From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug  1 06:10:29 PDT 1996
Article: 54728 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!bug.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!samba.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!news.walltech.com!cyberstation.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!psinntp!psinntp!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars...
Date: 30 Jul 1996 22:14:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 114
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tmfhf$e12@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Subj:	Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars...
Date:	07/29/96
To:	jamie@voyager.net

In a message dated 96-07-29 19:28:01 EDT, you write:

>Subj:	Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars...
>Date:	96-07-29 19:28:01 EDT
>From:	jamie@voyager.net (Jamie McCarthy)
>To:	mvanalst@rbi.com, ehrlich606@aol.com
>
>(A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups:
>alt.revisionism)
>
>ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote:
>
>[re the tall black shapes/chimneys]
>
>> Here's another one for Mr. Van Alstine then:
>> Is Jamie right?
>
>Jamie isn't even sure if he's right anymore.  I'm going to be taking
>a closer look at the photo soon and reevaluating my initial thoughts
>on the subject.  But I need more information than I have at my
>fingertips right now.  I'll post to this (very long!) thread once I
>have that information.
>
>I still think Ehrlich's idea that the black shapes are rolls of tar
>paper is patently absurd.

IF those things were *l'il chimneys* and the SS sought a patent on them,
_that_ would be patently absurd.

Reason why those black things ain't l'il chimneys:

1)  They are too tall to be little anythings.

2)  They have definite variable width.  Please don't tell me they made
them in different sizes.

3)  They are supposed to be made of concrete.  If those things were made
of concrete, they would be very hard to move.  MVA said yesterday that
_one __guy_ did it all by himself.

4)  They are black.  Concrete is not black.  You can follow in the steps
of the Krakow Institute, and discriminate against black of unknown origin,
but that is a violation of EEOC policy.

5)  They are neither in the same location as the metre-wide holes in the
aerial photos, nor are they large enough to cover those holes.  As Caecaa
likes to say, holes can't move around in concrete.

Reasons why those tall black things aren't boxes:

1)  Boxes are not normally black unless they are attached to airliners or
containing theses by Goldhagen.  Boxes are made of _wood_ , and wood would
show up as grey or white.

2)  OTOH, if the boxes were metallic they would show sharper definition as
well as glare.

3)  The only kinds of boxes that would be standing up like that would be
*this end up* type boxes, and therefore they would be containing
furniture, or possibly rifles, but not building materials.  OTOH, the idea
of leaving three boxes of rifles on the roof of a Krema unguarded at
lunchtime is ridiculous.

Reasons why the boxes are not rolls of tar paper, or some other roofing
element either for the roof of the Krema or other part of the building,
which is what they look like, and which is what I have seen on roofing
jobs since I was a little boy:

NONE

>
>> I regard Jamie McCarthy as the Tertullian of the Hoaxter set.
>
>How nice.  I don't know what that means but I think I've been insulted.
>Is DvdThomas watching?  I'm sure six months from now he'll claim that
>Ceacaa left alt.revisionism because, oh, that darn Jamie McCarthy
>chased him away with his potty mouth.  :-/

Tertullian was an early Christian writer (155-222).  His style has been
described as *dark and resplendent like ebony* (EB, 1910, v. 26, p. 661f),
in other words, he wrote like three rolls of tar paper on the roof of a
Krema.

He is best known for the remark, *Credibile est, quia ineptum est, certum
est quia impossibile est*,  which can with some justice be described as
ebon, dark, resplendent, and bituminous.

It means, *I believe it because it is absurd, I am certain because it is
impossible* -- having in mind the divinity of Christ, but which _mutatis
mutandis_ makes it first runnerup to Lipstadt's *Reason isn't enough* logo
on the Nizkor site.

[NOTE:  The first part of the quote is sometimes rendered, *Credo quia
absurdum est* by people who are constructing from English to Latin.  This
is a common error.  The quote itself is keyed to the following passage
>from  First Corinthians, 1:22-25.  Someone else should type this.]

Because of statements like the above, and his verbal polemics, Tertullian
is sometimes regarded as an intellectual phony, who defended Christianity
not because he believed it was true but because he thought it was good for
you to believe it.  I gather that Caecaa is implying that you are a
dishonest Hoaxter, who defends the pious fraud of the  Holocaust because
it is impossible to believe, and because you believe it is good for us to
believe in it.  If that were true, it should not surprise us, since, as
Schopenhauer noted long ago, the most skeptical Christian is usually the
Pope.

But I, personally, don't think Jamie is a phony.  In fact, I think he is
nice guy.  I hope this is not the kiss of death!



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug  1 06:10:30 PDT 1996
Article: 54766 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!nntp.coast.net!chi-news.cic.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Photographs from BELSEN Camp
Date: 1 Aug 1996 04:46:04 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 78
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tpqsc$r99@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31FF7761.7E37@rio.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31FF7761.7E37@rio.com>, Chuck Ferree  writes:

>
>Chuck Ferree writes:
>
>Elrlich,
>You come across as an imature young snot.

And you come across as an elderly gent who never got past 1945.  So,
you're gonna knee me in the crotch, huh?  And I'm supposed to be nice.

 You don't deal with any of 
>my points or anyone elses, you just keep saying, "yeah but you guys 
>killed a bunch of Germans." Which of course is why we were there.
>You continue to compare oranges with apples. How stupid and child-like 
>to accuse me of going back to Dresden and strafing survivors of the 
>fire-storm. Giwer uses really stupid analogies, but I have to tell 
>you, yours are as bad as the Liar Gywer. 

We're talking about Belsen here.  You go on about how the Germans starved
these people on purpose, next thing you know you'll be saying they gave
them typhus on purpose.  I make the perfectly valid point that many
Germans died from starvation and neglect those first two years before the
Marshall Plan kicked in,  while you and your guys were living high on the
hog, and you just won't deal with it.  Mind you, I don't say it was
deliberate, but it happened.

As for the strafing, it happened.  What was it, three waves of bombers?
Does that fall under the classification of overkill?  Sure, you had to do
your jobs.  Sure, your briefing officers told you all sorts of BS.  I
don't blame you.  What I don't understand is why the top brass decided to
send Mustangs in the next day to strafe the survivors.  I mean, what for? 


>
>The militray's job is to fight their war. In our case the Allies did 
>that. In the Axis case they committed many horrendous war crimes, by 
>design, not accidents, decisions were made by their governments, 
>policies were established and implemented.

Yes, and the German Army's job was to fight _their_ war.  The Germans
certainly did kill a lot more civilians than the Allies did,  but your
Soviet buddies did some criminal stuff too.  What is this *design, not
accidents* bit?  Are you telling me that Dresden was an accident?  No way,
very deliberate, like the whole bombing campaign that leveled 70 German
cities and killed over half a million.  It was one of those *policies ...
established and implemented ... by governments.*

 The German-Ausrtian bunch 
>occupied all of Europe by force, killing many innocents if the 
>process, The Allies, liberated Europe from the grasp of the Nazis, we 
>won, they lost, quit being a cry-baby about it.

And the Anglo-Americans reoccupied all of Europe by force, killing lots of
innocents in the process, and then occupied Germany, and dropped the ball
taking care of the people that they insisted had to surrender
unconditionally.  That is, until the Marshall Plan and private charities
kicked in.  OK, so thanks for that.  And thanks for winning the war,
because it is better that we won than them.  But just because I am
grateful that doesn't mean that I am going to just accept it when you act
like everyone who died under German custody died on purpose while
everybody who died under Allied care either didn't die or else died by
accident.

As for being a crybaby -- what's that about?  Do I accuse you of being an
anti-German, a racist, a fascist, a Naziboy, a Denier, or any of that
personal stuff just because you basically don't care about German
civilians who died 50 years ago?  But what do you call me if I _dare_ to
question your version of events.

WW2 was a terrible war.  The Germans started it.  Millions of men in the
armed forces of all the countries involved suffered and died.  Millions of
civilians suffered and died.  The Jews had it worst, because of the Nazis.
 The Soviets and the Poles also had it very bad.  And the Germans suffered
a lot, in the war, and after.  If you want to demand that I have
compassion for some, then I say I am not true to myself if I do not have
compassion for all.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug  1 06:53:38 PDT 1996
Article: 54814 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!nntp.primenet.com!newsfeeder.sdsu.edu!chi-news.cic.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hitler praiser Reinhardt and Mahler?
Date: 31 Jul 1996 14:28:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 71
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4to8jh$5lv@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
jamie@voyager.net (Jamie McCarthy) writes:

>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote (and I'll clean up the
>formatting):
>
>> > Wir besprechen Theaterfragen.  Der Fuehrer ist sehr interessiert.
>> > Er erklaert Erscheinungen wie Mahler oder Max Reinhardt, deren
>> > Faehigkeiten und Verdienste er nicht abstreitet.  In der
>> > Reproduktion vermag der Jude manchmal etwas zu leisten.
>> 
>> We speak about the the Theater.  The Fuhrer is very interested.  He
>> explains phenomena like Mahler and Max Reinhardt, who abilities and
>> achievements he does not contest.  In the executive arts the Jew
>> often has something to contribute.
>
>"The executive arts"!?
>
>This is a transparent attempt to make Hitler appear as non-Jew-hating as
>possible.  Or, if you prefer, it's a see-through attempt.

I don't think that the absence of pathological anti-semitism in Hitler's
makeup relieves him of responsibility for what happened.  I think it
raises an interesting point about the extent to which anti-semitism may
have been _used_ as a political tool in Eastern Europe.
>
>Cite, please, one example of the German word being used to indicate an
>_execution_ of a work of art (incl. music).

What's the big deal?  *Reproduktion* is neither a pejorative nor is it
*mimicry.*  Hitler is praising *reproduction*, that, is, execution,
reproduction, recreation.  What's wrong with that?

>
>Furthermore, Mahler was a _composer_ -- I'd like to hear what
>"execution" is involved in the composition of music.  No, clearly Hitler
>was saying that Mahler's work was imitative, reproductive of other
>composers.

*imitative, reproductive* as you have yoked them, is not correct in my
mind.  First of all, Mahler was famous as a _conductor_, _not_ as a
composer during the early 20th Century (he died in 1910, I believe).  The
big Mahler cult didn't begin until after Hitler took power, and the German
Jewish _executants_ of his works came to the USA (preeminently Bruno
Walter).  But secondly, Mahler and Bruckner were widely regarded at that
time, and still are even today among some critics, as derivative Wagnerian
epigones.  BTW, Bruckner wasn't Jewish, so there is nothing ethnic or
racial about this. 

>
>Somehow you seem to have "forgotten" the antisemitic propaganda which
>was being disseminated throughout the land at Hitler's order, one of the
>themes of which was that the Jew was incapable of producing anything of
>value, only of stealing, copying, or selling the labor of others.  But I
>suppose you see that as irrelevant.

Yeah, I'll bet this was another one of those secret Hitler orders that he
whispered in Goebbel's ear.

>
>> *executive* in this sense is the word commonly used in English to
>> denote *reproduction*, i.e., Arthur Schnabel was a great executant
>> of the Beethovenian canon, etc.  So what Hitler is saying, I would
>> submit, is that Mahler was greater as a conductor than as a
>> composer,
>
>Oh for crying out loud!
>
>
An apt characterization of Mahler's symphonic writing.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug  1 16:43:26 PDT 1996
Article: 54870 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp.coast.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: auschwitz:myths and facts
Date: 1 Aug 1996 14:16:18 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 28
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tqs9i$7d8@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4tpll0$t65@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4tpll0$t65@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt  Giwer) writes:

>
>	It is not a matter of losing or winning.  It is a matter of the
eye of the
>beholder.  
>
>	We have two polarized camps on this NG.  
>
>	It is all being stated for the lurkers.  
>
>	And of course committed lurkers are not the intended audience.  
>
>	You folks constantly make the mistake of posting for the committed
lurker.  
>
>	That is a total waste of time.  The objective is to be reasonable.
 Present
>a
>case simply and without "you're losing it" being the only response as
that
>only appeals to the committed lurker.  
>
>
>

A word to the wise is sufficient.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug  1 16:43:27 PDT 1996
Article: 54905 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mauve in Hungarian
Date: 1 Aug 1996 13:10:30 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tqoe6$5vm@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
jamie@voyager.net (Jamie McCarthy) writes:

>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>
>> The word means literally, the color of mallows, which is we know is a
>> tannish lavender, but not blue.
>
>"Literally"?
>
>Literally, the word "rose" means the color of roses, which vary from
>white to pink to red to yellow.  But the color is a pinkish-purple.
>
>Literally, the word "lilac" means the color of lilacs, which vary
>from white to lavender to a deep red.  But the color is a pale purple.
>
>I looked up a photograph of marsh mallows and found the flower to be
>mostly a pale pink.
>
>Do mine eyes deceive me, or did you just claim that the _literal_
>meaning of a color is significant in some way?
>
>

No, what I am claiming is that the possibilities for mistranslation or
confusion are virtually nil.  pale blue, or sky blue, would be
*egszinkek*, cyanic blue would be *kekgalic*, but *malyvaszinu* is mauve
and not some other color.  -BTW, pink is *rozsaszinu* (color of roses),
lilac is *halvanylila szin* (color of lilac), and so forth.
  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug  3 07:03:28 PDT 1996
Article: 54926 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mauving right along
Date: 1 Aug 1996 13:49:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 47
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tqqo6$6m5@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

>
>In article <4tmels$n4e@d31rz0.Stanford.EDU>, rjg@d31rz0.Stanford.EDU
>(Richard J. Green) wrote:
>
>> In article <4tk7q7$ij9@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>> Ehrlich606  wrote:
>> 
>
>[snip]
>
>> >>Is Ehrlich accusing Pressac of fabrication?  I assume he has good
>> >>evidence for this claim.
>> >
>> >Until I see _proof_ for the paragraph where Pressac argues for the fan
>> >kicking in after 5 minutes, other than his orotund description of fan
>> >motors in the roof of the Krema, I will be forced to conclude that he
is
>> >making it up.  I note that you snipped it out.
>
>As to "proof" that the ventilation of the gas chambers could have taken
>place aproximately 5 minutes after the Zyklon B was administered one need
>only look to Dr. Bendel's testimony concerning a gassing at Krema V:
>
>"...Five minutes later the doors were opened...." (Ibid. p.470.) 
>
>Clearly, Zyklon B had the capacity to kill the victims within a few
>minutes. As Krema V initially had no mechanical ventilation system, the
>doors were opend as soon as possible to air out the gas chambers. One
then
>might wonder, as Pressec evedently did, _why_ would the SS wait 20-30
>minutes- just before the gas-tight door of L.Keller 1 was opened -to
start
>the mechanical ventilation system of Krema II to air out the gas chamber?
>Given that the victims died wihin a few minutes of the Zyklon B being
>introduced, why _not_ start the ventilation of the gas chamber as soon as
>possible to air out the lethal atmosphere as much as possibel _before_
the
>door gas-tight door was opened? 

It still comes down to the fact that P is using the testimony concerning
the operation of one type of Krema to characterize the operation in
another type of Krema.  That is not proof.  I have still not seen any
proof that the fans would kick in after 5 minutes other than the fact that
you and P are obviously committed to this notion.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug  3 07:03:28 PDT 1996
Article: 54952 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Photographs from BELSEN Camp
Date: 1 Aug 1996 14:16:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 58
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tqsa5$7dd@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
jamie@voyager.net (Jamie McCarthy) writes:

>
>jamie@voyager.net (Jamie McCarthy) writes:
>
>> Do you think this testimony is more trustworthy than the testimony
given
>> by Emil Lachout, who assisted the Allied War Crimes Commission?
>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>
>> You might find that [Barton] is remarkably even handed.  But if
>> you don't like what you read, then you can come back here and call him
>> names.
>
>I'm not calling him anything.  I'm asking _you_ why you (obviously)
>think his testimony is trustworthy.  Specifically the part about what
>he says he saw at Belsen.
>
>If all Soviet witnesses are suspect and not to be trusted because the
>Soviet witnesses to Katyn were liars, then the logical conclusion is
>that all Zuendel witnesses are suspect and not to be trusted because
>the Zuendel witness to the Mueller document was a liar.
>
>Right?

Wrong.  The Zuendel trial was conducted according to completely different
rules to the Soviet Special commissions, of which we have negligible
evidence in the first place.  Canada is not the Soviet Union.  This is
obvious.  The Zuendel trial was not the IMT, either.  That too is obvious.

What people have to do is read the stuff for themselves and make up their
own minds about how much exaggeration or falsity is in the historical
record. Obviously, I am much more skeptical of anything generated by the
Soviet Union than you are.  I am not skeptical because I hate Russians,
btw.  But they have a reputation for faking trial materials through a
government agency (Department 14) of the state security apparatus (OGPU,
NKVD, KGB, take your pick), a prosecutor with a legendary reputation for
forgery (Roman Rudenko), and admission that at least one of their
commissions (on Katyn) was faked, and signatories that include a political
opportunist biological quack (Lysenko).  Beyond that, the materials the
Soviets provide are frequently incredible (yes, I know they are supposed
to have been _possible_.)

Dr. Barton does not live in a dictatorship.  He was not coached in his
statements by a disreputable state agency.  He did not *testify* by
affidavit.  He was subjected to rigorous cross examination.

Ultimately, you have to look at the evidence on its merits and its
believability.  I find Dr. Barton very credible.  Why don't you read his
summary, when and if you have the time, and let me know if you don't think
so too.  If you don't think so, tell me why, and I won't call you names or
attribute motives.  And you don't do that, either.



    


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug  3 07:03:29 PDT 1996
Article: 54985 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust final exam
Date: 2 Aug 1996 04:37:53 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 41
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tsep1$roo@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <3200a834.245501577@news.zilker.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <3200a834.245501577@news.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com (Mike
Curtis) writes:

>> 
>>My question to Ehrlich (who I do not characterize as a revisionist)-- 
and
>>others who say, "Come, let us reason together,"--  is to what extent is
rev-
>>isionism a matter of scepticism or even research?  In order to accept
>revision-
>>ism  (by which I mean the CODOH &tc variety) mustn't one also accept a
story
>>that is only supported by a conspiracy theory which rivals only _The
>Protocols
>>of the Elders of Zion_ in credibility?
>> 
>
>Here's this post from so long ago. Note the question to the Ehrlich
>person. Note the lack of reply. Dangling threads all over the place.
>Let's all thank Ehrlich606.

With respect to the questions Borowsky asks here, and other queries raised
elsewhere, I usually answer them elsewhere in the context of an answer to
another thread.  In this case, I answered this thread elsewhere.  I think
you know that.  Beyond that, one has to make a choice between responding
to every query and becoming completely reactive, or moving on to something
else.

Is revisionism a matter of research or skepticism?  Sure.  Whatever one
thinks of the Leuchter report it was done before the conventionalists got
into the game.  Whatever one thinks of Butz' approach, or his errors, his
book was the first attempt to analyze the killing rates at AB with any
rationality.  He was also the first to ask for pictures, that materialized
a few years later.

The skepticism involves not accepting at face value all testimony that has
problems. Conventionalists almost never admit explicitly the problems with
their testimonies, but revisionists do.  It also has nothing to do with a
Zionist conspiracy.  It does have a lot to do with war propaganda, and IMT
evidence, a great deal of which was processed by the Soviet prosecution,
which has doubtful credibility.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug  3 07:03:30 PDT 1996
Article: 55075 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.serv.net!news.ac.net!news1.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mauving right along
Date: 2 Aug 1996 05:01:16 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tsg4s$s27@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4tr4tq$s4f@d31sg0.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4tr4tq$s4f@d31sg0.Stanford.EDU>, rjg@d31sg0.Stanford.EDU
(Richard J. Green) writes:

>
>In article <4tqqo6$6m5@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>Ehrlich606  wrote:
>
>>It still comes down to the fact that P is using the testimony concerning
>>the operation of one type of Krema to characterize the operation in
>>another type of Krema.  That is not proof.  I have still not seen any
>>proof that the fans would kick in after 5 minutes other than the fact
that
>>you and P are obviously committed to this notion.
>
>Mr. Ehrlich clearly accused Pressac of fabrication.
>
>Mr. Van Alstine clearly showed that Pressac was not guilty of
>fabrication.
>
>Regards,
>
>Rich Green

I said *According to Pressac who is making this up as he goes along* which
means that he is claiming facts about the time the fans were turned on
that are not facts.  There is no factual justification for saying that
this happened.  There is only Pressac's opinion.  In this sense, *making
it up* refers to the argument, not to whatever
documentary/physical/factual elements constitute it.  It is therefore not
fabrication in the normal sense of the word, and you know that.
    


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug  3 07:03:31 PDT 1996
Article: 55126 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.cais.net!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Schott, Keyes, & Hitler  Re: FREE SPEECH?
Date: 1 Aug 1996 14:51:50 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 65
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tquc6$80q@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4tovvl$3gb@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4tovvl$3gb@grivel.une.edu.au>, ibokor@metz.une.edu.au (ibokor)
writes:

>Subject:	Re: Schott, Keyes, & Hitler  Re: FREE SPEECH?
>From:	ibokor@metz.une.edu.au (ibokor)
>Date:	1 Aug 1996 01:07:01 GMT
>
> 
> Juergen Langowski wrote:
> 
> 
> I didn't get the beginning of this thread, but if it helps,
> here's a quote from Himmler. The [!] is the author's.
> 	
> >>	Es trat an uns die Frage heran: Wie ist es mit den Frauen
> >>	und Kindern? - Ich habe mich entschlossen, auch hier eine
> >>	ganz klare L!sung zu finden. Ich hielt mich n!mlich nicht
> >>	f!r berechtigt, die M!nner auszurotten - sprich also,
> >>	umzubringen [!] oder umbringen zu lassen - und die R!cher
> >>	in Gestalt der Kinder f!r unsere S!hne und Enkel
> >>	gro! werden zu lassen. Es mu!te der schwere Entschlu!
> >>	gefa!t werden, dieses Volk von der Erde verschwinden zu
> >>	lassen.
> 
> Alles andere als Ehrlich606, ehrlich606@aol.com responded:
> 
> >Now this is an explicit call to kill the women and children, so
> that the
> >children will not pose a threat to the children of the SS in the
> future. 
> >*umzubringen* in this context can only be translated as kill,
> although in
> >other contexts it could be done as *put down*, *taken down* --
> there is
> >also a latent pun comparable to English, undertaking/undertaker. 
> But not
> >here.  Also, *verschwinden etc.* would be wiped off the face of the
> earth.
> > I am sure I will be criticized for my approach to _this_ passage, as
> >well.
> 
> d.A.:
> 
> Nyelv{\' e}sz-Urunk!
> 
> Legyen sz{\'i}vesz megmagyar{\'a}zni, hogy milyen
> k{\"o}r{\"u}m{\'e}nyekben jelenti a n{\'e}met sz{\'o}
> "umbringen", azt amit angolul "to put down"- illetve
> "to bring down"-nal fejezik ki?
> 
> d.A.
>
>

korulmenyek = ez a szo, ugy *umstaende* vagy *obstoiatel'stva*. < L.
*circum*, ugy a *korol*, *kozelites*, *fog* -- *um + bringen* -- es *nicht
umzubringen* -- *elpusztithatatlan*.  De *puszta* = *empty, bare, a
Puszta*, _nem_ *megoles*. 

*umbringen* = *to put down* ugy a kegyelemofes.  *umbringen* = *to bring
down* cf. *take under* = *temetkezes*.



  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug  4 21:50:59 PDT 1996
Article: 55349 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!eloi.vir.com!noc.van.hookup.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: auschwitz:myths and facts
Date: 4 Aug 1996 12:54:34 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 28
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u2kka$255@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4tuuee$5k2@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4tuuee$5k2@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt
 Giwer) writes:

>
>On 2 Aug 1996 08:59:42 GMT, patchwgl@infinop.com (Gary) wrote:
>
>>On 7/30/96 at 22:11, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt  Giwer) wrote: 
>
>>[snip]
>
>>>        They are ventilated with heated air, just like the Degesh 
>>delousing chambers
>>>were.  It is very old technology.

How could they be ventilated with heated air?  The last word I got from
MVA is that the air was sucked into the chamber directly from the outside.
 That means the air sucked in would have been the outside temperature.

>
>>Not as old as the "technology" of a mammalian (i.e., warm-blooded) 
>>body.  A full gassing chamber would have a large heating component 
>>present in the fresh corpses.
>
>	You need to learn something about turbulent mixing some day.  It
will be
>good
>for you.  
>


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug  4 21:51:00 PDT 1996
Article: 55356 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.serv.net!news.alt.net!news1.alt.net!news.exodus.net!news1.best.com!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!imci2!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Zyklon B: Kieselguhr & Gypsum
Date: 4 Aug 1996 11:52:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u2gvo$ss@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4u1duj$1n0@sjx-ixn2.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader



Arguments about the release rate of Zyklon B have been much of an issue
here, since conventionalists argue for a rapid release time, and cite
Peters' book of 1933 where he says that *the greater part was released
after 1/2 hour* while Germar Rudolf's Report has held that only about 37%
would be released in 1/2 hour, as part of a geometric curve.

What has been neglected to this point is the fact that, in the 1920's, the
release of Zyklon was almost total after a few minutes, using an almost
100% kieselguhr carrier, but that from that point onwards attempts were
made to slow the release time (for safety and non-wastage purposes) by the
addition of gypsum.  Diagreiss, a kieselguhr-gypsum composite, was the
main form in the '30's, and had a much slower release time.

I am abstracting here from the Rudolf Report, portions of which I have
obtained.  I will translate what I have with comments as soon as possible.
 However, I find it interesting that the comments, which help explain the
discrepancies in outgassing times, and which are _present_ in the Rudolf
Report, have not been referenced by any of the known holders of that
report who use this board.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug  4 21:51:01 PDT 1996
Article: 55382 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.structured.net!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: An SS Court States: Almost like Lt. Calley
Date: 4 Aug 1996 12:54:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u2kkd$257@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4tuvg9$sc3@juliana.sprynet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4tuvg9$sc3@juliana.sprynet.com>, rblackmore@juno.com writes:

>
>Almost like Lt, Calley....
>
>

You will note that this massacre was rather similar to those committed by
Germans, particularly SS and their foreign auxiliaries.  Note also that
the punishments handed down were ludicrously light.  Note further that no
one has written the book, *Johnson's Willing Executioners* (or maybe it
should be *Nixon's*?)


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug  4 21:51:02 PDT 1996
Article: 55383 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.structured.net!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Extermination or Sterilization
Date: 4 Aug 1996 12:54:36 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u2kkc$256@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4tuv3d$sc3@juliana.sprynet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4tuv3d$sc3@juliana.sprynet.com>, rblackmore@juno.com writes:

>
>So which is it, or which was it, sterilization or extermination, or
>extermination through sterilization?
>
>
>
The main advocate of sterilization was Dr. Brack.  Could it be that the
Brack Method referred to _that_?



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug  5 14:04:07 PDT 1996
Article: 64579 of news.admin.net-abuse.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.join.ad.jp!news.imnet.ad.jp!usenet.seri.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!news.postech.ac.kr!xpat.postech.ac.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.etri.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!wilbur.ohww.norman.ok.us!news.cais.net!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.misc
Subject: Re: Blacklist of Internet Service Providers?
Date: 30 Jul 1996 21:16:16 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 21
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4tmc50$c62@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <29JUL199622100909@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <29JUL199622100909@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu>,
dmittleman@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu (Danny Mittleman) writes:

>
>In article ,
>schwartz@infinet.com writes...
>>In article <023302Z29071996@anon.penet.fi>, an572010@anon.penet.fi
wrote:
>> 
>>> akira@clark.net writes:
>>> 
>>> > Has there ever been anyone who's compiled a list of rouge ISP's?
>> 
>>Rouge?
>
>    Just another Nazi trying to identify Communists sites.
>
>

I thought the appropriate word was *pinko*.  Don't people speak American
anymore?


From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug  6 08:45:58 PDT 1996
Article: 55495 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Moran's Scientific Breakthrough Saves World! (Re: for th
Date: 5 Aug 1996 07:27:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 13
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u4lqe$qg8@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4u04qt$hgd@hil-news-svc-4.compuserve.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4u04qt$hgd@hil-news-svc-4.compuserve.com>,
100644.317@compuserve.com (Miloslav Bilik) writes:

>
>It sounds like the old freudian joke about the cauldron: "I never
>borrowed it; the cauldron was soon damaged; I brought back the
>cauldron and it was not damaged at this time".
>
>

It's amazing that you can speak of blue-mauve throughout as though there
would be confusion among these colors.  Why don't you just say
*rouge-noir* and to hell with it?


From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug  6 08:45:58 PDT 1996
Article: 55506 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Germar Rudolf Responds on Zyklon Outgassing
Date: 5 Aug 1996 16:16:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 211
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u5kqb$9qc@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


The following message showed up in my mailbox, and I am posting and
forwarding.

*******

Zyklon B Verdampfungscharakteristik

Anmerkungen zu den Ausfuehrungen des Herrn Roesslers (Goettingen)

Ich bin froh, dass nach drei Jahren des Schweigens und der 
argumentationslosen Verfolgung sich endlich jemand der inhaltlichen Fragen

in Deutschland annimmt.

Roessler schrieb (uroessl1@gwdu19.gwdg.de Wed Dec 13 19:13:06 PST 1995, 
alt.revisionism newsgroup):

>Unfortunately, I just demonstrated that Rudolf lied about one source,
>he quoted, to validy his long evaporation rates - the book by Dr Peters.

Herr Roessler sollte sich bei seiner Wortwahl etwas maessigen. Haette ich 
bezueglich der Ausfuehrungen von Dr. Peters in einem seiner Publikationen 
gelogen, so hiesse das, ich haette wissentlich die Unwahrheit gesagt. Da
ich 
Herrn Roessler hier zunaechst fragen muss, was er mit dieser Luege meint 
(das geht aus diesem Text nicht hervor), ist ein Vorsatz meinerseits schon

auszuschliessen. Moeglicherweise habe ich geirrt, aber das waere noch zu 
ueberpruefen.

Roessler faehrt fort:

> Moreover, Rudolf's graphical representation stands on two bits of
>information - exponential decay in total evaporation, and a safe 
>rule of thumb about the times to evaporate all HCN from a modern
>product which resembles Zyklon-B. [...]
>It's Detia GmbH, and the graph WAS NOT PROVIDED by them, as Rudolf 
>admits. He mentions a letter, he received from them about their 
>HCN product, apparently this letter states only that it was a safe
>rule of thumb to assume nearly complete evaporation of the HCN within
>two hours at normal temperatures and under various other conditions
>which may modify the rate of evaporation. Rudolf is not very clear 
>about that point, although he admits, that the Detia people refused to
>give exact technical data just because the evaporation rate may
>differ depending on circumstances. And, whatever the letter really 
>contained, I cannot check.
>So, what Rudolf did apparently was simply fitting an exponential 
>to reach 10% remaining HCN after 2hours - and then he plotted that
>I wouldn't call this a technical information, do you?

Hier hat Herr Roessler ganz recht: Die Daten, die ich von Detia Freyberg 
(Lauden-bach/Bergstrasse) erhielt sind nicht gerade ueppig. Leider kann
ich 
den Brief nicht mehr reproduzieren, da er mir von der Polizei im September

1993 beschlagnahmt wurde (LG Stuttgart, Az. 17 KLs 83/94). Diese
Information 
ist dennoch technisch, wenn auch nicht so exakt, wie Naturwissenschaftler
es 
sich wuenschen. An der Annahme eines exponentiellen Verlaufes der
Gasabgabe 
wird aber doch wohl kaum etwas auszusetzen sein, zumal es keine Funktion 
gibt, die schneller abfaellt.

Roessler fuehrt aus:

>On the other hand, Rudolf acknowledges that the patent for Zyklon-B
>states nearly complete evaporation within 10mins.

Dies bezieht sich auf eine Fussnote in einem Beitrag zu den "Grundlagen
zur 
Zeitgeschichte". Das Patent bekam ich erst im Sommer 1994 von C. Mattogno,

so dass ich es in meinem Gutachten (Juli 1993) noch nicht beruecksichtigen

konnte. Es gilt aber weiterhin zu beruecksichtigen, dass aufgrund einer 
Untersuchung der Reichsmaterialpruefanstalt die Zusammensetzung von Zyklon
B 
Anfang der 30er Jahre stark veraendert wurde (wachsender Gipsanteil statt 
reine Diatomeenerde). Zur Zeit laufen bezueglich der exakten 
Zusammensetzung, Herstellungsverfahren und Eigenschaften noch intensive 
Literaturrecherchen, auf deren Ergebnisse ich selbst warte. Ich darf
deshalb 
diesbezueglich um etwas Geduld bitten.

Roessler meint weiter:

>I'm still evaluating Dr Peters' book(s) - but in all applications he
>mentions the peak of HCN-concentration in the air of fumigated rooms 
>(often very high concentrations) is reached within less than one hour -
>in essential agreement with these data and the remarks by Dr Peters
>about the possibility to control the release of HCN to a certain extent.

Wenn ich nicht irre, beziehen sich Dr. Peters Ausfuehrungen auf eine
Kammer 
mit Kreislaufverfahren. Da ich hier leider etwas von Bibliotheken 
abgeschnitten bin und mir all meine Archivalien bei den drei 
Hausdurchsuchungen beschlagnahmt wurden, kann ich das zur Zeit nur schwer 
ueberpruefen. Vielleicht aber sieht sich Herr Roessler in der Lage, das zu

ueberpruefen. Wenn dem so waere, so moechte ich doch anmerken, dass man
den 
Effekt eines Heissluftfoens (Kreislaufanlage) nicht mit dem einer durch 
menschliche Leiber erzeugten Waermekonvektion vergleichen kann.
Zuletzt darf ich fragen, ob sich Herr Roessler einmal Gedanken darueber 
gemacht hat, wie das Zyklon B in die angeblichen Gaskammern der
Krematorien 
II und III eingefuehrt worden sein soll in Ermangelung der so oft
zitierten 
Loecher in der Decke.

Herzlichst
Germar Rudolf

*********
[Rough translation of the foregoing text]
*********
Evaporation Characteristics of Zyklon B

Remarks on the Comments of Mr. Roessler of Goettingen

I am happy that after three years of silence and persecution without open
debate that finally someone in Germany has posed some substantial
questions about my Report.

Roessler  writes (uroessl1@gwdu19.gwdg.de Wed Dec 13 19:13:06 PST 1995, 
alt.revisionism newsgroup):

>Unfortunately, I just demonstrated that Rudolf lied about one source,
>he quoted, to validy his long evaporation rates - the book by Dr Peters.

Mr. Roessler should weigh his words more carefully.  If I had lied in
relation to the remarks of Dr. Peters in one of his publications, that
would mean that I had knowingly stated a falsehood.  But here I really
must ask Mr. Roessler what lie he is talking about, since it does not
follow from the text, that it is an issue that is already decided as far
as I am concerned.  Perhaps I have erred, but even that is not yet proven.

Roessler goes on:

> Moreover, Rudolf's graphical representation stands on two bits of
>information - exponential decay in total evaporation, and a safe 
>rule of thumb about the times to evaporate all HCN from a modern
>product which resembles Zyklon-B. [...]
>It's Detia GmbH, and the graph WAS NOT PROVIDED by them, as Rudolf 
>admits. He mentions a letter, he received from them about their 
>HCN product, apparently this letter states only that it was a safe
>rule of thumb to assume nearly complete evaporation of the HCN within
>two hours at normal temperatures and under various other conditions
>which may modify the rate of evaporation. Rudolf is not very clear 
>about that point, although he admits, that the Detia people refused to
>give exact technical data just because the evaporation rate may
>differ depending on circumstances. And, whatever the letter really 
>contained, I cannot check.
>So, what Rudolf did apparently was simply fitting an exponential 
>to reach 10% remaining HCN after 2hours - and then he plotted that
>I wouldn't call this a technical information, do you?

Here Mr. Roessler is completely correct: the data which I received from
Detia Freyberg
(Laudenbach/Bergstrasse) were not exactly ample.  Unfortunately, I can no
longer reproduce the letter, since it was confiscated by the police in
September, 1993.  While the information is rather technical, it also was
not as precise as a scientist would like.  As to the application of an
exponential curve for outgassing, I can scarcely understand what the
problem might be, since there is no function with a more rapid
declination.

Roessler continued:

>On the other hand, Rudolf acknowledges that the patent for Zyklon-B
>states nearly complete evaporation within 10mins.

This relates to a footnote in a contribution to *Foundations of
Contemporary History.*   I first received the patent from Carlo Mattogno
in the summer of 1994, so it could not have been used in my July, 1993,
Report.  On the other hand, the patent has relevance elsewhere, since a
report of the State Materials Testings Laboratory shows that the
composition of Zyklon B was sharply altered in the 1930’s, with increasing
amounts of gypsum added instead of pure diatomite.  Intensive study of the
literature will eventually reveal the exact composition, manufacturing
methods, and qualities of Zyklon B, and I look forward to these answers
myself.  In the meantime I can only ask for some patience.

Roessler opines further:

>I'm still evaluating Dr Peters' book(s) - but in all applications he
>mentions the peak of HCN-concentration in the air of fumigated rooms 
>(often very high concentrations) is reached within less than one hour -
>in essential agreement with these data and the remarks by Dr Peters
>about the possibility to control the release of HCN to a certain extent.

If I am not mistaken this is a reference to Dr. Peters’ comments for a
room with forced air circulation.  At present it is rather difficult for
me to confirm this, since I am unfortunately somewhat cut off from
libraries and all of my archives have been confiscated in the course of
three thorough searches and seizures at my home.  But perhaps Mr. Roessler
considers himself in a position to confirm this.  If so, I would like to
point out that the effect of hot air circulation in a forced air system
cannot be compared to the heat convection generated by human bodies. 
Finally I would like to ask whether Mr. Roessler has ever given any
thought as to how the Zyklon B would be introduced into the alleged gas
chambers of Crematorium II and III given the absence of any of the
oft-cited holes in the roof. 

Cordially,

Germar Rudolf




From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug  7 13:26:55 PDT 1996
Article: 55547 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!chi-news.cic.net!News1.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!winternet.com!mr.net!news.mid.net!newsfeeder.gi.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hitler praiser Reinhardt and Mahler?
Date: 6 Aug 1996 03:38:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 30
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u6sp7$5r4@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4u5cmi$4l2q@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4u5cmi$4l2q@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>
>As usual, Mr. Ehrlich mistranslates the German.  First, by using
>"Reproduktion", Hitler is saying that Jews don't do anything original. 
>Second, "...vermag der Jude manchmal etwas zu leisten" does not mean
>"...often
>has something to contribute".  It means "...sometimes is able to achieve
>something".  A big difference.  So what Hitler is saying is that when the
Jew
>is copying or reporoducing things, *sometimes* he is able to accomplish
>something.
>
>[deleted]
>
>

OK, but now your translation means that you grant that Reinhardt and
Mahler were in fact in the *reproduction business* i.e., putting on plays,
operas, concerts, etc.

BTW,  I just checked the 1995 Langenscheidt's dictionary because I wanted
to know a few words.  As I did, I checked *ausrotten* on the fly.  The
entry for *ausrotten* lists the _following_ definitions:  Pull up (as in
plants), wipe out, and stamp out, as figurative expressions.  Then the
noun, *Ausrottung*, gives stamping out as its primary definition, and
finally genocide as a figurative definition.  *Extermination* was nowhere
to be seen.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug  7 13:26:56 PDT 1996
Article: 55577 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.reed.edu!camelot.ccs.neu.edu!nntp.neu.edu!grapevine.lcs.mit.edu!bone.think.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hitler praiser Reinhardt and Mahler?
Date: 5 Aug 1996 11:15:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 119
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u5370$152@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4tqi4t$rp2@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4tqi4t$rp2@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>,
abels@stud-mailer.uni-marburg.de (Nele Abels) writes:

>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>[...]
>>Thanks for the work, but here I translate.
>>
>>>Wir besprechen Theaterfragen. Der Fuehrer ist sehr interessiert. Er
>erklaert
>>> Erscheinungen wie Mahler oder Max Reinhardt, deren Faehigkeiten und
>>> Verdienste er nicht abstreitet. In der Reproduktion vermag der Jude
>>>manchmal etwas zu leisten.
>>
>>We speak about the the Theater.  The Fuhrer is very interested.  He
>>explains phenomena like Mahler and Max Reinhardt, who abilities and
>>achievements he does not contest.  In the executive arts the Jew often
has
>>something to contribute.
>>
>>*executive* in this sense is the word commonly used in English to denote
>>*reproduction*, i.e., Arthur Schnabel was a great executant of the
>>Beethovenian canon, etc.  So what Hitler is saying, I would submit, is
>>that Mahler was greater as a conductor than as a composer, and Reinhardt
>>was great at putting on plays. No problem there.  *Mimicry* has nothing
to
>>do with it.  And he is saying _precisely_ what you noted about Jews
being
>>great *recreators* of art.
>
>I don't think that your translation is valid here. The Concise Oxford
>dictionary gives
>for "execution" in the sense you used: "Carrying out, performance". This
can
>be
>used as you correctly stated to describe the art of an interpreter or
>conductor. But
>in German you would not use "Reproduktion" to express this sense, but
>"Ausfuehrung".

But *Ausfuehrung* means *carrying out* -- it does not convey the concept
of *reproduce* in the sense of *recreate* (erfrischen, wieder erschaffen)
that I think is at issue here.  Query: at what point do Reinhardt and
Mahler (besides their Jewish background).intersect?  To my mind, in the
performing arts.  That explains the connection with *reproduction* in this
sense to me.

>I am sorry, but your translation of "Reproduktion" as "executive arts" is
>simply wrong.
>Reproduktion here means exactly "copying" - just in the way the copy of a
>famous
>painting by an art student may be technically briliant but is still a
copy.
>And this
>is the insult. The art of great directors as well as of all other artists
>lies in their originality.

I wish I could easily locate a source praising Furtwangler's reproductive
art so that you could see that such descriptions are not by necessity
pejorative.  In my dictionary *reproduktion* = *reproduction*.  But you
are implying here that Hitler does not consider Mahler or Reinhardt great
or original.  OK.

>
>Furthermore you can never translate "manchmal" with "often". It means
>"sometimes",
>nothing else. This adverb aggravates only the insult because it depicts
the
>Jewish
>culture generally being without any art and Reinhardt and Mahler being
great
>exceptions.

My regrets!  As a non native speaker I make such substitutions: manch,
manchmal.

Now here you are saying that Mahler and Reinhardt were great exceptions,
while a minute ago you were saying that they were skilled only in
*copying.*

However, now you _are_ picking up a theme, perhaps anti-semitic given the
context, about the Jewish culture in general, that it is not original. 
But here is a question in the discussion of German Jews:  where does their
German-ness begin, and their Jewish-ness stop, or vice versa?  Both an
anti-semite as well as a philo-semite will find specifically *Jewish*
aspects to Mahler.  Furthermore, both Mahler and Reinhardt were best known
for their *reproductions* -- Reinhardt with the classical and modern
theater, Mahler with his restoring the quality of the Vienna Opera.

So I still say that the statement of Hitler is a surprise to me, because I
would not expect him to praise Mahler or Reinhardt under any
circumstances. 

>
>>As far as Irving's paraphrase goes, it is a paraphrase.  Just exactly
>>where is his paraphrase deceptive?
>
>It is deceptive because it is not a paraphrase. I would paraphrase
Hitler's
>comment
>as it is delivered by Goebbles this way: "Well, the Jew is an artless
>barbarian. Mahler and
>Reinhardt? Oh, yes, sometimes the Jew is good in copying Aryans, true,
but
>original art?
>Never!" How can you possibly describe that as "speaking warmly" of the
>artists? Either
>Irving has known this irregularity, then his honesty has to be
questioned, or
>he hasn't
>known it, then his treatment of the source is more than strange.
>
>
And now what you have done is not paraphrase, but rewrite the quote. 
Moreover, I think you are making many more leaps in your reasoning than
either myself or David Irving.  Where does he say *artless barbarian*? 
*good in copying Aryans*?, *original art? Never!*?




From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug  7 13:26:57 PDT 1996
Article: 55629 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Behind the times...
Date: 6 Aug 1996 09:39:54 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 45
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u7hva$api@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4u70ot$c72@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4u70ot$c72@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>, schultr@ashur.cc.biu.ac.il
(Richard Schultz) writes:

>
>In the meanwhile, perhaps one of the Ausrotten Fan Club would care to
>translate the following passage from the German version of the IMT
>proceedings (I:36):
>
>	Der Angeklagte Ley erklaerte: 'Wir schwoeren, wir werden
>	den Kampf nicht aufgeben, bis der letzte Jude in Europa
>	ausgerottet und wirklich tot ist.  Es ist nicht genug,
>	den Juden, den Feind der Menschheit, auszuligliedern --
>	der Jude muss vernichtet werden.' . . . .
>	Der Angeklagte Streicher erklaerte: 'Die Sonne wird den
>	Voelkern der Erde nicht scheinen, bis der letzte Jude
>	tot ist.'
>	(NB to Herr Puckler aka Prince Myshkin:  you might want to
>	check out the number of Jews mentioned on that page as
>	having "disappeared [verschwunden]" and compare it with the
>	number you claim was invented at Nuremberg.)

I am going to translate every thing I come across and start using
dictionaries, too, because I obviously need the practice.  And practice
makes perfect.

*The defendant Ley said: *We swear that we will not give up the struggle
until the last Jew in Europe has been stamped out and is really dead.  
It's not enough that the Jew, the enemy of mankind, be driven off, he must
be destroyed*

*The defendant Streicher said *The sun will not shine on the peoples of
the earth until the last Jew is dead.**

Query: what is the derivation of *auszuligliedern*?!

Comment:  Both of these statements would have been public declarations,
and therefore have nothing to do with a secret extermination program.

Comment:  Ley elaborates *ausrotten* to mean *kill*, which means that
*ausrotten* does not mean *kill* all by itself.

Comment:  By the time of Aktion Reinhardt, which I believe future
historians will put more and more emphasis on, Julius Streicher had
nothing to do with anything.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug  7 13:26:58 PDT 1996
Article: 55648 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Except from Rudolf Report -- Zyklon B
Date: 6 Aug 1996 13:25:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 247
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u7v5l$f7d@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


FROM THE *RUDOLF REPORT*  (rough translation, original text at bottom)

 (p.60f): 

"In the middle of the 1920’s the carrier material for Zyklon B was almost
completely diatomite from which the prussic acid almost completely
outgassed in a matter of minutes. [176].  However the carrier, in a tin
can, would lose almost all of the prussic acid in a few days, and it would
flow around freely in the can thus creating a great risk in opening the
product.  As a result, the material testing laboratory in Berlin
recommended by the end of the 1920’s that at least part of the diatomite
be replaced with gypsum, whose water hydrating ability would hold the
prussic acid, and thus increasing the shelf life of the product. [177]. 
In the 1930’s increasing amounts of gypsum were added, which markedly
increased the evaporation rate over the course of time.  For a few years,
the product was called *Cyanosil* (tm).
The Zyklon B that was allegedly used for gassing human beings was made of
a diagreiss material, 5 to 10 millimeters in diameter, with the prussic
acid soaked into a small clumps of diatomite with a marked amount of
gypsum added, such that approximately 60% of the mass of the product
comprised the carrier material. [178,179].  The evaporation of the poison
gas from the carrier was achieved rather slowly.
This was foreseen when the longer shelf life for Zyklon B was achieved,
and therefore it was desired that personnel involved in the fumigation of
rooms should be equipped with gas masks while the preparation was being
distributed.  Since the gas mask filter provided uncertain protection from
specific concentrations (see attachment 3.4.2.3, page 75), and since
poisoning through the skin could also occur,  we can assume that the
slower release of the gas was for the security of the personnel in their
exit from the area after the laying down of the preparation.

The evaporation characteristics of prussic acid from carrier materials are
given in two sources. [179,180].  The information from the second of
these,  the US Army Chemical Corps, is given on Graph 12.  Unfortunately,
the source says nothing about the type of carrier material used, or about
the accumulation of layers of the product during application.  But it does
say that about 80% to 90% of the prussic acid would be outgassed in about
nine hours, at room temperature of about 26 degrees Centigrade.  The other
source is Detia Freyberg GmbH,  one of the offshoots of DEGESCH, which was
the main provider of prussic acid products until the end of the war.
[179].  Since the outgassing depends on temperature and air movement,
Detia Freyberg GmbH only provided a rule of thumb, which was that, given a
temperature in excess of 20 degress Centigrade, and an even distribution
of the product, 80% to 90% of the gas would be evaporated after two hours
(see Graph 13).

After 48 hours there is either none or only traces of prussic acid in the
carrier.  At lower temperatures there should be a corresponding decrease
in the evaporation of the prussic acid, and lengthening of the process. 
But given the conditions listed above, one can calculate that 50% of the
prussic acid will be outgassed after about 40 to 45 minutes. (120/3 min.) 
G. Peters claimed at the beginning of the 1930’s that about 50% of the
prussic acid would be released after half an hour, with a distribution of
the preparation in a sheet between 1/2 to 1 centimeter in thickness.
[163], which comes out as somewhat less than the reported time from Detia
Freyberg GmbH.  The higher evaporation rates given by Peters apparently
come after the time when the gypsum component in the carrier was being
increased for product stability, and needless to say, to lower the cost of
the carrier materials.   For further determinations it should be kept in
mind that during the first five, or apparently as much as ten, minutes
after applying the product, a maximum of 10% of the prussic acid will have
been lost from the carrier material at temperatures greater than 20
degrees Centrigrade.  If the temperature is lowered from the boiling point
of prussic acid to 0 degrees Centigrade, the evaporation time would be
approximately tripled (see Graph 1, page 38).  
According to a war time source, the evaporation of prussic acid from a
carrier at below zero temperatures is only slightly protracted. [181]. “

References:
163: G. Peters, Blausäure zur Schädlingsbekämpfung [Prussic Acid for Pest
Control] , Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart 1933, for comments on the
evaporation of prussic acid, see : p. 64f.
176: 	Patentschrift Nr. 438818 (D 41941 IV/451, 27.12.1926), 
courtesy of Carlo Mattogno, the patent claims that practically all of the
prussic acid was released after ten minutes.
177: Untersuchungsberichte der Reichsmaterialprüfungsanstalt
[Investigative Report of the State Materials Testing Laboratories],
Berlin.  This was provided courtesy of Dr. H. Leipprand (the precise
reference will be provided when possible).
178: See the pictures in J.-C. Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique… aaO. (Anm. 
16), S. 17, F.A. Leuchter (Anm. 2), S. 148, as well as Product information

der DEGESCH (Deutsche Ge-sellschaft für Schädlingsbekämpfung).
179: A. Moog, W. Kapp, Letter Detia Freyberg GmbH to the Autor, 
Laudenbach 11.9.1991. After the war the firm of Detia Freyberg was formed
>from  DEGESCH, which lay in the American zone. Concerning the mass of
carrier material in the product: telephone conversation with W. Kapp on
10.1.1992.  I also have with me a letter from the firm ARED, which give a
one to six hour evaporation time for prussic acid absorbed into paper
discs, at temperatures of 4 degrees Centigrade on up, Letter from ARED
GmbH to the Author, Linz, dated 12/30/1991.
180: S. Pinter, Mauthausen-Report, Beilage 3/US-Army Chemical Corps,
5.8.48.
181: G. Peters, W. Rasch, »Die Einsatzfähigkeit der Blausäure-Durchgasung 
bei tiefen Tempe-raturen«, Zeitschrift für hygienische Zoologie und 
Schädlingsbekämpfung, [The Suitability of Prussic Acid Gassing at Low
Temperatures, in Journal for Hygienic Zoology and Pest Control], 1941,
133f."

*********************************

"Mitte der zwanziger Jahre bestand das Trägermaterial von Zyklon B fast 
komplett aus Kiesel-gur, das die Blausäure innerhalb weniger Minuten fast 
ganz abgab [176]. Da der Träger jedoch bereits in den Blechbüchsen
innerhalb 
nur weniger Tage einen Großteil der Blausäure verlor - sie floß dann
flüssig 
in der Dose herum, so daß diese nur noch unter großem Risiko geöffnet
werden 
konnte - empfahl die Materialuntersuchungsanstalt in Berlin Ende der 
zwanziger Jahre, zumindest einen Teil des Kieselgurs durch Gips zu
ersetzen. 
Das Hydratwasser des Gipses binde die Blausäure, wodurch das Produkt in 
Dosen länger haltbar sei[177]. In den dreißiger Jahren wurde daher das 
Produkt zunehmend auf Gips umgestellt, wodurch sich die Abdampf-zeit der 
Blausäure im Laufe der Jahre merklich erhöhte. Vor einigen Jahren wurde
der 
Pro-duktname in »Cyanosil®« umgeändert. Das angeblich zur
Menschenvergasung 
verwendete Zy-klon B bestand aus einem Diagrieß-Produkt, 5 bis 10 mm
großen, 
mit Blausäure getränkten Klümpchen aus Diatomeenerde (Kieselgur) mit 
merklichem Gipsanteil, wobei ungefähr 60% der Masse des Produktes auf die 
Trägermasse entfällt[178,179]. Die Verdunstung des Giftga-ses vom Träger 
erfolgt recht langsam. Dies war abgesehen zur Erreichung langer
Lagerzeiten 
der Zyklon B-Dosen auch deshalb erwünscht, da bei Raumbegasungen das 
Personal, mit Gas-masken ausgestattet, das Präparat in den Räumen
verteilen 
mußte. Da ein Schutz-filter ab einer bestimmten Konzentration unsicher
wird 
(siehe Abschnitt 3.4.2.3., S. 75) und auch eine Ver-giftung durch die Haut

erfolgen kann, ist die langsame Freisetzung des Gases Voraussetzung für
den 
sicheren Rückzug des Perso-nals nach Auslegung des Präparates.
Die Verdampfungscharakte-ristik der Blausäure von Trägermaterialien wird
in 
zwei Quellen angege-ben [179,180]. Die Information der zweiten, von den 
US-Army Chemical Corps stam-menden, ist der Grafik 12 zu entnehmen. Leider

wird in der Quelle nichts ausgesagt über die Art des Träger-materials und 
die Anhäu-fung des Präparats bei der Anwen-dung. Bei einer
Raum-tem-peratur 
von etwa 26°C, der Siedetemperatur der Blau-säu-re, dauert da-nach der 
Vor-gang bis zur Abdampfung von 80 bis 90% der Blau-säure rund 9 Stunden.
Die andere Quelle stammt von der Detia Freyberg GmbH, einer 
Nachfolgege-sellschaft der DEGESCH, die bis Kriegsende der Hauptlieferant 
für Blausäu-re-Produkte war[179]. Da die Gasfreisetzung von Temperatur und

Luftbewe-gung abhängig ist, gibt die Detia Freyberg GmbH nur eine
Faustregel 
an. Danach gibt der Träger bei einer Temperatur von mehr als 20°C und 
gleichmäßiger Verteilung des Präparates innerhalb von 120 min 80 bis 90 % 
der Blausäure ab, siehe Grafik 13.
Nach 48 Stunden sind im Träger keine oder nur ver-nachlässigbare 
Blausäure-reste nachzuwei-sen. Bei nie-drigeren Temperaturen soll sich 
dieser Vorgang ent-sprechend dem fallenden Dampfdruck von Blausäure 
verlangsamen. Danach ist mit 50% Blausäure-Abgabe nach 40 bis 45 Minuten
zu 
rechnen (120/3 min). G. Peters gibt Anfang der dreißiger Jahre für eine 
50%ige Freisetzung der Blausäure ½ Stunde an, bei einer Verteilung des 
Präpa-rates von 0,5 bis 1 cm Schichtdicke[163]. Damit liegt dies etwas
unter 
dem von der Detia Freyberg GmbH genannten Zeitbereich. Größere
Abdampfzeiten 
als die von Peters genannten werden wahrscheinlich be-reits in den Jahren 
danach erreicht worden sein durch beständige Erhöhung des Gipsanteiles am 
Trägermaterial zur Erhöhung der Lagerstabilität (und - nebenbei bemerkt - 
auch zur Preissen-kung des Trägermaterials). Für spätere Feststellungen
ist 
es hier notwendig festzuhalten, daß während der ersten fünf,
wahrscheinlich 
sogar zehn Minuten der Präparatauslegung bei einer Temperatur größer als 
20°C maximal 10% der Blausäure den Trägerstoff verlassen haben.
Bei einer Erniedrigung der Temperatur vom Siedepunkt der Blausäure auf 0°C

würde sich die Ver-dampfungdauer etwa verdreifachen (siehe Grafik 1, S.
38). 
Nach einer Quelle aus der Kriegszeit wird die Abdampfung der Blausäure vom

Träger auch bei Minustemperaturen nur unerheblich verzö-gert[181]. Gegen 
Ende der Verdampfung ist bei niedrigen Temperaturen mit einer zunehmenden 
Verzögerung zu rechnen, da hier die Adsorptionskräfte des Trägers auf die 
Blausäure stärker zum Tragen kommen.
Zwischen der amerikanischen und den beiden deutschen Quellen liegt also
ein 
Faktor 4. Da die deut-schen Entlausungsprozeduren in der Regel im Bereich 
einiger weniger Stunden liegen (siehe weiter unten), ist der letzten
Quelle 
eher zu trauen, zumal hier auch die Verteilung des Präparates angegeben
ist. 
Peters[163] erwähnt außerdem, daß die Amerikaner fast ausschließ-lich 
Scheiben aus Pappe als Träger verwenden, die die Blausäure wesentlich 
langsamer abge-ben als das Diagrieß-Präparat.
Wird das Präparat nicht gleichmäßig verteilt, sondern gehäuft ausgelegt,
so 
kommt es natur-gemäß zu einer Verzögerung der Abdampfung. Dabei sind zwei 
Effekte zu beachten: Während das Volumen der zu verdampfenden Blausäure in

einer Präparateanhäufung mit der 3. Potenz der Größe wächst, wächst die 
Oberfläche des Haufens, über die die Verdampfung abläuft, nur quadratisch.

Damit hat man mit einem zu der Anhäufung proportionalen Wachstum der 
Ver-dampfungszeit zu rechnen. Weiterhin wird sich bei größeren Anhäufungen

durch den starken lokalen Wärmeentzug die Temperatur in und um das
Präparat 
verstärkt erniedrigen und damit die Verdampfung zusätzlich bremsen. Eine 
leicht überpropor-tionale Zeitdehnung mit der Grö-ße der Anhäufung des 
Präparates ist also gegeben.

References:
163: G. Peters, Blausäure zur Schädlingsbekämpfung, Ferdinand Enke Verlag,

Stuttgart 1933, bezüglich der Geschwindigkeit der Blausäure-Verdunstung
vom 
Zyklon B-Träger: S. 64f.
176: 	Patentschrift Nr. 438818 (D 41941 IV/451, 27.12.1926), 
dankenswerterweise von C. Mattogno zur Verfü-gung gestellt. Danach gab 
damals das Prä-parat innerhalb von 10 Minuten praktisch alle Blausäure ab.
177: Untersuchungsberichte der Reichsmaterialprüfungsanstalt, Berlin.
Diese 
Arbeiten stellte mir dankenswerterweise Herr Dr. H. Leipprand zur
Verfügung. 
(Genaue Quellenangabe wird gelegentlich eingefügt.)
178: Siehe Abbildungen in J.-C. Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique… aaO. (Anm. 
16), S. 17, F.A. Leuchter (Anm. 2), S. 148, jeweils aus
Produktinformationen 
der DEGESCH (Deutsche Ge-sellschaft für Schädlingsbekämpfung).
179: A. Moog, W. Kapp, Schreiben der Detia Freyberg GmbH an den Autor, 
Laudenbach 11.9.1991. Nach Aussage der Herren der Firma De-tia Freyberg 
führt diese Gesellschaft die Geschäfte der DEGESCH fort, die nach dem
Krieg 
in amerikanischen Besitz gelangte. Zum Mas-senanteil des Trägers am 
Gesamtprodukt: Ferngespräch mit W. Kapp vom 10.1.1992. Da-neben liegt mir 
ein Schreiben der Firma ARED vor, die für auf Pappscheiben adsorbierte 
Blau-säure Verdampfungszeiten von 1 bis 6 Stunden angibt, je nach 
Temperatur, von 4°C an auf-steigend, Schreiben der ARED GmbH an den Autor,

Linz, Az. 1991-12-30/Mag.AS-hj.
180: S. Pinter, Mauthausen-Bericht, Beilage 3/US-Army Chemical Corps,
5.8.48.
181: G. Peters, W. Rasch, »Die Einsatzfähigkeit der Blausäure-Durchgasung 
bei tiefen Tempe-raturen«, Zeitschrift für hygienische Zoologie und 
Schädlingsbekämpfung, 1941, 133f."


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug  7 13:26:59 PDT 1996
Article: 55697 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!news.sover.net!news.monad.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.megalink.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Schott, Keyes, & Hitler  Re: FREE SPEECH?
Date: 5 Aug 1996 12:51:21 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 130
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u58q9$3hs@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4u3pnj$4qg0@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4u3pnj$4qg0@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>
>Your translations are wrong, not unorthodox.  And if you know German,
which
>I suspect you don't, that makes you a pretty unappetizing person.  Why
would
>you try to fudge the meaning of a word as simple and unambiguous as
>"ausrotten"?
>
>
Since this is the last of series of karma dumps by Gord, in which he
alternately puffs himself up while tearing me down, I will recapitulate
the matter here.

It is known that Himmler gave two speeches in October, 1943 where he
discussed the massacres of Jews that had been taking place in German
occupied Eastern Europe.  It is clear also, that many of these massacres
involved women and children. That is a point that is sometimes argued by
revisionists, but not by me.

It comes down to a famous passage where Himmler speaks, by way of
introduction,
of the *Ausrottung des juedischen Volkes*.  Now the insistence is that
*Ausrottung* (cf. the verb, *ausrotten*) can only be translated as
*extermination* in English.  I object to this.

If we take the word in its constituents (as a verb) we can say *root out*
(as in weeding the garden), or we can say *eradicate* (probably the
closest Latin cognate in English), also *stamp out, extirpate* -- all of
these figurative, and finally, *exterminate* as regards a people or race. 
This is current usage.

Gord's argument is that anyone who knows German fluently will know that
ausrotten means to exterminate and nothing besides.  But of course that
argument begs the question.  Anyone who knows German fluently, and does
not require some stages of translation to understand, will know that in
German *ausrotten* simply means *ausrotten* and not some Latinism in
English.

So now we have two questions.  One is: how is a German going to hear the
word *ausrotten*, and how is an English speaker going to translate it?    

As to the first question, it is obvious that a German speaker today is
going to hear *ausrotten* as connotative of *extermination of a people*
and little else.  But we can legitimately ask if *ausrotten*'s semantic
meaning has been altered by its association with the National Socialist
regime.  David Irving made the following comments at the second Zuendel
trial, q.v.:

 "I am
very fluent in the German language, having lived in that country for a
long time and having read, of course, millions of words in the German
language in context," said Irving. "There is no doubt that in modern
Germany the word ausrotten now means murder. But we have to look at the
meaning of the word ausrotten in the 1930s and the 1940s, as used by those
who wrote or spoke these documents. In the mouth of Adolf Hitler, the word
ausrotten is never once used to mean murder, and I've made a study of that
particular semantic problem. You can find document after document
which Hitler himself spoke or wrote where the word ausrotten cannot
possibly mean murder. I can give one or two examples briefly. In August
1936, Hitler dictated the famous memorandum on the four year plan which
contains the phrase 'if the Bolsheviks succeed in entering Germany, it
will lead to the ausrotten of the German people'. Now, clearly, he doesn't
mean that if the Bolsheviks invade Germany it will lead to the murder of
50 million Germans. He is saying it will lead to the end of
Germany as a national state, as a power, as a factor, an end of the German
people. He says the same to the Czechoslovakian President Emil Hacha, on
March the 15th, 1939. Hacha has just signed away Czechoslovakia's
independence in a midnight session with Hitler and Hitler says to him
afterwards, 'It is a good thing that you signed because otherwise it would
have meant the ausrotten of the Czechoslovakian people'. Hitler didn't
mean, 'If you hadn't signed, I would have had to kill 8 million Czechs.'
What he is saying [is], 'If you hadn't signed, I would have ended
Czechoslovakia's existence as a separate country.' There are various other
examples of that and I defy anybody to find the meaning of the word
differently used by Adolf Hitler to mean the word 'murder'. This is the
kind of analysis which unfortunately the academic historians have not
bothered to conduct."

I consider these kinds of comments supportive of a thesis that holds that
the meaning of the word *ausrotten* has altered over time.  Assuming
Irving is correct, we might translate *Ausrottung des juedischen Volkes*
as destruction, eradication, or even annihilation of the Jewish People [as
an entity].  But I don't believe his comments suggest *extermination of
the Jewish people* as a valid translation.

The second question is how do we translate into English.  Since my
knowledge of German at this point is restricted to passive reading, I am
handicapped by the auditory directness that a fluent speaker possesses.
[And this means that I will be less able to readily recapture case and
declension when occasion (named Gord) demands.]

Ccompound words, whether in German, Hungarian, Russian, or other Slavic
tongues, have always interested me in the way that they can usually be
translated into English in two ways: (1) by finding the appropriate Anglo
Saxon equivalent, (2) by find a the Latin or Greek compound cognate.  For
example, *durchsichtig* could be translated as *transparent*,
*diaphanous*, or *see through*, and all three mean exactly the same thing,
even before we get to the next level of semantics, i.e., lucid,
perspicuous, etc.  Generally, the word I will use in a given instance
depends on the context, and that is critical here.  But I have a definite
preference for giving the most direct Anglo Saxon equivalent where
possible, because I think the Greco-Latinisms in English have a weaker
force, and because these compounds in their native languages _have_ such
force because they are comprised of native components.

The conventionalist position is that Himmler is talking about killing Jews
in these speeches.  I agree with that.  But the conventionalist position
_further_ is that Himmler is making explicit reference in this opening
sentence of this section to 
the physical extermination of the Jews, and I don't accept that.  It makes
no sense given the rhetorical structure of the section, in my opinion.  It
just doesn't make sense to explicitly refer to the physical extermination
of people by way of introduction, to describe it as -- in effect -- no big
deal, and then to reference the bodies lying there.

So I am not satisfied with the translation of *ausrotten* as
*exterminate.*  I know what the words means, nowadays.  And I am not
disputing that exterminations or mass murders took place.  But I am saying
that in context that translation does not make sense.  Two degrees in the
German language and shrill assertions of authority coupled with silly
personal remarks are irrelevant.




  
    


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug  7 13:26:59 PDT 1996
Article: 55701 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hitler praiser Reinhardt and Mahler?
Date: 6 Aug 1996 22:45:47 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 63
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u900r$ah@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4u8rtd$40ss@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4u8rtd$40ss@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>:>
>:>But *Ausfuehrung* means *carrying out* -- it does not convey the
concept
>:>of *reproduce* in the sense of *recreate* (erfrischen, wieder
erschaffen)
>:>that I think is at issue here.  Query: at what point do Reinhardt and
>:>Mahler (besides their Jewish background).intersect?  To my mind, in the
>:>performing arts.  That explains the connection with *reproduction* in
this
>:>sense to me.
>
>Mr. Ehrlich, I think the point here is the meaning of "Reproduktion" on
the
>one hand and the way Hitler would have likely used it on the other.  As
for
>the first, there seems to be little doubt that the word is very close to
its
>English counterpart.  But it is the German meaning that is determinative,
>since Hitler spoke German.  According to _Ullstein Lexikon der deutschen
>Sprache_, it means "Wiedergabe, Nachbildung, Vervielfaeltigung einer
>[originalen] ebenen Vorlage".  All these definitions connote the sense of
>copy
>or reproduce.  Even in English, we don't use "reproduce" to connote
>originality.
>
>Hitler's point was that Jews *sometimes* succeed when *reproducing*
things. 
>In other words, they are not original.  That would fit in very nicely
with
>his
>parasite and other similar opinions that are well known.  Allow me to
cite
>from _Mein Kampf_:
>
>"Since the Jew--for reasons that will at once become apparent--was never
in
>possession of a culture of his own..." [Chapter XI]
>
>"For what sham culture the Jew today possesses is the property of other
>peoples, and for the most part it is ruined in his hands."  [Ibid]
>
>"Thus, the Jew lacks the qualities which distinguish the races that are
>creative and hence culturally blessed." [Ibid]
>
>"No, the Jew possesses no culture-creating force of any sort, since the
>idealism, without which there is no true higher development of man, is
not
>present in him and never was present."  [Ibid]
>
>Wouldn't you agree that this context--in Hitler's own words--settles the
>issue?
>
>[rest deleted]
>
>
>

I don't disagree, since such sentiments were common in evaluating the role
of Jews in the arts.  But at the same time he is still praising Mahler and
Reinhardt, which surprises me.   


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug  7 13:27:00 PDT 1996
Article: 55731 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Dachau Gas Chamber
Date: 6 Aug 1996 22:27:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 88
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u8uur$t03@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

>
>In article <4u6rdf$t3l@juliana.sprynet.com>, rblackmore@juno.com wrote:
>
>> There was another pathologist with a differing opinion.  
>> Connsult Greg Raven's site for details.  They can't 
>> both be right can they?
>
>Indeed not. That "other" pathologist was Dr. Larson himself! When one
>bothers to actually check _Crime Doctor_, where Dr. Larson relates his
>accounts regarding the liberation of the concentration camps- especially
>Dachau -one (unsuprisingly) finds that Mr. O'Keefe, the author of "The
>'liberation of the camps': Facts vs. lies," to put it bluntly, lied. 
>
>
>For example, Mr. O'Keefe writes:
>
>"...Dr. Larson, who told his biographer that to his knowledge he "was the
>only forensic pathologist on duty in the entire European Theater," (note
>3) informed Wichita Eagle reporter Jan Floerchinger that "never was a
case
>of poison gas uncovered." (note 4)"
>
>Source: http://www.kaiwan.com/~ihrgreg/pamphlets/camps.html
>
>
>How odd. According to Dr. Larson:
>
>"The majority died of natural diseases of one kind or the another.
>However, we did probe into such questions as, 'What happened to those
>prisoners who became psychotic at Dachau? What did the Gestapo do with
>them?' Well, they took those people to the crematorium. First, however,
>they were taken to a big windowless building next to the crematorium
where
>the ceiling was covered with false shower heads. The victims were then
>ordered to strip and take a 'shower.' Outside the building, guards
dropped
>in cyanide pellets. Then they'd blow the cyanide gas out and remove the
>bodies next door to the crematorium ovens. I think this is what happened
>to most of the truly psychotic prisoners and those they considered unruly
>and unmanageable and who, in the Gestapo's opinion, were incorrigibles.
>But, in my opinion, only relatively few of the inmates I personally
>examined at Dachau were murdered in this manner. Still, medical
facilities
>were totally inadequate. When people fell hopelessly ill and death was
>imminent, and when they grew so weak they could no longer work or
>function, they were taken to the cyanide room for disposal. The Nazi
>called them 'mercy killings' because there was no hope of them getting
>well. Actually, the Germans considered them a liability, and
extermination
>was the answer." (_Crime Doctor_, p.61.)
>
>I do believe this is called lying. The fact is that Dr. Larson _clearly_
>intimates that prisoners in Dachau _were_ killed with cyanide gas and Mr.
>O'Keefe states otherwise. In fact, by Dr. Larsen's statement: "...in my
>opinion, only relatively few of the inmates I personally examined at
>Dachau were murdered in this manner" it is implicit that Dr. Larson, in
>his capacity as a U.S. Army _forensic_ pathologist (the only in Europe,
>lest we forget), _determined_ that prisoners had died from cyanide
>poisoning. 
>
>Yes, Mr. O'Keefe lied. It is there in black and white for all to see.
>Those who wish to see the truth that is.  

There you go again.  There is no *lie* here, because Mr. Keefe references
the reporter of the Wichita Eagle.  That is the source to check in the
first instance.  Second, *implicit* is not equivalent to *statement*.  The
Doctor says *I think this is what happened ...* and he says *in my
opinion, only relatively few of the inmates I personally examined were
murdered in this manner.* which could mean either that he accepts that
there were gassings but personally found no evidence of it, or it could
mean that there were a finite number that he found who had been gassed. 
If the latter, he could have stated the magnitude more precisely. 
Moreover, we assume that he is discussing the situation at the end of the
war.  On what basis is he conducting these investigations: is he analyzing
ashes, long buried skeletons, or newly dead corpses?  If the latter, does
this mean that gassings were continuing right up until the arrival of the
US Army?  And what of the gas chamber he describes with the fake
showerheads?  Is this the same one that was not yet completed so that the
gassings took place elsewhere?

>
>Mark
>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug  7 13:27:01 PDT 1996
Article: 55732 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Cult and the EU
Date: 6 Aug 1996 22:27:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u8uut$t04@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
Marty Kelley  writes:

>
>On 31 Jul 1996, Yale F. Edeiken wrote:
>
>> >   weinecks@mail2.sas.upenn.edu (Silke-Maria  Weineck) writes:
>> 
>> >  In Philadelphia, they built a Picasso museum, despite the fact that 
>> >  Picasso was European. Goes to show how crazy these Americans are.
>> 
>> 	Uh.  There's no Picasso museum in Phialdelphia.  There is a Rodin 
>> Museum, however.  It's right next to a prison for juveniles.
>
>I think it's outrageous that Philadelphia would waste public funds
>on a museum dedicated to a monster that, together with Godzilla and
>Mothra, has only terrorized Tokyo.  With the exception of Raymond Burr,
no
>Americans were hurt in those attacks.  Let the Japanese build
>their own damn Rodan museum.
>
>

I don't know which is worse: your homophobia or your disdain for Perry
Mason.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug  8 07:42:55 PDT 1996
Article: 55844 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: "Ash Gets In Your Eyes" - Giwer's New Theme Song
Date: 7 Aug 1996 04:17:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 111
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4u9jf5$7ar@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <320642ED.7639@unb.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <320642ED.7639@unb.ca>, Keith Morrison  writes:

>
>With all the recent chatter about how the ashes of a million or
>so people can be made to go away, one point that is forgotten
>(or ignored) by many participants is the fact that all the
>calculations done assume that the entire cremated population
>are adults.  Which is, of course, not true.
>
>To get a better reading of what exactly the amount of remains
>generated would be, I've taken the liberty of calculating remains
>based on age distribution.
>
>For the purposes of this gedankenexperiment, I've broken down
>the population into four groups, namely infant, child, teenager
>and adult.  Basically infants are under four years old, children
>are from 5 to 9, teenagers from 10 to 19 and adults 20 or above.
>
[Calculations to derive the following amounts of bone residue]
>
>infants      16 200 kg
>children     59 400 kg
>teenagers   254 800 kg
>adults    1 965 600 kg
>
>For a total of 2 296 000 kilos (2 296 metric tonnes) of bone.
>This is 16% lower than assuming all adults being cremated.

It seems to me you have a problem here, assuming that your total number of
victims (1 Mill) is correct.  That is, you are ignoring the issue of
work-value for the people who arrived at Auschwitz.  We can safely assume
that children younger than, say, 10, have absolutely no economic value to
the Reich.  Therefore they are either killed immediately or something else
happens to them.  By the same token, adults who are older than say, 60,
are not of any economic value either.  Again, they are either killed or
something else happens to them.  Bearing in mind the argument of economic
value, then, if given 1 million victims, we should expect the age groups
10 and below, and 60 and above, to be heavily over-represented and the age
group 10-60 to be heavily under-represented.

[More calculations of dumping ashes into rivers or fields]

>
>Based on hydrological considerations we can assume that the
>50% dumped in the river is gone and we don't have to worry
>about it.  Furthermore, like Mr Giwer, we'll assume that there
>is absolutely no way anything could get out of a lake so any
>ash dumped stays there.

You are assuming that the perpetrators are thinking these things through. 
If they had thought them through, they would have taken greater pains to
remove cyanide traces from the Kremas, among many other things.

>
>Dumping 25% on fields means 370 m^3.  Let's say, for argument,
>that we dump it on 50 hectares of fields.  Fifty hectares is
>500 000 m^2, which means we cover it to the astounding depth
>of .74 millimeters.  Hey, let's go full bore and dump *all*
>the ash there.  That brings us to an absolutely overwhelming
>thickness of (hold your breath here) 3 millimeters.

Again, this assumes a concern about secrecy and security belied by the
many mass graves that are located throughout Eastern Europe.  It also
assumes mechanisms for the thin distribution of ash over 124 that I
haven't heard of yet.  Sure, it _could_ have been done.  But _was_ it
done?
>
>That fifty hectares is 124 acres.  Does Giwer suggest that the
>Nazis could not find 124 acres to dump some ashes on?

You don't suppose the local farmers would want to know what was going on?

>
>The same rapid diminuation takes place dumping it on lakes.  Say
>we have an small lake 1 km by 2 km.  That is 2 square kilometers.
>There are 100 hectares in a square kilometer.  Our lake is
>200 hectares in size.  If we dump all the ash we cover the bottom
>to an average depth of 0.74 millimeters.

I don't think there are any lakes of that magnitude is the area, and you
are also assuming an even distribution which would be difficult to
accomplish.

[snip]

>Now Matt will probably get all cranky and start yelling about
>1 centimeter mesh and so forth.  So, in order to forestall the
>tantrum, lets assume that all the bone particles are at least
>1 cc in size (1 cm cubes).  Assuming that the fragments are
>scattered to form a layer two particles high (2 centimeters),
>we get an area required of 74 050 m^2 or 7.4 hectares.  Our lake
>is 200 hectares, remember?  This means the bone will cover 4%
>of the lake's surface.  That means the odds of drilling and
>actually hitting bone aren't very good.  It gets worse the
>thicker the bone layer.  At 4 centimeters high we're down to 2%,
>and so on.  Unless you know *exactly* where that ash was dumped
>the odds of finding it aren't very good.

This is better.  So where is this lake?  As far as where the ash is
dumped, I think we can surmise that it would be dumped at a point where
the road comes close to the lake?

>
>Wow.  No problem to get rid of that ash at all.
>

I like thought experiments.  The only problem with them, and this one in
particular, is that it seriously understates the energy requirements
involved in the distribution.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri Aug  9 00:01:43 PDT 1996
Article: 55965 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:   Wieder mit dem "Ausrottung" Wahnsinn.
Date: 8 Aug 1996 11:12:45 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 198
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ud05d$3rg@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4u9ksi$8js@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4u9ksi$8js@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>, schultr@ashur.cc.biu.ac.il
(Richard Schultz) writes:

>
>Humpty Dumpty (ehrlich606@aol.com) wrote:
>
>: It comes down to a famous passage where Himmler speaks, by way of
>: introduction,
>: of the *Ausrottung des juedischen Volkes*.  Now the insistence is that
>: *Ausrottung* (cf. the verb, *ausrotten*) can only be translated as
>: *extermination* in English.  I object to this.
>
>And we all feel really bad about that.

I'll bet you do.

>
>: If we take the word in its constituents (as a verb) we can say *root
out*
>: (as in weeding the garden), or we can say *eradicate* (probably the
>: closest Latin cognate in English), also *stamp out, extirpate* -- all
of
>: these figurative, and finally, *exterminate* as regards a people or
race. 
>: This is current usage. . . .
>
>This is the usage of the word as attested since the 16th century.  But
>(to coin a phrase) you knew that.
>
>Furthermore, there is no reason that the meaning of a compound word
should
>necessarily match the meanings of its components (consider, for example,
>English words such as "nightshade").  But you knew that.

As a matter of fact, breaking compounds down into their constituents is a
frequently revealing method for determining the semantic scope of a word. 
But -- you knew that.

>
>: As to the first question, it is obvious that a German speaker today is
>: going to hear *ausrotten* as connotative of *extermination of a people*
>: and little else.  But we can legitimately ask if *ausrotten*'s semantic
>: meaning has been altered by its association with the National Socialist
>: regime. . . .
>
>You can ask, but the answer is "no."  But don't take my word for it,
>or the word of any native German speakers, or every single German/English
>dictionary printed in the last century that has been consulted.  Just
>go to the appropriate volume of the Grimm Brothers' Dictionary (the
>German equivalent of the OED) and check out their citations, which as
>I said, demonstrate that the word's meaning has not changed since the
time
>of Martin Luther.

In other words, Luther translated *ausrotten* as *exterminate*? LOL!

>
>: [quoting David Irving]:
>: "I am very fluent in the German language, having lived in that country
for
>: a long time and having read, of course, millions of words in the German
>: language in context," said Irving. "There is no doubt that in modern
>: Germany the word ausrotten now means murder. But we have to look at the
>: meaning of the word ausrotten in the 1930s and the 1940s, as used by
those
>: who wrote or spoke these documents. In the mouth of Adolf Hitler, the
word
>: ausrotten is never once used to mean murder, and I've made a study of
that
>: particular semantic problem. You can find document after document
>: which Hitler himself spoke or wrote where the word ausrotten cannot
>: possibly mean murder. . .
>
>I posted the following quotation in another thread, but perhaps you
didn't
>see it, so I reprint it here.  It's from the German version of the IMT
>proceedings:
>
>	Der Angeklagte Ley erklaerte:  'Wir schwoeren, wir werden
>	den Kampf nich aufgeben, bis der letzte Jude in Europa
>	ausgerottet und wirklich tot ist.  Es is nicht genug,
>	den Juden, den Feind der Menschheit, auzugliedern --
>	der Jude muss vernichtet werden.'
>

I translated this elsewhere.  Please note that after stating *ausgerottet*
he goes on to say *is really/actually dead* which points to the ambiguity
of the meaning.  In other words, destruction or stamping out or similar
meanings, but _not_ extermination.

>The following quotation is from a speech by Hitler himself (30 Jan 1942)
>as reprinted in _Der Fuehrer ueber die Juden_, published by the NSDAP
>in 1943:
>
>	Wir sind uns im klaren, dass dieser Krieg ja nur damit 
>	enden koennte, dass entweder die germanischen Voelker
>	ausgerottet werden, oder dass Judentum aus Europa
>	verschwindet.  Ich habe am 1. September 1939 [sic]
>	im Deutschen Reichstag es schon ausgesprochen. . .
>	dass dieser Krieg nich so ausgehen wird, wie die Juden
>	sich es vorstellen, naemlich dass die europaeischen
>	arischen Volker ausgerottet werden, sondern dass das
>	Ergebnis dieses Krieges die Vernichtung des Judentums
>	ist.  Zum ersetenmal werden nicht andere allein verbluten,
>	sondern zum erstenmal wird diesesmal das echt altjuedische
>	Gesetz angewendet:  Aug' um Aug', Zahn um Zahn!

Yes, Hitler wanted to destroy the Jews or the Jewish People, or Judaism. 
No surprise here.  The question is whether you would seriously use
*exerminate* to translate any verb in the above passage. BTW, you are
ignoring Irving's comments.

>
>Or how about this one?  Page 103 of the book _Die juedische Weltpest_,
>published by the NSDAP in 1941, consists of a series of Biblical
>quotations (from Isaiah 34, 60, and 61, and Deuteronomy 7) that talk
>about destruction of non-Jewish peoples, e.g. the quotation from
>Isaiah 34 includes the following passage:
>
>	. . . Denn der Herr is zornig ueber alle Heiden und
>	grimmig ueber all ihr Heer.  Er wird die verbannen und
>	zum Schlachten ueberantworten.  Und iher Erschlagenen
>	werden hingeworfen werden, dass der Gestank von ihren
>	Leichnamen aufgehen wird und die Berge von ihrem
>	Blut fliessen. . . .
>
>This section of the book is entitled "Ausrottung aller Nichtjuden."

Destruction or Annihilation, but not Extermination.
>
>: I consider these kinds of comments supportive of a thesis that holds
that
>: the meaning of the word *ausrotten* has altered over time.  
>
>Except, of course, that it has not altered over time (as I pointed out
>above), and the above three quotations from Nazi sources show that they
>were using the word in its usual sense.

But not as *extermination*

>
>: Assuming
>: Irving is correct, we might translate *Ausrottung des juedischen
Volkes*
>: as destruction, eradication, or even annihilation of the Jewish People
[as
>: an entity].  But I don't believe his comments suggest *extermination of
>: the Jewish people* as a valid translation.
>
>How exactly do you propose to annihilate the Jewish People as an entity
>without killing them?

Richard, it can be done two ways: by physical destruction (which was
incomplete) or by destruction of the Jewish community (much more
complete).  Query:  Would you grant that the Polish Nation was being
annihilated from the time of the partitions to 1918, by persecution of
Catholic elements and the gradual Germanization and Russification of all
institutions?  I would.  And I am not denying that Himmler -- in the next
paragraph of this speech -- is explicitly talking about killing.  What I
object to is the use of the word *extermination.*  

>
>: The second question is how do we translate into English.  
>
>This is not in question.  You don't have to be fluent in German -- just
>able to pick up a German/English dictionary and discover that when
applied
>to people, "ausrotten" has and had one meaning, and one meaning alone.

OK.  I just looked in the 1995 Langenscheidt's and it says:  pull up
(weeds), wipe out, stamp out (figuratives), for the noun, Die Ausrottung,
it says, wiping out, and then figurative, genocide.  Nothing about
*extermination* there.

>
>: . . .So I am not satisfied with the translation of *ausrotten* as
>: *exterminate.*  I know what the words means, nowadays.  And I am not
>: disputing that exterminations or mass murders took place.  But I am
saying
>: that in context that translation does not make sense.  Two degrees in
the
>: German language and shrill assertions of authority coupled with silly
>: personal remarks are irrelevant.
>
>The simple fact is that you have absolutely no basis for claiming that 
>the translation "does not make sense," since by your own admission, you
>have a limited knowledge of the German language.  But that is beside the
>point.  The point is that people who have taken the trouble to
investigate
>the matter have discovered what all German speakers who have expressed an
>opinion agree on:  the word "ausrotten," when applied to people, has one
>meaning, and has had that meaning for centuries.
>
Yes, and the use of the English Latinism *exterminate* is an inappropriate
word to use in translation.

>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri Aug  9 08:02:10 PDT 1996
Article: 55977 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!netaxs.com!hunter.premier.net!news.cais.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!News1.mcs.net!imci2!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mauving right along
Date: 8 Aug 1996 21:57:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 47
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ue5te$ug@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

>
>In article <4tqqo6$6m5@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com
>(Ehrlich606) wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> It still comes down to the fact that P is using the testimony
concerning
>> the operation of one type of Krema to characterize the operation in
>> another type of Krema....  
>
>Are you suggesting that Zklon B had different physical properties when
>used in Krema II as opposed to Krema V? That people, when confined in gas
>chambers and exposed to equivelent concentrations of HCN, _didn't_ die in
>similar amounts of time? 
>
>> ...That is not proof.  I have still not seen any proof that the fans
would 
>> kick in after 5 minutes other than the fact that you and P are
obviously 
>> committed to this notion.
>
>Indeed no _proof_ (i.e. hard evidence) has been offered. No claims of
such
>were made. What _was_ offered was an _explination_, supported by
>circumstantial evidence and induction, to why it made little sense to
wait
>as long as indicated by Ho"ss or Nysizli for the ventilation of the gas
>chamber to commence. 
>
>You may accept the  explination given or not. I have no real problem with
>that. However, I should point out that _you_, Ehrlich606, haven't
>addressed the explination on its merits (or lack thereof) but simply (and
>dogmatically) click your heels three times and say  "No proof. No proof.
>No proof." 
>
>What was that you were saying about being "committed" to "notions?" Hmmm?

>
>

OK, since you put it like that then I am in agreement that we should agree
to disagree.  Pressac's explanation is _possible_ but in my opinion not
_probable_.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug 10 09:53:02 PDT 1996
Article: 56175 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ashholes was Re: "Ash Gets In Your Eyes" - Giwer's New Theme Song
Date: 9 Aug 1996 10:18:19 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 47
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ufhbb$cm7@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uev0i$drk@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uev0i$drk@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt
 Giwer) writes:

>
>On 8 Aug 1996 14:09:03 GMT, anny@ix.netcom.com(Annie Alpert) wrote:
>
>>In <4u9jf5$7ar@newsbf02.news.aol.com> ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
>>writes: 
>>previous discussion on the amount of ash snipped
>
>>>>Wow.  No problem to get rid of that ash at all.
>>>>
>>  Exactly true, Mr. E:
>
>>ASHES
>>  What became of the ashes of the victims at Auschwitz and
>>  other extermination camps that cremated the bodies.  Of
>>  course this is a disrespectful and nasty question, since it
>>  suggests that there is some deception taking place, but let's
>>  consider it anyway. 

This is where your problem begins.  You believe that to ask questions
about details of the Holocaust is disrespectful and nasty.  Exactly, Why? 
I can understand that it would be painful to a survivor or to a survivor's
children and grandchildren.  But this newsgroup is clearly labeled
*alt.revisionism* and no one _has_ to be here.  Moreover, this newsgroup
was set up expressly for the purpose of discussing revisionist minutiae.

Then you say that it is disrespectful and nasty since it suggests some
deception taking place.  Are you claiming that there has never been any
deliberate inflation of Nazi atrocities?  First of all you have to explain
away Auschwitz, and I am not going to take the tack that Moran does, which
claims that lowering the number of victims necessitates lowering the
number of Jewish victims.

Fact: Around 1989, leading historians of the Holocaust revised downward
their totals for Auschwitz Birkenau.  Fact:  Around 1990, the Polish
government reduced the claimed death toll for AB from 4 million to about 1
million.  Fact:  The source of the 4 million number is clearly USSR-8, the
Soviet Special Commission on Auschwitz, which based its totals on totally
arbitrary cremation statistics for the camp.  Fact: This document was
given judicial notice at Nuremberg.

It seems obvious to me that the 4 million number was cooked in the first
place.  Since the cooking was done by the Soviet Union, the same source,
by the way, of a forged ID card for John Demjanjuk, it follows that there
has indeed been deception on some matters concerning the Holocaust.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug 10 09:53:03 PDT 1996
Article: 56187 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars...
Date: 9 Aug 1996 10:18:25 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 54
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ufhbh$cmc@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uei1p$blq@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uei1p$blq@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa)
writes:

>
>Aug 8, 1996 Jamie McCarthy wrote:
>
>>I would also very much like to hear how Ceacaa 
>>explains this.
>
>
>I have been out of the discussion for several days. 
>The discussion is about the shape of the objects
>on the roof of Leichenkeller 1 in the picture??
>I would agree with M. VanAlstine if he says that
>the boxes are rectangular.  This is pretty evident
>if one looks  at photograph 17 on pg. 340 of Pressac.
>
>The shadows indicate that the picture was taken
>in early morning, for a Polish January/February
>on a mildly windy day.  
>
Yes, Jamie's detective work, along with looking at the overall picture
which captures the brightness values better, convinces me that the tar
paper thesis will not stand.

But Jamie's work also explains a few other things and raises some more
questions.

First of all, these are not boxes.  They are _crates_.  If chimneys, they
are _huge_.  Gauging the facing length of the Krema (cca. 25 feet), I
would guess the dimensions are 4 feet by 3 feet.  This is a good place to
ask why such massive structures would be needed for the
introduction/extraction of contraptions containing Zyklon B.  I can see no
functional explanation for this.

Secondly, the crates are light-colored. That follows.  What doesn't follow
is the shadows, which show clear rectangular shapes such that I mistook
them for bituminous felt.  Yet the aerial photographs of AB give shadows
that are extremely irregular in shape.

Furthermore the AB aerial photos have the induction chimneys in a center
line.  These boxes are _not_ in a center line, but about 3/4 of the way
towards the left.  Furthermore, there are only three *chimneys* where
there should be four.  Gauging the location of the three crates on the
roof in the picture, I wonder where Jamie would *interpolate* the fourth
*chimney*.

Finally, we have the fact that no holes exist either in these locations or
the center line in the still existing (though broken) roof of the Krema. 
Nor is there any trace of the masonry for the *little chimneys*.

>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug 10 09:53:03 PDT 1996
Article: 56217 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: the Zyklon B graph - zb.jpg (1/1)
Date: 9 Aug 1996 22:50:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 79
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ugtcu$1qe@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
writes:

>Subject:	Re: the Zyklon B graph - zb.jpg (1/1)
>From:	dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
>Date:	Fri, 9 Aug 1996 18:51:52 GMT
>
>Rudolph himself seems to agree this graph isn't worth
>much; he apparently reconstructed it from *one* data
>point. He chose an exponential function because, so
>he said, it's the "fastest decreasing mathematical
>function", which must be one of the stupidest things
>I heard in my life.

OK, then list some functions that decrease faster which will still have
80% to 90% of the product remaining after two hours.  I gather that is
what he is getting at.

>
>The graph presented here cannot be true, as it contradicts
>the much more accurate information from the Peters-Rasch
>paper: in far lower temperatures, there was no residue
>detected in the Zyklon after an hour, or at most two.

What is the *much more accurate* numbers from the Peters-Rasch paper? 
There are, as I recall, without alleged functions, graphs, or specificity
in the matter of outgassing.  I think there is something about that in
another post that I put up by Rudolf.

>
>It also contradicts the information in Dr. Peter's book
>that the large part evaporates in half-an-hour.

Yes, and that information was provided in 1933, at _precisely_ the time
when gypsum was being added to the diatomite to slow down the evaporation
rate.  See the other posts.

>
>The simplest explanation is that we're talking about
>two different products: one manufactured today vs.
>the wartime Zyklon. Other possibility is that Rudolph
>is lying through his teeth, as he did when misquoting
>Dr. Peters' book.

Rudolf recognizes that there are two different products: the question is
how different.  As a kind of control, he references an American product,
which used paper discs and which took _six_ hours to outgas in the wartime
period.  But Rudolf is convinced that he is talking about a
gypsum/diatomite compound.  Which, btw, is not blue.  Moreover, perhaps a
chemist hereabouts would care to comment on the moisture absorbency of
diatomite, gypsum, and the fabled ERCO cubes?

The fact that you are suggesting that Rudolf is a liar gratuitously, and
without referencing the remarkably conciliatory preface to *Grundlagen* is
duly noted.  But you know, the advantage of Rudolf's numbers is that, if
he _is_ lying, then he and Lueftl are telling exactly the same lie, in
other words, they are both operating under the same assumptions about the
product.  Which leads me to think that they may be mistaken, but they are
not lying.

>
>All that being said: this is a matter not of crucial
>importance. Even if the graph was indeed as Rudolph
>claims it to be, there would be no problems with
>using it to kill people in the Auschwitz gas chambers.

Given your prior dismissals to the other posts along these lines (lies,
irrelevant, contradicted by, etc.), I have to say that I consider the
guarded concession above as hysterically funny.

>
>
>-Danny Keren.
>
>
>-- 
>Lies written in ink can never disguise facts written in blood.
>
>-Lu Xun.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug 10 09:53:04 PDT 1996
Article: 56218 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Germar Rudolf Responds on Zyklon Outgassing
Date: 9 Aug 1996 22:50:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 61
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ugtd1$1qi@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Subject:	Re: Germar Rudolf Responds on Zyklon Outgassing
From:	dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
Date:	Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:30:13 GMT

ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:

[Quoting Germar Rudoplh]

# Mr. Roessler 

It's Dr. Roessler, actually.

E606: OK, how would I know?

# should weigh his words more carefully.  If I
# had lied in relation to the remarks of Dr. Peters in one
# of his publications, that would mean that I had knowingly
# stated a falsehood.

he quoted "the larger part" as "half". One must assume he
was intentionally lying.

E606: One must assume that Dan is jumping to conclusions.  Or else he is
anxious to dismiss Rudolf as a liar as quickly as possible? :)

# Here Mr. Roessler is completely correct: the data which I
# received from Detia Freyberg (Laudenbach/Bergstrasse) were
# not exactly ample.

Well that's good to hear.

# As to the application of an exponential curve for outgassing, 
# I can scarcely understand what the problem might be, since 
# there is no function with a more rapid declination.

This has to be one of the most idiotic things I read in my
life. There are many functions which decrease faster. That's
indeed one for the ZOG quote files.

E606: I am sure he means in the context of retaining 80% to 90% after two
hours, Dan, which was the data point quoted him by Detia Freyberg.

# Finally I would like to ask whether Mr. Roessler has ever
# given any thought as to how the Zyklon B would be introduced
# into the alleged gas chambers of Crematorium II and III 
# given the absence of any of the oft-cited holes in the roof.

Now that's just great. Some "revisionists", like Andrew Allen,
keep telling us there are three holes in the roof. And now
another one tells us there are none.

Never mind the photos in pressac's book which clearly show
the holes.

These people are amazing.

E606:  Dan, don't you think you are being amazing as well?  No one
disputes that there are _holes_ the fact is that they are not in the
locations where they could conceivably be induction holes, according to
both of your photographs.  Moreover, they have the rebar sticking out and
so on.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug 10 09:53:05 PDT 1996
Article: 56260 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars...
Date: 10 Aug 1996 00:59:23 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 73
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uh4vb$5nh@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uglb7$rkp@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uglb7$rkp@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa)
writes:

>
>Ehrlich606 wrote on 9 Aug 1996 
>>Yes, Jamie's detective work, along with looking at the 
>>overall picture which captures the brightness values better, >convinces
>me that the tar
>>paper thesis will not stand.
>  
>
>I do not think that Mr. Ehrlich should abandon the idea that the crates
>contained roofing material.  Similar crates appear in
>other photographs of the construction of Cremas II and III,
>particularly in conjuction with the "finishing " of concrete
>floors.  The photograph of discussion was taken during the construction
>period when roofing would have been going on.  
>The photograph was also taken to "document" the construction process. 
>None of these points is overwhelming but they
>do provide a convergence of evidence.

I agree.  I do not intend to abandon the idea that the crates contain
_something_ relative to roofing.  In the post you are referencing in your
comment, I specifically point out how the *little chimney* hypothesis has
big problems.  You are right about one thing, with dimensions of 3 x 4
they could easily contain rolls of roofing felt, or buckets of tar
prepping material, or adhesive, or solid tar in wrapped paper cylinder
plugs, or what not.  The tar paper thesis may stick after all.

>    It is my recollection that the Leichenkeller was roofed
>with an asphalt-like coating.  Whatever the roofing material
>was, it is quite likely that it arrived in crates.  Remember
>that there were two layers of roof over the original slab.

Which is why the idea of putting in the chimneys afterward becomes even
more difficult to defend.

>     Proof of what these boxes were is probably in the
>construction records at Auschwitz.  If Bituminous felt
>came in 3 x 4 crates then we have an important piece of
>the puzzle.
>
>   In discussions it is usually much easier to poke holes
>in someone else's hypothosis than create an airtight
>argument of one's own.  However, the claims that these
>boxes were "little chimneys" is far less likely than 
>the possiblity that they had something to do with 
>construction.


  Quite simply, the boxes are the wrong 
>number, the wrong place, the wrong size, the wrong
>shape, probably the wrong time in the construction
>schedule to be  "little chimneys".  Plus, there ain't
>no holes there!

You have summarized the salient objections well.  I will only point out in
addition that both you and Germar Rudolf have been to the site, and claim
that there are no holes in the appropriate locations, while Mssrs. Van
Alstine, McCarthy, and Keren have _not_ investigated the site.  And yet
they dismiss your observations.

>
>    Here is a question for Jamie.  Why did the Germans
>bother to convert Leichenkeller 1 into a homicidal
>gas chamber at all?  
>
While you are at it, ask Mark to explain why the boxes are in the wrong
position and throw the wrong kind of shadows compared to the aerial
photographs.
>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug 10 18:49:35 PDT 1996
Article: 56348 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mauve in Hungarian
Date: 8 Aug 1996 17:59:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 44
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4udo0b$j0q@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4u665v$dei@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4u665v$dei@grivel.une.edu.au>, 
writes:

>
>Mark Van Alstine asked:
>
>   Now what is the word for "pedant" in Hungrian? 
>
>d.A. answered:
>
>   Faszkalap.
>
>Alles andere als Ehrlich606 found a comrade who speaks Hungarian
>and posted the comrade's words as if they were his own:
>
>nem igaz, vaskalapos ez a szo.  *Faszkalap* ez az Ausztraliai kalap,
>*bush
>hat.* :)
>
>
>
>d.A. responds
>
>Tiszteletre Alkalmatlan Tolm{\' a}cs {\' U}r!
>
>Rem{\' e}lem, hogy a hib{\'a}im ellen{\'e}re {\'e}rtehet{\H o}
>amit {\' i}rok.
>
>
>Haggya ny{\' u}godtan {\H O}szint{\' e}tlen elvt{\'a}rs{\'a}t
>saj{\' a}t maga helyet besz{\'e}lni. {\" O}n segit{\' e}ge
>n{\' e}lk{\" u}l is k{\'e}pes baroms{\'a}got {\'i}rni, m{\' e}g
>akkor is, ha t{\" o}bb sz{\' o}val kevesebbet, mint {\H O}n.
>
>d.A.

_En_ oszintetlen!  Nezze a magat a tukorben! *faszkalap* szemermetlenseg. 
*Alles anderes als ...* sertes, *alkalmatlan tolmocs* is.  Nem, a *hibaid*
ellenem ertheto nekem.  Akarsz nem beszelgeteset, de egyezmenyet
meghodolasot is.Hogyha mukodsz a csintalan gyermeken, ez a kerdesed -- de
arrol te tudsz.

Kutyavasar egyszer volt a Budapesten.  Ez tul rovid az en eletem
kereskedelem veled serteseket.  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Aug 10 19:40:06 PDT 1996
Article: 56386 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!imci5!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Them lovely "chimneys" - kr2a.jpg (0/1)
Date: 10 Aug 1996 12:44:04 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uie8k$ibj@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uhi8c$gfa@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uhi8c$gfa@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt  Giwer) writes:

>
>	Since the chimneys are back in the news, here they are in all of
their
>irregular, huge, shadowless glory from the aerial view.
>
>
>

What is interesting here is that Mark Van Alstine did a beautiful
reconstruction of what one of these induction things would have looked
like in the cross section.  The dimensions are about 23 inches high and 27
inches across.  Furthermore, he alleges about 17 inches of dirt on the
roof of the Krema.  The problem I have here is twofold:  The aerial
photographs show no indication of the Krema roofs being covered with dirt.
 Second, neither a height of 23 inches or 6 inches (with the dirt) would
conceivably cast the kind of *shadow* we see in the picture.

Such dimensions also have nothing to do with the 3 x 4 foot crates of
roofing material in the by now famous photograph.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug 11 07:34:37 PDT 1996
Article: 56443 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!news.ironhorse.com!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Zyklon B: Kieselguhr & Gypsum
Date: 10 Aug 1996 12:44:20 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uie94$ibm@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
jamie@voyager.net (Jamie McCarthy) writes:

>.schneider@rz.uni-sb.de (Stefan Schneider) wrote:
>
>> Wenn Sie behaupten, dass es im Deutschen so etwas wie einen speziellen 
>> technischen Ausdruck gaebe, der der 'groessere Teil' heisst
>
>Der _groesste_ Teil.  The deniers, by repeating a lie often enough, have
>gotten you to repeat it as well.
>
>
>http://www1.ca.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?camps/auschwitz/cyanide/zyklon/images/p
eters-64.jpg
>
>

Why do you continue to neglect the fact that the 1933 text was written at
precisely the time when the diatomite component was being replaced with
gypsum to slow down the evaporation time?


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug 11 17:24:28 PDT 1996
Article: 56617 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mauving right along
Date: 11 Aug 1996 12:12:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 34
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ul0pl$ehk@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

>
>In article <4ue5te$ug@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com
>(Ehrlich606) wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> OK, since you put it like that then I am in agreement that we should
agree
>> to disagree.  Pressac's explanation is _possible_ but in my opinion not
>> _probable_.
>
>And _why_ is Pressac's theory, in your opinion, not "_probable_"? 
>
>I'm all ears. 

The simplest reason why I do not buy the explanation is that there is no
necessity for it.  Whether Pressac's concerns about throughput are
accurate or not, the fact remains that to cremate all of these people
would require an entire 24 hour period, and that is even assuming the
extremely generous cremation times calculated by the Sovet Special
Commission on Auschwitz (USSR-8).  Since no one would therefore be using a
Krema for at least a day after a mass gassing, because all of the previous
days victims would have to be cremated first (perhaps some dozens could
have been laid up in the Crematoria itself)  it follows that time-tabling
the gassing event with such precision makes no sense at all.  Under such
circumstances, a generous gassing time of even 30 minutes and _then_
ventilation for even another 20 minutes would hardly make a dent in the
time requirements before the LK could be used again.





From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug 11 17:24:29 PDT 1996
Article: 56628 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!chi-news.cic.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!in-news.erinet.com!imci5!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Except from Rudolf Report -- Zyklon B
Date: 11 Aug 1996 16:57:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ulhf1$kjf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uldoc$4g1g@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uldoc$4g1g@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>
>In message <4ug3nc$nqk@atlas.uniserve.com> - hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary
>Ostrov)Fri, 09 Aug 1996 19:27:58 GMT writes:
>:>
>:>In <320b42ba.1615344@news.pacificnet.net>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom
>:>moran aka the denier in search of a persona) wrote:
>
>[deleted]
>
>:>>	It is just another part of the Holocaust Achilles heal.
>:>
>:>The above is a prime example!  Here's a secret Li'l Tommy:  they are
>:>'looking sideways' primarily to be polite and to avoid letting you
>:>know that they are laughing at you.  Either that or they are totally
>:>disgusted at finding themselves in the presence of a hate-filled,
>:>ignorant, lying bigot such as you have proven yourself to be.
>
>By the way, Hilary, what is an Achilles HEAL?  :-)
>
>

An Achilles heal is achieved by sulking in a tent.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug 11 17:24:30 PDT 1996
Article: 56646 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ashholes was Re: "Ash Gets In Your Eyes" - Giwer's New Theme Song
Date: 11 Aug 1996 15:26:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 67
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ulc5p$ir0@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uicps$jqg@news.iglobal.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uicps$jqg@news.iglobal.net>, patchwgl@infinop.com (Gary)
writes:

>
>On 8/9/96 at 10:18, ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote: 
>
>[snip]
>>
>>Fact: Around 1989, leading historians of the Holocaust revised downward
>>their totals for Auschwitz Birkenau.  Fact:  Around 1990, the Polish
>>government reduced the claimed death toll for AB from 4 million to about
1
>>million.  Fact:  The source of the 4 million number is clearly USSR-8,
the
>>Soviet Special Commission on Auschwitz, which based its totals on
totally
>>arbitrary cremation statistics for the camp.  Fact: This document was
>>given judicial notice at Nuremberg.
>>
>>It seems obvious to me that the 4 million number was cooked in the first
>>place.  Since the cooking was done by the Soviet Union, the same source,
>>by the way, of a forged ID card for John Demjanjuk, it follows that
there
>>has indeed been deception on some matters concerning the Holocaust.
>
>
>Hilberg & Reitlinger (to mention two) never accepted the 4 million 
>figure.  Hilberg's figures have been posted several times before.  Need 
>I post them again, or will you "give judicial notice" of them, and 
>agree that your statement was in error?
>
>

There is no error.  You _are_ aware that the number was officially revised
downward at the end of the '80's, are you not?  And that Yehuda Bauer --
who is one of the authorities I had in mind -- announced his own downward
revision?  Tom Moran has reposted -- yet again -- his Behold the Lie riff:
you should consult that if you believe that even most conventionalists
have endorsed Reitlinger's or Hilberg's numbers over the years.

But thanks for bringing up both Reitlinger and Hilberg, because each in
their own way only buttresses my point.  In the first edition of his book,
Reitlinger (in 1954 or thereabouts) used very strong language ridiculing
not only the Soviet death counts but also survivor accounts which
exaggerated details.  Most of this was excised from the 1968 revision.  He
postulated a Jewish death toll at AB of about 750,000, and gave overall
death totals for the Final Solution (as he termed it) of between 2 and 4
million, based on his conclusion that Soviet pop stats were inaccurate. 
He was sharply criticized for this at the time.

Now, if you use him as an authority, then you should also endorse (a) that
the Soviets deliberately cooked the numbers, (b) that some survivors
engaged in exaggerations, (c) that the total death toll at AB was less
than a million, (d) that Soviet pop stats are inaccurate, and (e) that
less than six million died.  OTOH, the only point _I_ was making was (a). 
But since you brought Reitlinger up, why don't you explain away his other
points.

As to Hilberg, who is by far the most careful and honest of
conventionalist historians today (although he is not trained as a
historian), his estimates of 1 million for AB have gone with an estimate
of 5.1 million from all causes since his book first appeared.  He also
rejected the soap claims long ago in a footnote to his main text.  OTOH,
if someone on this board makes such claims, watch out.  In the meantime,
Hilberg's numbers are ignored.  What a surprise.

  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug 11 17:24:30 PDT 1996
Article: 56648 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Photographs from BELSEN Camp
Date: 11 Aug 1996 18:39:55 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 51
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ulnfr$n26@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt  Giwer) writes:

and then Dan Keren replied:

# If you have an actual, recorded death rate in the camps for
# that time frame then you are working from a list of recorded
# admissions and recorded deaths.  

The figures are from Pohl's letter to Himmler. I don't recall
he gives the exact reason for death, certainly not for
every individual.

It is not for me to explain why they died. It is for Nazi
apologists to explain how come there was a death rate of
10 percent per month (!!) during, for instance, July-September
1942, in the "work camps", while the death rate during the
whole war, for Allied POW's, was about 3 percent.

E606:  Once more you are omitting the fact that the death rate during this
period was seriously aggravated by the typhus epidemic of that summer. 
Moreover, you are not referencing the fact that this death rate elicited a
command from Himmler that it be lowered, not for humanitarian purposes,
mind you, but explicitly due to economic considerations.

E606:  As to why this affects the KZ population rather than Allied POW's,
my guess is that is has something to do with the admixture of East
Europeans (Soviets, Poles) who came from the region where typhus and
related diseases were chronic.  I wonder if there were any *carriers* like
Typhoid Mary in New York.  I recall that in WW1, when Russian POW's were
mixed with non-Russians, or even Russian troops were mixed with
non-Russians (as in France) disease breakouts would occur.  Yale might
want to contribute to this.

Now, that you have nothing more to say, you'll start demanding
to see an autopsy for each and every victim, and to demand
forensic evidence that it was really the Nazis who were
guilty for his/her death. But then again, one can also demand
an autopsy for everyone who died in Dresden, and a forensic
proof that it was indeed the alleged Allied bombs who killed
him/her. You're making about as much sense.

You're desperate. I can understand that. But do try not to
lose the little sanity which you may still have.

E606:  I for one don't think autopsy reports are relevant.  The real issue
that is going on here is the extent to which the mounds of corpses found
at Belsen at the end of the war were the result of deliberate starvation. 
The comments of Dr. Russell Barton continue to be ignored in this
discussion.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug 11 17:58:53 PDT 1996
Article: 56650 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Them lovely "chimneys" - kr2a.jpg (1/1)
Date: 11 Aug 1996 18:40:21 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ulngl$n2q@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Subject:	Re: Them lovely "chimneys" - kr2a.jpg (1/1)
From:	dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
Date:	Sat, 10 Aug 1996 20:20:43 GMT

Your point being?


-Danny Keren.

E606:  This is truly remarkable post.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug 11 21:47:04 PDT 1996
Article: 56710 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!netaxs.com!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!newsgate.duke.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: "Ash Gets In Your Eyes" - Giwer's New Theme Song
Date: 11 Aug 1996 18:40:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 66
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ulnhc$n33@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <320A67F2.408A@unb.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <320A67F2.408A@unb.ca>, Keith Morrison  writes:

>
>Ehrlich606 wrote:
>>
>> It seems to me you have a problem here, assuming that your total number
of
>> victims (1 Mill) is correct.  That is, you are ignoring the issue of
>> work-value for the people who arrived at Auschwitz.  We can safely
assume
>> that children younger than, say, 10, have absolutely no economic value
to
>> the Reich.  Therefore they are either killed immediately or something
else
>> happens to them.  By the same token, adults who are older than say, 60,
>> are not of any economic value either.  Again, they are either killed or
>> something else happens to them.  Bearing in mind the argument of
economic
>> value, then, if given 1 million victims, we should expect the age
groups
>> 10 and below, and 60 and above, to be heavily over-represented and the
age
>> group 10-60 to be heavily under-represented.
>
>So, like the total volume goes *down* right?

If the argument is accepted that economic considerations impinged on
killing all Jews, then the numbers _could_ go down;  but this would apply
to AB and not to the Aktion Reinhardt camps, which, IMHO, are a completely
different thing.

>
>Actually, that is a pointless statement.  I had considered doing just
that,
>but then reality set in.  The fact is most of those chosen for work died
>anyway and would be burned, so the *total* amount wouldn't really change
>much.

I don't think so pointless.  My argument is that an analysis of the death
registers would be heavily overrepresented with people in the 10-60 age
groups, since those would be the prisoners most like to be registered in
the camp, and have their deaths recorded.  Since about half of these
registers exist, it would be relatively easy to conduct a statistical
analysis of the demographic data contained in them.

Now again, the cca. 50% of the death books, with interpolation made for
the missing months, yields a death toll of about 170,000 (I think). 
Therefore we would have to conclude that the remaining unaccounted for
people (cca. 750,000) would have to belong mostly to the other population
cohorts, that is, small children and elderly.

The problem with that line of thinking is that expecting a more or less
normal distribution of age groups, that would imply that something on the
order of 2.5 million people were cycled through AB.  I don't know if that
was the case, and moreover, I don't think there was even distribution. 
Therefore the conventionalist position has always had adherents who insist
that large numbers of economically potentially valuable and healthly Jews
in the prime of life were gassed even though there were economic
requirements for slave labor throughout the Third Reich.  Although
documentation exists that Jews *sent to the East* were shot there,
directly conflicting labor requirements (although the documents attempt to
square the circle on this) the application of that policy within the KZ
system itself seems rather more ambiguous.





From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Aug 11 21:47:05 PDT 1996
Article: 56718 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!swrinde!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hitler praiser Reinhardt and Mahler?
Date: 11 Aug 1996 17:53:51 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 28
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ulkpf$m0a@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uh0jt$r4k@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uh0jt$r4k@grivel.une.edu.au>, 
writes:

>
>Alles andere als Ehrlich wrote:
>
>>I don't disagree, since such sentiments were common in evaluating
>the role
>>of Jews in the arts.  But at the same time he is still praising
>Mahler and
>>Reinhardt, which surprises me.   
>
>Anscheinend sind Sie am Ende Ihres Lateins wenn ich Sie
>auf Ungarisch antworte. Komisch, denn Sie haben sich 
>als Fachmann in Sachen Ungarisch aufgefuehrt.
>
>
Nye-e-e-t-s!  Poluchil tvoi ochen boshoi na vengerskii yazike pismo posle
reshenia moevo chto u menya nyet vremeni chtob otvetat' na tvoix
oskorblyonnix pisma.  Yesli ty dumash, chto ya ne mogy chitat' ili pisat'
na inostrannix yazikakh mne vsyo ravno.  Posle 13 goda, eto mne ne bolsho
problemoi.  K cozalenniu, ty dumash tak mnogo o sebe.

Prodolzhaiu perovodit', pisat', dumat'.  Prodolzhaesh-li-ty chevo?


  



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug 12 07:53:53 PDT 1996
Article: 56834 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:   Wieder mit dem "Ausrottung" Wahnsinn.
Date: 12 Aug 1996 07:51:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4un5sl$b3v@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ukulk$12g@arl-news-svc-4.compuserve.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4ukulk$12g@arl-news-svc-4.compuserve.com>,
100644.317@compuserve.com (Miloslav Bilik) writes:

>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>
>>>	Der Angeklagte Ley erklaerte:  'Wir schwoeren, wir werden
>>>	den Kampf nich aufgeben, bis der letzte Jude in Europa
>>>	ausgerottet und wirklich tot ist.  Es is nicht genug,
>>>	den Juden, den Feind der Menschheit, auzugliedern --
>>>	der Jude muss vernichtet werden.'
>>>
>
>>I translated this elsewhere.  Please note that after stating
*ausgerottet*
>>he goes on to say *is really/actually dead* which points to the
ambiguity
>>of the meaning.
>
>It was not "ausgerottet **oder** wirklich tot ist", but "ausgerottet
>**und** wirklich tot ist". It is unequivocal.
>
Which _means_ that ausgerottet by itself is _not_ unequivocal.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug 12 07:53:54 PDT 1996
Article: 56841 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!demos!news1.relcom.ru!EU.net!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Moran Can't Answer a Simple Question (Re: Lagace's testimony)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 06:06:40 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4umvng$9tf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uhi8c$gfa@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

<< Subject:	Moran Can't Answer a Simple Question (Re: Lagace's
testimony)
From:	dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
Date:	Sat, 10 Aug 1996 01:26:38 GMT

tm@pacificnet.net (tom moran) writes:

# The testimony given by the expert witness was that of
# only one man, 

"Expert"? This "expert" talks about corpses exploding and
igniting like a napalm bomb, burning the whole building
down (!!) - this is what he says. Some "expert" indeed.

E606: Lagace's testimony, which covered several bases, and the abstract of
which is at the Zuendel-site, did not say explode, that was apparently the
translation of Zuendel into the German.  What he said was that the
temperature of about 1600 degrees would be so hot that the introduction of
a new corpse would cause it to burst into flames.  The question is whether
or not that is true.  The rest are your rhetorical exaggerations.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug 12 07:53:55 PDT 1996
Article: 56848 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!gatech!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: the Zyklon B graph - zb.jpg (1/1)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 06:19:50 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 73
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4un0g6$a27@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Subject:	Re: the Zyklon B graph - zb.jpg (1/1)
From:	dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
Date:	Sat, 10 Aug 1996 19:34:03 GMT

ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:
# dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)

# OK, then list some functions that decrease faster which will
# still have 80% to 90% of the product remaining after two 
# hours.  I gather that is what he is getting at.

But Peters-Rasch say there was no residue after an hour
or at most two.

# What is the *much more accurate* numbers from the 
# Peters-Rasch paper? 

See above; plus other numbers about the density of the
HCN in the air. 

E606: I have consulted this, and if you could explain how I could download
the graphics for detailed consideration I would be happy to do so.  But
what I saw were indications about the behavior of Zyklon at below zero
temps over 48 and 24 hour periods.

# There are, as I recall, without alleged functions, graphs, 
# or specificity in the matter of outgassing.  

Better no graphs than graphs extrapolated from one (erroneous)
point of data.

## It also contradicts the information in Dr. Peter's book
## that the large part evaporates in half-an-hour.

# Yes, and that information was provided in 1933, 
# at _precisely_ the time when gypsum was being added to 
# the diatomite to slow down the evaporation rate.

We're talking about the Erco carrier, aren't we?

E606: No, Rudolf is clearly describing diagreiss (gypsum and diatomite)
and nothing else.

Moreover, the Peters-Rasch paper is from 1941, as noted
already. Your claim is irrelevant.

E606:  The only claim that _I_ am making is that the addition of gypsum to
the diatomite goes a long way to explaining the various discrepancies in
timings, including the writings of Peters.  I think that is a significant
fact, which should help make this discussion more orderly.

# Given your prior dismissals to the other posts along these
# lines (lies, irrelevant, contradicted by, etc.), I have to
# say that I consider the guarded concession above as 
# hysterically funny.

Sigh. I'm just trying to be accurate. The "revisionists" used
to claim it would take "days" for the HCN to outgas. Now
they dropped this, and the "debate" is about 37% in half-hour
vs. say, 70-80% in half hour. 

There's no "guarded concession" on my part, but for in your
hallucinations. All I'm saying is that even if the 37%
figure was correct, the Zyklon would still kill the people
fast enough. I don't suppose you disagree?

E606:  As a matter of fact, I _don't_ disagree.  The matter as far as I
can see is why are there so many different times floating around, and why
can't we arrive at a consensus on this?  Having obtained some of Rudolf's
text, I have posted this to help clarify the matter.  Indeed, neither
Rudolf nor Lueftl has ever claimed that 10 minutes was not a sufficient
time for a sufficient outgassing to kill everyone.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug 12 13:05:36 PDT 1996
Article: 56855 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ashholes was Re: "Ash Gets In Your Eyes" - Giwer's New Theme Song
Date: 12 Aug 1996 08:47:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 21
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4un95g$bvv@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uiqu0$374@atlas.uniserve.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uiqu0$374@atlas.uniserve.com>, hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary
Ostrov) writes:

>>Hilberg & Reitlinger (to mention two) never accepted the 4 million 
>>figure.  Hilberg's figures have been posted several times before.  Need 
>>I post them again, or will you "give judicial notice" of them, and 
>>agree that your statement was in error?
>
>You want Ehrlich to acknowledge that he has erred?!  Surely you jest,
>Gary!  The man does not seem to know how - although we have certainly
>seen him cobble many convoluted pontifications and/or self-righteously
>indignant protestations, in order to avoid retraction and apology. 
>
>His favourite response, though, is a refrain from the Sounds of
>Silence.  He claims to have "impressive intellect and knowledge" -
>perhaps he does, but it seems that he keeps it well-hidden from the
>readers of this newsgroup.
>
>

Wow.  That's the nicest thing you've said to me in months.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug 12 13:05:36 PDT 1996
Article: 56861 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ashholes was Re: "Ash Gets In Your Eyes" - Giwer's New Theme Song
Date: 12 Aug 1996 05:59:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 91
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4umvaa$9nq@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uhg8i$gfa@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uhg8i$gfa@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt  Giwer) writes:

>
>On Fri, 09 Aug 1996 18:36:20 GMT, hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary Ostrov)
>wrote:
>
>>In <4ufhbb$cm7@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
>>wrote:
>
>>[irrelevant troll reference snipped]
>
>>>>
>>>>On 8 Aug 1996 14:09:03 GMT, anny@ix.netcom.com(Annie Alpert) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In <4u9jf5$7ar@newsbf02.news.aol.com> ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
>>>>>writes: 
>>>>>previous discussion on the amount of ash snipped
>>>>
>>>>>>>Wow.  No problem to get rid of that ash at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>  Exactly true, Mr. E:
>>>>
>>>>>ASHES
>>>>>  What became of the ashes of the victims at Auschwitz and
>>>>>  other extermination camps that cremated the bodies.  Of
>>>>>  course this is a disrespectful and nasty question, since it
>>>>>  suggests that there is some deception taking place, but let's
>>>>>  consider it anyway. 
>
>>>This is where your problem begins.  You believe that to ask questions
>
>>No, Ehrlich, this is where _your_ problem begins.  You have no
>>interest in discussion of facts, rather your interest - like that of
>>all deniers/distorters  - is simply in finding hooks to which you can
>>append another recycled denier "argument."
>
>>[snip ehrlichian pontifications]
>
>>>Fact: Around 1989, leading historians of the Holocaust revised downward
>>>their totals for Auschwitz Birkenau.  Fact:  Around 1990, the Polish
>>>government reduced the claimed death toll for AB from 4 million to
about 1
>>>million.  Fact:  The source of the 4 million number is clearly USSR-8,
the
>>>Soviet Special Commission on Auschwitz, which based its totals on
totally
>>>arbitrary cremation statistics for the camp.  Fact: This document was
>>>given judicial notice at Nuremberg.
>
>>And, surprise, surprise, here it is:  Yet another recycled denier
>>"argument".  It has been presented and refuted countless times before.
>>So many times, in fact, that you can find a web page discussing "The
>>Auschwitz Gambit: The Four Million Variant":
>
>>http://www.nizkor.org/features/denial-of-science/4-million-1.html
>
>>Do tell us again, Ehrlich, about your "impressive intellect and
>>knowledge."  Then perhaps you will address the discussion you snipped
>>(i.e. the substance) of Ms. Alpert's post.
>
>	The "no historian" dodge again?  The reason that is a safe dodge
is
>that there are so few historians (one?  two?) in the field that it is
>hardly of interest.  
>
>
What I find interesting about this is that the original point is not
addressed at all.  The so-called 4 million gambit refers to the argument,
that, since the numbers for Auschwitz were lowered by about 3 million at
the end of the 1980's by a consensus of experts in the field, that means
that 3 million less Jews were gassed or died or whatever.

But I made it very clear that that is not the argument I am making.  The
argument that I _am_ making is that the 4 million claim is clearly rooted
in Soviet propaganda, and, indeed, I believe Nizkor FAQ #31 (sic! --
whichever one Moran keeps referring to) says almost the same thing. 
Indeed, the FAQ is even more explicit than I am -- without foundation, I
might add -- about the _motivations_ of the Soviets who cooked the
numbers.

Now if we accept the argument of the FAQ -- which is in fact what I am
saying -- then it follows that there has been some deception going on, or
more charitably, some inaccuracy that has been allowed to persist for a
long time for whatever reasons.








From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug 12 13:05:37 PDT 1996
Article: 56866 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Death in Mauthausen
Date: 12 Aug 1996 08:56:13 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4un9ld$c3p@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Subject:	Re: Death in Mauthausen
From:	dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
Date:	Sun, 11 Aug 1996 22:48:56 GMT

Alexander Baron  writes:

# page 54: in the 1950s and 60s there was "a regrettable 
# confusion...which often resulted in the shower room [at
# Maidanek] being presented as a gas chamber..."

Possible, although I wouldn't take Pressac as a 100 percent
accurate source. As I've said many times in the past, the
main value of his work is the large collection of documents
in it.

And if someone made such a mistake, so what?

E606:  The above concession about Pressac's credibility is duly noted.
  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug 12 14:38:40 PDT 1996
Article: 56916 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!inter2.interstice.com!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!news.abs.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Them lovely "chimneys" - kr2a.jpg (0/1)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 06:13:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 64
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4un03j$9vn@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uhi8c$gfa@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

<< Subject:	Re: Them lovely "chimneys" - kr2a.jpg (0/1)
From:	dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
Date:	Sat, 10 Aug 1996 22:11:12 GMT

ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:

# The problem I have here is twofold:  The aerial
@ photographs show no indication of the Krema roofs 
# being covered with dirt.

The photograph - at least the copy we have - is not
of high enough quality to determine this. My feeling
is that some kind of contrast stretching was applied
to it (histogram equalization, maybe).

E606: Now I do not understand you.  There are _several_ aerial photographs
of Auschwitz in the summer of 1944.  All of these show the Kremas as
clearly outlined.

# Second, neither a height of 23 inches or 6 inches 
# (with the dirt) would conceivably cast the kind of 
# *shadow* we see in the picture.

There is no shadow. It's just a dark region, which looks
larger than it really was, because of the strong blurring.
One can easily verify this by examining the gray levels
in a cross-section of the region. I tried to explain this
to Giwer, but it is hopeless. His estimate of their
size is off by a factor of about 3, which, well, is not
too bad for him.

E606:  I have only studied in detail one of the several photographs.  But
the argument for strong blurring doesn't explain why the shadow of the
chimney is quite distinct.  I have also read -- but have not independently
confirmed -- that the black shapes on the roof are of exactly the same
shape in two aerial photographs, even though they were taken at different
times of day.  I don't know what that means, but the shapes in question
are certainly not the dimensions I just described.

The dark region is most probably due to a cover - tarpaulin,
perhaps - on the covers of the chimneys. 

E606:  That was among my first reactions.  But the *black* values would be
expected to show some contrast in that case and I recall none.

# Such dimensions also have nothing to do with the 3 x 4 
# foot crates of roofing material in the by now famous 
# photograph.

You have no idea and no proof whatsoever that they are
crates of roofing material. You're simply inventing this.

E606:  My claim that the three things on the roof are crates is just as
substantiated as the argument as they are chimneys.  I would be the first
to grant that the photograph in question neither proves nor disproves
homicidal gassings.  That's not the point.  The point is the reliance on
less than best evidence on the one hand, and strained interpretation on
the other.

Let me offer an advice: don't try to comment on anything
technical. This seems to be way out of your element.

E606:  The third point is that you do not seem able to conduct an argument
without personal attacks.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug 12 20:56:34 PDT 1996
Article: 56961 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!news.ironhorse.com!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ashholes was Re: "Ash Gets In Your Eyes" - Giwer's New Theme Song
Date: 12 Aug 1996 12:01:54 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 108
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4unkhi$fsf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ull2v$4vf@news.enter.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4ull2v$4vf@news.enter.net>, yawen@enter.net (Yale F. Edeiken)
writes:

>
>>   ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:
>>
>>  >
>>  
>>  There is no error.  You _are_ aware that the number was officially
revised
>>  downward at the end of the '80's, are you not? 
>
>	No.  The number posted by the Auschwitz Musuem -- which did not 
>mention Jews -- was revised.  This was done after a long period of
protest
>*by 
>Jewish groups.*  An account of the protests can befound in Dershowitz's
book 
>"Chutzpah."
>
>	If you statement that a placque placed by the Polish government is

>"official" then you have another problem.  The Auschwitz Museum never 
>mentioned that Jews were murdered at Auschwitz.

Well, I don't know who else I could possibly reference as *official* if
not the Polish government.  Perhaps the IMT, which gave judicial notice to
a Soviet document claiming at least4 million dead at Auschwitz.

>
>> And that Yehuda Bauer --
>>  who is one of the authorities I had in mind -- announced his own
downward
>>  revision?  Tom Moran has reposted -- yet again -- his Behold the Lie
>
>	Which contains numerous lies.  Additionally l'il tommy presented
neither 
>a direct quote or citation of source.  Moreover no indication that Bauer
--
>who is 
>known for conservative extimates -- ever published a higher number. 
There
>was, 
>therefore, no downward revision.

But there was. Yehuda Bauer wrote in 1982:

Between April 1942 and November 1944, in addition to the Soviet
POWs, the gas extinguished the lives of probably up to 2,000 gypsies (in
1944), a few hundred more Soviet POWs, and between 1,500,000 and 3,500,000
Jews

 (A History of the Holocaust, New York, Franklin Watts, 1982, p. 215). 

Lucy Dawidowicz claimed 2 million, from the context I assume she is
referring to Jews only. 

(The War against the Jews / 1933-1945, New York, Holt, 1975, pp. 149-149).


Meanwhile, Pressac, according to the 1994 translation of his Auschwitz
book into German, is now quoting between 630,000 to 710,000 total for AB,
of which something under half a million were gassed.
>
>>  you should consult that if you believe that even most conventionalists
>>  have endorsed Reitlinger's or Hilberg's numbers over the years.
>
>	The most widely read book on the Third Reich, Shirer's "Rise and
Fall 
>of the Third Reich" published in 1960 uses the lower figure citing
>Reitlinger.  In 
>fact, as l'il tommy's post showed there are no authroties on the olocaust
>writing 
>after 1950 who do not accept the number now being used.  He would have
citred
>
>them, had they done so.  Instead he chose to misquote out of context only
one
>
>source currently in print.  
>
>	The point remains the same.  You, l'il tommy, and Giwer cannot
point to 
>a single modern source that agrees with you contention.  A look at the
>historical 
>record further shows that rather than an agreement with the position of
the 
>Auschwitz placque, historians of the Holocaust were constantly objecting
to
>it.
>
>	--YFE	

Sorry, the two quotes above at least throw your contention in doubt.  But
the point here is that the 4 million number is phony, that it was
demonstrably a Soviet creation (USSR-8 at the IMT), and that according to
conventionalist sources was deliberately inflated.  OK -- now this is a
case of deliberate deception that impinges on the Holocaust (_especially_
if we take the non-Jewish victims into account).  That was my point.

Now since there was one case, and since there were others (Majdanek,
Katyn, Demjanjuk, etc.) it follows that there could be others.  There is
nothing wrong with correcting the historical record, and you will note
that none of this either points to a *giant Zionist plot* anymore than it
undermines the reality of Holocaust.


    


From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 13 08:05:09 PDT 1996
Article: 56996 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: The Saugervermoegens of Zyklon Carriers
Date: 12 Aug 1996 19:20:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 40
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uoe8k$r2c@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


The following is from Peters, bottom of page 60, top of page 61, available
at the Nizkor site.  You can check my translation against that.

Particular difficulties are involved with the choice of material 
for their absorbency (Aufsaugung).  In this regard, many useless or only
slightly useful experiments were made. .... [p. 61] The patented process
of using felt appears practically over, since felt, in spite of its good
sucking ability (Saugervermoegens) remains too voluminous and and
therefore is inclined to give off part of the prussic acid with a light
squeeze or blow.  Also the much more versatile (mehrfach empfohlene)
Silica gel, in its normal trade form, is not suitable as a medium for
absorbing prussic acid because it forms a sticky paste with it (mit
Blausauere eine kittartige Paste bildet).  Recently, Half coke (Halbkoks)
was put forth as a carrier material, but the sucking ability
(Saugfahigkeit) of this material is much too strong....

Therefore there are now three porous materials, namely roasted kieselguhr
in kernel form (Diagreiss), a special gypsum product prepared in cube form
(Erco), and a particularly absorbent and chemically faultless wood product
in disc form.  These three products combine good absorbency, strong
structure, low alkalinity, and and low water retention (Wassergehalt).


A FEW OBSERVATIONS:

1)  I apologize for thinking that *Saugervermoegens* is a funny word.

2)  Silica gel forms a paste with prussic acid.  How could it have been
used?

3)  Erco is defined as a gypsum product.  That corresponds to the color
picture of Zyklon at Nizkor, by the way.  But Rudolf says that gypsum has
a slower release time that straight *diagreiss*.  Someone else will have
to figure it out.

4)  I am even more inclined to think that witnesses who saw blue Zyklon
were psychologically suggested by the German (cognate in Yiddish) name for
*prussic acid* = *Blau sauere* = *Blue Acid*



From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 13 08:05:09 PDT 1996
Article: 57033 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mauving right along
Date: 12 Aug 1996 16:00:50 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 73
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uo2hi$lpl@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4unqod$rsa@atlas.uniserve.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4unqod$rsa@atlas.uniserve.com>, hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary
Ostrov) writes:

>
>In <4ul0pl$ehk@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
>wrote:
>
>>In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
>>(Mark Van Alstine) writes:
>
>>>
>>>In article <4ue5te$ug@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com
>>>(Ehrlich606) wrote:
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>> OK, since you put it like that then I am in agreement that we should
>>agree
>>>> to disagree.  Pressac's explanation is _possible_ but in my opinion
not
>>>> _probable_.
>>>
>>>And _why_ is Pressac's theory, in your opinion, not "_probable_"? 
>>>
>>>I'm all ears. 
>
>>The simplest reason why I do not buy the explanation is that there is no
>>necessity for it.  [...]
>
>Wow!  Such "impressive intellect and knowledge."  Very convincing
>Ehrlich.  There was "no necessity" for the Nazis to murder 12 million
>innocent people (of whom approximately 6 million were Jewish) either.
>Using your logic, I suppose any explanation of these murders was
>"_possible_ but in [your] opinion not _probable_."
>
>Tell us again how you are "trying to undercut deniers", Ehrlich.
>
>

Yeah, when I wrote that I was under the misapprehension that the
revisionist/denier position was potentially dangerous if and only if it
was linked to race hatred.  But I have to be honest and say that I don't
think there are any regulars in this NG who are into race hatred, or, for
that matter, racial anti-semitism, although there are some who frequently
make anti-semitic remarks, my guess is just for trolling purposes.  And I
might add it certainly seems to work.  But then, I further surmise that a
lot of the folks who are into abusing people for making anti-semitic
statements are people who come here specifically for that purpose, i.e.,
fighting hate.

I am convinced that *revision* is something that is ongoing and is going
to happen anyway, and if we can't look calmly at ideas and evidence in
this newsgroup, and try to discuss things in a positive manner, then other
people, and I mean people who _do_ hate, will seize the agenda and that
will not be good.

I am also convinced that the Holocaust happened, but that there are lots
of things to look at and clarify, and I for one am not worried about
suspending judgment about this thing or that thing.  Now what happened
here was that Mark made a claim, I questioned the proof of the claim, he
granted that it was not proof, and asked why I didn't accept the plausible
explanation as proof, and I told him why.  I thought we had a pretty
decent exchange going, not to say that it hasn't reached its end.

I am here to learn and to share.  This topic is extremely controversial
and polarized, and so that makes the learning and sharing experience much
more hectic than it would be if -- say -- we were discussing postage
stamps.  But because I am basically here to learn and to share, I am not
interested in long drawn out hassles about minor points nor am I
interested in abusing other people here.  And so I try to conduct myself
accordingly.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 13 08:05:10 PDT 1996
Article: 57062 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!netaxs.com!tezcat.com!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Peters on Outgassing, 1941 Version
Date: 12 Aug 1996 19:24:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 44
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uoefs$r4r@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


Discussion has been going on about the evaporation of Zyklon at low
temperatures according to a 1941 article Peters published.  Without going
into a lot of detail, one should bear in mind that Peters’ main point was
that Zyklon B could still kill bedbugs at temperatures up to 10 degrees
below zero Centigrade.  The entire article is at Nizkor.

The crucial text reads as follows:  *In allen Faellen is der wesentlichste
Teil der Gasentwicklung nach einer order hoechstens nach zwei Stunden
vollzogen.  (Eine Kontrolle der Rueckstaende zu den entsprechenden Zeiten
bestaetigte deren restlose Entgasung.)  Die Verdunstung der Blausauere war also durch die niedrige
Temperatur nicht erheblich verlangsamt worden.*

Translating:  *In all cases, the most substantial part of the gas is
developed after one or at most two hours.  (A control of the residual
confirmed its complete outgassing after the corresponding times.)  _The
evaporation of prussic acid was therefore not seriously retarded at low
temperatures._*

Now, I take these three sentences to be frustratingly contradictory at
first glance.  The first sentence says the most substantial part
(*wesentlichste* would be more literally *the most essential*) but it does
not say *complete.*  But the second sentence implies that after one or two
hours the outgassing is completed.  Here again, the wording is *deren
restlose Entgasung* i.e., of its complete outgassing, but this doesn’t
correspond with page 65 of Peters in 1933, where he says *Alle
Traegermaterialen haben die Eigenschaft gemeinsam, dass die Blausaeure
restlos aus ihnen abdampft ....* i.e., All the carrier materials have this
quality in common, that the prussic acid is completely evaporated from
them.*  Nor does it correspond to the following sentence of the present
text, where he speaks of the evaporation being not *seriously* retarded,
instead of *not at all* retarded. (Again, the word *erheblich* (cf. to
heave, heavily) can also mean *considerably* or *gravely*; for the concept
of incosiderable or insignificant you would normally use a word like
*bedeutsamlos* which literally is *meaningless*.

>From  the above I draw the conclusion that, at low temperatures, the
outgassing process comes to an end, but that that is not identical to a
complete evaporation of the HCN.   In other words, small amounts of HCN
remain locked into the carrier substance due to the low temperatures.

Well, someone wanted to know.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 13 08:05:11 PDT 1996
Article: 57063 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Germar Rudolf Responds on Zyklon Outgassing
Date: 12 Aug 1996 06:25:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 33
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4un0r2$a46@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ugtd1$1qi@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Subject:	Re: Germar Rudolf Responds on Zyklon Outgassing
From:	dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
Date:	Sat, 10 Aug 1996 19:38:51 GMT

ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:

# No one disputes that there are _holes_ the fact is that
# they are not in the locations where they could conceivably 
# be induction holes, according to both of your photographs.  

I have not seen any proof for this. I know this is what
"revisionists" claim, but I have not seen any proof for 
that. "Revisionists" also claim that Bischoff ordered
corpses stored in a hot room, "so they will not freeze".

E606:  Why do you insist on changing the subject especially when I don't
even know what you are referring to?

My experience, after 5 years, is that "revisionists" are
not only dumb, but pathological liars as well. I do not
accept *anything* a "revisionist" says, before checking it.

E606:  OK, then be skeptical of what they say, but, at the same time, have
a secure grounding before attacking people.  Rudolf and Caecaa have both
been to the location, and say the holes aren't there.  OK, either the
holes are there or they are not there.  It seems to me the only way we can
check is to go and see for ourselves. In the meantime, I have to say that
I am inclined to think that they would be telling the truth, insofar as
such a fact can be so demonstrably refuted.  But, OK, maybe the holes
really are there, and they just could not *see* them.  I can't believe it
would be that difficult to obtain a current photo showing the holes and
their relationship to the overall roof.     



From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 13 08:05:12 PDT 1996
Article: 57072 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ashholes was Re: "Ash Gets In Your Eyes" - Giwer's New Theme Song
Date: 12 Aug 1996 20:06:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 52
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uoguf$sbn@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uo5od$23r6@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uo5od$23r6@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>
>In message <4ulc5p$ir0@newsbf02.news.aol.com> - ehrlich606@aol.com
>(Ehrlich606)11 Aug 1996 15:26:49 -0400 writes:
>:>
>
>[deleted]
>
>:>As to Hilberg, who is by far the most careful and honest of
>:>conventionalist historians today (although he is not trained as a
>:>historian), his estimates of 1 million for AB have gone with an
estimate
>:>of 5.1 million from all causes since his book first appeared.  He also
>:>rejected the soap claims long ago in a footnote to his main text. 
OTOH,
>:>if someone on this board makes such claims, watch out.  In the
meantime,
>:>Hilberg's numbers are ignored.  What a surprise.
>
>Now, now Mr. Ehrlich, could you tell me what discipline Thucydides was
>trained
>in?  :-)
>
>Hilberg's figures are not ignored, at least not my most rational people.
>
>But, just for the fun of it, let's say that the estimates are wrong and
the
>real number killed was only 3.5 million.  Does that mitigate the crime at
>all?
>
>
>

Well, it doesn't mitigate the crime _to me_, but I have no problem with
the six million figure because I think that the conditions of the war,
epidemics, maltreatment or at minimum not generous treatment, loss of a
will to live after losing all one owns, plus one's family, and being
reduced to a number, war casualties, reprisal casualties, partisan
casualties, mass killing casualties, and last but not least, Soviet
deportations both before June 21, 1941 and for some years after, could
easily amount to about six million.  

I think that overstressing the *death factory* imagery does a disservice
to a very very complicated process.  I also think that the Final Solution
was born with one leg in reality and one leg in wartime propaganda.  And I
don't think we're done sorting that out.  That and 59 cents gets me a cup
of coffee.





From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 13 08:05:12 PDT 1996
Article: 57089 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.serv.net!news.ac.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hitler praiser Reinhardt and Mahler?
Date: 12 Aug 1996 18:56:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 26
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uocq2$q61@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uabd7$dag@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uabd7$dag@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>, Nele Abels
 writes:

>
>"Ausfuehrung" and also "Auffuehrung" describe exactly the meaning you 
>laid out in your last post - that what a conductor does, for example. 
>"Reproduktion" has an entirely different meaning in German, and also in 
>English, referring to the Oxford Concise Dictionary and to the Cobild 
>Collins Dictionary. Your translation of "execution" (this is the English 
>word for "Ausfuehrung") for "Reproduktion" is wrong. There is no need for

>discussion here. Please don't lecture me on my native language.
>
>[..]
>
>>I wish I could easily locate a source praising Furtwangler's productive
>>art so that you could see that such descriptions are not by necessity
>>pejorative.  In my dictionary *reproduktion* = *reproduction*.  But you
>>are implying here that Hitler does not consider Mahler or Reinhardt 
>>great or original.  OK.
>
>Unfortunately, I do not know who Furtwangler was. But his comments are 
>irrelevant for this source anyway. 

OK, so I won't lecture you about your native culture, either.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 13 17:25:14 PDT 1996
Article: 57146 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust extermination claims
Date: 13 Aug 1996 10:11:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 100
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uq2dn$h5a@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
jamie@voyager.net (Jamie McCarthy) writes:

First of all, I want to thank Jamie for summarizing some of Pressac's
arguments.  If Pressac's book was more widely distributed then it wouldn't
be necessary to get these arguments second hand.

>And indeed, Pressac demonstrates in his "complementary proof" (ibid),
>with drawing 2197 and photographs he has taken from inside the gas
>chamber as it stands today, that the showerheads were dummies.
>
>He even goes so far as to calculate the number of showerheads which
>would have been required for Leichenkeller 1, based on average areas
>covered by showerheads in six other buildings at Auschwitz.  By his
>calculations, one would expect that 115 showerheads would be required
>per Leichenkeller (ibid), but only 14 were planned and installed.
>Pressac spares no effort to find many corroborations of his proof.

This is an instance of a place where I have a problem with Pressac's
reasoning.  The Leichenkeller is about 100 feet by 25 feet.  I can
visualize this.  And, I can visualize a communal shower in such a space,
for which 14 shower heads would be sufficient.  Such is my experience with
communal showers, anyway.  But _115_ showerheads?  Not in any communal
shower I have ever seen, either in the service or in school.  Not to
mention the water pressure to operate such an extravaganza, or the water
wastage that would result.  So, without questioning Pressac's conclusion,
I consider this a weak criminal trace.

>
>I should point out that revisionists, up until the publication of
>Pressac's work, considered the Leichenkeller 1 to be morgues, Leuchter
>of course leading the way.  Pressac demolished that argument with his
>numerous demonstrations that the room was for gassing.  In response,
>revisionists like Mattogno have started arguing that the room was for
>_delousing_ gassing (never mind that they contradict other
>revisionists, principally Leuchter).  But Pressac _also_ anticipated
>_that_ argument and eliminated it as well.

Leuchter, Krakow, and Rudolf have all found small traces of HCN in the
walls.  That means either cyanide gas that is not allowed to linger
(convention), fumigated once (Leuchter), or null values (Rudolf).  From
what I understand, Mattogno has found documentation in Moscow stating that
the room was marked off as *Entlauesungskammer* i.e., delousing chamber,
but this is supposed to mean in the showering sense.  Van Pelt has a photo
of a document in his latest book that claims that 19 (or some similar
number) gas chambers were designed for the Auschwitz.  I look at the
drawing, I see what look to be cubicles (i.e., like shower cubicles) and
they are marked on the drawing *Entlauesungskammern*.

Query:  were showers ever referred to as *delousing chambers* at any
location? 
Is it possible to combine HCN in any concentration with water for
delousing purposes?  I am open here.

>
>His "supplementary proof" is that an inventory of Leichenkeller 1 of
>Krema II contained 4 wire mesh introduction devices and 4 wooden covers
>(pp. 429-430).  These could only be used to exterminate human beings.
>As he points out, we have everything but signed affidavits to the
>murders themselves:  "It would be too much to expect the SS to have
>formally written that Zyclon-B was poured into these introduction
>devices." (p. 430)

Again, the only problem I have with these devices is that while they may
be listed on the inventory I have never seen one of things and apparently
neither has anyone else.

>
>And Pressac has other proofs as well.  He cites documents which refer to
>Leichenkeller 2, the room next to Leichenkeller 1, as an "undressing
>room" (pp. 432-434, 438).  Why would the Nazis need a room where a
>thousand or more people could undress simultaneously, unless, of
>course, they were about to be killed in the adjoining room?  There's an
>order for an urgently-needed peephole with a double layer of 8 mm thick
>glass.  (p. 434)  Why would two layers of third-of-an-inch-thick glass
>be required for the peephole in a morgue?

The problem you have with this is that the undressing room is about 175
feet by 25 feet.  I have seen undressing rooms for bathers at swimming
pools that are crowded for undressing purposes with just a couple hundred
people inside.  Yet, there is this insistence on a thousand, two thousand,
three thousand ....


>
>In his "39 criminal traces" section, he doesn't even mention the
>architectural modifications to the Krema, which also establish clearly
>that the rooms were not morgues.  (pp. 267-331)

such as?

  Nor does he mention
>the photographs which corroborate the existence of the wire mesh
>introduction devices and their "little chimneys" (pp. 340-342).  Again,
>this is because these are merely _corroborating_ evidence, not _proof_,
>by Pressac's phenomenally strict standards.
>

Again, what photos do you mean, unless it is the crate photograph or the
aerial photos.  I am listening to you here.  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug 14 08:50:32 PDT 1996
Article: 57217 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Revisionist Breakthrough on "Vergasungskeller" from Arthur Butz
Date: 13 Aug 1996 21:29:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ura57$3l4@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uovup$hgf@news.enter.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uovup$hgf@news.enter.net>, yawen@enter.net (Yale F. Edeiken)
writes:

>
>>   dvdthomas@aol.com (DvdThomas) writes:
>>  Rich Graves writes:
>  
>>  >Butz doesn't attempt to explain why the only place you find these
>>  >gas shelters is in concentration camps.
>  
>>  What makes you think that?
>
>	The fact that he makes no mention of them being elsewhere.
>
>

My take on this is that Butz is setting off a trial balloon.  Don't be
surprised if supplementary documentary indications in support of his
thesis emerges over the next year or so.  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug 14 08:50:33 PDT 1996
Article: 57223 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!netaxs.com!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:   Wieder mit dem "Ausrottung" Wahnsinn.
Date: 13 Aug 1996 21:39:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 107
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4urant$3un@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4un732$m7d@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4un732$m7d@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>,
abels@stud-mailer.uni-marburg.de (Nele Abels) writes:

>
>Obviously "Ausrottung aller Nichtjuden" means "Killing of all non-Jews"
here.
>So why not "extermination"?

Because I am a native English speaker. In English, *extermination* is only
heard with regard to the killing off of vermin in one's house or backyard.
 I have never heard the word in any other sense (except of course, in
translations of Himmler).  One never even hears about the *extermination*
of American Indians, unless someone is trying to make a bad polical
argument, even though in some places that is more or less what happened.  

The word conjures up a specific imagery of spraying with deadly
insecticides.  Although many will argue that that was what Holocaust
_was_, I don't think it is correct to translate that _one word_ as
*exterminate* at the beginning of the famous passage in Himmler's speech.

>
>[...]
>>>Except, of course, that it has not altered over time (as I pointed out
>>>above), and the above three quotations from Nazi sources show that they
>>>were using the word in its usual sense.
>
>>But not as *extermination*
>
>Mr. Ehrlich's knowledge of the German language does not reach far enough
to
>distinguish between the German words for "sometimes" and "often". By no
means
>is he qualified to make a judgment like this.

If I make a mistake with your language, so be it.  I do not bother you
when your English is less than perfect.  But here we are not talking about
the meaning of *ausrotten*, we are talking about the meaning of
*extermination.*  As you say, *please do not lecture me on my native
language.*

>[...]
>>>How exactly do you propose to annihilate the Jewish People as an entity
>>>without killing them?
>
>>Richard, it can be done two ways: by physical destruction (which was
>>incomplete) or by destruction of the Jewish community (much more
>>complete).  Query:  Would you grant that the Polish Nation was being
>>annihilated from the time of the partitions to 1918, by persecution of
>>Catholic elements and the gradual Germanization and Russification of all
>>institutions?  I would.  And I am not denying that Himmler -- in the
next
>>paragraph of this speech -- is explicitly talking about killing.  What I
>>object to is the use of the word *extermination.*
>
>Massive spreading of fog to distort the point that *no* native speaker of
>German,
>not now, not then, would translate the phrase "alle Juden werden
ausgerottet"
>in
>another way than "all Jews are killed".

Except for Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler, according to David Irving,
whose remarks you ignored by a massive spreading of fog, the kind that
used to be common in Breslau, but which now only happens in Wroclaw.  

>
>[...]
>>OK.  I just looked in the 1995 Langenscheidt's and it says:  pull up
>>(weeds), wipe out, stamp out (figuratives), for the noun, Die
Ausrottung,
>>it says, wiping out, and then figurative, genocide.  Nothing about
>>*extermination* there.
>
>Well, well. "The textfile was killed." Therefore "The Jews were killed"
means
>"The Jews were evacuated to another place", does it? Read a book about
>the metaphoric use of language.

I will read a book about the metaphorical use of language when you find
out who Furtwangler was.  In fact, why don't you find out who his father
was, first.  

>
>[..]
>>Yes, and the use of the English Latinism *exterminate* is an
inappropriate
>>word to use in translation.
>
>Here I have to agree. In this context, I would translate "ausrotten" as
"to
>slaughter".

Thank you.  *Slaughter* is preferable, because it is not *exterminate*. 
On the other hand, *slaughter* is not very good, because it is like
*schlacht* and *schlagen* which implies a battle or a beating. 
*annihilation*, *destruction*, *wiping out*, even *killing* are better.

But the point is that Himmler speaks in two paragraphs.  In the first one,
he says that *Ausrottung* is under way.  In the second, he describes it as
killing.  Therefore, *ausrotten* cannot mean *killing*, it must mean some
euphemism for that.  Perhaps you might consult a book on the metaphorical
use of language?


>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug 14 08:50:33 PDT 1996
Article: 57229 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!netaxs.com!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!psinntp!psinntp!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Saugervermoegens of Zyklon Carriers
Date: 13 Aug 1996 22:14:53 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 55
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4urcqt$562@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

>
>Furthermore, it also seems odd that, in NI-9912, diagreiss was attributed
>to be "a reddish brown granular mass" while Erco was "small blue cubes." 
>Silica, whether diatomaceous earth or silica gel (non-indicating), is
>generally whitish to grayish in color. What could have been added to
>diagreiss to give it a "reddish brown" color? What could have been added
>to Erco to give it its blue color? 
>
>

the text for the diagreiss is *gebrannte kieselgur in koerniger Form*, and
I just read that off as *roasted kielseguhr in kernel form*, because
*burnt* for *gebrannt* makes no sense to me, and that in turn determined
my translation of *koerniger* as *kernel* rather than *granular* since the
root with *corn* is the same.  Maybe this is where the text started
reminding me of popcorn rather than sex.

As to the bluish Erco, I don't have any idea, except I agree with you
about the whitish grayish color, and don't know where the blue would come
from, unless, again, it was a psychological suggestion, or, as you say, an
indicator.  Also, a photograph of the carrier substances in the same
source indicates that diagreiss is rather dark.
>
>> But Rudolf says that gypsum has a slower release time that straight
>*diagreiss*.  Someone else will have to figure it out.
>
>Rudolf says...? BZZT! Sorry, wrong answer. Rudolf also lies. 

So, if I catch him in a lie, I will let you know.  Except that you have me
killfiled, or, as Nele would put it, *ausgerottet.*  :)

>
>> 4)  I am even more inclined to think that witnesses who saw blue Zyklon
>> were psychologically suggested by the German (cognate in Yiddish) name
for
>> *prussic acid* = *Blau sauere* = *Blue Acid*
>
>Indeed. You have shown yourself inclined to think many things. Quite a
few
>of those things you "think" without much thought, apparantly. Not to
>mention you keep changing what you "think" as the situation suits you.
You
>also tend to leave your "thoughts" twisting in the wind. A stellar
>argument, IMHO, for your penchant to play (revel in?) the role of a
denier
>bellwether.... 
>
Hey, I thought I made a legitimate insight here.  As for being a denier
bellwether, who knows?  I am just expanding my store of knowledge.  If I
made up my mind there would be (a) not much to talk about, (b) not much to
learn.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug 14 15:43:56 PDT 1996
Article: 57325 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newshub.csu.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!newsfeeder.sdsu.edu!news.sgi.com!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hunter.premier.net!news.thenet.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Extraordinary Absence
Date: 14 Aug 1996 00:11:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4urjlt$96n@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <32109570.3178949@news.pacificnet.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <32109570.3178949@news.pacificnet.net>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom
moran) writes:

>	In order to drown the shrieks of the victims during the
>shooting, and also the sound of the firing, the Germans installed
>loudspeakers near the crematorium and in different parts of the camp,
>and all day long these loudspeakers blared forth jazz music.
>        This wholesale shooting became widely known among the
>inhabitants of Lublin."

Not bad.  How about this one?

The Germans executed their tortures, ill treatments, and shooting
to the accompaniment of music.  For this purpose they created a special
orchestra selected from among the prisoners.  They forced Professor
Stricks and the famous conductor Mund to conduct this orchestra.  They
requested the composers to write a special tune, to be called the *Tango
of Death.*  Shortly before dissolving the camp the Germans shot every
member of the orchestra.

Evidence at Nuremberg presented by the Soviet Union, 2/14/46, affidavit
for Yanov Camp read into the record.

source: IMT, vol. VII, . 451



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug 14 16:17:17 PDT 1996
Article: 57349 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!psgrain!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust extermination claims
Date: 14 Aug 1996 04:48:50 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 314
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4us3ti$g8i@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

>> This is an instance of a place where I have a problem with Pressac's
>> reasoning.  The Leichenkeller is about 100 feet by 25 feet.  I can
>> visualize this.  And, I can visualize a communal shower in such a
space,
>> for which 14 shower heads would be sufficient.  Such is my experience
with
>> communal showers, anyway.  But _115_ showerheads?  Not in any communal
>> shower I have ever seen, either in the service or in school.  Not to
>> mention the water pressure to operate such an extravaganza, or the
water
>> wastage that would result.  So, without questioning Pressac's
conclusion,
>> I consider this a weak criminal trace.
>
>Faulty reasoning on your part, actually. Simply because _you_ haven't
seen
>a communal shower with large numbers of showerheads you dismiss Pressac's
>argument? Or simply because _you_ rationalize that 14 shower heads in a
>"sauna" measuring 30m x 7m x 2.4m "would be sufficient" you dismiss
>Pressac's argument?

Are you suggesting that _my_ reservations have to take a back seat to
someone else's authority?  LOL!  These are the kinds of things that bother
me, that's all.
But, by the way, thanks for the information.

>
>But what did the _Nazis_ think "would be [a] sufficient" number of
>showerheads in a communal shower at Auschwitz? I would argue (as does Mr.
>McCarthy) that the answer can be found by examining the construction
>drawings and photos of the Zentral Sauna (and other similar facilities)
at
>Auschwitz. In the Bauleitung drawing 1841 (an initial drawing which was
>unrealized) one can see that the Brauseraum (shower room) contained 54
>showerheads in a room measuring approximately 10m x 8m. (_Technique_,
>p.68.) Clearly, early on the _Nazis_ thought that a communal shower
needed
>more showerheads than _you_ do. 

How are these showerheads arranged?  And, indeed, how are they arranged in
the LK?

>
>Considering that Bauleitung drawing 1841 was never realized, it would be
>best to  reference a drawing that _was_ realized to forstall the
>inevitable denier objections. I then would bring to your attention
>Bauleitung drawing 3084 (Ibid. p.76.). The shower room of this drawing,
by
>my count, shows 50 showerheads in the shower room, which by my
>measurement, is about 11m x 8m. In addition, Photo 25 (Ibid. p.80), shows
>(at least) 30 of these 50 showerheads.
>
>Yet L.Keller 1, which measured 30m x 7m, having nearly 2.4 times the area
>as the shower room in the Zentral Sauna, contained less than 1/3 the
>number of (faux) showerheads. Put it another way, the shower room in the
>Zentral Sauna had one showerhead per 1.76 sq m of floorspace . K.Keller
1,
>other the otherhand, had one (faux) showerhead per 15 sq. m of
floorspace.

Again, the question I would ask is how these were arranged, and how did
you arrive at your count?
>
>
>And you see nothing _wrong_ with this picture? (Besides the fact that the
>showerheads in L.Keller 1 were _non-functional_.) Amazing. Must by that
>blind eye of your's acting up again.... 

I don't know anything about them being non-functional.
>
>> >I should point out that revisionists, up until the publication of
>> >Pressac's work, considered the Leichenkeller 1 to be morgues, Leuchter
>> >of course leading the way.  Pressac demolished that argument with his
>> >numerous demonstrations that the room was for gassing.  In response,
>> >revisionists like Mattogno have started arguing that the room was for
>> >_delousing_ gassing (never mind that they contradict other
>> >revisionists, principally Leuchter).  But Pressac _also_ anticipated
>> >_that_ argument and eliminated it as well.
>> 
>> Leuchter, Krakow, and Rudolf have all found small traces of HCN in the
>> walls.  That means either cyanide gas that is not allowed to linger
>> (convention), fumigated once (Leuchter), or null values (Rudolf).  
>
>> From what I understand, Mattogno has found documentation in Moscow 
>> stating that the room was marked off as *Entlauesungskammer* i.e., 
>> delousing chamber, but this is supposed to mean in the showering sense.

>
>Hardly a revelation. It is known from eyewitness testimonies that the gas
>chambers were labeled with signs that said, in essense, "Zum Baden und
>Desinfektion" (to bath and disinfection), "Bath and disinfecting Room,"
or
>"To disinfection." (cf. Tauber, Ibid. p.483; Nyiszli, _Auschwitz_, p.49;
>Broad, _KL Auschwitz_, p.177.) In addition, the victims were _also_ told
>that they were going to be bathed and deloused. (cf. Ho"ss, _Death
>Dealer_,  p.43; Broad, _KL Aushwitz_, p.175.)

Yes, Yes, I know that part.  The question is whether *Badeanstalten fuer
Sonderaktionen* and *Entlauesungskammern* are synonymous in terms of what
they describe, and whether these terms have anything but a sinister or
homicidal connotation.

>
>> ...Van Pelt has a photo of a document in his latest book that claims
that 
>> 19 (or some similar number) gas chambers were designed for the
Auschwitz.  
>> I look at the drawing, I see what look to be cubicles (i.e., like
shower 
>> cubicles) and they are marked on the drawing *Entlauesungskammern*.
>
>Full citation, please. On what page, exactly, was this mentioned? What
>page was the photo on? 

I can't give you the citation straight off because I don't have the book. 
I browsed through it at a bookstore, looking, frankly, at the pictures. 
But I assume you have the book, since you have referenced it once.  It is
in one of the glossy photo inserts. I will try to give you a more precise
reference as soon as I can.

>
>> Query:  were showers ever referred to as *delousing chambers* at any
>> location? 
>
>Not to my knowledge. The delousing chambers were strictly for the 
>articles of clothing and other personal effects taken from the prisoners
>and victims. The series of Bauleitung drawings 801, 1293, 1715, and 2540,
>for the delousing installations (buildings BW5a and BW5b) loacated in the
>Womens' Camp clearly delineates between the delousing facilities and the
>shower room: "Gaskammer" vs, "Wasch und Brauseraum" or "Kammer" vs.
>"Brauseraum". (cf. _Technique_, pp.55-58.)
>
>BTW, the shower room (Bauleitung drawing 2540) also clearly shows that it
>too had 50 showerheads in the shower room which measured about 14m x 9m.
>(Ibid. p.58.)  

OK, this is better information.

>
>> Is it possible to combine HCN in any concentration with water for
>> delousing purposes?  I am open here.
>
>Yes. Photos 22, 23, and 24 (_Technique_, p.79) show a shallow concrete
>trough (located in the Zentral Sauna) that held a solution of water and
>prussic acid and was used to disinfest the prisoners. The caption to the
>photos reads:
>
>"Three views of the shallow bath situated at the entrance to the showers,
>filled with water and hydrocyanic acid in which the prisoners' body hair
>was disinfested just before the shower." (Ibid.) 
>
>In addition, the following excerpt, an adaptation of a letter from a
>former Czech prisoner to the head of the PMO, also helps clarify the
>procedure:
>
>"Before the shower and during the disinfestation, the prisoners underwent
>a disinfesting treatment. Just inside the entrance door to the showers
[in
>the Zentral Sauna] there was a small concrete bath full of a mixture of
>water and hydrocyanic acid, obtained by pouring Zyklon-B crystals in the
>water. The prisoners arriving for his shower, naked and with his head
>shaved, stepped into this basin and another stationed alongside the
basin,
>his hand protected by a glove, passed the mixture over his head, under
the
>arms and over the pubic hair." (Ibid.) 
>
>Needless to say, no such troughs appear on the drawings for the Kremas
and
>no eyetwitness testimony, to my knowledge, mentions such a trough in the
>Kremas. 

OK, that's fine.  This is good information.
>
>> >His "supplementary proof" is that an inventory of Leichenkeller 1 of
>> >Krema II contained 4 wire mesh introduction devices and 4 wooden
covers
>> >(pp. 429-430).  These could only be used to exterminate human beings.
>> >As he points out, we have everything but signed affidavits to the
>> >murders themselves:  "It would be too much to expect the SS to have
>> >formally written that Zyclon-B was poured into these introduction
>> >devices." (p. 430)
>> 
>> Again, the only problem I have with these devices is that while they
may
>> be listed on the inventory I have never seen one of things...
>
>Just because _you_ never saw a wire mesh introduction column doesn't mean
>they never existed! (Such a _subjective_ world view you have! Tsk tsk.)
>The fact is that they were removed from the L.Keller when the Kremas II
>and II were dismantled. Along with, for instance the gas-tight door to
>L.Kller 1 and the benches that were in L.Keller 2. (A gas-tight door-
with
>a heavy wire grid covering the peephole -and benches were revovered in
the
>Auschwizt Bauhof in 1945. [cf. Ibid. p.486.) 
>
>>...and apparently neither has anyone else.
>
>David Ole`re did. He even drew the wire mesh introduction column in the
>background of a sketch he made in 1946 that depicted the "dentists"
>extracting the gold teeth from the bodies of the victims who were killed
>in the gas chambers. (Ibid. Document 31, p.493.) 
>
>Michal Kula did. One can see a drawing of the introduction column based
on
>his June 11, 1945, deposition that looks like the one in Ole`re's sketch.
>(cf. Ibid. 487.) 
>
>Henryk Tauber did. He described the wire mesh introduction columns in his
>deposition taken at the Ho"ss Trial. It sounds like the one described in
>the drawing made from Kula' deposition. (cf. Ibid. pp.483-484.) 
>
>Nyiszli did. His description is similar to Tauber's. (cf. Nyiszli,
>_Auschwitz_, p.50.) 
>
>And you claim "apparently" nobody else saw the wire mesh Zyklon B
>introduction columns? Telling whoppers, are we now? Tsk tsk. You should
>_know_ better- especially as _I've_ informed _you_ about Tauber, Nyiszli,
>and Kula(?) before.  

Actually, I don't mean at the period you are describing, that is, the
period of the Hoess trial.  I know that witnesses describe the things, but
I didn't know how many or where.  This is useful information.  In your
prior information on this subject, you named names but didn't provide
sources.  And besides, what I mean is that I would feel a lot more
comfortable with these devices if there was one physically existing, had
been photographed, etc.

>
>> >And Pressac has other proofs as well.  He cites documents which refer
to
>> >Leichenkeller 2, the room next to Leichenkeller 1, as an "undressing
>> >room" (pp. 432-434, 438).  Why would the Nazis need a room where a
>> >thousand or more people could undress simultaneously, unless, of
>> >course, they were about to be killed in the adjoining room?  There's
an
>> >order for an urgently-needed peephole with a double layer of 8 mm
thick
>> >glass.  (p. 434)  Why would two layers of third-of-an-inch-thick glass
>> >be required for the peephole in a morgue?
>> 
>> The problem you have with this is that the undressing room is about 175
>> feet by 25 feet.  I have seen undressing rooms for bathers at swimming
>> pools that are crowded for undressing purposes with just a couple
hundred
>> people inside.  Yet, there is this insistence on a thousand, two
thousand,
>> three thousand ....
>
>Your appeals to incredulity (not to mention your ersatz "authority") are
>wearing thin. Obviously, you have no substantial rebuttal and must
instead
>wave your hands and say it cannot be Because! Ehrlich606! Says! So!

What you seem to be neglecting here, Mark, is that a person can't go
against their own minds.  The claim about *Because! I! Say! So!* is simply
a demand that I subordinate my personal opinion to the claims of someone
else's authority.  It don't work like that.  Moreover, arguments about
magnitude are the main problem that I have with the conventionalist stress
on mass gassings as a primary means of mass murder.

>
>Talk about lowest common (denier) denominators! 
>
>> >In his "39 criminal traces" section, he doesn't even mention the
>> >architectural modifications to the Krema, which also establish clearly
>> >that the rooms were not morgues.  (pp. 267-331)
>> 
>> such as?
>
>The elimination of the corspe chutes and the addition of a stairway
>leading to the basement antechamber between L.Kellers 1 and 2. Also the
>addition of the western access stairway to L.Keller 2. 

How were the corpse chutes supposed to operate?  And where would they have
been located?
>
>> >Nor does he mention
>> >the photographs which corroborate the existence of the wire mesh
>> >introduction devices and their "little chimneys" (pp. 340-342). 
Again,
>> >this is because these are merely _corroborating_ evidence, not
_proof_,
>> >by Pressac's phenomenally strict standards.
>> >
>> 
>> Again, what photos do you mean, unless it is the crate photograph or
the
>> aerial photos.  I am listening to you here. 
>
>The very one. The one which you (and Mr. Allen) keep flip-flopping over
in
>your claims as to what the "little chimneys" are. The ones you are purely
>_speculating_ as to what the "little chimneys" are while dogmatically
>ignoring the plentitude of evidence for their being part of the Zyklon B
>introduction system for L.Keller 1. 
>
Actually, Mark, this is not quite fair.  Caecaa has never claimed that
they were anything but boxes.  I was the one who erred.  But again, I just
don't see how they match up with either your drawing or the aerial
photographs.  There is good, not so good, and bad evidence.  I consider
that photo to be not particularly good evidence.

OTOH, the fact that I have not seen convincing discussion of what happened
to either the elderly or the very young either when the ghettoes were
emptied or when arrivals took place at camp are among the indications
which I think weigh heavily on the German concentration camp system.





From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug 15 07:49:57 PDT 1996
Article: 57478 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.serv.net!news.ac.net!news1.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mauving right along
Date: 14 Aug 1996 14:38:13 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ut6el$q0r@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

>> 
>> Yes, but don't you understand that there is a yin/yang thing here?  I
>> mean, this news group was set aside so that discussion of revisionist
>> issues would be separated from other discourse.  Therefore, everyone
who
>> comes here knows what to expect....  
>
>Spoken like a true denier "veteran." (Sotto voce: Unlike when te "old"
>Ehrlich606 first came to the group and whined about all the bad vibes
>between deniers and conventionalists....) 
>
>
When have I ever endorsed the tone of this group, other than just to get
resigned to it?  The whole point of this post is that, as much as
possible, I want to ignore this invective BS.  It's just a waste of time.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug 15 13:37:20 PDT 1996
Article: 57516 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!netaxs.com!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mauving right along
Date: 14 Aug 1996 10:50:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 35
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4usp3o$kps@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uqmvv$2jq@crl6.crl.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uqmvv$2jq@crl6.crl.com>, jhahn@crl.com (Jack Hahn) writes:

>: was linked to race hatred.  But I have to be honest and say that I
don't
>: think there are any regulars in this NG who are into race hatred, or,
for
>: that matter, racial anti-semitism, although there are some who
frequently
>: make anti-semitic remarks, my guess is just for trolling purposes.  And
I
>: might add it certainly seems to work.  But then, I further surmise that
a
>: lot of the folks who are into abusing people for making anti-semitic
>: statements are people who come here specifically for that purpose,
i.e.,
>: fighting hate.
>
>Ehrlich666 - Some (among them I) would say this falls under the catagory
of
>"blaming the victim"
>        
>I would say that "trolling" in this case is a euphamism for race baiting 
>which is not something that I would prefix with the words "just for"

Yes, but don't you understand that there is a yin/yang thing here?  I
mean, this news group was set aside so that discussion of revisionist
issues would be separated from other discourse.  Therefore, everyone who
comes here knows what to expect.  If there were no conventionalists here,
do you think there would be much race baiting, as you call it?  I don't,
because I don't see that on CODOH or Greg Raven's site.

Therefore it follows that when someone comes on and attacks revisionists,
the revisionist who wants to troll his opponent will reach for the nearest
club -- which is oftentimes race baiting.  That's what most of it is here.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug 15 13:37:20 PDT 1996
Article: 57538 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!netaxs.com!hunter.premier.net!news.cais.net!zdc-e!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:   Wieder mit dem "Ausrottung" Wahnsinn.
Date: 14 Aug 1996 14:37:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 97
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ut6cn$q04@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ut21k$25gu@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4ut21k$25gu@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>:>[...]
>:>>>	Der Angeklagte Ley erklaerte:  'Wir schwoeren, wir werden
>:>>>	den Kampf nich aufgeben, bis der letzte Jude in Europa
>:>>>	ausgerottet und wirklich tot ist.  Es is nicht genug,
>:>>>	den Juden, den Feind der Menschheit, auzugliedern --
>:>>>	der Jude muss vernichtet werden.'
>:>
>
>
>How would Mr. Ehrlich explain the words "...der Jude muss vernichtet
werden"
>in Ley's quote above?  He didn't say "das juedische Volk", but "der
Jude".

Literally?  *We vow that we will not give up the struggle until the last
Jew in Europe is dead and gone [Thanks, Gord, a nice touch].   It's not
enough that the Jew, the enemy of mankind, should be driven off.  The Jew
must be destroyed.*

But if I translate it that way then I am making an abstract statement
about a people, about as abstract as *Germany must Perish!* or *Germany
must be destroyed!*. [PS - I know the preference for annihilate for
*vernichten* but I think destroy is sufficient.  The problem here is that
if I take *Jude* literally, the homicidal force latent in the above
passage is considerably weakened.]    

.......[big biblical cut]

>But not as *extermination*
>:>
>:>Mr. Ehrlich's knowledge of the German language does not reach far
enough to
>:>distinguish between the German words for "sometimes" and "often". By no
>means
>:>is he qualified to make a judgment like this.
>
>Mr. Ehrlich also doesn't understand the German word "Reproduktion", which
is
>pretty damned close to its English equivalent.

On the contrary, I know quite well the synonymous value of *reproduction*
in German and English, and I know that *reproduction* does not mean
anything as inane as the mimicry of a parrot or an ape.
>
[cut]
>
>
>:>[...]
>:>>OK.  I just looked in the 1995 Langenscheidt's and it says:  pull up
>:>>(weeds), wipe out, stamp out (figuratives), for the noun, Die
Ausrottung,
>:>>it says, wiping out, and then figurative, genocide.  Nothing about
>:>>*extermination* there.
>:>
>:>Well, well. "The textfile was killed." Therefore "The Jews were killed"
>means
>:>"The Jews were evacuated to another place", does it? Read a book about
>:>the metaphoric use of language.
>
>I would add that we are referring to what "ausrotten" means when applied
to
>"Lebewesen" (living things).  I quote again (Grosses Brockhaus): "voellig
und
>fuer immer vernichten, alle toeten".
>
>:>[..]
>:>>Yes, and the use of the English Latinism *exterminate* is an
inappropriate
>:>>word to use in translation.
>:>
>:>Here I have to agree. In this context, I would translate "ausrotten" as
"to
>slaughter".
>
>I would use "exterminate", for two reasons.  First, it is suggested by
every
>bilingual dictionary I have consulted.  Second, it is used in respect of
>vermin (Ungeziefer).  That fits in perfectly with Hitler's Weltanschauung
of
>Jews as "parasites", "bacilli", etc.
>
Comment: (1) *ausrotten* means killing, the question is what filter of
euphemism is proper when translating it into English.  (2)  Check the
dictionary cited above.  (3)  The association of the English
*extermination* = *insects* doesn't work, because then one would talk
about *ausrotten* with regards to insects, and I haven't seen that kind of
usage in Peters -- yet.




>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Aug 15 13:37:21 PDT 1996
Article: 57574 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!overload.lbl.gov!agate!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hitler praiser Reinhardt and Mahler?
Date: 15 Aug 1996 06:24:45 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 48
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uuttd$k3s@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4utn6h$eiq@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4utn6h$eiq@grivel.une.edu.au>, 
writes:

>Subject:	Re: Hitler praiser Reinhardt and Mahler?
>From:	
>Date:	14 Aug 1996 23:24:01 GMT
>
>Alles andere als Ehrlich has inflicted upon the 
>readers of this newsgroup a pyrotechnic display
>of feigned erudition, holding forth at great length
>on both the German and the Hungarian languages,
>using disingenuously selective quotations and false
>claims to veil his absurd assertion in bogus
>verisimilitude.
>
>

Your need for self exculpation and condemnation of others is -- positively
German.  Actually, When you responded to the *Malyvaszinu* post I thought
that it would be nice to practice Hungarian, since I hadn't used it in
over a dozen years.  But you have not been at all civil, but rather
constantly insulting.  *Faszkalap* indeed!

So then it comes down to whether or not I want to respond to your carping
posts.  What's the point?  If Hungarian is your mother tongue, then by all
means post for us the significant passages from Nyiszli's memoirs. 
Otherwise, it is left to my imperfect skills.  Similarly, if Gord McFee
can't find the time to translate various things on the Nizkor site, then
it is left again to my long unused knowledge of German.  Anyway, I like
languages and this is a chance to practice.

In the meantime, carp away.  I addressed my last note to you in Russian,
because that was the tongue that came to me, and also, as a kind of tweak,
since you were insinuating that I couldn't respond to your Hungarian post
with the long German letter inside of it.  You know, that *I was at the
end of my tether.*  OK, well I put you at the end of yours, at least.  But
don't think that I have forgotten so much that I can't pick off most of
what you write in German or Hungarian straight off  without recourse to a
dictionary.  You should be flattered that an English speaker bothered to
learn your beautiful language in the first place.

*Faszkalap?*  You remind me of a poem by Atilla Jozsef, *Szuletesnapomra*.


 





From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri Aug 16 07:51:49 PDT 1996
Article: 57667 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!laslo.netnet.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:   Wieder mit dem "Ausrottung" Wahnsinn.
Date: 15 Aug 1996 06:23:16 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uutqk$k3h@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4urant$3un@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4urant$3un@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com
(Ehrlich606) writes:

>Subject:	Re:   Wieder mit dem "Ausrottung" Wahnsinn.
>From:	ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
>Date:	13 Aug 1996 21:39:09 -0400
>
>In article <4un732$m7d@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>,
>abels@stud-mailer.uni-marburg.de (Nele Abels) writes:
>
>

Under this thread, Sara requested a Furtwangler discography of the D minor
Symphony of Beethoven. Done.  Those who are interested in pursuing that
angle contact her.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri Aug 16 07:51:50 PDT 1996
Article: 57670 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!netaxs.com!news.dra.com!news.starnet.net!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Peters on Outgassing, 1941 Version
Date: 15 Aug 1996 15:32:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 54
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4uvu0j$3u@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uqcei$gpg@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uqcei$gpg@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>,
abels@stud-mailer.uni-marburg.de (Nele Abels) writes:

>
>"In all cases  the major part of the gas-developement is finished after
one
>or at
>most two hours. (A control of the residual at the appropriate times
confirmed
>the complete evaporation of the gas) The evaporation of prussic acid was
>therefore
>not seriously slowed by the low temperatures"
>
>Obviously there is no contradiction. The experiments show that at a low
>temperature,
>after one or perhaps two hours the prussic acid had nearly evaporated.
>Following tests
>show that no prussic acid remains in the carrier-material. Ergo - no
slowing
>down
>in low temperatures.
>
>I would strongly recommend Mr. Ehrlich to learn German to avoid making
>himself
>ridiculous in this newsgroup.
>
>

Now you are fudging here, Nele. *Nearly evaporated* is not the same as
*completely outgassed.* Or, if it is, then you are _accepting_ not only my
translation but my analysis as well.   And, btw, I am not trying to
disprove the Holocaust. What I am trying to do is make some sense of the
Peters article. Exactly where do our translations diverge, anyway?  The
only point that I note is that you have taken *appropriate*  for
*entsprechenden* which I took as a referent to the one or two hours time. 
Do you agree with this?

Peters' conclusions come after tabulating data on the concentration of HCN
in the air of the rooms being tested with Zyklon.  As a matter of fact,
the conclusion stated above is _incorrect_ according to the tabular data. 
In the first test, the average of the two sample points A and B averages
only 70% (out of an intended 100%) saturation after one hour.  Using a
geometric mean, which would have been more appropriate for a room that
size, the average is even lower.  _The saturation level never gets beyond
those readings_.

In the second test, (NOTE: in a smaller room)  the average HCN
concentration achieves about 40% after the first hour, and tops out at a
little over 50% after _three_ not _two_ hours.  Again, the concentration
drops continuously thereafter.

I consider these indicative of the fact that a portion of the Zyklon is
not evaporating, at very low temperatures, period.  



From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri Aug 16 11:12:10 PDT 1996
Article: 57742 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:   Wieder mit dem "Ausrottung" Wahnsinn.
Date: 15 Aug 1996 18:44:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 115
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4v098l$4hf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4uvl0b$f8c@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4uvl0b$f8c@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>
>In message <4urant$3un@newsbf02.news.aol.com> - ehrlich606@aol.com
>(Ehrlich606)13 Aug 1996 21:39:09 -0400 writes:
>:>
>:>In article <4un732$m7d@surz03fi.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE>,
>:>abels@stud-mailer.uni-marburg.de (Nele Abels) writes:
>:>
>:>>
>:>>Obviously "Ausrottung aller Nichtjuden" means "Killing of all
non-Jews"
>:>here.
>:>>So why not "extermination"?
>:>
>:>Because I am a native English speaker. In English, *extermination* is
only
>:>heard with regard to the killing off of vermin in one's house or
backyard.
>:> I have never heard the word in any other sense (except of course, in
>:>translations of Himmler).  One never even hears about the
*extermination*
>:>of American Indians, unless someone is trying to make a bad polical
>:>argument, even though in some places that is more or less what
happened.  
>
>I am also a native English speaker.  In English, "extermination" is *not*
>only
>used in connection with killing off vermin in your backyard or house. 
Let's
>see what a dictionary says.

OK, then give me some ways in which you use the word, or have heard it
used, outside of the limits I just mentioned above.  I honestly can't
think of any that I have heard.  You call the exterminator over to your
house.  That's it.

>
>Funk & Wagnalls _Standard Dictionary of the English Language_:
>
>[begin quote]
>exterminate: To destroy entirely; annihilate
>The word "exterminate" is applied to groups or masses of men or animals.
>[end quote] [Funk & Wagnalls, New York, 1973, Volume 1, page 449]
>Note as well the following definition from page 450:>
>[begin quote]
>extermination camp: A death camp
>[end quote] [Ibid]

Obviously, in this case extermination camp is the rendering of
*Vernichtungslager.*
>
>:>The word conjures up a specific imagery of spraying with deadly
>:>insecticides.  Although many will argue that that was what Holocaust
>:>_was_, I don't think it is correct to translate that _one word_ as
>:>*exterminate* at the beginning of the famous passage in Himmler's
speech.
>
>No, it does not Mr. Ehrlich.  It conjures up the image of *entirely
>destroying*.  In fact, "annihilate" is one of the synonyms given by Funk
&
>Wagnalls.  Please note the similarity between "voellig und fuer immer
>vernichten" and "destroy entirely".

Go ahead, and tell me what you think of when you hear and or use the word
*exterminate* _aside__from_ the association with the Final Solution.

>
>You are clearly wrong on this in both English and German.  Can't you see
>that,
>even if you won't admit it?
>
>Are all the German dictionaries wrong?  All the native German speakers? 
All
>the English dictionaries?  All of them wrong and only Mr. Ehrlich right?
>
>I have tried to be patient and civil on this, in order not to offend your
>sensitivities, but this does begin to grate somewhat.  First you play the
>game
>of defining "ausrotten" with translations.  That one fails.  Then you try
to
>fudge the German meaning.  That one also fails.  Now you try to fudge the
>English meaning of "exterminate".  Did you really think that all the
posters
>in this newsgroup are ignorant of *both* English and German?
>
We have already been over this.  I admire your persistence, as well as
your _attempts_ to remain patient and civil, but I must demur. 
*Ausrotten* means killing, I will grant you that.  The question is how do
we translate that into English?  I have cited my 1995 Langenscheidt's
which gives out several words we associate with killing and eradication,
but it does not give *exterminate*.  I have also tried to explain why I
don't think *exterminate* is appropriate for the particular Himmler
speech, for reasons of diction and rhetorical structure.

At the same time, to refer to an English dictionary in order to show that
*exterminate* means *killing* is hardly necessary.  As I have said many
times, I have never questioned the fact that Himmler was talking about
killing.  The question has always been the best way to render this, in
conjunction with the following paragraphs, into English.

Meanwhile, you have also made it clear that you advocate *exterminate* to
convey the sense of *utter physical annihilation.*  I disagree, not least
because of the references which Irving provided from Hitler's speeches and
remarks before the war, sometimes even referencing the German people.  I
don't think *ausrotten = exterminate* fits all these instances.

Your insistence that *ausrotten* can _only_ be translated by
*extermination* is contradicted by at least one dictionary, and by me.

 

     



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon Aug 19 16:04:06 PDT 1996
Article: 57939 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!zdc-e!zdc!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: A Kurt Pruefer Letter
Date: 16 Aug 1996 02:47:47 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 75
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4v15ij$hsp@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


[If you conventionalists would get off the stick, you wouldn’t be left
with me to translate this stuff.  Stop drooling, Nele, this was a tough
one]

[This is a two page letter located on Nizkor under *people*, *Kurt
Pruefer*]

Minutes

Present:  The head Engineer Pruefer [which literally means *inspector*] 
>from  the firm Topf and Sons, Erfurt, concerning the construction of
cremation facilities in the concentration camp Auschwitz

Proceedings:  Engineer Pruefer dropped by the local office at 2 PM on the
19th of August, 1942, in order to make the following points concerning the
installation of five three muffle cremation ovens at the concentration
camp and the new installation of two three muffle ovens of simple
construction [in einfacher Bauweise], Plan # D59-579 and # D59 599.

On this occasion the following was settled (festgelegt):

1)  No later than August 26-27, the fitter Holik will arrive from
Buchenwald, the fitter Koch in about two weeks [and at that point] the
construction of the five three muffle ovens will be started immediately
[Mit dem Aufbau ... wird sofort begonnen].  The firm Koehler in Myslowitz
continues the brickwork for the ovens and flues, and well as the
construction of the chimney, according to the plans and instructions of
Topf and Sons.

2)  With regard to the two three muffle ovens with the *Bath Installations
for Special Action* [Badeanstalten fuer Sonderaktion], it was recommended
by Engineer Pruefer, that the ovens from an already received shipment be
sent on [abzuzweigen] to Mogilev, and he would immediately bring it to the
attention of the SS Economic Development Office, and ask that further
arrangements be made.

3)  With regard to the construction of one of the 2. crematoriums with
five three muffle ovens, as well as  setting up of the air intake and
exhaust system (Be- und Entlaueftungsanlagen), this depends [muss erst ...
bezuegl] on the outcome of negotations with the the State Security Office
(RSHA), which are already underway.  We will be waiting for the quota
allocation.

4)  The firm of Topf and Sons mistakenly sent to Auschwitz the parts of
one of the double muffle cremation ovens which were meant for Mauthausen.

Engineer Pruefer recommended that the oven be constructed here.  The
missing parts -- the doors to two ovens and two ash flues [2 Einfuehrturen
und 2 Aschentnahmentueren] could be taken from the shipment of the five
three muffle ovens.

5.)  Together with Mr. Kohler and SS-Unterscharfuehrer Kirschnek, he
conducted a damage assessment of the newly built chimney in the existing
crematorium, and touched on the necessary steps to be taken.   - Since the
chimney gets very hot it must stand free and shouldn’t be tightly
connected with an outer casing [to the rest of the building].

6)  On Thursday, the 20th of August, 1942, Pruefer, together with Mr.
Koehler and SS Sturmfueher Janisch inspected the 5 three muffle ovens in
the camp, and went over the relevant details.

7)  Engineer Pruefer asked for a written order on the shipment of the two
three muffle and double muffle  cremation ovens, so that it could be found
out right away whether the ovens could be set aside for the Mogilev
consignment.

8)  10 freight bills are to be sent immediately to Topf for the missing
fire-clay and miscellaneous materials.

(various signatures,  handwritten notations)






From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 20 14:53:06 PDT 1996
Article: 58482 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!chi-news.cic.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:   Wieder mit dem
Date: 20 Aug 1996 15:00:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 21
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4vd20p$6l3@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4vcslv$4h3@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4vcslv$4h3@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com
(Ehrlich606) writes:

>
>Marty Kelly's information, that the Himmler speech in question is
>transcribed on thick red tape, which, at the time would have run at about
>30 ips, leads me to conclude that the quote in question, *die Ausrottung
>des judischen Voelkes* is incorrect, because the tape was _inverted_ at
>that point.  What Himmler actually said was, *sekleov nehcsiduj sed
>gnuttorsua.*  The key word here, of course, is *gnuttorsua*, which is
>perhaps a Masai expression used by Lettow Vorbeck's native conscripts in
>the East Africa campaign of 1914-1918.
>
>
Actually, I have inverted the vowel values for the *juedischen Volkes*,
which means that Himmler actually said, *seklov nehcsideuj sed
gnuttorsua*.  These changes would actually assist the translation of the
passage as *A pretty lass from Transylvania but a stupid cow all the same*
which has the Masai-Magyar basis of the phrase filtered through both
Romanic and Slavic word patterns and grammar.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 20 14:53:07 PDT 1996
Article: 58503 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:   Wieder mit dem
Date: 20 Aug 1996 14:32:30 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4vd0bu$5v3@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4vck7m$1jh@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4vck7m$1jh@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, dvdthomas@aol.com
(DvdThomas) writes:

>
>***NELE ABELS WRITES (he thinks to J.F. Beaulieu):
>
>Mr. Abels' comments are preceded by a single >.
>
>
>>And now the guy who has forgotten most of his German really puts
>>his foot into it.
>>
>>Jean-Francois Beaulieu  wrote:
>>
>>>>   I refer now to the evacuation of the Jews, the EXTERMINATION* of
the
>>>>   Jewish PEOPLE*. This is one of those things that is easily said:
>"the
>>>>  Jewish PEOPLE* are being EXTERMINATED*," says every Party member,
>>>>   "quite true, it's part of our plans, the ELIMINATION* of the Jews,
>>>>   EXTERMINATION*, we're doing it."
>
>and...
>
>>Beaulieu's translation points out to everybody that a meaning apart
>>from "to kill everybody" is meant...
>>
>>This manipulation is quite cunning, I have to admit that, but still
>>not perfect. I'm sure he could lie more effectively if he tried.
>
>

Personal affairs preclude extensive participation in the so-called unique
political culture of this newsgroup, but I could hardly forbear from the
opportunity to laud Herr Abels for correctly noting that *exterminate* is
a *cunning* and *manipulative* translation of the word *ausrotten.*  Would
you care to respond to the charge, Mr. McFee?



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug 21 09:27:20 PDT 1996
Article: 58697 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.serv.net!news.alt.net!news1.alt.net!news.exodus.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!howland.erols.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: How To Select A Good Husband
Date: 20 Aug 1996 15:57:51 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4vd5bv$7vg@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Subject:	How To Select A Good Husband
From:	qut@netcom.com (Skip)
Date:	Tue, 20 Aug 1996 17:54:58 GMT

[Followups-To: alt.flame]

One lies lifeless,
Stabbed by sword,
Another, pierced by arrow,
With their crimson blood,
Have they fed our soil.

He who fell for Russia in noble death,
His dead eyes will I kiss,
His cold brow caress.

[and so on]

E606: Just in case you were wondering, Skip has snipped the lament for
contralto that comes at the end of the battle scene in Eisenstein's
*Alexander Nevsky.*  It is actually a beautiful song if sung well.  The
translation is inexact so that the lyrics will scan to the melody.

  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Aug 21 09:27:21 PDT 1996
Article: 58717 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.serv.net!news.alt.net!news1.alt.net!news.exodus.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:   Wieder mit dem
Date: 20 Aug 1996 13:29:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4vcslv$4h3@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4vck7m$1jh@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


Marty Kelly's information, that the Himmler speech in question is
transcribed on thick red tape, which, at the time would have run at about
30 ips, leads me to conclude that the quote in question, *die Ausrottung
des judischen Voelkes* is incorrect, because the tape was _inverted_ at
that point.  What Himmler actually said was, *sekleov nehcsiduj sed
gnuttorsua.*  The key word here, of course, is *gnuttorsua*, which is
perhaps a Masai expression used by Lettow Vorbeck's native conscripts in
the East Africa campaign of 1914-1918.

It would mean, literally, *gnu tor sua*, that is, *fool of the gnu
[it]self*, where *sua* has the same self-referential qualities in Latin as
in Swahili [cf. Suaheli].  This in turn literally means, *child or
offspring of a gnu*, which, bearing the generic compass of *gnu* in this
usage, would mean, *Vieh sohn* in German, or, in Scots Gaelic, *McFee.* 
Any questions?  :)

    


From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue Aug 27 20:57:44 PDT 1996
Article: 60393 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!icarus.lon.hookup.net!hookup!news.redshift.com!dataphone!solace!umdac!newsfeed.sunet.se!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Validity of Himmler's Posen speech, again (was Re: Extermination or, Evac..
Date: 15 Aug 1996 18:44:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 60
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4v098n$4hg@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

>> >> 
>> >> As a matter of fact, it would be quite easy to insert a five minute
>> >> segment into a three hour speech.  I assume that the speech was
>> >> transcribed on 78 rpm discs?  Which run for a maximum of 5 minutes a
>> side?
>> >>  Uh oh.  Better not tell Gord.
>> >> 
>> >> But now you raise another interesting possibility.  If Himmler's
>> remarks
>> >> were _transcribed_ is it possible that he was transcribed
>> _incorrectly_?! 
>> >
>> >Ah, Ehrlich606, with his unsupported "speculations" that imply forgery
>> >etc., trods the well-worn denier-lemming path. Pity. Especially, as it
>> has
>> >been demonstrated time and time again here in this very newsgroup,
that
>> >such a path is but a slippery slope leading to the abyss of
intellectual
>> >depravity, anti-Semtism and racism....
>> >
>> >
>> I am reminded of the passage in De Quincey's *Gentle Art of Murder*
where
>> he discusses how the ruination of many a young man could be traced back
to
>> some murder or other that he thought little of at the time.  He goes on
to
>> describe how eventually such conduct would even lead the killer to stop
>> attending church services and even go so far as to be rude to his
maiden
>> aunt.
>> 
>> Of course, De Quincey is presenting a parody of *slippery slope*
>> arguments.  And so are you.
>
>Only if you consider the likes of Moran and Giwer as parodies of normal
>people....
>
>Keep it up and you may join them. 
>
>

Actually, I don't -- seriously -- have any problem with Himmler having
made this speech.  In any case I find the speech a couple days later (the
*umbringen* one) to be far more incriminating.  And that has witnesses.

However, Marty suggested how it could be done, so I just followed on.  Was
this speech really rendered on a Magnetophon machine?  Geez, how self
important Himmler must have been to do so!  In any case, I had heard that
the speech was found on discs, which implied acetates to me, either of a 5
or further matrix type.

Also, I have to correct myself.  The de Quincey is called, I recall,
*Murder Considered as One of the Fine Arts*, and is in the Swift *Modest
Proposal* vein.  Well worth looking into.

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor