Shofar FTP Archive File: people/r/raven.greg/1992/genie-topic9.9203
************
Topic 9 Sat Mar 28, 1992
GRAFFITI [Ric Helton] at 08:30 EST
Sub: The Holocaust: What are the Facts?
A place to discuss claims that the Holocaust never happened. This is a
continuation topic; the first will be archived to the PF*NPC library. Please
focus on the ISSUES and refrain from personal slurs and attacks.
908 message(s) total.
************
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 1 Sat Mar 28, 1992
GRAFFITI [Ric Helton] at 08:34 EST
The original Holocaust topic has filled up, and will be archived into the
Public Forum's library area early next week. Message numbers will not be
compacted so that citations to specific message numbers will remain accurate.
Please remember that this is a very volatile topic, and we discourage personal
attacks and abusive language toward other forum members. We are here to
discuss the facts surrounding the period in our history known as the
Holocaust. Note that specific religious issues which do not relate to the
topic most properly belong in the Religion & Ethics RoundTable, accessible on
GEnie page 8011.
Thank you for your cooperation and serious participation. Following is a copy
of the most recent messages in the debate, for your reference.
-Ric/PF*NPC sysop
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 2 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
878 Neil:
> May I point out that there has already been successful Holocaust
> revisionism?
>
> (1) That there were gas chambers used for killing Jews at Dachau. Later
> proved false.
> (2) That the Nazis made soap out of Jews. Later proved false.
> (3) That the Nazis made lampshades out of Jews. Later proved false.
> (4) That four million Jews died in the gas chambers. That figure is being
> downsized to between one and two million; the question of how many Jews
> died is still open to debate by half a close order of magnitude.
Neil, you are mistaking popular misconceptions for historical accounts. No
historical work published within scholarly circles has ever made the claims
you mention. The Nuremberg Trials did but they are NOT historical accounts.
So, your claim that this is the result of "revisionism" is incorrect. It is
the result of "history."
Hans-Peter explained it very well in his message when he spoke of what
authors of fiction, movies, etc. have caused to happen in this area. As you
know, a novelist may base the storyline on a particular historical event or
use that event as a backdrop for the story. However, because it is a work of
fiction, the author is not bound by any conventions of truth. Yet these
stories which are based in fact (but not totally factual) get acknowledged by
the general populace as being factual.
IOW, if anything of the above is "revisionism" it is that (1) there were
operating gas chambers at Dachau, (2) that Nazis made soap out of Jews, (3)
that the Nazis made lampshades out of Jews, and (4) that four million Jews
died in gas chambers.
BTW, even though the facts about the lampshades, soap and gas chambers at
Dachau are not part of the Holocaust per se, if anyone is interested in the
truth behind them, I will be glad to elaborate on these. However, it might be
best, so as not to confuse the issue (and in a discussion of the Holocaust,
these facts would be "off topic") to open up a new TOPic to discuss other
events that occurred during the same period of time but are not part of the
Holocaust itself.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 3 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
879 Neil:
> 1) How many witnesses to the operations of the gas chambers were deposed
> by the western allies, and what is their credibility? I must say that
> confessions put forward by the communist regimes must be disqualified on
> the face of them, because of the complete lack of veracity
> communist-obtained confessions have on every other subject.
To be perfectly honest, I don't know of any perpetrators who witnessed the
gassings and were deposed by the western Allies. With all the extermination
camps having been on Polish soil and with the USSR being the army which
"liberated" Poland, it was the USSR who also captured the vast majority of
those who were responsible for the gassings.
One wonders, however, why this question is crucial. After all, who "deposed"
Gengis Khan, Attila the Hun or even Stalin? Why do you believe (if you do)
that deposition is important in this case?
For instance, I do not rely on sources such as Hoess' confession or even on
Kurt Gerstein's account. The former because of the likelihood that it was
tainted and the second because, when taken in its entirety, the statements
are not coherent.
Yet, even though these are not credible and, I agree, cannot be depended upon
to enlighten us as to reality, the rest of the evidence (in particular the
paper trail) is more than able to stand on its own.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 4 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
879 Neil:
> 2) What physical evidence is there that people, rather than clothes, were
> exposed to lethal gas at Auschwitz? Weren't there gas chambers used for
> delousing at the camps in which it is now agreed by all that no human
> exterminations by gas took place?
If by "physical evidence" you mean autopsies, there are none. However, this
is what we do have (and what supports eyewitness accounts).
Even at Auschwitz there were de-lousing chambers for clothing. These are
acknowledged to be just that and are not considered to be chambers for
gassing people. Yet, there are structures which were contained within the
same bldgs. as the crematoria (far removed from the de-lousing chambers),
which have a lower concentration of HCN, which were tested for HCN in 1945,
which had doors which were "gas tight" with a peephole and which eyewitnesses
have claimed were used to gas people.
The concentration of HCN supports the gassing of people but was too low to
support the possibility of de-lousing. The gas tight door (for which we have
the special order within the primary documents) had no need for a "peephole"
if it was used for de-lousing. Some Deniers have claimed that the gas tight
door was so that the cellars could be used as an air-raid shelter and that
the peephole was to let in light. Yet, this explanation ignores the fact that
these chambers were in the cellar where there would be no outside light and
that the air tight chambers could have suffocated the occupants.
So, the physical evidence supports that these chambers were used for some
sort of gassing and, with the concentration of HCN being what it was, the
only possibility would have been mosquitoes or humans (since they both
require comparable concentrations). Now, if these chambers were to be used
for mosquitoes (remember that Birkenau was in a swampy area so we shouldn't
rule this out outright), why the need for a peephole? After all, from a
simple viewing, would it be possible to determine if the mosquitoes are dead
or "simply resting?" (That phrase is for Monty Python fans.) Yet, wouldn't it
be true that that same peephole could be used to determine if people were
dead since their struggle in their death throes would be clearly evident?
And, if it was used for mosquitoes, how did the Nazis get all those
mosquitoes in the chamber?
Given these as the two possibilities based upon the physical evidence and
using Occam's Razor, the conclusion is that it was people who were gassed in
these chambers.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 5 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
879 Neil:
> 3) It is put forward that the Nazis only gassed those Jews who were too
> sick, feeble, or otherwise unable to be useful for slave labor. The
> rituals of separating the two groups as they got off the cattle cars seems
> to parallel the logic, though not the humanity, of the sort of triage
> that is used in battlefield hospitals to separate the wounded into three
> groups: those whom quick attention will save, those who will survive
> without immediate attention, and those who no reasonable care will save.
> In battlefield triage, this last group is separated out and left to die.
I guess you missed the message #832 by S.PIERCE6. Let me quote the pertinent
parts here.
>> Robert Faurisson is not a legitimate historian, he is a charlatan.
>>
>> He used outright lies attributed to "historical research" to "prove"
>> there were no gas chambers. His thesis depended on an entry in an SS
>> doctor's diary which said, "This Sunday morning in the cold and humid
>> weather I was present at the IIth special action (Dutch). Atrocious
>> scenes with three women who begged us to let them live."
>>
>>According to Faurisson, this passage proves: 1) that a "special action" is
>> a sorting out by doctors of sick from healthy in a typhoid epidemic; 2)
>> that the "atrocious scenes" were "executions of persons who had been
>> condemned to death, executions for which the doctor was obliged to be
>> present"; 3) that among the condemned were three women who had come in a
>> convoy from Holland who WERE SHOT; 4) that there were no gas chambers,
>> since the women were shot and NOT GASSED.
>>
>> The above is what he falsely attributes to the diary entry, citing its
>> author and date!
>>
>> An eminent French scholar named George Wellers analyzed the diary entry
>> and the surrounding documentation for Le Monde. He did ACTUAL historical
>> research, checked the Auschwitz archives for the date of the entry and
>>found that 1710 Dutch Jews arrived that day of which 1594 went immediately
>> to the gas chamber. The remaining 116 (all women, including the doctor's
>> 3 women) were brought into the camp. The fact that the three women the
>> doctor referred to were SHOT is not found anywhere in the diary. In fact
>> that information came out at Dr. Kremer's Polish war crimes trial. He
>>said there, "Three Dutch women did not want to go into the gas chamber and
>> begged to have their lives spared. They were young women IN GOOD HEALTH,
>> but in spite of that their prayer was not granted and the SS who were
>> participating in the action SHOT THEM ON THE SPOT."
This gives but one example (there are numerous others) in which the "triage"
analogy falls apart.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 6 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
879 Neil:
> My question is: what is the particular significance of the \method\ of
> killing the marginal slaves?
The method is only important when we have a desire to know all the details.
If someone is satisfied with knowing the large picture but doesn't care about
the details of how, why, when, where, who, etc., then the method is not
important to that person.
> Was gassing in any sense cheaper or more efficient than simply lining
> them up and shooting them?
There were many good reasons for using gas rather than bullets. If you will
remember, bullets had been tried already by the Einsatzgruppen. Here are the
reasons (all of which come from the Nazis' own documents to justify the
switch in methods):
(1) Shooting women and children was very stressful on the SS who performed
the executions. A method needed to be found which required less direct
contact with the killing, fewer SS involved, and one in which it wasn't so
"messy."
(2) Not everyone was killed with the first burst of gun fire and this led to
wounded people crawling out of the mass graves in which they had fallen,
having to survey the bodies and "finish off" any who were still moving, etc.
This added to the stress mentioned in #1.
(3) Shootings, because of the noise inherent in them, alerted everyone within
earshot what was happening. This caused panic among many and created many
"ear" witnesses.
(4) A war was going on and bullets were needed for that.
The gassings solved these problems by:
(1) The SS men saw living people going into the chamber and then saw the
bodies but never had to see the blood or the actual death. Therefore it was
less stressful (yet, even with this, there were many suicides among the SS at
Auschwitz).
(2) No one in the gas chamber could avoid being killed. There were no
"wounded."
(3) Gassings were silent. There are differing reports on what the surrounding
population did or did not know about the functioning of the extermination
camps. This tells us, bare minimum, that the gassing allowed a "plausible
deniablity" for anyone who didn't want to admit what was happening at the
camps. The sound of gun fire certainly would be much more difficult to cope
with using the same technique.
(4) Although gas was used to fumigate barracks, subs, etc., it was not needed
in the same way in which bullets were needed.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 7 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
879 Neil:
> Why do you place such emphasis on the fact that Faurisson has a degree in
> literature rather than history?
You originally claimed that Faurisson was an "historian." Such a designation
implies a history degree. Also, when someone is being quoted or their work
referred to, it is common to put that person's credentials up for
consideration. For instance, Raul Hilberg has credentials as an historian.
Faurisson does not. Neither does Elie Wiesel, btw, and I would point that out
just as clearly as I have pointed out Faurisson's lack of history
credentials.
Each individual participant here is free to place whatever value he/she
wishes upon those credentials. Some might claim that Hilberg is "educated to
the point of ignorance" because of his credentials and, therefore, discredit
him. Others might have the opposite reaction.
Either way, do you see a problem with informing the participants and lurkers
of various authors' credentials?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 8 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
885 Raven:
> Although Pooh.bah has indeed provided a lot of information, much of
> it is irrelevant, tainted, or worse. The volume of her posts and the
> subtlety of her errors makes it virtually impossible for someone with
> a limited number of hours (and dollars) to disassembled each and
> every one of her statements.
Perhaps because my errors are so subtle even I am not aware of them. Would
you mind enlightening me and producing just one example?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 9 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
885 Raven:
> virtually everything I had been told about the Holocaust story ... in the
> classroom, on the television, in books ... was in error. I can't think of
> any other topic about which that can be said.
How many other historical events have you investigated on your own? Perhaps
"virtually everything" you have been told about other events is "in error"
but you are not aware of that.
For instance, since this is 1992 and the 500th anniversary of Columbus' first
trip to the "New World" maybe we should use that as an example.
Most schools teach that Columbus was responsible for discovering that the
earth was round. Is this true? No. It was Aristotle who proved the world is
round, pointing out during an eclipse that the earth casts a spherical shadow
on the moon. Plato popularized the concept. By Columbus's day it was taken
for granted. The person mainly responsible for the myth was Washington
Irving. (source: _Legends, Lies & Cherished Myths of American History_).
Or, how about the "fact" that Columbus "discovered" the New World? Most of us
acknowledge that this is wrong today but it is still taught in many schools.
Not even getting into the inherent problem of saying that someone
"discovered" a populated area, there is historical and archeological evidence
that Lief Ericsson did indeed come to the New World and even set up a colony.
Yet, he is never credited with being the first European to "discover" the New
World.
These are just two examples from one event. There are many more for this as
well as every other historical event.
How many other historical events have you researched and why have you
concentrated what seems to be the lion's share of your attention on this
particular one - the Holocaust?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 10 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
885 Raven:
> Contrast this to the treatment accorded Pooh.bah, who could be anyone,
> with any background, with any agenda, and who is lionized.
I believe that you are assuming facts not in evidence here. First, I realize
that you are new here on GEnie. I know this because in the first message in
this TOPic you told us that fact but I also know it because I'm a long
standing member of GEnie. Just because you do not know certain facts about me
you assume that others are wandering in the same darkness. Many of the
participants here have known me for years and quite a few of them have met me
face-to-face and even more of them have talked to me on the telephone.
Therefore, they are not "lionizing" an unknown - although I'm not certain
that I would claim that anyone is "lionizing" anyone else here.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 11 Fri Mar 27, 1992
POOH.BAH (Forwarded)
885 Raven:
> How do you think I feel, as a citizen of the United States, reading about
> how FDR did every dirty and illegal thing he could to get us into two
> world wars? How do you suppose I feel knowing that millions of soldiers
> died needlessly because Anglo-Saxon "leaders" such as Churchill and FDR
> cynically fanned the flames of war. How do you think I feel about the
> firebombings of German civilian populations? How do you think I feel about
> the ruthless attempts to exterminate the German populations of
> Czechoslovakia and other countries? How do you think I feel about
> Eisenhower reclassifying millions of German POW as DEF (disarmed
> enemy forces) so he could get around the Geneva accords and allow
> them to die of starvation, exposure, and disease? How do you think I
> feel about the post-war rape of millions of German women by Stalin's
> troops? How do you think I feel about the post-war rape of Germany
> itself, as pieces of its territory were wrenched away from it, and
> millions (if not billions) of dollar's worth of machinery and patents
> were taken as "reparations" for a war she did not start, and given to
> Britain and the Soviet Union? How do you think I feel about the
> United States fighting alongside the greatest mass murderer of all
> times, Joseph Stalin, and AGAINST the two countries who most clearly
> saw the dangers of communism, Germany and Japan? How do you think I
> feel about the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? How do you
> think I feel about the Soviet Union being made a party to the Pacific
> War at the last minute so all the captured Japanese arms could be
> redistributed to the communists?
>
> And these are just a few of the injustices I could mention from this
> short period alone. I find all these and more to be blatantly
> offensive, to use your terms. Are my feelings somehow less valid
> because I am not Jewish?
Excuse me, maybe I missed something here. Could you please cite some message
numbers in this TOPic in which any of the above are discussed in, what to
you, is an "offensive manner." I really do not want to be in a position to
offend anyone (unless someone finds the facts to be offensive) so I would
appreciate an example where one of the events from your list above has been
discussed in a manner which offended you. That is the only way that I can
insure that I do not make similar mistakes in the future.
BTW, have you read Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice" lately? The tone of
your message is very reminiscent of Shylock's famous speech: "I am a Jew.
Hath not a Jew eyes? hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses,
affections, passions? If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do
we not laugh? if you poison us do we not die?"
Sorry to one and all for the digression into the works of Shakespeare. As my
handle plainly illustrates, I have a love for works from the British stage
and I cannot help these digressions from coming quickly to mind.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 12 Fri Mar 27, 1992
ERIC-M (Forwarded)
>>> G.RAVEN [Greg Raven]
Somebody asked:
> What have you to offer in terms of evidence to support the existence of
> a Zionist conspiracy to force the Holocaust Hoax on us?
To which you replied:
> That is not a topic in which I am particularly interested. I have
> opinions on the matter, but they are largely irrelevant to the
> discussion here. I don't care who, what, or how we got into Shoah
> Business as long as we can get out ... now!
You brought up the outlandish claim that the Holocaust "hoax" was a Zionist
conspiracy. Please back up your claims with evidence. Thanks!
/
|/ ric
|/
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 13 Fri Mar 27, 1992
J.GERBER4 [Jim Gerber] (Forwarded)
-=-=-=- To: D.FRIEDMAN14 -=-=-=-
> There can be no motivation behind Holocaust revisionism other
> than anti- Semitism. Only an emotion so powerful in its
I must disagree. Mr Schulman, in his series of letters alludes to other
reasons. He points out that some Libertarians, join the ranks of the deniers
and says that he's not sure of his own motives. I took that to mean that many
of these people are willing to throw in with anti-semites and neo-Nazis in
order to further their own agenda. I don't know a lot of Mr. Schulman, not
having read his novels, but am willing to believe that he is not a "self-
hating Jew". My personal opinion is that he's being totally honest with us- -
he isn't sure that his support of the revisionists is based totally on the
desire to bring out the truth.
There's a lot in Mr. Schulman's writings to make one think and a lot to agree
with--he is a VERY accomplished writer, IMHO. On the other hand, he is, as he
admits, an anarchist and an extreme one at that (if there could ever be a
moderate anarchist!). His views are frightening and it's certainly believable
that he would be willing to go to such extremes as supporting the deniers in
order to further his political aims. If nothing else, Mr. Schulman has the
guts to admit that he and others do this.
James Wellington Gerber
"It's crackers to slip a
rozzer the dropsy in Snide"
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 14 Fri Mar 27, 1992
C.FINK4 [Carl] (Forwarded)
>>...C.S. Lewis, for example, had his degree in medieval literature,
>>but wrote authoritatively on philosophy, Christian apologetics,
>>psychology, and quantum physics....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you serious, Neil? Lewis was a smart guy, but he knew less about quantum
physics than a bright high school student might know today.
Carl
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 15 Sat Mar 28, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 (Forwarded)
Jim Gerber:
Would you question the American Revolution? The My Lai massacre? The
Cultural Revolution?
Then what makes the Holocaust so especially "vulnerable" to historical
"review?" It is no less an historical event (and a major one, at that) than
any of the occurrences I mention above. So why this perverse obsession with
disproving Hitler's crimes?
Raven "for a war she [Germany] did not start" Oh, right. Poland blitzkrieged
Germany. Silly me.
Dave Friedman
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 16 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Pooh.bah (regarding 792) ---
> Therefore, since [sic] much evidence has already been presented
(and not rebutted with any sort of evidence) on the fact that there
was an extermination program, let us move on to the camps themselves.
.
Whoa up there, little lady! You might have presented all your
evidence, but you are inaccurate in denying the presence of my
rebuttals. Also, it is mighty high-handed of you to suddenly and
unilaterally change the topic of conversation without so much as a
by-your-leave. You posted a couple of ambiguous Einsatzgruppen
reports (while not adequately addressing the ones I posted), posted a
couple of things about the Wannsee Protocols (while leaving
unanswered my doubts about this document), and made reference to the
probably forged Franke-Gricksh Resetttlement Action Report (while
completely side-stepping my question about both its authenticity AND
my challenge to discuss its contents).
---
Along the way, you have failed to satisfactorily address the
following posts:
.
Number 580, concerning the German Foreign Office memorandum of
21.Aug.1942 in which evacuation of the Jews is clearly stated as
being the intent of the Third Reich.
.
Number 581, concerning Hitler's desire to postpone the solution to
the Jewish problem until after the war is over.
.
Number 582, concerning my "reservations" about the Franke-Gricksch
Report.
.
Number 583, concerning the Madagascar Plan (about which you have made
numerous inaccurate posts). Also, you were incorrect in stating that
it was not possible to get currency into Germany during the war.
True, Britain proscribed it. However, Americans could send money to
Germany as long as it went through a "neutral" country en route.
---
However, I accept the fact that you have no more evidence to support
your claim that there was a policy of extermination, while pointing
out yet again that you have failed to establish your claim in the
least.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 17 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Pooh.bah (regarding 792) ---
In "Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers," by
Jean-Claude Pressac (preface by Beate and Serge Klarsfeld), New York,
Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, 1989, 564 pages (oversized), $100, we
have what is promoted as "a scientific rebuttal to those who deny the
gas chambers." However, it is far from that, and in many ways it is
the most convincing argument yet that the revisionists have been
right all along about the Holocaust story. Here are a few examples,
with pages number references for any who can locate a copy of this
illusive tome:
.
Pressac admits that his eyewitness testimonies (including the
well-known ones of Miklos Nyiszli and Charles Bendel) are riddled
with errors, absurdities, inventions, and contradictions (page 469 -
479).
.
Pressac writes, "This study already demonstrates the complete
bankruptcy of the traditional (Holocaust) history ..., a history
based for the most part on testimonies, assembled according to the
need of the moment, truncated to fit an arbitrary truth and sprinkled
with a few German documents of uneven value and without any
connection with one another." (page 264)
.
There is no conclusive or documentary evidence for the widely claimed
homicidal gassings in the Auschwitz main camp crematory building. The
entire building was drastically restructured and reconstituted after
the war, and the crematory chimney there is a phony. (pages 123,
131-133, 144-146, 551)
.
The often quoted autobiography of Rudolph H (former commandant at
Auschwitz) is riddled with errors. What is more, the handwritten
manuscript of several hundred pages contains not a single correction
or crossing out, suggesting that it was copied. (pages 127-128, 551)
.
A 1945 Soviet film that documents extermination gassings in the
Kanada I section of Birkenau is a completely put up job. No homicidal
gassings were ever carried out there. (pages 46, 47, 49, 264)
.
The 1946 British military trial of Zyklon suppliers Dr. Bruno Tesch
and Karl Weinbacher, which resulted in death sentences and hangings,
was unjust and probably a masquerade. (page 17)
.
The widely quote figure of four million Auschwitz deaths is
propaganda and symbolic (pages 13, 501)
.
Cremation is much more problematical and time-consuming than
Holocaust historians have claimed, and the widely repeated stories
about cremating 10,000 or even 25,000 corpses daily at Auschwitz are
absurd and impossible. (pages 244, 247, 253, 334, 413, 420)
.
The word "sonderaktion" (special action) was not a euphemism for
killing or extermination. (pages 210, 213)
.
The Germans did not use a secret code to conceal their crimes. (pages
247, 556)
.
The diagram of "gas chambers" at Birkenau in the widely circulated
1944 War Refugee Board Report is inaccurate. (pages 459, 461)
.
An architectural plan of Auschwitz-Birkenau from August 1942 shows
that the German authorities anticipated a camp large enough
eventually to hold 200,000 inmates. (page 203)
.
Photographs and diagrams show extensive quarantine and recuperation
facilities for sick and injured Birkenau inmates. (pages 510 - 513)
.
The plan to systematically exterminate Jews at Birkenau must have
decided upon between June and August 1942, and was first implemented
between March and June 1943. (pages 212-213, 246, 348) (This is a
radical departure from the standard Holocaust myth)
.
The danger of Zyklon B was underscored in a memo from Commandant H
on August 12, 1942, copies of which were widely distributed around
the camp. (page 201)
.
Workers from nine civilian firms helped construct Kremas IV and V
(pages 350, 384). These workers were allowed to go home to see their
families. (pages 210, 213) (This makes hiding the allegedly secret
gas chambers a bit more of a problem)
.
There are six photos that show humane conditions at
Auschwitz-Monowitz. (pages 506-507) (These are from the Durrfeld file
of Nuremberg trial number 6)
.
95 percent (or more) of the Zyklon B was used to kill lice, while
only 5 percent (or less) was used to kill people. (page 15)
.
Pressac states that when gassing humans with Zyklon B, the gas goes
directly to the victims' mouths. (page 555) (That is, it does not
deposit itself on and impregnate itself into walls, skin, clothing,
etc., which Zyklon B is known to do.)
.
In order to obtain more of the then-scarce Zyklon B to combat
disease, authorities at Auschwitz pretended to be gassing Jews. (page
188) (In order to save Jewish lives, the Auschwitz authorities
claimed to be killing them.)
.
Photographs which traditionally have provided proof of the gassings
are not definitive proofs. (page 429)
.
So-called eyewitness Nyiszli, on whose testimony Pressac depends a
great deal, multiplies his figures by 3, or by 5, or by 4, or by 2.5,
or by 6.7, or by 4 , or by 4 again, or by 2.5, or by 4 yet again, or
by 2 to 3. From this Pressac gets an average figure of 4, by which
the reader is supposed to divide the numbers in Nyiszli's comments to
get the true number. (page 475) Still, Pressac feels that Nyiszli is
a credible source.
.
The average number of cremations per day at Krema II was 960 or 288
or 720 (page 110) or 752 (page 183) or closer to 1000 (page 470,
because the figure of 2,000 on page 334 is not acceptable) or between
1000 and 1500 (page 475) or nearly 625. (page 494)
.
Pressac claims that the exhaust from gas and diesel engines (that is,
the CO content) is equally deadly to humans. (page 16)
.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many more instances in
which Pressac contradicts himself, but which cannot be shown in a
sentence or two. There are further instances in which when you
compare Pressac's work to others in the field, you come up against
still more discrepancies. All in all, this work is typical of the
"evidence" provided by exterminationists to support the Holocaust
story.
.
Pressac is a pharmacist.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 18 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Daniel Brin (regarding 793) ---
(and Patrick Braden, etc.)
You are your fellow lurkers from the PEN system in Santa Monica will
no doubt find it interesting that in this message, Pooh.bah is
quoting from the Polish report that you implied did not exist.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 19 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Pooh.bah (regarding 793) ---
The following is a condensed version of Fred Leuchter's
qualifications, as presented at the October 1990 IHR Conference.
---
Mr. Leuchter received his Bachelor's degree from Boston University in
1964, and did post-graduate study in Celestial Navigation Mechanics
at the Harvard Smithsonia Astrophysical Observatory in Massachusetts.
.
Since 1965, he has worked as an engineer on projects having to do
with electrical, optical, mechanical, navigational, and surveying
problems.
.
He holds patents in the fields of optics, navigation, encoding,
geodetic surveying, and surveying instrumentation, including patents
on sextants, surveying instruments, and optical instrument encoders.
.
From 1965 through 1970 he was the technical director for a firm in
Boston, where he specialized in airborne, opto-electronic, and
photographic surveillance equipment. He designed the first low-level,
color, stereo-mapping system for use in a helicopter, which has
become an airborne standard.
.
In 1970, he formed an independent consulting firm. During his period
with this form, he designed and built the first electronic sextant
and developed a unique, light-weight, compact, and inexpensive
optical drum, sector encoder for use with surveying and measuring
instruments. He also built the first electronic sextant for the U.S.
Navy. He has worked on and designed astro trackers utilized in the
on-board guidance systems of ICBM missles.
.
Because of his work in navigational devices he has had hands-on
experience with surveying and geodetic measuring equipment and a
thorough knowledge of map reading and cartography. He is trained in
reading and interpreting aerial photographs.
.
He has designed a computerized transit for surveying use, and several
years ago he developed the first low-cost personal telephone monitor.
.
During the past ten years, Mr. Leuchter has been a consultant to
several state governments on equipment used to execute convicted
criminals, including hardware for execution by lethal injection,
electrocution, gassing, and hanging. In the course of this work, he
designed a new gas chamber for the state of Missouri, and he designed
and constructed the first lethal injection machine in New Jersey. He
has also been a consultant on execution procedures.
.
Mr. Leuchter holds a research medical license from both state and
federal governmens, and he supplies the necessary drugs for use in
execution support programs.
.
In 1987, he formed Fred A. Leuchter Associates, a consulting
engineering firm specializing in general consulting, and the design
and construction of prototype hardware.
.
Fred Leuchter has been a forensic engineer consultant, and has
testified as an expert in courts in the United States and Canada. ...
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 20 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Pooh.bah (regarding 797) ---
This is a copy of a sheet I received from Mark Weber of the IHR. I
believe it constitutes a future article in the IHR Newsletter.
---
Leading Austrian Engineer Says Auschwitz Gassing Stories Not Possible
.
A leading Austrian engineer says that the well-known stories of mass
extermination of Jews in gas chambers at Auschwitz and Mauthausen are
"technically impossible." Walter Lueftl, 59, reaches this conclusion
in a report of more than a hundred pages that deals primarily with
Auschwitz. Entitled "Holocaust: Belief and Facts," the report was
published recently in Vienna. In it, Lueftl writes:
.
"The mass murder with Zyklon B [which was allegedly used to kill Jews
in Auschwitz gas chambers] could not have taken place. Not only would
this have violated natural law, but the technical and organizational
prerequisites for it did not exist. On the basis of structural
considerations, the crematories could not have handled the number of
victims. Corpses are not burning materials. To burn them requires
considerable time and energy."
.
Lueftl also characterizes the often-repeated story of Jews being
gassed with diesel engine exhaust as a "sheer impossibility," and
mentions the "discrepancies in witness testimonies" which "exist and
have still not been explained."
.
Lueftl, who is a court-recognized expert engineer, heads a large
engineering firm in Vienna. He has been serving as president of the
Austrian Engineers Chamber, a 4,000-member professional association.
.
His report has set off a furor in Austria. A leading official of the
governing People's Party expressed fear that it could harm the
country's "image" abroad. In response to protests, Lueftl has been
obliged to resign as president of the engineers association. In a
statement, Lueftl condemned Nazi atrocities, but once again cited the
absence of supporting forensic evidence. (Sueddeutsche Zeitung,
Munich, March 13 and 14-15: AFP and AP dispatches from Vienna.)
.
Lueftl's report is yet another authoritative confirmation of the
findings of American gas chamber expert Fred Leuchter, who testified
about his investigation of the supposed "gas chambers" of Auschwitz,
Birkenau, and Majdanek in the 1988 trial of German-Canadian publisher
Ernst Zuendel. ...
.
... The findings of Leuchter and Lueftl have also been corroborated
by the Institute of Forensic Research in Krakow, Poland.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 21 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Pooh.bah (regarding 800) ---
> Hydrocyanide HCN detaching from Zyklon B is a liquid with a boiling
point of approx 27 degrees Centigrade.
.
This is interesting, but it is not germaine. None of the four tests
mentioned in this topic have tested for HCN. They are testing for the
presence of "compounds of cyanic ions," as noted below.
---
> Much more durable are those complex compounds of cyanic ions
amalgamating with heavy metals. Such one is the aforementioned
Prussian Blue, but even it dissolved slowly in an aciduious
environment.
.
The first sentence is correct. The building materials used at
Auschwitz/Birkenau contained iron and other heavy metal ions which,
unlike solid pieces of metal, bond readily with HCN gas to produce
ferric-ferro-cyanide compounds. These compounds are extremely stable,
contrary to the second sentence, as was testified to by James Roth,
chief chemist of Alpha Analytical Labs in Massachusetts, at the 1988
"Holocaust" trial of Ernst Zuendel. Even after 45 years, the
compounds would not have weathered away. The proof of this is the
presence of Prussian blue staining still visible on the walls of the
delousing facilities.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 22 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Pooh.bah (regarding 800) ---
The results of the Polish forensic study are consistent with those of
the Leuchter Report. Thank you for typing it in ... it saves me the
trouble. The Institute specialists detected absolutely no traces of
cyanide compounds in most of the plaster and brick samples taken from
the alleged extermination gas chambers. Traces of cyanides were
detected in eight samples, seven of which were rooms in Block 3 of
Auschwitz (main camp) where, as the Institute's experts acknowledge,
inmate clothing was disinfected by gassing with Zyklon B.
.
The presence of an almost indetectable trace in sample 15 from the
alleged homicidal "gas chamber" in Krema building II in Birkenau is
entirely in keeping with Leuchter's conclusion that the room from
which it was taken must have been deloused with Zyklon at one time or
another.
.
It is not true that all the alleged gas chambers were exposed to the
elemen, as the Institute's experts contend. Specifically, the entire
crematory facility (Krema I) in the Auschwitz main camp, including
the alleged homicidal "gas chamber" there, has been completely intact
since the camp was liberated by Soviet forces in January 1945. The
authors of the Polish forensic report make no effort to explain the
adsence of cyanide compounds in this "gas chamber." Also, the alleged
extermination gas chamber of Krema II in Birkenau is protected by the
collapsed contrete ceiling, and is otherwise in its original
condition.
.
Finally, the Polish forensic report does not deal at all with the
deficiencies in the physical plant that Leuchter so brilliantly
brought to light.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 23 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Pooh.bah (regarding 800) ---
In response to questions put to him about the Polish forensic test,
Dr. Markiewicz states (in part):
---
[Before conducting the tests] I was not informed then about the
so-called "Leuchter's Report" or about the publications coming out at
that time, nor were my co-workers. Their investigations and results
are known to you from the expertise the copy of which is in your
possession. I'd like to mention that the Management of the Museum did
not inform us about the copying of this expert appraisal and its
propagation.
.
Now, in the light of letters and publications coming to us from
different countries, I have arrived at the conclusion that our
investigations aiming at the confirmation, if possible, of the use of
cyanic preparations in the rooms that survived whole or only in the
form of ruins, were rather preliminary in nature and incomplete. We
are bent on widening and deepening these investigations and have
already been preparing for them. It is only now when suitable
materials from literature have become accessible to us that we see
the purpose and sense of such studies. Naturally, we shall publish
their results and make them accessible to you and your Institute [of
Historical Review].
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 24 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Pooh.bah (regarding 826, et al) ---
> This (the 1-1.1 million) has always been the figure on which the
overall 6 million figure has been based. Therefore, there is no need,
just because Poland is finally bringing the plaques into line with
history, for history to revise the total figure when it never had any
of the sub-figures wrong.
---
I can appreciate your trying to retain your deniability over the 4
million figure, but you are missing two main points: 1) the 4 million
figure was (and perhaps still is) widely taught as being true, and 2)
if the 4 million figure is a lie, then I am correct in stating that I
have been repeatedly lied to about the Holocaust story.
---
From the Washington Times, Tuesday, July 17, 1990
Poland reduces Auschwitz death toll estimate to 1 million
by Krzysztof Leski and Ohad Gozani, London Daily Telegraph
.
London -- Poland has cut its estimate of the number of people killed
by the Nazis in the Auschwitz death camp from 4 million to just over
1 million. ...
.
... The revised Polish figures support claims by Israeli researchers
that Poland's former communist government exaggerated the number of
victims by inflating the estimate of non-Jews who died. ...
.
... Plaques commemorating the deaths of 4 million victims were
removed from the Auschwitz museum earlier this month. But the Polish
authorities said accurate estimates of the number killed could only
be made by studying German documents seized by the Soviet Union. But
Moscow has refused to return the archives.
.
According to Mr. Krakowsky, 5,860,000 Jews perished in the Holocaust,
mostly in Auschwitz and five other Polish death camps. There were
extermination camps in other occupied countries, including
Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union.
---
Wow! Lots of new wrinkles here, huh? If "most" of the Jews died in
the Polish death camps, this would mean roughly 3,000,000 deaths in
the camps alone. If Auschwitz, the main extermination center,
accounted for only about 1 million of these, that leaves a lot of
slack to be taken up by the other camps, about which we know very
little, and which certainly have never been claimed to have been as
big as Auschwitz. And then we have these "new" death camps in
Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union! Doesn't anyone here see why I
have trouble swallowing this story whole? It is almost chameleon-like
in its ability to adapt to whatever is needed of it.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 25 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Neil Schulman (regarding 870) ---
> Greg Raven, I must create a real cognitive dissonance in you.
.
Not at all. I accept that you and I differ on some views. I don't
really understand why you might think otherwise.
---
> ... the enmity you've expressed towards Jews and the Jewish people
in messages in this topic ...
.
This comment worried me, so I went back through my posts to see if I
might have misstated my position to lead you to think that I harbor
enmity toward Jews. I could find nothing, and in fact I harbor no
such feelings toward any group. I will take the chance of posting the
obvious when I say that not all Jews are Zionists, and not all
Zionists are Jews. If you have specific examples that trouble you,
please bring them to my attention at your convenience.
---
> ... do you believe in any restrictions on the right of Jews to keep
and bear arms?
.
Yes, except in the Middle East :->
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 26 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To D.Nott (regarding 880) ---
> I have a modest proposal. We should have daily or weekly updates,
perhaps here in the topic or as a cumulative library file, trackin
which questions G.Raven has failed to answer. Each time he posts, we
should remind him of these questions.
.
If you think this would constitute harassment, perhaps you should
refer to my post 18, in which I specifically request that anyone who
feels that his question is not satisfactorily being address bring the
mater up again to me. There is no reason to become malicious or
hysterical ... just remind me. Simple.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 27 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
To Dave Friedman (regarding 883) ---
You asked my opinion of Zionism. As a Libertarian and an atheist, I
am suspecious of all States and religions. However, generally
speaking I am only concerned with either to the extent that they
attempt to control my life, or use force, or commit fraud. If they
can find a way to let me alone, I am more than happy to let them
alone.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 28 Sat Mar 28, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] (Forwarded)
The power of the Holocaust story today ---
LA Times, Friday, March 27, 1992, page A4
Kohl Invites Waldheim to Lunch, Stirs Anger
by Tamara Jones, Times Staff Writer
Berlin -- Breaking an unofficial international shunning of Austrian
President Kurt Waldheim, German Chancellor Helmut Kohl invited the
former officer in the Nazi army to lunch today in what was described
by the Bonn government as a "polite gesture" and by Jewish leaders as
a moral outrage. ...
.
... Waldheim, a former United Nations secretary general, has
steadfastly denied allegations that he had a role in Nazi war crimes
while serving in Adolf Hitler's army in World War II.
.
Althoug the now-disbanded U.N. War Crimes Commission agreed there was
a prima facie case for prosecuting Waldheim when the allegations
surfaced in 1986, the charges were not pursued. Waldheim nonetheless
found himself on a diplomatic desert island, ostracized by Western
leaders and officially barred from entering the United States under
an immigration rule used to exclude political undesirables and common
criminals. ...
.
... In New York, the World Jewish Congress, which represents the
Jewish communities in 70 countries, including Germany, condemned Kohl
for "going out of his way" to meet Waldheim, whose six-year term
expires next month. The organization made the initial allegations in
1986 that Waldheim was involved in the deportation of Jews in the
Balkans to Nazi death camps.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 29 Sat Mar 28, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] (Forwarded)
Scaramouche, Message 882: You miss my point. Lewis wrote competently on
subjects for which he had no degree. He had no degrees in theology
whatsoever, yet he's regarded as one of the great theological writers of this
century.
But I will go further than that. Degrees are worth nothing in evaluating the
competence of the degree-holder in his subject.
I hold no degrees whatsoever, yet I have written and published two novels (one
endorsed by Anthony Burgess and Milton Friedman, another endorsed by Colin
Wilson and praised by Robert Heinlein). So tell me. Who's more competent to
write criticism of novels -- me, who's done it, or some Ph.D. who's never
published outside of academia, and couldn't write a potboiler to save his
life?
Earlier this year I appeared on the Op-Ed page of the LA Times, on the subject
of gun-control. I have no degree in criminology or sociology. Should they
have rejected me on that account?
Note the following well: I was once consulted by the head of the English
department of a major statewide university system (the holder of a doctorate
in English literature) to evaluate his fiction for commercial possibilities.
The man's writing was incompetent at the grammar-school level -- barbarisms,
incorrect syntax, and misuse of common expressions.
Further, teacher's unions in this country regularly oppose competency testing
of teachers. They know damn well what the results would show.
Am I competent to write about the subjects I choose to write about? You bet --
because I \research\ facts before I write about them, and make damn sure my
facts are correct before committing myself to them.
A committment to honest research is the only "credential" anyone needs.
To dismiss Faurisson because he holds an English degree rather than a history
degree is ridiculous. As a matter of fact, most universities wouldn't make a
distinction. My friend David Friedman has been teaching university-level
economics at Tulane (and has written a textbook on it) with a Ph.D. -- in
physics.
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 30 Sat Mar 28, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] (Forwarded)
D. Berkowitz, Message 888: Well, \you\, for one, dismiss Faurisson for extra-
historical reasons: his association with Willis Carto. QED.
Regarding degrees -- see above to Scaramouche.
Regarding whom candidates "associate" with -- that is because guilt-by-
association is politics-as-usual.
I presume no prior association between Carto and Faurisson because I have been
presented with no evidence of it. But Faurisson is French and lived in
France; Carto American and lived (lives?) in Southern California. Six
thousand miles is one reason I assume no prior connection. If you can prove
any, I'll reconsider my position.
My point about Heisenberg is that since his physics is not invalidated by his
political associations, Faurisson's writings are not necessarily invalidated
by his.
And I tell you as many times as is necessary: writing fundamental criticism of
Holocaust history is a good way not only not to get published in any
mainstream publications -- no matter what the quality of the work -- it also
risks blacklisting and political persecution. Faurisson was arrested and
criminally charged for his writings. You expect me to regard that as
something other than political repression? Where the hell was PEN or Amnesty
International?
As for who I accuse of McCarthyist tactics: Simon Wiesenthal, in calling for
criminal charges against those who write or speak their opinion that there
were no gassings at Auschwitz, or that the death of the Jews at Nazi hands was
smaller than is generally regarded; Lucy Dawidowicz, per my references in my
article; Abe Rosenthal, for his charges of anti-Semitism against Pat Buchanan.
Enough to prove that I'm not making "anonymous" charges?
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 31 Sat Mar 28, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] (Forwarded)
AH.Stein, Message 893: I have no problem with being "suspicious" about a
person's writings because of their associations. But that's where it should
end. One needs to judge the writing on its merits or lack thereof, without
prejudice.
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 32 Sat Mar 28, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] (Forwarded)
Pooh.Bah, Message 899: the fact that a court takes judicial notice of
something doesn't make it true or false. It merely means that's what the
judge believes to be true. And I have as low an opinion of judges as I do of
Ph.D.s.
Pooh.Bah, Message 900. Oh, yeah? From the 1968 edition of the \Encyclopedia
Britannica\, Volume 6, page 980: "In March, 1933, on the site of an ammunition
factory erected in 1917, a concentration camp, infamous for the brutalities
practiced in it, was opened within the boundaries of Dachau. It was set up and
run by the Nazi S.S. (\Schutzstaffel\). About 70,000 out of 206,202 detainees
lost their lives in the gas chamber or in other ways."
So the Britannica's reference in 1968, 23 years after the end of World War II,
isn't a "historical work published within scholarly circles" but a "popular
misconception"?
I find the distinction less than useful.
OK, we have no credible depositions of gassings at Auschwitz, and we have no
corpi delecti. Are you really saying that the only \physical\ evidence we
have of human gassings at Auschwitz are presumptions regarding the
concentrations of HCN left in the materials and an application of Occam's
razor as to the purpose of the peepholes?
Can you understand why, with so little physical evidence, and no credible
depositions, this might be considered by a reasonable person a \debatable\
historical question, considering that in 1968 the \Encyclopedia Britannica\
was still treating gassings at Dachau as established fact?
You say there are eyewitness accounts (plural) to the gassings. I recall one
in the film \Shoah\. How many other eyewitnesses to gassings are there, and
what work has been done to verify the credibility of the witnesses? Since
this seems to be all we have to go on, it seems rather important.
Incidentally, I recall you chewing out Greg Raven in a previous message for
confusing typhoid and typhus. It's not much of a mistake, when the \Webster's
Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary\ defines typhoid as "(1) of, relating to, or
suggestive of typhus."
Pooh.Bah, Message 903: Maybe I'm dense, but I don't understand how your
account disproves, or even relates to, my message regarding "triage" (as I
delimited it for the sake of this discussion).
Pooh.Bah, Message 904: Understood. If killing could be done quietly and
neatly, it's easier. Nevertheless, if it turned out that the camp deaths were
from other causes than gassings, it wouldn't exonerate the Nazis. I don't see
that denying gassings as the method of murder -- given the paucity of physical
evidence -- is that big a sin -- and certainly not worth criminal charges, as
have occured in France and Canada.
Do you stipulate that there are only around 80,000 or so \recorded\ deaths at
Auschwitz, and that whatever others occured are unrecorded and uncounted? Or
is there another record of the number of gassing victims?
Pooh.Bah, Message 905: I called Faurisson a historian because he was
researching and writing about historical events. See my message above to
Scaramouche why I completely discount the question of "credentials." Does
that make me a functionalist? >grin>
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 33 Sat Mar 28, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] (Forwarded)
Jim Gerber, Message 911: If you find an agenda in my writings here -- other
than a desire to see truth and fairness prevail -- please tell me. I'll try
to stop doing whatever it is immediately.
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 34 Sat Mar 28, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] (Forwarded)
Carl Fink, Message 912: C.S. Lewis was at Cambridge and Oxford, and had many
renowned scientists as friends and colleagues. Read his \Miracles\ if you want
to know how much or little he understood of quantum physics.
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 35 Sat Mar 28, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] (Forwarded)
Greg Raven, Message 922: I get the joke. I acknowledge your wit. But
seriously. I need a straight answer on the open record. "Do you believe in
any restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms, and specifically, any
restrictions on Jews to keep and bear arms?"
I admit that I have a hidden agenda in asking this question, but you don't
get me to go on the record about it until after I have an answer from you on
this.
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 36 Sat Mar 28, 1992
E.BROWN42 [scaramouche] at 09:34 EST
Neil,
You missed MY point. Lewis always acknowledged his "amateur" status and
referred his readers to the experts in the fields that he talked about. That
doesn't detract from his genius, it only adds to it, IMO.
Scaramouche
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 37 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 11:59 EST
914 Raven:
From my statement which you quoted into your message (adding, btw, a needless
"[sic]"):
>> Therefore, since [sic] much evidence has already been presented
>> (and not rebutted with any sort of evidence) on the fact that there
>> was an extermination program, let us move on to the camps themselves.
To which you replied:
> You might have presented all your evidence, but you are inaccurate in
> denying the presence of my rebuttals.
Sorry, but I never claimed that "all" of the evidence has been presented and I
have not seen rebuttals with "any sort of evidence." "Evidence" does not
include unsubstantiated statements nor plagiarism.
> Also, it is mighty high-handed of you to suddenly and unilaterally change
> the topic of conversation without so much as a by-your-leave.
Excuse me, Mr. Raven, but when I suggested that you and I isolate ourselves to
rebutting each other, it was you who declined that offer. Because of that, I
am not isolated to responding to you and only you. There have been several
messages lately which have asked for specific information regarding the gas
chambers, gassings, etc. Two have even made a request that it be discussed now
instead of later. Did you, perhaps, miss these messages?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 38 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 11:59 EST
914 Raven:
> You posted a couple of ambiguous Einsatzgruppen reports
As has been pointed out by others besides me, there is nothing ambiguous
about the Einsatzgruppen reports that I posted. To reinterate:
7/7/41: According to instructions by RSHA, LIQUIDATIONS of government and
party officials, in all named cities of Byelorussia, were carried
out. Concerning the Jews, according to orders, the same policy was
adopted. The exact number of the LIQUIDATED has not as yet been
established.
7/11/41: In Kaunas, up to now a total of 7,800 Jews have been LIQUIDATED...
10/7/41: Sonderkommando 4a EXECUTED 33,771 Jews on September 29 and 30.
10/12/41: These were the reasons for the EXECUTIONS. . .
10/18/41: 4,091 Jews and 46 Communists were EXECUTED. . .
10/27/41: . . .believed in the transfer right up to the moment of their
EXECUTION.
2/25/42: . . .140 more people had to be SHOT.
9/12/41: EXECUTIONS of Jews are understood everywhere and accepted favorably.
It is surprising how calm the delinquent are when they are SHOT...
9/25/41: . . .SHOT a total of 44,125 persons, mostly Jews.
9/28/41: EXECUTION of at least 50,000 Jews planned.
10/2/41: . . .EXECUTED 33,771 Jews in Kiev...
10/20/41: . . .apprehended and LIQUIDATED.
None of the key words in the documents that I have quoted are the least bit
ambiguous. Your charge is false. BTW, could you please define your meaning of
a "couple" of reports? This is a listing of 12 and I posted more than these.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 39 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:00 EST
914 Raven:
> You posted a couple of ambiguous Einsatzgruppen reports (while not
> adequately addressing the ones [sic] I posted)
You only posted a single Einsatzgruppen report. You did name two others but
never posted them even when asked to do so:
> Quoth the Raven:
>> You present yourself as being knowledgeable about all this, how about if
>> you explain Einsatzgruppen reports of 31.Oct.1941, 24.July.1941, and
>> 5.Aug.1941?
> Has anyone wondered yet why it is that I quote the documents and allow
> them to make my point but Raven just throws out dates and implies that
> there is something that _I_ am hidding?
> Raven: Quote the documents and don't lower yourself to vague innuendo.
> Just be sure that you quote in context, okay?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 40 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:01 EST
914 Raven:
> You posted a couple of ambiguous Einsatzgruppen reports (while not
> adequately addressing the ones [sic] I posted)
And, what about the single report that you DID post? What was my response?
> 579 Raven: Ah, yes, you quoted the last paragraph of a three page report.
> Now, let's put that quote into its proper context and see if it can stand
> up to scrutiny.
>
> This report is from Einsatzgruppe C, location: Kiev, date 31.October.1941.
> It carries a title of "Work carried out to date by the Security Police."
>
> Therefore, we must first see what "work" had been carried out thus far by
> this particular Einsatzgruppe in this particular location.
>
> 9/12/41: "Executions of Jews are understood everywhere and accepted
> favorably. It is surprising how calm the delinquent are when they are
> shot, both Jews and non-Jews. Fear of death seems to have been dulled by
> 20 years of Soviet rule."
>
> 9/25/41: "The units of the Higher SS and Police Chiefs, during the month
> of August, shot a total of 44,125 persons, mostly Jews."
>
> 9/28/41: "Execution of at least 50,000 Jews planned."
>
> 10/2/41: "Sonderkommando 4a in collaboration with Einsatzgruppe HQ and two
>
> Kommandos of police regiment South, executed 33,771 Jews in Kiev on 29-30
> September, 1941."
>
> 10/20/41: "A total of 537 Jews (men, women and adolescents) were
> apprehended and liquidated."
>
> Now that we have an idea of what "work" was done during the time for which
> the report in question covers, let us now turn to that report. I will post
> it in the next message.
> 579 Raven: Now for that part of the report that you did NOT quote.
>
> "In Galicia, particularly in Lvov, the German-speaking element was
> predominant. This made matters easier in practical terms since one was
> hard put to find any Bolshevik influence in the country. Measures were,
> therefore, mainly directed against the Jewish part of the population."
>
> "It may be stated today that the entire Ukrainian population has remained
> free of any Bolshevik ideology. In the beginning, as the German troops
> rapidly advanced, only superficial control was required in that area since
> hardly any Bolshevik seditious elements were found there."
>
> "Security Police has found two large groups of enemies in this area. They
> are: (1) the Jews; (2) active members of the former Soviet regime."
>
> Now, for the beginning of your quote: "It can be stated positively today
> that the Jews without exception served Soviet Bolshevism."
>
> BTW, this immediately follows the quote about the "two large groups." So,
> contained within this document is a definite contradiction. If the Jews
> were a security risk because they "served Soviet Bolshevism," then it
> follows that there would be only ONE group of "enemies."
>
> And, even with this, it totally ignores the previously statements that
> there was "hardly any Bolshevik seditious elements." Couple this with the
> number of Jews liquidated in my previous message (in particular on
> 9/29-30/41 - 33,771) and we can readily see that (1) the actions were
> taken and then the reasons for those actions were devised; and (2) the
> contradictory nature of these reports supports Hilberg's contention that
> the "Jewish danger" was a justification, rationalization and pure fiction.
> After all, if the Jews were so tied into the Soviet regime, then how had
> their "fear of death been dulled by 20 years of Soviet rule?" (see report
> from 9/12/41 in previous message).
>
> Since the last paragraph of the report you quoted is the only place that
> contradicts the rest, according to Occam's Razor, we must discredit that
> portion and accept the balance.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 41 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:02 EST
914 Raven:
> [You] posted a couple of things about the Wannsee Protocols (while leaving
> unanswered my doubts about this document)
I would still like to know your definition of "couple." I posted six length
excerpts of the Wannsee Conference Protocols. And what about "leaving
unanswered [your] doubts"?
> Quoth the Raven in 768:
>
>> The so-called "minutes" of the Wannsee Conference which you refer to
>> as the Wannsee Protocols are more probably notes made after the
>> Conference, rather than the actual minutes of the Conference. Big
>> difference.
>>
>> The "Wannsee Protocol" bears no official imprint, no date, no
>> signature, and was wtritten with an ordinary typewriter on small
>> sheets of paper. It does not bear the name of an agency, nor the
>> serial number under which an official record of the proceedings would
>> have been kept by the agency that initiated them. The fact that it is
>> stamped "Top Secret" only makes this document more suspicious.
>
> First, I am glad that you are able to quote Staeglich's work word for word
> but isn't it considered plagiarism to do so without proper credit?
>
> As you know (because Staeglich mentions this in his book), he never saw
> any of the documents of which he speaks. Now, let's discuss the Wannsee
> Conference Protocols, shall we?
>
> They were minutes of the meeting held January 20, 1942. Staeglich doubts
> this but supplies us with no reason for his doubt other than what you have
> quoted from him above. However, if he had taken the time and trouble to
> contact the National Archives in Washington, DC (since it was the US which
> captured the minutes of the Wannsee Conference), he would have had his
> answer immediately.
>
> The Wannsee Conference Protocols were contained within a group of
> documents. Among these documents was the cover letter for distribution of
> the minutes. I have no idea where you work or what type of work you do
> (all we know is that you have a "full-item" job....whatever that means)
> but if you've been involved in any meetings in which minutes are produced,
> you know that the distribution of those minutes usually have some sort of
> cover letter. This cover letter explains the enclosure (i.e. the minutes)
> and proposes another meeting of those from the various departments
> represented 1/20/42 but of lower rank.
>
> The entire group of documents was captured by the US and has been in US
> possession ever since. You aren't suggesting that the US personnel...our
> veterans...tampered with these documents, are you?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 42 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:03 EST
914 Raven: So, you claim that I did not address your #580. Perhaps you missed
the this posting:
580 Raven:
> 21.Aug.1942: "The present war gives Germany the opportunity and also
> the duty of solving the Jewish problem in Europe," the memorandum
> notes. The policy "to promote the evacuation of the Jews (from
> Europe) in closest cooperation with the agencies of the Reichsfuehrer
> SS (Himmler) is still in force."
Now, you might fool some of the people with the above but you should know me
well enough by now to realize that I won't be fooled. When you quote a
document, it is not permissible to include your interpretation in ()...I'm
referring to your "(from Europe)" inclusion.
Let's look at another document which has previously been posted by me.
23.October.1941.
"The Reichsfuehrer SS and Chief of the German Police has decreed that the
emigration of Jews is to be prevented, taking effect immediately. (Evacuation
Aktionen will remain unaffected.)"
Muller
This tells us that "evacuation" and "emigration" are two different terms in
the Nazi lexicon. Your document speaks of the "evacuation" which apparently
has nothing to do with leaving Europe....regardless of your personal
parenthetical remark.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 44 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:06 EST
914 Raven: So, you claim that I did not address your #582. Perhaps you missed
the this posting:
582 Raven:
> "camp physicians must use all means at their
> disposal to significantly reduce the death rate in the various
> camps." Furthermore, it states, "The camp doctors must supervise more
> often than in the past the nutrition of the prisoners and, in
> cooperation with the administration, submit improvement
> recommendations to the camp commandants ... The camp doctors are to
> see to it that the working conditions at the various labor places are
> improved as much as possible." Finally, the directive stresses that
> "The Reichsfuehrer SS (Himmler) has ordered that the death rate
> absolutely must be reduced."
It certainly gets tedious when questions are asked which have already been
answered. However, I will answer once again:
From the official report on Auschwitz to Heinrich Himmler from Alfred Franke-
Gricksch in May, 1943 (regarding the selections):
"The basic principle behind everything is: conserve all manpower for work.
The previous type of "resettlement action" has been thoroughly rejected,
since it is too costly to destroy precious work energy on a continual basis."
Of course, this is the report which goes on to describe the "resettlement
action" as the selection and gassing of Jews. The full text can be found in
one of the first dozen or so messages in this TOPic.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 45 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:07 EST
914 Raven:
> Also, you were incorrect in stating that it was not possible to get
> currency into Germany during the war. True, Briatin proscribed it.
> However, Americans could send money to Germany as long as it went through
> a "neutral" country en route.
This is not entirely true, is it, Mr. Raven? Even if Americans wanted to send
the money through a "neutral" country, the US Treasury Dept. had to issue a
special license to permit such a transfer of funds, didn't they? So, if
Treasury did not issue the license, US dollars could not be transferred.
Also, since any license went through the embassy system, the State Department
also got involved.
I could cite case after case where the issuance of the license was refused or
delayed until the US funds could not possible rescue the Jews. The first case
that comes to mind is the case of 70,000 Romanian Jews who could have been
saved for a mere $175,000. Private funds had been raised for this rescue but
the license for the transfer of funds was not forthcoming until it was too
late.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 46 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:08 EST
915 Raven:
> Pressac admits that his eyewitness testimonies (including the
> well-known ones of Miklos Nyiszli and Charles Bendel) are riddled
> with errors, absurdities, inventions, and contradictions (page 469 -
> 479).
Gee, I like that technique. By saying "his eyewitness testimonies" you make
it sound as though Pressac depends upon eyewitness testimony which he,
himself, discredits.
What is on pp 469-479?
The heading tells it all: "A Demonstration of the Impossibility of Relying on
Raw Testimony."
So, this is not _HIS_ eyewitness testimonies but a review of two eyewitness
testimonies in an attempt to prove why testimony alone is insufficient proof
of the gas chambers and gassings.
This, BTW, is a widely accepted belief within the historical community as
well.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 47 Sat Mar 28, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] at 12:08 EST
Scaramouche, Message 36,
Perhaps I missed your point about the word "amateur" status, because I don't
understand it now. Certainly Lewis wrote as a "lay" expert on Christianity,
inasmuch as he was not a cleric. But I don't see how this does anything but
support the point that one can write competently, even expertly, on matters
outside one's accredited area of expertise.
Certainly a lot of errors can be made by people writing outside their areas of
knowledge. For example, just because someone has a Nobel prize in science
doesn't mean we necessarily have to take their political opinions serously.
But writings, and writers, need to be judged by the writing.
If, when Faurisson had put forward his criticisms of the gas- chamber
histories, the French had responded with the arguments put forward by Pooh.Bah
earlier in this discussion (in the soon- to-be-archived Topic 4), everything
would have been fine and dandy. Instead, Faurisson was fired from his job
and prosecuted as a criminal.
This bites the big one. It sucks. It's abhominable.
It was the sort of response Adolf Hitler would have engaged in.
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 48 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:09 EST
915 Raven:
> Pressac writes, "This study already demonstrates the complete
> bankruptcy of the traditional (Holocaust) history ..., a history
> based for the most part on testimonies, assembled according to the
> need of the moment, truncated to fit an arbitrary truth and sprinkled
> with a few German documents of uneven value and without any
> connection with one another." (page 264)
This is just using the basic "quote out of context" technique. It is
humorous, though, to see the "..." in just that place! I wonder why you left
that parenthetical remark out?
Here, then, is the full paragraph from which the above was excerpted. Notice
that it is the METHODOLOGY of which Pressac disapproves and not the HISTORY.
I will break it into more than one paragraph for easier reading here.
However, the quote appears as a single paragraph in the text.
"The fact that the history of the extermination rested essentially on
eyewitness accounts gave rise in the West to a debate based on comparison and
confrontation of these testimonies, a critical attitude which led in the end
towards some people purely and simply denying the existence of homicidal gas
chambers. Testimony history and its revisionist offspring being very closely
linked, the one having generated the other, it became absolutely essential to
find a new historical approach in order to escape from the closed circle of
futile debate and go further in search of the truth.
"A precise study based on material evidence, such as the study of Krematorien
II and III, meets this requirement of getting out of the circle, but can by
no means be considered definitive, because like any human endeavour it
contains imperfections. It is intended above all to be THE BEGINNING, open to
criticism and improvement, of a detailed, in-depth study of ALL the gas
chambers, for homicidal or disinfestation purposes, still existing in the
Nazi concentration camps. This study already demonstrates the complete
bankruptcy of the traditional history (and hence also of the methods and
criticisms of the revisionists), a history based for the most part on
testimonies, assembled according to the mood of the moment, truncated to fit
an arbitrary truth and sprinkled with a few German documents of uneven value
and without any connection with one another.
"This new methodology is also a form of protection against the temptation to
seek media success, as in films or television programmes which, despite their
success, disdain even the most elementary historical approach and cut
themselves off from basic realities. Finding a hitherto unknown document that
makes it possible to fill a gap between two known facts and thus improving
our overall knowledge is a thousand times more necessary and important than
constantly wasting kilometers of film on the same places, the same ruins and
the same monuments without ever bringing anything new. The money invested in
these films or television broadcasts would have been better spent on genuine
historical research in order to establish a less fragile truth than that
based on human memory, which is fallible and changes over time."
Once again, this is not discrediting the Holocaust but only basing historical
accounts on eyewitness testimony.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 49 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:09 EST
915 Raven:
> There is no conclusive or documentary evidence for the widely claimed
> homicidal gassings in the Auschwitz main camp crematory building. The
> entire building was drastically restructured and reconstituted after
> the war, and the crematory chimney there is a phony. (pages 123,
> 131-133, 144-146, 551)
Page 123 tell us of the reconstruction of the gas chambers. This is not new
information and it is one of the things wrong with the Leuchter Report - he
doesn't take into consideration that these structures were demolished by the
Nazis and what remains was reconstructed from the plans.
Pages 131-133: Let's quote from the "Conclusion" on page 133 which covers
these pages and only these pages.
"Because of the lack of original documents and the transformations that have
been made [see the drawing of the present state of the premises at the end of
this chapter], it was not possible BEFORE [emphasis mine] to materially
demonstrate the existence of a homicidal gas chamber in the former morgue of
Krematorium I, even though the testimonies of the revisionist attacks [see
the remarks by R.Faurisson on Krematorium I in "Verite historique ou verite
politique" by S.Thion, La Vieille Taupe, April 1980, pages 314 to 317] have
essentially been concerned with this building, which is by far the most
visited in the camp. ...[Brief review of the findings of the Leuchter
Report]... Today, despite its poor reconstitution, the krematorium I must be
considered as an authentic symbol of homicidal gassings at Auschwitz, since
several thousand people did indeed die there through gassing."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 50 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:11 EST
915 Raven:
> There is no conclusive or documentary evidence for the widely claimed
> homicidal gassings in the Auschwitz main camp crematory building. The
> entire building was drastically restructured and reconstituted after
> the war, and the crematory chimney there is a phony. (pages 123,
> 131-133, 144-146, 551)
Pages 144-146: These pages only contain a group of photographs with the
overall heading: "External Views of Krematorium I"
Page 551: I'm sure that you brought this page up because it contains two more
photographs of Krematorium I. However, by so doing, you have demonstrated
that you believe the book to be so "elusive" that I don't have my own copy.
That was a mistake and, if you had known, I'm sure that you wouldn't have
brought up this page which is part of the Postface by Pressac.
Let me quote, then from page 551:
"All these trips [to Auschwitz] were made at my own expense. I owed nothing
to Faurisson, not being a robot for his exclusive use. I had undertaken the
work in order to complete documentation I required for my novel and there was
no question of my giving this up in favour of a _crazy hypothesis_ that was
turning out to look increasingly unlikely and indefensible as I delved
further into the drawings and files. His battle was not mine."
For those who are unaware, Pressac studied the Holocaust with Faurisson as
his teacher. Faurisson wanted Pressac to "prove" there were no gas chambers
at Auschwitz. Pressac was ready to do so out of conviction. But, Pressac was
not willing to falsify any findings or conclusions. Here is what Pressac
states on page 546 as to his break with Faurisson:
"I worked with Robert Faurisson from the end of March 1980 to December 1980.
Then, as all serious historical research became impossible, his dogma being
paramount, our meetings became less frequent, though we remained in touch,
then the final break came in April 1981. Before being able to realize that
the force of his argument rested purely and simply on the lead he held in the
knowledge of the facts, I had to catch up with him. Only then was I able to
judge impartially the value of his arguments. What first made me think
deeply, helped me and, I admit, disturbed me, was Pierre Vidal-Naquet's
article of September 1980, "La memoire d'Auschwitz." The second factor was my
own research at the PMO Archives and the documents I found there in three
stays ...(dates of stays)... Third was the pleading of Maitre Bernard
Jouaneau at the hearing of 1st June 1981 at the High Court of Paris during
the "Faurisson trial." But as early as the end of August 1980, Faurisson, who
was not at that time aware of it, could no longer count me among his
unconditional supporters. His theory stood up for only TWO DAYS to a direct
historical confrontation with the Museum documents and the Birkenau ruins,
the just result of over-hasty research that, irony of fate, had also lasted
two days."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 51 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:11 EST
915 Raven:
> The often quoted autobiography of Rudolph H (former commandant at
> Auschwitz) is riddled with errors. What is more, the handwritten
> manuscript of several hundred pages contains not a single correction
> or crossing out, suggesting that it was copied. (pages 127-128, 551)
Pages 127-128: "Hoess participated in the 'special actions' strictly in
accordance with his obligations and occupied his mind with the almost
insurmountable tasks imposed by the exponential growth of his camp, thus not
allowing his conscience tow dwell on the moral question. HE WAS PRESENT,
WITHOUT SEEING. In the author's opinion, this attitude explains the
involuntary errors found throughout his autobiography." [emphasis in the
original]
Page 551: "I first continued my own research concerning the founder and
former commandant of the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp, SS
Lieutenant-Colonel Rudolf Hoess. The manuscript of his 'Autobiography' was
long declared to be 'mythical' by the French extreme right. Faurisson claimed
it had emerged directly from headquarters of falsifying Soviet-Polish-
Stalinist communists. When I asked Iwaszko for this manuscript, he brought it
to me without any hesitation and I was able to consult it at my leisure. The
thing that struck me the most was that Hoess had written several hundred
pages without any crossings out. At first I thought that this could not be
his first version, but the resultant of previous draughts. I was no doubt
wrong, for many people, very self-controlled, write in this fashion (which is
far from being my own!). I discovered, but I was not the first to do so, that
only the autobiographical part (about half the pages) had been published at
that time, and that virtually all the notes Hoess had written about the
officials with whom he had been in contact and about various institutions of
the Third Reich that he knew, remained unknown. I would add that Hoess'
manuscript was written in PENCIL (a normal constraint in the case of
prisoners) ...." [emphasis in the original]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 52 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:12 EST
915 Raven:
> A 1945 Soviet film that documents extermination gassings in the
> Kanada I section of Birkenau is a completely put up job. No homicidal
> gassings were ever carried out there. (pages 46, 47, 49, 264)
Page 46, 47, 49: Six large photographs. The first one is of the gas chamber
in Kanada I and the second is an enlarged photograph of the peephole in the
door. These are photographs and not "film" (which isn't mentioned until
later. The caption for these two photos and two of the three from the
following page states: "Photos 14, 15, 16 and 17 have been deliberately
grouped together, for the four of them shown together sum up in striking
fashion homicidal gassings using Zyclon-B, as the Soviet Commission, the
first to undertake investigations on the site in 1945, understood, presented
and published them. However, the SCENE [emphasis mine] is a completely put up
job. It has been common practice to show together a gas-tight door from a
delousing gas chamber (having genuinely functioned as such) and an
enlargement of a peephole, together with the delousing agent Zyclon-B. Dating
from 1945, this particular presentation is supported by one or two
testimonies affirming that a group of Sonderkommando men were gassed in this
Kanada gas chamber."
Page 264: "In the film 'Chronicles of the Liberation of the camp, 1945'
already mentioned, the outside of A [emphasis mine] gas chamber using Zyclon-
B in the section of the camp known as 'Kanada I' is shown, with its
characteristic gas-tight door.... This is a real problem here, however, for
THIS [emphasis mine] gas chamber was strictly for disinfestation, not for
homicidal purposes."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 53 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:13 EST
915 Raven:
> The 1946 British military trial of Zyklon suppliers Dr. Bruno Tesch
> and Karl Weinbacher, which resulted in death sentences and hangings,
> was unjust and probably a masquerade. (page 17)
Page 16-17: "The director of Degesch condemned to death simply on the verbal
testimony of one of his employees, the book-keeper Emil Sohm, who declared
that in the autumn of 1942, he had seen among the firm's records, a report of
a visit, dictated by Bruno Tesch, in the course of which he is supposed to
have suggested to Wehrmacht officers who hold him of the 'difficulties'
caused by the mass executions of Jews by shooting, that they should kill them
in disinfestation gas chambers using HIS product, Zyclon-B (business first!)
containing a powerful poison, prussic acid. In 1946 simple malicious gossip
could easily lead to someone being hung. I DO NOT KNOW [emphasis mine]
whether the 'trip report' was produced before the tribunal, but IF IT WAS NOT
[emphasis mine], this trial was a masquerade."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 54 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:29 EST
915 Raven:
> Cremation is much more problematical and time-consuming than
> Holocaust historians have claimed, and the widely repeated stories
> about cremating 10,000 or even 25,000 corpses daily at Auschwitz are
> absurd and impossible. (pages 244, 247, 253, 334, 413, 420)
Now we have another technique emerging. This one is using the phrase
"Holocaust historians have claimed" when, in truth, it is the primary sources
which have made various claims that the Holocaust historians have reported.
Page 244: "On 28th June, following the handover of Krematorium III, the last
one ot be completed, Jaehrling calculated the overall throughput for the five
Krematorien as 4,756 people in 24 hours, and sen this information to SS
General Kammler in Berlin (Document 68). This official figure, coolly coubled
when expalining operations to high-ranking visitors (ef. SS Major Franke-
Gricksch's report above, giving a figure of 10,000 in 24 hours), had no basis
in practice, and probably has to be divided by two or three to arrive at the
true figure."
Page 247 has absolutely no mention of the numbers cremated but does discuss
who designed, built and supplied the crematoria.
Page 253: "Between May and the beginning of July 1944, some 200,000 to
250,000 Hungarian Jews were annihilated in the gas chambers and incineration
furnaces of Krematorien II and III, the gas chamber and five incineration
ditches of Krematorium V, and the gas chamber (the original interal walls
dividing the building into four small gas chambers had been removed, leaving
a single chamber of external dimension 7 m by 15 m) of Bunker 2/V and its
incineration ditch of 30 m^2 area."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 55 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:30 EST
915 Raven:
> The word "sonderaktion" (special action) was not a euphemism for
> killing or extermination. (pages 210, 213)
Page 210 is the reproduction of an official Nazi document in which the term
"special action" is used.
Page 213, in referring to the above document: "The term 'special action' in
THIS [emphasis mine] context means checks and interrogrations among a
specific category of person and has nothing to do with the selection of those
fit for work and the gassing of the rest."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 56 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:30 EST
915 Raven:
> The Germans did not use a secret code to conceal their crimes. (pages
> 247, 556)
Page 247 refers solely to claims made of coded phrases but does not state
that there was no coding.
Page 556: "By contrast, that of 26th August 1942 requesting 'material for the
special treatment' and that of 2nd October 1942 for 'material for the
resettlement of the Jews', where is the 'coding' when the Zyclon-B brought
back will be used to supply Birkenau Bunkers 1 and 2? There is no coding: a
spade is called a spade."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 57 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:31 EST
915 Raven:
> There are six photos that show humane conditions at
> Auschwitz-Monowitz. (pages 506-507) (These are from the Durrfeld file
> of Nuremberg trial number 6)
Now, this one is really funny! Pages 506-507 show pictures in the section
where Pressac debunks the Holocaust Deniers! In fact, according to him, all
the photos came "from revisionist sources" and not as you allege from the
"Durrfeld file of Nuremberg trial number 6."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 58 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:32 EST
915 Raven:
> 95 percent (or more) of the Zyklon B was used to kill lice, while
> only 5 percent (or less) was used to kill people. (page 15)
Which isn't at all surprising since it takes 1660% MORE Zyklon-B to kill lice
than it does to kill humans!
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 59 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:32 EST
915 Raven:
> Pressac states that when gassing humans with Zyklon B, the gas goes
> directly to the victims' mouths. (page 555) (That is, it does not
> deposit itself on and impregnate itself into walls, skin, clothing,
> etc., which Zyklon B is known to do.)
Page 555: "By contrast, in homicide gassings, the quantity of Zyklon-B used
was smaller, man being more sensitive than lice or bugs to hydrocyanic acid.
A little of the poison injected was inhaled by the victims and the rest was
removed by the extractor fans, so that the contact time was brief and the
walls did not have the time to become impregnated."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 60 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:34 EST
915 Raven:
> In order to obtain more of the then-scarce Zyklon B to combat
> disease, authorities at Auschwitz pretended to be gassing Jews. (page
> 188) (In order to save Jewish lives, the Auschwitz authorities
> claimed to be killing them.)
"In order to combat the typhus epidemic that was raging through the camp in
August 1942, it was necessary to eliminate the vector of the disease, lice.
The most effective delousing agent was Zyclon-B, and without this product it
would be impossible to eradicate the disease. On the eve of the 'Lagersperre'
order, authorization was recieved by radio to send a 5-tonne truck...to
Dessau, to the Zyclon-B production plant in order to collect 'gas intended
for gassing the camp against the epidemic that has broken out.' On 29th July,
authorization was received for anotehr truck to go to Dessau to load 'gas
urgently required for disinfection.' These two truck would have brought back
a MAXIMUM of 4,000 to 5,000 one kilogramme cans of Zyclon-B, if this was the
size chosen. On 26th August, Zyclon-B was running out or lacking, and a
Renault truck (probably 3.5 tonne AHN) was sent to Dessau, this time for
'material for special treatment.' On 2nd October, while the epidemic was
still present, having reached a peak in September, the camp required
'material for the resettlement of Jews.' Finally, on 7th January 1943, to
keep control of the now endemic typhus, another truck was sent to Dessau for
'disinfection material.' These five movement authorization are the only ones
in existence that mention this type of transport. They reflect the TWO
DIFFERENT UTILIZATIONS OF ZYCLON-B." [emphasis in the original]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 61 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:35 EST
915 Raven:
> So-called eyewitness Nyiszli, on whose testimony Pressac depends a
> great deal, multiplies his figures by 3, or by 5, or by 4, or by 2.5,
> or by 6.7, or by 4 , or by 4 again, or by 2.5, or by 4 yet again, or
> by 2 to 3. From this Pressac gets an average figure of 4, by which
> the reader is supposed to divide the numbers in Nyiszli's comments to
> get the true number. (page 475) Still, Pressac feels that Nyiszli is
> a credible source.
Please cite where Pressac "depends a great deal" on Nyiszli's testimony?
After all, on page 469 we have the beginning of a new section entitled:
"Critical study of the testimonies of doctors Bendel and Nyiszli concerning
the Birkenau Krematorien and the homicide gassings." This is then subtitled:
"A demonstration of the impossibility of relying on raw testimony."
This gives a much clearer picture of Pressac's "dependence" on Nyiszli.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 62 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:36 EST
915 Raven:
> Pressac claims that the exhaust from gas and diesel engines (that is,
> the CO content) is equally deadly to humans. (page 16)
Another technique is to interpret what has been said and then present the
interpretation as having been stated. Here, Pressac does not address the CO
content of either gasoline or diesel engines. They both produce CO and it is
that which is equally deadly. It is a basic law of all sciences: A = A or, in
this case, CO = CO.
Page 16: "He [Konk, a "disciple" of Faurisson's] forgot that the Treblinka
gas chambers used CO (carbon monoxide), contained in the exhaust gas of a
tank engine (gasoline or diesel, both being equally deadly for humans)."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 63 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:37 EST
915 Raven:
> This is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many more instances in
> which Pressac contradicts himself, but which cannot be shown in a
> sentence or two. There are further instances in which when you
> compare Pressac's work to others in the field, you come up against
> still more discrepancies.
So far you have not come up with a single example of where Pressac
contradicts himself and to compare Pressac's work to others is comparing
apples and oranges.
Pressac is a pharmacist and chemist. Others "in the field" are eyewitnesses
and historians. As Pressac states on page 264 (previously quoted), he is
employing new methods of investigation.
BTW, the Pressac text is not that elusive. It is available for free to
any library. (That is part of the Beate Klarsfeld Foundation's rules.)
Anyone else should be able to get it from the Foundation for $100.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 64 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:38 EST
916 Raven:
> You are your fellow lurkers from the PEN system in Santa Monica will
> no doubt find it interesting that in this message, Pooh.bah is
> quoting from the Polish report that you implied did not exist.
And you will no doubt find it interesting that this Polish report does NOT
support Leuchter's conclusions as you claimed on PEN.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 65 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 12:40 EST
917 Raven:
> Mr. Leuchter received his Bachelor's degree from Boston University in
> 1964, and did post-graduate study in Celestial Navigation Mechanics
> at the Harvard Smithsonia Astrophysical Observatory in Massachusetts.
BA in history, BTW. "Celestial Navigation Mechanics" sounds rather remote
from gas chambers, doesn't it?
> Since 1965, he has worked as an engineer on projects having to do
> with electrical, optical, mechanical, navigational, and surveying
> problems.
Hmm...no toxicology, pharmacology, chemistry, etc. which might have some
relevance to gas chambers?
> He holds patents in the fields of optics, navigation, encoding,
> geodetic surveying, and surveying instrumentation, including patents
> on sextants, surveying instruments, and optical instrument encoders.
How do you see that any of this is relevant to the understanding of human
physiology, HCN, gas chambers, execution methods, etc.?
> From 1965 through 1970 he was the technical director for a firm in
> Boston, where he specialized in airborne, opto-electronic, and
> photographic surveillance equipment. He designed the first low-level,
> color, stereo-mapping system for use in a helicopter, which has
> become an airborne standard.
Are you stating this to imply that his "stereo-mapping system" for the
helicopter made the copter into a death chamber? If not, how is it relevant
to this discussion?
> In 1970, he formed an independent consulting firm. During his period
> with this form, he designed and built the first electronic sextant
> and developed a unique, light-weight, compact, and inexpensive
> optical drum, sector encoder for use with surveying and measuring
> instruments. He also built the first electronic sextant for the U.S.
> Navy. He has worked on and designed astro trackers utilized in the
> on-board guidance systems of ICBM missles.
Okay, but how was he (assuming he was) able to make use of all this knowledge
and/or experience in his evaluation of gas chambers, HCN, etc.?
> Because of his work in navigational devices he has had hands-on
> experience with surveying and geodetic measuring equipment and a
> thorough knowledge of map reading and cartography. He is trained in
> reading and interpreting aerial photographs.
I'm sorry, maybe I'm a little dense. I still do not see the relevance of any
of this information. Could you please explain it to me?
> He has designed a computerized transit for surveying use, and several
> years ago he developed the first low-cost personal telephone monitor.
I'm still trying to sort this out. Are you implying that the gas chambers at
Auschwitz were monitored by telephone?
> During the past ten years, Mr. Leuchter has been a consultant to
> several state governments on equipment used to execute convicted
> criminals, including hardware for execution by lethal injection,
> electrocution, gassing, and hanging. In the course of this work, he
> designed a new gas chamber for the state of Missouri, and he designed
> and constructed the first lethal injection machine in New Jersey. He
> has also been a consultant on execution procedures.
Ah, now we are getting some place. Could you please name the state at which
Leuchter has consulted? Also, has the Leuchter's gas chamber been installed
in MO and, if so, how many executions have been performed using it? Also,
could you please clarify for me how any knowledge of electrocution, hanging
or lethal injection machines has assisted him in his evaluation of Auschwitz?
> In 1987, he formed Fred A. Leuchter Associates, a consulting
> engineering firm specializing in general consulting, and the design
> and construction of prototype hardware.
Wait, maybe I'm wrong but I could have sworn that Leuchter was criminally
charged with practicing engineering without a license and, because of that,
his consulting firm is now defunct. Isn't that true? I know that you talk to
the man. Maybe you could enlighten us.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 66 Sat Mar 28, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 12:59 EST
Mr. Raven:
In re, your statement along the lines that you only oppose Zionism insofar as
you, being a Libertarian, oppose all nationalistic movements.
(Sorry I didn't extract the direct quote: I forgot to capture it, and it
really wasn't worth going looking for it...)
If we concede that this is true, then we must wonder about why you have, time
& again, insisted on singling out "bloodthirsty Zionists," while leaving out
such "nationalists" as French, Germans, Americans (talk about bloodthirsty:
look what we did over in 'Nam :( ), etc? One has no choice but to wonder at
this perverse obsession with the Zionists.
Zionist Dave Friedman
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 67 Sat Mar 28, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 13:01 EST
Pooh:
Leuchter's alleged aerospatial work proves one thing, at least: you don't
gotta be a rocket scientist to know that the Holocaust happened >dark grin>
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 68 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:02 EST
917 Raven:
> The following is a condensed version of Fred Leuchter's
> qualifications, as presented at the October 1990 IHR Conference.
BTW, I have the tape of that conference, too. Isn't Leuchter's presentation
the funniest thing that you ever heard? I laughed so hard that my sides hurt!
I loved where he was describing the gas chamber at Dachau and he starts by
saying that there are "17 phony shower heads in the ceiling" and yet
concludes that this structure was "clearly a shower room." Now these are
direct quotes from his presentation. Do you think he honestly expects us to
believe that something which was "clearly a shower room" would have "17 phony
shower head in the ceiling?"
Another part made me laugh so hard that it brought tears to my eyes was in
his discussion of Hartheim. There he concluded that it didn't make sense for
the Nazis to have shipped inmates from Dachau to be gassed at Hartheim when
Dachau "had a bigger and better facility."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 69 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:03 EST
918 Raven:
> Leading Austrian Engineer Says Auschwitz Gassing Stories Not Possible
What makes this so interesting about this is that Lueftl denies passing on
his manuscript to anyone, says that he didn't release it in any fashion and
has no contact with "such circles." This leaves a burning question as to
what Lueftl does say in his manuscript, doesn't it. After all, the manuscript
itself has never been released and we certainly know how quotes out of
context, twisting of words and other techniques can be employed to distort
the meaning of a manuscript.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 70 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:04 EST
919 Raven:
>> Hydrocyanide HCN detaching from Zyklon B is a liquid with a boiling
>> point of approx 27 degrees Centigrade.
>.
> This is interesting, but it is not germaine.
Did I mention something that isn't on your agenda for discussion? Leuchter
directly addresses the question of temperature in his report. Is this,
perhaps, an uncomfortable area for you?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 71 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:05 EST
919 Raven:
> ...ferric-ferro-cyanide compounds. These compounds are extremely stable...
> Even after 45 years, the compounds would not have weathered away. The
> proof of this is the presence of Prussian blue staining still visible on
> the walls of the delousing facilities.
The following is from: "Der Leuchter-Bericht aus der sicht eines Chemikers"
by Josef Bailer. (Tr. "The Leuchter Report from the view of a Chemist"). Dr.
Bailer has a Ph.D. in chemistry and in considered an authority in Austria.
"Against this hypothesis in the Leuchter report, it is unlikely that
hydrocyanic gas would remain in the pores of the walls because light, lime
and water or dampness would have destroyed it....Apart from this, the
Leuchter report only suggests, but never actually maintains, that this kind
of cyanide residue had been found. Where the Leuchter report speaks of
provable cyanide, it deals with Berlin blue (a pigment, i.e., Prussian blue
is not prussic acid, but will give a positive reaction).
"It is, however, also unlikely that Berlin blue arose in the walls, because
the iron in the bricks and in the burnt lime acted unfavorably for the
reaction of the trivalent form [of iron], and because the alkaline
environment hindered the reaction. On the other hand, the Leuchter report
proposes that the absence of Berlin blue proves that Prussian blue was never
used in the area. But since Prussian blue was only rarely - in the case of
the existence of exceptional circumstances - leaves behind residues on walls
- and thus in usual cases there are no residuals to find - no conclusion can
be drawn from the absence of such residues."
So, we now have the Krakow Institute of Forensic Expertise AND Dr. Josef
Bailer making the same assertion.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 72 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:05 EST
920 Raven:
> The results of the Polish forensic study are consistent with those of
> the Leuchter Report.
Results and conclusions are two different things. You do know that the
CONCLUSIONS of the Leuchter Report and the Polish forensic study are
diametrically opposing views, don't you? If not, I did u/l the report and you
might want to take a look at it.
> The presence of an almost indetectable trace in sample 15 from the
> alleged homicidal "gas chamber" in Krema building II in Birkenau is
> entirely in keeping with Leuchter's conclusion that the room from
> which it was taken must have been deloused with Zyklon at one time or
> another.
No, the test results are NOT in keeping with Leuchter's conclusions. In fact,
to quote Dr. Josef Bailer again: "The result of [Leuchter's] report is
completely worthless."
The Krakow Institute of Forensic Expertise agree with Dr. Bailer. Leuchter's
conclusions are illogical, meaningless and, to use Bailer's word, worthless.
That now means that we have an Institute of forensic specialists, an Austrian
chemist and a French pharmacist/chemist who all agree against a man who has
no science degrees (such as biology, chemistry, toxicology, etc.) who
disagrees.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 73 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:06 EST
920 Raven:
> It is not true that all the alleged gas chambers were exposed to the
> elemen, as the Institute's experts contend. Specifically, the entire
> crematory facility (Krema I) in the Auschwitz main camp, including
> the alleged homicidal "gas chamber" there, has been completely intact
> since the camp was liberated by Soviet forces in January 1945. The
> authors of the Polish forensic report make no effort to explain the
> adsence of cyanide compounds in this "gas chamber." Also, the alleged
> extermination gas chamber of Krema II in Birkenau is protected by the
> collapsed contrete ceiling, and is otherwise in its original
> condition.
Gee, and you even cited the page within Pressac which shows why all of the
above are false statements. Does that mean that you haven't READ Pressac and
you are only quoting what someone else has said about his work?
Page 123: "The fact is that while the building itself [Krema I] is still the
original one, its internal arrangement, as found in January 1945, has been
RESTRUCTURED and the installations connected with its cremation and gassing
activities have been RECONSTRUCTED AND RECONSTITUTED,..."
And what about Krema II? Once again, Pressac explains: "These days the ruins
are regularly inundated with 30 cm of water in the summer, with the water
level reaching 1 meter during the spring thaw." Doesn't sound too protected
to me.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 74 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:07 EST
920 Raven:
> Finally, the Polish forensic report does not deal at all with the
> deficiencies in the physical plant that Leuchter so brilliantly
> brought to light.
Let's look at just one of these "deficiencies," shall we? What about
Leuchter's claim that an explosion would have occurred with the use of HCN
that close to the crematoria? Yet, the concentration used in the gas chambers
was way below the lower threshold needed to cause an explosion. Leuchter
admits that most of the Kremas were razed to their foundations so one wonders
how he obtained his conclusions about some of these "deficiencies."
I do now understand your comment to Revenant, though, about him being
"educated to the point of ignorance" when you now turn around and classify
Leuchter's work as "brilliant."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 75 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:08 EST
920 Raven:
> According to Mr. Krakowsky, 5,860,000 Jews perished in the Holocaust,
> mostly in Auschwitz and five other Polish death camps. There were
> extermination camps in other occupied countries, including
> Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union.
> ---
> Wow! Lots of new wrinkles here, huh? If "most" of the Jews died in
> the Polish death camps, this would mean roughly 3,000,000 deaths in
> the camps alone. If Auschwitz, the main extermination center,
> accounted for only about 1 million of these, that leaves a lot of
> slack to be taken up by the other camps, about which we know very
> little, and which certainly have never been claimed to have been as
> big as Auschwitz. And then we have these "new" death camps in
> Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union! Doesn't anyone here see why I
> have trouble swallowing this story whole? It is almost chameleon-like
> in its ability to adapt to whatever is needed of it.
Actually, the accepted figure for all 6 the extermination camps is 2.7
million. As far as the new discoveries, you do know that since the downfall
of the Soviet Union that new documentation has become available to the West,
don't you? Mr. Krakowsky (the chief archivist at Yad Vashem) has been
evaluating these new documents. He has announced that the total figure has
been UNDER estimated by 250,000-500,000.
This is what historical research is all about. Are you suggesting that the
historians and archivist should not continue to search for and read new
documents?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 76 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:09 EST
928 Neil:
> Who's more competent to write criticism of novels -- me, who's done it, or
> some Ph.D. who's never published outside of academia, and couldn't write
> a potboiler to save his life?
Actually, an avid reader would get my vote as to who's the best to write the
critic! :-)
All kidding aside, though, we are talking about a subject (i.e. historical
research) in which credentials might matter. As I've stated before, I don't
see any problem stating a person's credentials (when that person's opinion is
being presented, or their research) and allowing the participants (and
lurkers) here to put that information into the balance, too. For you and
Raven, the fact that someone has a college degree might work against that
person. For others, they might think it is a positive. Either way, they have
the information and what they do with it is up to them.
Doesn't that seem fair to you?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 77 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:10 EST
928 Neil:
> To dismiss Faurisson because he holds an English degree rather than a
> history degree is ridiculous. As a matter of fact, most universities
> wouldn't make a distinction. My friend David Friedman has been teaching
> university-level economics at Tulane (and has written a textbook on it)
> with a Ph.D. -- in physics.
Actually, your logic here is faulty. You cite a single example and from that
make a broad generalization. And, even with the example you present, you
don't present a lot of the information needed to make an evaluation. Such as,
in what was Dr. Friedman's undergraduate degree?
I can tell you from personal experience that universities expect a clear
demonstration of competence in an area in which one is not credentialed
before allowing that person to lecture (like alone hold a faculty position).
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 78 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:11 EST
931 Neil:
> So the Britannica's reference in 1968, 23 years after the end of World War
> II, isn't a "historical work published within scholarly circles" but a
> "popular misconception"?
Let's put it this way, Neil. I have about the same regard for the
Encyclopedia Britannica as you have for PhD's and judges. It is not
considered to be "historical work published within scholarly circles" by
anyone I know.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 79 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:11 EST
931 Neil:
> Are you really saying that the only \physical\ evidence we have of human
> gassings at Auschwitz are presumptions regarding the concentrations of
> HCN left in the materials and an application of Occam's razor as to the
> purpose of the peepholes?
Now you are altering the question a bit. We also have documentation (captured
by the West) which most historical scholars consider "physical evidence."
This includes the shipments of humans in, no shipments of humans out,
shipments of Zyklon-B in with the designation of certain amounts to be used
for the "resettlement of the Jews" and "special actions" while the
designation on other shipments clearly states "fumigation" or "disinfection."
We have documents which were captured by the West that record the operation
of the gas chambers, etc.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 80 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:12 EST
931 Neil:
> Incidentally, I recall you chewing out Greg Raven in a previous message
> for confusing typhoid and typhus. It's not much of a mistake, when the
> \Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary\ defines typhoid as "(1) of,
> relating to, or suggestive of typhus."
Actually, there is quite a bit of difference between typhoid and typhus.
Typhus is a disease characterized by fever, headache, rash, neurological
disturbances caused by a rickettsia transmitted either by lice or fleas.
Typhoid, OTOH, is a disease resulting from an infection with Salmonella. It
is transmitted human by human. The major manifestations are gastro-
intestinal.
The above comes from "Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine" (Ninth
Edition). pp 641 & 755.
I would tend to believe this source over Webster's Ninth New Collegiate
Dictionary but you might have a problem with it since it was written and
edited by persons holding doctorates.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 81 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:12 EST
931 Neil:
> Maybe I'm dense, but I don't understand how your account disproves, or
> even relates to, my message regarding "triage" (as I delimited it for the
> sake of this discussion).
The account is one in which HEALTHY people were being exterminated while your
triage analogy was one in which only those unfit for labor would have been
killed. Or did I misunderstand your triage analogy?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 82 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:13 EST
931 Neil:
> I don't see that denying gassings as the method of murder -- given the
> paucity of physical evidence -- is that big a sin -- and certainly not
> worth criminal charges, as have occured in France and Canada.
Denial of gas chambers has NOT caused criminal charges to be brought in
France and Canada (or in Sweden or Germany, either). If you review the cases
you will discover this.
The Keegstra case in Canada is for inciting hate against an identifyable
ethnic group. He has done this, in part, by claiming that the Holocaust (not
just the gas chambers) did not occur and that the Jews are responsible for
hoisting this massive hoax on the world. However, this is only part of what
he taught to his high school students which has resulted in his case.
The Zuendel case in Canada is for spreading false news (i.e. he presented
something he knew was untrue as though it were true). This known untruth,
though, was NOT the gas chambers. Browning clearly delineated the falsehoods
contained in the pamphlet that Zuendel was distributing. Mark Weber (for the
defense), BTW, agreed with most of Browning's points.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 83 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 15:14 EST
931 Neil:
> Do you stipulate that there are only around 80,000 or so \recorded\ deaths
> at Auschwitz, and that whatever others occured are unrecorded and
> uncounted?
No. I have heard reports about the records found in Moscow. However, I've
only heard these reports from the Holocaust Deniers and, through my
experience with them and reading their books, I do not trust what they say to
be accurate.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 84 Sat Mar 28, 1992
C.FINK4 [Carl] at 16:07 EST
Raven, your 917 - how many of the qualifications listed in your long
message has Leuchter since admitted under oath were lies? "Engineer", for
one.
Carl Fink
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 85 Sat Mar 28, 1992
W.PIKE [PACMan] at 17:52 EST
Hello All,
I have been lurking for awhile. I find the topic interesting to say the
least.
My father was involved in the liberation of several "death camps". He has
told me what he heard, smelled, touched, and seen personally.
I would challange anyone who was there at that time to dispute the Holocaust.
IT HAPPENED.
Millions of Jews, Gypsys, and others were systematically murdered by the
German Government (Nazies).
Anyone that says otherwise is either deluded, I would hope, or a liar.
PACMan
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 86 Sat Mar 28, 1992
S.PIERCE6 [Sheri] at 20:21 EST
(The following is recorded on film in Lanzmann's "Shoah." Perhaps some will
want to check out this extraordinary and chilling multi- tape documentary at
their video rental outlet).
Filip Mueller, Survivor:
Before each gassing operation the SS took stern precautions. The
crematorium was ringed with SS men. Many SS men patrolled the court with dogs
and machine guns. To the right were the steps that led underground to the
"undressing room." In Birkenau there were four crematoriums, Crematoriums 2
and 3, and 4 and 5. Crematorium 2 was similar to 3. In 2 and 3 the "undressing
room" and the gas chamber were underground. A large undressing room" of about
three thousand square feet, and a large gas chamber where one could gas up to
three thousand people at a time. Crematoriums 4 and 5 were of a different type
in that they weren't located underground. Everything was at ground level. In 4
and 5 there were three gas chambers, with a total capacity of at most eighteen
hundred to two thousand people at a time.
As people reached the crematorium, they saw everything -- this horribly
violent scene. The whole area was ringed with SS. Dogs barked. Machine guns.
They all, mainly the Polish Jews, had misgivings. They knew something was
seriously amiss, but none of them had the faintest of notions that in three or
four hours they'd be reduced to ashes.
When they reached the "undressing room," they saw that it looked like an
International Information Center! On the walls were hooks, and each hook had a
number. Beneath the hooks were wooden benches. So people could undress "more
comfortably," it was said. And on the numerous pillars that held up this
underground "undressing room," there were signs with slogans in several
languages: "Clean is good!" "Lice can kill!" "Wash yourself!" "To the
disinfection area." All those signs were only there to lure people into the
gas chambers already undressed. And to the left, at a right angle, was the gas
chamber with its massive door.
(Continued in next post)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 87 Sat Mar 28, 1992
S.PIERCE6 [Sheri] at 20:22 EST
Filip Mueller, Survivor (continued)
In Crematoriums 2 and 3 Zyklon gas crystals were poured in by a so-called
SS disinfection squad through the ceiling, and in Crematoriums 4 and 5 through
side openings. With five or six canisters of gas they could kill around two
thousand people. This so-called disinfection squad arrived in a truck marked
with a red cross and escorted people along to make them believe they were
being led to take a bath. But the red cross was only a mask to hide the
canisters of Zyklon gas and the hammers to open them. The gas took about ten
to fifteen minutes to kill. The most horrible thing was when the doors of the
gas chambers were opened--the unbearable sight: people were packed together
like basalt, like blocks of stone. How they tumbled out of the gas chamber! I
saw that several times. That was the toughest thing to take. You could never
get used to that. It was impossible.
You see, once the gas was poured in, it worked like this: it rose from
the ground upwards. And in the terrible struggle that followed - because it
was a struggle - the lights were switched off in the gas chambers. It was
dark, no one could see, so the strongest people tried to climb higher. Because
they probably realized that the higher they got, the more air there was. They
could breathe better. That caused the struggle. Secondly, most people tried to
push their way to the door. It was psychological: they knew where the door
was; maybe they could force their way out. It was instinctive, a death
struggle. Which is why children and weaker people, and the aged, always wound
up at the bottom. The strongest were on top. Because in the death struggle, a
father didn't realize his son lay beneath him.
(Continued in next post)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 88 Sat Mar 28, 1992
S.PIERCE6 [Sheri] at 20:23 EST
Filip Mueller, Survivor (continued)
Lanzmann: And when the doors were opened?
Mueller: They fell out. People fell out like blocks of stone, like rocks
falling out of a truck. But near the Zyklon gas, there was a void. There was
no one where the gas crystals went in. An empty space. Probably the victims
realized that the gas worked strongest there. The people were battered. They
struggled and fought in the darkness. They were covered in excrement, in
blood, from ears and noses. One also sometimes saw that the people lying on
the ground, because of the pressure of the others, were unrecognizable.
Children had their skulls crushed. It was awful. Vomit. Blood-from the ears
and noses, probably even menstrual fluid. I'm sure of it. There was everything
in that struggle for life, that death struggle. It was terrible to see. That
was the toughest part.
It was pointless to tell the truth to anyone who crossed the threshold of
the crematorium. You couldn't save anyone there. It was impossible to save
people. One day in 1943 when I was already in Crematorium 5, a train from
Bialystok arrived. A prisoner on the "special detail" saw a woman in the
"undressing room" who was the wife of a friend of his. He came right out and
told her: "You are going: to be exterminated. In three hours you'll be ashes."
The woman believed him because she knew him. She ran all over and warned the
other women.
"We're going to be killed. We're going to be gassed." Mothers carrying
their children on their shoulders didn't want to hear that. They decided the
woman was crazy. They chased her away. So she went to the men. To no avail.
Not that they didn't believe her: they'd heard rumors in the Bialystok ghetto
or in Grodno, and elsewhere. But who wanted to hear that! When she saw that no
one would listen, she scratched her whole face. Out of despair. In shock. And
she started to scream.
So what happened? Everyone was gassed. The woman was held back. We had to
line up in front of the ovens. First, they tortured her horribly because she
wouldn't betray him. In the end she pointed to him. He was taken out of the
line and thrown alive into the oven. We were told: Whoever tells anything will
end like that."
We in the special detail kept trying to figure out if there was a way we
could tell people, to inform them. But our experience, in several instances
where we were able to tell people, showed that it was of no use, that it made
their last moments even harder to bear. At most, we thought it might help Jews
from Poland, or Jews from Theresienstadt (the Czech family camp), who'd
already spent six months in Birkenau. We thought it might have been of use in
such cases to tell people. But imagine what it was like in other cases: Jews
from Greece, from Hungary, from Corfu, who'd been traveling for ten or twelve
days, starving, without water for days, dying of thirst; they were half crazed
when they arrived. They were dealt with differently. They were only told: "Get
undressed, you'll soon get a mug of tea." These people were in such a state,
because they'd been traveling so long, that their only thought was to quench
their thirst. And the SS executioners knew that very well. It was all
preprogrammed, a calculated part of the extermination process, that if people
were so weak, and weren't given something to drink, they'd rush into the gas
chambers. But in fact, these people were already being exterminated before
reaching the gas chambers. Think of the children. They begged their mothers,
screaming: "Mother, please, water, water!" The adults too, who'd spent days
without water, had the same obsession. Informing those people was quite
pointless.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 89 Sat Mar 28, 1992
P.PAVLOVSKY at 22:13 EST
>...Perhaps "virtually everything" you have been told about other
events is "in error" but you are not aware of that.
>...Most schools teach that Columbus was responsible for
discovering that the earth was round.
>...Neil, you are mistaking popular misconceptions for historical
accounts. No historical work published within scholarly circles has
ever made the claims you mention.
>...Yet these stories which are based in fact (but not totally
factual) get acknowledged by the general populace as being factual.
>...(Encyclopedia Britannica)... is not considered to be
"historical work published within scholarly circles" by
anyone I know.
I have a problem to accept the vast contrast in understanding of
historic events in "scholarly circles" and "the general populace".
I doubt that "Most schools teach that Columbus was responsible for
discovering that the earth was round". With the American mentality
there would be a lot of lawsuits (the problem might be if the judge
attended one of those schools).
Are "scholarly circles" so elitist that they reserve their
knowledge for themselves and keep "the general populace" in
darkness of ignorance?
And one non rhetoric question:
If the number of four million people killed in Auschwitz complex
was actually the number of people killed by National Socialists in
whole Poland, and the real number of people killed in Auschwitz is
something over one million, then what was the previous number for
people killed in Poland?
Sometimes I do agree even with Berkowitz;
825 D.BERKOWITZ:
> For myself, it makes no difference whether 100,000 or 100,000,000
Jews were slaughtered. Nor does the method[s] employed make a real
difference to me. The result is self-evident,...
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 90 Sat Mar 28, 1992
POOH.BAH at 22:32 EST
89 P.Pavlovsky:
> Are scholarly circles so elitist that they reserve their knowledge
> for themselves.....?
Not at all. Volumes upon volumes have been written. Some have been mentioned
here. Hilberg readily comes to mind in this classification...and one person
here has his abridged single volume while another has his three-volume set and
another one has made inquiries on how to obtain his three-volume set.
The problem is that most Americans spend more time watching TV than reading.
Another problem is that bookstores stock what sells. That usually means the
latest best sellers. Publishers, too, generally print only those materials
which they feel will have a good market.
Probably one of the best sources for these books is from college bookstores
since they do have a ready market these types of books. You can also order
them from most standard bookstores but they are not readily available on the
shelves.
If you are interested, I would be happy to supply you with a bibliography.
> ...what was the previous number for people killed in Poland?
It is the same as it has been....4 million Jews killed in the various camps
and ghettos throughout Poland.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 91 Sat Mar 28, 1992
S.PIERCE6 [Sheri] at 23:59 EST
CNN reported that the Polish statistics for Auschwitz were reduced
because there were fewer non-Jewish victims of the homicidal gas
chambers. ~~~
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 92 Sun Mar 29, 1992
P.PAVLOVSKY at 00:16 EST
90 POOH.BAH:
>The problem is that most Americans spend more time watching TV
than reading.
> Another problem is that bookstores stock what sells.
... and our culture goes @#$% &*!.
And you can't be surprised when TW serial "Shoah" is understood by
Americans as the documentary.
>If you are interested, I would be happy to supply you with a
bibliography.
Thanks, I don't feel a desire for an academic explanations for my
knowledge. I remember people and what they said.
I never met anybody who described "gas chambers", but I heard
several people who described shooting, hanging and beating to
death.
One very sad experience was when a friend of my told me that I
can't visit him because I have blue eyes and blond hair. He was
very nervous when he tried to explain that his mother was in a
concentration camp and hates people with blue eyes and blond hair.
I did understand.
There was a short article in the N.Y. Post 3-26-92:
UPI: ...1.5 million victims died at ...Auschwitz..., not 4 million-
acclaimed by the former Soviet Union - Jewish and Polish officials
said yesterday.
...official account of the number of victims was reduced following
verification of archives recently returned by Soviet authorities to
Poland.
Polish communist authorities used 4 million figure because it was
established by a postwar Soviet commission on Nazi crimes.
That article does not specify Jews, but "victims"
One more time:
What was the previous number for people killed in Poland?
Besides the previous number from Auschwitz.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 93 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 00:53 EST
To:30 SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman]
>D. Berkowitz, Message 888: Well, \you\, for one, dismiss Faurisson
>for extra- historical reasons: his association with Willis Carto.
>QED.
You seem determined to overlook the substance of any reply I give
you, and respond in meaningless soundbites. I gave you quite a
different explanation of the meaning of association. You seem hell
bent on convincing yourself without the need to confront the
differences I suggested. Why?
In any case, did Dov Berkowitz serve on any committee to discredit
Faurisson, was Dov Berkowitz consulted to pass judgement on
Faurisson. If by your QED, you mean to castigate me for condemning
Faurisson and being part of the McCarthyistic conspiracy to have
Faurisson fired, you are mistaken, and actually your charge reveals
the inability on your part to verify your inflammatory charge. I
suggest you offer apologies and retract.
>Regarding degrees -- see above to Scaramouche.
Again- you respond in sound bites. I never said that a degree meant
everything, just that a person without expertise would have to
convince those with it.
>Regarding whom candidates "associate" with -- that is becauseguilt-
>by- association is politics-as-usual.
Again you miss the substance and reply in soundbites. Is this a
personal philosophy?
>My point about Heisenberg is that since his physics is not
>invalidated by his political associations, Faurisson's writings
>are not necessarily invalidated by his.
As I wrote previously, a red herring, since I specifically never
claimed that his phyusics were invalidated. But you did not notice
the more important question which I did ask. Is that part of the
unbiased research?
>And I tell you as many times as is necessary: writing fundamental
>criticism of Holocaust history is a good way not only not to get
>published in any mainstream publications -- no matter what the
>quality of the work --it also risks blacklisting and political
>persecution. Faurisson was arrested and criminally charged for
>his writings. You expect me to regard that as something other
>than political repression? Where the hell was PEN or Amnesty
International?
>
And the proof.....
>As for who I accuse of McCarthyist tactics: Simon Wiesenthal, in
>calling for criminal charges against those who write or speak
>their opinion that there were no gassings at Auschwitz, or that
>the death of the Jews at Nazi hands was smaller than is generally
>regarded; Lucy Dawidowicz, per my references in my article; Abe
>Rosenthal, for his charges of anti-Semitism against Pat Buchanan.
Enough to prove that I'm not making "anonymous" charges?
I still haven't seen any proof. You have named names, but far from
proving the case. You reference to Rosenthal is particularly
specious, I think that Abe had much justification drawing
conclusions from Buchanan's intemperate remarks. In any case, this
is far, far from 'McCarthyistic tactis used by some Jews'. You have
spoken, I must say, in very inflammatory language condemning people
in the identical way you decry. I suggest you take the time to read
your own messages. Perhaps there is more behind the surface than you
care to reveal.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 94 Sun Mar 29, 1992
J.STENGEL [John] at 01:00 EST
I am having a problem with the techical data regarding hydrocyanic acid
(prussic acid)...specifically with the issue of dosage and length of time of
exposure to prove lethal to humans. Uptopic, Pooh.Bah posted data quoted from
a German (circa 1942, I believe) technical data sheet on the material.
.
>Prussic acid is one of the most powerful poisons. 1 mg per kg of body
>weight is sufficient to kill a human being. Women and children are
>generally more susceptible than men.
.
>The following is the lethal doses (in g/m^3) per species:
.
>Mosquitos: 0.25 for 30 minutes
>Bugs: 0.25 for 1 hour
>Humans: 0.30 instantly
>Fleas: 1.25 for 2 hours
>Rats and mice: 2.5 for 2 hours
>Lice: 5.00 for 2 hours
>Cockroaches: 5.00 for 2 hours
.
Claire questioned this lethality data uptopic; she asked how could the
fatal dose for humans be so much greater than that for rats and mice. The
same question bothered me, no one has adressed Claire's question yet (unless
I missed it). I consulted *Tabers Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary*;
under the heading "acid, hydrocyanic", it offers the following:
.
>HCN. A colorless, extremely poisonous, highly volatile liquid. Occurs
>naturally in plants. It is obtained synthetically by several methods.
>Has many industrial uses: electroplating, fumigation, and production
>of dyes, pigments, synthetic fibers, and plastic. Exposure of man to
>200-500 parts of acid per 1,000,000 parts of air for 30 minutes is
>fatal. It acts by preventing cellular respiration. SYN: Prussic acid;
>hydrogen cyanide.
Also, *Tabers* (under "Poisons and Poisoning" lists the human lethal dose
for cyanide (active ingredient in HCN) as "less than 5 mg per kg of body wt".
This means that the lethal dose of cyanide for a 70 kg (154 lb.) human is
about 350 mg.
.
If I remember my college chemistry, 200-500 parts per million is equal to
200 to 500 mgs/m^3 (which is in the range of concentration the German data
sheet cites). "Instantly", however, (as a time for lethal exposure) is a bit
farfetched at the concentration cited (300mg/m^3). According to *Geigy
Scientific Tables*, the mean adult lung capacity is about 3 liters. Assuming
15 breaths per minute; thats 45 liters of air per minute. Since 1 cubic meter
of air contains 1000 liters, at an HCN concentration of 300 mg per cubic
meter the 154 lb person would breath 1.16 m^3 (1,160 liters) of HCN
contaminated air before absorbing a lethal dose (350mg). At 15 breaths per
minute, (3 liters each), this means approximately 26 minutes of exposure till
death. An "instant" (one breath) lethal concentration would require in excess
of 100gms/m^3.
.
Pooh.Bah, If my math and my reasoning are correct, then the lethality data
you cited must be incorrect. This would also explain how the gas chambers
could, with minimal ventilation, be emptied of bodies without killing guards
or inmate workers. In addition, assuming that panicked victims would breath
much faster than the normal 15 breaths per minute, my data also tends to
support the anectodal accounts of the process taking about 15 minutes.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 95 Sun Mar 29, 1992
A.K.QUINN at 01:10 EST
For what it's worth: I entered Dachau Concentration Camp on April 29, 1945,
with the 45th Infantry Division. I was a 1st Lt then; I retired as a colonel
several years ago.
I remained in Dachau, taking testimony of inmates of all religious
backgrounds and none. I saw the ovens and the experimental medical
installation. I captured several SS doctors, as well. Later, I helped set up
the communications facilities at Nuremberg, and went on to serve with the
Military Government For Bavaria.
I am dumbfounded at attempts to deny things I saw with my own eyes and
things testified to by non-Jews. Among them was Father Roth, a member of the
Dominican Order (Friars), who had been in Dachau for over 6 years. He had
preached against the treatment of Jews. He could have kept his mouth shut, but
didn't. Neither will I.
I am Roman Catholic, now 74 years old. I wonder what happens after guys like
me die off? Till then, I'm a witness with a message, who doesn't understand
why anyone would want to believe Jews (and others) didn't suffer or suffered
less than supposed. =KevinQ=
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 96 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 01:25 EST
G-d Bless You, Colonel Quinn! And Father Roth! And all the righteous men and
women in the world like you!
Your work helps save all of humanity (even Ravens and RUNGU's).
Dave
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 97 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 01:29 EST
Thank you, Kevin. However, I can understand the motivation of those who want
to deny the obvious.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 98 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 01:46 EST
Dear Steve,
You don't seem to be responding to longer messages, so I thought I would
attempt to have a discussion by breaking it up into smaller pieces:
To:878 SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman]
>D.BERKOWITZ, Message 859: No, you are not reading me correctly. It
>is not criticism of the work of revisionists I am objecting to, it
>is \dismissal\ of them for extra-historical reasons, such as whom
>they associate with, who publishes them, and whether they have the
>right university degree to write about the subject.
You have made the claim now at least five or six times, and I have
yet to see you present the evidence to bolster the claim. That you
persist in perpetuating an accusation without corroboration does not
make a very convincing argument.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 99 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 01:49 EST
To Softserv-
>You seem to be confirming my point precisely. You are applying a
>reversed- time argument: that \since\ Faurisson later allowed Jew-
>haters to publish him when no one else would, that \therefore\ he
>must have been motivated by Jew- hatred himself to raise the
>questions he did.
Whoa, Neil. I think you have a fundamentally flawed understanding of
guilt by association. If Neil Schulman's brother-in-law was David
Duke, and I drew an inference about Neil Schulman's beliefs because
his sister made such a poor choice, I would be guilty of 'guilt by
association'. "Association" in context of that phrase means by
"inference", or even in the more pedestrian usage meaning "a shared
interest and friendship" one could not impute the values of one
friend are necessarily held by the other. But when the two work in
close association and are mutually supportive of each other's
position and one does not discriminate the differences between them,
then there is a justification for the inference that they share
common cause.
If, for example, George Bush would knowingly accept campaign funding
from the KKK, by the very acceptance I would correctly conclude that
the position espoused by the KKK is not too abhorrent for Bush to
deny their aid. I would consider that a sever moral flaw. It does
not make Bush a KKK member, but it would indicate that he is not
sufficiently outraged by the morally bankrupt to disassociate from
them.
Faurisson, however, is a collaborator with Carto, a benefactor, and
a booster of the IHR. If his revisionist scholarship was
sufficiently impressive, he would find a welcome audience amongst
professional scholars, who, I would think in most cases, are more
than willing to countenance heretical views than the public at large.
If his scholarship passed scrutiny of professional scholars, he
would hardly need to feed from the trough of the Nazis.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 100 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 01:50 EST
To Softserv
>As I Jew, I claim the right to answer a question with a question:
>does the fact that Heisenberg had Nazi associations invalidate his
>scientific work? Is the fact that the NASA rocket scientists
>built missiles for Hitler first a reason to say that Neil
>Armstrong never walked on the moon?
I don't believe that I ever invalidated Heisenberg's physics because of his
politics, nor the accomplishment of the Nazi rocket scientists. I would say
that Heisenberg was an immoral individual, and I would say that the US was
guilty of overlooking the Nazi connection of the rocket scientists. A better
question would have been, would I say that it would it have been better for
Heisenberg to forgo the benefit of advancing his career and physics for the
world by refusing association with the Nazis? The answer would be a resounding
yes!!! It would have been better to have been denied his scientific
achievement in consideration of the more compelling moral imperative. It would
have been better to have lost the rocket science advantage than to debase
morality by overlooking war crimes. Do you believe that the 'ends justify the
means' in your personal moral philosophy? That is exactly what you are arguing
in your defense of Faurisson.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 101 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 01:50 EST
To Softserv:
>And I never accused "the Jews" of ending Faurisson's career. Isee
>where you got that impression, though. I had two sentences in the
>same paragraph, one of which defended Faurisson, and another which
>aid that certain Jews are using McCarthyist tactics. I was not
>intending to link the two into one concept. Perhaps I should have
>paragraphed better.
But, even in this explanatory paragraph, you still allude to anonymous
'certain Jews' without documenting the charge or supplying any evidence. You
used inflammatory language, "McCarthyist tactics", without evidence to
document the assertion. THAT, Neil, is an example of McCarthyistic tactics.
Create anonymous villains, attack them, roast them with invective, gather
support, toss in the always charged word - Jews - and voila, a smear emerges.
>In any event, I do not hurl charges of McCarthyist tactics -- or
>anything other charges -- collectively. I deny "collective" guilt
>out of hand, and any interpretation of my statements in such a way
>will lead to error.
Well, then who are these anonymous Jews that you mentioned above? Identify
them, show how they have used these tactics, show how they made an impact on
Faurisson's career or on anyone else's. DO not make a charge of conspiracies
without substantiation. None has come. That is a typical collectivist's
tactic. Deny collective guilt, and then pillory collectively all the same.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 102 Sun Mar 29, 1992
R.ARBETMAN at 02:54 EST
RAVEN-
The mere fact that Allied propagandists used the Holocaust in their
message doesn't negate the fact that it happened.
I don't see where the historical record of the Holocaust covers up
any alleged or sustantiated misdeeds by Allied armies.
The Holocaust DOES give good reason for the establishment for a
national refuge for Jews. Do you have a problem with that?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 103 Sun Mar 29, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:00 EST
To Graffiti (regarding 886) ---
I don't want to worry this to death, but I do want to go on record as
being opposed to any an all actions on your part that make this
exchange less a discussion and more a competition. We have seen much
evidence of a cheering section and hecklers for the opposition on one
side of this exchange, which are inappropriate in a discussion (image
these same exchanges face-to-fate and you will see what I mean).
Furthermore, participants of the discussion who make statements as to
their infallibility should be automatically excluded from the
discussion, because you cannot have a discussion when one side claims
absolute truth and knowledge. Instead, this behavior is being
protected, and it bodes ill for the quality of the discussion.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 104 Sun Mar 29, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:00 EST
To Revenant (regarding 887) ---
Point 1: I have no obligation to answer any question that happens to
pop into your head.
.
Point 2: You have already stated your position quite clearly
regarding Zionist conspiracies. What makes you think I would respond
to this post even if I was interested?
.
Point 3: I started this TOPic, and the topic is about the Holocaust
story, not about Zionist conspiracies. If you wish to discuss
Zionists, Zionism, conspiracies, or any combination of the above,
start your own TOPic. You will be able to ascertain my interest by
the frequency of my visits and posts.
.
Point 4: I reserve the right to mention items off-TOPic without
having to provide you or anyone else with a bibliography.
.
Point 5: I don't recall even making the statement that the Holocaust
story was a Zionist conspiracy, and in fact that is not what I
believe.
.
Does this answer your question?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 105 Sun Mar 29, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:01 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 898) ---
Your post is based on the assumption that when I challenged your
infallibility, I was doing so only on the narrow topic of heaving,
geyser-spurting bodies. This is incorrect, and thus your entire
argument is moot.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 106 Sun Mar 29, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:01 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 899) ---
Well, now we know that you were not part of Mermelstein's legal team
in his latest debacle against the IHR. They made the same claim (that
because there was judicial notice taken of the Holocaust during the
first trial, and because the IHR signed an apology, that the IHR
agreed to the judicial notice). For their troubles, Mermelstein and
his high-priced lawyers were bounced so hard on this point that their
babies are going to be born dizzy.
---
Read that letter of apology again. Read it carefully. You will see it
says NOTHING about the Holocaust taking place. You will see it says
NOTHING about accepting the judicial notice. You will it simply
apologizes for hurting Mermelstein's (and others') feelings.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 107 Sun Mar 29, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:02 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 902) ---
> Yet, there are structures which were contained within the same
bldgs. as the crematoria (far removed from the de-lousing chambers),
which have a lower concentration of HCN, which were tested for HCN in
1945, which had doors which were gas tight with a peephole and
which eyewitnesses have claimed were used to gas people.
> The concentration of HCN supports the gassing of people but was too
low to support the possibility of de-lousing. The gas tight door (for
which we have the special order within the primary documents) had no
need for a peephole if it was used for de-lousing. Some Deniers
have claimed that the gas tight door was so that the cellars could be
used as an air-raid shelter and that the peephole was to let in
light. Yet, this explanation ignores the fact that these chambers
were in the cellar where there would be no outside light and that the
air tight chambers could have suffocated the occupants.
---
There are so many mistakes in these few words I scarcely know where
to begin. Because of time limitations, I will address only the most
egregious errors.
.
First, testing for HCN does NOT tell you whether HCN has ever been
used in a room, but rather whether there is HCN present at the moment
of testing.
.
Second, if lower levels of cyanide residues were present, these would
be consistent with disinfection of a room, which was also a use of
Zyklon B.
.
Third, with apparently no knowledge of either air-raids or air-raid
shelters, you proclaim that these rooms could not have been used as
such. This overlooks a wealth of information that contradicts your
insupportable assumptions.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 108 Sun Mar 29, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:02 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 907) ---
> How many other historical events have you researched and why have
you concentrated what seems to be the lion s share of your attention
on this particular one - the Holocaust?
---
I wish to announce that as of now I will answer only one more
personal question, and that has already been put to me by Mr.
Schulman. It is not important how many other historical events I have
researched, how much of my attention is absorbed by the Holocaust
story, or why it is important to me, and it cannot make any possible
difference in this forum.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 109 Sun Mar 29, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:03 EST
To Dave Friedman (regarding 913) ---
(to Jim Gerber)
> Then what makes the Holocaust so especially vulnerable to
historical review?
---
Excuse me for butting in, but one of the aspects of the Holocaust
story that makes it so "vulnerable" is that most of the evidence is
in the form of eyewitness testimony and forced confessions. For
virtually every other historical event, there is other evidence, so
that we do not need to rely on notoriously unreliable eyewitnesses,
etc. Add to this the fact that even exterminationists admit that much
of the so-called eyewitness testimony is erroneous or worse, and you
begin to run into big problems figuring out just what happened. Only
by open examination of this event can we ever hope to arrive at an
objective truth.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 110 Sun Mar 29, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:03 EST
To Neil Schulman (regarding 934, et al) ---
> Do you believe in any restrictions on the right to keep and bear
arms, and specifically, any restrictions on Jews to keep and bear
arms?
---
Categorically and for the record, no, I do not believe in any
restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms, either for people in
general or for Jews in specific. Furthermore, I believe that
individual ownership of guns is the only hope the citizens of any
country have for the ultimate preservation of their freedoms, either
against foreign invasion or internal intrigue. Finally, I fear that
if Americans wish to restore the freedoms guaranteed them in the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they are going to have to resort
to arms in my lifetime. It is not a prospect I welcome.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 111 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 03:15 EST
Mr. Raven:
Then why are the Holocaust survivors so "unreliable?"
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 112 Sun Mar 29, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] at 03:25 EST
Ladies and Gentlemen, Your Honor, and Members of the Jury: I submit that
regardless of Greg Raven's personal opinions regarding the truth or falsehood
of history, or his political opinions regarding Adolf Hitler and the Nazis,
his statement in Message 110 that he believes in the right of Jews to keep and
bear arms makes him not only \objectively\ not an anti-Semite, but a defender
of the Jewish people from any future holocausts.
Greg Raven advocates the only \final solution\ which will ensure that it
happens "never again."
J. Neil Schulman
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 113 Sun Mar 29, 1992
J.CHILDERS2 [LINDY-JIM] at 03:33 EST
So where are we in this topic? Is there any common ground which we can say is
accepted by both sides? Much of the discussion and dispute seems to be
concerned with credentials, conspriracy, and details which may or may not make
any difference. If at one time it was claimed that 4 million were killed at
Autschwitz and now it is believed to be 1 million I don't know if that makes
any difference to the discussion. I would like to ask Raven to express his
opinion on the following.
a. Do you agree that the NAZIs had a policy of Aryan supremacy?
b. Do you agree that they attempted to implement this policy by
eliminating Jews and others from Europe?
c. Do you agree that a large number of Jews and others died as a
result of b. ?
d. If you agree with a. b. and c., do you agree that these actions
were morally repugnent and not justifiable by any rationalizations?
By the way, a number of people on this topic have raised the question of anti-
semitism by implying that ONLY the Holocaust is the subject of revisionism or
denial. They have repeatedly asked why Raven only questions this area and
wonder about his motivation. I don't know Raven's motivation and unless given
reason to believe otherwise would accept that he has honest questions about
what happened. All areas of history or knowledge for that matter are subject
to questioning. Additional evidence is constantly turning up which causes us
to reevaluate previous beliefs. I don't think the decision of a judge can be
used to establish historical or scientific truth. During the Spanish
Inquisition judges held that Catholicism's teachings were a "fact". Galileo
was forced to recant his false beliefs by judges. To date I think Pooh.Bah
has done a credible job of proving that certain specific incidents did take
place. Some questions are still unanswered. One that I have been following
concerns the Wannabee(?) Protocals. A few hundred messages ago Raven said
that the original document had never been found but what had been found was a
typed record which claimed to be a copy made from a carbon copy of the
original and queried Pooh.Bah about having a carbon copy. Pooh.Bah in
response stated (correctly) that she had never claimed to have the carbon
copy, but had merely seen it. The question that was never answered to the
best of my knowledge is "Is there in fact an actual carbon copy or is the
document a typed transcript made from a carbon copy?"
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 114 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BRIN1 at 04:23 EST
Mr. Raven: On PEN, you repeatedly mentioned a team of "Polish forensic
experts" that "corroborated" Leuchter's report. Your refusal to provide any
independent corroboration of the existence of this team -- as well as your
many previous failings of fact -- naturally led to my skepticism. I now know,
thanks to Pooh.Bah, that a team of Polish forensic experts did examine the gas
chambers at Auschwitz. But they did NOT corroborate Leuchter's conclusions.
And so, I can safely say I was right to doubt that such a team existed.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 115 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 04:43 EST
Uh-oh. How many Polish forensic experts does it take... >grin, duck>
Neil:
I believe you claimed earlier to have read most or all of this topic (back
when it used to be Topic 4). How can *anyone* read the hogwash spewed by the
Mr. Raven and =not= believe him anti-Semitic?
"Bloodthirsty Zionists?" Come on, Neil. Wake up and smell the kasha!
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 116 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BRIN1 at 04:44 EST
Mr. Schulman: I would draw no such conclusion from Mr. Raven's defense of the
uncontrolled arming of the citizenry. It is no great secret that Jews would
be outnumbered in the civil war that he sees coming. Many on the extreme
fringes, such as the Identity movement, Posse Comitatus, et al, actually look
forward to the chance to go man-to-man against their Zionist "oppressors."
While it is true that Mr. Raven has never declared his support for such direct
action, he admires the human embodiment of such direct action -- Adolf Hitler.
All we can do is go by the evidence we have.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 117 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 07:31 EST
To: SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman]
>to keep and bear arms makes him not only \objectively\ not an anti-
>Semite, but a defender of the Jewish people from any future
>holocausts.
This is the most absurd defense that I have ever read anywhere.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 118 Sun Mar 29, 1992
S.BELCHER [Sam] at 09:21 EST
Pardon me, but what is IHR?
Raven: RE 108 Your interest in this topic, including the amount of your energy
devoted to it, are relevant to your objectivity. Just as I would expect that
a survivor of the death camps would not be "calm" or "objective" because of
the things they had experienced... I guess the question is what happened to
you to motivate you regarding this particular topic?
To all: Even if we disagree about the numbers of those killed, can we all
agree that to murder "only" 1 million is a crime against humanity?
We will never know exactly how many were killed, any more than we will ever
know exactly how many died in the Gulf War of 1991. (A much more recent, and
much better documented action.) I think it fair to say that any number of
murders (1milion, 2.5 million, 4 million?) was (and is) an atrocity that we
never want to see again.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 119 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 09:53 EST
118 Sam: The IHR is the abbreviation for the Institute for Historical Review.
This is an organization which was founded in 1979 by Willis A. Carto who also
founded the Liberty Lobby and the Populist Party which ran David Duke for
President in 1988. In TOPic 4, I u/l'ed some information about the IHR, its
off-shoot organizations/committees and some of the people involved with it.
Instead of reading through all the messages to find those, if you would like,
e-mail me and I'll send them to you privately.
Your comment about "'only' 1 million" brings to mind a quote from Stalin: A
single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic."
Hopefully we will be able to see the tragedy as well as the statistics
concerning the Holocaust.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 120 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 09:54 EST
92 Pavlovsky:
> UPI: ...1.5 million victims died at ...Auschwitz..., not 4 million-
> acclaimed by the former Soviet Union
>
> One more time:
>
> What was the previous number for people killed in Poland?
As you can see from the above quotes from your message, it was the USSR (and
communist Poland) who made the previous claim of 4 million killed at
Auschwitz. I don't know what the USSR (and communist Poland) previously
claimed for all of Poland (and I'm not even sure that they did indeed have
another figure). Therefore, my previous answer stands as I wrote it - the
previous figure (from reliable sources) WAS 4 million.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 121 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 09:55 EST
94 John:
> Claire questioned this lethality data uptopic; she asked how could the
> fatal dose for humans be so much greater than that for rats and mice. The
> same question bothered me, no one has adressed Claire's question yet
> (unless I missed it).
You might have missed it because of the TOPic change. BTW, it takes LESS HCN
to kill a human than rodents. Here, then, was one of the two replies that
answered Claire's question:
-------------
Claire:
You asked about the reason different concentrations are needed to produce
death in different species. You have outlined the basics of why HCN is lethal.
The overall conclusion is that it causes suffocation at the celluar level -
cells cannot oxidixe properly because of the blocking effect of HCN.
But, this means that the HCN must get from the lungs to the cells and that is
where the difference arises. HCN cannot float freely from the lungs to the
cells. It must combine with something in the host system's blood stream. This
"something" is iron (at least in mammals). The ability of HCN to combine with
iron and to be released to the cells in influenced by several factors,
including the concentration of HCN.
Since species have differences in various factors (including the amount of
iron in the blood stream), the concentration of HCN must be altered, too. As
HCN concentration increases, there is a progressive increase in the amount of
the iron that is combined with it. This is known as the percent saturation of
the iron. Therefore, the percent saturation has to be high enough to be lethal
and, the easiest way to obtain that level is to alter the outside
concentration of HCN to force the needed percent saturation.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 122 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 09:56 EST
94 John:
> If I remember my college chemistry, 200-500 parts per million is equal to
> 200 to 500 mgs/m^3 (which is in the range of concentration the German data
> sheet cites). "Instantly", however, (as a time for lethal exposure) is a
> bit farfetched at the concentration cited (300mg/m^3).
It might be easier if you plot this on a graph. 120 mg/m^3 in one hour is
fatal for humans. 200 mg/m^3 is fatal in 10 minutes. 300 mg/m^3 is the
immediate mortal concentration.
You will notice that the plot is not a straight line. This is caused by the
percent saturation that I discussed in my previous message.
Let me try to explain this another way. At a concentration of 120 mg/m^3,
let's say that 25% (purely hypothetical figure) of the iron in the blood
stream binds to the HCN. Now, if we raise that to 200 mg/m^3, this might give
us a 75% saturation because percent saturation is has a geometric and not
arithmetic progression. Therefore, at a 300 mg/m^3 we could achieve 100%
saturation which would mean that all cells: (1) would be robbed of oxygen;
and, (2) would be incapable of oxidation. And, because HCN works at the
cellular level (basically making the cells suffocate), it would only take one
or two breaths for death to occur....even if the person was taken quickly to
fresh air.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 123 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 09:57 EST
105 Raven:
> Your post is based on the assumption that when I challenged your
> infallibility, I was doing so only on the narrow topic of heaving,
> geyser-spurting bodies. This is incorrect, and thus your entire
> argument is moot.
Actually, your post accussed me of making a claim that I never made. Your
accussation there was inaccurate but, instead of dismissing it, I attempted
to point this out to you in case you had misread my previous message.
Are you now telling us that you had read my message correctly and understood
what I was saying and yet twisted its meaning to suit your purpose? I'm sure
that's not what you are saying. Please, clarify for us.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 124 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 09:57 EST
105 Raven:
> Read that letter of apology again. Read it carefully. You will see it
> says NOTHING about the Holocaust taking place. You will see it says
> NOTHING about accepting the judicial notice. You will it simply
> apologizes for hurting Mermelstein's (and others') feelings.
Perhaps you should read the ENTIRE document that was signed more carefully.
The full document was included the Statement of Record and the Apology. A
signature on one was a signature on the other, too.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 125 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 09:58 EST
107 Raven:
> First, testing for HCN does NOT tell you whether HCN has ever been
> used in a room, but rather whether there is HCN present at the moment
> of testing.
It is a common practice here on GEnie, when speaking in technical terms
outside of technical RTs, to aim for clarity and not precision. The testing,
as you know, was for hydrocyanic compounds and not HCN itself.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 126 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 09:59 EST
107 Raven:
> Second, if lower levels of cyanide residues were present, these would
> be consistent with disinfection of a room, which was also a use of
> Zyklon B.
Excuse me? "Disinfection" from what? Zyklon-B (HCN) is not lethal to bacteria
which is what is normally meant by "disinfection." Apparently you are
redefining the word "disinfection." Could you please clarify?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 127 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 09:59 EST
107 Raven:
> Third, with apparently no knowledge of either air-raids or air-raid
> shelters, you proclaim that these rooms could not have been used as
> such. This overlooks a wealth of information that contradicts your
> insupportable assumptions.
Actually that is not what I said. Let me quote from my previous message to
Neil:
> The gas tight door (for which we have the special order within the primary
> documents) had no need for a "peephole" if it was used for de-lousing.
> Some Deniers have claimed that the gas tight door was so that the cellars
> could be used as an air-raid shelter and that the peephole was to let in
> light. Yet, this explanation ignores the fact that these chambers were in
> the cellar where there would be no outside light and that the air tight
> chambers could have suffocated the occupants.
I hope this helps to clarify my position on the matter.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 128 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 10:01 EST
108 Raven:
> I wish to announce that as of now I will answer only one more
> personal question, and that has already been put to me by Mr.
> Schulman. It is not important how many other historical events I have
> researched, how much of my attention is absorbed by the Holocaust
> story, or why it is important to me, and it cannot make any possible
> difference in this forum.
It IS important to know how many other historical events you have researched
if you want to claim that the Holocaust is unique from all other historical
events in the misconceptions that surround it and inaccurate teachings.
When I read your claims to that effect, I assumed that you could substantiate
them. Was I wrong?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 129 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 10:02 EST
109 Raven:
> Excuse me for butting in, but one of the aspects of the Holocaust
> story that makes it so "vulnerable" is that most of the evidence is
> in the form of eyewitness testimony and forced confessions. For
> virtually every other historical event, there is other evidence, so
> that we do not need to rely on notoriously unreliable eyewitnesses,
> etc.
Greg, I really hate to see you embarass yourself like this. Did you forget
that you had logged onto GEnie and weren't on another network? You might want
to delete your message #109 to prevent further embarassment. After all, the
people here have seen many, many documents which contradict your above
statement and, if anyone still has doubts, I could always u/l some more.
Remember, I have not u/l'ed a single confession or survivor account (I assume
that's what you mean when you mention "eyewitness testimony." Am I wrong?)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 130 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 10:03 EST
113 Lindy-Jim:
> One that I have been following concerns the Wannabee(?) Protocals. A few
> hundred messages ago Raven said that the original document had never been
> found but what had been found was a typed record which claimed to be a
> copy made from a carbon copy of the original and queried Pooh.Bah about
> having a carbon copy. Pooh.Bah in response stated (correctly) that she
> had never claimed to have the carbon copy, but had merely seen it. The
> question that was never answered to the best of my knowledge is "Is there
> in fact an actual carbon copy or is the document a typed transcript made
> from a carbon copy?"
You are, I believe asking about the Wannsee Conference Protocols but the
question was raised regarding the Franke-Gricksch report. What we have now is
Raven doubting that an actual carbon copy exists and my claim that I have seen
it. Since this is a matter of his word against mine and there is no way that I
would be able to produce the evidence of my claim here on GEnie, I think
everyone is going to be left with having to decide this based upon their
assessment of the credibility of Raven and myself.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 131 Sun Mar 29, 1992
C.FINK4 [Carl] at 10:59 EST
Pavlovsky (sorry, you didn't post a first name), American textbooks are
disgraceful. History books in particular are so bad that it offends any
educated person who hears about them. And yes, my old books did teach the
"Columbus proved the world was round" lie, along with "The Indians left
America peacefully for the Europeans" and "America peacefully occupied the
Philippines to help the poor, inferior native peoples."
>> Second, if lower levels of cyanide residues were present, these
>>would be consistent with disinfection of a room, which was also a
>>use of Zyklon B.
No, actually HIGHER levels would be consistent with delousing use. Remember
that the necesary dose to kill many pests is higher than the human lethal
dose.
>> Third, with apparently no knowledge of either air-raids or air-
>>raid shelters, you proclaim that these rooms could not have been
>>used as such. This overlooks a wealth of information that >>contradicts
your insupportable assumptions.
So state this "wealth of information", Raven. I'd like to point out that
Pooh did NOT, as you claim state that the rooms couldn't be used as air-raid
shelters, just that as air-raid shelters they wouldn't have needed (or been
able to use) airtight doors, and that a peephole would be useless as a source
of light when it opened into a dark cellar.
By the way - you cannot simply state "There are other errors, but I'm just
going to imply that they exist, not state them." This is known as "slinging
baseless accusations".
>>For virtually every other historical event, there is other
>>evidence, so that we do not need to rely on notoriously unreliable
>>eyewitnesses, etc.
Really? What other evidence do we have of, say, the deaths at Masada? The
Rape of the Sabines? The Battle of New Orleans? in any case, you're ignoring
the huge amount of DOCUMENTARY evidence.
Carl Fink
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 132 Sun Mar 29, 1992
STEPHEN.KAHN [Scarlet I] at 13:53 EST
Rungu has stated allegations that Jewish communist leaders perpetrated
atrocities against millions of people in the Soviet Union.
See Topic 4 messages: 389, 556, 562, 563, 689, and 834.
He runs together an undeniable fact -- Soviet atrocities -- with a highly
questionable charge -- these actions are somehow Jewish.
In any case, these accusations are a red herring in this topic. The Nazis
either murdered millions of Jews or they did not. What happened or did not
happen in the Soviet Union has no bearing on that except for a slight
relevance to arguments about indigenous pogroms against Jews, but that is not
the main issue.
I don't believe those accusations and discussion of them belong in this topic.
Furthermore, I think they need much more critical examination than they get
here -- really, they as offensive as the claims the Holocaust is a hoax.
For that reason, I've started Topic 10 for discussion of Rungu's claims and
related issues. For starters, I've found some very interesting things in
Robert Conquest's book about the Ukrainian collectivization and famine.
Rungu cites Conquest as a source. Conquest directly undermines Rungu's
arguments. Come on over to Topic 10 if you are interested.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 133 Sun Mar 29, 1992
S.PIERCE6 [Sheri] at 15:14 EST
I noticed that The Discovery channel will air tonight at 9:30 EST, "A Painful
Reminder." "In 1945, British intelligence produced this film depicting the
atrocities of Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau and other Nazi concentration
camps. Producer Sidney Bernstein intended to force Nazis and their accomplices
to watch the film and gain a sense of the enormity of their crimes. However,
the documentary was suppressed on the grounds that it would hinder Germany's
recovery. Forty years later, in 1985, the film was released. Extensive camp
footage and oral testimony by survivors recalls the horror of life and death
in the camps."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 134 Sun Mar 29, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] at 15:29 EST
These are going to be my wrap-up comments in this topic, because outside
business is going to require a lot more of my time from now on, and I'm
generally cutting back my bbs discussions everywhere. See Category 8, Topic
14, Message 99, if you want to know what will be keeping me so busy.
Pooh.Bah, Message 76 and 77:
All of my friend David Friedman's degrees, undergraduate and postgraduate,
are in science, and he holds no degree in economics. He had been teaching
physics at the university level when he decided to switch to economics,
because he felt he could make a more useful contribution there -- not
surprising for the son of Milton and Rose Friedman of \Free to Choose\ fame.
When he decided to switch, he did nothing more than \read\ economics to bring
himself up to professional level. He started teaching economics at UCLA, then
was offered the job at the AB Freeman School of Business at Tulane University
(I don't recall whether he's an associate professor, full professor, or what).
Obviously, David has unusual advantages due to his upbringing; but the
quickest way to insult him is to introduce him as "Milton Friedman's son"; he
wants to be judged on his own work, not his family's. But if you simply go by
his "credentials," he's a guy teaching economics and writing economics -- with
degrees in physics.
As for me, I teach a graduate course through Connected Education/ The New
School for Social Research in "Book Publishing in the 21st Century." I'm
teaching students going for a Master's degree in media -- yet I have only
practical experience in my subject, and no degrees.
I find the dismissal of Faurisson and Leuchter because of their credentials
(or lack thereof) to be irrelevant and prejudicial. In the Rodney King trial
here in Los Angeles, the judge has ruled that Rodney King's background as an
ex-con may not be presented in the trial because its value is more
prejudicial than probative. I'd like to see the same standard applied to
holocaust writers.
The only thing that discredits work is proving that its facts are wrong. One
does well when one quotes relevant documents, discusses physical evidence and
scientific analysis of it, and quotes eyewitness statements. When one
dismisses one's opponent's argument because of who is saying it rather than
focusing on what they are saying, then one is making one's argument "to the
man" (\ad hominem\) rather than to the facts under discussion, and one is
engaging in debating tactics, rather than a search for truth. Discussion of
a person's credentials is useful in the affirmative -- to establish someone
as an expert -- but not in the negative, unless one's own facts impeach one's
credibility. So, no, mentioning a person's lack of "credentials seems to me
irrelevant and prejudicial, with no significant probative value, and much
unfairness can result thereby.
Pooh.Bah, Message 78: Look, regardless of what you or I think about the
accuracy of the articles in the \Encyclopedia Britannica\, it's a standard
(perhaps \the\ standard) reference work. If the Britannica as late as 1968
spoke of humans being gassed at Dachau, it's more than a "popular
misconception."
Pooh.Bah, Message 79:
Historical inquiry focuses on several things. First and foremost is original
documents from the time. Included in this category are depositions and trial
transcripts, official reports, memos, business and private letters, diaries
and logs, etc. But the documents have to be questioned as to the intent of
the person writing them. In the case of a bureaucrat's report to his
superior, it's obviously to cover his ass -- but you can make inferences
from what he says he did to what it is he was \expected\ to do -- or worse,
what he \thought\ he was expected to do -- the more bureaucratic an
organization, the more that is left unsaid to preserve plausible deniability.
The intelligence community has a scale for determining the probability of a
piece of information as being reliable or not -- I'd like to see someone
post that here, so we can start applying those reliability tests to the
documents. (And yes, \here\ the discussion of a person's credentials to the
reliability of their information can properly be brought into play.)
Secondly, there is physical evidence, such as might be discovered at an
archeological dig -- or by examining artifacts from a site and doing
scientific tests on them.
Thirdly, for more recent history, we have eyewitness accounts.
In the case of the gassings, we seem to have the following "dynamic" since the
end of World War II to the present:
1) Claims that gassings took place at a number of camps including those
liberated by the Western Allies have shrunk to those camps in which only the
communist regimes "liberated."
2) Contamination of evidence, documents, and court proceedings regarding the
events in the camps within communist control, making all such evidence
suspicious in origin and unreliable.
3) A flux in interpretations of the magnitude of the crimes and number of
victims, and the truth about who is responsible for doing what to whom,
because of a reanalysis and reinterpretation of data as the true liberation of
Eastern Europe makes access to till-now hidden records possible.
4) The possibility, if not the probability, that because it was the communists
who controlled access to much of the physical evidence for half a century, it
may be near-impossible to make definitive and conclusive statements about what
happened.
BUT:
5) My bottom line on this is that historical interpretation of the World War
II era events relating to the treatment of the Jews in Europe is \already\
undergoing severe revisionism, merely because new documents being released by
the post-communist regimes in Eastern Europe allow us access to information we
couldn't get before. We may finally learn how many Jews died at the hands of
the Nazis, how many died at the hands of indigenous populace, and how many
died as a result of the Stalin-era communist regimes. It may well turn out
that the communists end up being responsible for the deaths or more Jews, and
the Nazis being reponsible for less thereby. Or not. I don't know yet and
neither do you.
It may turn out that relatively few Jews were gassed at Auschwitz, and that
the bulk of the murder of Jews was by other means.
It may be that the final tally of Jews killed is closer to two or three
million rather than five or six million.
But it is a \debatable\ question, and one does not have to have a hatred of
Jews, or a love of the Nazis, to ask these questions, and the people who ask
these questions mustn't be dismissed \solely\ for asking them, nor for
associating with people who have bad agendas in wanting them asked.
Suppose you wanted to do research on a hypothesis that would prove that simply
by changing your diet, you could eliminate the damage to your lungs and heart
caused by cigarette smoking. Where could you go for financing of this
research other than the tobacco industry?
Having done these studies, should they be dismissed because the tobacco
industry has an agenda of wanting to sell more cigarettes?
Yes, you could be suspicious of the source. But ultimately, you would have to
analyze the research, itself. Dismissal of the report out of hand, because of
its source, it prejudicial, and bound to be suppressive of the truth.
The truth will out, I hope. But I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
Pooh.Bah, Message 80: If Merriam Webster can confuse typhoid and typhus, it's
a little much to blame Greg Raven for doing so.
Pooh.Bah, Message 81: It's my understanding that the SS guards separated out
those who were to be kept alive at the camps from those to be killed by
whether or not they were healthy and strong enough to be useful slaves. That
was my only point about "triage."
My Hebrew teacher's account confirms this, in that she used to pinch her
cheeks to remain healthy looking, so she would not be taken away to de.
Incidentally, this is one source for my skepticism. How did the general
population of the camps \know\ about the gassings? Did the guards taunt them
about it? If so, isn't it at least a plausible assumption that the Jews in
the camps believed they were in danger of being gassed whether or not
gassings were the main method of Jew execution?
Pooh.Bah, Message 82:
Faurisson wrote that in his opinion there were no gassings at Auschwitz. It
was already agreed upon that there had been no gassings at Dachau, as had been
previously claimed.
What was it, then, that Faurisson wrote that caused criminal charges to be
brought against him in France? What statement of his convicted him of
"falsifying history?"
And doesn't "falsifying history" or "telling untrue news" sound to you exactly
like the sort of criminal charges that are the hallmark of totalitarian
governments such as Hitler's and Stalin's? Dear God in Heaven, who is there
to defend those who speak unpopular thoughts?
Well, at least we don't put the heretics to the rack anymore. We just throw
them in jail, fine them, and fire them.
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 135 Sun Mar 29, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] at 15:38 EST
David Berkowitz, all your messages:
No, I'm not ignoring your points. I'm replying to what I think important and
relevant.
Nor am I going to go through all our previous comments to each other again.
Here is my position:
McCarthyism was the practice of accusing people of being communists or having
communist sympathies, in a time when such accusations could ruin a person's
reputation, get them fired from their jobs, and blacklisted. I'm not going to
spend time here recounting the history of HUAC and the McCarthy hearings, of
the blacklistings -- of those who went to prison, those who named names and
who didn't.
Look it up.
McCarthyism, today, means McCarthy-era type tactics: determining that a person
is guilty of some real or imagined sin because of their prior (or later)
associations, or because something they did (or were accused of doing) played
into the hands of someone else's agenda.
When Simon Wiesenthal calls for criminal sanctions against "denying the
Holocaust" -- when "denying the Holocaust" is made synonymous with "hate
crime" -- then that is McCarthyism: he is advocating that people be sent to
prison for their statements and beliefs.
When Lucy Dawidowicz calls historians anti-Semites because they choose to
investigate and debate the generally-accepted history of the Holocaust, that
is McCarthyism: she is telling us that the \subject\ of an historical
investigation is sufficient grounds to dismiss an historian as being honest
or truthful.
When Abe Rosenthal calls political candidate Pat Buchanan an anti-Semite for
his objections to the power of the official and unofficial Israeli lobby, for
Buchanan's objections to the Jewish community's treatment of the Catholic
Church's convent near Auschwitz, and for Buchanan's temerity in questioning
historical facts about the Holocaust, Abe Rosenthal is engaging in McCarthyist
tactics: he is trying to convince the American people that Pat Buchanan is the
equivalent of the Nazis in his opinions on the Jewish people.
There are those who deny that gassings took place, that the Nazis had an all-
encompassing, unchanging, and monolithic plan for wiping every Jew they could
get their hands on from the face of the earth, that the number of Jews
actually killed was on the close order of six million. People who deny any or
all of these are called "Holocaust deniers" and are thereby convicted of
having perpetrated a "hate crime."
There are those who assert that the history of the holocaust is false to fact,
and that this falseness is a deliberate hoax. They, too, are called "Holocaust
deniers" and are thereby convicted of having perpetrated a "hate crime."
France and Canada have no First Amendments, so criminal charges can be brought
in those countries for writing or speaking such things.
America does -- nevertheless, civil courts are holding that the denial of
certain aspects of history is sufficient to cause collectible damages to
persons who lived during that era.
Mel Mermelstein \survived\ the Holocaust. How the hell does someone's opinion
that it didn't happen (or didn't happen the way the history books tell it)
cause him damage? (Yes, I know that the substance of the Mermelstein suit was
that he had fulfilled the IHR's conditions and they didn't pay. Nonetheless,
the ruling depended on the court deciding whether the Holocaust had happened
the way generally-accepted history was written at the time. The court so
decided without the sort of proof that would have been necessary in an
American criminal trial.)
The courts are creating an Established History -- and Established Historians --
in exactly the same way there there have been Established Churches.
Sorry, but I'm an opponent of Established Churches \and\ Established History.
I believe in freedom to choose.
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 136 Sun Mar 29, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] at 15:39 EST
To all:
An armed Jewry cannot be exterminated. I stand by my statement.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 137 Sun Mar 29, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] at 15:44 EST
Since D.BERKOWITZ, in Message 93, said to me that, "I suggest you take the
time to read your own messages. Perhaps there is more behind the surface than
you care to reveal," let me post my "hidden" agenda in my next two messages.
Then I'm going to bow out of the main thrust of this discussion, as promised.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 140 Sun Mar 29, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 18:15 EST
Graffiti- I would like to respond to Neil Schulman's #138 and #139. BUT- since
it is more religious in nature, I would hate to see my message yanked with a
note that it belongs on the Religion RT. I see many flaws in his recitation
about what Judaism is really about, needs rebuttal, but are actually off-
topic. Before I respond, I request a ruling. #139 actually contains numerous,
IMO, anti-semitic references and demand refutation or, minimally, explanation.
Thanks.
Dov
The message below is NOT the one to which I am referring above.
To:135 SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman]
>David Berkowitz, all your messages:
Minor point, I am DOV, never been David. Friends call me Berel.
>No, I'm not ignoring your points. I'm replying to what I think
>important and relevant.
AH, we just don't seem to agree what is important and relevant!
Like my question to you of the morality of the 'ends justify the means'
arguement to excuse Faurisson. Such an irrelevant point to be swept under the
collective guilt-trip. C'mon, Neil You haven't engaged in real discussion. You
give up at every post. You repeat the same claims over and again as if they
were a mantra. You even had to resort to accusing me of McCarthyist tactics.
No proof, shrill accusations. Libertarian? Hardly.
>Look it up.
You are presuming that I did not know what it is, I asked for PROOF that such
tactics are actually being used. You didn't. Hence you are guilty of a smear
campaign. I am growing quite tired of this exercise. You have shown that you
are not above using collectivist type arguments when they suit you. I am
rather surprised by the lack of consistency.
>When Simon Wiesenthal calls for criminal sanctions against"denying
>the Holocaust" -- when "denying the Holocaust" is made synonymous
>with "hate crime" -- then that is McCarthyism: he is advocating
>that people be sent to prison for their statements and beliefs.
Can you verify this claim? I have asked for it a dozen times. And
counting.........Are we leaving out a context? Can you recite the
French law, its rationale? Simon Wiesenthal, if my memory serves correctly,
is no longer alive.
>When Lucy Dawidowicz calls historians anti-Semites because they
>choose to investigate and debate the generally-accepted history of
>the Holocaust, that is McCarthyism: she is telling us that the
>\subject\ of an historical investigation is sufficient grounds to
>dismiss an historian as being honest or truthful.
And the citation? Hmm......Context, page number, date of speech, quote?
Something? Is this character assasination?
>When Abe Rosenthal calls political candidate Pat Buchanan an anti
>Semite for his objections to the power of the official and
>unofficial Israeli lobby, for Buchanan's objections to the Jewish
>community's treatment of the Catholic Church's convent near
>Auschwitz, and for Buchanan's temerity in questioning historical
>facts about the Holocaust, Abe Rosenthal is engaging inMcCarthyist
AGain, I think Rosenthal, John Leo, Kurtz, Richard COhen have all demonstrated
a rather good prima facie case for their charge against Buchanan. You did not
go to the evidence, did not discuss any flaw, but have flown off the handle
and offered an hysterical attack against Rosenthal because you refuse to
examine the evidence.
Muravchik in Commentary in Feb(?) had an excellent piece investigating the
charge against Buchanan. It was hardly McCarthyism, it was about judging a man
for what he is about, for what he writes, for what he claims.
Is attacking David Duke for being an anti-Semite Nazi, McCarthyism?
> he is trying to convince the American people that Pat Buchanan is
>the equivalent of the Nazis in his opinions on the Jewish people.
No, not equivalent to the Nazis, that was your hysterical overstatment. He
only demonstrated Buchanan's EXTREME insensitivity to Jews to the point of
being anti-semitic. Again, I think we have difficulty in our understanding of
anti-semitism. What do you make of this from Podhoretz?
"... For some, nothing short of releasing the gas into
the showers of Auschwitz constitutes anti-Semitism; and even that
may not be enough- assuming (they quickly go on to add) that such a
thing ever really happened; or if it did happen, that it resulted in
as many deaths as "the Jews" claim it did."
>America does -- nevertheless, civil courts are holding that the
>denial of certain aspects of history is sufficient to cause
>collectible damages to persons who lived during that era.
Again, I believe you are leaving out [intentionally?] any particular citation
of case law.
> (Yes, I know that the substance of the Mermelstein suit was that
>he had fulfilled the IHR's conditions and they didn't pay.
>Nonetheless, the ruling depended on the court deciding whether the
>Holocaust had happened the way generally-accepted history was
>written at the time. The court so decided without the sort of
>proof that would have been necessary in an American criminal
>trial.)
Well, once you recognize the basis of the suit, it would seem that the
criteria to be victorious were not those required by a criminal case. So why
are you making so much hay from it?
>The courts are creating an Established History -- and Established
>Historians -- in exactly the same way there there have been
>Established Churches.
Oh, balderdash!!!! This is silly in the extreme. The man had a legitimate
claim to the purse. He won by accepted legal methods. Establishment History.
If you believe that, I can understand why you want that gun, Russian Roulette
must get tempting after all the corruption of the legal system. Huh, Neil?
>Sorry, but I'm an opponent of Established Churches \and\
>Established History.
>I believe in freedom to choose.
Uch und vey!!!!!! Uch und vey!!!!!!! My little keppelah is reeling from this
twisting and turning.
Neil Schulman you made rather gross and extreme charges without ever once
supplying any evidence other than your repition. I find you guilty of the very
tactics you would lay at the feet of others.
Dov, never David, ON LOAN FROM ZOG
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 141 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 18:17 EST
>Message 103 Sun Mar 29, 1992
>G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:00 EST
> To Graffiti (regarding 886) --- ...
Furthermore, participants of the discussion who make statements as to
their infallibility should be automatically excluded from the
discussion ...
You seem to be proposing censorship.
>because you cannot have a discussion when one side claims
absolute truth and knowledge. Instead, this behavior is being
protected, and it bodes ill for the quality of the discussion.
I think that an attempt by a group of Nazi sympathizers to sweep the mass
murder of millions of Jews under the rug bodes ill for the quality of any
discussion.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 142 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 18:18 EST
>Message 104 Sun Mar 29, 1992
>G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:00 EST
> To Revenant (regarding 887) ---
>Point 2: You have already stated your position quite clearly
regarding Zionist conspiracies.
I do not know of any alleged Zionist conspiracies. Would you please come
forward and explicitly state what you are alluding to?
> Point 3: I started this TOPic, and the topic is about the Holocaust
story, not about Zionist conspiracies.
More precisely, this topic is about the attempt by neo-Nazis and Nazi
sympathizers to rewrite history by denying the Holocaust.
> Point 5: I don't recall even making the statement that the Holocaust
story was a Zionist conspiracy, and in fact that is not what I
believe.
.
Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us as to what your beliefs are? Several
times, I have asked you that, specifically asking how many Jews you believe
actually were murdered by Hitler and his motley, yet efficient, crew, but
you have remained silent. Again, I ask: Was it 17? 357? 2,193? 25,297?
957,825? 3,573,294? 6,000,000? 11,273,597?
You claim that 6,000,000 is an exaggeration, but refuse to come forward
with what you believe would not be an exaggeration.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 143 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 18:18 EST
>Message 105 Sun Mar 29, 1992
>G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:01 EST
> To Pooh.bah (regarding 898) ---
Your post is based on the assumption that when I challenged your
infallibility, I was doing so only on the narrow topic of heaving,
geyser-spurting bodies. This is incorrect, and thus your entire
argument is moot.
Is that true, Pooh.Bah, or is it another misinterpretation?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 144 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 18:19 EST
>Message 106 Sun Mar 29, 1992
>G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:01 EST
> To Pooh.bah (regarding 899) ---
Well, now we know that you were not part of Mermelstein's legal team
in his latest debacle against the IHR.
I seem to recall that the IHR lost. If that's a debacle for the fighters
against the evil of the IHR, I wish them many more. Enough such debacles,
and the neo-Nazi, anti-semitic, racist IHR will be put out of business.
>For their troubles, Mermelstein and
his high-priced lawyers were bounced so hard on this point that their
babies are going to be born dizzy.
Is that based on your analysis of Mengele's infamous experiments?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 145 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 18:19 EST
>Message 108 Sun Mar 29, 1992
>G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:02 EST
> I wish to announce that as of now I will answer only one more
personal question, and that has already been put to me by Mr.
Schulman. It is not important how many other historical events I have
researched, how much of my attention is absorbed by the Holocaust
story, or why it is important to me, and it cannot make any possible
difference in this forum.
If I may practice law without a license (which is entirely appropriate,
since so many of the Holocaust deniers' base their baseless arguments on
the unlicensed practice of the admitted liar Fred Leuchter), I'd like to
point out that those questions go to your motivation in trying to deny
known historical fact.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 146 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 18:20 EST
>Message 109 Sun Mar 29, 1992
>G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 03:03 EST
> Excuse me for butting in, but one of the aspects of the Holocaust
story that makes it so "vulnerable" is that most of the evidence is
in the form of eyewitness testimony and forced confessions. For
virtually every other historical event, there is other evidence, so
that we do not need to rely on notoriously unreliable eyewitnesses,
etc.
Actually, most of the eyewitnesses to the Holocaust were murdered by the
Nazis, so that there were actually fewer eyewitnesses to their atrocities
than to many other historical events.
I am curious about what you mean by "other evidence." Could you give some
concrete examples of historical events that are known from "other evidence"
rather than eyewitness accounts? For example, how about the Revolutionary
War? Using the methods of the Holocaust deniers, I believe that the
absence of evidence other than eyewitness accounts proves beyond a shadow
of a doubt that Washington never crossed the Delaware.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 147 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 18:20 EST
>Message 111 Sun Mar 29, 1992
>D.FRIEDMAN14 at 03:15 EST
>Mr. Raven:
>Then why are the Holocaust survivors so "unreliable?"
Some people seem to believe that the only reliable Jew is a dead Jew.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 148 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 18:20 EST
113 Lindy-Jim:
>So where are we in this topic?
There is no common ground. This topic was started as an attempt to erase
the memory of the millions of Jews and non-Jews who were murdered by the
Nazis in the Holocaust. The rest of us are simply trying to protect the
naive from being taken in by the Big Lie technique used so effectively by
the Nazis and being used now by the neo-Nazi Holocaust deniers.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 150 Sun Mar 29, 1992
S.BELCHER [Sam] at 20:12 EST
AH.STEIN: True, but I would like to see (hear?) Raven respond to Lindy-Jim's
questions.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 151 Sun Mar 29, 1992
J.STENGEL [John] at 20:15 EST
I believe I made an error in citing Claire's question re: lethality of HCN
for humans..(see my post#94). I summarized Claire's question thus:
.
>Claire questioned this lethality data uptopic; she asked how could the
>fatal dose for humans be so much greater than that for rats and mice.
What I should have said:
.
>Claire questioned this lethality data uptopic; she asked how could
>the fatal dose for humans be so much LESS than that for rats and mice.
.
I apologize for my error and for any confusion it may have caused.
.
Pooh-Bah adressed the questions I asked in #94 in her posts 121-122. I am
still not convinced however that the German data is correct. Pooh.Bah, you
give an explanation of how HCN acts on blood chemistry (binding to iron) to
spread to the body cells and result in death. I accept that your explanation
of that process is correct...you must however expose the victim to a high
enough (airborne) concentration of HCN in order for the process you describe
to take place.
.
The German data that you cited uptopic also says that the lethal dose for
humans is 1 mg per kg of body weight. My source says puts it at about 5mg
per kg of body wieght. Now, even if we accept the lower (German data) figure
of 1 mg/kg body weight, this means that the fatal dose for a 70 kg (154 lb)
human would be 70mg, i.e. 70 mg must be inhaled into the lungs in order for
the blood chemistry mechanism you describe to take place. A concentration of
300 mg/m^3 would be the same as 3/10 mg per liter (1 m^3 = 1000 liters,
300/1000 = .3 mg HCN/liter). At this level of concentration the victim would
have to have a lung capacity of 115 liters in order to inhale a fatal dose
(70 mg) in only two breaths. Humans normally inhale from 2-6 liters of air
per breath. Whereas your description of the blood chemistry explains the
seemingly illogical fact that humans (with larger body mass) have a much
lower fatal dose than rodents (with much smaller body mass); it still does
not reconcile the inherent contradiction in the German data sheet; i.e. if
the fatal dose is 1 mg/kg of body weight, then an airborne concentration of
.30gms/m^3 cannot possibly result in "instant" (1-2 breaths) death. Again,
accepting the German figures, death would occur in about 80 breaths, or in
about 5 minutes at normal inhalation rates (assuming a lethal dose of 1mg/kg
body weight).
.
As we know, ZyklonB was widely used as a commercial fumigant throughout
Europe for many years. If the German data cited were correct, I cant see how
it could have possibily been used as a commercial fumigant, given such extreme
lethality (to humans). Any building fumigated with the stuff would be
dangerous and uninhabitable for long periods of time given that any stray
unvented pocket of low concentration HCN would cause "instant" death if
accidentally inhaled. Such an extreme lethality also gives credence to
revisionist arguments concerning danger of entering gas chambers to remove
bodies without elaborate ventilation.
.
In fact, a less extreme (but certain) lethality makes HCN the ideal agent
for mass killing. A gas chamber need not be hermetically sealed nor would any
elaborate ventilation system be needed. A crudely designed, partially
sealable room would suffice. All that is needed to kill everyone inside is to
be sure they stay inside for 10 to 30 minutes. Open the doors for a few
minutes to vent out the gas, and it's safe to go in. Also, any gas escaping
during the process, if accidently breathed, might cause some slight illness
but would not be lethal. The scenario I outline here is, I believe, more
consistant with eyewitness accounts than would be the scenario of an
instantly lethal gas.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 152 Sun Mar 29, 1992
ERIC-M at 20:40 EST
>>> POOH.BAH
> it would only take one or two breaths for death to occur....even if the
> person was taken quickly to fresh air.
Yeah...the problem, methinks, is in the definition of "instantly."
Death via inhalation of HCN gas does NOT occur instantly. When a human
inhales enough HCN so that he can smell it (an almond smell), he WILL die
unless given an "antidote" immediately. He will not die immediately...he will
die in a matter of minutes. But death is "instant" in that no more doses need
be given. Even if taken away from the contaminated area, he will still die.
Breathing HCN-free air will NOT help him anymore.
Once ya smell almonds, you're basically a goner if you don't have immediate
access to a cyanide-poisoning kit.
(Usually, bringing a bottle of almond extract into a school lab when working
with cyanide compounds is grounds for expulsion. >evil grin>)
/
|/ ric
|/
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 153 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 20:42 EST
134 Neil:
> In the case of the gassings, we seem to have the following "dynamic" since
> the end of World War II to the present:
> 1) Claims that gassings took place at a number of camps including those
> liberated by the Western Allies have shrunk to those camps in which only
> the communist regimes "liberated."
> 2) Contamination of evidence, documents, and court proceedings regarding
> the events in the camps within communist control, making all such evidence
> suspicious in origin and unreliable.
> 3) A flux in interpretations of the magnitude of the crimes and number of
> victims, and the truth about who is responsible for doing what to whom,
> because of a reanalysis and reinterpretation of data as the true
> liberation of Eastern Europe makes access to till-now hidden records
> possible.
> 4) The possibility, if not the probability, that because it was the
> communists who controlled access to much of the physical evidence for half
> a century, it may be near-impossible to make definitive and conclusive
> statements about what happened.
Excuse me, Neil, do you have any documentation for any of the above? If so,
could you please cite it?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 154 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 20:44 EST
134 Neil:
> I find the dismissal of Faurisson and Leuchter because of their
> credentials (or lack thereof) to be irrelevant and prejudicial. In the
> Rodney King trial here in Los Angeles, the judge has ruled that Rodney
> King's background as an ex-con may not be presented in the trial because
> its value is more prejudicial than probative. I'd like to see the same
> standard applied to holocaust writers.
Neil, I didn't realize that the Holocaust Deniers were on trial here. If that
is the case, then you are absolutely correct. However, I believe that their
role is more analogous to someone being put forward as an "expert witness" at
a trial offering an "expert opinion." If that is the case, then their
credentials are very much in order.
For instance, if all that was discussed were the test results of Leuchter's
report, there is no problem in not discussing his lack of credentials.
However, since his CONCLUSIONS (i.e. opinions) are also being discussed, that
puts him in the position of someone attempting to qualify for "expert" status
(which, BTW, was not granted to him in the Zuendel trial....but was granted
to Mark Weber of the IHR at the same trial. And, BTW, I agree with both
decisions.)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 155 Sun Mar 29, 1992
J.GERBER4 [Jim Gerber] at 20:44 EST
-=-=-=- To: SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] -=-=-=-
> If you find an agenda in my writings here --other than a desire
> to see truth and fairness prevail -- please tell me.
Neil, you wrote that many Libertarians privately support revisionism
and do so for what I took to be political reasons. You also said
that you were not completely sure of your own motivation. I assumed
you meant that you feel that the work of the revisionists weakens
the case of the statists and that you weren't sure that you would be
as supportive of these views if they tended to cause people to look
unfavorably on libertarians (lack of capitalization intentional to
signify I'm not referring to one particular organized group).
I think it's important we all give our backgrounds and possible
reasons for arguing and thinking as we do. I applaud your
forthrightness in going to the extremes you do. I wish a few others
would do likewise. Several folks here claim that they have done so
but I'm not at all sure.
My point about hidden agendas is that, if you look at the messages
here, you will see that some folks quote from sources that are
proven liars as if they are totally reliable. You can tell that
they are willing to believe these people because their "research"
furthers their own objectives while these same people are extremely
doubtful about the work of people who are "on the other side". I'm
trying to write neutrally here but I too have an agenda and I'll
admit it--I would like to make sure that we never have another
Holocaust. I feel strongly because I'm Jewish and am sure that if
the deniers have their way, then another attempt at extermination of
the Jews will eventually follow. I, personally, don't feel that
revelation of the full truth will hurt our shared cause (Never
Again) but, if I had to associate with Willis Carto to get the truth
out, I'd rather wait for the next opportunity.
-=-=-=- To: D.FRIEDMAN14 -=-=-=-
> Would you question the American Revolution? The My Lai
> massacre? The Cultural Revolution?
Depends on your definition of "question". If you mean, would I
attempt to disprove them if they furthered my political aims, then I
sure hope I would not. If you meant, would I be willing to hear new
evidence, yes. If you mean would I believe that it's possible that
we did not hear the whole story, then sure--isn't that why
historians are still studying things from the past?
> Then what makes the Holocaust so especially "vulnerable" to
> historical "review?"
Good question! If you look at the statements made by people here
and on the "SHould GEnie Allow This Debate" forum, you'll see some
different possible motives. Some messages are full of admiration of
the Germans and even for Hitler. One possible motive is the desire
to sugar coat Nazism in order to make it more palatable for possible
converts. Another is to further political aims by tearing down
current institutions. Some Libertarians I know say there is a
controversy in their ranks as to whether they should support
Revisionism. Obviously, any real Libertarian would not support
Nazism but they view revisionism as a way to show the public that
any kind of statism is inherantly bad. The controversy comes about
because many don't want to throw in with Antisimites and worse.
As for me, I'd rather not reexamine history than side with the likes
of Willis Carto. There's far more danger in that than in leaving
history the way we currently understand it. I hope it will never
come to that!
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 156 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 20:45 EST
134 Neil:
> But it is a \debatable\ question, and one does not have to have a hatred
> of Jews, or a love of the Nazis, to ask these questions, and the people
> who ask these questions mustn't be dismissed \solely\ for asking them, nor
> for associating with people who have bad agendas in wanting them asked.
Excuse me, Neil, but you addressed the above to me. Perhaps you meant it for
someone else? After all, I have not claimed that anyone here hates Jews,
loves Nazis or have dismissed anyone solely for asking certain questions.
Believe me, when I dismiss someone, I don't generally do so by addressing
him/her in as many messages as what I have posted here. Also, if you find one
of my messages in which I state that someone hates Jews or loves Nazis,
please point it out to me. Thanks.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 157 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 20:48 EST
134 Neil:
> Yes, you could be suspicious of the source. But ultimately, you would
> have to analyze the research, itself. Dismissal of the report out of
> hand, because of its source, it prejudicial, and bound to be suppressive
> of the truth.
Excuse me again, Neil, but I do believe that you have mistaken me for someone
else. You see, even though you have "seen" a couple of the books put out by
the IHR, I own, have read and analyzed virtually every book they have
published or distributed that denies the Holocaust in some manner or other.
In fact, I would venture a guess that I have read more of the IHR material
than anyone participating here....including Raven.
So, either you mistaken addressed the above to me or you have made an
erroneous assumption....which proves the adage of why one should never
ASSUME. :-)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 158 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 20:49 EST
From my 612 (in TOP 4):
> 594 RUNGU:
>> (including Anne Frank at Belsen, of typhoid)
> ANNE FRANK DID NOT DIE OF TYPHOID. SHE EXPIRED FROM TYPHUS. THESE ARE TWO
> VERY DIFFERENT DISEASES.
From RUNGU'S 597 (TOPic 4):
> Since the fatalities from typhus or typhoid (thank you for the correction,
> POOH.BAH, concerning Anne Frank)
From Neil's 931 (TOPic 4):
> Incidentally, I recall you CHEWING OUT GREG RAVEN in a previous message
> for confusing typhoid and typhus. It's not much of a mistake, when the
> \Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary\ defines typhoid as "(1) of,
> relating to, or suggestive of typhus."
From my 80 (in TOPic 9):
> Actually, there is quite a bit of difference between typhoid and typhus.
> Typhus is a disease characterized by fever, headache, rash, neurological
> disturbances caused by a rickettsia transmitted either by lice or fleas.
> Typhoid, OTOH, is a disease resulting from an infection with Salmonella.
> It is transmitted human by human. The major manifestations are gastro-
> intestinal.
> The above comes from "Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine" (Ninth
> Edition). pp 641 & 755.
> I would tend to believe this source over Webster's Ninth New Collegiate
> Dictionary but you might have a problem with it since it was written and
> edited by persons holding doctorates.
From Neil's 134 (TOPic 9):
> Pooh.Bah, Message 80: If Merriam Webster can confuse typhoid and typhus,
> it's a little much to BLAME GREG RAVEN for doing so.
From Neil's 928 (TOPic 4):
> You bet because I \research\ facts before I write about them, and make
> damn sure my facts are correct before committing myself to them.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 159 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 20:49 EST
134 Neil:
> Pooh.Bah, Message 81: It's my understanding that the SS guards separated
> out those who were to be kept alive at the camps from those to be killed
> by whether or not they were healthy and strong enough to be useful slaves.
> That was my only point about "triage."
Then, if you will re-read my response to your triage analogy, you will
discover that your analogy fails because of evidence that HEALTHY people were
gassed upon arrival, too.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 160 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 20:50 EST
134 Neil:
> And doesn't "falsifying history" or "telling untrue news" sound to you
> exactly like the sort of criminal charges that are the hallmark of
> totalitarian governments such as Hitler's and Stalin's? Dear God in
> Heaven, who is there to defend those who speak unpopular thoughts?
"Thoughts" and "news" are two separate entities and it is possible for
"unpopular thoughts" to be voiced, argued, printed, etc. without allowing
"false news" the same advantages.
For instance, I can say that "I think George Bush is the worse President we
have ever had." Now, many might not consider this an "unpopular thought" but
others would (most particularly the current administration >g>). Yet, this is
entirely different than for me to state as a fact that "George Bush practices
necrophilia." As far as I know, that is false news. :-)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 161 Sun Mar 29, 1992
POOH.BAH at 20:51 EST
136 Neil:
> An armed Jewry cannot be exterminated.
I wish you could tell that to the defenders of the Warsaw Ghetto who fought
so valiantly and withheld the Nazi forces for longer than the entire country
of Poland was able to....but, unfortunately, they were exterminated.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 162 Sun Mar 29, 1992
J.STENGEL [John] at 21:46 EST
----->Neil Schulman (Softserv) Sorry to see you will be leaving this
discussion, I found your posts straightforward and to the point. Best of
luck with your radio program!
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 163 Sun Mar 29, 1992
J.GERBER4 [Jim Gerber] at 22:00 EST
-=-=-=- To: SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] -=-=-=-
> when I rejected it, created in me such a loathing for this
> sort of Jewish bigotry and callousness to 98% of the human race
> such that I have had to fight to maintain a moral equilibrium,
> and realize the persecution that led to this insularity.
.....
> Jews must come to terms with the fact that our own bigotry is
> one of the causes for anti-Semitism.
Thanks for your explanation of your agenda. It speaks for itself.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Greg Raven advocates the only \final solution\ which will ensure
> that it happens "never again."
There are many who eagerly await the day they can conduct armed battle with
Jews. I really doubt guns will protect us from the Neo Nazis. Neil, I think
you blew it here--are you willing to support Raven because he will allow you
guns?
-=-=-=- To: G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] -=-=-=-
> Excuse me for butting in, but one of the aspects of the
> Holocaust story that makes it so "vulnerable" is that most of
> the evidence is in the form of eyewitness testimony and forced
> confessions.
Mr. Raven, I know you have read most of the posts here. do you dismiss ALL
the evidence presented concerning the Holocaust in the form of German
documents and the physical evidence? Do you claim it is all faked? Making
statements that all the evidence is eyewitness testimony and forced
confessions when the record shows otherwise may count for something in a
verbal debate where people can't check back but here, it just wastes time.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 164 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 23:03 EST
118 Sam:
>Pardon me, but what is IHR?
It's a group of neo-Nazis trying to erase the memory of the millions of
Jews and non-Jews murdered by the Nazis in the Holocaust.
IHR stands for Institute for Historical Review, or something like that. It
actually takes its inspiration from the book "1984."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 165 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 23:04 EST
132 Scarlet I: As Rungu undoubtedly is well aware, Jews, as unusual, were
among the most prominent victims of Soviet atrocities. They were in the
unenviable position of being targets both of the Bolsheviks and the
traditional anti-semitism of the Russian people.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 166 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 23:04 EST
133 Sheri:
>I noticed that The Discovery channel will air tonight at 9:30 EST, "A
Painful Reminder." "In 1945, British intelligence produced this film
depicting the atrocities of Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau and other Nazi
concentration camps. Producer Sidney Bernstein intended to force Nazis and
their accomplices to watch the film and gain a sense of the enormity of
their crimes. However, the documentary was suppressed on the grounds that
it would hinder Germany's recovery. Forty years later, in 1985, the film
was released. Extensive camp footage and oral testimony by survivors
recalls the horror of life and death in the camps."
I would not expect that documentary evidence to have any effect on the
Holocaust deniers, who already are well aware of the occurrance of the
Holocaust but have their own, obvious reasons for trying to convince people
it never happened.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 167 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 23:05 EST
134 NeilSchulman:
>I find the dismissal of Faurisson and Leuchter because of their
credentials (or lack thereof) to be irrelevant and prejudicial. In the
Rodney King trial here in Los Angeles, the judge has ruled that Rodney
King's background as an ex-con may not be presented in the trial because
its value is more prejudicial than probative. I'd like to see the same
standard applied to holocaust writers.
You're comparing apples and oranges. Indeed, many of the neo-Nazi
Holocaust deniers have used the opposite argument, trying to claim that the
Jews brought the wrath of the Poles, Russians, Ukranians, etc., upon
themselves.
The fact that prominent Holocaust deniers have lied about their backgrounds
is very relevant, and casts justifiable suspicion on their motivation,
reliability, and honesty.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 168 Sun Mar 29, 1992
AH.STEIN at 23:05 EST
136 NeilSchulman:
>To all:
>An armed Jewry cannot be exterminated. I stand by my statement.
Tell that to the souls of the armed Jews who were killed during and after
the Warsaw Ghetto uprising.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 169 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 00:57 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 37) ---
Because you seem to have lost track of what is going on here, allow
me to help you get straighened around.
---
After I started this topic, things were pretty hectic. You made the
following suggestion in 81 (and repeated it in 112):
.
> Let's not be going all over the place. Let's try to have some
organization. First, do you believe that there was an extermination
program? If you don't believe there was one then that is the place to
start and not with the gas chambers.
.
You then stated in 113: "As an afterthought, I should probably state
that I have evidence that there was an extermination program ..."
.
I then answered your question in the negative in 116, while
acknowledging that there were probably some excesses on the part of
the Einsatzgruppen. I held, however, that this was much different
from "an extermination program."
---
In the meantime, you mentioned a 1945 Polish forensic report in 58. I
responded to that briefly in 120. In 126, you said, "As far as the
1945 forensic study on Krema II, that is again putting the cart
before the horse, ..." indicating that you wanted to come to some
closure on the issue of an extermination program.
---
You then apparently suddenly came into a lot of spare time, because
you asked several times the question I had already answered. I then
had to answer the question again, which I did in 186, saying, "... my
answer is 'no.'"
---
Also in 186, I posted, "Because of your previously-mentioned request,
I will forego responding to the other posts you have made (regarding
Leuchter, etc.), until such time as we get around to these subjects
as part of our examination of this topic. If this is unsatisfactory,
please tell me which posts you would like responses to, and I will
provide them."
.
In 197, you posted, "Thank you for responding to my question and
refraining from getting sidetracked by other messages here. Even
though there are a number of things mentioned by both you and Rungu,
I will 'play by the same rules' so to speak."
---
You went on to say in 197, "You do not believe that there was an
extermination program and I know that there was one. Therefore, for
you to attempt to disprove the gas chambers is futile because if you
WERE able to do so, that would NOT disprove the extermination
program. However, if you are able to disprove the extermination
program, then the gas chambers are moot." I took this to mean that,
by the same token, if you could not prove there to have been an
extermination program, you would have an even more difficult time
attempting to fabricate the "gas chambers."
---
Now we are getting down to the crux of the matter. At the end of 197,
you posted:
.
> It would be great since you started this TOPic if you and I could
agree (with the approval of the other users) to make this a
one-on-one proposition which would help with the organization of the
discussion. You and I could agree to limiting ourselves to responding
only to each other and then Rungu could ask questions of either of
us, discuss with other users in the TOPic or just help you out behind
the scenes if you wish.
> Does this sound like a fair format to you? In anticipation of your
agreement, I will prepare my first set of documents in proof that
there was indeed an extermination program.
.
To this, I answered (in 236): "I do not mind discussing this topic
primarily with you, and as you seem to be the best versed person
participating for the exterminationist side, this seems somewhat
natural. However, I do not want to exclude anyone from the
discussion, if they feel they have something substantive to add. I
wanted to start this topic to get people involved, and I think it
inappropriate to exclude participants based on a quasi-elitist
standard. It would be nice if those posting the emotional (and the
repetitious) messages would allow us to conduct our discussion, but I
welcome all others."
.
In 249, you said, "I just don t want either you or I [sic] to get
distracted by side issues that might be proposed by others. I have
nothing against either you or I [sic] responding to those side issues
as long as it doesn t interfere with the discussion between you and I
[sic]. Agreed?"
.
To which, in 325, I said, "Agreed."
---
Is any of this starting to come back yet?
---
Now that, in 37, you suddenly and unilaterally decide to leap ahead
without having established but a shadow of what you had promised us,
you have gravely damaged your own case; you have not established that
there was a program of extermination, therefore what in the world are
you doing talking about "gas chambers?" You say it is because other
people made you do it? (Pooh ... Pooh! This is your mother talking,
Pooh. Stop acting like a bear of little brain and think for yourself.
If you friends all told you to jump off a cliff, would you do it?).
---
Here's what you need to do:
1) Establish that the Nazis had a policy of exterminating the Jews.
This would not necessarily need to reach all the way to Hitler,
perhaps, but at least to Himmler, I would think. (Good luck!)
2) Establish that this policy was followed to the exclusion of all
others (which makes sense, coming as it does from high up in the Nazi
hierarchy). (This might be tricky.)
3) Show that all the evidence we have of the Nazis pursuing other
policies with regards the Jews (resettlement, etc.) were fantasies,
propaganda, etc. (Bit of rough going here, what?)
4) Show that the policy was not being implemented quickly and/or
efficiently enough, and that other avenues were sought. (This kinda
ties back in with point 2.)
5) Show how the Nazis came up with their most efficient policy,
presumably the "gas chambers," and how this program was brought
on-line (gee, maybe you can refer to the Gerstein "confession" here,
huh?).
---
Then, when you have all this lined up, you can introduce the "gas
chambers," which you claim to be not only fast enough (even using
carbon monoxide from diesel engines?) to keep ahead of the
crematoria, but which had the advantage of being "silent" (except for
the screams of the victims, of course, as noted by many
"eyewitnesses").
---
As I find it difficult to believe that you will (or want to!) go
back, you are left with but few choices: 1) admit that you cannot
establish an extermination policy, 2) continue to claim that on the
basis of the sad assortment of documents and innuendo you have
provided thus far that you have met all five points I have listed
above and therefore are entitled to go on with or without me, or 3)
shift from the intentionalist viewpoint to the functionalist
viewpoint and claim that it doesn't matter if there was a policy or
not because you can prove the gas chambers murdered millions.
---
I am breathless in anticipation of your reply.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 170 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 00:58 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 38) ---
As I have said repeatedly, I grant that the Einsatzgruppen probably
engaged in excessive behavior during their short existence. However,
they were few in number (not, of course, counting their unindicted
co-conspirators!), spread over a wide area, with a lot of work facing
them, and they had to deal with partisan (guerrilla) warfare (the
dirtiest type of combat). This proves nothing, and in particular it
does nothing to establish a Nazi policy of extermination. Is this so
difficult to understand?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 171 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 00:58 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 42) ---
> This tells us that evacuation and emigration are two different
terms in the Nazi lexicon. Your document speaks of the evacuation
which apparently has nothing to do with leaving Europe...
.
Not true. As you well know, the Germans moved thousands of Jews east
of the so-called "killing centers" of Auschwitz, etc., into occupied
Russia. According to my encyclopedia, Poland is in Europe, while the
Soviet Union was (is) not. Therefore, "emigration" would refer to
transfers to areas such as Madagascar and Palestine, while
"evacuation" could refer to transfers to the East.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 172 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 00:58 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 46) ---
You say that Pressac discredits eyewitness accounts. Yet anyone
referring to the book would see that he relies heavily on Nyiszli.
Really, you don't expect me to attempt to untangle Pressac's jumbled
approach to this subject, do you? Pressac contradicts himself here
and many other places, a few of which I have pointed out.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 173 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 00:59 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 48) ---
> Once again, this is not [Pressac] discrediting the Holocaust but
only basing historical accounts on eyewitness testimony.
.
Ah, but that is not what Pressac says. He says (and you quote), "This
study already demonstrates the complete bankruptcy of the traditional
(Holocaust) history ..."
.
Thus, the question is whether or not a history is traditional (in
Pressac's view, perhaps). In this, Pressac casts his net wide ... and
whom does he capture? Hilberg? Gray? Reitlinger? Fleming? Gosh, you
don't think that, with his statement, "a history based for the most
part on testimonies, assembled according to the mood of the moment,
truncated to fit an arbitrary truth and sprinkled with a few German
documents of uneven value and without any connection with one
another," he might have snared a Pooh.bah?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 174 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 00:59 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 50)---
The statement that J.C. Pressac was a revisionist (before lending his
services to the exterminationists) is true as far as it goes. I was
not going to mention the matter because Pressac's work should stand
or fall on its own, regardless of the person who wrote it. However,
for those who may wonder about this man named Pressac, here is what
Robert Faurisson has to say (Pressac worked with Faurisson before
changing sides).
---
In the early 1980's Pressac attached himself to Faurisson and French
publisher Pierre Guillaume after seeing Faurisson's proof that the
gas chambers never existed (Pressac previously believed in the myth,
and was an admirer of Adolf Hitler). Pressac subsequently offered his
assistance in furthering the revisionist cause. However, according to
Faurisson, "... it was impossible for him (Pressac) to clarify his
answers, which served him a a refuge, as with a child caught being
naughty. He had the irritating habit of pretending, from one minute
to the next, that he hadn't said what he had just said. I invited him
to record our conversations with a tape recorder to avoid
misunderstandings. With childish fear, offering no explanation, he
refused to be recorded."
.
Faurisson has more to say about Pressac, but the bottom line is that
at their ultimate encounter, Faurisson had to show this obsequious
sycophant the door, literally, and in no uncertain terms. That is one
of the reasons why Pressac holds a grudge against Faurisson, and by
extension, revisionism. In his book, Pressac spends a lot of time
dealing with Faurisson, although the level of venom directed at
Faurisson is nowhere justified by the statements Pressac makes about
Faurisson's treatment of him. Finally, Pressac lies when he states
that he took the initiative and "broke completely with Faurisson"
(page 554).
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 175 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:00 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 51) ---
Are you sure you really want to put yourself in a position of
defending Hoess' autobiography? Does this mean you also accept his
"confession," or not? If so, are you willing to defend it as well? If
not, are you willing to admit that any court that would accept such
an obviously wrong "confession" cannot be relied upon for other
matters?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 176 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:00 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 54) ---
You have Pressac saying:
.
> This official figure, coolly doubled when explaining operations to
high-ranking visitors (ef. SS Major Franke- Gricksch s report above,
giving a figure of 10,000 in 24 hours), had no basis in practice, and
probably has to be divided by two or three to arrive at the true
figure.
.
I draw your attention to the last phrase of this excerpt. What
exactly does "probably has to be divided by two or three to arrive at
the true figure" mean? Does "probably" mean that Pressac doesn't know
and is guessing? Does "two or three" indicate some kind of new
precision in this matter?
.
I'm sure if Fred Leuchter had said something like this you would have
found all kinds of objections. Why are you so silent now?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 177 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:01 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 57) ---
> In fact, according to [Pressac], all the photos came from
revisionist sources and not as you allege from the Durrfeld file of
Nuremberg trial number 6.
.
Recheck your sources. You might be wise not to trust Pressac's word
on anything.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 178 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:01 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 59) ---
You quote Pressac as saying:
.
> By contrast, in homicide gassings, the quantity of Zyklon-B used
was smaller, man being more sensitive than lice or bugs to
hydrocyanic acid. A little of the poison injected was inhaled by the
victims and the rest was removed by the extractor fans, so that the
contact time was brief and the walls did not have the time to become
impregnated.
.
Zyklon B may be deadly, but it is not smart. It no more knows the
difference between a lung and a wall. And, because it tends to cling
to surfaces, this statement is ridiculous, even taking into account
the fact that Pressac is not qualified to make such a statement ...
although you seem to hold his complete lack of qualifications higher
than the extensive experience of Fred Leuchter. Fascinating.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 179 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:02 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 61) ---
> Please cite where Pressac depends a great deal on Nyiszli s
testimony?
.
If you read the book you say you have in your possession, you will
note that even though Pressac "corrects" Nyiszli's figures (!), when
he is all done he claims to have discovered Nyiszli's secret
scientific method (sometimes increasing the real number, sometimes
decreasing it, but "always" by about a factor of 4), thus proving the
accuracy of the numbers! In contrast, some other "eyewitnesses" do
not fare as well at Pressac's hand.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 180 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:02 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 62) ---
> Pressac does not address the CO content of either gasoline or
diesel engines. They both produce CO and it is that which is equally
deadly. It is a basic law of all sciences: A = A or, in this case, CO
= CO.
.
There are a great many things Pressac does not address ... details
and facts among them.
---
From the Second Edition of the Bosch Automotive Handbook, we learn
that 0.3 percent carbon monoxide by volume can cause death in 30
minutes. From the same source, we learn that an automobile engine
easily emits this much CO, but a diesel engine emits between 0.01 and
0.045 percent CO by volume at idle (more at maximum power, but it has
never been stated that these diesel engines were operated under
maximum load, merely at high rpm, which is entirely different).
Speaking of these two as being equally deadly is false and
misleading. But of course, Pressac does have the qualifications to
make such statements, doesn't he?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 181 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:03 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 63) ---
> As Pressac states on page 264 (previously quoted), he is employing
new methods of investigation.
.
Fred Leuchter also employed a new method for investigating the
Holocaust story ... the scientific method. Apparently, its novelty is
too much for some to accept.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 182 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:03 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 65) ---
Now that you have gratuitously (and erroneously) picked apart Mr.
Leuchter's qualifications, why not go the rest of the way and explain
why these same failings "prove" that none of his creations,
inventions, etc., could possibly work.
.
And then perhaps you would like to provide us with Mr. Pressac's
qualifications, just so we have an idea to what standard we are being
held.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 183 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:03 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 69) ---
> This leaves a burning question as to what Lueftl does say in his
manuscript, doesn t it.
.
Time will tell.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 184 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:04 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 75) ---
> As far as the new discoveries, you do know that since the downfall
of the Soviet Union that new documentation has become available to
the West, don t you? Mr. Krakowsky (the chief archivist at Yad
Vashem) has been evaluating these new documents. ...
> This is what historical research is all about. Are you suggesting
that the historians and archivist should not continue to search for
and read new documents?
---
Of course not. I would be interested to hear, however, who all has
access to these documents. If it is only Yad Vashem, are you
suggesting that only Jews can evaluate the history of the Holocaust
story?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 185 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:04 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 78) ---
In my opinion, if those in "scholarly circles" get one version of
history and the rest of us get another version, then people like me
should "storm the gates" and demand the truth ... which is exactly
what I am doing in a manner of speaking. You keep intimating that you
and a select group of others know the truth of the Holocaust story,
and that no one else does. Then, you attempt to denigrate my
knowledge of this matter because I had the poor taste to read the
version for public consumption, instead of obtaining a PhD in history
and snuggling up to the Insiders Who Know. This is bunk.
---
I pulled out my Time-Life Picture History of WWII yesterday. It was
printed in 1950. In it, there is only one brief mention of "gas
chambers," which according to Time-Life were at Dachau, Buchenwald,
and Bergen-Belsen ... the extermination centers.
---
Really, Pooh. If you have any pull at all with these Keepers of
Truth, won't you impress upon them the value of coming clean on this
Holocaust business? It seems that you would save yourselves a lot of
grief by so doing, and then you wouldn't have to put up with topics
such as this, here on GEnie, on Prodigy, or anywhere else.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 186 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:05 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 79) ---
> We also have documentation (captured by the West) which most
historical scholars consider "physical evidence." This includes the
shipments of humans in, no shipments of humans out, shipments of
Zyklon-B in with the designation of certain amounts to be used for
the resettlement of the Jews and special actions while the
designation on other shipments clearly states fumigation or
disinfection.
---
If this represents physical evidence, then most historical scholars
need to undergo a "physical" to see if their brains are still
functioning. Your false connection of human transports with shipments
of Zyklon B can only be for the purpose of creating a connection
between the two where none exists.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 187 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:05 EST
To W.Pike (regarding 85) ---
> My father was involved in the liberation of several death camps .
He has told me what he heard, smelled, touched, and seen personally.
---
Please tell us which camps, and if you could, a little more detail
about what your father heard, smelled, touched, and saw.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 188 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:06 EST
To Sheri Pierce (regarding 86, 87, 88, 89) ---
Why not ask Pooh.bah if she finds Mueller's account credible?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 189 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:06 EST
To Sheri Pierce (regarding 91) ---
> CNN reported that the Polish statistics for Auschwitz were reduced
because there were fewer non-Jewish victims of the homicidal gas
chambers.
---
The only way this recount could be done is if there exist detailed
records. What we need is access to these records (or an admission
that they simply do not exist and the whole thing was made up).
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 190 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:07 EST
To John Stengel (regarding 94) ---
The topic of toxicity of HCN can be vexing. I don't know if this will
help or not, but here are a couple of bits of information I have
picked up:
---
According to Bill Armontrout, warden of the Missouri State
Penitentiary, Missouri uses a gas chamber 6 by ten feet. At the top
of the chamber is an exhaust vent with a powerful fan used to send
the gas up a 40 foot stack. Armontrout said he would never attempt an
execution without a high stack. Even with it, the guards stationed on
two towers nearby must vacate their posts while the gas is vented.
.
The Missouri system places a bucket of water and sulphuric acid
solution beneat the condemned man, into which 37 cyanide pellets
(about one pound) are tipped with a lever. The solution is kept warm
so the pellets will gas off quickly.
.
From the time the lever drops, the condemned man's eyes are glazed
over after a ten count. At a count of about 58 the condemned man
appears dead. However, the EKG machine does not show a flat line
until after 13 minutes have passed.
.
The Missouri chamber contains four ammonia reservoirs to help
neutralize the cyanide gas. The ventilation fan runs for about an
hour, and then two officers equipped with rubberized clothing and
Scott air packs enter the chamber, remove the bucket of solution, and
begin to hose down the condemned man, "paying particular attention to
the hair and the clothing."
(loosely from Robert Lenski's book, "Holocaust on Trial")
---
Pressac's book also gives formulae for making the calculations to
which you refer, but I cannot find my notes or I would reproduce
them.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 191 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:07 EST
To Kevin Quinn (regarding 95) ---
> I entered Dachau Concentration Camp on April 29, 1945, with the
45th Infantry Division. I was a 1st Lt then; ... I saw the ovens and
the experimental medical installation. ... I am dumbfounded at
attempts to deny things I saw with my own eyes and things testified
to by non-Jews.
---
Thank you for joining the discussion. Could you please be more
specific? How many gas chambers were there? How big were they
(roughly)? How many inmates had been gassed to death (roughly)? How
many inmates died after the Allies liberated the camp (roughly)?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 192 Mon Mar 30, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:08 EST
To R.Arbetman (regarding 102) ---
> I don t see where the historical record of the Holocaust covers up
any alleged or sustantiated misdeeds by Allied armies.
.
Compare the number of Allied soldiers, leaders, etc. who were put on
trial for war crimes after the war with the number of Germans put on
trial (to say nothing of those summarily executed), and I think you
will get the picture ... that is, assuming you are familiar with
Allied atrocities.
---
> The Holocaust DOES give good reason for the establishment for a
national refuge for Jews. Do you have a problem with that?
.
Yes, two. First, I do not agree that the ends justify the means. And
second, I believe the Jews could have gone to Palestine WITHOUT
having to create a Zionist state. However, this is all off topic.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 193 Mon Mar 30, 1992
C.FINK4 [Carl] at 01:15 EST
GRAFFITI, I don't consider 139 anti-Semitic. (Rebuttal to Dov's 140)
Mind you, I personally have never met such bigotted Jews as Neil refers to -
but claiming that they exist is not anti-Semitism per se.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 194 Mon Mar 30, 1992
C.FINK4 [Carl] at 01:32 EST
Raven, your 171 - parts of the Soviet Union were in Europe, and parts in
Asia. In particular (and as examples) Armenia, Ukraine, and Moldavia are in
Europe.
Raven, your 174 - if Pressac says he broke with Faurisson, and Faurisson
that he ejected Pressac, why should we simply accept Faurisson's account, as
you do ("...Pressac lies when he states that he took the initiative and 'broke
completely with Faurisson'")? I'm completely objective on this, since I've
never read either of their works.
Raven, your 180 - I'm not an engineer (or car mechanic), but my knowledge of
chemistry is sufficient to tell me what causes CO production in any carbon-
compound burning engine. To be explicit, it's incomplete combustion. Now,
presume that some Germans are going to gas some people. Is it beyond their
technical prowess to adjust the carburetor (or whatever fuel-injection system
diesel engines use) so that the mixture is too rich? On most modern cars, one
would have to turn what amounts to a screw. Rich mixture --> more CO.
I'm not an expert on the incident, of course, but if one sets out to
suffocate people with exhaust fumes, one can. In any case, if the bus was
halfway-decently sealed, the CO2 (carbon dioxide) emitted by the cleaner-
burning diesel would simply smother people by oxygen lack, in the absence of
CO.
Carl Fink
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 195 Mon Mar 30, 1992
A.K.QUINN at 03:28 EST
The gas chambers I saw at Dachau were above ground. The inmates were well
aware of what was going on: they had set up an underground prisoners
committee, headed by a man named patrick Joseph O'Leary, no kidding... I found
them having a meeting the day after liberation, and Patrick was laying down
the law about the stealing of potatoes...
I recall 2 gas chambers. There were about 34,OOO inmates in the camp when we
got there. Not many Jews; they mostly were sent to Auschwitz and Bergen-
Belsen, I was told. There were 2 Americans and 4 English, all captured
intelligence agents (one was a priest.)
A few days after April 29 there was a solemn high Mass of thanksgiving,
with a choir of surviving Polish priests. I still have a hand-written letter
from Cardinal Faulhaber (of Munich-Freising) asking the American authorities
to release the remaining priests so that they could be sent to hospitals. No
dice: SHAEF policy was that Germans would be released last. Ironic: they had
been there the longest.
Dachau was not the out and out extermination camp that Auschwitz was: there
was work for prisoners in a nearby factory (which I did not visit) and on some
farmland and botanical laboratories.
I do not recall many statistics other than those mentioned above. Remember,
I stayed on for 5-6 weeks, and there was a typhus epidemic in the camp. One
Jewish girl I recall vividly: she had been a medical student in Italy and told
mehow her family was separated at a staging area. Emotional? not she; calm,
factual. I found out later that of all the countries in Europe, Italy did the
best job of protecting and hiding Jews. Even the fascist police... =KevinQ=
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 196 Mon Mar 30, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 03:43 EST
Col. Quinn:
Great stuff! Thanks for sharing!
Greg Raven:
"Compare the number of Allied soldiers, leaders, etc. who were put on trial
for war crimes with the number of Germans put on trial..."
Compare the number of Allied soldiers who were members of the Einsatzgruppen
with the numbers of Germans who were members of the Einsatzgruppen.
"According to Bill Armontrout, warden of the Missouri State Penitentiary,
Missouri uses a gas chamber 6 by ten feet."
Mr. Raven, you're just a walking, talking guide to America's gas chambers &
crematoria. Never know when it might come in handy, right, chief? ;)
Incidentally, I'm still "breathless," to use your adjective, waiting for your
enlightening expose on how Germany actually didn't start the war.
Dave, The Eternal Jew
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 198 Mon Mar 30, 1992
SOFTSERV [NeilSchulman] at 04:03 EST
Dov Berkowitz, since you think I made anti-Semitic statements in my message
139, I won't presume to call you Berel. But I will apologize for banalizing
your name -- there are so many Davids around here that I mistyped.
I can't keep up the pace of this discussion anymore. It's been a full-time
job all weekend to do it, and I have pressing deadlines approaching.
Pooh.Bah, how do you do it?
There's only one thing I feel a need to respond to. The Jews of the Warsaw
ghetto held the fort for three months with 8 handguns.
If you want to argue against the fact that an armed Jewry can't be
exterminated, argue with the Israelis.
I'll be back when I can find the time. (I expect to see "875 New Messages" by
then. Ugh!)
Neil
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 199 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:02 EST
To POOH.BAH (2)
Popular misconceptions being mistaken for historical accounts? Those very
"misconceptions" were presented to everybody as historical FACT until fairly
recently via the mass media, so-called survivors' sworn statements, and
"holocaust literature". The "human lampshades", "human soap" and "mass
gassings" in the camps on German soil were presented as valid history in ALL
circles, scholarly or not, and NOT as ostensibly fictional accounts as you
allege. Yet even now they are still sometimes presented in the mass media as
irrefutable fact; they show up in popular literature. The general public
still largely believes in these myths.
You have alleged that such myths are "not intrinsic to the holocaust" but in
fact they have always been CENTRAL to it, for such fabrications have been the
emotional mainstay of the holocaust in general.
The historical process in which lies and myths of this nature are exposed and
then rejected, and finally replaced with verifiable fact is the process of
"revisionism". Such revisionism reshapes a distorted history into genuine
history. You seem to treat "revisionism" as a dirty word, but in fact without
it we would probably know nothing about human history at all.
You are correct that the Nuremberg Trials were "not historical accounts". The
testimonies presented there were often ludicrously false along with much of
the documentation. Still, human beings were executed on the basis of those
testimonies and documents. The (anti-Nazi) Werner Maser's book "NUREMBERG: A
NATION ON TRIAL" is an excellent account of those victors' show trials for
those interested in this area.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 200 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:03 EST
To POOH.BAH (3)
I am glad to hear that you "do not rely on sources such as Hoess' confession
or even on Kurt Gerstein's account" as being "not credible and cannot be
depended upon". THANKYOU. That being the case, why have you made reference
to the former in support of the "mass gassings" and the "extermination
campaign" in earlier messages?
Thankyou also for admitting that the de-lousing chambers were just that
(message 4) and not the "gas chambers" as they are so often described. But
then you go on to say that they must have been used for "some sort of gassing"
and presented us with a convoluted rationale to support this. You seem to be
of two minds on this issue.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 201 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:05 EST
To POOH.BAH (7)
I agree with you that the input of a professional historian is important when
the holocaust is under discussion, but since so many historians carefully shy
away from this area of research (a "no-win" area of study for their careers)
it has devolved upon non-historians to do the job. There are just as many non-
historians writing from both the holocaust and revisionist perspectives in
both camps.
In some of your earlier messages you sneered at Mark Weber of the Institute
for Historical Review. Those reading these messages may not be clear on Mr.
Weber or his qualifications as an historical revisionist. Let me give some
details: he worked and lived in Germany and is fluent in the German language
(do you remember your comments about non-German-speakers?) which you regard as
quite important. He received his BA in history in 1976 with high honors from
Portland State University. He received laudatory recommendations from a
number of his professors and was offered several scholarships for post-
graduate study; he chose a full fellowship from Indiana University where he
studied and taught for several semesters. He received his Master's degree in
central european history from there in December 1978. He has done serious
research work at both the Institute for Contemporary History in Munich and at
the National Archives in Washington D.C.
Need I go on? He meets all of your criteria. Yet he has presented and
published paper after paper in which various aspects of the holocaust,
including "mass gassings", are rejected as invalid. Currently he is a full-
time researcher with the Institute for Historical Review and an Associate
Editor of the IHR's JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL REVIEW. He is a full-blown
holocaust revisionist, and, since he meets your criteria as someone eminently
qualified to present findings on the holocaust, then surely and by your own
logic, you should be respecting his work and findings?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 202 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:06 EST
To POOH.BAH (9)
Your analogy of the round-worlders versus the flat-worlders is thought-
provoking. For centuries the world was "known" to be flat and it was regarded
as "irrefutable" and unchallengable. Deniers of the flat-earth dogma were
treated and regarded in exactly the same fashion as holocaust revisionists
today. Yet, ultimately, the truth emerged.
You asked why Mr. Raven has concentrated his attention on the holocaust rather
than on other historical areas of research. The answer should be obvious.
Because it is the one single area of history which is the most rife with
historical error. The more outrageous the falsehoods asserted about it ("mass
gassings", "lampshades", "human soap" etc.), the more attractive it has become
as a discussion area. Of course, the same question could be turned around and
directed at YOU, POOH.BAH. But what is the point and what would be "proven"
by posing such a question? Don't tell me we're back into "neo-Nazi conspiracy"
theories and "agendas" and the like.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 203 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:06 EST
To POOH.BAH (11)
Your Shakespeare digression puzzled me. What were you trying to say? That
the Great Bard was an anti-semite? Yes, he WAS an anti-semite but I don't
think anybody has denied that. But what does it have to do with our
discussion? Does his "Merchant of Venice" somehow prove an extermination
campaign on the part of the Germans centuries later?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 204 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:08 EST
To SOFTSERV (30)
The "guilt-by-association" method employed with the intention to damage the
credibility of various revisionists is indeed political. I agree with your
statements on that, entirely.
Such an approach in not appropriate for historical study. Yet this is one
area of history, i.e. the "holocaust", which has been politicized like no
other event or period. To question the holocaust or any aspect of it is held
to be tantamount to somehow being a "hate crime". This very definition has
been legislated into effect in France and Canada. Attempts are being made to
do the same thing right here in our country, both via our courts in harassment
suits directed against revisionists and revisionist organizations and via the
machinations of "thought control" organizations such as the Anti-Defamation
League. This politicization of history benefits noone! If we are to learn
from history then we have to approach it dispassionately and not fear what is
uncovered.
You are also correct in your statement that "blacklisting and political
persecution" follows authors of critiques of holocaust history. It is in line
with what I stated above. I might add that physical violence and even terror
bombings frequently are directed against revisionists, such as the fire-
bombing of the I.H.R. offices in California several years ago, and the
physical attacks on David Irving, Professor Faurisson, and others. My guess
is that you would condemn such methods of intimidation, but I doubt if many
others here would.
Your willingness to judge such writings by their merits or lack thereof, and
without prejudice, is commendable. I personally have read revisionist
material that was anti-semitic garbage (and promptly rejected it) but have
also found that the majority of revisionist writings are excellently
researched and presented.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 205 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:09 EST
To SOFTSERV (32)
Actually, I was the person "chewed out" for confusing Anne Frank's death from
typhoid or typhus. POOH.BAH's obvious intention was to "expose" me as an
ignoramus, while my intention was to illustrate that Anne was not gassed as is
still widely and popularly believed.
Your definition of Faurisson "a historian because he was researching and
writing about historical events" I would agree with. My Webster's College
Dictionary defines "historian" as:
1. An expert in or authority on history.
2. A writer of history; chronicler. So that puts you in pretty good
company.
By the way, you do seem to have an "agenda". It is the pursuit of historical
truth.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 206 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:09 EST
To POOH.BAH (46)
I am glad to see that you recognize Pressac's discrediting of the Auschwitz
"eyewitness" testimonies. Will you therefore join with me in condemning the
usage of such unreliable testimony as "evidence" or "proof" of an
extermination campaign?
Your respect for "widely accepted belief within the historical community"
means what? That an "accepted belief" is no longer open to question? That
historical research must shudder to a stop in an area of such "accepted
belief"? It was widely accepted belief that the Earth was flat until
revisionists such as Aristotle and Columbus came along who questioned that
belief. It was widely accepted historical belief that Troy was a legend until
a certain German archaeologist actually located it's physical remains. The
holocaust and the allegations of "mass gassings" and an "extermination
campaign" are widely believed. Does this mean that nobody is allowed to
question it or to do serious research in this area?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 207 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:10 EST
To POOH.BAH (49)
You are correct that the "gas chambers" currently on display at Auschwitz were
reconstructed after the war. Whether or not they were reconstructed from "the
plans" is not clear though, since Nazi "gas chamber" plans (I presume you mean
construction blueprints?) have not been publicly presented and such original
plans are not to be found. The Polish authorities claim to have them but,
again, they have not been displayed to the public.
It is still, however, popularly believed and even taught in our schools that
the original Auschwitz gas chambers are still standing and open to public
inspection.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 208 Mon Mar 30, 1992
H.P.SKALIKS [Hans-Peter] at 06:17 EST
A.K.QUINN...message 195
All the current written reports suggest that there were no gas chambers at
Dachau. You must be keen-sighted indeed to have spotted right away what all
the professional researchers missed.
Perhaps what you took for gas chambers were in fact something else.
D.FRIEDMAN14...message 196
Allied soldiers, both east and west, committed quite enough atrocities to keep
researchers busy for a long time, if there were some interest in justice. I
KNOW that you are not so naive as to believe that the allies had a clean vest
in this whole campaign. It is rather dishonest to attempt to create this
impression in your post. While one atrocity does not excuse another, things
were not nearly so one-sided as some of the respondents here would have us
believe.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 209 Mon Mar 30, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 06:26 EST
Hans-Peter:
I never said the Allies had clean hands, where atrocities were concerned
(indeed, I slammed our side pretty hard on the Military R/T, where atrocities
against Japanese troops were concerned). If, however, you mean to tell me
that Allied crimes are comparable to Nazi crimes...In terms of magnitude
that's like comparing shoplifting a 10-cent lollipop with embezzling $10
billion from a bank.
Show me evidence of an Allied systematic program of genocide, similar to the
German one.
M.RUNGU:
You're back! >wolf grin> Lucky us! Hopefully, you've been rejuvenated by
your time away from the front.
Would you like to explain, yet, how you, ostensibly an ignorant with a thirst
for truth, know so much about revisionism?
Love, Dave,
Jud Suss
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 211 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:29 EST
171 Raven:
> Not true. As you well know, the Germans moved thousands of Jews east
> of the so-called "killing centers" of Auschwitz, etc., into occupied
> Russia. According to my encyclopedia, Poland is in Europe, while the
> Soviet Union was (is) not. Therefore, "emigration" would refer to
> transfers to areas such as Madagascar and Palestine, while
> "evacuation" could refer to transfers to the East.
I would strongly suggest then that you get a new cncyclopedia. Europe extends
to the Urals which are definitely within the borders of what was the USSR.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 212 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:30 EST
172 Raven:
> You say that Pressac discredits eyewitness accounts. Yet anyone
> referring to the book would see that he relies heavily on Nyiszli.
> Really, you don't expect me to attempt to untangle Pressac's jumbled
> approach to this subject, do you? Pressac contradicts himself here
> and many other places, a few of which I have pointed out.
As I've asked before cite one example of where Pressac "relies heavily on
Nyiszli." You have admitted on another network that you have seen Pressac's
book but have not read it. Is this true and, if so, could you please cite the
source for you list of page numbers from Pressac and what those pages relate?
Is this why you are now having such difficulty citing references for your
assertions?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 213 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:31 EST
173 Raven:
> Ah, but that is not what Pressac says. He says (and you quote), "This
> study already demonstrates the complete bankruptcy of the traditional
> (Holocaust) history ..."
Everyone here has now seen the full quote and can decide for themselves if
you are or are not quoting out of context in such a way that it alters the
meaning of what Pressac is saying. For anyone who missed the full quote, it
is in my message 48.
> Gosh, you don't think that, with his statement, "a history based for the
> most part on testimonies, assembled according to the mood of the moment,
> truncated to fit an arbitrary truth and sprinkled with a few German
> documents of uneven value and without any connection with one another," he
> might have snared a Pooh.bah?
You do know the difference between TESTIMONIES and DOCUMENTS, don't you?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 214 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:31 EST
175 Raven:
> Are you sure you really want to put yourself in a position of
> defending Hoess' autobiography? Does this mean you also accept his
> "confession," or not? If so, are you willing to defend it as well? If
> not, are you willing to admit that any court that would accept such
> an obviously wrong "confession" cannot be relied upon for other
> matters?
This one is really cute. You make an accusation against Pressac, I quote
directly from Pressac to rebut your erroneous statement and now you claim
that _I'm_ "defending Hoess' autobiography?" Sorry. You are twisting things
again. Why don't you start by asking me my own opinion of Hoess'
autobiography?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 215 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:32 EST
176 Raven:
> I draw your attention to the last phrase of this excerpt. What
> exactly does "probably has to be divided by two or three to arrive at
> the true figure" mean? Does "probably" mean that Pressac doesn't know
> and is guessing? Does "two or three" indicate some kind of new
> precision in this matter?
Anyone who today claims that they know exactly how many were cremated to the
precise number is the one who stands to lose credibility. It can be said that
from X to Y were cremated but it cannot be said with any certainty that Z
were cremated. Now, if you had read the book, you would realize that Pressac
quoted a number of official sources that claimed different numbers.
Therefore, because these numbers flucuated, so must the divisor.
> I'm sure if Fred Leuchter had said something like this you would have
> found all kinds of objections. Why are you so silent now?
Obviously, I am not "silent now" and since you asked that in the same message
in which you asked the other question, this tells us volumes about you. Does
it really rattle you that much that I have a copy of Pressac and were able to
immediately rebut your source? BTW, where did you say that you got that list?
Was it from Mark Weber?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 216 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:32 EST
177 Raven:
>> In fact, according to [Pressac], all the photos came from
>> revisionist sources and not as you allege from the Durrfeld file of
>> Nuremberg trial number 6.
.
> Recheck your sources. You might be wise not to trust Pressac's word
> on anything.
Excuse me but your original message was concerning Pressac's work. By your
stating that the photos came from the "Durrfeld file of Nuremberg trial
number 6" that was an implicit statement that that statement came from
Pressac's book. Since it did not, my correction stands as written.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 217 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:33 EST
178 Raven:
> Zyklon B may be deadly, but it is not smart. It no more knows the
> difference between a lung and a wall. And, because it tends to cling
> to surfaces, this statement is ridiculous, even taking into account
> the fact that Pressac is not qualified to make such a statement ...
> although you seem to hold his complete lack of qualifications higher
> than the extensive experience of Fred Leuchter. Fascinating.
Ah, now I see why you were so uncomfortable with me disclosing the boiling
point of HCN! You should have told me sooner or, since I had already
disclosed it, you perhaps should not have made this statement.
Because HCN has such a low boiling point, that means at a relatively low
temperature (25 degrees C or about 77 degrees F) it is in the form of a gas.
Gas does not "cling" to lungs any more than it does to walls. Gas is easily
ventilated and, therefore, does not have time (as Pressac points out) to
impregnate exposed surfaces.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 218 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:34 EST
179 Raven:
>> Please cite where Pressac depends a great deal on Nyiszli s
>> testimony?
.
> If you read the book you say you have in your possession, you will
> note that even though Pressac "corrects" Nyiszli's figures (!), when
> he is all done he claims to have discovered Nyiszli's secret
> scientific method (sometimes increasing the real number, sometimes
> decreasing it, but "always" by about a factor of 4), thus proving the
> accuracy of the numbers! In contrast, some other "eyewitnesses" do
> not fare as well at Pressac's hand.
Does this mean that you CANNOT or that you WILL NOT cite where Pressac
depends a great deal on Nyiszli. And, how does correcting Nyiszli's figures
constitute "dependence?"
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 219 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:34 EST
180 Raven:
> Speaking of these two as being equally deadly is false and
> misleading.
Please read Carl Fink's #194.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 220 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:35 EST
181 Raven:
> Fred Leuchter also employed a new method for investigating the
> Holocaust story ... the scientific method.
Actually, Leuchter didn't employ the "scientific method"....at least not by
using scientific techniques. You do know what a "control sample" is according
to scientific techniques, don't you? The fact that Leuchter's considers the
sample he took from a de-lousing chamber to be his "control sample" indicates
his lack of scientific methods and techniques.
BTW, have you seen the video that was taken of him collecting the samples? It
had me laughing so hard I almost died. Some of the samples he took, he put in
nice little baggies....however, he didn't label them as he took them. Then,
other samples he just up and forgot about his little baggies and stuffed them
in his shirt pocket!
I truly consider that a GREAT scientific method, don't you?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 221 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:35 EST
182 Raven:
> Now that you have gratuitously (and erroneously) picked apart Mr.
> Leuchter's qualifications
Oh, was it "erroneous" to ask how his qualifications that you stated have
anything to do with the subject matter that we are discussing? I'm sorry...I
didn't mean to ask you questions that were so difficult.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 222 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:36 EST
184 Raven:
> I would be interested to hear, however, who all has
> access to these documents. If it is only Yad Vashem, are you
> suggesting that only Jews can evaluate the history of the Holocaust
> story?
Apparently you are unaware that Yad Vashem does not discriminate based upon
religion. Therefore, any researcher is welcome there and can evaluate the
materials. The documents were sent to Yad Vashem because they were the ones
who have been fighting for their release so ardently over the years. BTW,
according to Robert Wolfe at the National Archives here in Washington, DC, we
could NOT have gotten the documents here because of they did not meet the
criteria necessary for our archives.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 223 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:37 EST
185 Raven:
> You keep intimating that you and a select group of others know the truth
> of the Holocaust story, and that no one else does. Then, you attempt to
> denigrate my knowledge of this matter because I had the poor taste to read
> the version for public consumption, instead of obtaining a PhD in history
> and snuggling up to the Insiders Who Know. This is bunk.
There is something with which I'm having some problems here, Raven. You have
Hilberg's book (the single volume one, I believe). You have mentioned
Reitlinger, Fleming, Bauer and many others. Yet, when you make your claims as
to what the history of the Holocaust states, you refer back to things you
were taught in school.
The works by Hilberg, Reitlinger, Fleming, Bauer, etc. ARE the works to which
I'm referring when I speak of "scholarly circles" and Holocaust history.
Why not use these sources when attempting to state what the Holocaust is and
what it isn't according to the historical community?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 224 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:37 EST
186 Raven:
> If this represents physical evidence, then most historical scholars
> need to undergo a "physical" to see if their brains are still
> functioning.
Documents are physical evidence by definition. I believe that you are
confusing "physical" and "forensic" in this case.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 225 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:38 EST
190 Raven:
> According to Bill Armontrout, warden of the Missouri State
> Penitentiary, Missouri uses a gas chamber 6 by ten feet. At the top
> of the chamber is an exhaust vent with a powerful fan used to send
> the gas up a 40 foot stack. Armontrout said he would never attempt an
> execution without a high stack. Even with it, the guards stationed on
> two towers nearby must vacate their posts while the gas is vented.
Thank you for this great example and for stating your source. I'm just
wondering, however, why you did not include the fact that Missouri has
executed no one during Armontrout's tenure there as warden?
You'll find that on page 353 of Lenski's book.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 226 Mon Mar 30, 1992
AH.STEIN at 06:56 EST
155 Jim Gerber:
> > If you find an agenda in my writings here --other than a desire
> > to see truth and fairness prevail -- please tell me.
[From NeilSchulman]
>Neil, you wrote that many Libertarians privately support revisionism
and do so for what I took to be political reasons. You also said
that you were not completely sure of your own motivation.
Jim, many young Jews, like Neil, go through periods where they look at the
superficial aspects of the Jewishness of their parents and decide it's
hypocritical. (I should know; I did myself.)
Fortunately, most of those young rebels mature and realize that the
superficial aspects they found hypocritical are only superficial
manifestations of a culture, heritage and religion that have much to offer
those lucky enough to grow up as part of it.
Others never mature in that way, and rather grow into self-hating Jews. We
have a few here on GEnie, and most of us have been "treated" to the
analyses of some of them on television and newspapers.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 227 Mon Mar 30, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 07:03 EST
It's one thing to be self-destructive. But to want to bring down your whole
people is megalomaniacally so.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 228 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:42 EST
199 Rungu:
> The "human lampshades", "human soap" and "mass gassings" in the camps on
> German soil were presented as valid history in ALL circles, scholarly or
> not, and NOT as ostensibly fictional accounts as you allege.
Excuse me but I never classified any of the above as "fictional accounts."
Were there extermination camps on German soil? No. Were there gassings on
German soil? Yes. The soap and lampshades are also not fictional accounts
within specific limits.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 229 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:42 EST
199 Rungu:
> The historical process in which lies and myths of this nature are exposed
> and then rejected, and finally replaced with verifiable fact is the
> process of "revisionism". Such revisionism reshapes a distorted history
> into genuine history. You seem to treat "revisionism" as a dirty word,
> but in fact without it we would probably know nothing about human history
> at all.
I am all in favor of revisionism. I certainly don't treat it as a dirty word.
If I did, I would have no problems using it instead of "Denier" when
describing those who deny the Holocaust.
In fact, I would like to think that every great historian (throughout the
ages) has a good chunck of revisionism in his/her soul. If not, typically bad
history gets written. Tacitus is a good example of this.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 230 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:43 EST
200 Rungu:
> I am glad to hear that you "do not rely on sources such as Hoess'
> confession or even on Kurt Gerstein's account" as being "not credible and
> cannot be depended upon". THANK YOU. That being the case, why have you
> made reference to the former in support of the "mass gassings" and the
> "extermination campaign" in earlier messages?
Could you please cite any message in which I've used Hoess' confession? I
think after reviewing TOPic 4, you will find that I was not the one who cited
it.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 231 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:43 EST
200 Rungu:
> Thankyou also for admitting that the de-lousing chambers were just that
> (message 4) and not the "gas chambers" as they are so often described.
> But then you go on to say that they must have been used for "some sort of
> gassing" and presented us with a convoluted rationale to support this.
> You seem to be of two minds on this issue.
You must have misread my message. There were de-lousing chambers and there
were other gas chambers which were separate from those de-lousing chambers.
The "convoluted rationale" was the proof of these other gas chambers.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 232 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:44 EST
201 Rungu:
> In some of your earlier messages you sneered at Mark Weber of the
> Institute for Historical Review.
I'm sorry if you felt that I "sneered" at Mark Weber. All I did was to
mention that he is associated with the IHR and a former member of William
Pierce's neo-Nazi National Youth Alliance. I have also mentioned that he was
qualified as an expert witness at the Zuendel trial in Toronto and that I
agreed with that decision.
I have much respect for Mark Weber but that doesn't mean that I agree with
him. :-)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 233 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:45 EST
201 Rungu:
> For centuries the world was "known" to be flat and it was regarded
> as "irrefutable" and unchallengable. Deniers of the flat-earth dogma were
> treated and regarded in exactly the same fashion as holocaust revisionists
> today. Yet, ultimately, the truth emerged.
Thank you for proving my point so well, Rungu! Aristole "discovered" that the
earth was round and Plato popularized that fact. Aristole was Plato's student
so, as you can see, your above statement is one of the popular
misconceptions...which was the point of my original message. IOW, every
historical event has certain popular misconceptions surrounding it. However,
these "misconceptions" are never used as "proof" that the actual history is
in false.
> You asked why Mr. Raven has concentrated his attention on the holocaust
> rather than on other historical areas of research. The answer should be
> obvious. Because it is the one single area of history which is the most
> rife with historical error.
Both you and Raven have made this statement that the Holocaust is the "one
single area of history which is the most rife with historical error." Yet,
thus far, neither of you have offered anything to substantiate this. In fact,
your earlier comment tends to discredit this one. How does one know which
event is the "most rife" with historical error if one has not studied other
events?
Greg has refused to answer this question but, perhaps, you could help him
out. Can you explain why it is "irrelevant" to study other historical events
before making this claim? Can you explain how anyone can make this claim
without having studied other events?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 234 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:46 EST
203 Rungu:
> Your Shakespeare digression puzzled me. What were you trying to say?
> That the Great Bard was an anti-semite? Yes, he WAS an anti-semite but I
> don't think anybody has denied that. But what does it have to do with our
> discussion? Does his "Merchant of Venice" somehow prove an extermination
> campaign on the part of the Germans centuries later?
Excuse me but _I_ deny that the Great Bard was an anti-Semite. :-)
Sorry my digression puzzled you. It meant exactly what I said it meant - that
Greg's "have I no feelings" type of discourse reminded me of that speech of
Shylock's.
As I was often told: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." :-)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 235 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:47 EST
205 Rungu:
> POOH.BAH's obvious intention was to "expose" me as an ignoramus, while my
> intention was to illustrate that Anne was not gassed as is still widely
> and popularly believed.
> By the way, you do seem to have an "agenda". It is the pursuit of
> historical truth.
Excuse me, let me see if I understand you correctly. In message 3, TOPic 4
(your first message in this discussion) you say: "I for one don't know much
about the subject, but would like to learn more about it...." and in this
message you speak favorably of "historical truth", yet, when someone corrects
a point of historical fact, that person has an "obvious intention" to
"'expose' me as an ignoramus?"
Have I missed something here, Rungu?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 236 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:47 EST
206 Rungu:
> Your respect for "widely accepted belief within the historical community"
> means what? That an "accepted belief" is no longer open to question?
> That historical research must shudder to a stop in an area of such
> "accepted belief"? It was widely accepted belief that the Earth was flat
> until revisionists such as Aristotle and Columbus came along who
> questioned that belief.
Do you mind if I take this comment and show it to historians who know me?
They will get a good chuckle out of it! They are always after me because I am
always questioning "accepted belief."
My statements about "accepted belief" have in solely in regard as to what the
historical community does and does not accept as the facts concerning the
Holocaust. This is something which is very important to know if one is going
to deny it or revise it, don't you think?
BTW, Columbus made absolutely no contribution to questioning the belief that
the world was flat. The roundness of the earth was an "accepted belief" long
before he was born. This is a clear demonstration of what I meant of a
popular misconception. And here, when I posted that as an example before,
someone even told me that no one believed and that it wasn't taught that
Columbus "discovered" that the earth was round!
Thank you for helping me prove my point!
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 237 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:48 EST
207 Rungu:
> Whether or not they were reconstructed from "the plans" is not clear
> though, since Nazi "gas chamber" plans (I presume you mean construction
> blueprints?) have not been publicly presented and such original plans are
> not to be found. The Polish authorities claim to have them but, again,
> they have not been displayed to the public.
This doesn't make sense. Documents are to be "displayed to the public"? If
you travel to the Auschwitz Museum and use their archives, you will be able
to see the plans.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 238 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:48 EST
208 Han-Peter:
> All the current written reports suggest that there were no gas chambers at
> Dachau. You must be keen-sighted indeed to have spotted right away what
> all the professional researchers missed.
This is not quite accurate, Hans-Peter. There was a de-lousing chamber at
Dachau (which was probably one of the gas chambers that Kevin saw) and there
WAS a gas chamber....but it was never used. Inmates from Dachau were shipped
to Hartheim during the "euthanasia program" phase of operations for the
purpose of being gassed.
So, Kevin does have the correct count according to historical fact. Even
Leuchter when went to examine the facility says in the Second Leuchter Report
(or at least the report on that report that he presented to the IHR) that the
gas chamber at Dachau had "17 phony shower heads" in it....and then somehow
concluded that this structure was "clearly used as a shower room."
I've never heard it alleged that one of the atrocities was making inmates
shower without water. Maybe Leuchter has discovered a new one! :-)
Actually, Hans-Peter, Dachau was never heavily populated by Jews. Most of
those who died either throught the euthanasia program or other methods at
Dachau were Germans who disagreed with Hitler.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 239 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 07:49 EST
208 Han-Peter:
> Allied soldiers, both east and west, committed quite enough atrocities to
> keep researchers busy for a long time, if there were some interest in
> justice. I KNOW that you are not so naive as to believe that the allies
> had a clean vest in this whole campaign. It is rather dishonest to attempt
> to create this impression in your post. While one atrocity does not excuse
> another, things were not nearly so one-sided as some of the respondents
> here would have us believe.
On this point, Hans-Peter, you and I are in total agreement.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 240 Mon Mar 30, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 07:58 EST
To:193 C.FINK4 [Carl]
> GRAFFITI, I don't consider 139 anti-Semitic. (Rebuttal to Dov's
>140)
You didn't rebut Dov, because Dov didn't say that #139 was anti- semitic, Dov
said:
> #139 actually contains numerous, IMO, anti-semitic references and
>demand refutation or, minimally, explanation. Thanks.
Quite a difference, I would think. Particularly since it makes such sweeping
statements and draws such wide conclusions. Like blaming the Jews- a
collectivist argument- for anti-semitism!
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 241 Mon Mar 30, 1992
H.P.SKALIKS [Hans-Peter] at 08:00 EST
D.Friedman14...message 209
Dave, I believe we are now playing a few word games. The Anglo- American
bombing campaign claimed approximately 1.5 million victims, including 600,000
children under 14. It was policy to specifically target residential areas with
a bomb mix designed to maximize civilian casualties. These methods lack the
personal touch of the NS regime, but the effect is the same.
More than 1 million German prisoners of war were allowed to starve to death in
American captivity, even though the Americans certainly had no shortage of
food.
Some 5 million former German soldiers were used as slave labour by the allies,
who were hypocritical enough to put others on trial for similar efforts.
More than 4 million ethnically German former residents of eastern Germany
(East Prussia, Silesia, Pomerania), Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia, etc. lost
their lives during the period from 1945- 1947, in many cases as the result of
application of techniques similar to the ones it is alleged were employed at
Babi Yar. Their only crime was being ethnically German and having property
that somebody else wanted.
I mention these events not to justify or minimize the suffering of Jews, but
to point out that other people also have a cause for being unhappy about the
events of that period. Some of the respondents here leave the impression that
they are not so much opposed to the concept of atrocities in general, but only
opposed to atrocities against Jews. This excessive tribal focus pulls the rug
out from under any moral point, universal or otherwise, they might try to make
about this issue.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 242 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 08:49 EST
In reply to: Message 181 G.RAVEN [Greg Raven]
-> Fred Leuchter also employed a new method for investigating the
->Holocaust story ... the scientific method. Apparently, its novelty
->is too much for some to accept.
Scientific method calls for a control sample to be taken from an unaffected
source, not from a source known to be affected. Leuchter's use of samples
taken from the delousing chambers in Block 3 as controls is equivalent to
using a group that's administered 10 times the therapeutic level of a drug
when testing that medication's effectiveness. Instead of using a sample
that's known to be contaminated, he would have, if using proper scientific
method, taken a sample from a source in the same vicinity which was not known
to have been exposed to HCN, then compared the levels of cyanic compounds in
it, the Krema samples and Block 3 samples.
Were we to use Leuchter's "scientific method" in another instance of
contamination, we might conclude that it is entirely safe to live in the
residential sections of Chernobyl, since the level of radioactivity there is
so much lower than that found at the Chernobyl nuclear plant...
185 Raven,
->I pulled out my Time-Life Picture History of WWII yesterday. It
->was printed in 1950. In it, there is only one brief mention of
->"gas chambers," which according to Time-Life were at Dachau,
->Buchenwald, and Bergen-Belsen ... the extermination centers.
Allow me to clarify for you and to eradicate the misunderstanding which Time-
Life has apparently placed in your mind. There were six extermination camps.
These were Auschwitz-Birkenau, Belzec, Chelmno (Kulmnoff), Majdanek, Sobibor
and Treblinka.
Again, so that there's no chance for further confusion on your part, there
were six extermination camps.
These were:
Auschwitz-Birkenau
Belzec
Chelmno (Kulmhoff)
Majdanek
Sobibor
Treblinka
Please note that Dachau, Mathausen, Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, etc., are
missing from this list.
----------
David & Reb Dov (various posts),
It may interest you to know that the acronym "ZOG", which you have been using
to denote "Zionist Occupation Group" was also the acronym of a Jewish partisan
group in (I believe) the Warsaw Ghetto.
A proud Acronym, to be sure.
Termy, Zionist-in-training
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 243 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 08:57 EST
9 Messages follow, giving the entirety of a report from Einzatzkommando 3. As
my spell-checker decided to die unexpectedly & I'm on a laptop, with no backup
copy readily available, I ccan assure you there are some typos. They are
mine. Don't assume the document in error if you find such...
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 244 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 08:58 EST
The Commander of
the Security Police and
the SD
Einsatzkommando 3 Kauen [Kaunas), 1 December 1941
_Secret Reich Business!_ 5 copies
4th copy
_Complete List of Executions Carried Out in the EK 3 Area_
_up to 1 December 1941._
Security police duties in Lithuania taken over by Einsatzkommando 3 on 2
July 1941.
(The Wilna [Vilnius] area was taken over by EK 3 on 9 Aug. 1941, the
Schaulen area on 2 Oct. 1941. Up until these dates EK 9 operated in Wilna
and
EK 2 in Schaulen.)
On my instructions and oorder the following executions were conducted by
Lithuanian partisans:
4.7.41 Kauen-Fort VII- 416 Jews, 47 Jewesses 463
6.7.41 Kauen-Fort VII- Jews 2,514
Following the formation of a raiding squad under the command of SS-
Obersturmfuhrer Hamann and 8-10 reliable men from the Einsatzkommando the
following actions were conducted in cooperation with Lithuanian partisans:
7.7.41 Mariampole Jews 32
8.7.41 Mariampole 14 Jews, 5 Comm. officials 19
8.7.41 Girkalinei Comm. officials 6
9.7.41 Wendziogala 32 Jews, 2 Jewesses
1 Lithuanian (f.), 2 Lith.
Comm., 1 Russ. Comm. 38
9.7.41 Kauen-Fort VII- 21 Jews, 3 Jewesses 24
14.7.41 Mariampole 21 Jews, 1 Russ., 9 Lith.
Comm. 31
17.7.41 Babtei 8 Comm. officials (inc. 6
Jews) 8
18.7.41 Mariampole 39 Jews, 14 Jewesses 53
19.7.41 Kauen-Fort VII- 17 Jews, 2 Jewesses, 4 Lith.
Comm. 2 Comm.
Lithuanians (f.), 1 German
Comm. 26
21.7.41 Panevezys 59 Jews, 11 Jewesses, 1
Lithuanian (f.), 1 Pole, 22
Lit. Comm., 9 Russ. Comm. 103
22.7.41 Panevezys 1 Jew 1
23.7.41 Kedaniai 83 Jews, 12 Jewesses, 14
Russ. Comm., 15 Lith.
Comm., 1 Russ. O-Politruk 125
25.7.41 Mariampole 90 Jews, 13 Jewesses 103
28.7.41 Panevezys 234 Jews, 15 Jewesses, 19
Russ. Comm., 20 Lit.
Communists 288
___________
Total carried forward 3,834
[Note: on 17.7.41, the notation that 6 of the 8 Communists killed were
Jewish, and the differentiation throughout this and subsequent sheets between
the various victims & their affiliation(s). Also note in later sheets the
listings of Jewish children as a separate entry.]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 245 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 08:59 EST
Sheet 2
Total carried over: 3,834
29.7.41 Rasainiai 254 Jews, 3 Lit.
Communists 257
30.7.41 Agriogala 27 Jews, 11 Lit.
Communists 38
31.7.41 Utena 235 Jews, 16 Jewesses, 4
Lit. Comm., 1 robber/
murderer 256
11/31.7.41 Wendziogala 13 Jews, 2 murderers 15
August:
1.8.41 Ukmerge 254 Jews, 42 Jewesses, 1 Pol.
Comm., 2 Lith. NKVD
agents, 1 mayor of Jonava
who gave order to set fire to
Jonava 300
2.8.41 Kauen-Fort IV 170 Jews, 1 US Jew, 1 US
Jewess, 33 Jewesses, 4 Lith.
Communists 209
4.8.41 Panevezys 362 Jews, 41 Jewesses, 5
Russ. Comm., 14 Lit.
Communists 422
5.8.41 Rasainiai 213 Jews, 66 Jewesses 279
7.8.41 Uteba 483 Jews, 87 Jewesses, 1
Lithuanian (robber of
corpses of German soldiers) 571
8.8.41 Ukmerge 620 Jews, 82 Jewesses 702
9.8.41 Kauen-Fort IV 484 Jews, 50 Jewesses 534
11.8.41 Panevezys 450 Jews, 48 Jewesses, 1
Lith., 1 Russ. C. 500
13.8.41 Alytus 617 Jews, 100 Jewesses, 1
criminal 719[sic]
14.8.41 Jonava 497 Jews, 55 Jewesses 552
15 and Rokiskis 3,200 Jews, Jewesses and J.
16.8.41 children, 5 Lith. Comm., 1
Pole, 1 partisan 3,207
9 to Rassainiai 294 Jewesses, 4 Jewish
16.8.41 children 298
27.6 to Rokiskis 493 Jews, 432 Russians, 56
14.8.41 Lithuanians (all active
Communists) 981
18.8.41 Kauen-Fort IV 689 Jews, 402 Jewesses, 1
Pole (f.), 711 Jewish
intellectuals from ghetto in
reprisal for sabotage action 1,812
19.8.41 Ukmerge 298 Jews, 255 Jewesses, 1
Politruk, 88 Jewish children,
1 Russ. Communist 645
22.8.41 Dunaburg 3. Russ. Comm. 5 Latvians
incl. 1 murderer, 1 Russ.
guardsman, 3 Poles, 3
gypsies (m.), 1 gypsy (f.), 1
gypsy child, 1 Jew, 1 Jewess,
1 Aremenian (m.), 2 Politruks
(prison inspection in
Dunaburg) 21
___________
Total carried forward 16,152
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 246 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 09:00 EST
Sheet 3
Total carried forward 16,512
22.8.41 Aglona Mentally sick; 269 men, 227
women, 48 children 544
23.8.41 Panevezys 1,312 Jews, 4,602 Jewesses,
1,609 Jewish children 7,523
18 to Kreis Rasianiai 466 Jews, 440 Jewesses, 1020
22.8.41 Jewish children 1,926
25.8.41 Obeliai 112 Jews, 627 Jewesses, 412
Jewish children 1,160
25 and Seduva 230 Jews, 275 Jewesses, 159
26.8.41 Jewish children 664
26.8.41 Zarasai 767 Jews, 1,113 Jewesses, 1
Lith. Comm., 687 Jewish
children, 1 Russ. Communist
(f.) 2,569
26.8.41 Pasvaylys 402 Jews, 738 Jewesses, 209
Jewish children 1,349
26.8.41 Kaisiadorys All Jews, Jewesses and
Jewish children 1,911
27.8.41 Prienai All Jews, Jewesses and
Jewish children 1.078
27.8.41 Dagda and 212 Jews, 4 Russ. POWs 216
Kraslawa
27.8.41 Joniskis 47 Jews, 165 Jewesses, 143
Jewish children 355
28.8.41 Wilkia 76 Jews, 192 Jewesses, 134
Jewish children 402
28.8.41 Kedianiai 710 Jews, 767 Jewesses, 599
Jewish children 2,076
29.8.41 Rumsiskis and 20 Jews, 567 Jewesses, 197
Ziezmariai Jewish children 784
29.8.41 Utena and 582 Jews, 1,731 Jewesses,
Moletai 1,469 Jewish children 3,782
13 to Alytus and 233 Jews 233
31.8.41 environs
September:
1.9.41 Mariampole 1,763 Jews, 1,812 Jewesses,
1,404 Jewish children, 109
mentally sick, 1 German
subject (f.), marriad to a
Jew, 1 Russian (f.) 5,090
___________
Total carried over 47,814
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 247 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 09:01 EST
Sheet 4
Total carried over 47,814
28.8 to Darsuniskis 10 Jews, 69 Jewesses, 20
2.9.41 Jewish children 99
Carliava 73 Jews, 113 Jewesses, 61
Jewish children 247
Jonava 112 Jews, 1,200 Jewesses, 244
Jewish children 1,556
Petrasiunai 30 Jews, 72 Jewesses, 23
Jewish children 125
Jesuas 26 Jews, 72 Jewesses, 46
Jewish children 144
Ariogala 207 Jews, 260 Jewesses, 195
Jewish children 662
Jasvainai 86 Jews, 110 Jewesses, 86
Jewish children 282
Babtei 20 Jews, 41 Jewesses, 22
Jewish children 83
Wenziogala 42 Jews, 113 Jewesses, 97
Jewish children 252
Krakes 448 Jews, 476 Jewesses, 201
Jewish children 1,125
4.9.41 Pravenischkis 247 Jews, 6 Jewesses... 253
4.9.41 Cekiske 22 Jews, 64 Jewesses, 60
Jewish children 146
Seredsius 6 Jews, 61 Jewesses, 126
Jewish children 193
Velinona 2 Jews, 71 Jewesses, 86
Jewish children 159
Zapiskis 47 Jews, 118 Jewesses, 13
Jewish children 178
5.9.41 Ukmerge 1,123 Jews, 1,849 Jewesses,
1,737 Jewish children 4,709
25.8 to Mopping up in 16 Jews, 412 Jewesses, 415
6.9.41 Rasainiai Jewish children 843
in Georgenburg all Jews, all Jewesses, all
Jewish children 412
9.9.41 Alytus 287 Jews, 640 Jewesses, 352
Jewish children 1,279
9.9.41 Butrimonys 67 Jews, 370 Jewesses, 303
Jewish children 740
10.9.41 Merkine 223 Jews, 355 Jewesses, 276
Jewish children 854
10.9.41 Varena 541 Jews, 141 Jewesses, 149
Jewish children 831
11.9.41 Leipalingis 60 Jews, 70 Jewesses, 25
Jewish children 155
11.9.41 Seirijai 229 Jews, 384, Jewesses, 340
Jewish children 953
12.9.41 Simnas 68 Jews, 197 Jewesses, 149
Jewish children 414
11 and Uzusalis Reprisal against inhabitants
12.9.41 who fed Russ. partisans;
some in possession of
weapons 43
26.9.41 Kauen-F.IV 412 Jews, 615 Jewesses, 581
Jewish children (sick and
suspected epidemic cases) 1,608
___________
Total carried over 66,159
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 248 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 09:02 EST
Sheet 5
Total carried over 66,159
October:
2.10.41 Zagare 633 Jews, 1,107 Jewesses, 496
Jewish chil. (as these Jews
were being led away a
mutiny arose, which was
however immediately put
down; 150 Jews were shot
immediately; 7 partisans
wounded) 2,236
4.10.41 Kauen-F.IX - 315 Jews, 712 Jewesses, 818
Jewish children 1,845
(Reprisal after German police
officer shot in ghetto)
29.10.41 Kauen-F.IX - 2,007 Jews, 2,920 Jewesses,
4,273 Jewish children
(mopping up ghetto of
superfluous Jews) 9,200
November:
3.11.41 Lazdijai 485 Jews, 511 Jewesses, 539
Jewish children 1,535
15.11.41 Wilkowski 36 Jews, 48 Jewesses, 31
Jewish children 115
25.11.41 Kauen-F.IX - 1,159 Jews, 1,600 Jewesses,
175 Jewish children
(resettlers from Berlin,
Munich and Frankfurt am
Main) 2,934
29.11.41 Kauen-F.IX - 693 Jews, 1,155 Jewesses, 152
Jewish children (resettlers
from Vienna and Breslau) 2,000
29.11.41 Kauen-F.IX - 17 Jews, 1 Jewesses, fo
contravention of ghetto law,
1 Reichs German who
converted to Jewish faith and
attended rabbinical school,
then 15 terrorists from the
Kalinin Group 34
EK 3 detachment in Dunaberg
in the period 13.7-21.8.41: 9,012 Jews, Jewesses and
Jewish children, 573 active
Communists 9,585
EK 3 detachment in Wilna:
12.8 to City of Wilna 425 Jews, 19 Jewesses, 8
1.9.41 Communists (m.), 9
Communists (f.) 461
2.9.41 City of Wilna 864 Jews, 2,019 Jewesses, 817
Jewish children (Sonderaktion
because German soldier shot
at by Jews) 3,700
___________
Total carried forward 99,804
[ed. note: Note comment appended to entries dated 29.10.41, 25.11.41 and
29.11.41. This should clarify various "resettlement", "emigration" and
"evacuation" memoranda, orders and notices.]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 249 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 09:03 EST
Sheet 6
Total carried forward 99,804
12.9.41 City of Wilna 993 Jews, 1,670 Jewesses, 771
Jewish children 3,334
17.9.41 City of Wilna 337 Jews, 687 Jewesses, 247
Jewish children and 4 Lith.
Communists 1,271
20.9.41 Nemencing 128 Jews, 176 Jewesses, 99
Jewish children 403
22.9.41 Novo-Wilejka 468 Jews, 495 Jewesses, 196
Jewish children 1,159
24.9.41 Riesa 512 Jews, 744 Jewesses, 511
Jewish children 1,767
25.9.41 Jahiunai 215 Jews, 229 Jewesses, 131
Jewish children 575
27.9.41 Eysisky 989 Jews, 1,636 Jewesses, 821
Jewish children 3,446
30.9.41 Trakai 366 Jews, 483 Jewesses, 597
Jewish children 1,446
4.10.41 City of Wilna 432 Jews, 1,115 Jewesses, 436
Jewish children 1,983
6.10.41 Semiliski 213 Jews, 359 Jewesses, 390
Jewish children 962
9.10.41 Svenciany 1,169 Jews, 1,840 Jewesses,
717 Jewish children 3,726
16.10.41 City of Wilna 382 Jews, 507 Jewesses, 257
Jewish children 1,146
21.10.41 City of Wilna 718 Jews, 1,063 Jewesses, 586
Jewish children 2,367
25.10.41 City of Wilna - Jews, 1,766 Jewesses, 812
Jewish children 2,578
27.10.41 City of Wilna 946 Jews, 184 Jewesses, 73
Jewish children 1,203
30.10.41 City of Wilna 382 Jews, 789 Jewesses, 362
Jewish children 1,533
6.11.41 City of Wilna 340 Jews, 749 Jewesses, 252
Jewish children 1,341
19.11.41 City of Wilna 76 Jews, 77 Jewesses, 18
Jewish children 171
19.11.41 City of Wilna 6 POWs, 8 Poles 14
20.11.41 City of Wilna 3 POWs 3
25.11.41 City of Wilna 9 Jews, 46 Jewesses, 8 Jewish
children, 1 Pole for
possession of arms and other
military equipment 64
EK 3 detachment in Minsk from
28.9-17.10.41:
Pleschnitza, 620 Jews, 1,285 Jewesses,
Bischolin, 1,126 Jewish children and 19
Scak, Communists
Bober,
Uzda 3,050
___________
133,346
___________
Prior to EK 3 taking over security police duties, Jews liquidated
by pogroms and executions (excluding partisans) 4,000
___________
Total 137,346
===========
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 250 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 09:04 EST
Sheet 7
Today I can confirm that our objective, to solve the Jewish problem for
Lithuania, has been achieved by EK 3. In Lithuania there are no more Jews,
apart from Jewish workers and their families.
These total:
In Schaulen c. 4,500
In Kauen c. 15,000
In Wilna c. 15,000
I also intended to kill these Jewish workers plus their families but came up
against strong protests on the part of the civil administration (the
Reichskommissar) and the Wehrmacht and instructions were issued that these
Jews and their families were not to be executed.
It was only possible to achieve our objective of making Lithuania free from
Jews by forming a raiding squad consisting of specially selected men led by
SS-Obersturmfuhrer Hamann, who grasped my aims completely and understood the
importance of ensuring cooperations with the Lithuanian partisans and the
relevant civilian authorities.
The execution of such actions is first and foremost a matter of organization.
The decision to clear each district of Jews systematically required a
thorough
preparation of each individual action and a reconnaissance of the prevailing
conditions in the district concerned. The Jews had to be assembled at one or
several places. Depending on the number of Jews a place for graves had to be
found and then the graves dug. The distance from the assembly point to the
graves was on average 4 to 5 km. The Jews were transported in detachments of
500 to the execution area, with a distance of at least 2 km between them.
The
following example, selected at random, demonstrates the difficulties and the
acutely stressful nature of the work:
In Rokiskis 3,208 people had to be transported 4 1/2 km before they could be
liquidated. In order to get this work done within 24 hours,
[continued next message]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 251 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 09:05 EST
Sheet 8
over sixty of the eighty available Lithuanian partisans had to be detailed
for
cordon duty. The rest, who had to be relieved constantly, carried out the
work together with my men. Lorries are only very occasionally available for
transporting the Jews. There were a number of escape attempts, which were
thwarted single-handedly by my men, whose own lives were at risk. Three men
from the Kommando at Mariampole, for example, shot thirty-eight escapeing
Jews
and Communist officials on a path in a wood, with the result that none of
them
managed to escape. The marching distance to and from each individual action
totalled 160-200 km. It was only through the efficient use of time that it
was possible to carry out up to five actions per week while still coping with
any work that arose in Kauen, so that no backlog was allowed to build up.
The actions in Kauen itself, where there was an adequate number of reasonably
well-trained partisans available, were like parade-ground shooting in
comparison with the often enormous difficulties which had to be faced
elsehwere.
All the officers and men in my Kommando took an active part in the major
actions in Kauen, except for an official from the criminal detection
department, who was exempted owing to illness.
I consider the Jewish action more or less terminated as far as
Einsatzkommando
3 is concerned. Those working Jews and Jewesses still available are needed
urgently and I can envisage that after the winter this workforce will be
required even more urgently. I am of the view that the sterilization
programme of the male worker Jews should be started immediately so that
reproduction is prohibited [ed. take note of this, to be compared to other
documents later]. If despite sterilization a Jewess becomes pregnant she
will
be liquidated.
One of the Einsatzkommando 3's most important duties, after the Jewish
actions, was too inspect the prisons in each village and town, most of which
proved to be overcrowded. In every town there were an average of 600 people
of Lithuanian origin held in prison without any real reason. These people
had
been detained by partisans merely on the basis of denunciation. Many
personal
scores had been settled in the process. Nobody cared what became of them.
You had to visit the prisons and stop for just a moment in the overcrowded
cells, which as far as hygiene was concerned defied description, to believe
the
[continued next message]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 252 Mon Mar 30, 1992
TERMY at 09:06 EST
Sheet 9
conditions there. In Jonoava - and this is one example among many - 16
men were kept in a dark room in a cellar 3 m long, 3 m wide and 1.65 m high
for five weeks. They could all have been released since there were no
charges
against them. Girls aged between thirteen and sixteen were incarcerated
because they had applied to join the Communist youth in order to get work.
In
such cases we had to take quite radical measures to hammer the message home
into the heads of the relevant Lithuanian authorities. The prisoners were
assembled in the prison yard and checked off against lists and documents.
Those who had been locked up on spurious charges as a result of quite
harmless
behaviour were put in a special group. Those whom were sentenced to one to
three months and six months for their crimes were also separated into a
special group, and those that were to be liquidated, such as criminals,
Communist officials, Politruks and other riff-raff, were put into another
group. Some of them, depending on their crime, particularly the Communist
officials, received an additional punishment of ten to forty lashes with the
whip which was meted out immediately. After the inspection was over the
prisoners were led back to their cells. Those that were to be freed were led
to the market-place in a column where, after a short address in the presence
of many inhabitants, they were set free. The content of the speech (it was
translated sentence by sentence by an interpreter into Lithuanian and
Russian)
was as follows: "If we were Bolsheviks we would have shot you, but as we are
Germans we are giving you back your freedom."
The prisoners were then warned that they were to steer clear of any political
activity, that they should report any subversive activities which came to
their notice to the German authorities. They were also urged to take part in
actively rebuilding local agriculture. They were finally warned that should
one of them be found guilty again of a crime he would be shot. They were
then
released.
It is difficult to imagine the joy, gratitude and delight our measures awoke
in those released and indeed in the local population. We often had to use
sharp words to cool the enthusiasm of women, children and men who with tears
in their eyes tried to kiss our hands and feet.
(signed) Jager
SS-Standartenfuhrer
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 253 Mon Mar 30, 1992
GRAFFITI [Ric Helton] at 16:47 EST
A couple of people have asked about making general statements about Judaism.
That isn't really our realm, but if the comments are brief and tied back into
the Holocaust discussion, they are okay. We just can't support a religious
debate here because of the vagaries and expertise needed to moderate such a
debate. (You can visit the Religion & Ethics RoundTable for supplementary
material to determine your position on religious matters.) We'd prefer THIS
topic deal with the history and factual information dealing with the Holocaust
itself.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 254 Mon Mar 30, 1992
GRAFFITI [Ric Helton] at 17:52 EST
[1 message deleted]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 255 Mon Mar 30, 1992
AH.STEIN at 19:02 EST
>Message 170 Mon Mar 30, 1992
>G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 00:58 EST
>This [the Einsatzgruppen] proves nothing, and in particular it
does nothing to establish a Nazi policy of extermination. Is this so
difficult to understand?
You are about 10% right. (Of course, 10% Jewish blood was more than enough
to satisfy the thirst of the Nazis.)
It is not one single event or action that provides proof of the Holocaust.
It is the overwhelming body of incontrovertible evidence; the existence
and actions of the Einsatzgruppen form just a small part of that body of
evidence.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 256 Mon Mar 30, 1992
AH.STEIN at 19:02 EST
>Message 171 Mon Mar 30, 1992
>G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 00:58 EST
>According to my encyclopedia, Poland is in Europe, while the
Soviet Union was (is) not.
I suggest you purchase a new encyclopedia. The Soviet Union no longer
exists. :-)
However, during its existence, I'm pretty sure that it included parts of
Europe as well as Asia.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 257 Mon Mar 30, 1992
C.FINK4 [Carl] at 20:16 EST
M.RUNGU, 199:
>>...so-called survivors' sworn statements....
If they aren't really survivors, what are they, M? Dead people? I don't
follow.
POOH.BAH:
RUNGU keeps referring to the human-fat soap and human-skin leather stories
as untrue. In at least one thing, I can concur with him/her: these stories
were taught to me as fact. Are they in fact
distortions/exaggerations/legends? This is an honest question, by the way -
if they aren't true, I'd rather know the facts.
RUNGU, 205:
Anyone who's actually read Anne Frank's DIARIES knows that she died of
typhus, since it is mentioned in the afterword, at least in the edition I
read.
Dov Berkowitz, 240:
My apologies, Dov. I posted 193 at a very late hour, and I didn't read your
140 carefully enough. In fact, I agree completely with your position as
expressed in 240.
Carl Fink
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 258 Mon Mar 30, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 20:52 EST
ZOG is commonly used for Zionist Occupied Government. I never heard about the
group in the Warsaw Ghetto.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 259 Mon Mar 30, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 21:09 EST
Termy:
Re: one of the last documents you posted (all great stuff, BTW!):
"SS Obersturmfuehrer Hamann"?
Need I comment?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 260 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 21:55 EST
To SOFTSERV (29)
"A commitment to honest research is the only 'credential' anyone needs." I
don't think I could agree more.
The silly rejection of those revisionists who are not trained historians while
sneering at those revisionists who DO have eminent credentials in that area is
absurd. Naturally, the other side's credentials and training is never
objected to or questioned.
The attacks on Professor Faurisson, Dr. Staglich, Professor Butz, Dr. Sanning,
and the many other holocaust revisionists are directed at them not because of
their backgrounds, but because of their inconvenient and embarrassing findings
and assertions.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 261 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 21:56 EST
To POOH.BAH (51)
In earlier messages you announced to us that the Hoess memoirs were
"unreliable" even though you had used them to support your belief in an
"extermination program" and "mass gassings". Now again you are saying that
this "document" is rife with "errors" but also, again, you seem to be using it
to buttress your case.
I think what's needed is to come right out and say that the Hoess "memoirs"
were extracted under torture, are totally unreliable, and should no longer be
used so support the extermination thesis.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 262 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 21:57 EST
To POOH.BAH (54)
Now we have "another technique emerging"? Holocaust historians have claimed
certain things to be facts entirely on the basis of so-called "primary
sources" (translation: the infamous survivors' tales and "eyewitness"'s
accounts). These writers were not merely "reporting" the claims made in such
accounts but in fact treating them as factual "proof" of an extermination
campaign. The Hoess memoirs are a typical example of such a "primary source".
He was an eyewitness to the actual historical events in question, but his
"memoirs" were extracted under torture and at the direction of his postwar
captors. The holocaust writers concentrate on the former but deliberately
ignore the latter. He witnessed events but his memoirs reflect not the events
but how his captors want those events presented. I have a copy of this famous
"COMMANDANT OF AUSCHWITZ" by Hoess (Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London, 1959),
and from reading both it and his appendices it is clear that it conforms
entirely with all the "survivors" and "eyewitnesses" accounts that even you
admit are unreliable and ahistorical. And since when is a "memoir" emanating
from a prisoner in a communist Polish prison to be treated as of historical
value?
Can you not come right out and condemn such shoddy historiographical work?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 263 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 21:58 EST
To POOH.BAH (58)
So "it takes 1660% MORE Zyklon-B to kill lice than it does to kill humans"?
It sounds like you're undermining your own case. First of all you told us
that trace elements of the gas "prove" an extermination campaign was underway,
yet now we are told by you that.........>sigh> ......forgive me if I am
getting confused. It really does seem that every piece of "evidence"
proferred gets interpreted in opposite ways to support different approaches of
"proving" the "mass gassings".
You also stated in one of your messages that not a single body has been
unearthed and then autopsied and concluded to have been "gassed". This in
spite of the "mass graves" that supposedly were dug to accomodate the
"millions" of deceased Jews that the 3 teensy crematoria (with a maximum
cremation rate of less than 70 bodies per day each!) could obviously not
handle.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 264 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 21:59 EST
To POOH.BAH (59)
So the Zyklon-B gas as "inhaled by the victims and the rest removed by the
extractor fans". Where are the extractor fans? Where are the openings in the
roofs or walls for them? The (which you admitted were constructed AFTER the
war and according to you, built to the specifications of "the plans")
presently standing-at-Auschwitz "gas chambers" do not have extractor fans and
the structures don't even have openings in the roofs or walls for them. So
what's going on?
And where precisely is this extremely dangerous gas "extracted" to? The camp
staff and their families had their accomodations close by. Are you telling us
that each time a "mass gassing" took place, the surrounding area was also
poisoned? And if by use of convoluted reasoning, the gas was somehow
extracted extremely slowly and carefully (or whatever or however the reasoning
will be invented), how would this conform to the claimed use of these "gas
chambers" virtually non-stop to accomodate the "millions" that supposedly went
through them?
You also said the gas "contact time was brief, so the walls did not have time
to become impregnated with it", i.e. the gas. This is another example of the
kind of creative excuse-making employed to back up a thesis that is
insupportable. The story has to constantly undergo change to accomodate each
inconvenient question or doubt.
These are the kinds of questions that we aren't supposed to ask. We are just
supposed to ACCEPT the claims of the mass gassings. We are not supposed to
look too closely at the (postwar constructed!) present gas chambers or think
too carefully about what is probable or improbable about their usage. Nor are
we to demand to see the original "plans" on which these structures were
"re"built.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 265 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:00 EST
To POOH.BAH (63)
Again, your logic and the demands you present for qualifications criteria of
those writing about the holocaust are contradictory.
So Pressac is a pharmacist and chemist. But not a historian as you so
frequently demand? Isn't he therefore "not credible"? And how about his
German? You have sneered at Mr. Raven because he is not fluent in German and
therefore (presumably, according to your logic) not capable of examining the
"primary sources" that employ that language. Does Pressac speak German? Yes?
No? And if he IS fluent in that language, wouldn't that "prove" that he has
"neo-nazi" leanings or something like that (to use the typical smear tactics
directed against revisionists)?
You also mentioned others "in the field" as being "eyewitnesses", but in
earlier messages you admitted that accounts emanating from alleged
"eyewitnesses" were unreliable. Have these suddenly become "reliable" again?
It seems that the statements and accounts from "survivors" and "eyewitnesses"
are "reliable" or "unreliable" depending upon which point you want to prove or
which assertion you want backed up.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 266 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:02 EST
To POOH.BAH (65)
Thankyou for your acknowledgement that Fred Leuchter has professional
qualifications as an historian. And thankyou also for acknowledging his many
other qualifications and achievements. At least we can be relieved that we
aren't going to be accused of having invented such qualifications, such
backgrounding that he has. And since he has this background, and therefore
meets your own posed criteria, why is he still rejected? I hope it's not
because he has presented findings that contradict the PC holocaust dogma.
And, yes, his consulting firm is indeed probably "defunct". And why? Because
an all-out campaign was directed against his previous clients to discourage
them from offering him any more business as a consultant and expert in
execution hardware systems (probably his BEST qualification for his forensic
research at Auschwitz). The aim was to destroy Fred Leuchter's abilitiy to
make a living in exactly the same way that such methods were used to "punish"
Professor Faurisson in France for his work and writings on holocaust
revisionism.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 267 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:03 EST
To D.FRIEDMAN14 (66)
When or where has Mr. Raven talked about "bloodthirsty Zionists" or expressed
a "perverse obsession" with Zionism? The answer is nowhere. The mention of
Zionism or it's links or purported links to the generation of the holocaust
stories or to Nazism or WWII in general does not constitute what you
imaginatively describe as a "perverse obsession", but, rather, another
historical area or historical tangent that needs proper examination. One
author, Lenni Brenner in "ZIONISM IN THE AGE OF THE DICTATORS" revealed the
sometimes collaboration between Zionist leaders or organizations and the
Nazis, and why such collaboration took place. If you take the trouble to read
Brenner's work, you might agree with me that "perverse obsession" is out of
place.
It seems that Mr. Raven is between a rock and a hard place. If he doesn't
answer each and every message thrown at him, he will be accused of "backing
out" or of not having any revisionist material to present. But if he DOES
respond to a fair number of messages using as much of his time has he can,
then he is accused of having a "perverse obsession" with the subject.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 268 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:04 EST
To POOH.BAH (69)
Yes, I agree with your statement that "we certainly know how quotes out of
context, twisting of words and other techniques can be employed to distort the
meaning of a manuscript." Holocaust historians and holocaust non-historian
writers have been doing just that for decades.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 269 Mon Mar 30, 1992
E.BROWN42 [scaramouche] at 22:04 EST
A point of fact, to my knowledge Missouri has not gassed anyone since 1965.
When the death penalty was revived here in 1989, the gas chamber had so
deteriorated as to make gassing impossible without reconditioning the seals (a
very expensive proposition). Execution is by lethal injection at the Potosi,
Missouri facility, not by gassing at the Jefferson City prison. I'll be glad
to confirm this for anyone who is interested.
Scaramouche (a man from Missouri)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 270 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:06 EST
To POOH.BAH (73)
Thankyou for AGAIN agreeing that the "installations connected with cremation
and gassing [at Auschwitz]" have been reconstructed and reconstituted AFTER
the war. Postwar construction at these sites has always been a bone of
contention, so it's refreshing to hear it re-acknowledged as fact.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 271 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:07 EST
To POOH.BAH (75)
So now "the accepted figure for all 6 the [sic] extermination camps is 2.7
million"? Accepted by who? And why has this figure dropped so dramatically
from the earlier figures of 6,000,000 Jews, 5,000,000 Poles, and millions of
others? Are all the holocaust writers in agreement on the figure you quote of
"2.7 million"? And do they agree on the numbers for each camp and the methods
used to bump them off?
The documentation released from the (ex)Soviet Union is interesting to me too.
I am also interested in WHO gets to look at and "interpret" (selectively to
conform to some agenda?) such documentation, and why it is not released to the
general public for broad examination. You have revealed that already a Mr.
Krakowsky, chief archivist at Yad Vashem, is checking them out and gracing us
with his "interpretations". Forgive me if I am already growing skeptical...
I agree with you that historians and archivists should continue to search for
and read new documents. But I will say that the release of such materials
should be accorded to EVERYBODY, and not just this or that group whose aim is
to reaffirm the earlier establishment claims about the holocaust at all costs.
Historical research is "all about" a free and open and fair approach, and
respect for all objective and unbiased findings. Step by step the truth is
(hopefully) arrived at as far as possible. Selective release of documentation
and records is not in conformity with this principle of research.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 272 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:07 EST
To POOH.BAH (76)
Here again the qualifications game is played by you. If an anti-revisionist
holocaust writer doesn't have certain qualifications, it doesn't matter, we
have to respect his writings. If such an anti-revisionist DOES have
(whatever) qualifications, then he/she becomes somehow omniscient and
irrefutable.
On the other hand, if a revisionist writer who questions the holocaust HAS
certain qualifications, they are not enough or not in the "right" field, or
they just don't matter and are to be ignored because he/she is assumed to be
"anti-semitic" or serving some "agenda" (which of course is never demonstrated
or proven, merely asserted like so much mud thrown). If such a revisionist
does NOT meet the qualifications criteria, then he/she is "non-credible" and
to be sneered at.
Professor Butz is sneered at because he isn't a historian but "merely" an
expert in the engineering field and computer sciences. Leuchter is vilified
because he IS a historian and not something else. Professor Faurisson is
"undermined" and "exposed" because he is not a historian but rather an expert
in the study of literary texts and documents (precisely his approach to
holocaust documentation)....... Weber is seemingly too hot to handle on the
qualifications thing, and so he is merely presumably dismissed as an "anti-
semite" with an "agenda".
And on and on it goes.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 273 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:08 EST
To POOH.BAH (79)
You said "we have documents which were captured by the West that record the
operation of the gas chambers". You know as well as I do that these "gas
chambers" referred to are the de-lousing chambers that employed Zyklon-B as a
fumigant to de-louse inmates' clothing. You also know that the purpose of
such de-lousing of clothing was to keep the incidence of illness to a minimum
to SAVE life. I don't doubt that such documents exist since I know that the
Germans were so meticulous in the keeping of even the tiniest records of the
operations of such facilities.
But to imply that these de-lousing facilities were "gas chambers" utilized for
the "mass gassings of Jews" is quite wrong.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 274 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:09 EST
To POOH.BAH (80)
The point about the typhoid/typhus thing that is being escaped from is that
Anne Frank died of (you pick!) at Belsen rather than was "gassed" at Auschwitz
as it still, even now, popularly believed. The whole point of my original
posting in which I mentioned Anne's death was that popular misconception about
the holocaust (which even YOU admit widely exists) needs to be cleared up and
the facts need to be brought back into accord with historical writings. The
manner in which the famous Anne Frank died is one of these things, in my
opinion, in view of the fact that she is so famous.
Equally important is the necessity to bring to broad public attention the fact
that the stories of "human lampshades", "human soap", and "mass gassings at
Dachau" (all three of these early holocaust assertions you have already agreed
with me were false) and many of the other imaginative propagandistic
allegations about the holocaust were FALSE and were FABRICATIONS. It is
important because of the very popular misconceptions (which you admit to)
surrounding them.
I would also say that a very close look should be taken at WHO fabricated such
stories, and WHY. I think that might be more historically revealing than
merely ignoring and disregarding such stories and their fabricators.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 275 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:10 EST
To POOH.BAH (82)
Holocaust "denial" (translation: the questioning of ANY allegation or
assertion found in standard holocaust writings and "histories") has INDEED
been the basis on which the criminal charges were brought against various
people in France, Germany, and Canada. You know this yourself when you
described such "denial" as the "incitement of hate against an identifyable
[sic] ethnic group". This phenomenon in which an area of history is examined
closely and doubts are cast being made into a criminal act is purely
political. Americans are generally unaware of these court actions around the
world and what they portend for our freedoms of thought and speech here in
America.
The Zundel case of "spreading false news" is probably the most ludicrous case
in history in the method by which PC thought is imposed and non-PC thought is
"punished". The denial of certain aspects of the holocaust was interpreted as
"false news". It was also assumed that Zundel "knew" that such skeptical
denial of certain aspects of the holocaust (like what? The "human soap" or
"human lampshades" stories which even POOH.BAH admits are fabrications?) was
"false" and that therefore he was wilfully "spreading false news". Never mind
that this anachronistic law dating back to 1275 in England (and ABOLISHED by
the English in 1888) was a legalistic joke that everybody in Canada thought so
silly that nobody bothered to remove it from the books. And never mind that
nobody else gets prosecuted under it.
The application of this weird law was employed as a desperate measure to SHUT
UP and SILENCE a man who expressed politically incorrect views on the
holocaust. It's only a matter of time before similar repression occurs here
in the United States.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 276 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:11 EST
To POOH.BAH (83)
You can be sure that the (ex)Soviet records that assert a total death toll at
Auschwitz at around 80,000 will disappear down "memory hole" if such
documentation and records are exclusively handed over to "holocaust museums"
and establishment holocaust "scholars".
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 277 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:12 EST
To W.PIKE (85)
I am interested in what your father had to say about what he "heard, smelled,
touched, and saw personally" when he entered the "death camps". Did he see
piles of bodies and emaciated prisoners? I don't doubt it. Did he see the
ravaged effects of malnourishment and lack of medicines experienced with the
collapse of the German transport and supply systems? I am sure that he did.
Did he see any "gas chambers"? Or did he see what he THOUGHT or WAS TOLD were
gas chambers but were in fact de-lousing facilities and/or crematoriums? And
did he believe each and every assertion and allegation told him by the
survivors without skepticism?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 278 Mon Mar 30, 1992
M.RUNGU at 22:12 EST
To S.PIERCE6 (86)
So now the famous "Shoah" tv-movie is now presented as evidence and "proof"
that an extermination campaign was being waged against the Jews of Europe.
Now I have seen it all. POOH.BAH, where are you? POOH told me not to rely on
what the mass media presents as "evidence" for the holocaust, but now I can't
find her...
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 279 Mon Mar 30, 1992
E.BROWN42 [scaramouche] at 22:14 EST
Rungu,
I believe that Pooh-Bah has already pointed out that the gas loses it's
potency when vented to the outside air. It's the concentration of the gas in
an enclosed unventilated area that poses the hazard. (see my above post on the
Missouri gas chamber. One of the reasons it was abandoned was the fear that
gas would escape into the witness area during an execution because of the
decay of the seals.)
Scaramouche
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 282 Mon Mar 30, 1992
C.FINK4 [Carl] at 23:11 EST
RUNGU:
>>So "it takes 1660% MORE Zyklon-B to kill lice than it does to kill
>>humans"? It sounds like you're undermining your own case. First
>>of all you told us that trace elements of the gas "prove" an
>>extermination campaign was underway, yet now we are told by you
>>that.........>sigh> ......forgive me if I am getting confused. It
>>really does seem that every piece of "evidence" proferred gets
>>interpreted in opposite ways to support different approaches of
>>"proving" the "mass gassings".
Read more carefully. The point is that finding higher levels of HCN
derivatives in the (real) delousing chamber is not inconsistent with the use
of the execution chambers to kill people.
>>You also said the gas "contact time was brief, so the walls did
>>not have time to become impregnated with it", i.e. the gas. This
>>is another example of the kind of creative excuse-making employed
>>to back up a thesis that is insupportable. The story has to
>>constantly undergo change to accomodate each inconvenient question
>>or doubt.
RUNGU, you haven't actually shown anything wrong with Pooh's reasoning here.
All you've done is sling unsupported charges around. Instead of referring to
this as "excuse-making", explain why it's wrong.
>>I am also interested in WHO gets to look at and "interpret"
>>(selectively to conform ot some agenda?) such documentation, and
>>why it is not released to the general public for broad
>>examination. You have revealed that already a Mr. Krakowsky,
>>chief archivist at Yad Vashem, is checking them out and gracing us
>>with his "interpretations". Forgive me if I am already growing
>>skeptical...
Read more carefully, RUNGU (again). If you, yourself, fly to Israel and
visit Yad Veshem, you may examine the documents, as Pooh stated in one of her
messages. By the way, why the quotation marks around "interpretations"?
Surely you aren't going to call Mr. Krakowsky's work "fact"? Is this just
general doubt-casting?
Carl Fink
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 283 Mon Mar 30, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 23:50 EST
266 M.RUNGU:
"Thankyou [sic] for your acknowledgement that Fred Leuchter has professional
qualifications as an historian."
Last week, he was a master engineer. I guess this week, he's an historian.
Next week, I suppose, you'll tell us he's a coroner and did autopsies
definitively proving that the Jews who died under Hitler died of happy,
natural causes.
281 Dov:
WELL DONE!!!
Dave
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 284 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 23:51 EST
260 Rungu:
> The silly rejection of those revisionists who are not trained historians
> while sneering at those revisionists who DO have eminent credentials in
> that area is absurd. Naturally, the other side's credentials and training
> is never objected to or questioned.
Please cite by message number where: (1) a Holocaust Denier author has been
rejected; and, (2) a Holocaust Denier who does have credentials has been
sneered at.
If you are unable to cite messages numbers, then the participants and lurkers
here will come to the conclusion that you are again making unsubstantiated
statements.
> The attacks on Professor Faurisson, Dr. Staglich, Professor Butz, Dr.
> Sanning, and the many other holocaust revisionists are directed at them
> not because of their backgrounds, but because of their inconvenient and
> embarrassing findings and assertions.
Please cite your evidence for this statement. Once again, if you do not, we
will have to assume that you have no evidence and will have to discount this
as yet another unsubstantiated accusation.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 285 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 23:53 EST
261 Rungu:
> In earlier messages you announced to us that the Hoess memoirs were
> "unreliable" even though you had used them to support your belief in an
> "extermination program" and "mass gassings".
I asked you in a message I posted this morning to cite a single message that
I have posted in which I have used the Hoess memoirs or his confession. I
will assume that you posted this message before you read that one. However,
I once again challenge you to either cite a message in which I have done so
or to admit that you are in error.
> Now again you are saying that this "document" is rife with "errors" but
> also, again, you seem to be using it to buttress your case.
You have made this comment in reference to my message 51. Do you honestly
believe that 210 message later that I don't remember what I wrote or cannot
retrieve it? I quote it in its entirety:
--------
915 Raven:
> The often quoted autobiography of Rudolph H (former commandant at
> Auschwitz) is riddled with errors. What is more, the handwritten
> manuscript of several hundred pages contains not a single correction
> or crossing out, suggesting that it was copied. (pages 127-128, 551)
Pages 127-128: "Hoess participated in the 'special actions' strictly in
accordance with his obligations and occupied his mind with the almost
insurmountable tasks imposed by the exponential growth of his camp, thus not
allowing his conscience tow dwell on the moral question. HE WAS PRESENT,
WITHOUT SEEING. In the author's opinion, this attitude explains the
involuntary errors found throughout his autobiography." [emphasis in the
original]
Page 551: "I first continued my own research concerning the founder and
former commandant of the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp, SS
Lieutenant-Colonel Rudolf Hoess. The manuscript of his 'Autobiography' was
long declared to be 'mythical' by the French extreme right. Faurisson claimed
it had emerged directly from headquarters of falsifying Soviet-Polish-
Stalinist communists. When I asked Iwaszko for this manuscript, he brought it
to me without any hesitation and I was able to consult it at my leisure. The
thing that struck me the most was that Hoess had written several hundred
pages without any crossings out. At first I thought that this could not be
his first version, but the resultant of previous draughts. I was no doubt
wrong, for many people, very self-controlled, write in this fashion (which is
far from being my own!). I discovered, but I was not the first to do so, that
only the autobiographical part (about half the pages) had been published at
that time, and that virtually all the notes Hoess had written about the
officials with whom he had been in contact and about various institutions of
the Third Reich that he knew, remained unknown. I would add that Hoess'
manuscript was written in PENCIL (a normal constraint in the case of
prisoners) ...." [emphasis in the original]
-------
The only "case" that I am making in message 51 is that Raven was, at best,
mistaken and, at worse, prevaricating when he made his comment about
Pressac's opinion of the Hoess autobiography. I have not stated in message 51
my opinion as to the autobiography.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 286 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 23:53 EST
262 Rungu:
> Holocaust historians have claimed certain things to be facts entirely on
> the basis of so-called "primary sources" (translation: the infamous
> survivors' tales and "eyewitness"'s accounts).
Now this one is really funny! So it is now "survivor's tales" and
"eyewitness"'s [sic] accounts?
If we take you to mean exactly what you have said, that means that you
discount the Einsatzgruppen reports because they were written by the
perpetrators who, by definition, were eyewitnesses. It also means that you
discount anything said or written by any Nazi who was in a position to know
what orders were given and/or how those orders were carried out.
You don't really mean this do you?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 287 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 23:54 EST
263 Rungu:
> So "it takes 1660% MORE Zyklon-B to kill lice than it does to kill
> humans"? It sounds like you're undermining your own case. First of all
> you told us that trace elements of the gas "prove" an extermination
> campaign was underway, yet now we are told by you that.........>sigh>
> ......forgive me if I am getting confused.
Please cite the message number in which I made the claim that "trace elements
of the gas 'prove' an extermination campaign was underway."
Either substantiate your statement or admit that you are in error.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 288 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 23:55 EST
264 Rungu:
> To POOH.BAH (59)
> So the Zyklon-B gas as "inhaled by the victims and the rest removed by the
> extractor fans". Where are the extractor fans? Where are the openings in
> the roofs or walls for them? The (which you admitted were constructed
> AFTER the war and according to you, built to the specifications of "the
> plans") presently standing-at-Auschwitz "gas chambers" do not have
> extractor fans and the structures don't even have openings in the roofs or
> walls for them. So what's going on?
What is going on, Rungu, is that you are either not reading the messages or
you are not understanding what is being written or you are intentionally
twisting words to suit your own purposes. Could you please inform us which it
is? Here is the complete text of my message 59:
-------
915 Raven:
> Pressac states that when gassing humans with Zyklon B, the gas goes
> directly to the victims' mouths. (page 555) (That is, it does not
> deposit itself on and impregnate itself into walls, skin, clothing,
> etc., which Zyklon B is known to do.)
Page 555: "By contrast, in homicide gassings, the quantity of Zyklon-B used
was smaller, man being more sensitive than lice or bugs to hydrocyanic acid.
A little of the poison injected was inhaled by the victims and the rest was
removed by the extractor fans, so that the contact time was brief and the
walls did not have the time to become impregnated."
-------
As you can clearly see, I have made no comment in this message but have
merely quoted Pressac to show that Raven was incorrect in his #915.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 289 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 23:56 EST
264 Rungu:
> And where precisely is this extremely dangerous gas "extracted" to? The
> camp staff and their families had their accomodations close by. Are you
> telling us that each time a "mass gassing" took place, the surrounding
> area was also poisoned? And if by use of convoluted reasoning, the gas
> was somehow extracted extremely slowly and carefully (or whatever or
> however the reasoning will be invented), how would this conform to the
> claimed use of these "gas chambers" virtually non-stop to accomodate the
> "millions" that supposedly went through them?
Let me just save a little time here and quote a previous message in which I
answered this question for Sprocketeer:
-------
847 Sprocketeer:
> Pooh.Bah, how did the Nazis dispose of the waste gas from the gas
> chambers? It hadn't occured to me before to wonder where it went.
The Nazis ventilated the gas from the gas chambers into the outside air with
the ventilation system exiting from the roof of the Kremas. This, BTW, is the
same method employed by the state of Missouri.
Now, Neil has related about the CA system but it cannot be compared to the
Nazi camps. For one thing, the Nazis didn't have a little thing called "OSHA"
nor did they care about any of the inmates - only the guards. The guards who
operated the gas chambers had gas masks with special filters specifically for
use with Zyklon B. Since Zyklon B had been used for fumigation for decades
before the camps, these special filters had been tested very well not only in
the laboratory but also in the field.
Remember also that the gas chamber is a finite size with a finite amount of
air. This size and amount are crucial factors in determining concentration of
HCN. However, once vented to the outside air, the concentration drops
immediately to a harmless level. Also, because HCN is "lighter than air," it
rises rapidly and is blown away with the wind.
There is another factor which make a difference between the CA system and the
Nazi camps....the walls surrounding the CA prison. These walls, if higher
than the venting system, could have more of a tendency to prevent adequate
dispersal of HCN. The Nazi camps, OTOH, were fenced with barbed wire which
would not have the same effect.
Also, 0.3 g/m^3 kills humans instantly. The American prison systems use
between 0.3 g/m^3 and 0.32 g/m^3 for the most humane execution possible.
Since, from primary sources (such as the report on the "Resettlement of the
Jews") we know that death occurred within MINUTES (as opposed to seconds),
the logical conclusion is that the concentration used by the Nazis was lower
than what is used here in the US. This would further lower the risk of those
who were any distance from the gas chamber being affected by the ventilated
HCN.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 290 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 23:57 EST
265 Rungu:
> So Pressac is a pharmacist and chemist. But not a historian as you so
> frequently demand?
Please cite where I have ever "demanded" that someone have credentials in
history before writing on the subject. If you cannot cite a single message in
which I do so, please admit that you are in error.
BTW, it is appropriate to look for scientific credentials when reviewing a
scientific work. Pressac wrote a scientific work. Pressac has scientific
credentials.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 291 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 23:58 EST
265 Rungu:
> You have sneered at Mr. Raven because he is not fluent in German and
> therefore (presumably, according to your logic) not capable of examining
> the "primary sources" that employ that language.
Please cite where I have commented on Raven's lack of German in a message. If
you cannot cite an example, please admit that you are in error.
> Does Pressac speak German? Yes? No? And if he IS fluent in that language,
> wouldn't that "prove" that he has "neo-nazi" leanings or something like
> that (to use the typical smear tactics directed against revisionists)?
Yes, Pressac does know German. Please cite any time that I have ever made a
claim that anyone who knows German has "neo-Nazi" leanings. If you cannot
cite a single case where I have done so, please admit that you were in error
to imply that I would believe such a thing.
BTW, I, too, know German. Does that give you any clue as to the fact that I
don't consider knowing German indicative of anything other than either being
a native speaker of the language or having taken the time to acquire a second
language?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 292 Mon Mar 30, 1992
POOH.BAH at 23:58 EST
265 Rungu:
> Thankyou [sic] for your acknowledgement that Fred Leuchter has
> professional qualifications as an historian. And thankyou also for
> acknowledging his many other qualifications and achievements. At least we
> can be relieved that we aren't going to be accused of having invented such
> qualifications, such backgrounding that he has. And since he has this
> background, and therefore meets your own posed criteria, why is he still
> rejected? I hope it's not because he has presented findings that
> contradict the PC holocaust dogma.
Leuchter is NOT being rejected - his findings are. If you have been reading
this TOPic, then you know the various problems with his sample collecting,
his "control" sample and his conclusions. If you haven't been reading this
TOPic well enough to know these things, then I would suggest you do so.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 293 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 00:00 EST
267 Rungu:
> When or where has Mr. Raven talked about "bloodthirsty Zionists"
You will find that comment in message 767 of TOPic 4.
I hope that I can expect equal promptness in your citing the various messages
where I have made the statements that you have said that I made.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 294 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 00:00 EST
271 Rungu:
> So now "the accepted figure for all 6 extermination camps is 2.7
> million"? Accepted by who? And why has this figure dropped so
> dramatically from the earlier figures of 6,000,000 Jews, 5,000,000 Poles,
> and millions of others? Are all the holocaust writers in agreement on the
> figure you quote of "2.7 million"? And do they agree on the numbers for
> each camp and the methods used to bump them off?
The total number exterminated was between 5-7 million Jews (normally cited as
6 million) and around 5 million non-Jews.
If you read TOPic 4, then you are aware that the extermination camps weren't
the only method of extermination. Therefore, there is no contradiction nor
discrepancy.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 295 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 00:01 EST
271 Rungu:
> The documentation released from the (ex)Soviet Union is interesting to me
> too. I am also interested in WHO gets to look at and "interpret"
> (selectively to conform to some agenda?) such documentation, and why it is
> not released to the general public for broad examination. You have
> revealed that already a Mr. Krakowsky, chief archivist at Yad Vashem, is
> checking them out and gracing us with his "interpretations".
As far as the originals, I'm sure you realize that they will never be allowed
out of an archive. As far as reviewing the original AT the archive, that is
permissible. As far as having translations or copies produced and made
available to the general public, I'm sure that that will occur as soon as
there are translators available, funding to publish, etc.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 296 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 00:02 EST
272 Rungu:
> To POOH.BAH (76)
> Here again the qualifications game is played by you. If an
> anti-revisionist holocaust writer doesn't have certain qualifications, it
> doesn't matter, we have to respect his writings. If such an
> anti-revisionist DOES have (whatever) qualifications, then he/she becomes
> somehow omniscient and irrefutable.
> On the other hand, if a revisionist writer who questions the holocaust HAS
> certain qualifications, they are not enough or not in the "right" field,
> or they just don't matter and are to be ignored because he/she is assumed
> to be "anti-semitic" or serving some "agenda" (which of course is never
> demonstrated or proven, merely asserted like so much mud thrown). If such
> a revisionist does NOT meet the qualifications criteria, then he/she is
> "non-credible" and to be sneered at.
Ah, finally you cite a message of mine where I have allegedly made the above
comments. Here is my message #76:
-------
928 Neil:
> Who's more competent to write criticism of novels -- me, who's done it, or
> some Ph.D. who's never published outside of academia, and couldn't write
> a potboiler to save his life?
Actually, an avid reader would get my vote as to who's the best to write the
critic! :-)
All kidding aside, though, we are talking about a subject (i.e. historical
research) in which credentials might matter. As I've stated before, I don't
see any problem stating a person's credentials (when that person's opinion is
being presented, or their research) and allowing the participants (and
lurkers) here to put that information into the balance, too. For you and
Raven, the fact that someone has a college degree might work against that
person. For others, they might think it is a positive. Either way, they have
the information and what they do with it is up to them.
Doesn't that seem fair to you?
-------
After you have re-read what I really did say, I expect you to admit that you
were in error or twisting my words or prevaricating - you can choose which
one fits based upon what your motivations were.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 297 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 00:25 EST
272 Rungu:
> Professor Butz is sneered at because he isn't a historian but "merely" an
> expert in the engineering field and computer sciences. Leuchter is
> vilified because he IS a historian and not something else.
Please cite any message number in which Butz is "sneered" at or Leuchter is
"vilified." If you cannot find a single message by me that does so, please
admit that you were in error.
It is interesting to note, however (now that YOU brought it up), that an
engineer wrote the Holocaust Deniers' "Bible" and an historian wrote the
Holocaust Deniers' engineering report!
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 298 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 00:26 EST
273 Rungu:
> You said "we have documents which were captured by the West that record
> the operation of the gas chambers". You know as well as I do that these
> "gas chambers" referred to are the de-lousing chambers that employed
> Zyklon-B as a fumigant to de-louse inmates' clothing.
Reality Check:
Resettlement of Jews
The Auschwitz camp plays a special role in the resolution of the Jewish
question. The most advanced methods permit the execution of the Fuehrer-order
in the shortest possible time and without arousing much attention. The so-
called "resettlement action" runs the following course: The Jews arrive in
special trains (freight cars) toward evening and are driven on special tracks
to areas of the camp specifically set aside for this purpose. There the Jews
are unloaded and examined for their fitness to work by a team of doctors, in
the presence of the camp commandant and several SS officers. At this point
anyone who can somehow be incorporated into the work program is put in a
special camp. The curably ill are sent straight to a medical camp and are
restored to health through a special diet. The basic principle behind
everything is: conserve all manpower for work. The previous type of
"resettlement action" has been thoroughly rejected, since it is too costly to
destroy precious work energy on a continual basis.
The unfit go to cellars in a large house which are entered from outside. They
go down five or six steps into a fairly long, well-constructed and well-
ventilated cellar area, which is lined with benches to the left and right. It
is brightly lit, and the benches are numbered. The prisoners are told that
they are to be cleansed and disinfected for their new assignments. They must
therefore completely undress to be bathed. To avoid panic and to prevent
disturbances of any kind, they are instructed to arrange their clothing
neatly under their respective numbers, so that they will be able to find
their things again after their bath. Everything proceeds in a perfectly
orderly fashion. Then they pass through a small corridor and enter a large
cellar room which resembles a shower bath. In this room are three large
pillars, into which certain materials can be lowered from outside the cellar
room. When three- to four-hundred people have been herded into this room the
doors are shut, and containers filled with the substances are dropped down
into the pillars. As soon as the containers touch the base of the pillars,
they release particular substances that put the people to sleep in one
minute. A few minutes later, the door opens on the other side, where the
elevator is located. The hair of the corpses is cut off, and their teeth are
extracted (gold-filled teeth) by specialists (Jews). Then the corpses are
loaded into elevators and brought up to the first floor, where ten large
crematoria are located. (Because fresh corpses burn particularly well, only
50-100 lbs. of coke are needed for the whole process.) The job itself is
performed by Jewish prisoners, who never step outside this camp again.
The results of this "resettlement action" to date: 500,000 Jews. Current
capacity of the "resettlement action" ovens: 10,000 in twenty-four hours.
[NOTE: Above is from the report of an official inspection trip of Auschwitz
in May 1943.]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 299 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 00:27 EST
274 Rungu:
> Equally important is the necessity to bring to broad public attention the
> fact that the stories of "human lampshades", "human soap", and "mass
> gassings at Dachau" (all three of these early holocaust assertions you
> have already agreed with me were false)
Please cite the message number in which I have "agreed" that all three of the
above are false. If you cannot cite a single message in which I have made
such a claim, please admit you are in error.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 300 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 00:27 EST
257 Carl:
> RUNGU keeps referring to the human-fat soap and human-skin leather stories
> as untrue. In at least one thing, I can concur with him/her: these
> stories were taught to me as fact. Are they in fact
> distortions/exaggerations/legends? This is an honest question, by the way
> - if they aren't true, I'd rather know the facts.
Carl, I will u/l the appropriate documents tomorrow and let you make up your
own mind as to the facts.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 301 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:12 EST
To D.Friedman (regarding 111) ---
> Then why are the Holocaust survivors so "unreliable?"
---
I'm not sure what your question is in reference to, but I will
attempt to answer what I think you are asking.
.
If by "Holocaust survivors" you are referring to to so-called
eyewitness testimony of people who were inmates at the so-called
death camps, there are any number of societal, cultural, political,
personal, and even religious reasons that might color their
recollections ... including guilt.
.
However, perhaps the most compelling reason to suspect these
testimonies is not because they come from Jews, or from some other
anti-Nazi group that might have reason to "remember" things
differently, but rather because they are human, and humans have shown
they have poor memories.
---
For example, the following piece on memory by Philip Ziegler (New
York Times "Book Review") appeared in "Forbes" (2/9/87).
.
> "Between 1936 and 1945 an ingenious anthropologist called Tom
Harrison set up a network of observers to record the views of the
Briton-in-the-street on a wide range of issues. The fruit of his
labors, the Mass Observation Archive, contains many first-hand
accounts of incidents that occurred during the wartime blitz, which
were written immediately after the event and can therefore reasonably
be accepted as accurate. Some 30 years later, a number of the
surviving 'mass observers' were asked to revive their memories. In
every case, the relationship between the original and the revised
version was so remote as to be almost coincidental. Yet, but for the
original written evidence, their oral testimony would have been
accepted as eminently reliable."
.
Of course, there are many other similar studies that show the
unreliability of eyewitness testimony.
---
You may also be interested in what Germaine Tillion wrote in 1954
about this topic:
.
Those persons [who gratuitously lie] are, to tell the truth, much
more numerous than people generally suppose, and a subject likke that
of the concentration camp world --- well designed, alas, to stimulate
sado-masochistic imaginings --- offered them an exceptional field of
action. We have known numerous mentally damaged persons, half
swindlers and half fools, who exploited an imaginary deportation; we
have known others of them --- authentic deportees --- whose sick
minds strove to go even beyond the monstrosities that they had seen
or that people said had happened to them. There have been publishers
to print some of their imaginings, and more or less official
compilations to use them, but publishers and compilers are absolutely
inexcusable, since the most elementary inquiry would have been enough
to reveal the imposture.
(This excerpt from an IHR pamphlet, "A Prominent False Witness: Elie
Wiesel")
---
Along these same lines, you might be interested by an article in the
3/20/88 Baltimore "Sun" calls attention to the rising incidence of
impostors who tell grisly stories of wartime derring-do in Vietnam,
but who never served there, let alone saw combat. Psychologists and
counselors working with Vietnam veterans have identified one telltale
sign of these liars; a propensity to claim involvement in some
atrocity, such as massacring women and children.
---
This is, of course, a complex area of study, but the bottom line is
that as valuable as eyewitness testimonies can be in some
circumstances, they must always be considered as less than the best
evidence.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 302 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:13 EST
To Jim Childers (regarding 113) ---
> a. Do you agree that the NAZIs had a policy of Aryan supremacy?
b. Do you agree that they attempted to implement this policy by
eliminating Jews and others from Europe?
c. Do you agree that a large number of Jews and others died as a
result of b. ?
d. If you agree with a. b. and c., do you agree that these actions
were morally repugnent and not justifiable by any rationalizations?
---
Answers:
a) I cannot agree with your terminology. I believe the Nazis wished
to have a pure Aryan race, which is somewhat different from what you
asked.
b) Again, I would like to demur from your terminology. I believe they
wanted to implement a program of the elimination of Jewishness (that
is, Jewish behavior and etc.) from Europe, which they proposed to do
via moving the Jews out of Europe.
c) Depending on what you mean by "a large number of Jews," yes I
agree that many ... too many ... Jews died as a result, although a
great many Jews also died as a result of the actions of the Soviets,
the British, and the Americans as well.
d) I agree that these actions were repugnant, although judging by the
rationalizations I have seen here on GEnie, I now question my
previous beliefs on the limits rationalization.
---
But keep in mind, I am not apologizing for Hitler, for the Nazis,
etc., and I am not denying that Jews (and others) died, and that this
whole mess was a tragedy. However, I feel that virtually all this
tragedy could have been avoided if not for Stalin, Churchill, and
FDR. I also feel that the nature and size of the tragedy has been
vastly overstated, and built up and sustained with lies.
.
As I have stated before, even though I believe that Jews suffered and
died during the reign of the Third Reich, there was no "Holocaust." I
also feel that to call what DID happen to the Jews a Holocaust now,
after nearly half a century of using the word "Holocaust" to refer to
something else, is extremely misleading.
.
Let's say that tomorrow all the so-called historians decided to come
clean, and they issued a press release to the effect, "200,000 Jews
died during WWII of all causes." This is plenty bad. But to call this
"death by all causes" a "Holocaust" after previously associating the
word "Holocaust" with gas chambers, death camps, human soap, human
skin lampshades, human skin jodphurs, human skin gloves, etc., is
absolutely wrong. What it does is allow those who have used the
Holocaust story to further their political agendas to say, "You see?
There was a Holocaust," without recognizing that the meaning of the
word has changed.
.
I believe that the word "Holocaust" has been so tainted that a couple
years from now, when no one who keeps current on this topic still
believes in the "6 million" (no matter what they might say in
public!), we should scrap the word "Holocaust" completely. To do
anything less would be unfair.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 303 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:13 EST
To Sam Belcher (regarding 118) ---
> I think it fair to say that any number of murders (1milion, 2.5
million, 4 million?) was (and is) an atrocity that we never want to
see again.
.
I agree. However, once it is established that the number is much MUCH
smaller, it should no longer be called the "Holocaust," for reasons
already mentioned.
.
As for never wanting to see it again, this "never again" mentality is
dangerous because it is so narrow in focus. What happened to "never
again" in Uganda? In Cambodia? In Iraq? If the claim is that we must
remember the "Holocaust" because we must learn from it, it is obvious
that we need another instructional aid ... the Holocaust story ain't
cutting it.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 304 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:14 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 121) ---
> But, this means that the HCN must get from the lungs to the cells
...
.
You need a refresher course in toxicology. HCN will also kill from
skin contact.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 305 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:14 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 124) ---
> Perhaps you should read the ENTIRE document that was signed more
carefully. The full document was included the Statement of Record and
the Apology. A signature on one was a signature on the other, too.
.
For someone who claims to be plugged in, you sure are out of the loop
on this one. Why don't you check out the results of the latest
Mermelstein case? You will see that Mermelstein's high-paid,
high-powered legal team attempted to make the same point you are
attempting to make. Only they made the mistake of trying this before
a judge instead of in front of a group of people who are probably not
knowledgeable about judicial proceedings. As you will find when you
do the research (from the original documents, no doubt), is that the
judge straightened them out in a big hurry, and Mermelstein's vaunted
case went down in flames in a matter of minutes, handing total
victory to the IHR.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 306 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:14 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 125) ---
> It is a common practice here on GEnie, when speaking in technical
terms outside of technical RTs, to aim for clarity and not precision.
.
I've seen more than enough of what happens when precision is
sacrificed, thank you. Please do not repeat mistakes such as these in
future posts.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 307 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:15 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 126) ---
> Excuse me? Disinfection from what? Zyklon B (HCN) is not lethal
to bacteria which is what is normally meant by disinfection.
Apparently you are redefining the word disinfection. Could you
please clarify?
.
I would never dream of redefining the word. I am using "disinfection"
in the same way the Germans used it during WWII, to denote the
elimination of pests from buildings, etc. YOU may be attempting to
define "disinfection" as applying only against bacteria, but this is
your modern usage, not that used by the Germans during WWII.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 308 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:15 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 127) ---
Your statement that an air-raid shelter would not need a gas-tight
door reveals your lack of understanding of air raid shelters. Air
raids are relatively short-duration events, during which protection
might be required against any number of air-borne particles, flame,
etc. This type of gas-tight door on this type of building is
consistent with air-raid shelters, not with "gas chambers."
.
Of course, we must not ignore the other use for gas-tight doors,
which is that it is desireable to have a gas-tight door on a morgue
so the smell is somewhat contained.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 309 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:16 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 129) ---
> Greg, I really hate to see you embarass yourself like this. Did you
forget that you had logged onto GEnie and weren t on another network?
You might want to delete your message #109 to prevent further
embarassment. After all, the people here have seen many, many
documents which contradict your above statement and, if anyone still
has doubts, I could always u/l some more.
.
People indeed have seen a number of documents, but it is not the
documents that contradict my statements but your rather fanciful
interpretations of those documents. Big difference.
---
> Remember, I have not u/l ed a single confession or survivor account
(I assume that s what you mean when you mention eyewitness
testimony. Am I wrong?)
.
An as example, you have fancifully interpreted my message 109 and
come up with this wild assumption. As important as you are to this
discussion, you are not the center of my world, Pooh.bah. I sometimes
refer to other people, and to items not first mentioned by you.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 310 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:16 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 130) ---
> You are, I believe asking about the Wannsee Conference Protocols
but the question was raised regarding the Franke-Gricksch report.
What we have now is Raven doubting that an actual carbon copy exists
and my claim that I have seen it. Since this is a matter of his word
against mine and there is no way that I would be able to produce the
evidence of my claim here on GEnie, I think everyone is going to be
left with having to decide this based upon their assessment of the
credibility of Raven and myself.
.
Although you have referred to the Franke-Gricksch report numerous
times (starting in post 30 of the topic 4), and in fact have stated:
.
> Actually the copy I reviewed is the carbon copy. Being a carbon
copy, it is an exact duplicate of the original.
.
I must have missed the posting where you answered my posts 68, 763,
and 914.
.
If you read these posts, especially 763, you will see that there are
some serious questions about this document. If you have examined "an
exact duplicate" of a document that I have heard does not exist, I
must discover more. On the other hand, if you have only examined a
copy of the typescript copy, we need to talk about the contents of
this document.
.
This is not simply a case of my word against yours. There are
definite identifying characteristics that you should be able to share
with us either way, much as you have tried to do with the Wannsee
Protocols, Himmler's Posen speeches, etc.. I hope you can appreciate
the seriousness of this matter.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 311 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:17 EST
To Carl Fink (regarding 131) ---
> No, actually HIGHER levels would be consistent with delousing use
[that disinfection use]. Remember that the necesary dose to kill many
pests is higher than the human lethal dose.
.
You have misread my post. Disinfection is a sporadic occurrance, not
something that happens all the time. You might disinfect a barracks
or morgue once or twice a year, for example.
.
Delousing, on the other hand, is carried out primarily in rooms
designed for the process. As such, these rooms received many repeated
doses of HCN.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 312 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:17 EST
To Eric-M (regarding 152) ---
> Death via inhalation of HCN gas does NOT occur instantly. When a
human inhales enough HCN so that he can smell it (an almond smell),
he WILL die unless given an antidote immediately. He will not die
immediately...he will die in a matter of minutes. But death is
instant in that no more doses need be given. Even if taken away
from the contaminated area, he will still die. Breathing HCN-free air
will NOT help him anymore.
---
There are a couple errors with the above statement. First, I believe
that HCN is odorless. The "almond smell" is a safety precaution added
to some HCN, but as skunk scent is added to natural gas.
.
Second, death is far from immediate, even in the massive overdoses
used in America gas chambers. In fact, American gas chambers (and the
German delousing chambers) had first aid kits. Although there is
certainly a dosage beyond which there is no return, removing the
victim from the HCN environment, administering fresh air, and washing
the HCN from the skin will begin the rehabilitation process. In fact,
I have read of the accidental poisoning of a prisoner in a German
camp, who was revived and nursed back to health. Apparently, the
people running those "death camps" were a little disorganized.
:->
---
By the way, this "revivability" is one reason to doubt the so-called
eyewitness accounts of the doors of the "gas chambers" being thrown
open as soon as the screaming of the victims stopped.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 313 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:18 EST
To Pooh.bah (regarding 154) ---
> However, since his [Fred Leuchter's] CONCLUSIONS (i.e. opinions)
are also being discussed, that puts him in the position of someone
attempting to qualify for expert status (which, BTW, was not
granted to him in the Zuendel trial....but was granted to Mark Weber
of the IHR at the same trial. And, BTW, I agree with both decisions.)
---
I thought Leuchter was admitted as an expert witness with regards the
premises of Auschwitz, Birkenau, and Majdanek (as he saw them), with
with regards to the plans, their feasibility as "gas chambers."
(paraphrasing Lenski's book, bottom of page 373). Can you expand on
this, please?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 314 Tue Mar 31, 1992
G.RAVEN [Greg Raven] at 01:18 EST
To Jim Gerber (regarding 155) ---
> Neil, you wrote that many Libertarians privately support
revisionism and do so for what I took to be political reasons.
.
I know a great many Libertarians, and only one or two of them
expresses anything even approaching openness to this topic. However,
the one Libertarian I know who expresses the strongest support of
discussion of this topic, does so on First Amendment grounds. I
wanted to make this distinction because mentioning "political
reasons" with no explanation might mislead some. The great majority
of the Libertarians I personally know either have no interest in this
topic or wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole (I guess that's what
running for office does for you, even if your name is David Duke).
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 315 Tue Mar 31, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 01:29 EST
301 Mr. Raven:
"The most compelling reason to suspect these testimonies is not because they
come from Jews...bur rather because they are human, and humans have shown they
have poor memories."
People do indeed have poor memories for some things. Where they left the car
keys, whether they fed the dog, going to class (oops. >grin>). Spending time
in a concentration camp, being caught in an "Aktion," the smell of burning
flesh, etc. don't quite fall into the same category.
Since this is common sense, you must have another reason for considering
Holocaust victims' testimony suspect. Or do you propose to tell me that there
is no difference???
Yours,
D.T. Friedman
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 316 Tue Mar 31, 1992
D.FRIEDMAN14 at 01:33 EST
307 Mr. Raven
"I am using 'disinfection' in the same way the Germans used it during WWII, to
denote the elimination of pests from buildings, etc."
Yep. Buildings. And ghettos. and countries. And eventually, a continent.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 317 Tue Mar 31, 1992
J.STENGEL [John] at 01:44 EST
---->Greg Raven (#190)
>According to Bill Armontrout, warden of the Missouri State
>Penitentiary, Missouri uses a gas chamber 6 by ten feet. At the top
>of the chamber is an exhaust vent with a powerful fan used to send
>the gas up a 40 foot stack. Armontrout said he would never attempt an
>execution without a high stack. Even with it, the guards stationed on
>two towers nearby must vacate their posts while the gas is vented.
>.
>The Missouri system places a bucket of water and sulphuric acid
>solution beneat the condemned man, into which 37 cyanide pellets
>(about one pound) are tipped with a lever. The solution is kept
>warm so the pellets will gas off quickly.
>.
>From the time the lever drops, the condemned man's eyes are glazed
>over after a ten count. At a count of about 58 the condemned man
>appears dead. However, the EKG machine does not show a flat line
>until after 13 minutes have passed.
.
The data you supply serves well to illustrate the points I made in my #94
and #151. You dont give the height of the chamber; I will assume it to be 8
feet. The dimensions (6'x 10'x 8') gives 480 ft^3, converting to metric,
thats approximately 13.5 m^3. Converting the one pound of cyanide pellets we
have 454 grams, or 45,400 mg. I will assume that the reaction of the 454 gms
of CN with the H2S04 yields at least 454 gms of HCN.
.
Once the chemical reaction is completed on all the CN, the airborne
concentration of HCN in the chamber is approximately 34grams/m^3 or
34mg/liter. At a lethal dose of somewhere between 1mg/kg body weight and
5mg/kg body weight and assuming the condemned weighs 70 Kg (154 lbs); lethal
dose would be from 70mg to 350mg, lets split the difference and say 210 mg.
At a concentration of 34mg/liter and assuming 3 liters of contaminated air
inhaled on each breath; thats 102 mg HCN inhaled at each breath...two breaths
is all it takes and the condemned is a goner. Indeed, the 37 pellets is
"overkill" to say the least; the guy is dead long before all the cyanide is
converted to HCN gas or the maximum concentration is reached in the chamber.
The elaborate ventilation system you describe in the Missouri death chamber is
indeed an absolute necessity given the described levels of HCN used.
.
Lets assume the Governor cuts the Warden's budget for executions
(drastically). At the same time, the ventilation system in the gas chamber
breaks down and there are no funds to fix it. Our poor Warden has 100
executions to perform...only one pound of cyanide in stock and a busted gas
chamber ventilator. The law will not allow him to stuff all 100 prisoners in
the chamber at one time...how can he perform his duty given such lack of
logistic support?
.
The Warden calls in Fred Leuchter (the consultant budget is still intact.)!
Fred advises, "No problem, Warden". Fred cuts each of the 37 pellets into
thirds, "as a matter of fact, you can handle 111 executions; and don't worry
about the fans, you won't need them!"
.
The first of the 100 is promptly secured in the chamber. Fred glances at
his watch, drops the 1/111 lb. pellet in the vat and peers with cool,
professional dispassion through the chamber window. Fred does a few quick
calculations on his pocket calculator..."hmm lets see", he mumbles, "thats .31
mg/liter, 160 lbs, 220 breaths at 15 per". "It'll take 15 minutes Warden",
declares Fred with a tone of subdued enthusiam, "17 if he holds his breath
for 2"!
.
Sure to Fred's prediction, after the proscribed quarter hour the condemned
shows no sign of life. After another 15 minutes, Fred takes a few deep
breaths holding the last one. To the shocked surprise of the Warden, Fred
opens the chamber door and walks in. He quickly walks over to the grill of the
disabled ventilation system and manually opens it. He leaves the chamber
door slightly ajar as he exits. "Let it air out for a few minutes", declares
Fred with professional authority; "and the guards can remove the body without
danger".
.
"Well", says the Warden, "that may have taken a little longer than usual,
but I guess Dead is Dead!" The Warden is truly relieved that he has managed
to do his duty in spite of the obstacles those guys up at the State Capital
put in his way. Betraying a rare tone of admiration, the Warden shakes Fred's
hand and pays him the ultimate compliment, "Ya know Fred, you consultants are
worth every penny!".
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 318 Tue Mar 31, 1992
B.EATON2 [BZE] at 01:50 EST
To Raven In message #169 you list 5 things "she has to do." You are
mistaken. It is not Pooh.bah that needs to 'prove' anything. You are the one
who began this topic by questioning accepted facts, accepted by the vast
majority of historians and other scholars of the period.
The burden of proof rests with you. What evidence do you have that the
Holocaust never existed? We would all like to hear it. You have made much of
a few minor pts, but never given any conclusive evidence to support your
claims. At the same time you insist that Pooh.Bah's carefully researched
material is 'false,' again without presenting any data to substantiate that.
If you want anyone to believe that the Holocaust didn't happen, it is up to
you to present proof in the form of documents, statistics, eyewitness
accounts, or any other acceptable form of evidence. To date you have done no
such thing.
Over to you, Mr. Raven.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 319 Tue Mar 31, 1992
A.K.QUINN at 01:54 EST
I see that my assertions about gas chambers cannot be supported by
"researchers." Don't know where they were on 29 April 45, but I was there and
saw a building with a sign outside: Brause. Inside, in a room used by the SS,
there was a door to the outside, and another one into the romm with the
"shower\heads." Over that door was the sign "GIFT !!" Guess that makes me a
researcher. =KevinQ=
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 320 Tue Mar 31, 1992
TERMY at 02:57 EST
199 M.Rungu,
->Those very "misconceptions" were presented to everybody as
->historical FACT until fairly recently via the mass media, so
->called survivors' sworn statements, and "holocaust literature".
1. Did, oh, say, Hilberg present the afore-mentioned misconceptions as fact?
2. Do you believe everything you hear/see/read via mass media? If so, you
must have quite a collection of laundry detergents...
->You have alleged that such myths are "not intrinsic to the
->holocaust" but in fact they have always been CENTRAL to it, for
->such fabrications have been the emotional mainstay of the
->holocaust in general.
Mmmm...I should think that the CENTRAL fact concerning Holocaust is that
approximately so many millions of people were killed simply because they were
Jewish or Gypsy.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 321 Tue Mar 31, 1992
M.RUNGU at 04:13 EST
To POOH.BAH (72)
Thankyou for acknowledging that the Leuchter Report and the Polish forensic
study have produced much the same findings. You disagree in that the
conclusions from both reports contradict, but at least you agree that the
findings are the same. We are making some progress...
The names and personages you mentioned and the wonderful scientific
qualifications they possess begs a question: do they have history degrees?
You have said on numerous occasions the importance of having such professional
history training if aspects of the holocaust are discussed or examined. It
was the basis of your attack on Professor Faurisson of France. His
professional speciality is the examination and criticism of text and
documents, and it is precisely that special area of expertise that Faurisson
has employed to examine Holocaust "memoirs", accounts of "eyewitnesses" and
"survivors" and various documents.
Again, it seems, we are back into the qualifications game. If one has THIS
qualification or lacks it, it "proves" or "exposes" something and somebody's
reputation is somehow rendered "non-credible". Professor Butz and Professor
Rassinier are attacked because they are not professional historians (the non-
historians amongst the holocaust writers are not, of course, similarly
attacked). At the same time, the qualifications of a Leuchter or a Mark Weber
as historians are ignored or sneered at. They are attacked because they don't
have the scientific qualifications (Weber) or not enough of such scientific
qualifications (Leuchter).
I want to understand this. What exactly is required for somebody to write on
the holocaust, according to your criteria? Is one expected to have degrees in
ALL fields, and if so, how MANY degrees? And why is this tight standard not
applied to establishment holocaust writers, i.e. those who affirm and support
the holocaust stories?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 322 Tue Mar 31, 1992
M.RUNGU at 04:13 EST
To S.PIERCE6 (87)
I thought I had seen it all, but then I saw Filip Mueller once again being
paraded forth with his "survivor tale". Here again we see the calibre of the
"evidence" and "proof" in support of the holocaust extermination legend.
The problem with Mueller as a source is his gross exaggerations and
improbabilities, and his repeated plagiarism from another author. His
"EYEWITNESS AUSCHWITZ" book talks about "15 huge ovens cremating 3,000 corpses
daily" (p.59). Even the most modern crematoria found today cannot cremate a
single corpse in less than 3-4 hours, although Mueller says they were cremated
3 at a time in each Krema per hour. Even Hoess (another totally unreliable
source as even POOH.BAH agrees) only claims some 2,000 corpses cremated daily.
An excellent study appeared in the Spring, 1990 issue of the JOURNAL OF
HISTORICAL REVIEW called "AUSCHWITZ: A CASE OF PLAGIARISM" by Carlos Mattogno
(a specialist in textual criticism) in which he compares the "work" of Mueller
and that of Miklos Nyiszli ("AUSCHWITZ: A DOCTOR'S EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT") and
shows up the repeated textual plagiarism.
Neither book is of any value. The Nyiszli text is wildly false while the
Mueller one is just largely a copy of it. Trying to proffer Mueller as
"proof" of an extermination campaign actually weakens and damages such
allegations.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 323 Tue Mar 31, 1992
M.RUNGU at 04:14 EST
To POOH.BAH (90)
You are absolutely right saying "most Americans spend more time watching TV
than reading". Sad but true. And what do they see on tv relating to the
holocaust? Stories about "human lampshades", "human soap", claims that "mass
gassings" were occurring in ALL the camps, and that "6,000,000 Jews were
GASSED at Auschwitz". As you know and have admitted, such claims are false.
But the mass media is still propagating them in one form or another.
Which makes it all the more important for you to join with me in condemning
this media falsification of history and to call on it to present the facts
instead of these myths.
And yes, the bookstores stock what sells. Serious historiographical work are
usually only found in a small and remote section. Which makes it all the more
important that revisionist titles make their appearance there.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 324 Tue Mar 31, 1992
M.RUNGU at 04:14 EST
To S.PIERCE6 (91)
So now the scaling downwards of the numbers is directed at NON-Jewish victims
rather than Jewish ones? Why am I not surprised? After all, these "others"
were never given much precedence anyway in the tear-jerker pseudodocs and
"Shoah"-type soaps presented to us on tv.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 325 Tue Mar 31, 1992
M.RUNGU at 04:15 EST
To D.BERKOWITZ (93)
SOFTSERV's point was his condemnation of the methods used to discredit and
"punish" Professor Faurisson for the studies and monograms he has presented
and published, that question aspects of the holocaust. He also expressed his
belief of your approval of such methods, which your many messages seem to make
clear. Now, if you feel that SOFTSERV is mistaken in this and you do NOT
approve of these methods used to silence and "punish" the French Professor,
then it would be appropriate, to clear this up, to openly and clearly condemn
these methods and to assert that Professor Faurisson's has a right as a
scholar to present his findings and viewpoints on the holocaust, and that no
measures should be taken against him once he has done so.
It boils down to a commitment to free and open expression. Can you do this?
Can you make such a commitment? We are waiting. If you can NOT condemn such
actions, then it becomes clear that SOFTSERV was correct. I think this is the
fairest way to clear up your dispute with SOFTSERV.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 326 Tue Mar 31, 1992
M.RUNGU at 04:15 EST
To A.K.QUINN (95)
I read your message with interest. What exactly is it that you witnessed and
saw at Dachau? Did you see "gas chambers" or were you told about "gas
chambers" at this camp? And are you aware that no holocaust historian or
holocaust writer today claims that gassings took place at this camp? Are you
aware that such claims are rejected by them?
The crux of our discussion about the holocaust is that no actual extermination
campaign was planned or carried out, and particularly that no "mass gassings"
took place. Nobody is denying that people suffered and died (Jews, Germans,
Gypsies or whatever) or that brutalities occurred (on ALL sides by the way).
Nowhere has it been claimed that Jews did not "suffer". If you think I am
mistaken then I suggest you go back and read the messages that have been
publicly posted on this subject.
Lastly, are you aware of the atrocities committed by the American forces
against German prisoners of war and camp staff on April 29th, 1945
specifically at Dachau? A book by Colonel Howard A. Buechner (U.S. Medical
Corps A.U.S. [Ret.]) entitled "DACHAU: THE HOUR OF THE AVENGER gives the
details and mentions the names of a number of the American personnel entering
the camp (you might know some of them).
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 327 Tue Mar 31, 1992
D.BRIN1 at 05:28 EST
Excuse me, but Mr./Ms. Rungu once again referred to Mr. Leuchter as a
"historian." I understand that Mr. Leuchter possesses a bachelor's degree on
the subject.
Please, Mr./Mrs. Rungu, if you say that you want to discuss and debates the
facts of the Holocaust, why don't you do so? Rather than argue over this
person's credentials and that person's credentials, and relentlessly complain
about persecution of those who seek to reveal the truth as you see it, why
don't you provide evidence that the Holocaust never happened? So far, you
haven't.
I have made the same request of Mr. Raven, but the best he was able to provide
went like this: The Holocaust couldn't have happened, because if the nazis
killed six million Jews, there wouldn't be any Jews left.
In the meantime, Pooh.Bah has provided -- is providing -- that "mountain of
evidence" that Mr. Raven has taunted me to produce to prove that the nazis
exterminated large populations of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and other
"misfits" as a matter of policy. All that you appear to do in response is to
misquote her and otherwise dodge her challenges. This is not discussion and
debate.
If you cannot produce evidence to support your conclusion, and if you cannot
controvert evidence produced by the opposing side, then I submit that you
should reevaluate the assumptions that brought you here in the first place.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 328 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 06:31 EST
Rungu: In reviewing the messages from TOPic 4, I noticed that there were a
number of questions that you have left unanswered. Perhaps you can take a
moment now and answer them for me.
FROM #163:
148 Rungu: What, in your opinion, should be the credentials for an "expert"
in gas chambers?
FROM #247:
> Secondly, the Einsatsgruppen operations in and of themselves have always
> been suspicious. Orders may have been issued, but they were not always
> carried out, in spite of the reports coming in from the actual units in
> the field supposedly carrying out those orders. Often it was found that
> the planned operations were impractical or even downright impossible, and
> even sometimes FALSE reports were sent in with fabricated figures of
> fatalities amongst the targets.
Excuse me, do you know this from personal experience or could you cite some
sources for these strange claims?
FROM #611:
Actually, because of the contradictory news reports, Ernst Zundel (someone
from your camp, you know) called Irving to inquire about his (Irving's)
position. Zundel isn't even sure where Irving stands on the issue. He stated
that Irving "sort of" gave an explanation. Have you spoken to Irving and are,
perhaps, better able to give us some insight into this?
FROM #714:
> But this is typical as regards "exterminationist" presententation of
> documents. First, they will claim that there are "tons" of such
> documents; but when pressed to produce them, they only come up with a
> relatively small number, ALL of which are highly questionable or
> irrelevant; when this emerges, they will then shift gears and try to claim
> that the Germans "destroyed everything" to hide their "crimes", or
> sometimes even talk about the Germans using some kind of special code
> language, etc. etc.
Please make your case against anyone who is posting here that the above is
based in reality.
FROM #715:
I like the way you are now qualifying the gassings....are you implying that
there were gassings but not in "mass"? If so, please define "mass" for us.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 330 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:29 EST
302 Raven
> As I have stated before, even though I believe that Jews suffered and
> died during the reign of the Third Reich, there was no "Holocaust." I
> also feel that to call what DID happen to the Jews a Holocaust now,
> after nearly half a century of using the word "Holocaust" to refer to
> something else, is extremely misleading.
> .
> Let's say that tomorrow all the so-called historians decided to come
> clean, and they issued a press release to the effect, "200,000 Jews
> died during WWII of all causes." This is plenty bad. But to call this
> "death by all causes" a "Holocaust" after previously associating the
> word "Holocaust" with gas chambers, death camps, human soap, human
> skin lampshades, human skin jodphurs, human skin gloves, etc., is
> absolutely wrong. What it does is allow those who have used the
> Holocaust story to further their political agendas to say, "You see?
> There was a Holocaust," without recognizing that the meaning of the
> word has changed.
Could you please review for us the derivation of the word "Holocaust" in
regards to the events that occurred between 1933-1945 in Europe? When was it
first used in this regard? What was meant when it was used concerning these
events? Who first used it this way and why?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 331 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:30 EST
302 Raven
> To Pooh.bah (regarding 121) ---
> But, this means that the HCN must get from the lungs to the cells
> ...
> .
> You need a refresher course in toxicology. HCN will also kill from
> skin contact.
Only through much greater exposure with much higher concentrations. That is
why the usual method of use of HCN is inhalation. Cyanide, of course, can
also be lethal by ingestion as was clearly demonstrated through the Tylenol
tampering case a number of years ago.
However, it doesn't matter whether the method of introduction is through the
lungs, the skin or the GI tract - the fact still remains that HCN must get
from that location to the cells.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 332 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:30 EST
307 Raven
> I would never dream of redefining the word. I am using "disinfection"
> in the same way the Germans used it during WWII, to denote the
> elimination of pests from buildings, etc.
Oh, I see. So you are saying that the Nazis used a special code which only
you can decipher correctly. That is interesting, Raven!
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 333 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:31 EST
308 Raven
> Of course, we must not ignore the other use for gas-tight doors,
> which is that it is desireable to have a gas-tight door on a morgue
> so the smell is somewhat contained.
Now this is really funny! So, Raven, could you please tell us how many
morgues you have seen and how many of those morgues have gas-tight doors? Or,
is your source other than from personal experience? If so, please state what
it is.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 334 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:32 EST
308 Raven
From your #109:
> Excuse me for butting in, but one of the aspects of the Holocaust
> story that makes it so "vulnerable" is that most of the evidence is
> in the form of eyewitness testimony and forced confessions.
From my #129:
> After all, the people here have seen many, many documents which contradict
> your above statement and, if anyone still has doubts, I could always u/l
> some more.
From your #309:
> People indeed have seen a number of documents, but it is not the
> documents that contradict my statements but your rather fanciful
> interpretations of those documents.
Really? Please cite one example of a place in which I had a "rather fanciful
interpretation." If you cannot do so, please admit that you were in error.
> Remember, I have not u/l ed a single confession or survivor account
> (I assume that's what you mean when you mention eyewitness
> testimony. Am I wrong?)
.
> An as example, you have fancifully interpreted my message 109 and
> come up with this wild assumption.
My assumption was that you were referring to a "confession" or "survivor
account" when you mentioned "eyewitness testimony." Could you please explain
how this is "fanciful" since testimony implies court proceeding and those who
have testified were perpetrators ("confessions") or survivors?
Perhaps you are using a code here in which "eyewitness testimony" no longer
means what it usually does (much the way you have done with "disinfection").
If so, could you please define "eyewitness testimony?"
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 335 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:33 EST
309 Raven
> If you read these posts, especially 763, you will see that there are
> some serious questions about this document. If you have examined "an
> exact duplicate" of a document that I have heard does not exist, I
> must discover more. On the other hand, if you have only examined a
> copy of the typescript copy, we need to talk about the contents of
> this document.
> This is not simply a case of my word against yours.
I have stated previously that I have reviewed the carbon copy of the
document. You claim that someone told you that it doesn't exist. It then does
become your word (or that of whoever gave you the erroneous information)
against mine.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 336 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:34 EST
312 Raven
> Although there is certainly a dosage beyond which there is no return,
> removing the victim from the HCN environment, administering fresh air, and
> washing the HCN from the skin will begin the rehabilitation process.
According to the "Directives for the use of prussic acid" from which I quoted
before:
Slight poisoning: Dizziness, headache, vomiting, genreal feeling of sickness,
etc. All these symptoms pass if one immediately gets out into the fresh air.
Severe poisoning: The affected person will collapse suddenly and faint. First
aid: fresh air, remove gas amsk, loosen clothing, apply artificial
respiration. Lobelin, intermuscular 0.01 g. Do not give camphor injections.
Poisoning through the skin: Symptoms as for "Slight poisoning." Treat in the
same way.
It seems, then, that "washing the HCN from the skin" is not part of the
"rehabilitation process" even when the source of poisoning is THROUGH the
skin!
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 337 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:34 EST
312 Raven
> I have read of the accidental poisoning of a prisoner in a German
> camp, who was revived and nursed back to health.
Please cite a source for this statement.
> By the way, this "revivability" is one reason to doubt the so-called
> eyewitness accounts of the doors of the "gas chambers" being thrown
> open as soon as the screaming of the victims stopped.
Please read my previous message. This would be a case of "severe poisoning"
and, in such a case, "revivability" would not occur based solely upon being
removed from the HCN.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 338 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:35 EST
313 Raven
> I thought Leuchter was admitted as an expert witness with regards the
> premises of Auschwitz, Birkenau, and Majdanek (as he saw them), with
> with regards to the plans, their feasibility as "gas chambers."
> (paraphrasing Lenski's book, bottom of page 373). Can you expand on
> this, please?
Certainly. In fact this is a perfect example why primary sources are superior
to secondary sources.
From page 9049 of the court transcript:
"THE COURT: Well, he said - I realize his opinion on this is that there were
never any gassings or there were never any exterminations carried on in this
facility. As far as I'm concerned, from what I've heard, he is not capable of
giving that opinion."
This, of course, was after Leuchter's credentials had been reviewed by the
Court.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 339 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:36 EST
321 Rungu:
> You have said on numerous occasions the importance of having such
> professional history training if aspects of the holocaust are discussed or
> examined.
Rungu, you have repeatedly stated something that is false. Here you do so
again. Once again I ask that you provide just one example from one of my
messages in which I have maintained that "professional history training" is
important before one can discuss or examine matters concerning the Holocaust.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 340 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:36 EST
321 Rungu:
> I want to understand this. What exactly is required for somebody to write
> on the holocaust, according to your criteria? Is one expected to have
> degrees in ALL fields, and if so, how MANY degrees? And why is this tight
> standard not applied to establishment holocaust writers, i.e. those who
> affirm and support the holocaust stories?
Anyone may write on the Holocaust or any other subject matter. However, I
believe you are asking what would make one work "credible" and another "not
credible."
First, is the work written as non-fiction or fiction? Non-fiction is
superior.
Second, does the author utilize primary or secondary sources? Primary are
superior.
Third, are the primary sources from documents and/or diaries or are they from
testimony and/or memoirs? Documents and/or diaries are superior.
Fourth, do all conclusions logically follow from substantiated statements or
are statement either unsubstantiated or the conclusions illogical? Obviously,
the former is superior.
If two works by two different authors disagree on conclusions and yet both
works have met all four of the above "superior" characteristics, then the
following might be considered to attempt to resolve the contradiction:
First, does the author know the language of the primary documents or must the
author read them in translation? Knowing the primary document language is
superior.
Second, what are the author's credentials?
The above is my personal criteria for historical works. My personal criteria
for scientific works is different. What is yours?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 341 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:38 EST
322 Rungu:
> I thought I had seen it all, but then I saw Filip Mueller once again being
> paraded forth with his "survivor tale". Here again we see the calibre of
> the "evidence" and "proof" in support of the holocaust extermination
> legend.
Now this IS interesting. You have responded to the same S.PIERCE6 in message
278 AND 322....and the messages are vastly different. Could you please shed
some light on why that is?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 342 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 08:38 EST
323 Rungu:
> Stories about "human lampshades", "human soap", claims that "mass
> gassings" were occurring in ALL the camps, and that "6,000,000 Jews were
> GASSED at Auschwitz". As you know and have admitted, such claims are
> false.
Rungu, I have asked repeatedly and you have ignored my challenge. Produce
just one example where I have stated that lampshades and soap are false.
Failure to do so or to admit that you are in error will greatly diminish your
credibility.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 343 Tue Mar 31, 1992
TERMY at 08:54 EST
On 16 July, 1941, the following minute was sent to Adolf Eichmann by SS
Sturmbannfuhrer Hoppner who was based in Posen at the time. Of particular
note are points 4 and 5, with 5 serving to reinforce the issue raised in the
report by Jager, sheet #8 concerning sterilization of the Jewish workforce
remaining after the liquidations. These should function to give a clear
picture of the meaning of the term "final solution of the Jewish question"
and
similar euphemisms.
-----------
I enclose a minute in which the contents of various discussions in the Reich
Governor's office here are summarized. I would be grateful for your comments
in due course. Parts of it sound incredible but would in my view be
perfectly
feasible.
...The issue of the solution of the Jewish question in the Reich Gau
Wartheland has been raised by various agencies at meetings in the Reich
Governor's [Greiser's] office. The following solution is being proposed:
1. All Jews in the Warthegau will be put in a camp for 300,000 Jews which
will be constructed in the form of barracks as close as possible to the coal
depot and will contain workshops for tailors, shoemakers, etc.
2. All the Jews in the Warthegau will be brought to this camp. Jews capable
of work can be placed in labour gangs as required and deployed outside the
camp.
3. In the opinion of SS Brigadefuhrer Albert such a camp requires far fewer
police to guard it than is the case at present. Moreover, the continual
threat of epidemics to the population round Litzmannstadt [Lodz] and other
ghettos is reduced to a minimum.
4. This winter there is danger that not all the Jews will be able to be fed.
Serious consideration must be given as to whether the most humane solution
might not be to finish off those Jews who are incapable of work with some
quick-acting preparation. At all events, this would be more pleasant that
letting them starve.
5. Furthermore, it was proposed to sterilize all those Jewesses who are
still
fertile so that the Jewish problem would finally be solved with the present
generation.
6. The Reich Governor has not yet commented on this matter. People have the
impression that Regierungsprasident Ubelhor does not want the Litzmannstadt
ghetto to disappear since he seems to earn a lot from it. As an example of
what one can earn from the Jews, I was told that the Reich Labour Ministry
pays 6 RM [per day] from a special account for every Jew employed, while the
actual cost of the Jew is only 80 pf.
-----------
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 344 Tue Mar 31, 1992
TERMY at 08:55 EST
Excerpts from the verdict against SS-Untersturmfuerher Max Taubner,
24 May, 1943.
[NOTE: This case was tried before a GERMAN SS COURT. These are NOT
findings by an Allied court.]
1. The accused is a fanatical enemy of the Jews. At the start of his
service in the East he resolved to "get rid of" 20,000 Jews if
possible. Together with his work platoon [Werkstattzug] he was
assigned to the 1./SS-Brigade in August 1942 and left Arys, East
Prussia on 8 September 1942, arriving in Zwiahel [Novograd Volynsky]
on 12 September. He learned from the Ukrainian mayor that over 300
Jews were being held in prison. The mayor asked for authorization to
shoot them. The accused heard that the Wehrmacht was issuing Jewesses
with certificates saying that they were not Jewish. As, in his
opinion, the Wehrmacht was too sentimental he decided to carry out the
execution with his platoon. Outside the village a grave was dug by
the Ukrainian militia by the side of which the Jews - men, women and
children - had to kneel. They were then shot at close range in the
nape of the neck when the order was given.
On 17 October 1941 [sic] the accused arrived at Scholochowo with his
platoon. Here he heard that the Jews had said they intended to set
fire to the "Collective" and that two Ukrainian women had stepped on
mines and had been seriously injured. On these grounds, here too the
accused conducted an execution of Jews on his own initiative. While
in Novograd Volynksy 319 Jews had been executed, here it was 191...SS-
Unterscharfuerher Mueller, who did not belong to the accused's unit,
but had his permission to take part in the execution, snatched
children from their mothers. Then, holding them in his left hand, he
shot them and threw them into the grave. The accused took him to task
about this but nevertheless did not stop him.
...He decided to clear Alexandriya of Jews...Four hundred and fifty-
nine Jews were shot in Alexandriya.
Whereas, however, the executions in Novograd Volynsky and Sholokowo
proceeded in a more or less orderly fashion, in Alexandriya they
degenerated into vicious excesses...They were also beaten with spades,
an act in which SS-Sturmmann Ackermann particularly distinguished
himself. SS-Sturmman Wuestholz ordered the Jews to beat each other to
death, promising that the survivors would not be executed...The
accused himself joined in with the beating and also hit Jewesses in
the face with a whip. Whenever there was a break he played the song
"You Are Crazy, My Child" on an accordion. Some Jews were also beaten
before the execution in a cellar at the quarters. On one occasion a
couple of Jews had to tear down a wooden hut. It was arranged in such
a way that the hut collapsed on top of them and they were buriend
underneath the ruins...There were also shootings which were not always
authorized. In such cases individual Jews, after they had been
beaten, were simply shot dead on the spot behind the house. On one
occasion, a Jew was hanged simply because this was what the accused
wanted.
[continued in next message]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 345 Tue Mar 31, 1992
TERMY at 08:56 EST
Taubner verdict from SS Court, 24 May, 1943 (Part II)
2. The accused took a number of photographs of the executions and
allowed SS-Sturmmann Fritsch to take further photographs, although he
knew that the photographing of such incidents was not permitted...The
photographs were developed in two photographic shops in southern
Germany and the accused showed them to his wife and friends.
3. ...the accused also stayed in Konotop for some time during the
autumn of 1941. Here he was told by a Cossack captain that the
commander of the Ukrainian militia, Chamrai, was in contact with
Communist guerillas...he ordered SS-Sturmmanner Wuestholz and Hermann
to shoot him...they disarmed him and shot him dead with a
pistol...When the matter became known, he ordered the two men to
submit a report to the effect that Chamrai had in fact tried to attack
them and had therefore had to be shot.
4. [Details about an attempt to make his wife have an abortion. - Ed.]
...It could not be proved that the accused executed Jews without any
authority ono a journy from Arys to Bialowitza in August and the
beginning of September 1941...
The accused claims not to have known that he was not permitted to take
photographs of the executions he carried out. The accused however
cannot be believed in this matter...the accused has known that
photographs may not be taken of official procedures, since these are
to be viewed as "secret". ...The accused also claims not to have
given the order to execute Chamrai...this is contradicted by
Wuestholz's statement taken under oath, which is credible...His
statement is above all supported by the statement of ethnic German SS-
Sturmmann Hermann...
[continued in next message]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 346 Tue Mar 31, 1992
TERMY at 08:57 EST
Taubner Verdict (Part III)
When reaching its lawful verdict on the charges against the accused,
the SS and Police Supreme Court was guided by the following
considerations:
1. The accused shall not be punished because of the actions against
the Jews as such. THE JEWS HAVE TO BE EXTERMINATED AND NONE OF THE
JEWS THAT WERE KILLED IS ANY GREAT LOSS. Although the accused should
have recognized that THE EXTERMINATION OF THE JEWS WAS THE DUTY OF
KOMMANDOS WHICH HAVE BEEN SET UP ESPECIALLY FOR THIS PURPOSE, he
should be excused for considering himself to have the authority to
take part in the extermination of Jewry himself. [emphasis mine] Real
hatred of the Jews was the driving motivation for the accused. ...The
accused allowed his men to act with such vicious brutality that they
conducted themselves under his command like a savage horde. The
accused jeopardized the discipline of the men...neglected his
supervisory duty...The accused is therefore to be punished under
section 147 of the MStGB [Militarstrafgesetzbuch: Military Penal
Code]. Since however the provisions of this punishment only provide
for imprisonment or detention of up to fifteen years, it is recommened
that section 5a of the Special War Punishment Statutory Order be
applied, since such a deterioration of discipline requres a severe
sentence.
2. By taking photographs of the incidents or having photographs
taken, by having these developed in photographic shops and showing
them to his wife and friends, the accused is guilty of disobedience.
Such pictures could pose the gravest risks to the security of the
Reich if they fell into the wrong hands...His disobedience is
therefore to be viewed as a particularly serious case. By contrast
the SS and Police Supreme Court does not consider that his conduct
constitutes a deliberate undermining of Germany's military power...For
this crime the accused is to be punished under section 92 of the
MStGB.
[continued in next message]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 347 Tue Mar 31, 1992
TERMY at 08:58 EST
Taubner Verdict (Part IV)
3. The shooting of the commander of the Ukrainian militia is
punishable under section 115 of the MStGB. The accused ordered
subordinates to shoot Chamrai and should therefore be punished at the
perpetrator. The SS and Police Supreme Court cannot, however, in this
case either, consider the accused as a muderer...This crime was
therefore manslaughter in the sense of section 212 of the RStGB
(Reichstrafgesetzbuch: Penal Code of the Reich]. In comparison of
this serious crime it is of no consequence that the accused attempted
to hush up his actions. The SS and Police Supreme Court have
therefore refrained from examining this cover-up under criminal law.
4. Finally, the accused is guilty of incitement to an attempted
abortion. Such an attempt was made by his wife. The fact that this
attempt was unsuccessful because there was in for no pregnancy is
irrelevant. For this, the accused is to be punished under section
218, 48 of the RStGB.
VI
The following factors played a decisive role when determining the
sentences:
It must be assumed that from the outset the accused did not act out of
sadism but out of a true hatred for the Jews. He nevertheless let
himself be drawn into committing acts of cruelty which are to be
attributed to severe character deficiencies and a high degree of
mental brutalization. In the accused's favor is the fact that he has
enjoyed very little military training and as a result was not up to
his role as a leader of men. For these reasons the death penalty did
not seem appropriate, but the accused deserved to be punished by a
severe prison sentence....BECAUSE OF HIS SERIOUS ABUSE OF HIS
LEADERSHIP DUTIES, the SS and Police Supreme Court have considered a
term of imprisonment of 5 years under section 5a of the Military
Special Penal Decree [Kriegssonderstrafrechtsverordnung] to be
necessary. [emphasis mine]
In addition, the taking of tasteless and shameless pictures under
circumstances where the taking of such photographs is forbidden cannot
be viewed lightly. They are the expression of an inferior character.
Particularly revealing in this connection is the fact that the accused
evidently took particular pleasure in a photograph of a Jewish woman
who was almost completely naked. As already said, this is a
particularly severe case of disobedience...the exceptional danger that
arose as a result of his taking and distributing these pictures must
be taken into consideration. An aggravating factor is that the
accused gave a false word of honor in order to play down this
misdemeanor. The SS and Police Supreme Court considers a term of
imprisonment of three years the required punishment for his
disobedience.
The manslaughter of...Chamrai...can only be atoned for with a term of
imprisonment...In committing this crime the accused again shows that
he possesses neither moderation nor self-discipline. The SS and
Police Supreme Court considers a term of imprisonment of two years to
be appropriate for this crime.
[continued in next message]
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 348 Tue Mar 31, 1992
TERMY at 08:59 EST
Taubner Verdict (Part V)
In the view of the SS, any incitement by an SS officer to abortion
deserves severe punishment. ...however [this case can] be viewed more
leniently in view of the fact that the accused is a lover of children
and his wife has already borne him three children. In addition, the
accused was concerned that his wife would not survive a further
pregnancy...The SS and Police Supreme Court therefore consider a
prison sentence of six months to be sufficient.
In accordance with section 74 of the RStGB the four months the accused
has already spent in prison should be deducted when calculating the
overall sentence. The SS and Police Supreme Court has sentenced the
accused to a total of ten years' imprisonment. The accused has been
expelled from the SS and declared unfit for service. The conduct of
the accused is unworthy of an honorable and decent German man. For
this he has been given under section 32 of the RStGB the additional
sentence of ten years' deprivation of his civil rights.
VII
In view of the fact that the accused persisted in attempting to
justify his behavior by lying in the main trial, the time he has
already served in prison was not deducted from his sentence.
--------------
Dismissal of the case against the remaining parties, 1 June 1943
The following has been established on the basis of the main trial of
SS-Untersturmfuehrer Max Taubner, commanding officer of a supplies
workshop platoon and an officer in Kommandostab RF-SS, before the SS
and Police Supreme Court on 24 May 1943:
...The following men were party to the punishable acts committed or
ordered by SS-Untersturmfuehrer Max Taubner:
1. SS-Unterscharfuehrer Walter Mueller particularly stood out during
the shootings of Jews for the brutality with which he tore small
Jewish children from their mothers. He held these children out in
front of him with his left hand and then, with his right hand, shot
them with a pistol.
2. SS-Sturmmann Ernst Fritsch took photographs of shootings of Jews.
He was aware thta the taking of such photographs was forbidden...
3. SS-Sturmmann Karl Ackermann particularly distinguished himself
during the execution of Jews by beating Jews with a spade.
4. SS-Sturmmann Rudolf Wuestholz shot the Ukrainian captaing of the
militia, Chamrai. He did this on the orders of SS-Unterstrumfuehrer
Max Taubner, who was acting contrary to the law, thereby making
himself guilty of the crime of manslaughter.
Allowances have been made for the fact that the accused were, without
exception, acting on the orders of and under the responsibility of SS-
Untersturmfuehrer Max Taubner. In this respect, their own culpability
may be described as slight...
The cases against these accused have therefore been dismissed.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 349 Tue Mar 31, 1992
TERMY at 09:03 EST
A couple of points covered in the preceding messages bear reinforcement.
1. This verdict is NOT a post-war verdict, but one handed down by a German
court (the SS and Police Supreme Court) DURING the war.
2. The court, in considering sentencing, clearly states "The accused shall
not be punished because of the actions against the Jews. The Jews have to be
exterminated and none of the Jews that were killed is any great loss.
Although the accused should have recognized that the extermination of the
Jews was the duty of the Kommandos which have been set up especially for this
purpose, he should be excused for considering himself to have the authority
to take part in the extermination of Jewry himself."
a. The court found no reason to punish Taubner for killing Jews.
Their concern was, instead, the manner in which they had been
killed.
b. The court clearly and unequivocally states that the "Jews
have to be exterminated", that there were "Kommandos which have
been set up especially for this purpose", and "extermination of
Jewry." It's almost certain there are legal professionals
monitoring this topic. I would ask them to elaborate on the
significance of this, and what the implications are.
3. Charges against Taubner's subordinates were dismissed, though the court
stated that they'd taken part in the killings of Jews. Again, their comments
dealt with the fashion in which these subordinates killed the Jews, not the
fact that Jews were killed.
4. The court does not say "special action", "special treatment" or any other
ambiguous phrase in reference to the Jews. It uses the term " "exterminate"
and variations thereof.
5. As usual, there's a typo or two, and they're mine...
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 350 Tue Mar 31, 1992
TERMY at 09:04 EST
A week or so ago, a claim was made (by, Mr. Raven, I believe) that
there were 50,000 Jews remaining in Berlin at war's end. No source
was given for this assertion, nor references. Where was this
information obtained?
Termy
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 351 Tue Mar 31, 1992
GRAFFITI [Ric Helton] at 12:41 EST
[3 messages deleted. Please keep this on the topic of the Holocaust, and
please refer all differences of opinion in religious training and truth to the
Religion & Ethics RT on GEnie page 390. (Type MOVE 390;1 to access the
bulletin board, a Basic*Service.) -Ric
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 352 Tue Mar 31, 1992
S.PIERCE6 [Sheri] at 18:41 EST
Re: Schulman
Does anyone else here find the continuing assertion that
Faurisson's credibility was unjustly diminished hypocritical
and dishonest?
Why has Mr. Schulman's consistently evaded the real
circumstances leading to Faurisson's dismissal, originally
posted in T4/832, cited again in T9/9, and again at the
bottom of this post?
29>> Am I competent to write about the subjects I choose
to write about? You bet -- because I \research\ facts
before I write about them, and make damn sure my facts are
correct before committing myself to them.
32>> I called Faurisson a historian because he was
researching and writing about historical events.
33>> If you find an agenda in my writings here -- other
than a desire to see truth and fairness prevail -- please
tell me. I'll try to stop doing whatever it is immediately.
47>> If, when Faurisson had put forward his criticisms of
the gas- chamber histories, the French had responded with
the arguments put forward by Pooh.Bah earlier in this
discussion (in the soon- to-be-archived Topic 4), everything
would have been fine and dandy. Instead, Faurisson was
fired from his job and prosecuted as a criminal.
134>> I find the dismissal of Faurisson and Leuchter because
of their credentials (or lack thereof) to be irrelevant and
prejudicial ... The only thing that discredits work is
proving that its facts are wrong.
>> Robert Faurisson is not a legitimate historian, he is a
>> charlatan.
>>
>> He used outright lies attributed to "historical research" to
>> "prove" there were no gas chambers. His thesis depended on
>> an entry in an SS doctor's diary which said, "This Sunday
>> morning in the cold and humid weather I was present at the
>> IIth special action (Dutch). Atrocious scenes with three
>> women who begged us to let them live."
>>
>> According to Faurisson, this passage proves: 1) that a
>> "special action" is a sorting out by doctors of sick from
>> healthy in a typhoid epidemic; 2) that the "atrocious
>> scenes" were "executions of persons who had been condemned
>> to death, executions for which the doctor was obliged to be
>> present"; 3) that among the condemned were three women who
>> had come in a convoy from Holland who WERE SHOT; 4) that
>> there were no gas chambers, since the women were shot and
>> NOT GASSED.
>>
>> The above is what he falsely attributes to the diary entry,
>> citing its author and date!
>>
>> An eminent French scholar named George Wellers analyzed the
>> diary entry and the surrounding documentation for Le Monde.
>> He did ACTUAL historical research, checked the Auschwitz
>> archives for the date of the entry and found that 1710 Dutch
>> Jews arrived that day of which 1594 went immediately to the
>> gas chamber.
>>
>> The remaining 116 (all women, including the doctor's 3
>> women) were brought into the camp. The fact that the three
>> women the doctor referred to were SHOT is not found anywhere
>> in the diary. In fact that information came out at Dr.
>> Kremer's Polish war crimes trial. He said there, "Three
>> Dutch women did not want to go into the gas chamber and
>> begged to have their lives spared. They were young women IN
>> GOOD HEALTH, but in spite of that their prayer was not
>> granted and the SS who were participating in the action SHOT
>> THEM ON THE SPOT."
>>
>> Faurisson knew that his diary source (Dr. Kremer) testified
>> that the gas chambers did exist, but omitted the fact; he
>> knew the three women were "in good health," but said they
>> were selected on medical grounds during an epidemic; he knew
>> they were shot for begging to evade the gas chamber, but
>> said they were shot because they "were condemned to death."
>>
>> So it is really not surprising if Faurisson was denounced by
>> French academia.
>>
>> (see Village Voice 6/81 P. Berman's "Gas Chamber Games:
>> Crackpot History and the Right to Lie" or Alan Dershowitz's
>> book, "Chutzpah.")
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 353 Tue Mar 31, 1992
S.PIERCE6 [Sheri] at 18:42 EST
Re: Schulman
329>> Berkowitz then goes on into an assertion that the non-Jewish world
engages in collective blame against Jews, and asserts that Boesky and Milken's
"Jewish origins would become part of their crime." Nowhere in any newspaper,
magazine, TV, or radio account did I see a word linking any charges against
these two men to their Jewish origins.
What conclusions can be drawn from the above? Maybe he just ignores the media
named. Indeed, where has he been through the Stewart "Den of Thieves"
controversy and stereotypical cartoons about the referenced case?
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 354 Tue Mar 31, 1992
S.PIERCE6 [Sheri] at 18:44 EST
Re: Schulman
I say with no guile whatsoever that I have never encountered what Mr. Schulman
dubs in 138-139 as "Jewish bigotry." I agree with Dov that the reference is
vile slander and collective defamation.
In his anxiety to justify his personal rejection of Judaism, Mr. Schulman
appears determined to demean those here who freely choose to identify with and
practice that beautiful religion.
No one asked him to present his damning views of the Torah, Israel, and the
Jewish people in this forum. He did so under the pretext of revealing his
"agenda." No amount of denial can alter how I perceive that agenda. Given
the subject area, Friedman's characterization of it was perfect. And if more
messages are going to be removed, I hope this time it starts with 138-139.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 355 Tue Mar 31, 1992
S.PIERCE6 [Sheri] at 18:45 EST
Re: Schulman
Harrassing email will be dealt with in an appropriate manner.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 356 Tue Mar 31, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 18:54 EST
Not so well done, Dave. The rebuttal has been deleted. Strange exercise of
sysopery, IMO. Messages #138-139 which had nothing to do with the holocaust
and contained caustic and defamtory references to Jews remain, and my rebuttal
was denied. I think the sysop has admitted his inability to measure Jewish
sensibilites, and I think he should pass over the topic to someone who can.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 357 Tue Mar 31, 1992
AH.STEIN at 18:55 EST
>Message 260 Mon Mar 30, 1992
>M.RUNGU at 21:55 EST
>The attacks on Professor Faurisson, Dr. Staglich, Professor Butz, Dr.
Sanning, and the many other holocaust revisionists are directed at them not
because of their backgrounds, but because of their inconvenient and
embarrassing findings and assertions.
Not quite. The attacks come about because of the lies and hatred they try
to propogate.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 359 Tue Mar 31, 1992
ERIC-M at 19:38 EST
>>> M.RUNGU
> You also said the gas "contact time was brief, so the walls did not have
> time to become impregnated with it", i.e. the gas. This is another
> example of the kind of creative excuse-making employed to back up a
> thesis that is insupportable. The story has to constantly undergo
> change to accomodate each inconvenient question or doubt.
There is nothing wrong with changing a theory as more data is received. If
the theory that some Jews were gassed is totally incorrect, there should be
some piece of evidence that will blow it away. Let's see it.
As it is, we can only guess what is the correct scenario. I wasn't there.
Were you? We cannot say with absolute certainty that Jews were gassed. Nor
can we say that they were not. The evidence tends to support the former,
though.
Inconvenient questions or doubt do NOT disprove a theory. Please present
evidence that does.
/
|/ ric
|/
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 360 Tue Mar 31, 1992
ERIC-M at 19:39 EST
>>> M.RUNGU
> When or where has Mr. Raven talked about "bloodthirsty Zionists" or
> expressed a "perverse obsession" with Zionism?
In one of his posts. If you wish to find it, type "rea 4 aut=g.raven" and
"rea 9 aut=g.raven"...it's in one of the two topics.
When he has expressed the idea that the Holocast is a propaganda vehicle used
by the Zionists to further Judaic causes, he should suport such claims.
Saying that doing so would be off-topic is an excuse which shows he HAS no
such evidence. No excuses should be accepted. Either evidence backing his
outlandish claims should be presented, or he should resign himself to knowing
that he is not going to be believed in the future when he makes more
unsupportable claims.
/
|/ ric
|/
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 361 Tue Mar 31, 1992
ERIC-M at 19:40 EST
>>> G.RAVEN [Greg Raven]
> There are a couple errors with the above statement. First, I believe
> that HCN is odorless. The "almond smell" is a safety precaution added to
> some HCN, but as skunk scent is added to natural gas.
I don't know. :-) This is what I've been told, though, by knowledgeable
chemical experts. Personally, I've never smelled HCN. >grin> I would
question why the "almond smell myth" would be perpetuated if it were not true,
since any possible HCN gas we would have encountered would only be that
created inadvertantly from KCN. It could very well be that a side reaction is
what causes the smell, instead of HCN itself. Like I said, I cannot say with
100% certainty. I haven't studied the toxicology of HCN in great depth. I'll
defer to your better knowledge if you have. I just know enough so I don't
accidentally kill myself. :-)
> Although there is certainly a dosage beyond which there is no return,
> removing the victim from the HCN environment, administering fresh air,
> and washing the HCN from the skin will begin the rehabilitation process.
Yes...by "immediate," I was assuming enough concentration of HCN to administer
a lethal dose quickly. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear.
/
|/ ric
|/
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 362 Tue Mar 31, 1992
D.BERKOWITZ at 20:08 EST
To: 353 S.PIERCE6 [Sheri]
>Re: Schulman
NS 329> Berkowitz then goes on into an assertion that the non-Jewish
NS >world engages in collective blame against Jews, and asserts that
NS >Boesky and Milken's "Jewish origins would become part of their
NS >crime." Nowhere in any newspaper, magazine, TV, or radio account
NS >did I see a word linking any charges against these two men to
NS >their Jewish origins.
SP >What conclusions can be drawn from the above? Maybe he just
SP >ignores the media named. Indeed, where has he been through the
SP >Stewart "Den of Thieves" controversy and stereotypical cartoons
SP >about the referenced case?
Sheri he was too busy researching Faurisson's bonafides to notice. Boesky's
and Milken's ethnic heritage was widely disseminated. A pity that the man
missed this. Perhaps this is part and parcel of holocaust revisionism. Ignore
anything that remotely resembles Jew- baiting.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 363 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:00 EST
FROM HIMMLER'S POSEN SPEECH
October 4, 1943
I also want to talk to you, quite frankly, on a very grave matter. Among
ourselves it should be mentioned quite frankly, and yet we will never speak
of it publicly...I mean the clearing out of the Jews, the extermination of
the Jewish race. It's on of those things it is easy to talk about - "The
Jewish race is being exterminated," says one party member, "that's quite
clear, it's in our program - elimination of the Jews, and we're doing it,
exterminating them." ....
Because we have exterminated a bacterium we do not want, in the end, to be
infected by the bacterium and die of it. I will not see so much as a small
area of sepsis appear here or gain a foothold. Wherever it may form, we will
cauterize it. Altogether, however, we can say that we have fulfilled this
most difficult duty for the love of our people. And our spirit, our soul, our
character has not suffered injury from it.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 364 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:02 EST
FROM HIMMLER'S POSEN SPEECH
October 6, 1943
In this connection, I may comment before this very tightly knit group on a
matter which you, my Party comrades, all take for granted, and which is the
most difficult task I have ever faced in my life, the Jewish problem. All of
you gladly take it for granted that there are no longer any Jews in your
administrative districts. All Germans - with few individual exceptions - are
aware that we could not have endured the bombings, the hardships of the
fourth year of the war, and could not endure fifth and sixth years of war
that are perhaps yet to come, if we still had this demoralizing pest in our
national body. "The Jews must be eradicated." This brief sentence is easily
said. But for the man who must carry out what it calls for, it is the gravest
and hardest thing in existence. Now, look, after all they're Jews, only
Jews....
I ask that you assembled here to pay attention to what I have to say, but not
repeat it. The question came up: Well, what about the women and children? -
I came to a determinedly simple conclusion about that, too. I did not believe
that I had the right to wipe out the men - rather I should say, kill them or
have them killed - and let their children grow up to avenge themselves on our
sons and grandsons. The hard decision to wipe this people off the face of the
earth had to be made. For us, the organization that had to carry out this
task, it was the most difficult one we ever had. But it was accomplished, and
without - I believe I can say - our men and their leaders suffering any
mental or spiritual damage....By the end of the year, the Jewish problem in
the lands we have occupied will be solved. There will be left only remnants,
individual Jews who are in hiding. The problem of Jews who are partners in
mixed marriages and the problem of half-Jews will, in accordance with this
policy, be rationally examined, decided upon, and resolved.....
With this I'll wind up my discussion of the Jewish problem. You now have the
necessary information, and you will keep it to yourselves. At some much later
date, one may consider the possibility of telling the German people a little
more. I believe that it is better that we all bear this together for our
people, as we have done, and take the responsibility on ourselves (the
responsibility for a deed, not just for an idea) and take this secret with us
to our graves.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 365 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:05 EST
The above two excerpts are from speeches given by Himmler at Posen. These
speeches were given from Himmler's handwritten notes, recorded as they were
given, transcribed from the recording and that transcription was "polished" by
Himmler to eradicate any "ums," "ahs," etc. that creep into virtually any
speech that is given.
The originals of the handwritten notes, recordings and polished transcriptions
are in the National Archives in Washington, DC. I have seen the notes and
transcription and have heard the recording myself.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 366 Tue Mar 31, 1992
C.FINK4 [Carl] at 21:10 EST
>> You have misread my post. Disinfection is a sporadic occurrance,
>>not something that happens all the time. You might disinfect a
>>barracks or morgue once or twice a year, for example.
Raven, would you really like to disinfect a barracks or morgue with hydrogen
cyanide gas? A barracks, in particular, is not sealed - the gas would escape
into the environment, and contaminate any clothing or other items in the room.
It would be as big a production as "tenting" a house is today - if the Germans
could do that, with WW II technology-plastics to make the tent from.
Also, you yourself have contended that these chambers were special delousing
chambers for clothing (as opposed to a morgue or barracks). Presumably after
going to the trouble of making a special delousing chamber, the Germans used
it more often than twice a year.
By the way, if vented HCN makes the gas chambers impossible, why doesn't it
make the delousing chambers impossible?
Raven, your 312:
HCN poisoning of the blood is irreversible. Once the cyanide radical
combines with the hemoglobin, it can't be removed. A person can be saved only
if the dosage was sublethal, or if given transfusions to restore red blood
cell function.
Also, it is the hydrocyanic acid itself that smells of almonds (in fact,
almonds contain HCN). It's a warning signal all chemistry students are told
to be alert for (some idiot might pour out his cyanide in the sink and follow
it with acid).
Carl Fink
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 367 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:16 EST
********************************************************
********************************************************
WARNING!!!!!
********************************************************
********************************************************
The next 13 documents might be disturbing to sensitive participants and
lurkers.
Carl, Raven, Rungu and all other participants and lurkers: The first
two messages are from the IMT and disclose the testimony concerning
human skin and the comments of two of the denfense attorneys.
The next 3 messages are from the IMT and concern soap from human fat.
I present all five of them without editorial comment or characterization.
Everyone should determine for themselves how much weight to place of this
testimony.
The next 8 messages after that trace a "scientific" project of the Nazis -
a Jewish skeleton collection. The 8 documents span that time from the
request that Himmler and/or his office authorize such a collection to the
discussion regarding the collection's destruction before the Allies can
capture the anatomical institute which housed it.
For those who would prefer to skip these messages, I will post a notice
with a similar banner to the above "WARNING" so no one need read these
documents....just watch for that banner to be notified when to resume
reading. (Since I cannot guarantee that I will not cross-post with anyone
else, you might wish to check the name on the messages to make sure that
you do not miss someone else's message while skipping mine.)
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 368 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:19 EST
From the court transcript on 29 January 46, IMT VI:
M.DUBOST: Do you know anything about the fate of tattooed men?
BALACHOWSKY: Yes, indeed.
M.DUBOST: Will you please tell us what you know about them?
BALACHOWSKY: Tattooed human skins were stored in Block 2, which was called at
Buchenwald the Pathological Block.
M.DUBOST: Were there many tattooed human skins in Block 2?
BALACHOWSKY: There were always tattooed human skins in Block 2. I cannot say
whether there were many, as they were continuously being received an passed
on, but there were not only tattooed human skins, but also tanned human skins
- simply tanned, not tattooed.
M.DUBOST: Did they skin people?
BALACHOWSKY: They removed the skin and then tanned it.
M.DUBOST: Will you continue your testimony on that point?
BALACHOWSKY: I saw SS men come out of Block 2, the Pathological Block,
carrying tanned skins under their arms. I know, from my comrades who worked
in Pathological Block 2, that there were orders for skins; and these tanned
skins were given as gifts to certain guards and to certain visitors, who used
them to bind books.
M.DUBOST: We were told that Koch, who was the head at that time, was
sentenced for this practice.
BALACHOWSKY: I was not a witness of the Koch affair, which happened before I
cam to the camp.
M.DUBOST: So that even after he left there were still tanned and tattooed
skins?
BALACHOWSKY: Yes, there were constantly tanned and tattooed skins...
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 369 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:19 EST
From the court transcript on 14 December 45, IMT III:
DR. KAUFFMANN [Defense attorney for Kaltenbrunner]: The witness did not
mention that the Camp Commandant Koch and his inhuman wife were condemned to
death by an SS court, among other things, on account of these occurrences.
DR. BERGOLD [another defense attorney]: I can well understand that my
colleague, Dr. Kauffmann protests the Prosecution's failure to mention a very
important point, namely, that the German authorities indicted this inhuman SS
leader and his wife and condemned them to death.
From the court transcript on 14 January 46, IMT V:
DR. KAUFFMANN: Kaltenbrunner told me that it was known in the whole SS that
the commandant Koch and his wife had been taken to account also - I emphasize
"also" - on account of these things and that it was known in the SS that one
of the factors determining the severity of the sentences imposed had been
this proved inhuman behavior.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 370 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:20 EST
From the court transcript on 19 February 46, IMT VII:
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: In the Danzig Anatomic Institute semi-industrial
experiments in the production of soap from human bodies and the tanning of
human skin for industrial purposes were carried out. I submit to the Tribunal
as Exhibit Number USSR-197 (Document Number USSR-197), the testimony of one
of the direct participants in the production of soap from human fat. It is
the testimony of Sigmund Mazur, who was a laboratory assistant at the Danzig
Anatomic Institute. ...
Q: Tell us how the soap was made out of human fat at the Danzig Anatomic
Institute.
A: In the courtyard of the Anatomic Institute a one-story stone building of
three rooms was built during the summer of 1943. This building was erected
for the utilization of human bodies and for the boiling of bones. This was
officially announced by Professor Spanner. This laboratory was called a
laboratory for the fabrication of skeletons, the burning of meat and
unnecessary bones. But already during the winter of 1943-44 Professor Spanner
ordered us to collect human fat and not to throw it away. This order was
given to Reichert and Borkmann.
In February 1944 Professor Spanner gave me the recipe for the preparation of
soap from human fat. According to this recipe 5 kilos of human fat are mixed
with 10 liters of water and 500 or 1000 grams of caustic soda. All this is
boiled 2 or 3 hours and then cooled. The soap floats to the surface while the
water and other sediment remain at the bottom. A bit of salt and soda is
added to this mixture. Then fresh water is added, and the mixture again
boiled 2 or 3 hours. After having cooled the soap is poured into molds.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 371 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:21 EST
From the court transcript on 19 February 46, IMT VII:
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: I shall now submit to the Tribunal two documents
which have been kindly put at our disposal. They are records of sworn
statements by two British prisoners of war; in particular that of John Henry
Witton, a soldier of the Royal Sussex Regiment. The document is submitted to
the Tribunal as Exhibit Number USSR-264 (Document Number USSR-264). The
members of the Tribunal will find this quotation in Paragraph 5, Page 495, of
the document book. ... I quote:
[from John Henry Witton's sworn statement] "The corpses arrived at an average
of seven to eight per day. All of them had been beheaded and were naked. They
arrived sometimes in a Red Cross wagon containing five to six corpses in a
wooden case and sometimes in a small truck which contained three to four
corpses...The corpses were unloaded as quickly as possible and taken down
into the cellar, which was entered from a side door in the main entrance hall
of the Institute...They were then put into large metal containers where they
were left for approximately 4 months....Owing to the preservative mixture in
which they were stored, this tissue came away from the bones very easily. The
tissue was then put into a boiler about the size of a small kitchen
table...After boiling the liquid it was put into white trays about twice the
size of a sheet of foolscap and about 3 cm deep....Approximately 3 to 4
trayfuls per day were obtained from the machine."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 372 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:22 EST
From the court transcript on 19 February 46, IMT VII:
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: This [next] witness himself did not witness the
application of the soap but I am submitting to the Tribunal as Exhibit Number
USSR-272 (Document Number USSR-272), the written testimony of a British
citizen William Anderson Neely, a corporal of the Royal Signals. The members
of the Tribunal will find this excerpt on Page 498 of the document book,
Volume 2...:
[from William Anderson Neely's swore statement] "The corpses arrived at an
average rate of 2 to 3 per day. All of them were naked and most of them had
been beheaded...A machine for the manufacture of soap was completed some time
in March or April 1944. The British prisoners of war had constructed the
building in which it was housed in June 1942. The machine itself was
installed by a civilian firm from Danzig by the name of AJRD. It consisted,
as far as I remember, of an electrically heated tank in which bones of the
corpses were mixed with some acid and melted down. This process of melting
down took about 24 hours. The fatty portions of the corpses and particularly
those of females were put into a crude enamel tank, heated by a couple of
bunsen burners. Some acid was also used in this process. I think it was
caustic soda. When boiling had been completed, the mixture was allowed to
cool and then cut into blocks for microscopic examination....I cannot
estimate the quantity produced, but I saw it used by Danzigers in cleaning
tables in the dissecting rooms. They all told me it was excellent soap for
this purpose."
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 373 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:23 EST
The Ahnenerbe
The Reich Business Manager (Recihsgeschaeftsfuehrer)
Berlin 9 February 42
To: SS Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Brandt
Dear comrade BRANDT:
...Due to those circumstances [illness] Prof HIRT was able to furnish only a
preliminary report which, however, I still should like to submit to your
attention. The report concerns:
1. his research in the field of microscopy of living tissues
(Intravitalmikroskopie); the discovery of a new method of examination, and
the construction of a new research microscope.
2. a proposal for securing skulls of Jewish-Bolshevik Commissars.....
Sincerely yours
Heil Hitler!
Yours
Sievers
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 374 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:24 EST
PRELIMINARY REPORT
Object: Securing skulls of Jewish-Bolshevik Commissars for the purpose of
scientific research at the Strassburg Reich University.
There exist extensive collections of skulls of almost all races and peoples.
Of the Jewish race, however, only so very few specimens of skulls stand at
the disposal of science that a study of them does not permit precise
conclusions. The war in the East now presents us with the opportunity to
remedy this shortage. By procuring the skulls of the Jewish Bolshevik
Commissars, who personify a repulsive, yet characteristic subhumanity, we
have the opportunity of obtaining tangible, scientific evidence.
The actual obtaining and collecting of these skulls without difficulty could
be best accomplished by a directive issued to the Wehrmacht in the future to
immediately turn over alive all Jewish Bolshevik Commissars to the field M.P
The field MP in turn is to be issued special directives to continually inform
a certain office of the number and place of detention of these captured Jews
and to guard them well until the arrival of a special deputy. This special
deputy, commissioned with the collection of the material is to take a
prescribed series of photographs and anthropological measurements, and is to
ascertain, in so far as is possible, the origin, date of birth, and other
personal data of the prisoner. Following eh subsequently induced death of the
Jew, whose head must not be damaged, he will separate the head from the torso
and will forward it to its point of destination in a preservative fluid
within a well-sealed tin container especially made for this purpose....
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 375 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:25 EST
The Ahnenerbe
The Reich Business Manager (Reichsgeschaeftsfuehrer)
Berlin 2 November 42
To: SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Brandt
Dear Comrade Brandt!
The Reichsfuehrer SS [Himmler] once ordered, as you know, that the SS
Hauptsturmfuehrer Prof. Dr. Hirt should be provided with all necessary
material for his research work. I have already reported to the Reichsfuehrer
SS that for some anthropological studies 150 skeletons of inmates or Jews are
needed and should be provided by the concentration camp Auschwitz. It is only
necessary that the Reich Main Security Office will now be furnished with an
official directive by the Reichsfuehrer SS; by order of the Reichsfuehrer SS,
however, you could advise so yourself.
Sincerely yours,
Heil Hitler!
Yours
Sievers
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 376 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:26 EST
The Reichsfuehrer Personal staff
Field Command Post, 6 November 42
To: Reich Main Security Office
Office IV B 4
c/o SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann
Concerning: Creation of a skeleton collection in the Strassbourg Anatomical
Institute.
The Reichsfuehrer-SS ordered, that everything necessary for his
investigations is to be made available to the Director of the Strassbourg,
Anatomical Institute, SS Hauptsturmfuehrer, Prof. Dr. Hirt, who is also head
of a department at the Institute for Military Scientific Research in the
"Ahnenerbe" Office. On order of the Reichsfuehrer-SS, I therefore request
that the establishing of the planned skeleton collection be made possible. SS
Obersturmbannfuehrer Sievers will communicate with you regarding the
particulars.
By order of
Brandt
SS Obersturmbannfuehrer
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 377 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:27 EST
Office Ahnenerbe
Institute for Military Scientific Research
21 June 1943
To: Reich Main Security Office
Office IV B 4
Attention: SS Obersurmbannfuehrer Eichmann
Subject: Assembling of a collection of skeletons.
With reference to your letter of 25 September 1942 IV B 4 3576/43 g 1488 and
the personal talks which have taken place in the meantime on the above
matter, you are informed that the co-worker in this office who was charged
with the execution of the above mentioned special task, SS Hauptsturmfuehrer
Dr. Bruno Beger, ended his work in the Auschwitz concentration camp on 15
June 1943 because of the existing danger of infectious diseases.
A total of 115 persons were worked on 79 of whom were Jews, 2 Poles, 4
Asiatics and 38 Jewesses. At present, these prisoners are separated according
to sex and each group is accommodated in a hospital building of the Auschwitz
concentration camp and are in quarantine.
For further processing of the selected persons an immediate transfer to the
Natzweiler concentration camp is now imperative, which must be accelerated in
view of the danger of infectious diseases in Auschwitz. Enclosed is a list
containing the names of the selected persons.
It is requested that the necessary directives be issued.
Since with the transfer of the prisoners to Natzweiler the danger of
spreading diseases exists, it is requested that an immediate shipment of
disease-free and clean prisoners' clothing for 80 men and 30 women be ordered
sent from Natzweiler to Auschwitz.
At the same time one must provide for the accommodation of the 30 women in
the Natzweiler concentration camp for a short period.
Sievers
SS Standartenfuehrer
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 378 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:28 EST
Office Ahnenerbe
5 June 1944
To: SS Standartenfuehrer Ministerialrat Dr. Brandt
Reichsfuehrer SS Personal staff
Concerning: Jewish Skeleton collection
According to the proposal of 9 February 42 which was approved on 23 February
42, Prof. Dr. Hirt had assembled a skeleton collection. Because of the vast
amount of work connected with the research activities defleshing of the
corpses has not been completed. Should Strassburg be threatened, Prof. Dr.
Hirt would like to know your instructions regarding the skeleton collection.
If the corpses were defleshed immediately, important scientific data could
not be obtained and part of the work would have been done for nothing. On the
other hand this procedure would make the corpses unidentifiable and the
remaining flesh parts could be declared as having been left by the French
when the Germans took over the Anatomical Institute. Please advise as to
which of the following possible proposals should be followed:
(1) Preserve the collection as a whole
(2) Dissolve part of the collection
(3) Dissolve the whole of the collection.
Sievers
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 379 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:29 EST
15 October 1944
To: SS Standartenfuehrer Dr. Brandt
On 12 October 1944, I talked to SS Standartenfuehrer Sievers on the telephone
and asked him whether the skeleton collection at Strassburg had already been
completely broken up in accordance with instructions given by SS
Standartenfuehrer Baumert. SS Standartenfuehrer Sievers could not tell me
anything about that, since he had not yet received any detailed news from
Professor Dr. Hirt. I told him that, if the dissolution had not yet taken
place, some part of the collection should still be preserved, It had to be
certain however, that the complete dissolution could be accomplished promptly
if Strassburg should be endangered because of the military situation. SS
Standartenfuehrer Sievers promised to have the appropriate investigations
made and to report about them.
Berg
SS Hauptsturmfuehrer
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 380 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:30 EST
26 October 1944
To: SS Standartenfuehrer Dr. Brandt
During his presence at the Field Command Post on 21 October 1944, SS
Standartenfuehrer Sievers informed me that the dissolution of the collection
in Strassburg, had already been completed in compliance with the orders given
formerly. Considering the whole situation he thinks that this procedure was
the best one.
Berg
SS Hauptsturmfuehrer
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 381 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 21:36 EST
****************************************************
****************************************************
END OF WARNING!!!!!!!
****************************************************
****************************************************
The above 13 messages are presented here not because they are "central"
to the Holocaust or because I am trying to "prove something" by including
them. The first 5 were posted because Carl requested the information.
The next 2 were posted because they help to possibly explain some aspects
described by the two British POWs. The next 6 were posted to demonstrate
how a "paper trial" can be discovered for different occurences under the
Nazis AND to indicate how sadistic some "scientific" aspects were.
As with all the documents that I u/l, the participants and lurkers are
free to make their own decisions as to what each means and what weight
to attach to each bit of evidence.
Actually, these 13 messages do not constitute record events which were
even part of the Holocaust. They simply record events that took place
during the time of the Holocaust AND that the sadism of the Holocaust
enabled to occur.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 382 Tue Mar 31, 1992
POOH.BAH at 22:27 EST
169 Raven: Please read CAT 15 TOP 7 MSG 297-302 for the answers to your
questions.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 383 Tue Mar 31, 1992
J.CHILDERS2 [LINDY-JIM] at 22:32 EST
B.EATON2 [BZE] at 01:50 EST
>You are the one who began this topic by questioning accepted facts, accepted
by the vast majority of historians and other scholars of the period.
The burden of proof rests with you. What evidence do you have that the
Holocaust never existed? We would all like to hear it. You have made much of
a few minor pts, but never given any conclusive evidence to support your
claims. >
I must disagree. The burden of proof can never rest on proving that an event
did not happen. I could claim that I saw a UFO last night. You tell me that
it is unlikely. I challenge you to prove it didn't happen. You cannot prove
it. Therefore it happened? No. The burden of proof would be on me to prove
that what I claim happened has in fact happened. Luckily, there is a great
deal of proof concerning what happened. Pooh.Bah is doing an admirable job of
presenting his evidence. In fact Raven has now admitted that the Germans
wanted to eliminate Jewishness from Europe and that a large number of Jews
died because of that. The argument is at this point over the details and
whether or not the deaths were caused by a deliberate policy of extermination
or if the deaths were so to speak incidental to the NAZI goal of eliminating
Jewishness from Europe.
------------
Category 15, Topic 9
Message 384 Tue Mar 31, 1992
J.WEISBERGE1 [Jon W.] at 23:24 EST
Softserv 198:
Actually, the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had more than 8 handguns. According to
_The Jews of Warsaw_ (by Yisrael Gutman, University of Indiana Press, 1982),
the ZOB had approximately 500 handguns, 2,000 hand grenades, 10 rifles, "one
or two" submachine guns and about 2,000 Molotov cocktails, while the ZZW had
approximately 250 handguns, plus "a larger supply [than the ZOB] of rifles and
submachine guns," and an unspecified number of light machine guns, as well as
"some quantity" of explosives and Molotov cocktails. (page 366).
Since you have expressed such an abiding concern for the facts of history, I
thought you'd like to know that your assertion was dead wrong. Not even close
to the facts.
Dov 258:
Termy has ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government) confused with (as noted above)
the ZOB, Zhydowska Organizacja Bojowa - the Jewish Fighting Organization.
Rungu 267:
Raven made reference to "bloodthirsty Zionists" in 15/4, message
767, 6 days ago, in the course of his claim that the Allies were worse than
the Nazis; the deaths of innocents was, in his words, "the fault of FDR,
Churchill, and bloodthirsty Zionists who would be satisfied with nothing less
... even at the expense of European Jewry, who were used as pawns in a
disgusting game of international power politics." [ellipsis in original]
As for your reference to Brenner's book, I am flabbergasted. You have
previously claimed that it is impossible to trust any documents coming from
"communists." You have expressed your admiration for measures taken by the
Nazis against "communists." You have charged, specifically, Jewish
"communists" with genocidal murder. And now you come and present as a
reliable source a book which is not only written by a Jewish "communist"
(actually, Trotskyist) but claims that "Hitler was systematically killing
Jews" (p.230)?!?!? You certainly seem to have an elastic standard of
credibility.....
Neil Schulman 329:
Re: "When was the last time you saw a Jewish writer in this country complain
about Israeli treatment of the Palestinians?"
Are you serious? There is a broad range of American Jews who oppose the
occupation of the West Bank and Gaza - opposed it even before the intifada
(for example, both the AJ Congress and AJ Committee passed resolutions calling
for an end to the occupation and an exchange of land for peace in the summer
of 1987). Among writers, I can think off the top of my head of Arthur
Hertzberg, Leonard Fein, Letty Cottin Pogrebin, Irena Klepfisz, Melanie
Kaye/Kantrowitz, Norman Birnbaum, Michael Lerner, Michael Walzer and David
Biale - and, as I say, that's off the top of my head. Oh, and Woody Allen.
You appear to be completely ignorant - as, of course, does Raven, who made
comments in re Jews and Palestinians in this topic much, much earlier -
whereof you speak.
The statement of yours "phrased as a collectivist charge against the Jews" was
in your # 139 of Sunday:
"Jews must come to terms with the fact that our own bigotry is one of the
causes for anti-Semitism."
Not only is "Jews" not modified by "many," or "some," or any other "specific"
or "statistical" qualifier, but the entire statement is a classic example of
blaming the victim.
It was I, BTW, who wrote to Dov describing your writing here on GEnie (not
professionally; I've never read any of your commercial work) as that of one
who wishes to play the enfant terrible, a rather apt characterization, if I
say so myself. You hold others - though not, it seems, G.Raven and M.Rungu -
to a far higher standard of truth than you are pleased to observe yourself.
Termy 350:
Yes, indeed.
"Message 699 Tue Mar 24, 1992
M.RUNGU at 06:15 EST
...Berlin alone had some 50,000 Jews still living there, free, to the great
surprise and embarrassment of the holocaust-legend..."
That is but one of the many points which Raven and Rungu have been asked to
elaborate upon but have failed to do so.
Pooh.Bah:
Are you familiar with the debate regarding recent writings by the German
historians Nolte, Hillgruber, etc.? I was reminded of it recently, and was
struck by the fact that even though these historians seek to explain (and, to
some extent, justify) Hitler's actions, they do not dispute the existence of
the Shoah. Are there Holocaust revisionists in Germany?
------------
Home ·
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Search
Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.