First, we must understand what "Active Measures" (активные мероприятия) means. "Active Measures" was the actions of political warfare conducted by USSR secret service (Cheka, OGPU, NKVD, KGB, FSB) to influence world events, in addition to collecting intelligence. Beginning in the 1920s, it was used both abroad and domestically and included "all sorts of forgeries and faked material" (according to former KGB general Oleg Kalugin) as well as propaganda, disinformation, counterfeiting, assasinations, political repression, and other methods.
A good source of general information on "Active Measures" here is:
Prepared Statement of GEN (Ret) Keith B. Alexander on Disinformation: A Primer in Russian Active Measures and Influence Campaigns (March 30, 2017) before the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
https://archive.is/6LQVL or PDF: https://web.archive.org/web/20190109011 ... 033017.pdf
Example forgeries from "Soviet Influence Activities: A Report on Active Measures and Propaganda, 1986 - 87"
https://web.archive.org/web/20190208115 ... s-1987.pdf
As well as KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov, especially the psychological warfare (brainwashing / ideological subversion) aspect:
In 1980, the CIA presented a lengthy, detailed report to congress about the USSR's efforts against the U.S and cited some 150 anti-American document forgeries, usually with official-looking stationery and supposedly signed by top U.S. officials. It "conservatively" estimated that the USSR spent $3 billion per year on such propagand and covert actions. Here is an excerpt from the Testimony of John McMahon, Deputy Director for Operations, Central Intelligence Agency, which can be found at the following link:
CIA on FM 30-31B - Soviet Covert Action (the Forgery Offensive)
Active measures encompass a range of activities, the most important of which include the following: written and oral "disinformation"; forgeries, false rumors; "gray,": unattributed; and "black": falsely attributed propaganda; manipulation and control of foreign media assets, manipulative political action and the use of "agents-of-influence" operations, clandestine radio stations, use of foreign Communist Parties and international front groups for pursuing Soviet foreign policy objectives, support for international revolutionary and terrorist organizations, the so-called national liberation movements, and even political blackmail and kidnaping.
One of the major weapons the Soviets have chosen to use in intensifying ideological struggle and advance their foreign policy objectives at the same time is the use of forged documents. The increase of such forgeries in recent years is discussed in detail in the study I am submitting to the subcommittee, but I would like to summarize for you some of the findings of that study because of the scope and magnitude of the current forgeries effort, and because of the subcommittee's expressed interest in the subject.
It is an established Soviet practice to employ forgeries in covert action and psychological warfare operations against the United States. Of the some 150 anti-American forgeries produced by the Soviet Union and its East European allies in the postwar period, the most damaging ones have been fabrication of official-looking government documents and communiques. The Soviets also have manufactured personal letters which were allegedly written by U .S. officials and which purport to contain information regarding official policy. Previous studies prepared for the Congress by the Central Intelligence Agency documented 46 examples of Soviet and bloc forgeries which came to our attention from 1957 to 1965.
From a 1988 report to US Congress:
https://archive.is/AdznlCharacteristics of Soviet Forgeries
Forgeries have long been a staple tool of Soviet active measures operations. They are produced by Service A of the KGB’s First Chief Directorate. Forgeries attributable to the Soviet bloc can be distinguished from the efforts of individual forgers by the following telltale characteristics.
Soviet-produced forgeries commonly use official letterheads of the U.S. government or other organizations, and frequently carry security classifications. An intelligence organization like the KGB is able to procure a great many official forms, letterheads, official signatures, and so on, which can be used to construct a forgery using “cut-and-paste techniques. It is known that the Soviet bloc countries make an assiduous effort to collect such material.
The use of security classifications is common because it enhances the believability and sensationalistic appeal of forgeries. Unclassified but “confidential” correspondence between high-ranking or influential individuals has a similar appeal.
Soviet forgeries typically surface as copies of the purported documents, not as originals. The use of photocopies makes the job of the forger easier, as it enables him to utilize “cut-and-paste” techniques with official U.S. government or other forms. It also makes it impossible to do a pen and ink analysis of the original. Similarly, Soviet forgeries are often out-of-focus or smaller than full size, which also impedes forensic analysis.
...The question of “who benefits” from the forgery is key. The content of Soviet forgeries is typically such that if they were believed, the targets of the forgery would be inclined to act in a way that is contrary to U.S. interests.
Finally, the accusations in Soviet-produced forgeries are often either vague or related to supposedly secret matters, which makes it more difficult for rebuttals by the U.S. government to remove all doubt in the minds of those who may be inclined to be give credence to the forgery.
Of course, the above information was procured by the US government for the purpose of exposing anti-American forgeries by the Soviet Union, but it shows us how invested the Soviets were in producing forgeries.
Also some notes on forged documents from "Holocaust or Hoax" by Jürgen Graf:
Let us consider below some of the "documentary proofs" for the Holocaust repeatedly trundled out for us in the standard literature. We will divide these into two groups: obvious forgeries, documents of questionable authenticity, and, finally, undoubtedly genuine, but deliberately falsely interpreted documents.
In contrast to the attitude of some revisionists, only relatively few of the documents which are presented as proofs of the extermination of the Jews are obvious falsifications. These include three remarkable examples, which we will examine as follows:
a) The Wannsee Protocol
For decades, it was claimed that the extermination of the Jews was decided at the Wannsee Conference in Berlin of 20 January 1942. Anyone who reads the (alleged) protocol of that conference (17), will discover that it contains no mention of any physical extermination of the Jews, nothing about gas chambers, and speaks only of "evacution" and "resettlement". The orthodox historians, as usual, offer the lazy excuse that these are code words for extermination.
Even if this document were genuine, it would in no way constitute proof for any extermination of the Jews, but rather for their deportation, which is not disputed by any revisionist. But the Wannsee Protocol is a rather crude forgery, as shown by several revisionist researchers, in greatest detail by Johannes P. Ney (18). The forgery is proven by absuridities of content (for example grossly exaggerated numbers of Jews living in Europe), as well as formal errors.
30 copies of the Wannsee Protocol are supposed to have been prepared. Of these 30 copies, only 1, the 16th, has survived, quite remarkably, in several different versions, in which SS is written sometimes in runes, and sometimes in normal script.
Even the exterminationists are distancing themselves further and further from the Wannsee protocol. In the Canadian Jewish News of 20 January 1992, Israeli Holocaust Specialist Yehuda Bauer, calls the belief that the conference arrived at any decision to exterminate the Jews, a "silly story". According to him, the whole caste of historians just blabbered a silly story for decades, like parrots. The "silly story" also appears in all schoolbooks.
b) The document of 28 June 1943 on the capacity of the crematoria of Auschwitz
To prove the powerful capacity of the Auschwitz crematoria, the exterminationists tirelessly quote a letter allegedly prepared on 28 June 1943 by the leader of the Auschwitz Central Construction Administration, Bischoff, through his subordinate SS Brigadefuehrer Kammler (19), according to which the daily capacity of the crematoria of Auschwitz and Birkenau are as follows:
- crematory I: 340 persons [sic!] each
- crematoria II and III: 1440 persons each
- crematoria IV and V: 768 persons each.
Note the remarkably un-German-sounding use of the word "persons" in this connection. Much more revealing, however, is the content.
As may be seen from the standard literature, for example the work of Raul Hilberg (20), the main crematorium at Auschwitz I possessed 6 muffles; crematoria II and III of Birkenau possessed 15 muffles each; and the Birkenau Kremas IV and V possessed 8 muffles each. This makes a total of 52 muffles. In today's modern crematoria, the burning of one corpse per muffle takes one to one and a half hours (see illustration 1V, the reproduction of a letter from Freiburg crematorium). If one can cremate 4,756 bodies per day in 52 muffles, that would be 95 bodies per day per muffle, which would mean that the crematoria of Auschwitz were around four times faster than modern crematoria! This means that either all the laws of thermodynamics were suspended, or that the letter is a fabrication (presumably from a Communist forgery factory). Irrefutable proof of the falsity of this document has been provided by Carlo Mattogno (21).
Another example is document USSR-54, the only forensic report ever introduced into evidence at Nuremberg, where the USSR blamed their own atrocity in the Katyn forest on the "German Fascist Invaders"
KATYN: How the Soviets Manufactured 'War Crime' Documents (translation of USSR-54) by C.W.Porter
At the time, the US government even helped them cover up the Soviet atrocity at Katyn:
Some related threads:
Forged Documents at the IMT Nuremberg Trial