Article 0296, Allen Andrew

Dear Mr. Van Alstine:
I repeat that I am talking about roof of Leichenhalle 1
Crema II. Although there is a hole in the ground at the site of the
alleged gaschamber there is something in the hole.
I had hoped that J. Morris would make a clear response to my request
for confirmation what is there. All readers of this thread should rely on
Pressac. Please refer to Pressac Technique & Operation at page 354. This
will confirm for you, Mr. Van Alstine, that there is a concrete roof
collasped into the hole. Once you have satisfied yourself that I
am correct in this matter, I invite you to proceed with our discussion.
The construction of the roof should be of interest to both
Exterminationists and Revisionists.

Lies written in ink can never disguise facts written in concrete. F.L.

From [email protected] Sat Feb 17 09:45:27 PST 1996
Article: 23864 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!
news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!uniserve!news.sol.net!daily-planet.execpc.com!
homer.alpha.net!uwm.edu!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!
newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars…
Date: 16 Feb 1996 11:07:16 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
Reply-To: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

From [email protected] Sat Feb 17 09:47:01 PST 1996
Article: 23842 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!
imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!
news.mindlink.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news
From: [email protected] (John Morris)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars…
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 06:33:14 GMT
Organization: University of Alberta
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: async15-15.remote.ualberta.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(John Morris) wrote:

>> [email protected] (Ceacaa) wrote:
>>
>> >Dear Mr. Van Alstine:
>> > Thank you for your detailed response. I will track down
>> >your cites. I note that I was not writing about Crema I
>> >but about Crema II and III. The question is the lack of
>> >any fittings to hold pillars in place (either on the floor
>> >or in the roof) and the ad hoc nature of the “vents”, ie.
>> >crudely chipped with the re-bar still in place.
>>
>> So far I have found your description far too vague in terms of which
>> Krema still has its roof mostly intact though collapsed. In which
>> roof, II or III, are the crudely chipped in holes still visible?
>>

>Mr. Morris,

>I believe Ceacaa has stated that the Kremas in question are, in fact
>Kremas II and III. Below is an excerpt from my reply to the article where
>he mentions this:

>===============================================================================
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Ceacaa) wrote:

>> Dear Mazal Over Board Exterminationist:
>>
>> We are sorry that it would take you “many a merry hour” to
>> make a reconstruction of our initials. We had hoped for (although
>> not expected) some small show of wit from you rather than your
>> usual ad hominem stupidities.

>> Of course you totally miss the point of our comment. You
>> do not have to believe our description of the so-called
>> “vents” in the ceiling of Leichenhalle 1 Cremas II and III.
>> The holes still exist and can be viewed. What was there can
>> be sussed out from what is there now.

>Again, I feel compelled to point out that you claim to have seen firsthand
>these vent holes in the ceiling of the gas-chamber in Krema II. I find
>this interesting in that, according to a photgraph in _Auschwitz: a
>history in photograp[hs_, the gas-chamber of Krema II is nothing more than
>an open pit in the ground filled with the ruins of the structure and
>weeds. There is no ceiling to the gas-chamber, and thus no vent holes to
>see.

This really perplexes me. In the Nova television presentation
“Designers of Death,” Prof. Van Pelt is seen standing in the remains
of the gas chamber at Krema II, and it is as you describe: a pit full
of weeds and little else besides bits of foundation walls.

Messrs. Raven and Ceacaa claim to have seen otherwise. I am assured by
more reliable people in private e-mail that portions of one of the gas
chamber cielings is still largely intact. But it cannot be Krema II
unless my eyes deceive me. That is why I asked Ceacaa to specify which
cieling was still intact. He now specifies L.Keller I at Krema II
which was the gas chamber.

So I am still quite perplexed.

Nevertheless, the claim that the gas chamber cieling at either of
Krema II or III should have crudely chipped in holes for the grillwork
induction columns is consistent with what Prof. Van Pelt has
discovered about the series of decisions leading to the use of
L.Keller I as a gas chamber. It was originally planned to use the
L.Keller as a morgue just as its name suggests, and there was thus no
need to have made allowances for the induction columns. Instead, the
roof had one ventilation hole consistent with the needs of an ordinary
morgue.

As the inefficiency of transporting the bodies of the victims from
Bunker I became more apparent, the L.Keller was redeployed as a gas
chamber. Only then did it become necessary to cut holes into the
cieling for the induction columns. However crudely made these holes
may have been, it would be a fairly simple matter to seal them well
enough to prevent significant quantities of HCN from escaping through
the roof.

Mr. Ceacaa’s objection that the holes were cut into the roof by the
Soviets is thus far unsupported by any evidence. It is simply another
convenient way of displacing inconvenient evidence. One might almost
call it a “deus ex machina” method of adducing evidence.


John Morris
at University of Alberta
————————————————————————
The Nizkor Project: An Electronic Holocaust Resource
File archives – ftp://ftp.almanac.bc.ca
Web page – http://nizkor.almanac.bc.ca

From [email protected] Mon Feb 19 08:36:44 PST 1996
Article: 24100 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!
imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!
news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars…
Date: 18 Feb 1996 22:16:50 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
Reply-To: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Dear Group:
This comment is on the thread of the “porous
pillars” however, Mark Van Alstein wrote that:
Kremas IV and V, having above ground gas-chambers,
on the relied natural draft generated
when the gas-chamber doors, which opened to the
outside, were opened to ventilate them.
This theory of ventilation is impossible as anyone who
has visited the ruins of KIV or KV knows. Only one of the
several rooms alleged to have been a gas chamber in K V
had an outside door. If one had relied on “natural drafts”
to clear the air of the gaschambers, you would have gassed
the whole building. For reference see Pressac pg. 391 Document
14

From [email protected] Thu Feb 22 12:12:48 PST 1996
Article: 24516 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!
imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!
news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars…
Date: 22 Feb 1996 01:19:43 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
Reply-To: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Dear Group
Mark Van Alstine writes, ” Hmm. I do believe, Ceacaa, that you are a
bit mistaken here. Unsuprising, considering you claims about the Krema
II.”

My claims (actually statements of the Absolute Truth) about the
Krema II consist solely of a discussion of the
roof of Leichenkeller 1, ie. what was there in May 1944 and is there
now, claims that Pressac and (apparently) J. Morris agree with.

But, Mr. Van Alstine, let’s take this one step at a time.
Do you agree that the roof of Leichenkeller 1 of Krematorium II,
Birkenau was made of a poured in place concrete slab with
wooden forms?

From [email protected] Thu Feb 22 23:06:39 PST 1996
Article: 24638 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!
news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!
news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ceacaa’s eerie silence was (Re: Pellets, shower, porous pi
Date: 23 Feb 1996 00:04:03 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Dear Gord McFee,
Our silence was due to ski week, members of the collective
hit the slopes, please see our response in “pellets, shower, porous
pillars. Of course, the issue is what was on the roof in 1944 and
what is presently on the roof of L 1 KII. Since most of the
exterminationist “experts” don’t seem to know what is there
now this discussion is moving rather slowly. It is hoped that
you and M VS will consult your Pressac and J. Morris and get up
to speed on this.

From [email protected] Fri Feb 23 07:11:49 PST 1996
Article: 24638 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!
imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!
newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ceacaa’s eerie silence was (Re: Pellets, shower, porous pi
Date: 23 Feb 1996 00:04:03 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Dear Gord McFee,
Our silence was due to ski week, members of the collective
hit the slopes, please see our response in “pellets, shower, porous
pillars. Of course, the issue is what was on the roof in 1944 and
what is presently on the roof of L 1 KII. Since most of the
exterminationist “experts” don’t seem to know what is there
now this discussion is moving rather slowly. It is hoped that
you and M VS will consult your Pressac and J. Morris and get up
to speed on this.

From [email protected] Mon Feb 26 22:50:33 PST 1996
Article: 25228 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!
imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!
news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ceacaa’s eerie silence was (Re: Pellets, shower, porou
Date: 26 Feb 1996 23:39:40 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <4gu1uc[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected] (Ceacaa)

To readers of this thread:
You all should know that Gord McFee is
known as the Don Rickles of the Exterminationists
(only without the humor). If you are interested in
an attempt at a serious discussion go back
to “Pellets, shower, porous columns”

From [email protected] Wed Feb 28 06:58:05 PST 1996
Article: 25411 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!
imci2!imci3!imci4!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!
news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!
newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘porous pillar’
Date: 28 Feb 1996 01:14:50 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
Reply-To: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Daniel Keren writes:
“The current status of the ceiling has nearly zero relevance to
this question.”
It seems here that D. Keren is now making a tacit admission
that the roof of Leichenhalle 1 of Crema II does still exist and
is made of poured in place concrete with re-bar. Bravo Daniel!

Poured in place concrete is a particularly immutable form
of construction and allows one to deduce the order of construction.
The roof, as it exists now, is the best evidence of what the roof
was like 52 years ago. Remember,
Lies written in ink can never disguise facts written in concrete.

“The “porous pillar” was a wiremesh introduction
device for the Zyklon. It could have simply been removed.”

Perhaps, but if it were attached either at the top (ceiling
or roof) and/or floor there would be bolt holes or clamps.

But before we go on too far, let us discuss the number of holes
that are on the roof today. I say that there are only three.
Most Exterminationists say there are 4. They are wrong.

Daniel, do you think that perhaps the Germans removed one of
the holes and took it back to Berlin with them or do you
agree that there are now just three holes on the roof?

Once you learn the correct number of holes, we should move on
to the condition of the holes. By then you might see some
relevance in the present “status” of the roof.

-Lu Xun.

From [email protected] Wed Feb 28 06:58:07 PST 1996
Article: 25418 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!
news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!
news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘porous pillar’
Date: 28 Feb 1996 01:59:31 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 98
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected] (Ceacaa)

My goodness John Morris pops up too and writes:
But I have yet to see a photograph that shows the entire roof,
or a series of photographs that shows all the sections of roof. I am still
looking for such a photograph, and in the meantime, I am witholding
judgment.
(Good John, keep an open and skeptical mind. Some day you
might even become a Revisionist. Go look at Pressac at 265 for some
photographs or buy the David McCalden tape “Escape from Auschwitz”.)

John goes on to write:

There are any number of reasons why the holes would have been cut
after construction. (Such as they were part not of the original plan
or needed at the time of construction in Feb-March 1943)

It could have been that the Nazis kept the homocidal purpose of
the chamber from the construction engineers. (This is absurd,
the drawings were completed on 8/5/42 by SS Sergeant Ulmer,
Checked on 8/5/42 by SS Second Lieutenant Dajaco and SS
Sergeant Ertl, and final approved on 8/5/42 by SS
Captain Bischoff. These SS men were all part of the Auschwitz
staff.

It could have been an oversight. (Maybe they forgot the doors too!
Don’t forget the Myth is that Crema II was the result of Hoes’s
visit to Treblinka to learn the “best techniques”. He also
practiced at Crema I in the main camp. If Hoes’s confession
is true then the failure to put in the necessary vent holes
cannot have been an oversight.

It could have been that they realized that throwing Zyklon B
through the door was not very effective. (Especially if it was in
the basement of the building)

It could have been that they realized that throwing Zyklon B
through the ceiling vent was not very effective. (No John, the ceiling
vents were put in _after_ the ceiling was built)

It could have been that the wire mesh induction columns were an
afterthought. (This might be true but it does not address the
lack of attachment points of roof or floor.)

But the absence of direct proof about *why* the SS did things the way
they did is not proof that they did not do things.

In addition, we have only the word of a denier named Ceacaa who
*says* he visited Birkenau and who *says* the roof is intact and
who *says* that he found only two crudely cut holes. For all
anyone knows, Ceacaa simply read the descriptions by the deniers
David Cole and Fred Leuchter. (Mr. Morris, don’t you believe
eyewitness testimony. Actually, I said there are three holes,
two I could wiggle through and one too small to enter.

But still, I have to ask, why any holes at all would have been
cut into the roof? The deniers assert that the Poles or the
Russians cut the holes, but they offer no proof of that
assertion, and I am afraid that the claim that something must
have been forged or faked by the Soviets is used far too often
with inconvenient evidence to have any credibility at all. Some
might even call it a “deus ex machina” kind of argument. Indeed,
if the Russians did fake the holes, why didn’t they do a better
job of it? If they were trying to make the physical site match
the story, why didn’t they cut nice clean holes to match the
dimensions of the induction columns?
(I don’t assert that the Soviets cut the holes in the roof. This is
a straw argument. I am limiting my point to the clear evidence
of the existing state of the roof. There were no more than three
vents: They were put in after the original pour ie. January 1943:
The re-bar is still attached but cut in one place and bent out of
the way: there are no attachment fixtures or holes for attachments
around the holes)

For that matter, why were so many witnesses tortured into saying
that there were induction columns, and why were documents forged
to show how the induction columns ought to be made? If the
forgers were so good at making up such a convincing story with
such a finely-grained level of verisimiltude, why did they not
simply forge an order from Hitler for the extermination of the
Jews? Deniers have been convinced by much less sophisticated
forgeries such as the Lachout document.

Please, the term is Revisionist. “Deniers” is a vulgar term created
by those persons who cannot carry a discussion on facts. My point
is that the best evidence of what was there in 1943 is what is there
now.
Lies written in ink cannot disguise facts written in concrete F.L.


John Morris
at University of Alberta
————————————————————————
The Nizkor Project: An Electronic Holocaust Resource
File archives – ftp://ftp.almanac.bc.ca
Web page – http://nizkor.almanac.bc.ca

From [email protected] Thu Feb 29 06:36:44 PST 1996
Article: 25530 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!
news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!
newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Ceacaa)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ceacaa’s eerie silence was (Re: Pellets, shower, porou
Date: 29 Feb 1996 02:21:54 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected] (Ceacaa)

Inane!? I thought my comments were as incisive as Holms (Sherlock)
and as penetrating as Holms (Larry).