Origin and Content of DOK 239

This is the place for your questions, propositions, formal debate topics, etc. but they do have to be approved by the Moderator before they will be published visibly, and must not address opponents disrespectfully, if at all. The subjects have to be simple or straightforward and kept on topic.

Moderators: been-there, Budu Svanidze

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by Roberto » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:25 pm

Aryan Scholar wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:55 pm
Roberto wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:33 pm
Aryan Scholar wrote:
Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:58 am
Roberto wrote:
Wed Jun 14, 2017 2:19 pm
The cause of death can be proven on hand of the Jäger Report and other evidence, but even without such other evidence the arguments quoted (that violent death is suggested by the placement of the graves in remote rural areas and that there's no evidence of catastrophic disease mortality among Jews in any population center of the Trakai district in 1941) would be pertinent. (...) Actually all mentioned evidence points to mass killings of Jews in the areas mentioned in DOK 239, which is the only possibility to be reasonably considered as concerns the origin of the mass graves described. (...) Mass graves made by Jews is a rather unlikely possibility. First of all because the related evidence points to mass graves used to bury Jews, not to mass graves made by Jews.
Please, quote the parts of the related evidence of DOK 239 which explicit describe "mass graves used to bury Jews". Let's see it.
The related evidence aside, it is hardly logical to assume that the DMO could have used the term "Jewish mass grave" for a grave made by Jews containing something other than dead Jews. Using such a designation for a mass grave made by Jews but not containing dead Jews would have been misleading and induced the letter's recipient in error. Besides, if the contents of the mass graves in question were not dead Jews, why didn't the DMO specify what the contents of the mass graves were? That would be more interesting to the letter's recipient than information about who had made the mass graves.
It is perfect logical Dr. Paskevicius could be describing mass graves with carcasses from animals (or a combination of corpses from people and carcasses from animals) made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews). This is completely consistent with DOK 239 origin and content.
Actually that's neither logical nor consistent with the document in question, for the reasons explained in the quote. Which I hereby expand considering the latest possibility you mentioned:

The related evidence aside, it is hardly logical to assume that the DMO could have used the term "Jewish mass grave" for a grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews, which would probably have been hard to find in Lithuania in mid-1942) containing something other than dead Jews. Using such a designation for a mass grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews) but not containing dead Jews would have been misleading and induced the letter's recipient in error. Besides, if the contents of the mass graves in question were not dead Jews, why didn't the DMO specify what the contents of the mass graves were? That would be more interesting to the letter's recipient than information about who had made the mass graves, or on whose land they were located. Insofar as it could have been of interest to the recipient that those responsible for the graves were Jews (in order to hold them accountable for creating hazards to the public health and/or for non-Jewish human contents of the graves), a precision of what exactly the graves contained (if they had not contained dead Jews) would have been necessary information, which the DMO would have unduly withheld from the Regional Commissioner by not specifying the contents of the graves.
Aryan Scholar wrote:Please, quote the parts of the related evidence of DOK 239 which explicitly describe "mass graves used to bury Jews". Let's see it.
I didn't say that the document explicitly refers to "mass graves used to bury Jews". The argument is that "Jewish mass grave" would not have been a term used for a mass grave containing something other than dead Jews, for the reasons explained. And that, besides, the possibility of the mass graves in question containing something other than dead Jews is not borne out by other evidence, whereas all related evidence points to mass graves containing the bodies of Jews who had met a violent death.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Aryan Scholar
Posts: 4649
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:56 pm
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by Aryan Scholar » Sun Jun 18, 2017 8:00 pm

Roberto wrote:
Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:25 pm
Actually that's neither logical nor consistent with the document in question, for the reasons explained in the quote. Which I hereby expand considering the latest possibility you mentioned: The related evidence aside, it is hardly logical to assume that the DMO could have used the term "Jewish mass grave" for a grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews, which would probably have been hard to find in Lithuania in mid-1942) containing something other than dead Jews. Using such a designation for a mass grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews) but not containing dead Jews would have been misleading and induced the letter's recipient in error. Besides, if the contents of the mass graves in question were not dead Jews, why didn't the DMO specify what the contents of the mass graves were? That would be more interesting to the letter's recipient than information about who had made the mass graves, or on whose land they were located. Insofar as it could have been of interest to the recipient that those responsible for the graves were Jews (in order to hold them accountable for creating hazards to the public health and/or for non-Jewish human contents of the graves), a precision of what exactly the graves contained (if they had not contained dead Jews) would have been necessary information, which the DMO would have unduly withheld from the Regional Commissioner by not specifying the contents of the graves. (...) I didn't say that the document explicitly refers to "mass graves used to bury Jews". The argument is that "Jewish mass grave" would not have been a term used for a mass grave containing something other than dead Jews, for the reasons explained. And that, besides, the possibility of the mass graves in question containing something other than dead Jews is not borne out by other evidence, whereas all related evidence points to mass graves containing the bodies of Jews who had met a violent death.
Please, substantiate the "argument is that "Jewish mass grave" would not have been a term used for a mass grave containing something other than dead Jews" with authoritative (or even testimonial) evidence related to DOK 239.

Please, quote the parts of the related evidence of DOK 239 which explicitly "points to mass graves containing the bodies of Jews who had met a violent death".

Let's see it.

Aryan Scholar
Posts: 4649
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:56 pm
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by Aryan Scholar » Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:19 pm

Roberto wrote:
Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:25 pm
Actually that's neither logical nor consistent with the document in question, for the reasons explained in the quote. Which I hereby expand considering the latest possibility you mentioned:

The related evidence aside, it is hardly logical to assume that the DMO could have used the term "Jewish mass grave" for a grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews, which would probably have been hard to find in Lithuania in mid-1942) containing something other than dead Jews.
Jews (Rabbinites and Karaites) owned lands in the Trakai village and whereabouts (originally Troki) long before the Germans occupied Lithuania in 1941.

Troki, Asher Shomrony-Straus, 1954, pag. 11:
The Karaites were brought to Troki at the end of the 14th century by the Lithuanian Prince Vitold, who expanded the borders of his country to the Black Sea and to the east, in which dwelt a large Karaite community. (...) Most of the lands of the village were granted to the Karaites that were held in Troki, in addition to various rights and privileges. Besides agriculture, they also engaged in trade, but in they encountered stiff competition from the Jews, who settled in Lithuania and were merchants there well before the arrival of the Karaites. (...) The Catholics, even though they spoke Polish and proclaimed themselves Poles, were in actuality descendants of a mixture of Poles, Byelorussians and Lithuanians who lived within the region of this country. (...) Many would work the lands of the Karaites in fifty-fifty land tenancy, or they were day-laborers in their vegetable gardens. A few of them supported themselves as hired fisherman with the Jewish lake tenants, or would fish on their own in the broad lakes of the village.

[source]
Jews even had agricultural courses in Lithuania long before the Germans occupied Lithuania in 1941.

ORT Lithuania:
A Jewish village in aid of Jewish farmers

Image

Kalinava agricultural labour course students in the orchard, 1935–1940.Photograph by Jasvoinas, World ORT Archive

[source]
Moreover...

Pinkas Hakehillot Lita: Encyclopedia of Jewish Communities, Lithuania, pag. 77:
Under Soviet Rule (1940-1941) (...) When the lines of tanks rolled into the Lithuanian towns on June 15, There were many Jews among the masses, particularly the youths, who cheered the Red Army soldiers. (...) Because of the special situation of the Jews (economic, religious, cultural and educational), the effect of Sovietization was very serious and brought about serious consequences. (...) The agricultural reform too affected the Jews negatively, as there were many who owned large tracts of farmland that they didn't work personally, but by hired labor and were therefore defined as exploiters or estate owners who had part of their farm distributed among peasants. Another branch, which suffered was the small shopkeepers. They had heavy taxes imposed on them and difficulties were placed in their way in replacing sold goods. As a result many were forced to close their businesses and lost their source of income. In a number of towns, Jews who had their businesses nationalized, had to resort to working at public services. The Sovietization policy hurt in particular the Jewish minority for whom commerce, shop keeping and light industry were the main source of income. (...) On the other hand, Jewish artisans could now integrate into the economy by joining productive co-operatives (known as Artels). A minority remained independent (they were called Kustarniki). Jews in the free professions now had state and municipal positions open to them. Sovietization was specially kind to wage earners, laborers and the poorest sections of the population, and of course, to the senior members of the Communist party and the upper strata of the public and state administration. As to the other Jews, the new regime caused a sharp drop in their standard of living and the day-to-day existence.

[source]
Roberto wrote:
Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:25 pm
Using such a designation for a mass grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews) but not containing dead Jews would have been misleading and induced the letter's recipient in error. (...) Insofar as it could have been of interest to the recipient that those responsible for the graves were Jews (in order to hold them accountable for creating hazards to the public health and/or for non-Jewish human contents of the graves), a precision of what exactly the graves contained (if they had not contained dead Jews) would have been necessary information, which the DMO would have unduly withheld from the Regional Commissioner by not specifying the contents of the graves.
Not if the recipient of DOK 239, Hurst Wulff, already know in advance what were the content of the Jewish mass graves described by Dr. Paskevicius.
Roberto wrote:
Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:25 pm
Besides, if the contents of the mass graves in question were not dead Jews, why didn't the DMO specify what the contents of the mass graves were? That would be more interesting to the letter's recipient than information about who had made the mass graves, or on whose land they were located.
Because:
Roberto wrote:First of all, it mattered neither to the DMO nor to Regional Commissar Wulff how the people whose graves the DMO mentioned had died. (...) That was not of interest to either the sender or the receiver, whose concerns were of a hygienic nature. (...) Buried corpses can be a health concern independently of the cause of death. (...) What makes sense, for the reasons explained, is [Regional Commissar Wulff] inquiring about dead bodies of both humans and animals. (...) Carcasses, i.e. mortal remains of animals, might be those of animals who died of disease in the field and were not removed. (...) And it is reasonable to assume that it was used with this meaning in the letters containing the Regional Commissioner's questions to the DMO, because from a medical-hygienic perspective animal carcasses may be as much a health hazard as human corpses. (...) On the other hand, it makes sense that Wulff should have requested information about both "Leichen" and "Kadaver", i.e. about both human corpses and animal carcasses. This because the underground presence of both could pose a health risk to the neighboring populations, namely or especially due to leachate seeping through the soil into the groundwater.
Roberto wrote:
Wed Jun 07, 2017 7:00 pm
Aryan Scholar wrote:
Wed Jun 07, 2017 8:52 am
Dr. Paskevicius and Horst Wulff could be discussing DOK 239 mass graves and graves with corpses and carcasses without to know anything about the cause of death of such corpses and carcasses.

Do you agree?
Yes, what killed the people whose graves/corpses were mentioned by Paskevicius need not have interested either him of Wulff.

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by Roberto » Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:37 pm

Aryan Scholar wrote:
Sun Jun 18, 2017 8:00 pm
Roberto wrote:
Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:25 pm
Actually that's neither logical nor consistent with the document in question, for the reasons explained in the quote. Which I hereby expand considering the latest possibility you mentioned: The related evidence aside, it is hardly logical to assume that the DMO could have used the term "Jewish mass grave" for a grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews, which would probably have been hard to find in Lithuania in mid-1942) containing something other than dead Jews. Using such a designation for a mass grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews) but not containing dead Jews would have been misleading and induced the letter's recipient in error. Besides, if the contents of the mass graves in question were not dead Jews, why didn't the DMO specify what the contents of the mass graves were? That would be more interesting to the letter's recipient than information about who had made the mass graves, or on whose land they were located. Insofar as it could have been of interest to the recipient that those responsible for the graves were Jews (in order to hold them accountable for creating hazards to the public health and/or for non-Jewish human contents of the graves), a precision of what exactly the graves contained (if they had not contained dead Jews) would have been necessary information, which the DMO would have unduly withheld from the Regional Commissioner by not specifying the contents of the graves. (...) I didn't say that the document explicitly refers to "mass graves used to bury Jews". The argument is that "Jewish mass grave" would not have been a term used for a mass grave containing something other than dead Jews, for the reasons explained. And that, besides, the possibility of the mass graves in question containing something other than dead Jews is not borne out by other evidence, whereas all related evidence points to mass graves containing the bodies of Jews who had met a violent death.
[quote="Aryan Scholar"Please, substantiate the "argument is that "Jewish mass grave" would not have been a term used for a mass grave containing something other than dead Jews" with authoritative (or even testimonial) evidence related to DOK 239.
Logical arguments should be met with logical arguments, not with requests for "authoritative (or even testimonial.

There's another argument supporting my point besides those already mentioned. Let's look at the description of the "individual graves" in that document (emphases added):
Individual graves

1. Community of Kaischedoren

1) In southerly direction 2 km from Kaischedoren by the road Kaischedoren-Zesmaren, lying low in the forest, there is a grave with 8-10 corpses, which is covered by a layer of soil up to 1 meter high.

2. By the village Palomene 12 km north of Kaischedoren along the road Palomene-Zaslen there is a grave with 8-12 corpses.

2. Community of Zaslen

In northerly direction 1 km from Zaslen by the road Zaslen-Gegusien there is a grave with 15-20 corpses. The grave is covered by a layer of soil up to 1 m high.

3. Community of Rudischken

In northerly direction 1 km from Rudischken, 200 m from the road Traken-Rudischken in the forest there is a grave with 15-20 corpses. The grave is covered by a layer of soil up to 1 m high.
In all these cases information about the contents of the graves, but no information about who made the graves or on whose land they are located.

So it's makes no sense, considering the document's internal logic, to assume that the term "Jewish mass graves" should have referred to anything other than the contents of these mass graves as being Jewish corpses. Applying one criterion (who had made them or on whose land they were located) in informing about the mass graves and another (what the contents of the grave were) in informing about the "individual graves" would have been inconsistent and illogical, besides confusing or misleading the reader.
Aryan Scholar wrote:Please, quote the parts of the related evidence of DOK 239 which explicitly "points to mass graves containing the bodies of Jews who had met a violent death".

Let's see it.
No problem.

1. The Jäger Report, mentions mass killings in the areas where Paskevicius mentioned the existence of mass graves:

Mass killings by the EK in Trakai on 30 September 1941 are mentioned on page 6 (http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... tm.en.html). The District Medical Officer's report refers to this area as follows:
In easterly direction 2 km from Traken, 1 km from the village of Wornicken, 1 km from the forest, 1 km from the lake, in a sandy depression, there is a Jewish mass grave 80 meters long, 4 meters wide and 4 meters deep.
962 Jews were killed in Semiliski on 6 October 1941. The DMO's report refers to this area as follows:
In northerly direction 1 km from Semelischken by the forest, 50 m from the road, 2 km from the river Strawa on a sandy height, there is a Jewish mass grave about 30 m long. Drainage in the direction of Semelischken.
784 Jews were killed in Rumsiskis a. Ziezmariai on 29 August 1941. The DMO's report refers to this area as follows:
In northerly direction 3 km from Zesmaren, on land belonging to the village Trilischken, 1 km from the road Zaslen-Zesmaren, on a sandy height there is a Jewish mass grave 33 meters long.
1,911 Jews were shot on 26 August 1941 in Kaisiadorys. The DMO's report refers to this area as follows:
In northerly direction 5 km from Zesmaren, 2 km from the road Kaischedoren-Zesmaren, by the Bladukischer Forest there is a Jewish mass grave 30 meters long.
2. The Holocaust Atlas of Lithuania (http://www.holocaustatlas.lt/EN/) provides the following information regarding the areas mentioned in the DMO's report:
Mass Murder of the Jews at Trakai

About massacre

“Until September, 1941, the Jews of Trakai lived in their homes and apartments. During the first days of September, police forced the town’s Jews into a ghetto which was located among summer homes beyond a lake. Jews were taken to the ghetto in canoes and small boats. In total about 400 Jews of Trakai were sent to the ghetto. Later, rural police sent Jews from Aukštadvaris, Onuškis, Rudiškės, Žydkaimis and Lentvaris to the ghetto. Police from Trakai, Aukštadvaris, Onuškis and Lentvaris guarded the ghetto.

“About two weeks after the ghetto was established, 20–30 members of the Special Squad arrived in Trakai. A German petty officer travelled with them. According to testimony from some members of the Special Squad, Martin Weiss also went to Trakai.

“On September 30, 1941, men, women, children and the elderly were lined up in columns and escorted by armed guards – local policemen commanded by Kazimieras Vasilevskis, policemen from Aukštadvaris, Onuškis and Lentvaris and local white armbanders and Special Squad murderers – to the Varnikai forest and shot after many humiliations. The mass murder began in the morning and ended in the afternoon.

“The Jäger Report says 1,446 Jews were shot in Trakai on September 30, 1941, including 366 men, 483 women and 597 children.”
Address: Trakai district, Trakai administrative district, Varnikai village
Victim number: 1446
Perpetrators
Special Squad;
M. Weiss;
Trakai police, led by K. Vasilevskis;
police and white armbanders from Aukštadvaris, Onuškis and Lentvaris;
How to find?

Driving on road no. 4751, turn right at the sign “Varnikų piliakalnis” in Varnikai village. Drive past the cemetery deeper into the forest to the commemorative stone. Proceed in 100 meters and you’ll see the monument.
Latitude: 54.649933 Longitude: 24.961733
Monument

A concrete obelisk was set up at the mass murder site after World War II. In 1984 and 1985 the gravesite was reconstructed and a wooden sculpture installed (sculpture by Marijanas Misevičius).

Unique site code: 11288

Status: Listed on register

Inscription: “The blood of 1,446 Jewish children, women and men was spilled here. Nazis and their local collaborators brutally murdered them on September 30, 1941. Let the memory of those who perished in innocence remain sacred” (in Yiddish and Lithuanian)
There's information about the massacre (about particulars of the killing and the Lithuanians who took part therein) that is not contained in the Jaeger Report and must thus be based on other evidence, namely eyewitness testimonies.
Mass Murder of the Jews from Semeliškės, Vievis and Žasliai
About massacre

“In the second half of September, 1941, the Jews of Semeliškės were moved to the ghetto. Jews from Vievis and some Jews from Žasliai were also imprisoned. The ghetto existed for about two weeks. During the first few days of October, a truck carrying about 20–30 members of the Special Squad arrived in Semeliškės from Vilnius. A German man came by car. He and head of the rural district of Semeliškės and the local police chief went to inspect the future killing site. The Jews of Semeliškės were killed on October 6, 1941. In the morning police from Semeliškės, Vievis and Žiežmariai who guarded the ghetto began to move Jews to the execution site. Another group of police guarded the pit. The executioners of the Special Squad forced small groups of Jews to the pit and shot them. The massacre lasted several hours. After returning to Semeliškės the shooters got drunk. The guards did not get any vodka.

“According to the Jäger report, 962 Jews were killed in Semeliškės: 213 men, 359 women and 390 children.”
Address: Semeliškės administrative district, Semeliškės forest, Elektrėnai district
Victim number: 962
Perpetrators
Special Squad;
head of the rural district of Semeliškės;
police chief of Semeliškės;
policemen from Semeliškės, Vievis and Žiežmariai
How to find?

When you come to Semeliškės from Vilnius (road no. 4709), turn onto the road on the right just before the post office. Continue to the forest. In the forest go about 50 meter s and you’ll see a commemorative marker on the left. Turn onto the forest track and go another 100 meters until you see the monument.
Latitude: 54.671500 Longitude: 24.673700
Monument

Unique site code: 11285

Status: Listed on register

Inscription: “At this place the Nazis and their helpers spilled the blood of 960 Jewish children, women and men on October 6, 1941” (in Yiddish)
Same thing here.
Mass Murder of the Jews of Kaišiadorys and Surrounding Areas

About massacre

“The planned mass shooting of Jews began at the end of August, 1941. Initially the Gaižiūnai military installation was chosen as the site for the mass murder, then the site was changed to the Strošiūnai forest. Two sites were to be used for the mass murder: one in the so-called Vasiliev ditch, the other next to what is now the Vilnius–Kaunas highway.

“Jews held at a Kaišiadorys storehouse were murdered first. They were divided into groups of 20–30 and led to their execution. They shot men first, then women and children. By evening the storehouse was empty and 500 people had been shot. Jews in the ghetto and another warehouse were killed later.

“According to the Jäger Report, Jews from the Kaišiadorys ghetto and temporary isolation site, 1,911 people, were shot on August 26, 1941. It is believed that not all Jews in the Kaišiadorys ghetto and temporary isolation site could have been shot in one day. Thus it is thought that only the last day of the mass murders is indicated in the report. The main organizers of the mass murder of the Jews were SS-Obersturmführer Joachim Hamann’s Rollkommando and locals with white armbands, local police and local volunteers.”
Address: Kaišiadorys district, Žiežmariai administrative district, Strošiūnai forest (9th quadrant)
Victim number: 1911
Perpetrators
Rollkommando Hamann/1st Battalion, 3rd Unit;
Kaišiadorys white armbanders, police and local volunteers;
How to find?

On the highway from Vilnius to Kaunas, turn right at the Žiežmariai exit (road no. 1808). Go 1.5 km, turn onto the forest road to the right.
Latitude: 54.823900 Longitude: 24.460700
Monument

A monument was placed at the mass murder site on October 16, 1964. In 1990 Žiežmariai traditional artist Vidmantas Kapačiūnas made three sculptures out of oak which were later burned.

Unique site code: 10892

Status: Protected by state

Inscription: “The Nazi henchmen and their local collaborators brutally tortured and buried half-alive 2,200 Jewish men from Žasliai, Žiežmariai and Kaišiadorys” (in Lithuanian and Yiddish)
Same thing here.
Mass Murder of the Jews (Women, Children and Elderly) of Kaišiadorys and Surrounding Area
About massacre

“On August 29, 1941, the surviving Jewish women, children and elderly – in total 784 people – of Kaišiadorys and surrounding areas (Žasliai, Žiežmariai, Rumšiskės) were shot. Lithuanian self-defense unit, Rollkomando Hamann, local police and white armbanders took part in the mass murder.

“On November 3, 1952, a Soviet special commission studying the mass murder state determined the ditch had been 55 meters long, 3 meters wide and 2 meters deep. The ditch was filled with corpses up to one meter.”
Address: Kaišiadorys district, Žiežmariai administrative district, Strošiūnai forest (28th quadrant)
Victim number: 784
Perpetrators
Rollkommando Hamann/1st Battalion 3rd Unit;
Kaišiadorys white armbanders and police;
How to find?

Turn right after 60 km when you go on the Highway A1 (E85) from Vilnius to Kaunas. There is a small gravel road. After 100 m turn left. Go straight 300 m until you reach the mass killing site.
Latitude: 54.803950 Longitude: 24.558563
Monument

A commemorative marker was placed at the mass murder site on October 16, 1964. The inscription was replaced with a new commemorative plaque in 1991.

Unique site code: 10891

Status: Protected by state

Inscription: “The Nazi henchman and their local collaborators brutally tortured and buried half-alive about 1,800 Jewish men and women from Žasliai, Žiežmariai and Kaišiadorys here on August 28, 1941” (in Yiddish and Lithuanian)
Same thing here. The quote also expressly mentions a postwar Soviet crime site investigation.

3. Mass execution of Jews from Semeliškės and nearby villages is mentioned under http://yahadmap.org/#village/semeli-k-s ... huania.784. The link leads to a transcription/translation of or from a witness interview:
Bronislawa, born in 1933, recollects: “All the Jews were shot within the first year. Later, the Germans were asking around if there were any Jews left. People used to snitch on each other. In Žuvyčiai, the Germans found a person who hid Jews. They were all taken to the nearby forest. The Jews were shot and the person who provided shelter was acting crazy after that scene. They wanted to shoot him too, but they didn’t. There was one Lithuanian serving the Germans so he stood up for him. There was a notice saying that all the members of the family would be shot if someone was hiding Jews. But people still hid them and saved them. (Witness N°6, interviewed in Semeliškės, on September 19, 2013)
and to the translation or partial translation of a Soviet investigation report:
150-200 meters northwest of the Bovshi farmstead, in Semeliškės volost of Trakai Uyezd, there is a fenced cemetery that contains the remains of 1020 civilians brutally tortured and shot by German fascist monsters. At the end of September 1941, about 1000 men, women and children were brought by the Germans to the place mentioned above under heavy escort. Victims were undressed about 50 meters from the ditch, beaten with sticks, then blindfolded and shot. They were shot in groups of six people. Sick victims were thrown from the cart into the pit and shot inside the pit. In this way, from 10 AM until 6 PM, 1020 men and women were shot. Screams and moans could be heard from 2-3 kilometers away." [Local government commission report, compiled on August 27, 1944, RG-22.002M.7021-94/438]
All this evidence points to mass killings of Jews in all or some of the areas mentioned in DOK 239.

And as it points to mass killings in such areas, it also points to the existence of mass graves in such areas containing the corpses of those mass killings' victims, as it would make complete sense to bury the victims and no sense at all to leave their corpses lying around in the open. Besides, some of the aforementioned sources expressly mention graves:
In the morning police from Semeliškės, Vievis and Žiežmariai who guarded the ghetto began to move Jews to the execution site. Another group of police guarded the pit. The executioners of the Special Squad forced small groups of Jews to the pit and shot them.
Two sites were to be used for the mass murder: one in the so-called Vasiliev ditch, the other next to what is now the Vilnius–Kaunas highway.
“On November 3, 1952, a Soviet special commission studying the mass murder state determined the ditch had been 55 meters long, 3 meters wide and 2 meters deep. The ditch was filled with corpses up to one meter.”
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 7060
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 7:59 am
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by been-there » Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:57 am

8 hours to kill a thousand people?

Blindfolding them and shooting them in groups of six?

Roberto, are you not aware that this “Soviet investigation” hardly supports your argument as it does not seem a credible account?
Roberto wrote:
Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:37 pm
3. Mass execution of Jews from Semeliškės and nearby villages is mentioned under this link. The link leads to the translation or partial translation of a Soviet investigation report:
150-200 meters northwest of the Bovshi farmstead, in Semeliškės volost of Trakai Uyezd, there is a fenced cemetery that contains the remains of 1020 civilians brutally tortured and shot by German fascist monsters. At the end of September 1941, about 1000 men, women and children were brought by the Germans to the place mentioned above under heavy escort. Victims were undressed about 50 meters from the ditch, beaten with sticks, then blindfolded and shot. They were shot in groups of six people. Sick victims were thrown from the cart into the pit and shot inside the pit. In this way, from 10 AM until 6 PM, 1020 men and women were shot. Screams and moans could be heard from 2-3 kilometers away." [Local government commission report, compiled on August 27, 1944, RG-22.002M.7021-94/438]

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by Roberto » Sat Jun 24, 2017 11:06 am

Aryan Scholar wrote:
Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:19 pm
Roberto wrote:
Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:25 pm
Actually that's neither logical nor consistent with the document in question, for the reasons explained in the quote. Which I hereby expand considering the latest possibility you mentioned:

The related evidence aside, it is hardly logical to assume that the DMO could have used the term "Jewish mass grave" for a grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews, which would probably have been hard to find in Lithuania in mid-1942) containing something other than dead Jews.
Jews (Rabbinites and Karaites) owned lands in the Trakai village and whereabouts (originally Troki) long before the Germans occupied Lithuania in 1941.

Troki, Asher Shomrony-Straus, 1954, pag. 11:
The Karaites were brought to Troki at the end of the 14th century by the Lithuanian Prince Vitold, who expanded the borders of his country to the Black Sea and to the east, in which dwelt a large Karaite community. (...) Most of the lands of the village were granted to the Karaites that were held in Troki, in addition to various rights and privileges. Besides agriculture, they also engaged in trade, but in they encountered stiff competition from the Jews, who settled in Lithuania and were merchants there well before the arrival of the Karaites. (...) The Catholics, even though they spoke Polish and proclaimed themselves Poles, were in actuality descendants of a mixture of Poles, Byelorussians and Lithuanians who lived within the region of this country. (...) Many would work the lands of the Karaites in fifty-fifty land tenancy, or they were day-laborers in their vegetable gardens. A few of them supported themselves as hired fisherman with the Jewish lake tenants, or would fish on their own in the broad lakes of the village.

[source]
Jews even had agricultural courses in Lithuania long before the Germans occupied Lithuania in 1941.

ORT Lithuania:
A Jewish village in aid of Jewish farmers

Image

Kalinava agricultural labour course students in the orchard, 1935–1940.Photograph by Jasvoinas, World ORT Archive

[source]
Moreover...

Pinkas Hakehillot Lita: Encyclopedia of Jewish Communities, Lithuania, pag. 77:
Under Soviet Rule (1940-1941) (...) When the lines of tanks rolled into the Lithuanian towns on June 15, There were many Jews among the masses, particularly the youths, who cheered the Red Army soldiers. (...) Because of the special situation of the Jews (economic, religious, cultural and educational), the effect of Sovietization was very serious and brought about serious consequences. (...) The agricultural reform too affected the Jews negatively, as there were many who owned large tracts of farmland that they didn't work personally, but by hired labor and were therefore defined as exploiters or estate owners who had part of their farm distributed among peasants. Another branch, which suffered was the small shopkeepers. They had heavy taxes imposed on them and difficulties were placed in their way in replacing sold goods. As a result many were forced to close their businesses and lost their source of income. In a number of towns, Jews who had their businesses nationalized, had to resort to working at public services. The Sovietization policy hurt in particular the Jewish minority for whom commerce, shop keeping and light industry were the main source of income. (...) On the other hand, Jewish artisans could now integrate into the economy by joining productive co-operatives (known as Artels). A minority remained independent (they were called Kustarniki). Jews in the free professions now had state and municipal positions open to them. Sovietization was specially kind to wage earners, laborers and the poorest sections of the population, and of course, to the senior members of the Communist party and the upper strata of the public and state administration. As to the other Jews, the new regime caused a sharp drop in their standard of living and the day-to-day existence.

[source]
Interesting but hardly relevant, as Jewish ownership of land before the Soviet or the German occupation does not mean such ownership during such occupation, and the contents (see previous post) and context of DOK 239 don't suggest that the DMO was providing any information about who owned the land on which the graves were located.

As concerns Jews who had to "resort to working at public services" under Soviet rule, that made them targets of the Nazis already before they were targeted for being Jews, as Heydrich had ordered to kill Jews in Soviet party and government positions:
Heydrich believed that Soviet Jewry formed the “biological basis” for the Soviet state; hence he gave explicit orders that the four Einsatzgruppen of the Security Police and SD that followed the German army into the USSR physically annihilate Jews holding positions in the Soviet Communist party and the Soviet state apparatus.


https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.ph ... d=10007406
In a letter dated 2 July 1941 Heydrich communicated to his SS and Police Leaders that the Einsatzgruppen were to execute all senior and middle ranking Comintern officials; all senior and middle ranking members of the central, provincial, and district committees of the Communist Party; extremist and radical Communist Party members; people's commissars; and Jews in party and government posts. Open-ended instructions were given to execute "other radical elements (saboteurs, propagandists, snipers, assassins, agitators, etc.)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einsatzgr ... g_in_1941
4) Exekutionen

Zu exekutieren sind alle

Funktionäre der Komintern (wie überhaupt die kommunistischen Berufspolitiker schlechthin),

die höheren, mittleren und radikalen unteren Funktionäre der Partei, der Zentralkomitees, der Gau- und Gebietskomitees,

Volkskommissare,

Juden in Partei- und Staatsstellungen,

sonstigen radikalen Elemente (Saboteure, Propagandeure, Heckenschützen, Attentäter, Hetzer usw.),

soweit sie nicht im Einzelfall nicht oder nicht mehr benötigt werden, um Auskünfte in politischer oder wirtschaftlicher Hinsicht zu geben, die für die weiteren sicherheitspolizeilichen Maßnahmen oder den wirtschaftlichen Wiederaufbau der besetzten Gebiete besonders wichtig sind. Insbesondere ist Bedacht zu nehmen, daß Wirtschafts-, Gewerkschafts- und Handelsgremien nicht restlos liquidiert werden, so daß keine geeigneten Auskunftspersonen mehr vorhanden sind.
http://www.edition-judenverfolgung.de/n ... Itemid=177

Translation:
4) Executions

To be executed are all

officials of the Komintern (just as Communist professional politicians in general),

the higher, middle and radical officials of the party, the central committee and the district and sub-district committees,

people’s commissars,

Jews in party and state positions,

other radical elements (saboteurs, propagandists, snipers, assassins, inciters etc.),

insofar as they are not in a particular case not or no longer required to provide information in political or economic matters that are especially important for the further security police measures or the economic reconstruction of the occupied territories. It must be especially taken into account that economic, union and trade boards are not completely liquidated leading to no adequate information providers being available anymore.
Note: the first sentence’s last period has a "nicht" too many that makes no sense. The wording that makes sense in the letter’s context is the following:
soweit sie nicht im Einzelfall nicht oder nicht mehr benötigt werden, um Auskünfte in politischer oder wirtschaftlicher Hinsicht zu geben, die für die weiteren sicherheitspolizeilichen Maßnahmen oder den wirtschaftlichen Wiederaufbau der besetzten Gebiete besonders wichtig sind.
Translation:
Insofar as they are not in a particular case not or no longer required to provide information in political or economic matters that are especially important for the further security police measures or the economic reconstruction of the occupied territories.
Aryan Scholar wrote:
Roberto wrote:
Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:25 pm
Using such a designation for a mass grave made by Jews (or in land owned or leased by Jews) but not containing dead Jews would have been misleading and induced the letter's recipient in error. (...) Insofar as it could have been of interest to the recipient that those responsible for the graves were Jews (in order to hold them accountable for creating hazards to the public health and/or for non-Jewish human contents of the graves), a precision of what exactly the graves contained (if they had not contained dead Jews) would have been necessary information, which the DMO would have unduly withheld from the Regional Commissioner by not specifying the contents of the graves.
Not if the recipient of DOK 239, Hurst Wulff, already know in advance what were the content of the Jewish mass graves described by Dr. Paskevicius.
Advance knowledge of mass graves made by Jews or on Jewish land containing something other than dead Jews would be highly unlikely. Advance knowledge of Jäger's killing activities, on the other hand, would be very likely.
Aryan Scholar wrote:
Roberto wrote:
Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:25 pm
Besides, if the contents of the mass graves in question were not dead Jews, why didn't the DMO specify what the contents of the mass graves were? That would be more interesting to the letter's recipient than information about who had made the mass graves, or on whose land they were located.
Because:
Roberto wrote:First of all, it mattered neither to the DMO nor to Regional Commissar Wulff how the people whose graves the DMO mentioned had died. (...) That was not of interest to either the sender or the receiver, whose concerns were of a hygienic nature. (...) Buried corpses can be a health concern independently of the cause of death. (...) What makes sense, for the reasons explained, is [Regional Commissar Wulff] inquiring about dead bodies of both humans and animals. (...) Carcasses, i.e. mortal remains of animals, might be those of animals who died of disease in the field and were not removed. (...) And it is reasonable to assume that it was used with this meaning in the letters containing the Regional Commissioner's questions to the DMO, because from a medical-hygienic perspective animal carcasses may be as much a health hazard as human corpses. (...) On the other hand, it makes sense that Wulff should have requested information about both "Leichen" and "Kadaver", i.e. about both human corpses and animal carcasses. This because the underground presence of both could pose a health risk to the neighboring populations, namely or especially due to leachate seeping through the soil into the groundwater.
Roberto wrote:
Wed Jun 07, 2017 7:00 pm
Aryan Scholar wrote:
Wed Jun 07, 2017 8:52 am
Dr. Paskevicius and Horst Wulff could be discussing DOK 239 mass graves and graves with corpses and carcasses without to know anything about the cause of death of such corpses and carcasses.

Do you agree?
Yes, what killed the people whose graves/corpses were mentioned by Paskevicius need not have interested either him of Wulff.
The contents of a mass grave made by Jews or on Jewish land containing something other than Jews would have been of interest to the Regional Commissioner for the reasons explained (in order to hold the Jews accountable for creating hazards to the public health and/or for non-Jewish human contents of the graves). If the mass graves contained dead Jews, on the other hand, what had killed those dead Jews would be of no interest to the Regional Commissioner. Besides, he is likely to have known it already.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Aryan Scholar
Posts: 4649
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:56 pm
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by Aryan Scholar » Sat Jun 24, 2017 11:51 am

Roberto wrote:
Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:37 pm
Logical arguments should be met with logical arguments, not with requests for "authoritative (or even testimonial.

There's another argument supporting my point besides those already mentioned. Let's look at the description of the "individual graves" in that document (emphases added):
Individual graves

1. Community of Kaischedoren

1) In southerly direction 2 km from Kaischedoren by the road Kaischedoren-Zesmaren, lying low in the forest, there is a grave with 8-10 corpses, which is covered by a layer of soil up to 1 meter high.

2. By the village Palomene 12 km north of Kaischedoren along the road Palomene-Zaslen there is a grave with 8-12 corpses.

2. Community of Zaslen

In northerly direction 1 km from Zaslen by the road Zaslen-Gegusien there is a grave with 15-20 corpses. The grave is covered by a layer of soil up to 1 m high.

3. Community of Rudischken

In northerly direction 1 km from Rudischken, 200 m from the road Traken-Rudischken in the forest there is a grave with 15-20 corpses. The grave is covered by a layer of soil up to 1 m high.
In all these cases information about the contents of the graves, but no information about who made the graves or on whose land they are located.

So it's makes no sense, considering the document's internal logic, to assume that the term "Jewish mass graves" should have referred to anything other than the contents of these mass graves as being Jewish corpses. Applying one criterion (who had made them or on whose land they were located) in informing about the mass graves and another (what the contents of the grave were) in informing about the "individual graves" would have been inconsistent and illogical, besides confusing or misleading the reader.
This do not rule out the hypothesis the Jewish mass graves in DOK 239 could have also corpses and carcasses from gentiles and animals.
Roberto wrote:
Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:37 pm
No problem.

(...)

All this evidence points to mass killings of Jews in all or some of the areas mentioned in DOK 239.

And as it points to mass killings in such areas, it also points to the existence of mass graves in such areas containing the corpses of those mass killings' victims, as it would make complete sense to bury the victims and no sense at all to leave their corpses lying around in the open.
Could you please stop to post wall of texts with quotes which do not say anything about the mass graves in DOK 239?

Please, quote the parts of the related evidence of DOK 239 which explicitly "points to mass graves containing the bodies of Jews who had met a violent death".

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by Roberto » Sat Jun 24, 2017 11:56 am

been-there wrote:
Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:57 am
Roberto wrote:
Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:37 pm
3. Mass execution of Jews from Semeliškės and nearby villages is mentioned under this link. The link leads to the translation or partial translation of a Soviet investigation report:
150-200 meters northwest of the Bovshi farmstead, in Semeliškės volost of Trakai Uyezd, there is a fenced cemetery that contains the remains of 1020 civilians brutally tortured and shot by German fascist monsters. At the end of September 1941, about 1000 men, women and children were brought by the Germans to the place mentioned above under heavy escort. Victims were undressed about 50 meters from the ditch, beaten with sticks, then blindfolded and shot. They were shot in groups of six people. Sick victims were thrown from the cart into the pit and shot inside the pit. In this way, from 10 AM until 6 PM, 1020 men and women were shot. Screams and moans could be heard from 2-3 kilometers away." [Local government commission report, compiled on August 27, 1944, RG-22.002M.7021-94/438]
8 hours to kill a thousand people?

Blindfolding them and shooting them in groups of six?

Roberto, are you not aware that this “Soviet investigation” hardly supports your argument as it does not seem a credible account?
The Soviet report contains an unusual detail (namely the blindfolding, which isn't mentioned regarding any other mass killing of Jews that I know about), and the killing may have lasted longer than reported (though one should take into consideration that "in groups of six people" may have meant six people shot by the same marksman or group of marksmen, so if there were several marksmen or groups of marksmen involved, the number killed in each batch would be higher). But the report mentions a mass killing in an area where the Jäger Report mentions mass killings and DOK 239 mentions "Jewish mass graves". So it corroborates the contents of both documents in this respect.

The dating (end of September) also roughly matches the Jäger Report, which mentions the killing of 962 Jews at "Semiliski" under the date 6 October 1941 (page 6, see under http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... tm.en.html). That may have been the completion date of a killing that took more than one day. The precise number given by the Soviets (1,020 victims, which exceeds Jäger's figure by 58) suggests that the mass grave may have been excavated and the corpses counted. If so, it is possible that some corpses added later to the grave were of victims (e.g. Soviet prisoners of war) who had actually been blindfolded, and the blindfolding detail was then applied to all victims due to a misunderstanding or as an embellishment.

Note that the report nowhere mentions Jews, by the way. This fits what I wrote under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... eport.html about Soviet reluctance to point out Jews as "special" victims of Nazi mass killing.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Aryan Scholar
Posts: 4649
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:56 pm
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by Aryan Scholar » Sat Jun 24, 2017 12:57 pm

Roberto wrote:
Sat Jun 24, 2017 11:56 am
been-there wrote:
Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:57 am
8 hours to kill a thousand people?

Blindfolding them and shooting them in groups of six?

Roberto, are you not aware that this “Soviet investigation” hardly supports your argument as it does not seem a credible account?
The Soviet report contains an unusual detail (namely the blindfolding, which isn't mentioned regarding any other mass killing of Jews that I know about), and the killing may have lasted longer than reported (though one should take into consideration that "in groups of six people" may have meant six people shot by the same marksman or group of marksmen, so if there were several marksmen or groups of marksmen involved, the number killed in each batch would be higher).
The RG-22.002M.7021-94/438 Soviet report do not make any mentions regarding the mass killing of Jews, but of Lithuanian civilians.
But the report mentions a mass killing in an area where the Jäger Report mentions mass killings and DOK 239 mentions "Jewish mass graves". So it corroborates the contents of both documents in this respect.
The RG-22.002M.7021-94/438 Soviet report do not make any mentions of any Jewish mass grave, but of a fenced cemetery.
The dating (end of September) also roughly matches the Jäger Report, which mentions the killing of 962 Jews at "Semiliski" under the date 6 October 1941 (page 6, see under http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... tm.en.html). That may have been the completion date of a killing that took more than one day. The precise number given by the Soviets (1,020 victims, which exceeds Jäger's figure by 58) suggests that the mass grave may have been excavated and the corpses counted. If so, it is possible that some corpses added later to the grave were of victims (e.g. Soviet prisoners of war) who had actually been blindfolded, and the blindfolding detail was then applied to all victims due to a misunderstanding or as an embellishment.
How do you know it is a precise number given by the Soviets? Where the figure comes from?
Note that the report nowhere mentions Jews, by the way. This fits what I wrote under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... eport.html about Soviet reluctance to point out Jews as "special" victims of Nazi mass killing.
The RG-22.002M.7021-94/438 Soviet report clearly point out the Lithuanian civilians as the victims of the "German fascist monsters". Accepting your "Soviet reluctance to point out" argument implies the Soviets made an inaccurate and misleading report, which makes the report unreliable.
150-200 meters northwest of the Bovshi farmstead, in Semeliškės volost of Trakai Uyezd, there is a fenced cemetery that contains the remains of 1020 civilians brutally tortured and shot by German fascist monsters. At the end of September 1941, about 1000 men, women and children were brought by the Germans to the place mentioned above under heavy escort. Victims were undressed about 50 meters from the ditch, beaten with sticks, then blindfolded and shot. They were shot in groups of six people. Sick victims were thrown from the cart into the pit and shot inside the pit. In this way, from 10 AM until 6 PM, 1020 men and women were shot. Screams and moans could be heard from 2-3 kilometers away." [Local government commission report, compiled on August 27, 1944, RG-22.002M.7021-94/438]

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Origin and Content of DOK 239

Post by Roberto » Sat Jun 24, 2017 1:44 pm

Aryan Scholar wrote:
Sat Jun 24, 2017 12:57 pm
Roberto wrote:
Sat Jun 24, 2017 11:56 am
been-there wrote:
Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:57 am
8 hours to kill a thousand people?

Blindfolding them and shooting them in groups of six?

Roberto, are you not aware that this “Soviet investigation” hardly supports your argument as it does not seem a credible account?
The Soviet report contains an unusual detail (namely the blindfolding, which isn't mentioned regarding any other mass killing of Jews that I know about), and the killing may have lasted longer than reported (though one should take into consideration that "in groups of six people" may have meant six people shot by the same marksman or group of marksmen, so if there were several marksmen or groups of marksmen involved, the number killed in each batch would be higher).
The RG-22.002M.7021-94/438 Soviet report do not make any mentions regarding the mass killing of Jews, but of Lithuanian civilians.
Irrelevant because a) the Soviets tended to avoid pointing out that the victims were Jews, and b) the Germans are not exactly known to have executed large numbers of non-Jewish Lithuanian civilians. On the other hand, the Jäger Report mentions the killing of Jews in the area in question.
Aryan Scholar wrote:
But the report mentions a mass killing in an area where the Jäger Report mentions mass killings and DOK 239 mentions "Jewish mass graves". So it corroborates the contents of both documents in this respect.
The RG-22.002M.7021-94/438 Soviet report do not make any mentions of any Jewish mass grave, but of a fenced cemetery.
The context of the report shows that the "cemetery" is not a cemetery containing individual graves but a mass grave. The fencing-in of the mass graves is mentioned in DOK 239:
The mass graves were sprinkled with chlorinated lime and covered with soil in 1941. In the spring of 1942 the graves were uncovered, sprinkled with chlorinated lime, covered with a layer of soil up to 1 meter high and fenced in.

Aryan Scholar wrote:
The dating (end of September) also roughly matches the Jäger Report, which mentions the killing of 962 Jews at "Semiliski" under the date 6 October 1941 (page 6, see under http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... tm.en.html). That may have been the completion date of a killing that took more than one day. The precise number given by the Soviets (1,020 victims, which exceeds Jäger's figure by 58) suggests that the mass grave may have been excavated and the corpses counted. If so, it is possible that some corpses added later to the grave were of victims (e.g. Soviet prisoners of war) who had actually been blindfolded, and the blindfolding detail was then applied to all victims due to a misunderstanding or as an embellishment.
How do you know it is a precise number given by the Soviets? Where the figure comes from?
The figure comes from an obviously Soviet report. The Lithuanian collaboration government would hardly have investigated German killings and referred to the killers as "German fascist monsters". The Vilnius area in August 1944 was under the control of the Soviets, who had taken Vilnius on 13 July 1944, see under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation ... _Offensive. By "precise" I didn't mean that the number is exact but that it is rendered down to tens ("1,020" instead of "1,000"). The accuracy of the figure is suggested by the fact that it is not much higher than Jäger's figure for this area (962). If, as the precision of the figure suggests, the Soviets excavated and counted the corpses, then either Jäger undercounted or another 58 corpses were buried in the grave after Jäger's operation.
Aryan Scholar wrote:
Note that the report nowhere mentions Jews, by the way. This fits what I wrote under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... eport.html about Soviet reluctance to point out Jews as "special" victims of Nazi mass killing.
The RG-22.002M.7021-94/438 Soviet report clearly point out the Lithuanian civilians as the victims of the "German fascist monsters". Accepting your "Soviet reluctance to point out" argument implies the Soviets made an inaccurate and misleading report, which makes the report unreliable.
150-200 meters northwest of the Bovshi farmstead, in Semeliškės volost of Trakai Uyezd, there is a fenced cemetery that contains the remains of 1020 civilians brutally tortured and shot by German fascist monsters. At the end of September 1941, about 1000 men, women and children were brought by the Germans to the place mentioned above under heavy escort. Victims were undressed about 50 meters from the ditch, beaten with sticks, then blindfolded and shot. They were shot in groups of six people. Sick victims were thrown from the cart into the pit and shot inside the pit. In this way, from 10 AM until 6 PM, 1020 men and women were shot. Screams and moans could be heard from 2-3 kilometers away." [Local government commission report, compiled on August 27, 1944, RG-22.002M.7021-94/438]
The omission of the victims' Jewish ethnicity would make the report unreliable only in this respect, but not logically lead to the conclusion that the report in unreliable as a whole and no mass killing took place in the Semeliškės area (moreover as the Jäger Report mentions mass killing of Jews in this area and DOK 239 mentions a Jewish mass grave in the same area).
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest