Martin Bormann 11 July 1943 memo - Hitler prohibits publicly discussing "future overall solution" to Jewish Question

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1583
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Martin Bormann 11 July 1943 memo - Hitler prohibits publicly discussing "future overall solution" to Jewish Question

Postby Lamprecht » 3 months 3 weeks ago (Wed Dec 11, 2019 9:21 pm)

I did not see any thread devoted to this document.
Occasionally it is cited by exterminationists as proof that the Nazis were mass murdering Jews. I have found these two images

ImageImage
Betrifft: Behandlung der Judenfrage

Im Auftrage des Führers teile ich mit:

Bei der öffentlichen Behandlung der Judenfrage muß jede Erörterung einer künftigen Gesamtlösung unterbleiben.

Es kann jedoch davon gesprochen werden, dass die Juden geschlossen zu zweckentsprechendem Arbeitseinsatz herangezogen werden.

gez. M. Bormann
English:
Re: Treatment of the Jewish Question
-----
On Instructions from the Fuehrer I make known the following:

Where the Jewish Question is brought up in public, there may be no discussion of a future overall solution.

It may, however, be mentioned that the Jews are taken in groups for appropriate labor purposes.

Signed, M, Bormann

Just looking at this document, there is nothing at all about it that implies any sort of extermination policy. Yes, an extermination policy would be secretive if it existed, but there are many reasons for a policy to be secretive even if it does not involve extermination. Every government/military on the planet has secret programs/operations that they do not want discussed.

The document contrasts "future overall solution" with current use of Jews for forced labor. This is towards the end of Aktion Reinhardt, the secret mass resettlement program. As to why these labor camps would not be secretive, it was because that was totally impossible: various concentration camps allowed mail/postcards, prisoners were sometimes released after a period of time, and for example at Auschwitz, civilians could come to work and be paid for it.

Despite many critics [perhaps ironically] pretending as though a mass resettlement program during WWII was some sort of enjoyable vacation, or some benevolent thing the Germans would have wanted everyone to know about, this is not merely a strawman. I would suggest the following threads:

The "Operation Reinhardt Secrecy Oath" - proof for extermination? viewtopic.php?t=12924

Prisoners dying in transit to the AR camps (Sobibor, Belzec, Treblinka) / other deaths / expected death tolls viewtopic.php?t=12910

The date of this document (11 July 1943) must be noted. According to exterminationists, the "Final Solution" was not always a plan to exterminate Jews. Instead, it slowly developed into a genocidal policy. None of the "Final Solution" documents actually state that the "Final Solution" was a "kill all Jews" policy - quite the opposite. Usually it is said that at the beginning of 1942 the decision to exterminate the Jews was made, typically citing the 20 January 1942 Wannsee Conference.

The claimed text of the Wannsee conference - the Wannsee Protocols - make no mention of any extermination plan. I will not go too deeply into Wannsee here because there are other threads for that, but I will provide some links and the nquote some part of the Wannsee Protocols. Just search "Wannsee" in this forum, it is covered heavily:

Wannsee Conference minutes debunked viewtopic.php?t=1647

English Translation of Wannsee Protocols: https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wannsee_Protocol

Wannsee Conference Info https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wannsee_Conference

From the Wannsee Protocols:
At the beginning of the discussion Chief of the Security Police and of the SD, SS-Obergruppenführer Heydrich, reported that the Reich Marshal had appointed him delegate for the preparations for the final solution of the Jewish question in Europe and pointed out that this discussion had been called for the purpose of clarifying fundamental questions.

The wish of the Reich Marshal to have a draft sent to him concerning organizational, factual and material interests in relation to the final solution of the Jewish question in Europe makes necessary an initial common action of all central offices immediately concerned with these questions in order to bring their general activities into line. The Reichsführer-SS and the Chief of the German Police (Chief of the Security Police and the SD) was entrusted with the official central handling of the final solution of the Jewish question without regard to geographic borders. The Chief of the Security Police and the SD then gave a short report of the struggle which has been carried on thus far against this enemy, the essential points being the following:

a) the expulsion of the Jews from every sphere of life of the German people,

b) the expulsion of the Jews from the living space of the German people.


In carrying out these efforts, an increased and planned acceleration of the emigration of the Jews from Reich territory was started, as the only possible present solution.
...
In the meantime the Reichsführer-SS and Chief of the German Police had prohibited emigration of Jews due to the dangers of an emigration in wartime and due to the possibilities of the East.

Another possible solution of the problem has now taken the place of emigration, i.e. the evacuation of the Jews to the East, provided that the Führer gives the appropriate approval in advance.

There is nothing in this document to suggest any sort of plan to exterminate the Jews. Yet, this is when "Final Solution" is supposed to have become an "extermination" policy.

Martin Bormann was no random NSDAP official. He was Hitler's private secretary and after Rudolf Hess's 1941 flight to Britain became the head of the NSDAP's Chancellery. Bormann was accepted into Hitler's inner circle, accompanied him almost everywhere and provided him briefings and summaries of events. He was present with Hitler in the Fuehrerbunker when Hitler committed suicide. Bormann himself did not attend the Wannsee conference, but his assistant SS-Oberführer Dr. Gerhard Klopfer did attend. So we should reasonably expect that Bormann himself knew what was discussed there, and would have known about any extermination policy if it was taking place.

Another document from Martin Bormann, dating 9 October 1942 (9 months after Wannsee) gives a different picture regarding the "Final Solution" than what exterminationists would have us believe. I will link to a thread devoted to this document, and also quote excerpts from it:

3244-PS Martin Bormann on the solution of the Jewish Problem viewtopic.php?t=9280

From the text:
Preparatory Measures for the Solution of the Jewish Problem in Europe-Rumors About the Position of the Jews in the East.
V.I. 66/881 of the 9 Oct., 1942

In the course of the work on the final solution of the Jewish problem, discussions about "very strict measures" against the Jews, especially in the Eastern territories, have lately been taking place within the population of the various areas of the Reich. Investigations showed that such discussions - mostly in a distorted and exaggerated form - were passed on by soldiers on leave from various units committed in the East, who had the opportunity to eye-witness these measures. It is conceivable that not all "Blood Germans" are capable of demonstrating sufficient understanding for the necessity of such measures, especially not those parts of the population which do not have the opportunity of visualizing bolshevist atrocities on the basis of their own observations. In order to be able to counter-act any formation of rumors in this connection, which frequently ark of an intentional, prejudiced character, the following statements are issued for information about the present state of affairs:

For approx. 2000 years, a so-far unsuccessful battle has been waged against Judaism. Only since 1933 have we started to find ways and means in order to enable a complete separation of Judaism from the German masses.

The work toward a solution which has previously been accomplished can in the main be divided as follows:

The repulsion of Jews from the individual spheres of living of the German people...

The attempt to completely drive out the enemy from the area of the Reich... it was hoped this problem could be solved in the main by speeding up the Jewish emigration.

Since the outbreak of war in 1939 these possibilities of emigration decreased to an ever greater extent... in view of the large numbers of Jews residing in these territories a complete repulsion of the Jews by emigration is no longer possible.

...the whole problem must still be solved by the present generation.

A complete removal or withdrawal of the millions of Jews residing in the European economic space [Wirtschaftsraum] is therefore an urgent need in the fight for the security of existence of the German people.

Starting with the territory of the Reich and proceeding to the remaining European countries included in the final solution, the Jews are currently being deported to large camps which have already been established or which are to be established in the East, where they will either be used for work or else transported still farther to the East...

As we see, Bormann quite explicitly states that the "Final Solution" is a policy of expelling/resettling/deporting Jews; Either to concentration camps or further east. Read the whole thing, I didn't exclude any talk of extermination or gassing. This document is in total congruence with the revisionist position, but exterminationists will likely insist that "evacuation" or "deportation" or "resettlement" here is a "code word for mass murder." :roll:

Already by the time of this document (9 October 1942), it was known that the "Final Solution" would be postponed until after the war. Some examples:

1 - Undated Schlegelberger memo (March or April 1942) stating Hitler declared to Hans Lammers that "the Solution of the Jewish Problem has been postponed until after the war is over" viewtopic.php?t=534

2 - 24 July 1942, Hitler at a HQ dinner stated that he will tackle Jewish problem "nach Beendigung des Krieges" (after the war's over). https://archive.is/RXi60#selection-153.78-161.199

3 - Two other examples here: viewtopic.php?p=93103#p93103

In regards to #3, that entire thread is devoted to documents mentioning the "Final Solution" - it is a great read


In conclusion, there is nothing about this specific document that refutes revisionists or necessarily supports the "Holocaust" story. In fact, quite the opposite. The document is dated over one and a half years from the Wannsee Conference, which is supposedly when the Germans decided to exterminate all Jews.
The document is stating that there should be no speculative discussion regarding a future solution to the Jewish question. Yet, if the Jews had actually been subjected to over a year and a half of extermination, what sense would it make to say there should be no future discussion of the Jewish Question? At this point in time it is claimed that over 1.5 million Jews were already killed at 3 AR camps. Why would they prohibit talk of a "future overall solution" if the Jews were expected to all be dead by then? :?

If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10002
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Martin Bormann 11 July 1943 memo - Hitler prohibits publicly discussing "future overall solution" to Jewish Question

Postby Hannover » 3 months 3 weeks ago (Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:16 am)

The mentioned Schlegelberger Document along with the Luther Memorandum clarifies 'The Jewish Question", real & verifiable documents that make short work of the ridiculous 'extermination' claims:

Image
"Mr Reich Minister Lammers informed me that the Führer had repeatedly declared to him that he wants to hear that the Solution of the Jewish Problem has been postponed until after the war is over. That being so, the current discussions are of purely theoretical value, in Mr Reich Minister Lammers' opinion. He will moreover take pains to ensure that, whatever else happens, no fundamental decisions are taken without his knowledge in consequence of a surprise briefing by any third party."

Document's origins: Schlegelberger's undated minute on Lammer's reference to Hitler's ruling is in German Federal Archives (BA) file R.22/52. It was sent to Staatssekretär Freisler and two other officials (bottom left). This document has been published in facsimile in David Irving's books Hitler's War, Goebbels. Mastermind of the Third Reich, and Nuremberg, the Last Battle. It was definitely dated March or April 1942. Lammers was in Berlin on April 26, 1942. See Scheel's report on a talk between Lammers and Meissner after the final session that day (T175/139/7479 et seq.)

In support of the Schlegelberger Document see the Luther Memorandum:
http://www.codoh.com/library/document/154/
Hitler, the 'Final Solution,' and the Luther Memorandum, A Response to Evans and Longerich
excerpt:
"On the occasion of a reception by the Reich Foreign Minister on 26 November 1941 the Bulgarian Foreign Minister Popoff touched on the problem of according like treatment to the Jews of European nationalities and pointed out the difficulties that the Bulgarians had in the application of their Jewish laws to Jews of foreign nationality."

"The Reich Foreign Minister answered that he thought this question brought by Mr. Popoff not uninteresting. Even now he could say one thing to him, that at the end of the war all Jews would have to leave Europe. This was the unalterable decision of the Fuehrer and also the only way to master this problem, as only a global and comprehensive solution could be applied and individual measures would not help very much."

- Hannover

No millions of human remains claimed to be in known locations, no "holocaust".
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Sannhet
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:12 pm
Location: USA

Re: Martin Bormann 11 July 1943 memo - Hitler prohibits publicly discussing "future overall solution" to Jewish Question

Postby Sannhet » 2 weeks 1 day ago (Mon Mar 23, 2020 10:47 pm)

Bei der öffentlichen Behandlung der Judenfrage muß jede Erörterung einer künftigen Gesamtlösung unterbleiben

The key word here is of course künftigen, meaning something in the future; something coming; ahead; prospective.

Others of interest:

Gesamtlösung, interesting term. Probably in practical terms synonymous with the famous Endlösung; or what? But gesamt can mean 'comprehensive' or 'aggregate.' Another mid-20th century political usage of gesamt was a political party called the Gesamtdeutscher Block, which advocated for peaceful reunification, independence, a restoration of the prewar borders, and repatriation of German deportees to their ancestral homes in the east. In short, a comprehensive solution to the serious problem of Germany division that threatened to destabilize Europe. The solution was primarily territorial and secondarily political (needless to say, not involving violence). A Gesamtlösung to the Judenfrage would presumably follow the spirit of the way gesamt was used be those who formed that party.

unterbleiben, this word means to cease. Unless there is a bureaucratese usage I am missing, I take it to mean that in July 1943 there was talk going on of the Jewish question, as something still on the table, something still to be dealt with. Orthodox Holocaust history has millions already gassed by this point, and has us believe this was an open secret. So why would party leaders still be debating what to do?

User avatar
HMSendeavour
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: Antipodes
Contact:

Re: Martin Bormann 11 July 1943 memo - Hitler prohibits publicly discussing "future overall solution" to Jewish Question

Postby HMSendeavour » 1 week 6 days ago (Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:18 am)

Both the Schlegelberger document and the Luther Memo are backed up by a very similar statement made by Hitler in the Henry Picker table talks, the table talks considered to be more genuine than the Bormann derived version. Establishment historians could only deny the legitimacy of the Picker Table Talks to avoid this fact.

"Nach Beendigung des Krieges werde er [Hitler] sich rigoros auf den Standpunkt stellen, dass er Stadt für Stadt zusammenschlage, wenn nicht die Drecksjuden rauskämen und nach Madagaskar oder einem sonstigen jüdischen Nationalstaat abwanderten." ("After the ending of the war, he [Hitler] would rigorously adopt the standpoint that he would demolish town after town, if the Jewish dregs did not decamp and emigrate to Madagascar or to some other national Jewish homeland.")

Source: Henry Picker, Hitlers Tischgespräche in Führerhauptquartier (Hitler's Table Talk at the Führer's HQ), published by Percy Henry Schramm ( ... ), Stuttgart, 1963, p. 471.
Now what does it mean for the independent expert witness Van Pelt? In his eyes he had two possibilities. Either to confirm the Holocaust story, or to go insane. - Germar Rudolf, 13th IHR Conference

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10002
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Martin Bormann 11 July 1943 memo - Hitler prohibits publicly discussing "future overall solution" to Jewish Question

Postby Hannover » 1 week 6 days ago (Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:38 am)

HMSendeavour wrote:Both the Schlegelberger document and the Luther Memo are backed up by a very similar statement made by Hitler in the Henry Picker table talks, the table talks considered to be more genuine than the Bormann derived version. Establishment historians could only deny the legitimacy of the Picker Table Talks to avoid this fact.

Per 'Table Talk', Picker, etc., there are these

Genoud, Heim & Picker’s Hitler's “Table Talk”: A Study in Academic Fraud & Scandal
Veronica Clark
https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/9/3/4880
and:
http://carolynyeager.net/our-hitlers-ta ... ilable-cds
Our "Hitler's Table Talk" series now available on CD's
A two-disc CD set containing all 56 of the newly-edited, discussing Hitler's Table Talk, spanning 1941 to 1944.
and:
The Faking of Hitler's "Last Testament": http://www.fpp.co.uk/Hitler/docs/Testam ... enoud.html
and:
Table Talk, Picker: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Hitler/Table_Talk/Picker.html

Thoughts?

Thanks, Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
HMSendeavour
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: Antipodes
Contact:

Re: Martin Bormann 11 July 1943 memo - Hitler prohibits publicly discussing "future overall solution" to Jewish Question

Postby HMSendeavour » 1 week 5 days ago (Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:26 am)

Hannover wrote:
HMSendeavour wrote:Both the Schlegelberger document and the Luther Memo are backed up by a very similar statement made by Hitler in the Henry Picker table talks, the table talks considered to be more genuine than the Bormann derived version. Establishment historians could only deny the legitimacy of the Picker Table Talks to avoid this fact.

Per 'Table Talk', Picker, etc., there are these

Genoud, Heim & Picker’s Hitler's “Table Talk”: A Study in Academic Fraud & Scandal
Veronica Clark
https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/9/3/4880
and:
http://carolynyeager.net/our-hitlers-ta ... ilable-cds
Our "Hitler's Table Talk" series now available on CD's
A two-disc CD set containing all 56 of the newly-edited, discussing Hitler's Table Talk, spanning 1941 to 1944.
and:
The Faking of Hitler's "Last Testament": http://www.fpp.co.uk/Hitler/docs/Testam ... enoud.html
and:
Table Talk, Picker: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Hitler/Table_Talk/Picker.html

Thoughts?

Thanks, Hannover


Yes, I am very skeptical of the table talks, and to be honest rather disappointed that they're probably not all genuine. Or at least, they're not verifiably genuine to any legitimate degree that I can tell. Irving has stated, specifically in his criticism of Martin Broszat when he was criticising "Hitler's War" on the basis of Table Talk quotations that Broszat was using the printed version while Irving was using notes. I do not think these could be Bormann's or Pickers notes, maybe they were Heims? I do not know what notes we do have whether any are originals, or if they're all just Genouds notes of the "original" notes.

Irving claimed to have been using originals of some kind that were apparently not to the same doctored notes as the 1945 Table Talks by Genoud introduced by Trevor-Roper. Irving obviously had a reason to believe that the earlier Table Talks are genuine. So even though he dismissed Genouds notes for the 1945 Table Talks I don't think that Irving is so stupid as to not realise that it would be weird to believe one set of Genouds Table Talks and not be skeptical, as Veronica Clark claims. I'm just curious what evidential difference sets them apart, if any.

This could all be put to rest if we KNEW what originals existed or not. If any of the original notes do not exist then I think we should dismiss any if not ALL of the Table Talks. If some originals do exist and could be verified we would have to be skeptical of the circumstances under which those notes were made, because they're probably not verbatim transcripts of Hitler's words taken by a stenographer. Notes jotted down from memory multiple days later is basically worthless. Many Hitler documents, the "incriminating ones" suffer from this consistent problem.

Unfortunately the illegitimacy of the Table Talks would narrow what we know about what Hitler thought to Mein Kampf and statements made by others, genuine or not. Which is very disheartening because I'm sure we'd all love to have original Hitler table talks. And there are specific quotations, like the ones I posted, which have revisionist value. It's an odd situation.

It's always confused me as to why Genoud, a supposed Nazi would doctor so negatively Hitler's Table Talks in some cases.
Now what does it mean for the independent expert witness Van Pelt? In his eyes he had two possibilities. Either to confirm the Holocaust story, or to go insane. - Germar Rudolf, 13th IHR Conference

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1106
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Martin Bormann 11 July 1943 memo - Hitler prohibits publicly discussing "future overall solution" to Jewish Question

Postby Werd » 1 week 5 days ago (Fri Mar 27, 2020 5:41 pm)

Hitler's Table Talk is indeed an unreliable source.
https://codoh.com/library/document/4880/?lang=en

Mainly because it has passed through too many translations and even mis-translations. Cue Hugh Trevor Roper. Of course. :lol:

User avatar
HMSendeavour
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 3:12 pm
Location: Antipodes
Contact:

Re: Martin Bormann 11 July 1943 memo - Hitler prohibits publicly discussing "future overall solution" to Jewish Question

Postby HMSendeavour » 1 week 4 days ago (Sat Mar 28, 2020 12:32 am)

Werd wrote:Hitler's Table Talk is indeed an unreliable source.
https://codoh.com/library/document/4880/?lang=en

Mainly because it has passed through too many translations and even mis-translations. Cue Hugh Trevor Roper. Of course. :lol:


Yes, I am aware of the Veronica Clark piece. Orthodox historians seem to be varied in their position as to authenticity, they seem to primarily use the 1980 heavily abridged Picker version and do not use the English if they can prevent it. Or they'll use it to cement some point that suits their views.

Again it just depends on whether or not we have any of the original notes, the circumstances in which they were taken, whether they can be verified etc. etc. Otherwise it's a no go. But yeah the problem with the English ones is that they're translated from the "german" originals (where?) into French, then back into English.
Now what does it mean for the independent expert witness Van Pelt? In his eyes he had two possibilities. Either to confirm the Holocaust story, or to go insane. - Germar Rudolf, 13th IHR Conference


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dresden and 1 guest