Why do you not email the National Archive and just ask them if the original intercepts are archived and if so, can you be supplied with a scanned copy, or it be put online? Witte and Tyas may have looked for the original intercept and may know the answer, or they did not think to do so, as they are not familiar with interception as you are. Why do you think the original intercept would be in the same file?
its a fair question, arent you british yourself Nessie?
Surely emailing these people would be child's play for you.
The burden of proof is on the claimant. I am happy to point out that, yet again, Turnagain is making claims he refused to evidence.
I recently visited Bletchley and asked about the Hofle Telegram and why it appears to be the only AR intercept. The answers I got were;
1 - it may not be the only intercept, there are approximately 5 million intercepts decoded and translated and it took until 2000 before the Holfe Telegram was identified. There may be others sitting, as yet unidentified, in the National Archives. It is also possible other AR transmissions were only partly intercepted and decoded and were destroyed as they appeared to be insignificant.
2 - In September 1938 the Germans introduce an Enigma machine and by December, a 5th rotor means the Poles are unable to decode any transmissions. That remained the case, with a few manual decodes, until the introduction of the earliest machine, the Bombe in 1940. However, there were only two Bombes in operation and daily key decoding was an average of 426. Much of AR took place in 1942-3, prior to the introduction of the Collossus computer, that made such a huge impact on Bletchley's ability to decode intercepts. There were 2 Collossus in operation in May 1944 and 6 by the end of the year, which is a year after AR had finished. The first system, the Bombes, were far less successful, such that in 1941, the daily average was 992 keys decoded using 14 Bombes and in 1942 that had risen to 3637 using 49 bombes. By 1944, when AR had finished, that had risen again to 8301 using 303 Bombes.
3 - for much of 1942, Bletchley was not having much success decoding intercepts as Enigma machines had incorporated another rotor. It was November 1942 before it was becoming more common to decode the intercepts. The Holfe Telegram was decoded at the start of 1943, and by autumn of that year, it had more or less ended. It was also not clear then who Hofle was, or what AR was. The Allies were far more interested in the ongoing war in North Africa and Italy. By D-Day 1944, Bletchley was decoding an average of 18,000 messages daily, so an earlier intercept that made no sense had been filed and literally forgotten.
It is possible there is another AR message lying in the archives, but it is more likely that because AR was mostly ongoing prior to large scale decoding of interceptions by Bletchley, that other messages were missed.
Only a gullible fool would believe that someone just by luck/sheer chance came upon a file out of so many recently declassified and unarchived files and just happened to find an intercept and ‘recognised’ it referred to and ‘corroborated’ the racist, anti-German, empirically refuted, holyhoax atrocity-propaganda alleging 4.25 million joos being gassed to death.
What is the likelihood of one such intercept just being randomly discovered out of all the several hundreds of thousands of decrypted intercepts, so soon after they were declassified?
And then only a gullible fool would believe the ‘story’ that no similar communications were ever found ever again. 🤣🤦♂️
A reasonable, rational person would acknowledge that the ’discovery’ was either extremely ’lucky’ and/or extremely unlikely. A gullible fool or a deceitful moron defending a ludicrous belief-system would not.
As I understand it, the ones who made public the ’discovery’ of it are Peter Witte and Stephen Tyas. Presumably one of them ’found’ it. But in their publication they don’t mention who found it. Nor do they mention how — whoever did ‘find’ it — just happened upon this particular intercept amongst the many, many thousands. This fact alone should make any reasonable person suspicious. There are 101 archives of files, and each one contains several thousands of decrypted intercepts.
So who found it and how?
But nobody dare question things like this. Most everybody in the world knows nothing about this kind of detail, and so just gullibly and obediently ’believe’ what they are told to believe.
As I stated before, for a historian to publically question in this way would be career-suicide. The only academics and publishing historians who question any of this H-narrative have been ostracised and smeared. Look what happened to Prof Nolte, Prof. Faurisson, Prof Hayward, Roques, Germar Rudolf and David Irving for proof of that.
And the reason is because the whole mass-gassing narrative CAN NOT WITHSTAND CLOSE SCRUTINY!
Just the spelling of the name HOEFLE in this extreeeeeemely fortunate ‘find’ defies reason for anyone who knows the detail (as has been explained previously). But online holocaust defenders, Holyhoax true-believers and the general public do not know nor are interested in the details.
Above is the image of the decrypt as it appears in a chapter written by Peter Witte and Stephen Tyas in a part of a study called Holocaust and Genocide Studies, V15 N3, Winter 2001, pp 468-486.
In the notes at the back are some interesting quotes from the interrogations of German PoWs. They have to do with the use of initial letters for the Aktion Reinhardt camps.
Globocnik's successor in Lublin, Jakob Sporrenburg, apparently said during interrogation that "Globocnik's men would talk about Camp 'S'” This is supposedly recorded in a report on the interrogation of SS Gruppenfuhrer Jakob Sporrenberg that was carried out in London on February 25th 1946. The file containing his interrogation is apparently in the PRO, WO 208/4673 166970, folder 14.
In another post-war interrogation at Nuremberg, on November 15th 1945, the prisoner Dieter Wishceny is reported to have stated that in Eichmann's office, the Aktion Reinhardt camps were marked only with their initial letters. But when asked which camp the letter T represented, he curiously gave the answer that T stood for Lublin?!? 😮
Interrogator: “What was Camp T?” Wishceny: “If I correctly recollect, that belonged to the complex Lublin system. I remember having heard the designation Camp T”.
Interrogator: “Was that also an annihilation camp?" Wishceny: “Yes, Sir”.
Source: interrogation of Dieter Wishceny, Nuremberg, November 15, 1945, folders 2—3. Printed in The Holocaust, edited by John Mendelsohn, (New York, London- Garland, 1982), vol 8, pp 72-73
But that ‘eye-witness’ evidence doesn’t fit the belief-system, so is ignored by the holyhoax mass-gassing narrative promulators. That proves that the so-called ‘convergence of evidence’ rhetoric is really cherry-picked details chosen by applying ‘confirmation bias’.
Here is something by an expert who did question the narrative and was targeted, smeared, libelled, persecuted and bankrupted for doing so. He thought the Höfle decrypt looked according to his “own cursory forensic examination of ink, paper, and typewriter” 80% authentic... but...
... there is still a twenty percent chance that it is a forgery: • the misspelling of Reinhardt (as Reinhart), • the wrong arithmetic, • the possibility that the authors simply worked backwards from a well-known figure — 1,274,166 in the Korherr report of April 1943 — in order to authenticate it, • the unusual lack of any register-number or date for the originating query ("Betr.:...") , • the prominence of the names involved (Eichmann himself), • the top state-secret classification GEHEIME REICHSSACHE found only once elsewhere by me so far in the tens of thousands of otherwise overwhelmingly trivial decodes, • the five-page document somehow being bound into the archive file out of page-sequence (5, 1, 2, 3, 4).
These are just some of the anomalies unique to the Höfle document.