Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day010.16
Last-Modified: 2000/07/20
MR IRVING: Each time, right?
A. Each time, and all the 30 dwelling barracks in Auschwitz
would take 360 and 600 kilos of Zyklon-B. Then there were
also workshop storage barracks, and they would have taken
240 to 400 kilos, which means that the complete delousing
of the camp (and we are now talking about Auschwitz 1 and
Auschwitz 2) would have taken between 1750 and 2,900 kilos.
Now, on the basis of this comparison with these
other camps, I had established that an amount of 9,000
kilos for Zyklon-B for Auschwitz in 1943 would have been
within the kind of range of the possible. It would be the
high end, but I would not have been surprised to see so much.
This means that if we take that 9,000 as a kind
of bench mark of what a normal -- Auschwitz under normal
conditions would have used, then we can have at least two
. P-134
complete delousing of all the barracks in the camp in
1943.
Now, I take two eyewitness testimonies which is
one from Helen Zipitehau who was in the women's camp from
-- a Slovac Jew -- 1942 until the liberation in 1945.
She remembered three our four of these large delousings of
the whole women's camp in her two-and-a-half year stay.
Then Dr Ziegsmund Bendel in the Tesch trial declared that
he has only one delousing of the barracks during his 13
month stay in Auschwitz. This is the kind of
practical
information we have about how many times. I mean, I
do
not have any more information on that.
It seems then that the 1750 to 2,000 -- that
this let us say two or three, maybe two delousings in
1943
of the whole camp would still bring us below the 9,000
kilos of Zyklon used after all the gas chambers have
been
working every day, the delousing gas chambers, and
basically we have had the delousing of the blocks.
I must make one kind of -- a particular
thing must be noted, that if in the German document
sometimes there is talking about the "Entlausung des
Blocks", it means that the people in the block are
going
to be taken to be deloused. There is particular
things.
It says that block 11 was "entlaust" which means
everyone
was taken to be BW5A, the delousing building in the
women's camp, or so on.
. P-135
This means then when we go to page 29 that I
say
that 9,000 given these two, these very infrequent
delousings of the whole camp, that those 9,000 kilos
of
Zyklon-B which I originally established on the basis
of
comparison with other camps seems to be on the high
side
but within the ball park of what Auschwitz would have
needed for its normal concentration camp purposes.
So then the question is, what are these
other
3,000 kilos of Zyklon-B going to be used for? What
other
kind of needs did Auschwitz have for Zyklon-B which
were
not to be found in other concentration camps?
MR JUSTICE GRAY: That, I think, probably completes your
answer. It is a long answer, but it was very helpful
and
very clear to me. So back to Mr Irving.
MR IRVING: My first question is you have, of course, read,
have you not, the testimony and supporting evidence in
the
trial of Bruno Tesch whose company was the main
distributor East of the Elf for Zyklon-B?
A. I told you before that I have read parts of the trial
and
part of testimony. In detail, they are the testimony
of
Alfred Zamm.
Q. This question is not meant to be the least bit
offensive,
but you are not an expert in disinfestation, are you?
A. No, I am not.
Q. The company of Tesch and Stavanacht were, in fact, the
leading disinfestation experts in the whole of Europe
. P-136
which is why their Managing Director found himself on
the
end of a British rope in 1946?
A. I do not think that is why he found himself on the
rope,
but they were the leading firm, yes. They developed
the
procedure.
Q. The record of the trial shows that both he and his
fellow
convict, Weinbarer, repeatedly visited these camps and
checked what was going on and trained the local staff
in
the proper application and use of these pesticides and
fumigating agents, these materials, is that not right?
A. I remember that in the transcript of what I read that,
indeed, there is a mention of these visits, but I
would
not comment in detail since I do not have them in
front of
me.
Q. Is it not right that during the trial, which is
recorded
verbatim -- it is in the Public Record Office, in fact
--
the accountant of the company was required to produce
the
records on which you have partially based your
calculations showing precisely what the deliveries of
Zyklon-B to Auschwitz were during the years concerned
for
precisely the same exercise that we have been doing in
court today?
A. That exercise has not been done.
Q. In the Tesch trial?
A. At the trial, at the trial they did not do this
exercise.
Q. Have you read the letters of clemency that were
submitted
. P-137
to the court after the death sentences were passed?
A. I have not.
Q. Yes. Well, then we are in a difficulty. Will you
take it
Bruno Tesch, the Managing Director, when confronted
with
the figures of Zyklon-B delivered to the Auschwitz
camp,
and doing the calculation of how many sets of clothing
had
had to be fumigated on a regular interval, on a
regular
basis, and how many barrack buildings had had to be
fumigated and disinfested, expressed astonishment that
they managed to do the task with as little as 12
tonnes in
that one year concerned? He said that on these
figures
they would have had nothing left whatsoever for any
kind
of sinister purposes, and that this is very clearly
stated
in the trial and in appeals for clemency?
A. I cannot comment on what Mr Tesch said. What I can
comment on is the fact that the amount of Zyklon being
delivered to other camps was so much smaller than
Auschwitz that I think this is a more interesting road
to
pursue.
Q. That was, of course, the point of my interruption
which
his Lordship quite properly reproved me for, when
I pointed out that Auschwitz was receiving very large
quantities of pesticide for a certain reason which you
set
out so admirably in your first book, namely, that
Auschwitz had been built in the middle of an area
which
had traditionally over the centuries attracted typhus
. P-138
plagues, and it was the heart of a terrible typhus
plague
in 1942?
A. I do remember what is in my book without actually
having
to consult it. I never say anywhere in the book that
Auschwitz was a place which was suffering typhus
plagues.
I only mentioned the issue of climate actually in the
discussion of an introduction of Jan Sehn to his
report on
Auschwitz where Jan Sehn makes a very big point of it,
and
where I say actually I disagree because Jan Sehn in
some
way tries to create a context of unhealthiness for the
place as if the Germans had chosen Auschwitz with this
in
mind. I say this, obviously, is not supported by
historical evidence.
Q. Had Auschwitz ever been used as a disinfestation
centre
for transients in previous generations or before the
Nazis
came? Had they used it -- it was right on the border
of
the Austro-Hungarian Empire, was it not?
A. Yes. This is part of my research in the past has been
actually on the origin of the camp, and the Sturmlager
was
originally created as a labour exchange.
Q. Yes. It had all the appropriate installations there
for
fumigating the transients, did it not?
A. They had no installations whatsoever for the
fumigation of
transients.
Q. Not for preparing them in this manner?
A. I mean, one of the big problems was, of course, that
. P-139
Zyklon did not exist at the time, at the time that
when
the camp functioned there were also no steam
installations
or hot air installations.
Q. Have I read your book entirely wrongly then when you
suggest that the transients were held in Auschwitz for
a
while and subjected to appropriate measures to make
sure
they were fit for travelling into a cleaner part of
Europe?
A. I have -- I think you are confusing two things. I can
see
where the confusion comes from. There is one quote I
make
a general, in the book, a general kind of description
of
the movement of Eastern European Jews who go to
America
and who cross the border and at a certain moment are
going
to be -- their clothing is going to be deloused one
way or
another. It does not say what way it is. It is an
account of a girl called Mary Anton who panics ----
Q. I remember this, yes?
A. --- at this thing, so that is the one account which is
there. The second account is about the use of ----
Q. Because they are taken off the train and sent in to be
washed, am I right?
A. Yes, and she gets very nervous about that.
Q. She says, "Oh, my God, they are going to gas us"?
A. No, "to kill us", not "gas us"; and those facilities
existed, some of them at the border and also they
existed
in the harbours of Bremen and Hamburg.
. P-140
Q. When was that? Roughly what year was that?
A. This was 1880s, 1890s.
Q. So it has been a problem over the decades, there has
been
a problem in that region?
A. I mean, the German ----
Q. It is a very swampy region, is it?
A. No, I mean, but this was happening all over the East,
that
people who were, that Jews, migrants who were leaving
the
Russian Empire were subjected to German hygienic
measures
as they crossed the border or came into the harbours
of
Bremen and Hamburg where they were placed in
quarantine.
There were special areas of the harbour where these
Jews
were quarantined. There were these kinds of
installations. However, Auschwitz was slightly
different
because while Auschwitz, at the one side, had these
transmigrants who went over the border there, because
it
was a border town, the camp was not created with that
in
mind. The camp was created, the Sturmlager was
created to
very specifically house transmigrant workers who all
converged on Auschwitz in March and April of every
year
looking for seasonal work in Germany. There were only
three little hotels in the town, and the hotels said
these
people were living on the street, and there were 10 or
15,000 people living on the street.
So, the Austrian Government decided to
create a
centre at the border where these people could be
housed
. P-141
and where then also German agents for the various
employment opportunities, like the Jungkris(?) in the
estates, could come, send people on and then the most
important function there was to actually check if all
the
young men had done their military service and were
allowed
to leave the country.
Q. And that was Auschwitz, right?
A. That was in Auschwitz.
Q. Yes. Just to round off this topic of the Zyklon
consumption figures, you have done very interesting
calculations, and I have to admit they are admirably
done,
the calculations. You arrive overall at the end of
these
very lengthy and complicated calculations at a
probable
consumption of nine tonnes?
A. Nine tonnes in the camp in 1943, yes.
Q. As opposed to the 12 tonnes that we know to have been
delivered. Is this a meaningful difference, in your
view,
in view of the fact that you are totally inexperienced
in
pest control?
A. I invite other people to redo the calculations again.
I thought that, as far as an historian, I must say
that
using the maximum delousing capacity of the camp and
the
maximum -- and how much it will take on the basis of
German documents to delouse the whole camp ----
Q. Does it make any allowance for inefficiencies of any
measures anywhere? Does it make your usual engineer's
. P-142
allowance for inefficiencies somewhere or mistakes?
A. I think that I have made a very generous assumption in
the
amount of Zyklon-B which was being used.
Q. Or for quantities being sent on to the satellite
camps?
These are things which you did not -- in my
submission,
there is no significant difference statistically over
that
range of calculations and figures and, given the
uncertainty of the starting points between nine tonnes
and
12 tonnes, on the one hand, is that correct?
A. Nine tonnes can be justified, but it is a very high
number
because I am assuming two complete delousings of the
camp,
of all the buildings in the camp, per year.
Q. If you had assumed three, of course, you would have
come
over 12 tonnes, would you not?
A. No, I would come over nine tonnes.
Q. Yes. You said you were just assuming two?
A. Not over 12 tonnes. But at a certain moment the
question
is how many delousings of the whole camp were
operated.
Q. We just have two eyewitnesses, is this correct, who
suggests that -- one of them was one of the
eyewitnesses
to whom, I have to say, I attach little credence and
the
other one I may or may not be correct in saying she
only
records three or four, is that correct, in the time --
--
A. During her whole time in the camp.
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.