Himmler's note infers Hitler knew of liquidation ?

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
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10305
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 2:09 am)

This whole matter just plain stinks as the note refers to a Jekelius, a claimed nonexistent son of Molotov.
Verhaftung Dr Jekelius Angebl.
Sohn Molotow.
Judentransport aus Berlin.
Keine Liquidierung.

That dog don't hunt.

I also see that comrade seinfeld attempts to buttress his belief in various liquidations of innocent Jews by putting stock in Irving, who tries to buttress his opinion on alleged massacres at Riga by referring to the absurd 'Bruns Document'.

see here as yours truly shreds the Bruns statements:
'The bogus Bruns document'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=15

also see:
'Bruns admits confession was fake'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=1311

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

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 2:28 am)

Semblance7's question:
does Irving inadvertently suggest Hitler knew of liquidations?


I read Irving's response which Seinfeld posted the URL to. But it's confusing. Best thing would be to look at Irving's Hitler's War.

The problem is that Irving converted to revisionism over a period of time. So Semblance7's post is about an assertion Irving had for awhile that Hitler didn't know about the extermination policy, rather it was Himmler and Heydrich who were exterminating the Jews. That is the context.

But reading this Zimmerman chapter is something else.
Deniers claim that there is a debate as to whether the Holocaust occurred. But for historians there is no debate; just as for scientists there is no debate as to whether the earth is round.

http://www.mossadist.by.ru/HD_p2_ch8.htm


This chapter mentions all kinds of memos I've never heard of like:

A key piece of evidence tying Hitler to the extermination was Himmler's memo to Hitler dated December 1942 cited earlier in Chapter 2. The memo listed under "Jews executed" a total of 363,211 while 23,000 others are listed as killed for a four month period in the Soviet Union in 1942. The receipt of this memo is initialed by Hitler's adjutant as being received on December 31, 1942.21


But as I've mentioned, the holocaust is too big to come down to key evidence memos. Plus who is to say these memos aren't planted? It's a conspiracy after all. There's people who were involved in fabricating this giant lie. I'd think they'd be capable of creating memos. When one sees how unfair the Nuremberg Trials were, why then suppose a huge level of honesty in terms of finding memos and documents? Hilberg is completely dishonest, for instance, and he was one of the people working in the place that catalogued the memos. We've seen falsified air photos. So why suppose utmost honesty regarding Soviets who found memos, or allies who found memos?

What if there was a memo that said "we've dug up the 600,000 Jews at Treblinka and cremated them on open air fires. Mission accomplished." Signed by a Hitler Adjutant! It wouldn't matter. There would be a mountain of forensic evidence if that happened.

Notes to Semblance7's post are:
12. Charles Sydnor, "The Selling of Adolf Hitler: David living's Hitler's War," 12 Central European History No. 2 (June 1979), 169-199 reprinted in Marrus, ibid. , Part 3, Vol. 1, 21-52. See also Gerald Fleming, Hitler and the Final Solution (Berkeley: 1984).
13. David Irving, Hitler's War (NY: 1977) 332, 504, 505.
14. Dawidowicz, The Holocaust and the Historians, 38.
15. Ibid., 38; Broszat, "Hitler and the Genesis of the Final Solution," 106.

http://www.mossadist.by.ru/Source_Notes.htm

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10305
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 2:44 am)

A key piece of evidence tying Hitler to the extermination was Himmler's memo to Hitler dated December 1942 cited earlier in Chapter 2. The memo listed under "Jews executed" a total of 363,211 while 23,000 others are listed as killed for a four month period in the Soviet Union in 1942. The receipt of this memo is initialed by Hitler's adjutant as being received on December 31, 1942.21

Utter nonsense.
What a bunch of liars, here is the bogus 'memo':

Image

see it and others demolished here:

'No Elephant'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=146

and for:
Deniers claim that there is a debate as to whether the Holocaust occurred. But for historians there is no debate; just as for scientists there is no debate as to whether the earth is round.

More judeo-supremacist projection, science is on the Revisionist side. And besides, there are no laws against claiming the world is flat? There are laws against questioning the 'holocau$t' trash. It is liars who need laws to protect their lies.

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

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 3:34 am)

It's kind of downright ridiculous when you think about it. Was Hitler some Berlin Detective or was he head of the Third Reich?

Someone thought Molotov had a son by the name of Dr. Jekelus? What about a son named Dr Molotov? Dr. Jekelus, is that latin for Dr. Jekyll?

Since when does low level sleuthing go up to the top of the command and then down. Some bureaucrat heard Dr. Jekelus might be Molotov's son and got right on the phone to Hitler who then called Himmler. o.k.

Or maybe Hitler himself was working on the case. Figuring out just who might be on that train.

semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 9:02 am)

Comrade said -
I don't wish to be rude to you, but you obviously know very little about the "Holocaust". Rather then expect everyone else to do your research for you, you should do more serious study of what both the exterminationists and revisionists have to say, both in terms of print and on the internet


Condescension noted, Comrade, but I have done exactly as you've suggested (study of what both the exterminationists and revisionists have to say) and that is, in fact, the impetus for my post - does liquidation (Himmler) equate with extermination?

Carto's suggests it's too small to be big (or too big to be small?)

Hannover suggests it's like the Bruns document

I suggest it is an interesting (open?) question that is still waiting to be definitively answered.

disillusioned
Member
Member
Posts: 64
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 7:19 am

Postby disillusioned » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 11:08 am)

Getting back to Semblance7's original post, does anyone have the original text? Can they post it?

Semblance:

Execution of criminals and resistant elements was normal during the war. The simplest (and most likely) explanation for the memo is the occupants of the vehicle were criminals, assuming that the note was real and that Hitler was implying execution.

It's not likely that this is a "key" piece of evidence. "Key" evidence would be mass graves, tons of ashes, actual photos/movies/audio recordings, verified official documents, etc. If you went to trial now, you would need these kinds of actual evidence.

In order for this to be an open question, there would have to other evidence surrounding it. Evidence that would be admissable in a court of law, that could be subjected to analysis.

Your stretching it here by saying this note mean something dark and nefarious.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10305
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 11:22 am)

disillusioned,

I agree with you completely, see my previous points.

per your request:
Image
from
http://fpp.co.uk/Himmler/Note301141b.html

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

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 12:25 pm)

Hi Semblance7,

I agree that Camerade Seinfeld's remark to you was way out of line. The gentlemanly nature of your response back is admirable.

Seinfeld did find an URL where Irving directly responds to this. For one Irving points out:
Dawidowicz (and those aping her) accuse me of editing a transcript of a Heinrich Himmler phone conversation of November 30, 1941 to suit my thesis - as though this were the only evidence I adduced in my 860pp biography,

This is also contrary to Zimmerman's mentioning that it was the main piece of evidence in his book.

Also, you're mentioning that Irving thought Heydrich and Himmler were "rogue elements." Maybe Irving thought that in 1977 when he wasn't even a revisionist yet.

Then as Hannover and others mention, we don't know the context. Were they partisans? People convicted? Did Hitler say "Jews" simply because most of them were Jews? Molotov isn't Jewish, so his son would be half if anything after all.

A phone conversation itself might even be hard to figure out. But a few lines about the conversation? Let's look at the phrase again:
"Arrest Dr. Jekelius. Presumably Molotov's son. Transport of Jews from Berlin. No Liquidation."


Maybe "no liquidation" means not liquidating Molotov's son rather than the train. Irving would seem to agree with that interpretation
Perplexed by Himmler's hand-written note about a call to Heydrich after visiting Hitler's bunker on November 30, 1941-- "Arrest [of] Dr Jakelius. Alleged son Molotov. Consignment [Transport] of Jews from Berlin. No liquidation."--these wizards of modern history scoffed that probably Molotov's son was believed to be aboard a trainload of Jews from Berlin concealed as "Dr. Jakelius" and was on no account to be liquidated.

http://fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Vicksell.html


Then there's Irving's mentioning that Molotov had no son.

But this leads to a puzzling conclusion regarding Dr. Jakelius: Irving states that he was killed with the whole transport
Dr. Jakelius was a Viennese neurologist involved in the Euthanasia program; and the consignment of Jews from Berlin had that morning arrived at Riga and had already been liquidated by the local SS commander by the time that Himmler scribbled down Hitler's injunction."


I don't know what to make of that. But keep in mind that Irving isn't our star revisionist here on revforum. He's often criticized. The above quote wouldn't be the first time I read Irving and it didn't really fill in the whole picture for me.

Bergmann
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:29 pm

Postby Bergmann » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 1:10 pm)

The facsimile which Hannover posted is actually from Himmler’s “Dienstkalender” (Work Diary). Since I have a copy of that book, I checked it out.

According to it, Molotov had no son, but a daughter.

That the trainload of Jews from Berlin was liquidated in Rumbula came from SS-man Jeckeln, who confessed to this during the crossexamination by the Soviet SMERSH.

To my knowledge, no mass graves of this massacre were ever found.

semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 2:08 pm)

Thank you, CCS,

As if to speculate (and only that):
Arrest Dr. Jekelius. Presumably Molotov's son
(mind - this is from Himmler's hand) might suggest illegitimacy (?)
Heydrich and Himmler were rogue elements
Perhaps my intent was not clear. I was making a point to Comrade, to the contrary, that, how could these men possibly have been considered rogue when they were wholly at the core of the Reich?

And if we are to believe Irving (and I tend to, although I purposefully stand-back a notch)
Dr. Jakelius was a Viennese neurologist involved in the Euthanasia program; and the consignment of Jews from Berlin had that morning arrived at Riga and had already been liquidated by the local SS commander by the time that Himmler scribbled down Hitler's injunction."

To me, thus far, the question of liquidation / extermination (per my original post) remains open.

Regards

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 2:48 pm)

It's odd that Dr. Jekelius and SS man Jekelyn have similar names. Maybe it's nothing. Maybe Himmler confused names. Was Himmler supposed to contact Jekelyn regarding Jekelius?

Is there a possibility that these notes about different things which when read by others later, appear as one single note?

Hi Bergman, thanks for the info:
What is the Soviet SMERSH?

Jekelyn confessed during a trial. Was he in Soviet custody? If so it's odd that Irving would take that at face value.

Richard Perle
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:45 am

Postby Richard Perle » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 3:00 pm)

So it would seem that at the time of writing, Irving accepted confessions such as that one from Jeckeln.

I'm not sure how open to interpretation the term "liquidation" is. Didn't the Germans openly discuss the liquidation of ghettos meaning the deportation of the inhabitants, or is that use just an exterminationist spin that I have yet to purge from my mind?

Maybe "no liquidation" means not liquidating Molotov's son rather than the train. Irving would seem to agree with that interpretation


That's what I was thinking at first, but....

If Dr. Jekelius was a Viennese neurologist involved in the Euthanasia program and this memo talks about arresting him, then we must assume that he wasn't yet in custody. So why would he be on a train of Jews, who are in effect prisoners?

Lets look at the memo as it is written. I think I have identified the right part using Irving's translation (handwriting is so hard to read) and preserved the format:

Verhaftung Dr Jekelius
Angebl. Sohn Molotow.
Judentransport aus Berlin.
Keine Liquidierung.

Which, in English, is:

Arrest Dr Jekelius
Alleg. Son of Molotov.
Jew Transport from Berlin.
No Liquidation.


Note how each part is on another line. Of course, clearly space was an issue on the paper, (although Himmler does cram more on a line further down), but doesn't this suggest that each line in this case relates to something entirely different to the line above? That would explain the lack of logical connection between the arrest of Dr Jekelius, an alleged son of Molotov and the transport of Jews from Berlin. These words are written by Himmler presumably (correct me if I'm wrong) for his own use as a reminder of what he spoke about with Heydrich. They are just notes jotted down that might not make sense to anyone else and might have no discernable context. I know I have glanced at notes by phones and found them puzzling. I've even looked at my own notes from long ago and had no idea what I meant at the time of writing them.

Perhaps in Himmler's conversation with Heydrich they spoke about arresting Jekelius, about an alleged son of Molotov, about a transport of Berlin Jews and about not liquidating something or someone. Is that too much of a stretch? The notes are brief and disjointed whatever way you interpret them. Maybe they are even more incoherent and indecipherable to anyone but Himmler than has been thought.

Of course, this allows for "No liquidation" to be unrelated to the transport of Berlin Jews. That the phrase appears underneath mention of such a transport could be a coincidence of the kind only noticed and deemed important by historians starved of any real documentary evidence for extermination.

It would be interesting to know what the other lines on the memo say and if the same format is seen. It is hard to imagine that Irving or anyone else wouldn't have considered this if the memos had a pattern of this type of note taking. Although if after investigation any link between Jekelius and Molotov seems absurd then I think my theory can be the only one that works.
Last edited by Richard Perle on Thu May 19, 2005 3:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 3:11 pm)

Carto's

Thanks again for engaging in my thread. Best I can derive so far is that the Himmler note of 'non-liquidation' remains open to interpretation...

and with that, might there be a consensus (here) that the question does indeed remain open?

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2463
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 3:47 pm)

Thanks Semblance7. Welcome to the forum.

I liked Perle's interpretation above. My experience with understanding even my own notes from awhile back is similar.

semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu May 19, 2005 5:04 pm)

Carto's,

I would suggest that perhaps at the very least a 'tip of the hat' ought to be offered to Irving for his 'bringing forth of documents' (In Himmler's hand - no less). Who else has done that?

I proffer, with all due respect, that Himmler's note of liquidation remains 'grey' (re it's interpretation)

Does liquidation equate with extermination?


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests