government, was en masse, without lists of names or even exact numbers. Usually ghettos were totally liquidated, and only the killing capacity of the camps and the volume of the trains dictated the number of people who were deported. In places where some Jews were temporarily left behind, the Germans counted the few who remained, while all the others were pushed into the trains.
Documents of the German railway authorities, which were found after the war, provided some data on the number of trains and freight cars. If we take into account that each fully packed freight car carried 100-150 people, we can arrive at an approximate indication of the number of Jews in each transport.
Another source of information was the census of the ghetto inhabitants carried out by the Judenrats in some of these places. A census of this type was usually undertaken by order of the German authorities for purposes of forced-labor requests or in preparation for the deportations. Sometimes the Judenrats also took a census for their own purposes, for example, for food rationing or housing problems.
Documents containing these data and sometimes even the number of Jews who were deported, as collected by the Judenrat, were found after the war. Sometimes they were mentioned in diaries written by ghetto inmates and left behind.
Numerous memoirs written by survivors, as well as the memorial books (Yizkor books), contain important data about the deportations, including, dates and the number of deported. Testimonies by survivors, statements by local people who witnessed the deportations, and evidence given by members of the German administration at the war-crimes trials serve as significant sources of information.
Together, all these documents and sources enable us to arrive at an estimation that comes very close to the actual figures and dates of the deportations to the Operation Reinhard death camps.

An extremely valuable research study undertaken to establish the timetable and number of deported Jews from the General Government and to which death camp they were sent was carried out by Tatiana Berenstein and published in Poland in the Biuletyn Zydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego (Bulletin of the Jewish Historical Institute), Warsaw, No. 3/1952, No. 21/1957, No. 3/1959, No. 59/1966, No. 61/1967. Another source is the "Luach Hashoa (Holocaust Calendar) of Polish Jewry" prepared by Rabbi Israel Schepansky and published by "Or Harnizrach," New York, 1974. A most important and more up-to-date source is the Pinkas Hakehillot (Encyclopedia of Jewish Communities), Poland, Vol. 11, Eastern Galicia, and Vol. III, Western Galicia, published by Yad Vashem, Jerusalem, in 1980 and 1984. The following tables of the deportations are based on all the aforementioned primary sources and research studies.
Source of quote:

http://holocaust-info.dk/statistics/info.htm

It would be interesting to have a look at Tatiana Berenstein’s listing of her sources, which Michael Mills seems to have available.
Michael Mills wrote:The item of data most likely to be accurate is the dates of the deportations from the various localities listed. The source of that data is probably the recollection of survivors, and also reports by the Polish underground, which was observing what was going on, and also apparently got information from the Ukrainian guards.
Plus correspondence among Nazi officials such as cited above, plus train schedules and transportation documents where such could be recovered.
EXCERPTS FROM JUDGMENTS (URTEILSBEGRUNDUNG) Passed on September 3, 1965 in the trial of Kurt Franz and nine others at the court of Assizes in Dusseldorf (First Treblinka Trial) (AZ-LG Dusseldorf: II 931638, p. 49 ff.), and the trial of Franz Stangl at the court of Assizes at Dusseldorf (Second Treblinka Trial) on December 22, 1970 (pp. 111 ff.,AZ-LG Dusseldorf, XI-148/69 S.) Number of Persons Killed at the Treblinka Extermination Camp: ------------------------------------------------------------- At least 700,000 persons, predominantly Jews, but also a number of Gypsies, were killed at the Treblinka extermination camp. These findings are based on the expert opinion submitted to the Court of Assizes by Dr. Helmut Kraunsnick, director of the Institute for Contemporary History (Institute fur Zeitgeschichte) in Munich. in formulating his opinion, Dr. Kraunsnick consulted all the German and foreign archival material accessible to him and customarily studied in historical research. Among the documents he examined were the following: (1) The so-called Stroop report, a report by SS Brigadefuhrer [Brigadier] Jurgen Stroop, dealing with the destruction of the Warsaw ghetto. This report consists of three parts: namely, an introduction, a compilation of daily reports and a collection of photographs. (2) The record of the trial of the major war criminals before the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg. (3) The official transportation documents (train schedules, telegrams, and train inventories) relevant to the transports to Treblinka. The latter documents, of which only a part were recovered after the war, were the subject of the trial and were made available to Dr. Krausnick by the Court of Assizes. Dr. Krausnick's report includes the following information: According to the Stroop report a total of approximately 310,000 Jews were transported in freight trains from the Warsaw ghetto to Treblinka during the period from July 22, 1942 to October 3, 1942. Approximately another 19,000 Jews made the same journey during the period from January, 1943 to the middle of May, 1943. During the period from August 21, 1942 to August 23, 1943, additional transports of Jews arrived at the Treblinka extermination camp, likewise by freight train, from other Polish cities, including Kielce, Miedzyrec, Lukow, Wloszczowa, Sedzizzow, Czestochowa, Szydlowiec, Lochow, Kozienice, Bialystok, Tomaszow, Grodno and Radom. Other Jews, who lived in the vicinity of Treblinka, arrived at Treblinka in horse-drawn wagons and in trucks, as did Gypsies, including some from countries other than Poland. In addition, Jews from Germany and from other European countries, including Austria, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Greece were transported to Treblinka, predominantly is passenger trains. It has not been possible, of course, to establish the exact number of people transported to Treblinka in this fashion, because only a part of the transportation documents, particularly those relevant to the railroad transports, are available. Still, assuming that each of the trains consisted of an average of 60 cars, with each freight car holding an average total of 100 persons and each passenger car an average total of 50 (i.e., that each freight train might have carried an approximate total of 6,000, and each passenger train an approximate total of 3,000 Jews to Treblinka) the total number of people transported to Treblinka in freight trains and passenger trains might be estimated at approximately 271,000. This total would not include the 329,000 from Warsaw. Actually, however, these figures in many instances were much larger than the ones cited above. Besides, many additional thousands of Jews - and also Gypsies - arrived in Treblinka in horse-drawn wagons and on trucks. Accordingly, it must be assumed that that the total number of Jews from Warsaw, from other parts of Poland, from Germany and from other European countries, who were taken to Treblinka, plus the total of at least 1,000 Gypsies who shared the safe fate, amounted to far more than 700,000, even if one considers that several thousands of people were subsequently moved from Treblinka to other camps and that several hundred inmates succeeded in escaping from the camp, especially during the revolt of August 2, 1943. In view of the foregoing, it would be scientifically admissible to estimate the total number of persons killed in Treblinka at a minimum of 700,000. The court of Assizes sees no reason to question the opinion of this expert, who is known in the scholarly world for his studies on the National Socialist persecution of the Jews.
The expert opinion he has submitted is detailed, thorough, and therefore convincing.

In the fall of 1969 another expert, Dr. Scheffler, submitted for the second Treblinka trial an opinion which was based on more recent research, estimating the total number of victims at about 900,000.
Source of quote:

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... eblinka.01
An accurate calculation of the number of victims is at present impossible. It will be remembered that Treblinka ceased its activities in the autumn of 1943, so that the German authorities had enough time to wipe out the traces of their crimes. The most reliable method of counting the number of victims is by counting the number of train-loads. The figures based on the dimensions of the gas chambers give no guarantee whatever of accuracy, as we do not know, firstly, how often the gas-chambers were used, and, secondly, the number of people who, on an average, were gassed at any one time. In establishing the number of train-loads, the commission based its findings on the evidence given by the witnesses, laying special stress on the statements of the railway workers and on the railway records from Treblinka station, which are in the possession of the commission of enquiry.
The most active period seems to have been from August to the middle of December, 1942. During that time we may assume one daily train-load as unquestionable according to the evidence of the railway-workers. Indeed four witnesses put the figure at two per day. After that, from the middle of January to the middle of May, 1943, the average was probably one a week. Some of the witnesses put the figure at three.
The average number of wagons in a transport was 50 through sometimes, as the railway records showed, it was as many as 58.
The total number of wagon-loads of victimls from August 1, 1942, to May 15, 1943, may be taken, with some certainty, to have been 7,550.
In the later period, from the railway records; the list of the wagons for August 17, 1943; a telegram of August 18, 1943; and a document entitled Fahrplanordnung Nr. 290 sent from Treblinka station by the Reichsbahndirektion Königsberg, the number of train-loads could be established quite accurately.
In the above-mentioned Fahrplanordnung we read among ather things: Zur Abbeförderung von Aussledlern verkehren folgende Sonderzüge von Bialystok nach Malkinia. Ziel Treblinka, from which it may be concluded that after the revolt the following train-loads, were brought in: on Aug. 27, 1943, 41 wagons; on Aug. 19, 35 wagons; on Aug. 21, two transports of 38 wagons each; on Aug. 22, two transports of 39 wagons each; and on Aug. 23, one transport of 38 wagons; i. e. a total of 266 wagons.
As an average number of persons per wagon we may take 100 (the majority of witnesses deposed that it was more than 150).
According to this calculation the number of victims murdered at Treblinka amounts to at least 731,600. Taking into consideration the great caution with which the investigators assessed the number of train-loads and the average number of persons per wagon, this must be accepted as probable, that in actual fact the number of victims was even larger1. (1It should be pointed out that from pertinent documents such as telegrams, time-tables and way-bills it appears absolutely certain that more than two thousand wagon-loads of Jews were brought to Treblinka; yet these documents constituted but a small part of all the railway documentary evidence, the greater part of which is lost.)
Source: German Crimes in Poland. Volume I. Published by the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland. Warsaw, 1946

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gcpoltreb1.htm
Michael Mills wrote:The numbers deported is less likely to be accurate, except in cases where a German record has survived, eg the Stroop Report giving the numbers deported from the Warsaw Ghetto. In most cases, the numbers given by the sources used by Arad must have been estimates, probably by observers such as the Polish underground. Some of the estimates may have been quite accurate, others less so. Experience shows that estimates made of large numbers of people, eg of participants in a street march, can vary enormously form one observer to another, unless they are counted one by one.
Where data are based on eyewitness evidence, the witnesses seem to have been rather good observers, judging by the coincidence of numbers computed on the basis of their observation and those resulting from the above cited documentary evidence and the mentioned assessments by Krausnick, Scheffler and the Central Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, which were based solely on documentary evidence.
Michael Mills wrote:The data on the destinations of the transports is probably conjectural in many cases. Observers might see Jews being rounded up in a particular locality and despatched on a train, but they would not necessarily know where the train was going.
If the trains came back empty soon thereafter, as they did, the witnesses would at least have known that the destination was not some far-away place in the occupied territories of the Soviet Union but a place not too far away from the site of loading. Polish railway men and anyone who had contact with them would in any case know about the destinations. The existence of the murder factory at Belzec, for instance, was known in Cracow through the accounts of Polish railway workers since June 1942 (Golczewski, as above).
Michael Mills wrote:In some cases, agents of the Polish underground followed transports, especially those leaving Warsaw, and observed where they ended up. However, even then the agents sometimes got it wrong, as for example in the report of the "delayed-action gas" that is apparently a delousing procedure observed in a transit camp wrongly identified as Treblinka II, the extermination camp.
Hardly in a transit camp, for there is no evidence whatsoever to there having been such a transit camp. What those agents most probably saw was a delousing procedure at the nearby Treblinka I labor camp for non-Jewish Poles, where according to Golczewki a total of 10,000 people were interned at one or the other time since 1941.
Michael Mills wrote:It is entirely possible, even likely, that many of the transports observed leaving particular destinations on particular dates and presumed to have gone to one of the three camps did not in fact end up there but went to other destinations.
It is in fact highly unlikely, as all transportation documents that could be recovered as well as the above cited correspondence among Nazi officials mention Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka as final destinations and there is no evidence to any transports bound in the direction of these camps having gone anywhere else.
Michael Mills wrote:An example is the 19 transports from the Netherlands in the first half of 1943 that are presumed to have gone to Sobibor. German records show the destination of those transports as Chelm, a town on the Bug river, on the eastern border of the Generalgouvernement with Reichskommissariat Ukraine. Now, a number of Dutch Jews did end up in Sobibor, and were among the surviving escapees. At the time they arrived at Sobibor, the camp was being converted into a centre for processing captured Soviet ammunition, and it is likely that they were required as a work-force, being preferred to Polish Jews as they could no so easily escape, not knowing the language or the country.
Golczewski speaks of 34,000 Jews from the Netherlands the transports of whom to Sobibor can be traced individually. In the chapter on the Netherlands of Dimensionen des Völkermords, Gerhard Hirschfeld writes the following (page 153):
Am 5. März traf der erste Transport mit 1105 Menschen aus Westerbork nach dreitägiger Bahnfahrt in Sobibór ein. Es fand keine Selektion statt und die ankommenden wurden mit nur wenigen Ausnahmen noch am gleichen Tag ermordet. Bis zum Juli 1943 kamen noch weitere 18 Züge mit insgesamt 33 208 Juden dort an, von denen nur 19 die unbeschreibliche Realität des Lagers überlebten. Es sind vor allem die Zeugnisse dieser 19 Überlebenden, 16 Frauen und dreier Männer, die Auskunft über den Verbleib der Transporte nach Sobibór geben. Mit Ausnahme von zwei Deportationen (10. und 17. März) verließen die Züge Westerbork stets an einem Dienstag und erreichten Sobibór an dem darauffolgenden Freitag. Der Ankunftstag war für die überwiegende Mehrzahl der Deportierten auch ihr Sterbetag.
My translation:
On 5 March the first transport with 1 105 people arrived at Sobibór after a three day trip from Westerbork. There was no selection, and the arrivals were with a few exceptions murdered on the same day. Until July 1943 there arrived at this place another 18 trains with a total of 33 208 Jews, of whom only 19 survived the indescribable reality of the camp. The testimonies of these 19 survivors, 16 women and three men, are the main source of information about the fate of these transports to Sobibór. Except for two deportations (10 and 17 March) the trains always left Westerbork on a Tuesday and reached Sobibór the next Friday. The day of arrival was also the day of their death for the overwhelming majority of deportees.
Hirschfeld lists the following transports to Sobibór from the Netherlands in the attachment to his study:

Date of transport; transit camp; number of deportees; destination

2.3.1943; Westerbork; 1,105; Sobibór
10.3.1943; Westerbork; 1,105; Sobibór
17.3.1943; Westerbork; 964; Sobibór
23.3.1943; Westerbork; 1,250; Sobibór
30.3.1943; Westerbork; 1,255; Sobibór
6.4.1943; Westerbork; 2,020; Sobibór
13.4.1943; Westerbork; 1,204; Sobibór
20.4.1943; Westerbork; 1,166; Sobibór
27.4.1943; Westerbork; 1,204; Sobibór
4.5.1943; Westerbork; 1,187; Sobibór
11.5.1943; Westerbork; 1,446; Sobibór
18.5.1943; Westerbork; 2,511; Sobibór
25.5.1943; Westerbork; 2,862; Sobibór
1.6.1943; Westerbork; 3,006; Sobibór
8.6.1943; Westerbork; 3,017; Sobibór
29.6.1943; Westerbork; 2,397; Sobibór
6.7.1943; Westerbork; 2,417; Sobibór
13.7.1943; Westerbork; 1,988; Sobibór
20.7.1943; Westerbork; 2,209; Sobibór

In view of the above, I would like to see evidence that the trains were officially bound for Chelm and that any Dutch Jews on them ended up anywhere else than at Sobibór. Were any survivors from those transports other than the 19 mentioned by Hirschfeld ever identified?
Michael Mills wrote:However, it is quite possible that part of the deportees from the Netherlands continued their journey into the Ukraine, and that their destination and fate remain unknown.
Theoretical possibilities are one thing, possibilities plausible under the circumstances and evidence are another.
Michael Mills wrote:Certainly contemporary reports tell of Jews from the West arriving in Ukraine.
What exactly do those contemporary reports tell? What data – if any – do they contain about the origin and number of the deportees?


michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

#18

Post by michael mills » 24 May 2002, 14:15

Let's have a look at some of the items of information that Mr Muehlenkamp adduced, and see what they actually mean.

First, at some of the things Arad had to say about the methods of estimating the numbers of Jews deported to Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka.
The deportation method, as carried out by the German authorities in the General Government, was en masse, without lists of names or even exact numbers. Usually ghettos were totally liquidated, and only the killing capacity of the camps and the volume of the trains dictated the number of people who were deported. In places where some Jews were temporarily left behind, the Germans counted the few who remained, while all the others were pushed into the trains
According to the above, no exact count was made by the Germans of the Jews being deported. Only those exempted from deportation for labour were counted. In that case, what is the source of the figures quoted in the Hoefle telegram? They can only be estimates, perhaps derived by subtracting the known number of Jews remaining in the ghettos (who were counted, as Arad says) from some notional figure of the original number. The accounts of survivors suggests that there was no organised counting of the deportees when they arrived at the extermination camps. Accordingly, we cannot rely on the accuracy of the figures quoted in the various German reports, as they are not based on detailed counts.

Another source of information was the census of the ghetto inhabitants carried out by the Judenrats in some of these places. A census of this type was usually undertaken by order of the German authorities for purposes of forced-labor requests or in preparation for the deportations. Sometimes the Judenrats also took a census for their own purposes, for example, for food rationing or housing problems.
Documents containing these data and sometimes even the number of Jews who were deported, as collected by the Judenrat, were found after the war. Sometimes they were mentioned in diaries written by ghetto inmates and left behind.
The above sources of information would be quite useful for supplying data on the approximate numbers of Jews in the ghettos when the deportatios started (although any census for the purpose of food rationing would be likely to contain inflated numbers, so as to obtain additional rations). However, those sources would tell us nothing about where deportation transports went.

Numerous memoirs written by survivors, as well as the memorial books (Yizkor books), contain important data about the deportations, including, dates and the number of deported. Testimonies by survivors, statements by local people who witnessed the deportations, and evidence given by members of the German administration at the war-crimes trials serve as significant sources of information.
Of the above sources of information, the evidence given by members of the German administration is most likely to be reliable. The Yizkor books are martyrologies, not histories, and are unlikely to be based on accurate counts. Testimonies by survivors and witnesses to the deportations are inevitably highly subjective. If survivors of the Dresden bombing could imagine that they were being strafed by Allied fighters, then Polish villagers could also imagine things.

Now let's have a look at the statements in the Polish publication, "German Crimes in Poland".
The most active period seems to have been from August to the middle of December, 1942. During that time we may assume one daily train-load as unquestionable according to the evidence of the railway-workers. Indeed four witnesses put the figure at two per day. After that, from the middle of January to the middle of May, 1943, the average was probably one a week. Some of the witnesses put the figure at three.
The average number of wagons in a transport was 50 through sometimes, as the railway records showed, it was as many as 58.
The total number of wagon-loads of victims from August 1, 1942, to May 15, 1943, may be taken, with some certainty, to have been 7,550.
The total number of wagon-loads that is said to be "certain" is obviously a calculation, based on subjective statements about the number of trains per day, multiplied by the number of wagons per train. There may well have been some days on which two trains arrived. There may have been whole weeks on which one train per day arrived. But how long did those periods last? it seems to me that the testimony by the Polish railwaymen is highly subjective. Some railwayman observes that at certain periods one train per day arrived, and extrapolates it over a whole half-year. Likewise, it is likely that some of the transports had as many as 50 wagons, but it is also likely that that was the maximum that impressed itself itself on the minds of the railwaymen, and many transports may have been a lot smaller. No reliance can be placed on the calculated number of total wagon-loads, unless the basis of the calculation can be proved conclusively.

In the later period, from the railway records; the list of the wagons for August 17, 1943; a telegram of August 18, 1943; and a document entitled Fahrplanordnung Nr. 290 sent from Treblinka station by the Reichsbahndirektion Königsberg, the number of train-loads could be established quite accurately.
In the above-mentioned Fahrplanordnung we read among ather things: Zur Abbeförderung von Aussiedlern verkehren folgende Sonderzüge von Bialystok nach Malkinia. Ziel Treblinka, from which it may be concluded that after the revolt the following train-loads, were brought in: on Aug. 27, 1943, 41 wagons; on Aug. 19, 35 wagons; on Aug. 21, two transports of 38 wagons each; on Aug. 22, two transports of 39 wagons each; and on Aug. 23, one transport of 38 wagons; i. e. a total of 266 wagons.
Here at last we have some hard data, based on German railway records. But as I said, it is limited to a particular period, the liquidation of the Bialystok Ghetto after the uprising there. But can we be sure that all the wagon-loads recorded as leaving Bialystok ended up at Treblinka II? Survivors from Bialystok relate how selections were carried out at the place of origin, with the Jews not wanted for labour, eg Talmud students, being loaded onto certain wagons, and those selected for labour being loaded onto others. At Malkinia, the wagons containing the unwanted Jews were disconnected and sent to Treblinka, while the rest of the train containing the Jews selected for labour continued to other locations, including Majdanek. That would explain the formulation "Sonderzuege von Bialystok nach Malkinia". We find the same reference to Malkinia in the telegram from Ganzenmueller to Wolff of one year earlier, and it probably has the same sigificance; Malkinia was the place where the transports from Warsaw were divided into those taking the "useless" Jews to Treblinka for extermination, while the remainder contained to places of slave-labour.

Thus the estimate bt the Polish Commission is based on premisses that are in some cases highly subjective and in others faulty.

Mr Muehlenkamp also adduces the Stroop report which gives a figure for the number of Jews deported from Warsaw. But that says simply that they were deported; it does not say that they were all sent to Treblinka.

With regard to the deportation of Dutch Jews, at the trial of Eichmann, documents were presented that showed that the destination of the transports was Chelm. The Prosecution tried to get Eichmann to confirm that the Dutch Jews arriving at Chelm were then sent to Sobibor, but Eichmann did not know; all he knew was that he had been ordered to send transports to Chelm. The questioning resulted in a comical episode where presiding judge Moshe Landau insisted that Chelm was actually Chelmno, thus showing himself to be a complete dork. Eichmann then confirmed that Chelmno was an extermination camp that he had witnessed, but that said nothing about the Dutch Jews who travelled via Chelm.

The crucial fact is that the Prosecution produced no documents that listed Sobibor as the destination of the Dutch Jews; the destination was Chelm, the border town. If Hirschfeld listed Sobibor as the destination of transports from Westerbork, then he has obviously substituted Sobibor for Chelm, on the assumption that all the Dutch Jews who arrived at Chelm then were taken to Sobibor.

The 19 Dutch-Jewish survivors of Sobibor were from those who were taken to Sobibor to work on the processing of ammunition (there were about 1000 Jewish workers in total), and they escaped during the uprising in October 1943. No doubt they learned from the other prisoners about the gas-chamber exterminations that had taken place in the previous year, and assumed that their fellow deportees from the netherlands had met that fate. I doubt whether they actually witnessed the deportation process themselves.

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#19

Post by Roberto » 24 May 2002, 17:26

Let's have a look at some of the items of information that Mr Muehlenkamp adduced, and see what they actually mean.

First, at some of the things Arad had to say about the methods of estimating the numbers of Jews deported to Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka.

Quote:
The deportation method, as carried out by the German authorities in the General Government, was en masse, without lists of names or even exact numbers. Usually ghettos were totally liquidated, and only the killing capacity of the camps and the volume of the trains dictated the number of people who were deported. In places where some Jews were temporarily left behind, the Germans counted the few who remained, while all the others were pushed into the trains


According to the above, no exact count was made by the Germans of the Jews being deported. Only those exempted from deportation for labour were counted. In that case, what is the source of the figures quoted in the Hoefle telegram? They can only be estimates, perhaps derived by subtracting the known number of Jews remaining in the ghettos (who were counted, as Arad says) from some notional figure of the original number. The accounts of survivors suggests that there was no organised counting of the deportees when they arrived at the extermination camps. Accordingly, we cannot rely on the accuracy of the figures quoted in the various German reports, as they are not based on detailed counts.


It is rather improbable that Höfle, an official charged with and presumably bent on giving his superior a picture of the progress of “Einsatz Reinhart” as accurate as possible, would have relied on mere estimates. The fact that Höfle details his figures to the last digit also speaks against this contention. It is reasonable to assume that he had access to the train schedules and transportation documents which were partially recovered after the war and where the number of deportees was stated. Those conducting the transports probably established the strength thereof on the basis of the number of wagons and the capacity of each, which according to several eyewitness testimonials was written in chalk on the outside of each wagon. If the Jews deported weren’t counted upon loading, it was nevertheless possible to establish their number with a great degree of accuracy on the basis of the number of wagons filled to the brim with Jews and the established loading capacity of each wagon. This in turn means that, in order to establish a more or less exact figure of deportees from a given locality, the person in charge could deduct the known number of Jews remaining not from “some notional figure”, but from a rather exact figure based on the number of transports from the respective locality and the capacity of each. The fact that Höfle obviously gave exact figures on arrivals at the camps to his superiors on a monthly basis, on the other hand, suggests that counting at the places of origin was actually a lot more exact than assumed by Arad.
Quote:
Another source of information was the census of the ghetto inhabitants carried out by the Judenrats in some of these places. A census of this type was usually undertaken by order of the German authorities for purposes of forced-labor requests or in preparation for the deportations. Sometimes the Judenrats also took a census for their own purposes, for example, for food rationing or housing problems.
Documents containing these data and sometimes even the number of Jews who were deported, as collected by the Judenrat, were found after the war. Sometimes they were mentioned in diaries written by ghetto inmates and left behind.

The above sources of information would be quite useful for supplying data on the approximate numbers of Jews in the ghettos when the deportatios started (although any census for the purpose of food rationing would be likely to contain inflated numbers, so as to obtain additional rations). However, those sources would tell us nothing about where deportation transports went.
The above suggests that “notional” figures on the population of a locality before deportation may actually have been very precise and that Höfle’s staff could thus often establish the number of deportees with a great degree of exactitude by deducting the number of those left behind from the census data of the respective Jewish councils.
Quote:
Numerous memoirs written by survivors, as well as the memorial books (Yizkor books), contain important data about the deportations, including, dates and the number of deported. Testimonies by survivors, statements by local people who witnessed the deportations, and evidence given by members of the German administration at the war-crimes trials serve as significant sources of information.



Of the above sources of information, the evidence given by members of the German administration is most likely to be reliable. The Yizkor books are martyrologies, not histories, and are unlikely to be based on accurate counts. Testimonies by survivors and witnesses to the deportations are inevitably highly subjective. If survivors of the Dresden bombing could imagine that they were being strafed by Allied fighters, then Polish villagers could also imagine things.
“Could” doesn’t mean “did”, of course, and the situations are not exactly comparable because the Polish villagers watching the transports, unlike the survivors of either Dresden or the extermination camps, were not under stress. Still, the most reliable data are actually to be expected from members of the German administration.
Now let's have a look at the statements in the Polish publication, "German Crimes in Poland".

Quote:
The most active period seems to have been from August to the middle of December, 1942. During that time we may assume one daily train-load as unquestionable according to the evidence of the railway-workers. Indeed four witnesses put the figure at two per day. After that, from the middle of January to the middle of May, 1943, the average was probably one a week. Some of the witnesses put the figure at three.
The average number of wagons in a transport was 50 through sometimes, as the railway records showed, it was as many as 58.
The total number of wagon-loads of victims from August 1, 1942, to May 15, 1943, may be taken, with some certainty, to have been 7,550.


The total number of wagon-loads that is said to be "certain" is obviously a calculation, based on subjective statements about the number of trains per day, multiplied by the number of wagons per train. There may well have been some days on which two trains arrived. There may have been whole weeks on which one train per day arrived. But how long did those periods last? it seems to me that the testimony by the Polish railwaymen is highly subjective. Some railwayman observes that at certain periods one train per day arrived, and extrapolates it over a whole half-year. Likewise, it is likely that some of the transports had as many as 50 wagons, but it is also likely that that was the maximum that impressed itself itself on the minds of the railwaymen, and many transports may have been a lot smaller. No reliance can be placed on the calculated number of total wagon-loads, unless the basis of the calculation can be proved conclusively.


Quote:
In the later period, from the railway records; the list of the wagons for August 17, 1943; a telegram of August 18, 1943; and a document entitled Fahrplanordnung Nr. 290 sent from Treblinka station by the Reichsbahndirektion Königsberg, the number of train-loads could be established quite accurately.
In the above-mentioned Fahrplanordnung we read among ather things: Zur Abbeförderung von Aussiedlern verkehren folgende Sonderzüge von Bialystok nach Malkinia. Ziel Treblinka, from which it may be concluded that after the revolt the following train-loads, were brought in: on Aug. 27, 1943, 41 wagons; on Aug. 19, 35 wagons; on Aug. 21, two transports of 38 wagons each; on Aug. 22, two transports of 39 wagons each; and on Aug. 23, one transport of 38 wagons; i. e. a total of 266 wagons.



Here at last we have some hard data, based on German railway records. But as I said, it is limited to a particular period, the liquidation of the Bialystok Ghetto after the uprising there. But can we be sure that all the wagon-loads recorded as leaving Bialystok ended up at Treblinka II? Survivors from Bialystok relate how selections were carried out at the place of origin, with the Jews not wanted for labour, eg Talmud students, being loaded onto certain wagons, and those selected for labour being loaded onto others. At Malkinia, the wagons containing the unwanted Jews were disconnected and sent to Treblinka, while the rest of the train containing the Jews selected for labour continued to other locations, including Majdanek. That would explain the formulation "Sonderzuege von Bialystok nach Malkinia". We find the same reference to Malkinia in the telegram from Ganzenmueller to Wolff of one year earlier, and it probably has the same sigificance; Malkinia was the place where the transports from Warsaw were divided into those taking the "useless" Jews to Treblinka for extermination, while the remainder contained to places of slave-labour.

Thus the estimate bt the Polish Commission is based on premisses that are in some cases highly subjective and in others faulty.
The estimate by the Polish Commission is based on extrapolations of incomplete documentary evidence complemented by eyewitness testimonials which may be subjective but are not necessarily so and by considerations that may be wrong but are everything other than illogical or unreasonable. In view of the recently discovered Höfle memorandum and the assessment by Wolfgang Scheffler at the second Treblinka trial before the Düsseldorf County Court, the figure established by the Central Commission for the whole period of operation of the Treblinka extermination camp (731,600) must be considered too low rather than too high.

As to the references to Malkinia in the Fahrplanordnung assessed by the Central Commission (“Zur Abbeförderung von Aussledlern verkehren folgende Sonderzüge von Bialystok nach Malkinia. Ziel Treblinka”) and in Ganzmüller’s letter to Wolff, there is no need or room for fantasizing about what they may have meant let alone constructing a non-existing transit camp at Malkinia, for which there is no evidence whatsoever, out of them. A look at the railway map kindly provided by Scott Smith in his post # 1719 (3/8/02 6:38:54 pm) on the thread

Treblinka Extermination Camp
http://pub3.ezboard.com/fskalmanforumfr ... 41&stop=60

of the old forum shows that Malkinia lies on the line going from Warsaw to Bialystok and that any trains going to Treblinka from either Warsaw or Bialystok would have to stop at Malkinia in order to be re-directed from the Warsaw-Bialystok line to the Warsaw-Siedlce line, from which a spur line went to Treblinka extermination camp. The line between Warsaw and Bialystok is actually referred to as the “Warsaw-Malkinia RR” on the map. The long and complicated marshalling procedure that must have been carried out at Malkinia station sufficiently explains why Malkinia was mentioned as a stop in regard to trains bound for Treblinka which travelled on the Warsaw-Malkinia-Bialystok line.
Mr Muehlenkamp also adduces the Stroop report which gives a figure for the number of Jews deported from Warsaw. But that says simply that they were deported; it does not say that they were all sent to Treblinka.
The “adduction” actually originated with Michael Mills:
michael mills wrote:The numbers deported is less likely to be accurate, except in cases where a German record has survived, eg the Stroop Report giving the numbers deported from the Warsaw Ghetto.
The Stroop Report in fact does not state the destination of the ca. 310,000 Jews who were transported in freight trains from the Warsaw ghetto to Treblinka during the period from July 22, 1942 to October 3, 1942. But Ganzmüller’s letter to Wolff does:
[…]“Seit dem 22.7. fährt täglich ein Zug mit je 5 000 Juden von Warschau über Malkinia nach Treblinka, ausserdem zweimal wöchentlich ein Zug mit 5 000 Juden von Przemysl nach Belzec.[…]”
My translation:
[…]“Since 22.7. a train with 5 000 Jews goes daily from Warsaw via Malkinia to Treblinka. Furthermore there is a train with 5 000 Jews going from Przemysl to Belzec twice a week.[…]”
A look at both documents thus leaves no room for doubt as to where those ca. 310,000 Jews mentioned by Stroop went to.
With regard to the deportation of Dutch Jews, at the trial of Eichmann, documents were presented that showed that the destination of the transports was Chelm. The Prosecution tried to get Eichmann to confirm that the Dutch Jews arriving at Chelm were then sent to Sobibor, but Eichmann did not know; all he knew was that he had been ordered to send transports to Chelm. The questioning resulted in a comical episode where presiding judge Moshe Landau insisted that Chelm was actually Chelmno, thus showing himself to be a complete dork. Eichmann then confirmed that Chelmno was an extermination camp that he had witnessed, but that said nothing about the Dutch Jews who travelled via Chelm.
How do we know that the documents showing Chelm as the destination of transports referred to the trains from Westerbork to Sobibor listed by Hirschfeld?
The crucial fact is that the Prosecution produced no documents that listed Sobibor as the destination of the Dutch Jews; the destination was Chelm, the border town. If Hirschfeld listed Sobibor as the destination of transports from Westerbork, then he has obviously substituted Sobibor for Chelm, on the assumption that all the Dutch Jews who arrived at Chelm then were taken to Sobibor.
Hirschfeld didn’t exactly suck that out of his thumb, as Michael Mills obviously believes. The reasoning may have been that

- the trains that left Westerbork on the dates indicated in Hirschfeld’s list were ostensibly bound for Chelm, but they (or their load) never arrived there;

- the same trains were, however, seen three days after departure arriving at Sobibor by Dutch permanent inmates temporarily spared to help unload incoming trains from their home country and direct the deportees to the gas chambers, some of which permanent inmates managed to survive Sobibor.

In the first footnote to his list of transports, Hirschfeld tells us that the transportation lists prepared at Westerbork and other documents of the camp administration make it possible to determine exactly the date of each transport, the number of deportees and their age and sex. It was more difficult to establish their destinations, which except in the case of deportations to Theresienstadt and Bergen Belsen were simply stated as “to the East”. In this respect the records of the destination camps, where existing, and the testimonials of surviving inmates were used to establish what had become of these trains.
The 19 Dutch-Jewish survivors of Sobibor were from those who were taken to Sobibor to work on the processing of ammunition (there were about 1000 Jewish workers in total), and they escaped during the uprising in October 1943. No doubt they learned from the other prisoners about the gas-chamber exterminations that had taken place in the previous year, and assumed that their fellow deportees from the netherlands had met that fate. I doubt whether they actually witnessed the deportation process themselves.
The above speculation does not stand up to scrutiny. The survivors from the Dutch transports to Sobibór were not allowed to live on account of their good looks, but because they were needed for the performance of the extermination tasks. At least some of them are likely to have seen duty at the arrival ramp, where it was their task to receive the arrivals from the Netherlands and to calm them down and direct them to the gas chambers in their own Dutch language, thus avoiding panic and providing for a smooth running of the extermination process. This explains why the survivors were able to record not only the dates of arrival of the trains from Westerbork – three days after departure, usually on Fridays for trains that left Westerbork on Tuesdays –, but also the number of arrivals from the transport selected for the camp’s labor force: 60 – 80 young men and women from the transport of 10 March 1943, 35 men from the transport of 17 March 1943, 46-58 young men and women from the transport of 6 May, 80 men from the transport of 11 May and 81 young men from the transport of 1 June 1943, according to Hirschfeld. The testimonials of the surviving witnesses, according to the same source, further made it possible to trace the destinies of 359 Dutch Jews known by name who perished at Sobibór.

cobalt
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 17 Jun 2002, 23:19
Location: USA

#20

Post by cobalt » 19 Jun 2002, 09:21

Mr. Muehlenkamp, pardon for the intrusion into this highly with numbers charged conversation, but attrocities of gigantic proportions were carried out by all sides and no one cared about numbers at the time. So why are the numbers right down to the decimal points so important today 60 years later? The majority of people living today don't remember WWII and some never even heard of it. So the event that we call WWII caused the death of 50 - 60 million people, but it might as well have been caused by the impact of as asteroid, because there is nothing that can be done about it today. However when one's brain gets too cluttered up with facts and figures it does not leave much room for common sense deductions and rationale. It does not matter if there is a record or a study that can account for all the body parts of the victims because ultimately nobody really cares.

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#21

Post by Roberto » 19 Jun 2002, 10:33

cobalt wrote:Mr. Muehlenkamp, pardon for the intrusion
Well, buddy, it seems you chose the wrong tone right at the outset.
cobalt wrote:into this highly with numbers charged conversation, but attrocities of gigantic proportions were carried out by all sides and no one cared about numbers at the time. So why are the numbers right down to the decimal points so important today 60 years later?
Could it be because of all those ideologically motivated propagandists who, taking advantage of a perceived or expected ignorance of the scale of Nazi crimes, try to play down that very scale in order to make a regime they cherish look somewhat more acceptable?
cobalt wrote:The majority of people living today don't remember WWII and some never even heard of it.
That’s what said propagandists obviously count on.
cobalt wrote:So the event that we call WWII caused the death of 50 - 60 million people, but it might as well have been caused by the impact of as asteroid, because there is nothing that can be done about it today.
If that’s your point of view, why do you even bother to hit the keyboard? To me there is a difference between “bad luck” (natural catastrophes, epidemics, etc.), war and murder. Detailed knowledge of either is a first step to avoiding their repetition at least on the same scale, especially in the case of the latter two, in my opinion. And I don’t think I’m alone with that opinion.
cobalt wrote:However when one's brain gets too cluttered up with facts and figures it does not leave much room for common sense deductions and rationale.
If that’s your problem, how about blaming it on the limitations of your own mind?
cobalt wrote:It does not matter if there is a record or a study that can account for all the body parts of the victims because ultimately nobody really cares.
Certain issues are important, others less so. The motivations of the killers and the order of magnitude of their killing belong in the former category, as I see it, at least as long as there are fools who would like to put the killers on a pedestal. If you think those things don’t matter, I suggest you dedicate your efforts to endeavors that you consider more important and leave those who think they matter alone.

cobalt
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 17 Jun 2002, 23:19
Location: USA

#22

Post by cobalt » 19 Jun 2002, 22:06

Mr. Roberto: I think it is your perpetual paranoia which makes you think that I propose putting killers on a pedestal. I'm all for justice, but unless an effort is made to bring all killers, and I mean all, to justice there is no point in pushing the issue. It makes no sense to go after the participants of the Lidice massacre and shrug off the massacre of My Lay, for example.

What has the world learned from this? That human nature is human nature, and that rules are written to be broken . But what is more important is it has educated the militaries how to prevent exposure of their deeds or to sanitize and codename their activities. Nowadays mass anihilations of civilians are labeled "collateral damage" to make them more palatable. So where is your meaningull lesson?

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#23

Post by Roberto » 19 Jun 2002, 23:25

cobalt wrote:Mr. Roberto: I think it is your perpetual paranoia which makes you think that I propose putting killers on a pedestal.
I think it's your perpetual self-centered paranoia that makes you think I was talking about you. I was referring to the Nazi propagandists who call themselves "Revisionists". Ever heard about them?
cobalt wrote: I'm all for justice, but unless an effort is made to bring all killers, and I mean all, to justice there is no point in pushing the issue. It makes no sense to go after the participants of the Lidice massacre and shrug off the massacre of My Lay, for example.
Why, should we let the Lidice killers go because we can't get the My Lai killers as well? Let's at least get the former if we can, I say.
cobalt wrote: What has the world learned from this? That human nature is human nature, and that rules are written to be broken . But what is more important is it has educated the militaries how to prevent exposure of their deeds or to sanitize and codename their activities. Nowadays mass anihilations of civilians are labeled "collateral damage" to make them more palatable. So where is your meaningull lesson?
You're something of a pessimist. I see some progress in the middle of all the muck. At least in the recent bombings of Serbia and Afghanistan an effort was made to use precision weapons and avoid civilian casualties, which were accordingly lower than in previous wars. There was no such effort in World War II or Vietnam, where all belligerents fought with complete disregard for the civilian population, even when they didn't deliberately massacre civilians out of hand.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

For Cobalt

#24

Post by michael mills » 20 Jun 2002, 09:32

Cobalt

You have obviously noticed Mr Muehlenkamp's extreme aggressiveness in his attitude to any poster whom he disagrees with.

He himself has made known a few details of his background which in my view go a long way toward explaining that aggressiveness.

According to his information, he was born into a highly nationalistic expatriate German community in Colombia, to parents who had migrated there at some unspecified point after the War. Again according to what he has told us, Hitler was revered in that community as the great leader of the German people. Mr Muehlenkamp himself, to use his own words, "playfully romanced National Socialism" in his teenage years (ie when he was about the same age as the "radical right" youths in Germany today). At some unspecified point he gave up his nationalist ideas and became the aggressive opponent of "Fascism" that he likes to appear to be.

It may well be that, having moved to Germany, he found that a past record of "playfully romancing national Socialism" was not exactly conducive to succeeding in the "politically correct" Europe of today, and he adopted his swaggeringly aggressive stance toward any person whose views he disagrees with as a means of establishing his "anti-Fascist" credentials. More often than not, he is setting up straw men and knocking them down.

In a way, that is a bit of a shame, as some of his posts have shown that he is at times quite capable of dispassionate, rational analysis of the phenomenon that was Nazi Germany, for example, his discussion of the theses of the German historian, Christian Gerlach, which posit rational and utilitarian motives for the genocidal policies adopted by the German Government. He quite openly avows that those theses are "revisionist" in that they depart markedly from "politically correct" historiography, and has no qualms in accepting those theses - nor should he.

Unfortunately, he seems to have a compulsive need to "fight denial", and for that reason he will often zero in on particular contributors to this forum who advance views that are "revisionist" in the sense used above, and denounce them aggressively as "deniers", falsely attributing to them extremist ideas and attitudes that they do not have, as in your case. But as I have shown above, the reasons for his modus operandi are fairly clear. As we all know, there is no-one more zealous and self-righteous in a particular cause as a convert from an opposing cause.

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Re: For Cobalt

#25

Post by Roberto » 20 Jun 2002, 10:33

michael mills wrote:You have obviously noticed Mr Muehlenkamp's extreme aggressiveness in his attitude to any poster whom he disagrees with.


Well, it’s not exactly as if Mr. Cobalt had approached me in a friendly way, is it? Mills seems to be another lousy observer.
michael mills wrote:He himself has made known a few details of his background which in my view go a long way toward explaining that aggressiveness.
That’s what Mills, with his known tendency for farfetched sweeping conclusions, would like to believe.
michael mills wrote:According to his information, he was born into a highly nationalistic expatriate German community in Colombia, to parents who had migrated there at some unspecified point after the War. Again according to what he has told us, Hitler was revered in that community as the great leader of the German people.
Going one step further, Mills is now misrepresenting my words. I said that there were many old Nazis around in the community, which is a fact but of course doesn't mean that the community as a whole revered Adolf as a great leader. That’s Mills’ wishful thinking.
michael mills wrote: Mr Muehlenkamp himself, to use his own words, "playfully romanced National Socialism" in his teenage years (ie when he was about the same age as the "radical right" youths in Germany today). At some unspecified point he gave up his nationalist ideas and became the aggressive opponent of "Fascism" that he likes to appear to be.
I grew up at age eighteen, whereas Mills still seems to live in a state of immaturity at age 54. It was not then that I became an aggressive opponent of National Socialism, however. That happened only when I met dishonest propagandists like himself on this forum.
michael mills wrote: It may well be that, having moved to Germany, he found that a past record of "playfully romancing national Socialism" was not exactly conducive to succeeding in the "politically correct" Europe of today, and he adopted his swaggeringly aggressive stance toward any person whose views he disagrees with as a means of establishing his "anti-Fascist" credentials. More often than not, he is setting up straw men and knocking them down.
As usual, Mills has some rather strange ideas of what “may well be”. At least he should know me well enough by now to realize that "political correctness” is the last thing I cared about and that my views are entirely my own.
michael mills wrote: In a way, that is a bit of a shame, as some of his posts have shown that he is at times quite capable of dispassionate, rational analysis of the phenomenon that was Nazi Germany, for example, his discussion of the theses of the German historian, Christian Gerlach, which posit rational and utilitarian motives for the genocidal policies adopted by the German Government. He quite openly avows that those theses are "revisionist" in that they depart markedly from "politically correct" historiography, and has no qualms in accepting those theses - nor should he.
As I said, Mills should have realized by now that “political correctness” is the last thing I care about. If the apologetic propaganda he tries to sell were seen as “politically correct”, I would still reject and despise it. Whether accepted or not, nonsense is nonsense. Revisionism in the proper sense of the word is something I am very fond of, on the other hand. It may occasionally have something to do with refuting “politically correct” notions – such as the long-cherished myth that the Wehrmacht was not involved in Nazi crimes – but it is essentially about furthering the knowledge of history by re-interpreting the motivations of its actors in the light of newly discovered evidence. It thus has nothing to do with the “Revisionism” promoted by Mills and his more radical peers, which consists in denying, misrepresenting or playing down historical facts in support of an ideological agenda.
michael mills wrote: Unfortunately, he seems to have a compulsive need to "fight denial",
Dead wrong. I just have a healthy aversion to propaganda nonsense.
michael mills wrote: and for that reason he will often zero in on particular contributors to this forum who advance views that are "revisionist" in the sense used above, and denounce them aggressively as "deniers", falsely attributing to them extremist ideas and attitudes that they do not have, as in your case.


Mills is invited to show me what statements of mine betray such “advance views” in regard to Mr. Cobalt. He is also invited to show us where I have falsely attributed extremist ideas to other posters. In doing this, Mills should be careful not to confound the provocation I occasionally use to find out what a newcomer is up to with deliberately or lightheartedly false accusations.
michael mills wrote: But as I have shown above, the reasons for his modus operandi are fairly clear.


Mills has shown nothing other than what it is he would badly like to believe, which in turn is illustrative of the bizarre workings of his own mind.
michael mills wrote: As we all know, there is no-one more zealous and self-righteous in a particular cause as a convert from an opposing cause.


I don’t intend to convert anyone, well aware as I am that true believers cannot be converted. I only intend to provide information to set the record straight whenever Mills et al try to sell propaganda lies (which Mills admittedly does far more skillfully and discreetly than his peers). And that intention has a lot more to do with elementary common sense and a passion for historical truth than with me being the “convert from an opposing cause” that I seem to be in Mills’ weird fantasies. I reckon it is hard for ideologically motivated propagandists like himself to conceive an opponent devoid of an ideological agenda.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

#26

Post by michael mills » 20 Jun 2002, 15:09

Mr Muehlenkamp fulminated:
He is also invited to show us where I have falsely attributed extremist ideas to other posters. In doing this, Mills should be careful not to confound the provocation I occasionally use to find out what a newcomer is up to with deliberately or lightheartedly false accusations.
Well, well, well! Mr Muehlenkamp is telling us that he DOES "occasionally" use provocation, that he DOES "deliberately" and "lightheartedly" make false allegations.

"lighthearted"? A bit like "playfully romancing" National Socialism perhaps. As I wrote, Mr Muehlenkamp will often barge in aggressively, treating posters as if they were obscurantist extremists, making all sorts of allegations and insinuations which I said were often false or misrepresentative, and which he now admits are false. (Of course, some posters to this board are obscurantist extremists, but Mr Muehlenkamp seems incapable of drawing a distinction between them and other posters who simply have a different view to his own).



I only intend to provide information to set the record straight whenever Mills et al try to sell propaganda lies (which Mills admittedly does far more skillfully and discreetly than his peers)
Mr Muehlenkamp does quite often provide very useful information. It would be helpful if he stuck to that rather than aggressively attacking other posters. It would also be helpful if he would sometimes admit that he does not have all the information, and refrain from attacking the honesty of persons who introduce information with which he is unfamiliar.

I will leave it to readers to determine whether any contributuions I have made to this board constitute "propaganda lies". Perhaps Mr Muehlenkamp could list some.

I reckon it is hard for ideologically motivated propagandists like himself to conceive an opponent devoid of an ideological agenda.
It is obvious to any reader that a high proportion (not all) of Mr Muehlenkamp's posts are promoting a particular ideological agenda. But I am entirely willing to accept that that agenda is not his own, and he is not personally committed to any particular ideology, having abandoned his youthful flirtation with National Socialism when he realised its unacceptability in the modern world. As I have surmised previously, he is the monkey, not the organ-grinder (now that's a light-hearted allegation, meant entirely in jest). As I wrote, he is adopting the POSE of being a "denial-fighter", in order to work his passage in his current environment and to wipe out the taint of his youthful flirtation with National Socialism.

I sometimes get the feeling that when he comes out swinging wildly against some hapless newcomer whom he "lightheartedly" accuses of "denial", his target is actually his own former National Socialist self, which he is trying to deny. When he uses the term "your beloved Fuehrer" as the implied object of devotion of someone he is attacking, it is really his OWN (former) beloved Fuehrer.

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#27

Post by Roberto » 20 Jun 2002, 15:55

michael mills wrote:Mr Muehlenkamp fulminated:
He is also invited to show us where I have falsely attributed extremist ideas to other posters. In doing this, Mills should be careful not to confound the provocation I occasionally use to find out what a newcomer is up to with deliberately or lightheartedly false accusations.
michael mills wrote:Well, well, well! Mr Muehlenkamp is telling us that he DOES "occasionally" use provocation, that he DOES "deliberately" and "lightheartedly" make false allegations.
No, I said exactly the opposite. Mills should learn to read.
michael mills wrote:"lighthearted"? A bit like "playfully romancing" National Socialism perhaps. As I wrote, Mr Muehlenkamp will often barge in aggressively, treating posters as if they were obscurantist extremists, making all sorts of allegations and insinuations which I said were often false or misrepresentative, and which he now admits are false. (Of course, some posters to this board are obscurantist extremists, but Mr Muehlenkamp seems incapable of drawing a distinction between them and other posters who simply have a different view to his own).
Any example of someone I wrongly treated as an obscurantist extremist, so that I may apologize to the poor soul? With my statements exposing such treatment, if possible.
I only intend to provide information to set the record straight whenever Mills et al try to sell propaganda lies (which Mills admittedly does far more skillfully and discreetly than his peers)
michael mills wrote:Mr Muehlenkamp does quite often provide very useful information. It would be helpful if he stuck to that rather than aggressively attacking other posters.
As I do so in order to respond in kind and/or when I've read propaganda nonsense too thick or too often repeated, that depends entirely on said other posters.
michael mills wrote:It would also be helpful if he would sometimes admit that he does not have all the information,
With that I have no problem, as Mills well knows. Lack of information is often the reason why I request backup to glib assertions made by my opponents.
michael mills wrote:and refrain from attacking the honesty of persons who introduce information with which he is unfamiliar.
I consider it my duty to provide backup to a statement of mine if so requested, whereas Mills obviously considers a similar request to be an attack on his "honesty". Could that be because he is not so sure as to how honest his assertions are?
michael mills wrote:I will leave it to readers to determine whether any contributuions I have made to this board constitute "propaganda lies". Perhaps Mr Muehlenkamp could list some.
The preparation of such a list would take some time due to the discretion Mills applies in spreading his half-truths or untruths. His puny efforts to construct "transit camps" en route to the Aktion Reinhard(t) extermination camps and his contention that Aktion T4 was an effort to "target" a mortality that was expected to occur anyway in German mental health institutions due to wartime conditions are two good examples of this proceeding.
I reckon it is hard for ideologically motivated propagandists like himself to conceive an opponent devoid of an ideological agenda.
michael mills wrote:It is obvious to any reader that a high proportion (not all) of Mr Muehlenkamp's posts are promoting a particular ideological agenda.
I wonder what that "particular ideological agenda" is supposed to be about, and I strongly doubt that Mills can explain it.
michael mills wrote:But I am entirely willing to accept that that agenda is not his own, and he is not personally committed to any particular ideology, having abandoned his youthful flirtation with National Socialism when he realised its unacceptability in the modern world.
Mills should be careful not to repeat fantasies of his that have been demonstrated as such. He might make a fool of himself.
michael mills wrote: As I have surmised previously, he is the monkey, not the organ-grinder (now that's a light-hearted allegation, meant entirely in jest).
Getting better, insults and all. Who is the "organ grinder" supposed to be?
michael mills wrote: As I wrote, he is adopting the POSE of being a "denial-fighter", in order to work his passage in his current environment and to wipe out the taint of his youthful flirtation with National Socialism.
That's what Mills would obviously like to believe so badly that he keeps repeating it, even though I have explained that my sole motivation is a healthy aversion to dishonest propagandists like himself.
michael mills wrote: I sometimes get the feeling that when he comes out swinging wildly against some hapless newcomer whom he "lightheartedly" accuses of "denial", his target is actually his own former National Socialist self, which he is trying to deny.
The more Mills plays that cord, the sillier he becomes. Is there any "hapless newcomer" I have wrongly accused of "denial" that he can show me?
michael mills wrote:When he uses the term "your beloved Fuehrer" as the implied object of devotion of someone he is attacking, it is really his OWN (former) beloved Fuehrer.
Mills would make a lousy psychologist. Irony aside, is there anyone I used that term on who did not express his devotion by trying to make good old Adolf appear in an unwarrantedly favorable light?

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

#28

Post by michael mills » 20 Jun 2002, 16:15

Irony aside, is there anyone I used that term on who did not express his devotion by trying to make good old Adolf appear in an unwarrantedly favorable light?
Aye, there's the nub of the issue. What exactly constitutes making Hitler appear in an "unwarrantedly favorable" light?

If a particular action of Hitler's is explained as a ruthless reaction to events rather than an expression of maniacal bloodlust an "unwarrantedly favorable" interpretation of Hitler?

One suspects that for Mr Muehlenkamp, any explanation of Hitler's actions that was not based upon his being the devil incarnate would be "unwarrantedly favorable".

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#29

Post by Roberto » 20 Jun 2002, 18:25

michael mills wrote:
Irony aside, is there anyone I used that term on who did not express his devotion by trying to make good old Adolf appear in an unwarrantedly favorable light?
michael mills wrote:Aye, there's the nub of the issue. What exactly constitutes making Hitler appear in an "unwarrantedly favorable" light?
Evidence to the contrary.
michael mills wrote:[If a particular action of Hitler's is explained as a ruthless reaction to events rather than an expression of maniacal bloodlust an "unwarrantedly favorable" interpretation of Hitler??
No. Pure "maniacal bloodlust" was rarely the motivation. Irrational recklessness was usually combined with considerations perceived as rational.
michael mills wrote:One suspects that for Mr Muehlenkamp, any explanation of Hitler's actions that was not based upon his being the devil incarnate would be "unwarrantedly favorable".
Nonsense. Adolf's actions usually resulted from a combination of ruthless fanaticism and cold-blooded power politics. He was no devil incarnate. He was just one of history's greatest mass murderers, among other things.

Post Reply

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”