Ray Barren wrote:What is the problem here? A number is given for various categories and subjects. Jews made up their individual own category. Why should we expect a total figure when purpose of report is to divide them? Why else would it report on partisans killed in battle, immediately after battle and then shot later after questioning?
If someone is sending a report on the progress of a "secret extermination program", why does one have to separate the figures as to who is being "executed"?
Did he think Hitler wouldn't know who his soldiers were allegedly "executing"? In "secret"?
Ray Barren, why are the "accomplices and suspects" separated, but not the "bandits" themselves?
Ray Barren wrote:A mountain out of a molehill as you seem to wish to dismiss this document at all costs.
Is this about me now? I didn't write the report, nor the translation.
Ray Barren wrote:Where did they emigrate to, these executed Jews? Are there any other documents which record people being emigrated, but lists them as "executed" in the original German?
And I thought this report was fake? Who forged this report and why has not been stated yet though.
I don't know where they went. All that's needed is to show they aren't where you say they are. The lack of 300,000+ remains in the area being claimed is established... By you and your pastor.
Also, it seems to be a trend to say "murdered victims" when a grave is found. Since when does a mass grave equal murder? 300,000+ victims would certainly have a minimum of 300,000+ bullets in them. Spent casings amount to proving people fired, but certainly doesn't prove who was shot. You can't put the actual rounds and the bodies in the same place.
Ray Barren wrote:I never said it would be impossible. Ill say my own statements. My point was that this philosophy of proof has never been used in the study of modern history. Forensic or archaeological information as only source of proof doesnt sit too high on the evidentiary weight because it is so often unavailable or unstudied by researchers. I referred to examples in past posts which were handwaved by others. This holds true for many things that revisionists hold dear-communist crimes for one. How many mass graves are there to show the millions of people which we know were killed by the Stalinists and Maoists? Researchers dont look at graves for immediate proof but look at other forms of evidence. They can look at graves but this practice is not highly regarded among the scholars I read. This seems to a very recent trend by the revisionists I have read as the works that I read to see the evidence against the Holocaust (was recommended to read Butz Hoax of 20th Century first).
I showed you the work on some of the mass graves in the past few years, you consider this a "failed attempt"? You can also check reports by Russians on others who recorded the mass graves they found after the war. I do not have them at present. Perhaps if you do some needed research into the topic you can learn about them instead of just asking for revisionist responses to everything as you did with this document. No one expands ones mind through tunnel vision.
How Im reading this discussion is that incessant demands for mass graves and charges of forgery are only real response to document that revisionists can offer at this time as the ultimate fall back defense. Even when graves are shown they are dismissed. You didnt pick up the line until halfway through with this discussion, the godsend it was to feel better about explaining the document-rather not having to now. These types of actions help me understand why revisionists are described as having faulty and conspiracy approaches as they simply negate and offer no alternate interpretations. If thats all revisionism is (forgery allegations and demands for increasing amount of evidence) then Im wasting my time here. I hope Im wrong because I think a discussion can be had for those with open minds on this issue.