British Intelligence -- revisionists?

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
comrade seinfeld
Member
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:27 pm

British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby comrade seinfeld » 1 decade 4 years ago (Thu Jun 09, 2005 10:10 pm)

I was surprised that David Irving did not include this on his website but there is an interesting article at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/ (search for holocaust and what I am talking about is the first article today) entitled "Why British Intelligence refused to believe all reports of the mass murder of Poland's Jews". This is in relation to the publication by the British Government archives (presumably) of "Intelligence co-operation between Poland and Great Britain World War 11".

At the time Churchill did not take account of any atrocity reports, but both Anthony Eden and Roosevelt did not take seriously the atrocity propaganda concerning homicidal gas chambers and such emanating from Polish and Jewish sources, as, acting on advice from British Intelligence, it was assumed that it was just an attempt to divert the Allied war effort to the advantage of the Poles, and especially the Polish Jews. In this regard the names of William Cavendish-Bentinck and Roger Allen are important, as they were scathing of such atrocity reports, and it can be assumed that they woud have the means to know what was really happening in Poland, since, if such atrocity reports were true that would have been truly astounding propaganda for the Allies. Moreover, as the above publication makes clear the British were cooperating with Polish sources in order to help them decipher the Axis telegraphic codes, so they would have surely known what was really happening.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9895
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:23 pm)

"British Intelligence refused to believe all reports of the mass murder of Poland's Jews ...

At the time Churchill did not take account of any atrocity reports, but both Anthony Eden and Roosevelt did not take seriously the atrocity propaganda concerning homicidal gas chambers ...

While at the same time the BBC was broadcasting phoney gas chamber claims into Axis controlled territory.

It's no wonder they silenced Himmler by murdering him.

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

User avatar
comrade seinfeld
Member
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:27 pm

Postby comrade seinfeld » 1 decade 4 years ago (Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:25 am)

I decided to actually download the article since if people are using proxy servers in order to avoid censorship relating to a "Holocaust denial" site, as I am at present, they will not be able to access the article directly from the above link.

Why British intelligence refused to believe all reports of the mass murder of Poland's Jews
By Michael Evans
Information about the gas chambers was kept from Churchill because officials would not accept the evidence of witnesses





BRITAIN’s intelligence chiefs refused to accept witness reports of the German massacre of Polish Jews in the Second World War and discounted the existence of the Holocaust, according to an authorised account based on official archives.

The intelligence chiefs thought that reports of the genocide of Jews in Poland, brought by two emissaries from Warsaw, lacked credibility. Their disbelief was one of the reasons why Winston Churchill was kept ignorant of the scale of the Holocaust at a time when decisive action might have been taken to try to stop the wholesale killings.

The dismissive response to the Holocaust reports in 1942 and 1943 is detailed in a remarkable publication of official intelligence records of the Second World War, sanctioned by the British and Polish governments.

Intelligence Co-operation Between Poland and Great Britain World War II highlights the successes of the Anglo-Polish wartime relationship, notably the extraordinary joint efforts by codebreakers to decipher Germany’s Enigma coding machine, used for all Berlin’s military communications throughout the war. The Poles were the first to break the Enigma codes.

However, the intelligence chiefs’ dismissal of the evidence of German genocide of Polish Jews provides an insight into one of the most controversial issues of the war. Anthony Eden, the Foreign Secretary, met one of the emissaries but was more interested in Polish-Soviet relations and future borders between the two countries than in any Allied action on behalf of murdered Jews. President Roosevelt also met the same emissary from Warsaw in Washington, but asked more questions about Polish resistance.

William Cavendish-Bentinck, chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, the main co-ordinator of intelligence in the 1939-45 war, summed up the views of the British intelligence hierarchy. He thought the Polish, and especially Jewish, reports on the German atrocities were not credible. According to the declassified intelligence archives, he stated in August 1943 that they were “exaggerating the German atrocities, and did so ‘to stiffen our resolve’”.

The two key emissaries from Warsaw, both witnesses of the slaughter, were Jan Karski, who came to London in November 1942, and Jan Nowak-Jezioranski, who arrived in December in 1943. Karski, a liaison officer of the Polish underground, told Cavendish-Bentinck about the mass murder of Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto and in a concentration camp called Belzec.

Nowak-Jezioranski said that some 3.3 million Polish Jews had been murdered from the beginning of the war until August 1943. His report in the intelligence archives says “the Germans used troops, tanks and artillery to liquidate the ghetto in Warsaw”. He handed over photos as evidence.

Although Karski, who was initially interrogated by MI5, wrote his own account of the disbelieving Allies after the war, the new history shows up the Whitehall brick wall that he and the other emissary faced when they tried to convince London and Washington of Germany’s Holocaust strategy.

The new official history says: “As chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee and thanks to Enigma, Cavendish-Bentinck had access to the decrypted German police and SS reports which also mentioned the persecution and genocide of the Jews on the territories held by the Germans.

“This was a clear validation of Polish and Jewish information. Cavendish-Bentinck [a former Ambassador to Warsaw] was more interested in military intelligence on the Germany Navy than in the fate of dying Polish Jews.” It goes on: “As was the case with his political master, Anthony Eden, who was responsible for SIS [Secret Intelligence Service], he believed that only the swiftest possible end to the war could save the Jews of occupied Europe from complete annihilation.”

Roger Allen, a high-ranking Foreign Office official who worked closely with Cavendish-Bentinck during the war, “refused to believe that the Germans used gas chambers in Poland to murder people”.

At the end of August 1943, Allen wrote in a memo that he could “never understand what the advantage of a gas chamber over a simple machinegun or over starving people would be”. He said the recurring mentions of gas chambers in reports were “very general and tended to come from Jewish sources”.

The testimony of both Polish emissaries was kept secret. In the War Cabinet minutes concerning Karski’s account of the massacres, all references to the Jews were deleted, and when Eden wrote to Churchill on the subject, he also removed everything which mentioned Jews being murdered. Eden refused to let Karski report personally to Churchill because he felt it was “his duty to protect the elderly and overworked Prime Minister from too many petitioners”.

The official history, with a foreword by Tony Blair, is by the Anglo-Polish Historical Committee, set up five years ago to evaluate historical records. The first volume of findings is published this month.













User avatar
Haldan
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1371
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: <secret>
Contact:

Postby Haldan » 1 decade 4 years ago (Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:46 am)

Karski, a liaison officer of the Polish underground, told Cavendish-Bentinck about the mass murder of Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto and in a concentration camp called Belzec.


Would that be Jan Karski? In that case I recommend that people see: Polish [Jewish?] Liar-Lie-Champion Jan Karski Warns World of Incredible 1944 "Quicklime Train Hoaxoco$t" AND IS BELIEVED.

-haldan
<?php if ($Holocaust == false ) {deny_repeatedly(); } else { investigate(); } ?>
Homage to Catalin Haldan

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9895
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Fri Jun 10, 2005 1:16 am)

The one and only Jan Karski, see:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=2163
That's as good as they can do.

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

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3358
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re:

Postby Hektor » 7 years 1 month ago (Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:57 am)

Hannover wrote:
"British Intelligence refused to believe all reports of the mass murder of Poland's Jews ...

At the time Churchill did not take account of any atrocity reports, but both Anthony Eden and Roosevelt did not take seriously the atrocity propaganda concerning homicidal gas chambers ...

While at the same time the BBC was broadcasting phoney gas chamber claims into Axis controlled territory.

It's no wonder they silenced Himmler by murdering him.

- Hannover
Some claim the BBC ignored it:
Why the BBC Ignored the Holocaust


By Joshua18
July 10, 2010

Nothing much ever changes in Blighty.

Why the BBC ignored the Holocaust: Anti-Semitism in the top ranks of broadcasting and Foreign Office staff led to the news being suppressed, says Stephen Ward
Stephen Ward
Sunday, 22 August 1993
Anti-Semitism in the higher ranks of the Foreign Office and the BBC during the Second World War led to a policy which suppressed news about Germany's attempt to exterminate European Jews, new research will show this week.
The attitude was reinforced by a belief that the British population was anti-Semitic and that anti-German propaganda about atrocities in the First World War, which was often fiction, had made the public sceptical of such stories. Early in the war the Government and the BBC agreed that this time, British propaganda would contrast Nazi 'lies' with British truthfulness and a 'good clean fight'.
The evidence is contained in documents from the BBC archives and Government papers at the Public Record Office, which have been uncovered during research for a new Radio 4 series, Document. The first programme will tell of the relationship between the Foreign Office and the BBC between 1939 and 1945.
The papers, together with interviews with some of the surviving figures, show that both Foreign Office and BBC officials held a low opinion of Jews, and believed this was shared by the public.
They deduced that saving millions of Jews would not be seen as a desirable war aim by the British. At other times they justified suppression of details of the atrocities by arguing that they would not be believed.
News reports could only be carried if, in the view of the BBC and the Foreign Office, they were well-sourced. If the sources were Jewish, they tended not to be believed.
The Foreign Office was, with hindsight, astonishingly sceptical about atrocities. As late as 27 August 1944, Victor Cavendish Bentinck, assistant under-secretary, was still doubting the existence of gas chambers. 'I think we weaken our case against the Germans by publicly giving credence to atrocity stories for which we have no evidence.
'These mass executions in gas chambers remind me of the story of the employment of human corpses during the last (1914-18) war for the manufacture of fat, which was a grotesque lie and led to the true stories of German enormities being brushed aside as being mere propaganda.'
Another Foreign Office official, Roger Allen, notes: 'It is true that there have been references to the use of gas chambers in other reports; but these references have usually, if not always, been equally vague, and since they have concerned the extermination of Jews, have usually emanated from Jewish sources.'
He goes on: 'Personally I have never really understood the advantage of the gas chamber over the simpler machine-gun, or the equally simple starvation method.'
The attitude at the top of the BBC at the start of the war is illustrated by a recollection in the Document programme from Harman Grisewood, assistant to the BBC's head of European broadcasting in 1939. He visited Germany just before the outbreak of war and saw the segregation and oppression of Jews. On his return he went to see the director-general of the BBC, Frederick Ogilvie (who died in 1942).
Mr Grisewood recalls: 'What he said was terrifying; I can still remember it word for word. He said: 'You know the Germans are very sentimental people.' I said, 'Yes it's often explained to one that this is so.' He then said: 'Well, what we're going to do is broadcast the nightingale to the Germans. The cellist Beatrice Harrison will go into the woods near Oxford and play her cello. The nightingale will sing and we'll broadcast that to the Germans.' I felt there was no point really in going on with the conversation.'
For the rest of the article, follow the link:
http://www.thejc.com/blogpost/why-bbc-ignored-holocaust

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9895
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby Hannover » 7 years 1 month ago (Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:36 pm)

The evidence is contained in documents from the BBC archives and Government papers at the Public Record Office, which have been uncovered during research for a new Radio 4 series, Document. The first programme will tell of the relationship between the Foreign Office and the BBC between 1939 and 1945.
The papers, together with interviews with some of the surviving figures, show that both Foreign Office and BBC officials held a low opinion of Jews, and believed this was shared by the public.
They deduced that saving millions of Jews would not be seen as a desirable war aim by the British. At other times they justified suppression of details of the atrocities by arguing that they would not be believed.
News reports could only be carried if, in the view of the BBC and the Foreign Office, they were well-sourced. If the sources were Jewish, they tended not to be believed.

So very typical. Notice we do not actually see a single "document". Why?

This is just an obvious set-up for more lawsuits, aka: money.

And how did those laughable gas chambers supposedly work?

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

astro3
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:52 am

Re: British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby astro3 » 7 years 1 month ago (Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:36 pm)

Well this is a very odd synchrony. I've just been over today (October 5th) to the Public Records Office in Kew to check out these papers, released after a 50-year period in 1996. Dr Nick Terry sent me his paper 'Conflicting signals: British Intelligence on the final solution...' about them which he gave in 2002. He follows on from Breitman 'Official Secrets' 1998 about these decrypt-documents.

British Intel was decrypting signals from the German labour-camps 1941-43. So here we have enormously valuable primary-source documentation pre-Nuremberg about what was really going on. The famous 'Enigma' decoding operation at Bletchley Park was here being used.

(Any page you want, you just put it under a camera, click a button, and it is sent to your email address free of charge! Neat eh?)

So I'd like to make two comments. First of all, Dr Terry's paper is continually berating British intel for failing to notice or apprehend that what he views as the 'final solution' was really happening. Occasionally they would receive outrageous claims from Polish sources about mass gassing and decline to believe it! It seems to me that these recently-declassified British Intel reports may actually be very compatible with a Revisionist position.

If I could figure out how to put up images onto this site I'd do so, some of the 'Top-Secret' pages are quite impressive.

If anyone wants to meet me for a cup of tea at Kew to checkout these newly-released transcripts, let me know! I'm wondering whether there may be a lot to be said for a Revisionist position that is 100% compatible with these British Intel documents.

I suggest these decrypts from the camps show that the Germans were doing their best to get constructive labor out of the inmates.

If I may remind you, way back in 1981 this statement was made about the British Decrypts: "the returns from Auschwitz, the largest of the camps with 20,000 prisoners, mentioned illness as the main cause of death, but included references to shootings and hangings. There were no references in the decrypts to gassings." (F. Hinsley, Brit Intel Knowledge of A. in 1942') Now at last we can check out these actual documents.

Dr Terry is irritated at the naivety of British Intel at believing Jewish deaths were just due to Typhus etc, and not realising what was 'really' happening. What was really happening is well-expressed by this thread!

OK that's my first point. The second is, that these British Intel documents do really report mass shootings of Jews on quite a large scale in the Russian campaign. So judging by these documents, in response to the question 'did the Nazis exterminate Jews as such?' I guess the answer might have to be, Yes it would seem so, during the Russian campaign German military do seem to have been wiping out whole groups of persons designated as Jews. That is very much used in Terry's argument. We are here taking about hundreds or thousands but not tens of thousands, and not in labour-camps.
Last edited by astro3 on Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

astro3
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:52 am

Re: British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby astro3 » 7 years 1 month ago (Sat Oct 06, 2012 1:41 pm)

Not many of us have Borjastic’s courage:
I was talking to one one my oldest friends yesterday....I told him outright that it didn't happen. At that point he was so shocked that further intelligent conversation was not possible. So we carried on drinking a rather fine wine from Bergerac.’.’ (your top reasons viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7275)

So is there an easier entry line, something like, ‘you realise that all the early British Intel judgements, based upon decryptions of German messages, just did not buy the H-concept? They saw the labour-camps as industrial and saw the deaths happening there as caused by typhus basically. And, when they started getting Polish reports of deliberate mass- extermination they were inclined to be sceptical.'

It wasn’t until mid-1944 that Churchill came out with his 'biggest crime in history' remark re Auschwitz, but even then he wrote nothing about that in his War-history did he?

I think this new source is supportive of our side. Also – please correct me if I’m wrong – it could enhance our credibility because we’d admit that atrocities – large scale exterminations of ‘Jews’ were indeed reported as the Nazis stormed across Russia (the maddest thing they ever did).

I just wish that someone more knowledgeable than me about war history could check out these documents. This is a source with high credibility. The Establishment does not really know what to do with it, apart from making embarrassed comments as to how British Intel ‘failed to realise’ that the H. Was going on. (does that remind you about how the International Red cross apologised for ‘failing to realise’ that the H. Was happening?) I fully accept the paradox pointed out by Hannover,that the BBC first started broadcasting the gassing story in 1942, and I don't know what the answer is.

............................................
By the way, the number of inmates given for 'Auschwitz' for January-July 1942 were ten thousand going up to 16 thousand total, starting with only about 2% Jews and climbing up to 30% Jews. The huge majority were Poles, plus a small number of Russians. Ie the number of Jews went up from around a couple of hundred to about five thousand during those six months. This must be the Auschwitz-I base-camp. So this does not at all confirm what I've read elsewhere about half the inmates being Jewish. So that averages around 20% Jews. The figures for Dachau hover more constantly around 30% Jews.

User avatar
Kingfisher
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1673
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby Kingfisher » 7 years 1 month ago (Sun Oct 07, 2012 1:00 pm)

astro3 wrote: The Establishment does not really know what to do with it, apart from making embarrassed comments as to how British Intel ‘failed to realise’ that the H. Was going on. (does that remind you about how the International Red cross apologised for ‘failing to realise’ that the H. Was happening?)

So that makes British Intelligence, the Red Cross and the Roman Catholic Church that either didn't know what was going on or didn't believe it. The Church in Poland must have had a pretty good picture of what was happening there.

(I watched a documentary on the French/German channel Arte on Friday 5 October about the Secret Power of the Vatican. For WW2 it covered Pope Pius XII's intervention to try to stop the deportations from Holland, but no mention at all of where they were destined for or of extermination. It then jumped from 1942 to the post war situation in Italy and how the new "devil" was Communism. It is probably still available on the website for people in France and Germany.)

Jerzy Ulicki-Rek
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 526
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 10:48 pm

Re: British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby Jerzy Ulicki-Rek » 7 years 1 month ago (Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:16 am)

"Would that be Jan Karski? In that case I recommend that people see: Polish [Jewish?] Liar-Lie-Champion Jan Karski Warns World of Incredible 1944 "Quicklime Train Hoaxoco$t" AND IS BELIEVED. "


Yes.The same Jew "Karski" pretending to be a Pole.
Jerzy

astro3
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:52 am

Re: British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby astro3 » 7 years 1 month ago (Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:32 pm)

German Labour-camps - the shocking truth

Here is a decrypt from British Intelligence, which was cracking the German codes, made in July 1942. I photocopied it from the Public Records Office, Kew (in West London, near Richmond):

V Labour and Industry
The shortage of manpower leads to a considerable employment of prisoners outside as well as inside concentration camps. There are constant enquiries regarding the trade of prisoners and evidence on the part of undertakings and firms of demand for prisoner labour.

On May 1st, LUBLIN can provide: 1200 clerical workers and students, 200 bakers, 150 butchers, 350 agricultural workers and 800 workers of various trades, total 2700. (85/7). On the same date DR. CAESAR is informed that KL RAVENSBRUECK disposes of 3 German speaking women horticulturalists and 2 botanists. (85/12). The transfer of 95 skilled workers and 180 unskilled workers to the GUSTLOFF works is arranged on May 13th at the rate of RM 5,00 per day and per prisoner for skilled workers, and RM 4,00 for unskilled workers. (60/8). KL DACHAU sends 18 prisoners to the Versuchsanstald fuer Ernaehrung und Verpflegung on May 15th., at a rate of RM 0,30 per day per prisoner. (70/8) 20 prisoners are required on June 22nd. For laying a field cable from ENNSDORF to MAUTHAUSEN (139/15). In KL FLOSSENBUERG, prisoners who are not fit for heavier work will be employed on repair work, and the finishing of children’s toys. (80/28). A demand for 30 to 40 prisoners comes from a cement factory (131/18). HIMMLER himself requires by 10 A.M. on May 27th. the number of glass blowers available in KLa (86/34); and canvassing of makers of musical instruments in proceeding in JULY (174/1).


At last it can be told: prisoners not fit for heavier work had to - finish off children's toys!

as I understand it, this was composed by a German and only decrypted by British intel.

Next to the numbers of different groups in the camps, that I've cited above (Russians, Poles & Jews) these comments were written:

Dachau: on 19 May, 18 prisoners to be transferred.
20 May 67 prisoners leave.
20 carpenters sent from Dachau to Mauthausen.
Auschwitz: A Pole escaped 13 May.
15 May Himmler expresses his interest in the tanning experiments.
9 June: Typhus, 18 out of 106 died.
Mauthausen: 4 May: a prisoner is shot in flight
Two lines of total camp inmate numbers were given: 9 March 5600, 2 April 5367 and the comment made: 'fall in numbers is presumably caused by separating off civilian Russians.' (They had decided only to count Russian military?)

I'd say these comments are a final nail in the coffin of the belief that these were 'death-camps' designed for extermination.

User avatar
Kingfisher
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1673
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby Kingfisher » 7 years 1 month ago (Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:29 pm)

Congratulations astro3. This is superb stuff. This ought to be the nail in the coffin for the mainstream story.

The trouble is, of course, that none of it will ever find its way into the mass media, or if it does, only in a totally distorted and misrepresented form

User avatar
Zimyix
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 1:36 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby Zimyix » 2 years 11 months ago (Sun Nov 20, 2016 3:12 pm)

astro3 wrote:If I could figure out how to put up images onto this site I'd do so, some of the 'Top-Secret' pages are quite impressive.

If anyone wants to meet me for a cup of tea at Kew to checkout these newly-released transcripts, let me know! I'm wondering whether there may be a lot to be said for a Revisionist position that is 100% compatible with these British Intel documents.

I suggest these decrypts from the camps show that the Germans were doing their best to get constructive labor out of the inmates.
.



Is there anyway you could email me these docs? Especially the ones detailing the need for workers and designating the weak ones to make "children's toys". Having this primary source could really help my research.

thanks,
Zim

User avatar
Kingfisher
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1673
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: British Intelligence -- revisionists?

Postby Kingfisher » 2 years 11 months ago (Sun Nov 20, 2016 4:34 pm)

I may be able to help you with this but not for another week or so. I'm going to be in a country where HD is illegal until then.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 11 guests