------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1712991-#Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714801 From: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 To: BryPuppy 103275,1030 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 26-Jan-96 21:59:30 BryPuppy: I'd like to exit the subject of "beliefs" and move onto something more concrete. I hope you don't mind. I have before me two sketches of an alleged "gas chamber-crematoria" death factory. The first one I am going to "draw"
is the one as composed by Rudolf Vrba (formerly Walter Rosenberg) which appears in the infamous War Refugee Board report. Verba (Rosenberg) claims to have "witnessed" "gassings" of which we can examine in due time. At the Zundel Trial of 1985, Vrba (Rosenberg) testified that he was the author of the plan. ____________________ ! ! !___________ ! "A" ! "B" ! "C" ! ! ! !___________! !__________!_________ ! In this sketch "A" is the furnace room. "B" is a large hall. "C" is a "gas chamber. This next "drawing" (I've never tried this before ) is one as constructed by a man named Jean Claude Pressac author of the book, "Auschwitz: Operation and Technique of the Gas Chambers" published by the Beate Klasfeld Foundation. Here it is: _____ ! ! ! "D" ! ! ! !_____! __________ _______ ___________ ! "C" ! ! ! ! "B" ! !__________! ! ! !___________! ! "A" ! ! ! !______ ! Now: "A" is the furnace room. "B" is the waiting room. "C" is the "gas chamber" and "D" is "Halle d'attente en sous-sol" (I don't understand French, but I think it may mean an underground hall. At this point, its not important. We'll get to it in due time.) What you have here is two "experts" describing the same crematory! Pressac goes on to "revise" his drawing a just a bit to describe some minor additions that were supposedly added later (an elevator and a narrow-gage railway). The absurd contradictions are obvious. So who are we to trust? Which one is "correct" in his drawing? We can probe into how each of these "experts" constructed their drawings and expose them for the mistruths they are, but why don't you pick one and we'll start with it. Once we are done with our examinations, the unbiased individual may well experience sickness to finally realize innocent Germans were executed according to the myth surrounding these "death factories." Cliff There is 1 Reply. ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1713095-#Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714807 From: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 To: Sysop Alex Krislov 76703,243 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 26-Jan-96 22:00:13 Alex: CGS>> " One of the Jewish participants involved in beating a confession out of Hoess confessed (braggingly) about the campaign some years later."<< >>Oh, I see. When it suits your purpose, ONE alleged witness or participant is "evidence." But when thousands of witnesses to an event exist, you call their testimony "latrine gossip."<< It depends on the credibility of the one witness verses the unsubstantiations, falsehoods, contradictions, etc., of the masses. The "thousands of witnesses" you speak of don't corroborate with each other. Certainly the damaging testimony by "eyewitnesses" that appear in the War Refugee Board reports, etc., destroy their own credibility. Would you like an example? >>Of course, there is copious forensic evidence. There are real examinations of the actual crema materials, done right after the war (as opposed to Leuchter's inept "anaylsis," done without care for which stones were part of the crema and which were not). There are documents showing how the chambers were built.<< What forensic examinations were performed at these sites by anyone other than the communists "right after the war?" The hogwash Auschwitz Museum wasn't even "prepared for the public" until the late 1950's. The communists wouldn't even let individuals from the West on site. The three forensic examinations that have been conducted at the site corroborate each other and all examiners have concluded NO gassings ever took place there. Explain that. >>There are confessions by the principles.<< This is true. We also have piles of "confessions" from warlocks and witches. These "confessions" prove nothing. Due to the fact that the courts at the IMT and the Auschwitz Trial took judicial notice of the holocaust the defendants were left with no other methods of defense other than to sign confessions, deny direct involvement, following German directives, etc., in hopes of saving their hide. Much like the confessions of witches who claimed to have copulated with Satan, the confessions of Nazi "war criminals", as concerns the holocaust, can not be substantiated and are blatantly obtuse to scientific and engineering realities. >>By the way, I remind you that your claim about vergasunskeller has already been addressed. Are you going to reply, or just repeat a lie over and over again?<< What's to discuss? Vergasungskeller = carburation cellar. Gaskammer = gas chamber. The term "Gaskammer" appears in NOT ONE DOCUMENT. Cliff There are 2 Replies. ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1714807-Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714948 From: Sysop Alex Krislov 76703,243 To: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 27-Jan-96 04:05:08 Cliff, UNH-uh. Faurisson is the only person who puts forth vergasungkeller as a name for a gasification chamber for the initial firing of the crematoria. And since the chambers were COKE-fired, his translation is patently special pleading, an attempt to rewrite the language to get out of a tight spot. That is one of the items you simply ignored before, Cliff. As you ignore everything that doesn't suit you. You also ignored the fact that he didn't argue for "gassification chamber" when he tries to claim that gas chambers were use for "disinfection" of clothes. Gee, Cliff, do you think the Nazis disinfected clothes by gassifying them? No, Faurisson's "translations" are like all matters that fall into his topsy-turvy world: not only false, but shifting depending on which fabrication he's advancing. As to the witnesses, it's remarkable how deniers always try to compare the eyewitness testimony of thousands --which are largely consistent with each other, no matter how often you lie about it-- to that of "witches," etc., even though the latter usually WAS coerced. Your "one witness" isn't credible, Cliff. And neither is your pretense that thousands of witnesses who corroborate each other aren't credible. --Alex ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1714807-Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714952 From: Sysop Alex Krislov 76703,243 To: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 27-Jan-96 04:05:23 Cliff, Now let's take a look again at some of the material you've ignored--just material from me, mind you! That you've ignored the substantial contributions of others here is easily seen by anyone who has followed your latest evasions of actual debate. You claimed that four million were supposedly gassed. I pointed out the real source of the number four million. You ignored it. AND YOU KNEW THE ANSWER FROM PREVIOUS DEBATES. You claimed that no Jews were sent to concentration camps before the war. We have discussed Dachau in the past, Cliff. SO AGAIN YOU KNEW WHAT YOU WERE POSTING WAS A LIE. And you ignored the facts again. You provided a quotation utterly without context, about hating Germans. You were asked who said it and when. You ignored that request. Now you're putting that forth as an example of others hating. But we STILL don't know the context or your source. Is this another of your Prenatis-style "authorities," where you post lies, but refuse to let them be examined? You claimed the Talmud was "a ridiculous fiction." In the past you have posted ridiculous, hate-filled false translations of the Talmud. You've had the reality behind those passages pointed out time and again, and time and again you've refused to even check the source material. Again, you preferred to post material YOU KNEW WAS A LIE. Why, Cliff, if you're interested in "the truth" are you unwilling to discuss the very material you post? --Alex ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1713096-Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714804 From: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 To: Sysop Alex Krislov 76703,243 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 26-Jan-96 21:59:44 Alex: >>Ah, the old standby: they're all lying! All of them! You put forward one estimate from an American academic to "prove" how many Jews were in Europe before the Nazi slaughter--and reject, with slimy words, the thousands of eyewitnesses to events you pretend not to believe in. In short, you pick the items that suit your lie...and, often enough, lie about them. I've noticed you're not answering my messages lately, Cliff. I remind you this is a discussion forum. If you're going to put notions forward, you are obliged to discuss them.<< Reread your text in this post. All you have done is make accusations and hateful comments. What's to discuss? Perhaps you might find my discussion with BryPuppy on the "gas chambers" and crematoria at Auschwitz-Birkenau of interest? Why not join us? Cliff ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1712852-Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714805 From: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 To: Charlie 75301,1255 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 26-Jan-96 21:59:57 CGS>>The Hoess affidavit was extorted as one of his torturers has admitted.<< >>Did you find this out AFTER your attempts to discredit Hoess were laughed out of the Political Debate Forum?<< I learned the specific details after the discussions you mention. Who is this confessed torturer? Höss was tortured by the British soldiers of the 92nd Field Security Section. Confirmation has come with the publication in England of a book containing the name of the principal torturer (a British sergeant of Jewish origin) and a description of the circumstances of Höss's arrest, as well as his third-degree interrogation. The book is by Rupert Butler. It was published in 1983 (Hamlyn Paperbacks). Butler is the author of three other works: The Black Angels, Hand of Steel and Gestapo, all published by Hamlyn. The book that interests us is entitled Legions of Death. Its inspiration is ant-Nazi. Butler says that he researched this book at the Imperial War Museum in London, the Institute for Contemporary History and Wiener Library, and other such prestigious institutions. At the beginning of his book, he expresses his gratitude to these institutions and, among others, to two persons, one of whom is Bernard Clarke ("who captured Auschwitz Commandant Rudolf Höss"). The author quotes several fragments of what are either written or recorded statements by Clarke. Bernard Clarke shows no remorse. On the contrary, he exhibits a certain pride in having tortured a "Nazi." Rupert Butler, likewise, finds nothing to criticize in that. Neither of them understands the importance of their revelations. >>Where did he come from? To whom did he confess? What was the substance of his confession?<< >>How does the (made-up?) Hoess affadavit jibe with the genocide evidence at Auschwitz?<< An affidavit is testimonial evidence. To answer your question, not only does Hoess make contradictions to his own testimony but it conflicts with practically all the "eyewitness" testimony of "gassings" at Auschwitz-Birkenau. There remains no forensic, analytical or physical evidence substantiating the alleged holocaust. The myth hinges on testimony that is contradictory, extorted, hearsay and unsubstantiated. >>Before you say that there is no genocide evidence at Auschwitz, remember that I have several hundred unanswered questions left over from Political Debate Marginal Issues. Do you want to go all the way back to square one, debating the credibility of Bill Shirer and scurrying around trying to locate and discredit dozens of off-hand remarks made by Nazis, from Hitler to Hoess? I can still get my hands on pages of evidence you would have to go back and refute.<< Yes, I'd like to discuss those documents with you in detail. I'd entered here with that intent but have fallen under a barrage of messages that want to focus on ME instead of the documents themselves. I'm better prepared now to discuss them. Cliff ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1712857-#Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714806 From: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 To: Charlie 75301,1255 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 26-Jan-96 22:00:02 Charlie: >>I get emotional about the Holocaust and believe that it happened, but it's based on a more substantial factual, logical and historical foundation than anything else I believe.<< What evidence have you to offer besides testimony? >>The world is day by day becoming more convinced that the Holocaust happened, because new evidence comes to the public's attention every time guys like you start denying it.<< A pipedream. You know this isn't case, otherwise CompuServe would not have had to strike a deal with the German government to censor discussion of the holocaust in Germany. Laws forbidding denying of the holocaust would not be necessary if the "exterminationists" did not fear the truth. Cliff There is 1 Reply. ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1714806-Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714949 From: Sysop Alex Krislov 76703,243 To: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 27-Jan-96 04:05:10 Cliff, "You know this isn't case, otherwise CompuServe would not have had to strike a deal with the German government to censor discussion of the holocaust in Germany." What on earth are you talking about? I am aware of no such agreement. Are you thinking of the internet access to URLs with "Sex" in their titles? --Alex ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1713513-#Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714808 From: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 To: Charlie 75301,1255 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 26-Jan-96 22:00:20 Charlie: Here's a sample of some "eyewitness" testimony of which and Alex speak so highly and typical of what you consider "credible." Actually, "incredible" is much more appropriate. Sigismund Bendel, who claims to have belonged to the Sonderkommando at Auschwitz-Birkenau, treats us with the following "eyewitness" account of a cremation: "Thick, black smoke ascends from the pits. It all happens so quickly and is so unimaginable that I think I am dreaming........An hour later everything is back to normal. The men take the ashes out of the pits and make a pile." Charlie, you can't reduce a corpse to ashes in an open pit in one hour. Not even a modern crematory can do it in one hour! Now imagine a transport of Jews being burned, bones and all, into a pile of ashes in one hour in an open pit! As Bendel says, it is "unimaginable" because it is physically impossible! I'd like you to pick your most credible "eyewitness" as to how the "gas chambers" were designed actually operated. Toss in another that describes the interior of any of the crematoria. But be careful Cliff There is 1 Reply. ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1714808-Holocaust - Msg Number: 1714951 From: Sysop Alex Krislov 76703,243 To: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 27-Jan-96 04:05:16 Cliff, Same old thing--comparing ashes and oranges. You keep comparison a cold-start modern cremation, complete with a coffin, to multiple-baffled crema...or, in this case, to an open pit! You take terms that are obviously used differently in these different contexts and claim a one-to-one correspondance. And what a thin reed to deny the burning pits on! He said an hour. Did he mean it literally? We don't know. We DO know that all the witnessness agreed on the existence of those pits, and that hundreds testified that bodies were burnt in this fashion. So you pick out one tiny detail and yell, "See!? They're all lying!" Well, SOMEbody's lying here. I think we all know who. --Alex ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1717664-Holocaust - Msg Number: 1719664 From: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 To: Sysop Alex Krislov 76703,243 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 31-Jan-96 21:39:44 Alex: >>If Rosenberg only saw the exterior, I'd certainly assume Pressac's examine of the detailed plans and other documentation would be more reliable.<< But how could this be? Pressac's detailed plans were derived from Verba's (Rosenberg's) testimony! >>Of course, contrary to your fictions, Pressac's material has not be shown to be unreliable.<< Oh, but it has! The man must have been self-inducing some of those pills he counted (since he's a pharmacist) when he wrote the book. Merely one example here: Pressac claims that Wetzler and Verba (Rosenberg) did not observe the exterior of the crematoria beyond March, 1943. But Wetzler himself was a registrar at the camp mortuary at least until June 8, 1943! Also in the Verba and Wetzler report they stated: "AT PRESENT (my emphasis) there are four crematoria in operation at Birkenau......" Verba (Rosenberg) and Wetzler escaped from Birkenau on April 7, 1944 and composed their report a couple of weeks later! Verba and Wetzler were inmates at Birkenau for over a year from the time Pressac says they did not view the crematoria. So Pressac hasn't a clue about what he's writing. He refutes the "eyewitness" testimony, that you and others esteem so highly, and replaces it with his own warped illusions! This is just a small sample, want more? >>But it is typical that you seek to use one person's statement against another, while pretending that contradictions mean BOTH are wrong. This is a failure of logic, Cliff, and you know it. A proper consideration involves looking at both, including their source materials, and seeing which fits the facts.<< I'm simply pointing out that a man like Pressac writes a fiction, "Auschwitz: Operation and Technique of the Gas Chambers", a very suggestive title, when he in fact knows absolutely nothing about "gas chambers" and relies on "testimony" to concoct his tome apparently for the sake of propaganda and profit. He has been unequivocally discredited. The assumption here is that you would have opted for this Jew Rosenberg's (or Verba, or whoever, if he hasn't changed his name yet again) testimony over Pressac! Surely you knew Pressac derived his drawing based upon "eyewitness" testimony . Furthermore, I do believe both men are liars. And they do contradict each other. Not only that, Verba's (Rosenberg's) testimony as to the existence of "gas chambers" was derived from hearsay by his own admission. So give me some hard evidence for proof of these "gas chambers". I'm sick of hearsay testimony and books written by "experts" based upon hearsay. Got any engineering plans? Like the ones supposedly handed to this Wetzler fellow? Cliff ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1717834-Holocaust - Msg Number: 1719665 From: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 To: Mike Curtis 76711,3360 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 31-Jan-96 21:39:59 Mike: >>One describes the krema based upon technical engineering drawings (Pressac), while the other depends upon memory of hearsay.<< O.K.!!!!! Now we are getting somewhere! Just what "engineering drawings" did old Pressac use? I'd be very, very interested in this information. >> Who has "demolished" Pressac's work? Citations, please.<< Very well, but remember: I'd like that information on the "engineering drawings". Pressacs works have been demolished by Carlo Mattogno for one. Check it out. >>Which German officers were convicted on the basis of Vrba's testimony?<< Emil Hantl, Herbert Scherpe, Emil Bednarek (indirectly), Dr. Franz Bernhard Lucas, there are others of course. >>How many witnesses were called to testify? How many defendants denied the existence of the gas chambers (hint: none)?<< This has already been addressed. The "courts" had already taken Judicial Notice as to the validity of the holocaust. Much like the courts of yore, which acknowledged that witches existed, it was simply a matter of degree of guilt. Obviously the defendants were utilizing a defense that might get them a light sentence or one that showed no willing participation. >>Be specific - cite document and transcript numbers - if you want to move the discussion to Nuremberg.<< You do the same as to any physical, documentary or engineering feasibility evidence that "gas chambers" existed for the purposes of exterminating Jews. I'll show you mine if you show me yours. >>The book, which I have seen, was printed privately as a limited edition.<< Maybe you should try READING it. >>At about $110 a copy, it was hardly mass market material. Is the author here maintaining that the value of a printed work is dependent not upon the accuracy of its content, but upon the numbers printed? If so, Batman Comics must have greater historical value than any history text ever printed.<< Oh get down off your high horse! You know exactly what I mean. With all this Revisionism exposing your holocaust myth for the lie it is, one would assume that a book titled: "Auschwitz: Operation and Technique of the Gas Chambers" would be your "ace in the hole". Fact is its nothing more than fancy book, with a fancy title, packed full of contradictions, lies and propaganda and you well know it. Besides that, I can't believe someone would print a book so damn physically large! Was that to add to the illusion? >> As to Vrba, please show that he lied during Zundel's trial, or that his book contains blatant falsehoods.<< I've never read his book, yet. However, let it be know that this Verba (Rosenberg) didn't even come forward as one of the authors of the first two sections of the War Refugee Board report! The very report during the IMT's that propped up the holocaust myth. Can you imagine having testimony against you in a criminal trial in this manner? Where the accuser does not even have to testify against you! Just a piece of paper with an allegation is sufficient! If Verba did indeed author sections of the WRB he did not lie at the Zundel trial based on the excerpts I read. He admitted the whole idea about "gas chambers" was concocted on total hearsay. "Evidence" that is absolutely worthless as everyone knows now. But, during the IMTs, the courts took Judicial Notice on the holocaust based on false, hearsay testimony in the WRB report! Somebody is guilty of perjury or one must admit that the IMTs were showtrials attempting to send a political message in behalf of World Jewry. Cliff ------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: #1717665-Holocaust denial law - Msg Number: 1719663 From: Cliff G. Swiger 76053,707 To: Sysop Alex Krislov 76703,243 Forum: ISSUES Sec: 00-Staff Lounge Date: 31-Jan-96 21:39:32 Alex: >>As always, faced with the thousands of eyewitness accounts, you point out that eyewitness testimony is not always reliable. What you omit is that we're not talking about ONE witness, but several thousand, all of whom agree on the most important aspects of the testimony.<< I'm not going to permit you to lead me down a diversionary path over the subject of mass testimony. For our examination here I wanted to disregard testimony on either side of the issue unless it pertained specifically to the alleged "gas Chambers". But, what I was really fishing for was some document or specification sheet describing the construction of these "gas chambers". I would even like to read the testimony of ONE "holocaust eyewitness" who can lend some hint of credibility to this mythos. I opted for the testimony in the War Refugee report since it seems to be the most vindictive. Perhaps there is other testimony providing more detail. This is why I asked you to come up with your best "witness". This was some latitude I was giving you. I would rather examine something more concrete as posted above. Fact is, Alex, there is no other evidence than testimony. And simply because there is a mass of it proves absolutely nothing. Testimonial evidence should corroborate or bolster the physical evidence. So show me a picture of a pile of corpses, a crematorium, a can of Zyklon B and a concentration camp. Does this prove a Jew holocaust? Certainly not. I'm not saying the allegation of Jews on this matter shouldn't be investigated as they were. But grow up, Alex. Don't act so childish when I don't accept your assertion that the holocaust is reality simply due to mass testimony. Many people claim many things, like UFOs, but none have been substantiated. And don't create the illusion that each and every "holocaust eyewitness" testimony substantiates the other. Fact is such testimony is so far fetched and contradictory to others is does more to expose the holocaust for the myth it is! >>It is dishonest to pretend that no eyewitness testimony is reliable.<< I never said that ALL eyewitness testimony was unreliable. I simply said that the "eyewitness testimony" should corroborate more conclusive physical, analytical and documentary evidence. As concerns the "gas chambers", its these later three that I would like to see more of. But you continue to deride my request because I don't draw "Final Conclusions" from your suggestion that mass testimony represents established fact. >>You seek not to find the truth, but to invalidate all the evidence. That practice is the most dishonest of all. It is the hallmark of someone who seeks not to learn, but to erase.<< A poor attempt at suggestion here, Alex. I'm only challenging "testimonial" evidence. I'm simply asking for other more concrete proof to substantiate the mass testimony. Masses of folks will "testify" as to the existence of the particular god they believe in but conclusive evidence is sorely lacking to validate the claim. You know I've read a lot of "holocaust testimony". I simply asking for evidence in support. Cliff
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor