Table of content:
1.0 U.S Gas chambers, how it works
2.0 Auschwitz gas chambers
3.0 The gasing procedure
4.0 Ferro-cyanides traces
5.0 The stupidity of the method
6.0 Question related to the morgues
7.0 Leuchter dishonest?
1.0 US gas chambers
Zyklon B is not used in American gas chambers, mainly because it requires
too much time to drive the gas from the inert carrier. The method is to generate
the gas on site by chemical reactions of sodium cyanide and 18 % of sulphuric
acid. At the time of use, the HCN is already vaporised and is released through
valves into the gas chambers. The door is gasketed with a single pressure seal.
Because the chamber contains such a lethal gas, it is operated at a negative
pressure to guarantee that any leak would be inward. The pressurised system
also insures a quick evacuation of the gas through the top of the chamber and
an exhaust stack is normally require to avoid serious health problems around.
Walls are of welded steel construction or of plastic PVC. After an execution,
it is preferable to wash the walls carefully to avoid residual emissions. During
the execution, a mechanical system is required to distribute the gas quickly in
the chamber (1).
This technology has existed since the 1920s, but actually, it has been almost
abandoned since it’s a too complex and costly method. It’s also dangerous for
the executioners. The first considerations which led to this system was the
wrong belief that it could give a more ‘humane’ death, without pain, but later
it was establish that this was not true.
2.0 Auschwitz gas chambers
It’s sometimes difficult to describe the Auschwitz gas chambers: most of the
books on that topic talk about gas chambers without describing the mechanism
they were suppose to have used. There are very, very few photos of the alleged
gas chambers of Krema 2 and 3, even though the buildings are still there (but
not totally intact). Some eyewitness claimed that showers were used to introduce
Zyklon B (a gas lighter than the air) while others talked about SS men throwing
cans of Zyklon B into the chamber. Actually, there are roof vents on the top of
Krema 2 at Auschwitz, and the Auschwitz Museum claims they were there before
the Russians captured the camp. (The Communist authorities allowed any visitor
to come there after 1958). In this version, Zyklon B was poured from those roof
vents in a metallic wiremesh. However, Hoess, in his ‘memoirs’, describes it as
follows (2)
“The extermination process in Auschwitz was taking place in
that way: […] After they had removed their clothes, the
Jews were pushed into the gas chamber. This one had showers
and pipes, and this was giving really the impression of a
bath room […]. Then, the door were closed and screw*** and
the special team members were throwing the Zyklon through
roof vents across the ceiling. The gas was finding its way
through the pipes before to reach the ground. It was then
able to spread everywhere. From the *** of the door, one
could see that those who were close to the pipes were fal-
ling soon.[…]. Half an hour after the gas was send, the
door was open and we started the ventilation system.”
There was no fan for either Krema 4 or Krema 5 in the story. This one is sup-
posed to have exisex for Kremas 2 and 3 only. According to Rudolph Hoess in
his memoirs we can thus conclude that the Germans were opening the door and
then used the fan to spread…the gas in all the crematoria building!
In A.T.O, page 258, a drawing of the eyewitness David Olere shows pellets
wich were spread on the floor and Pressac comments that: It can be entirely
fictive or based on what the artist saw, anyway this picture is the only one
wich show a homicidal gassing.
The walls are of mortar and bricks, there are no gaskets to isolate the
alleged homicidal room, no distribution system, no pressurised system neither,
no mechanical constructions (pipes or other) which are used in a normal gas
chamber.
3.0 The gassing procedure:
The first mass gasing of Jews is supposed to have occur miles away from
Bikernau, in 2 little farmhouses converted for the sake of mass killing. It
was a total absurdity to reship the Jews from Bikernau there rather than to
shot them on the spot. The reason why the legend was built around those 2
farmhouses is simply that it was judged as preferable to use Kramer’s diary
as a starting base to draw the main elements of the story. In the first part
of the legend, pellets were allegedly throw in the house through a hole in
the wall(3). Since Zyklon B (according to the manufacturer) sticks adheres
strongly to surfaces and that the special disinfection team needed to wait
20 hours after use before entering a normal room without a gas mask (4),
then the removal of bodies immediately afterwards would be extremely difficult
if we rely on the Hoess memoirs. In this biography, the ex-commandant of
Auschwitz stated explicitely that the Sonderkommando were eating and smoking
while they were working (ie without gas masks). However, if we consider someone
who would be equipped with a heavy gas mask, the removal wouldn’t be easy
neither. In the case of the so-called gas chambers, HCN could adhere to the
walls, the ceilling, the corpses but much more to the hairs of hundreds of
victims before being released gradually. In the case of the 2 farmhouse of
1942 also, the remaining pellets on the ground would be a danger for the Son
derkommandos if they had to accomplish their task without any delay.
There is an interesting remark here: Degesh facilities, those small rooms
which were used by the Germans for disinfecting clothes, were equipped with
exhaust stacks and systems to heat the gas in pipes before re-injecting it
into the room: they wanted to avoid condensation on walls. But nothing like
that exists in the ‘homicidal gas chambers’, less developed technologically.
4.0 Ferro-cyanide traces:
The Revisionist claim is that since delousing chambers (Degesh facilities)
contain up to 1,000 times more ferro-cyanide traces on the walls than ‘homicide
gas chambers’ in the Leuchter original samples than there was no mass gasing of
Jews and the mortuaries where few cyanide compounds were found had just been
disinfected once during the war. It might be said here that the original claim
of the anti-Revisionist (Raul Hilberg) was that most of the Zyklon B was used
for killing people according to ‘reliable sources’, but since Leuchter’s fin-
dings in 1988 the Holocaust lobby decided to adopt a new version (Pressac)
where more than 95% of the Zyklon B was use for disinfections.
Although Revisionists are more interested in the ferro-cyanide traces
(Prussian blue) which forms a stable element, the Cracow team and their
sleeping partner (the Auschwitz Museum) decided to play on the confusion
that may exist with potassium cyanide which is, indeed, soluble in water
and the ferro-cyanide. The claim that acid rain could have washed cyanide
away compounds is true for potassium cyanide, but not for ferro-cyanide
compounds. An excellent rebuttal of the Nizkor argument can be found on:
http://www.kaiwan.com/~ihrgreg – (Page doesn`t exist) under the section
$Journal of Historical
Review , Winter 1992-93, Volume Twelve, Number 4, especially the article
by Paul Grubach: The Leuchter Report Vindicated.
The Revisionist interpretation of the minor traces of ferro-cyanide pig-
mentation on the ‘gas chamber’ walls is that the entire building was probably
evacuated once or twice during the war to be disinfected. Such traces were
found on other rooms which were not supposed to be either gas chambers or
Degesh facilities (for example, the washroom of Krema 1) and the level were
comparable. The conclusion is thus that those buildings were just disinfected.
Since lice was the reason for the typhus epidemics, one can expect the lice
to quit the hairs of the bodies and invade the buildings where several persons
were working, so there’s nothing abnormal with the hypothesis that the Germans
disinfected the mortuaries with Zyklon B.
If someone claims that Leuchter falsified the samples of the washroom, then
it might be asked why he planted a sample with few cyanide compounds for the
gas chamber rather than a sample with no cyanide compound. One of Leuchter’s
suggestion after his findings was to allow a neutral international commission
that could solve the problem forever with a transparent and open inquiry,
but as usual the Holocaust lobby did not follow the suggestion and preferred,
after 7 years only, to use his own usual commission rather than a mixed team
with pure random samples.
Another argument is that the disinfection was taking 10 to 20 hours while
the gassing of people was taking just 10 to 30 minutes. In that case, it is
claimed that it’s not surprising to find far less ferro-cyanide compounds on
the walls of the ‘gas chambers’. This argument is not responding to the fact
that the level of cyanide between the ‘gas chamber’ of Krema 1 and the washroom
of the same building are comparable. Moreover, things do not work that way in
real life: the physical absorption of a gas by a surface is a very quick process.
Some experiments were conducted on the adsorption of gases by solids: what they
show, mainly, is that most of the gases are absorbed within a few minutes at 0
degrees Celsius on charcoal. (5) There is a saturation level for the solids,
over which you can’t expect to see more gas to be absorbed by it (adsorption
is the word used rather than absorption for such a process). Experiments were
conducted on oxygen, nitric oxide, CO, nitrogen, etc…: the conclusion was
that an average of 80% was adsorbed within 15 minutes while 20% was adsorbed
in the reminding 72 hours of the experience (5).
In that case, chemical adsorption is coming right after the physical adsor-
ption, but due to the time that is necessary for the gas to be released by a
surface, it is wrong to say that a gassing over ’10 hours’ will create 20
times more compounds than a gassing over 30 minutes. Some HCN molecules will
react with iron if the microscopic conditions are favourable at a moment,
the others will be released.
5.0 The stupidity of the method
The best way to kill people is not to transport them over 1,000 kilometres
with all the cost involves and to put them in those ‘gas chambers’ but to shoot
them on site. The reason for which the gas chamber story was used in connection
with Zyklon B can be found in one of Hilberg’s books: he shows proof over many
pages (mainly Zyklon B invoices) that Zyklon B was produced in Germany, and
carried to Auschwitz. No one contests that Zyklon B was used at Auschwitz to
eliminate lice which were bringing typhus into the camp, even on the anti-Revi-
sionist side: there’s too much proof of that. It was essential at Nuremberg to
maximise the proofs and minimise the risk with the use of such documents for
which a dual interpretation is necessary: Zyklon B was use to disinfect clothes
and fight typhus epidemics which were killing Jewish manpower, but Zyklon B was
also used to liquidate them.
6.0 Questions related to the morgues.
A couple of years ago, Jean-Claude Pressac brought forth a new version of
the story in which the absence of details and schemas about gas chambers in
the documentation seased in the hands of the Germans was not due to an official
Nazi policy to ‘keep the secret’ but to the fact that the mortuaries were transf-
ormed by technicians in gas chambers late. The question is quite simple: if 200
to 300 people died from ordinary death (epidemies) in Auschwitz each day, where
did the Germans put the bodies of those peoples before to cremate them?
The morgues of Krema 2 and 3 were there to receive bodies before their cre-
mation, 30 ovens for those 2 buildings were insufficient to reduce to ashes all
the corpses immediately. But the Jews who were dying from epidemics didn’t stop
dying after the transformation of the mortuaries into gas chambers, so where
did they put them? Was the truck bringing one body at a time from the hospital
afterwards? Or were they piled up outside while dozens to hundreds of civilians
were working at the camp, without counting the SS families who were visiting
the camp? ‘Scuze us, that’s because of our secret gas chambers that we are
coding in our documents’.
Does it mean that the Jews who had to walk to those crematories were allowed
to see hundreds of corpses near the crematoria even though the German intention
was to ‘fool’ them? If this is the case, one could expect that the same Sonder-
kommandos who allegedly brought the corpses from the ‘gas chambers’ to the
ovens were also in charge of the disposal of those other bodies. Unfortunately,
their tales do not mention this interesting problem.
7.0 Leuchter, dishonest?
The main argument which was developed against Leuchter is that he’s not an
engineer. In this case, experience is more important than an academic training.
He has worked several years for the American Navy and the American Air Force,
creating equipment for civil and military applications. He has patents in do-
mains like optics, meteorology, navigation, etc. He has already been described
by a penitentiary director as a highly competent consultant(6). He knows what
he’s talking about, even though he can, like anyone, make mistakes. In Massa-
chusetts, only a fraction of the engineers have licences (I think it’s 5,000
out of 50,000) and there is no legislation about the specific topic of ‘gas
chambers’. In such a case, Leuchter was the only one of the 50,000 engineers
who was prosecuted, after his report: this is not because he used false repre-
sentation, this is simply because he was victimised.
(1) The first Leuchter report
(2) Le commandant d’Auschwitz parle (Hoess memoirs, page 244, French
edition )
(3) Kremmer’s diary
(4) NI-9912
(5) Absorption Of Gases By Solids, by McBain, published by George Routledge
& Sons, London, (1932), page 124.
(6) RHR, no 6, page 142. JHR, volume 12, number 4
From [email protected] Fri Apr 19 07:04:18 PDT 1996
Article: 31909 of alt.revisionism
Path:news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: AUSCHWITZ: Revisionnist FAQ (1)
Date: 19 Apr 1996 02:23:49 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 306
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne39.vir.com
Thanks to Alexander Baron, who revided the text (my english is not perfect)
and gave me several suggestions for this FAQ and the 2 pages that follow.
This FAQ is a response to the usual scr… FAQ that Nizkor is posting.
CREMATORIA
The first section of this FAQ deals with crematoria in Birkenau. The
Revisionist claim is usually supported by the affirmations of Ivan Legace,
a crematory operator from Calgary who has been subjected to smear attacks
>from the Holocaust lobby in alt.revisionism. I hadn’t really the time to
involve myself on this topic, I’m working 40 hours a week, and I’ve no
connection with the Simon Wiesenthal Center, which can raise billions of
dollars for the construction of Holocaust Museums. However, I never heard
about any crematory operator who was produced in a court case by the Ho-
locaust lobby to support the claim that 4 bodies can be reduced to ashes
in 30 or 45 minutes in a crematory oven. My first knowledge of the topic
was limited, than I got an interview with M. Marc Poirier (Funeral House
Magnus Poirier, Montreal) and a phone interview with a chemist who is main-
taining several crematoria in Quebec. Later, I got several phone interviews:
with M. Denis, from ‘Incineration Plus’ (Montreal); S. Ouellet (Urgel Bour-
gie Funeral House, Montreal); J. Choiniere, Crematorium d’Arche (Longueuil);
a man from ‘le Cimetiere du Bas du Fleuve’; M. Cloutier, from Le Cremato-
rium Mont-Royal.
The first thing that must be said is that Auschwitz crematoria were
operating at 800 degrees Celcius approximately, according to the annex of
an anti-Revisionist book, “Les chambres a gaz ont exist‚”, by G. Wellers.
An annex to the book shows the source: report of the Polish War Crime In-
vestigation Commission and Jan Sehn. This communist commission claimed
right after the war that the Nazis were able to cremate 3 or 4 people in
20 or 30 minutes per oven at a temperature of about 800 degrees. Cremato-
ries were not operating at 1,200 to 1,600 degrees like today’s crematoria
in those days; they were less technologically developed.
The first thing that must be said is that nowhere was I told that the
cremation took less than about 2 hours for a normal body. The range was
between two hours to two and a half hours. To that one must add a pre-
hea ting period of 30 minutes for the first cremation of the day. A Cana-
dian law states that the after-burner region must have a temperature above
1000 degrees Celsius before beginning the cremation. The after-burner is a
part of the structure where a little wall slows down the evacuation of the
combustion products and where a flame is applied to those ones. The purpose
is simply to burn the remains of the primary combustion and avoid the ex-
pulsion of pollutants into the atmosphere.
In the case of the Auschwitz ovens, we are told that the period of
operation was limited in the time: the Krema 1 at Auschwitz 1 (six ovens)
was just sufficient to dispose the bodies of the inmates who died from or-
dinary causes (typhus, other diseases) and the main crematoria of Birkenau
started to work only after February 1943. It was also documented by the
anti-Revisionist write Jean-Claude Pressac that those crematoria were sub-
jected to several breakdowns, especially Kremas 4 and 5 but also the other
two. One of the two latest was shut down finally in the same year but even
the other one stopped operating for several weeks in miscellaneous situa-
tions. The Auschwitz camp was evacuated in January 1945. Normally a crema-
tory must be cleaned up and is not operating 24 hours a day. Nevertheless,
the claim nowadays is that about a million people died in Auschwitz-Birkenau
and that most of them were cremated there. According to the latest version
of the Nizkor FAQ: more than 700,000 in Kremas 2 and 3. These had 15 ovens
each, the crematorium buildings 4 and 5 had 8 ovens each. All of that in
less than 18 months, with several breakdowns.
My inquiry gave me the possibility to learn also the average quantity
of air that is evacuated from a crematory in Quebec: about 625 cubic feet
per minute, or 1400 cubic metres per hour. In the case of the Auschwitz
ovens, the figure that can be derived from the data present in “Anatomy Of
A Death Camp” is about 2,000 cubic metres per oven. In that case, we have
a figure of 33% less air that is applied to the corpse in a crematory here,
but also a figure for a temperature that is 75% higher. The claim that a
body could be cremated in 30 minutes is difficult to support with physical
evidence here.
Multiple corpses in an oven:
The Auschwitz ovens dimensions were about 1 metre in diameter, and se-
veral corpses were allegedly incinerated at a time to increase their effi-
ciency. Everywhere I was told that the cremation of a body is directly re-
lated to the volume which is occupied. A normal corpse takes between two
hours to two and a half hours to be cremated, an extremely obese corpse much
more time, and the lower limit that the chemist and those crematory opera-
tors knew was about an hour and a quarter. In some other countries, the
cremation time seems to be faster (there are few variables on which one can
play) since some Revisionists have already given figures like 1 hour 30
minutes for a normal body. In that case, the oxygen intake is probably hi-
gher. The ratio surface/volume to burn is also one of the factor that in-
fluences the faster cremation. The combustion of the corpse is just the
oxidation of its molecules with the oxygen that is brought into the muffle.
An analogy could be drawn with the combustion of a log: cutting it into thin
slices will reduce the combustion time. In the case of the Birkenau ovens,
packing the muffles would result in a drastic drop in the air intakes. The
heads and shoulders of the corpses would stop the path of air molecules and
fewer could reach the most important part of the body that is offering a
large surface: the trunk.
A good analogy is that of a window you open lightly to let air in. Since
there’s little space available, several corpses piled up in the muffle would
not allow a maximisation of the surface that it offers to oxygen: abdomens
would be in contact with backs, etc…Cremation specialists often use the
equivalent in pounds to estimate the cremation time, they use datas like ‘a
150 pounds body’ or a ‘250 pounds body’, etc…
Nizkor claim that emaciated corpses wouldn’t take as much time to cremate,
and this is true, however they ignore the fact that most of the Jews allegedly
gassed were supposelly killed upon arrival. Photos of new inmates who arrived
at Auschwitz do exist (1) and these, contrarily to the Jews who were victims
of typhus and shortage over months in camps at the end of the war have nothing
in common with famished-looking persons. It is 90 % of the persons allegedly
cremated in the Holocaust story. There is also an attempt to use the argument
that most of the victims were children, but this is plainly wrong: a simple
study that uses the lists that are provided by the Holocaust lobby itself
(eg Danuta Czech in “Auschwitz Chronicle”) shows that the children among the
victims could not account for more than 20%.
The best way to cremate a million Jews was simply to built more cremato-
ria. The author Arthur Butz gave a wonderful parallel several years ago that
must be summarise (2):
There are two tables which are available for the crematory ovens. Most of the
deaths in Germany’s camps occurred at the end of the war when the chaotic con-
ditions of the defeat created large scale shortages and boosted the mortality
rate, according to mortality statistics that the SS were using for those camps
(the documentation related to the official mortality rate, registration books
and so on were seized by the Allies). On the other hand, most of the deaths in
Auschwitz occurred during the summer of 1942-1943 with typhus epidemics. It is
said usually, even on the Nizkor site, that the majority of Jews who were de-
ported to Auschwitz were not registered, and vanished without trace because
the Germans didn’t record their names in their files, they gassed them on
arrival. Only the Jews who died from ordinary death were registered in the
death book. Jews who were sent to other camps were not tattooed.
At the end of 1942 a campaign was launched by Himmler to fight typhus and,
as he stated in a letter, to reduce the mortality rate at ‘any cost’ (3). On
January 20, 1943 Gluecks, inspector of the camps, in a circular addressed to
all the Commandants of Nazi camps, ordered them to fight the too high mortali-
ty rate ‘with all the available means’. Other documents (4) attest of this
exchange between Pohl, Himmler and Glucks on that topic and one could also
find a more accesible source about this campaign by reading Reitlinger, _The
Final Solution_, First edition, page 127.
On September 30, 1943 Pohl was able to report progress in a letter to
Himmler. What is interesting is that he provides the statistics about mortali-
ty rates in miscellaneous camps: from July 1942 to February 1943 the mortality
rate was about 8% while it dropped to 2.8% in June 1943. An interesting aspect
is the August month:
August 1943
population death %
Dachau 17,300 40 0.23
Sachsenhausen 26,500 194 0.73
Buchenwald 17,600 118 0.67
Mauthausen 21,100 290 1.37
Auschwitz 74,000 2380 3.1
etc….
Again, exterminated Jews in gas chambers are not included in this internal
correspondence. If we look at mortality rates due to natural causes we can see
that the number of ovens is almost comparable with camps where there is no ex-
termination claim. In 1942, crematoria were constructed in Dachau and Sachen-
hausen: each had 4 ovens. At Dachau there were 2 ovens before 1942 (samething
for Sachsenhausen). At Buchenwald there were six. In Auschwitz the number of
ovens was between 30 and 46, depending on the period. The number of inmates
grew to 100,000 at the end of 1943.
But there’s another way: Dachau and Buchenwald wee in Germany and as ‘non-
extermination’ camps, they can be used for the comparison if we want to see
the intention of the Germans when they launched the construction of crematoria
rather than when they were functional and compare it with the death rate there.
In the previous case, Auschwitz seems a bit better equipped with crematoria
than the other camps if we take into account the mortality rate, but if we
look back at the moment when the decision to build crematoria was taken, here
we get even a lower proportion of crematoria/death record for Auschwitz than
for camps in Germany, sometimes by a factor of two.
If we just take the year 1942, 45,575 inmates died in Auschwitz and 2,470
in Dachau (5). But it is at this moment that the SS launched the construction
of most of the crematoria, so we can have a clear idea of what they had in the
mind: Auschwitz was half as well equipped with crematoria as Dachau, according
to normal death figures, probably for budgetary constraints.
The main reasons for the high death rates in Birkenau were the typhus epi-
demics of 1942-1943 for which Germans lost the control and also the fact that
many sick inmates were shipped to Birkenau, according to documents (it was,
indeed a death camp).
Permanent use?
I will add an observation here: if we are told that the crematories were
operating 24 hours a day, than we will need to substract 4 days from that.
The worst period of the extermination process, according to the legend, is
the summer of 1944, when 300,000 to 400,000 Hungarian Jews were allegedly
liquidated and cremated in Auschwitz in two months (6). The story is that
thousands of bodies were burned in open pits since even the ‘fantastic’ cre-
matoria of Auschwitz were not able to dispose of 5,000 to 10,000 bodies a day.
And in that story, the crematoria were working 24 hours a day over this period
also. It was normal for the U.S. Air force to take photos of a target before
and after the bombardment. Before, to evaluate the defense, after, to evaluate
the damaged. The I.G. Farben industrial complex of Auschwitz-Monowitz was
bombed at the end of the summer, and 4 photos, taken by U.S. airplanes, give
a picture of Birkenau during this critical period: The May 31, 1944, the June
26, 1944, the August 25, 1944 and the September 13, 1944. In none of the pho-
tos can one see any trace of thousands of bodies burned in open pits. Morever,
on the 4 photos, there is no smoke released by the crematoria chimneys! (7).
Nizkor do not use those air photos, but rather a classical one:
> in massive pits. Two gruesome photographs of these “burning pits”, taken
> in secrecy in Auschwitz-Birkenau, have survived. They are of reasonable
> quality, and show men standing by a pile of naked bodies, with the smoking
> pit in front of them. Some bodies are being dragged into the pit. The pho-
> tographs are reproduced by Pressac.
This photo was allegedly taken in Birkenau, but it could have been taken
anywhere else in Europe; no detail on the photo allows the reader to know
where it was taken.
The fuel:
The average quantity of fuel that is necessary to burn a body in a crema-
torium today is about 23 cubic metres of natural gas, or the equivalent of 30
to 35 kg of coke if we convert with calorimetric data. In the 20s, things were
not different, and since the author J.C. Pressac reproduces the documents that
deal with coke deliveries to Auschwitz-Birkenau ( A.T.O., 1989 ), it is possible
to estimate approximately the number of people who were cremated there. 2,200
tons of coke, or the equivalent of 70,000 to 100,000 persons if we account for
a proportion of 20% children. The coke shipments to Birkenau give a figure that
matches almost perfectly the death registers of the camp.
The documents:
There are very few documents that are normally adduced to ‘prove’ that Birke-
nau’s crematoria were able to dispose of so many people, most of the ‘proofs’
are based on post-war eyewitness testimonies. However, it is not bad to look
at the 2 main ones:
The Jahring document (28 June, 1943) says that the 52 muffles of Auschwitz-
Birkenau were able to reduce to ashes 4,756 corpses per day with a 24 hour a
day operation. The date of the document matches the period when several major
breakdowns were affecting Birkenau’s crematoria (the SS were trying desperately
to repair it at that time, as Pressac documented). The origin of the document
is the ‘Committee of the Anti-fascist Resistance of the German Democratic Repu-
blic. There was no reason for the SS to claim such an output at the moment that
they had so many difficulties with those crematoria: this document is a forgery.
Morever, in another document reproduce on page 224 the crematoria operated only
12 hours a day.
Another document that is used on the anti-Revisionist side: ‘Fritz Sander
and Paul Erdmann, Prufer’s superiors at Topf, estimated an output of 30 to 36
bodies in 10 hours […]’ (8). The reference is Weimar, LK 6451, letter Topf
July 14, 1941.
According to the rest of the text, the best I could understand is that this
was a double muffle furnace. In Pressac’s book there are several references to
contract invoices, and not only for Auschwitz: it seems that Pressac had access
to a huge amount of letters and documentation that were written over 10 years,
the number of quotations about the crematoria is impressive. I would not be
surprised if he met several references to lower cremation output in those let-
ters.
Nevertheless, the documents that are usually used to ‘prove’ those crematoria
output are rare: 2 or 3. It is possible that this letter exaggerates the outputs
a bit for ‘selling purposes’. It is said too that the first cremation was car-
ried on only on August 15, 1941 with that furnace. This means simply that this
claim in the letter, probably, was not based on something that was observed but
on an hypothetically optimistic estimate. In short, it is worthless.
Notes And References
(1) The Auschwitz Album
(2) “The Hoax of the Twentieth Century”, by Arthur Butz, 360
pages, published by the Institute for Historical Review, P.O. Box
2739, Newport Beach, CA 92659 U.S.A.
(3) (document 2172-PS, Reitlinger, “The Final Solution”, First edition, page 127).
(4) (1469-PS, NMT, Volume V, page 372)
(5) Butz, page 378
(6) “Debunking the Genocide Myth: A Study of the Nazi Concentration Camps and
the Alleged Extermination of European Jewry”, Introduction by Pierre Hofstet-
ter, Translated from the French by Adam Robbins, published by the Institute
for Historical Review, (1978), page 246.
(7) “Air Photo Evidence”, John Ball, Samizdat Publishers, 206
Carlton Street Toronto, Canada M5A-2L1. [Around 10$ US plus ship-
ment, (416) 922-9850].
(8) (Anatomy of a Death Camp, page 189).
From [email protected] Sun Apr 21 15:08:24 PDT 1996
Article: 32202 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
tns.sdsu.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!
news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!news.interlink.net!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Van Alstine: a real moron
Date: 21 Apr 1996 17:02:33 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 106
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne33.vir.com
The title was originally: Auschwitz, a revisionist FAQ (2)
Here’s an example of how Van Alstine ‘logic’ is poor:
>> There are very, very few photos of the alleged gas chambers of Krema 2 and 3,
>> even though the buildings are still there (but not totally intact).
>Of course, the Nazis severley restricted the taking of such photographs
>and their distribution. It is hardly suprising then that very few survived
>the war. I suggest you read the transcription from _Auschwitz: a history
>in photographs_ for a description of how the Nazis managed photos taken at
>Auschwitz. You can find it at:
Here, the context of my paragraph was obviously refering to photos taken
_after the war_, since I said ‘very few’. And I said: kremas 2 and 3.
I must recall here how Van Alstine, in an attempt to use any argument to
discredit Ceasa claim and the fact that holes were perfored in the ceiling
_after_ the construction of it said that there was no remaining
roof for the krema 2. And that Caesa was lying when he said that holes
(roof vents) were existing on the remaining part of the roof since the roof
was no longer there. Of course, Van Alstine was wrong, there’s a Video
which show those holes.
>> …According to Rudolph Hoess in his memoirs we can thus conclude that
>> the Germans were opening the door and then used the fan to spread…the
>> gas in all the crematoria building!
>The fallacy if this assumption, Mr. Beaulieu, is that you blithely ignore
>that Kremas II and III (and later Krema V) had _deaeration_ systems. The
>HCN-laden air in the gas chambers was sucked out from the L.Kellers and
>exhausted to the _outside_ from outlets on the roof of the Kremas.
>Meanwhile, the _aeration_ system brought fresh air into L.Keller 1 so that
>wihtin a period of several minutes the entire volume of air in the gas
>chamber was replaced several times.
The original text that I quoted was weird: according to the sentences,
the Germans were opening the door and started the fan _at the same
moment_. It doesn’t take a genius to guess that even with an air outake,
if you open the door during this operation than a lot of HCN would invade
the other rooms also from the door. A normal human being who has a
brain would try to dismiss my claim in a more intelligent manner. Example,
since I took it from the french version, it is possible that the original
memoirs do not contain exactly the equivalent and that the translation is
wrong. After all, once in the past I used a french book which contained
a bad translation for another case. But since I mentionned also at the
same time this paragraph from Hoess and that nobody claimed that there
was something wrong with the translation that I used, than I figured
that this one was the right one. If someone bring the original text and
that this one do not contain such an absurdity, than I will drop this
paragraph. That’s simple. I’ve not access to the original text. But Van
Alstine’s approach is stupid, as it happen often, he offer an argument
that is a non sense.
>> It might be said here that the original claim of the anti-Revisionist (Raul
>> Hilberg) was that most of the Zyklon B was used for killing people according
>> to ‘reliable sources’, but since Leuchter’s findings in 1988 the Holocaust
>> lobby decided to adopt a new version (Pressac) where more than 95% of the
>> Zyklon B was use for disinfections.
>This, of course, is a yet another blatant misrepresentation. Pressac was
>specifically about writing about the amounts of Zyklon B used to control
>the severe typhus epidemic of the summer of 1942. He writes:
[snip]
Here Van Alstine claim that despite it is true that Hilberg claimed that
most of the Zyklon B was used for homicidal purposes, despite Pressac
claimed the opposite, my argument was wrong because Pressac claim that only
for a short period, e.g. the summer of 1942. As usual, Van Alstine logic is
ridiculous. I’ll take now one of Rassinier’s book, who refer to R. Hilberg
first edition. But I can get the original book of Hilberg within a week,
doesn’t matter, Raissinier give the page number (570) where I can find
these informations.
Shippment of Zyklon B to Auschwitz: 19,5 tons.
Those do not include the year 1944 according to Rassinier. If we take
now the dimension of Krema 2, 500 meter cube, and the concentration that
were allegedly used, 12 g /meter cube _at least_ according to Pressac
than we get 6 kg per gasing. If we take now the other figure that Van
Alstine is using in other circunstances, around 0.5 g /meter cube (when
Van Alstine try to justify the minor amount of Prussian blue on the walls)
then we get 250 grams per gasing. The thing here is that we can hardly
have more than few box (or few kilograms) per gasing. A gasing is suppose
to have kill few hundreds peoples each time, around 800 peoples each time.
In krema 3, 4, 5, the same story with different volumes, however since
the bulk of the gasing were suppose to be in kremas 2 and 3, this gives
250 kg to 6 tons. It is not ‘almost all the Zyklon B’.
But suddenly I realized something Mr Van Alstine: why did Hilberg
omitted to show the invoices for 1944? Did he show it later? Don’t know
but I’ll try to verify. But normally if your statement is true we would
expect that a _huge_ amount of Zyklon B was deliver to the camp in 1944
with the Hungarian Jews story. Since you still claim that Hilberg was
right, since only 10% of the gasing were done in the story in 1942,
this mean that the 1944 Zyklon B deliveries exceed largelly 20 tons.
My instinct tell me Mr Van Alstine that the 1944 Zyklon B deliveries
were far less than those of 1942. Simply because 100% of it was use
for disinfection and that the typhus epidemy was almost over after 1943.
The Germans were certanly still disinfecting, but less often. I’ll
search for such kind of informations, but I’m absolutelly sure that you
won’t be able to support your claim. In that case, we would expect that
a large amount of Z.B was deliver in 1944, but I know in advance that you
won’t be able to proove that Zyklon B deliveries in 1944 were more important
than in 1942-43.
From [email protected] Tue Apr 23 07:16:49 PDT 1996
Article: 32300 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!
news.nstn.ca!news.dal.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!
newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: AUSCHWITZ: Revisionnist FAQ (1)
Date: 23 Apr 1996 02:05:10 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4l6[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne47.vir.com
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>
> Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Daniel Keren <[email protected]> wrote:
> > For the case of John Morris first, I will remind you that for the crematory
> > operator to whom he ‘promissed to not reveal his name’, Morris was never
> > able to back his claim that the destruction of the coffin could take the
> > largest part of the cremation. First, as I have already said, wood do
> > not contain 66% of water like the human body and offer a large surface/volume
> > in this case, so it doesn’t take a genious to guess that at 1400 degrees it
> > doesn’t take more than 20 minutes before the dislocation of the coffin.
> > If you claim the opposite, I’ve already suggest an experience with a torsh
> > an a piece of wood if someone doubt. Over 2 hour or 2 hour 1/2, this is not
> > the major part of the cremation. For his other claim on the Nizkor site:
>
> Is it possible, even likely, that cremating someone in a
> wooden coffin would reduce the time of cremation seeing how it would
> put the firey inferno into a higher degree. Are people cremated in
> coffins? To mean that when the relatives get the ashes of the deceased
> they are part wood ashes. Why would they cremate people in coffins?
For your first question, I don’t believe so. I hadn’t any comment
of that kind before, but since the wood need to be burn before,
I figure that this compense the extra-heat that is provide to the body.
WW With a burning time of 15, 20 minutes or a bit more I imagine that
the extra-heat has little impact over the whole process, but it
is more a quick instinctive response than anything else.
For the other question, I know that in some US states peoples are
burn withour a coffin while in other ones some are burn with. Yale
has already said a day that there’s a law somewhere about ‘the dignity
of human’, or something like that, it’s probable that we have such
a law in Canada since they cremate ino a coffin here. However, there’s
no problem related to the texture of the cofin ashes vs the bone’s
ashes.
f
From [email protected] Tue Apr 23 07:16:50 PDT 1996
Article: 32301 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!
news.nstn.ca!news.dal.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!
newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Van Alstine: a serial liar
Date: 23 Apr 1996 02:10:51 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne47.vir.com
[email protected] (Richard Schultz) wrote:
>
> Jean-Francois Beaulieu ([email protected]) wrote:
> : I prefer to split M. Van Alstine into several parts
>
> Ouch!
I’m protesting energically in advance for those who would suggest
that I did a linguistic error. It is call a lapsus.
From [email protected] Tue Apr 23 10:49:07 PDT 1996
Article: 32382 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!
news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!news.mid.net!sbctri.tri.sbc.com!
newspump.wustl.edu!newsfeed.rice.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!cmcl2!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: AUSCHWITZ: Revisionnist FAQ (1)
Date: 21 Apr 1996 05:13:42 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 81
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4l6[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne36.vir.com
Daniel Keren <[email protected]> wrote:
# Whatever the story tellers say, today’s facts are there for
# the investigation, and the Holocaust facts for yesterday deny
# today’s facts. A simple phone call to any local crematory can
# undo any Holocaust facts on cremation rates.
>Interesting; both Mike Stein and John Morris did exactly what
>you suggest here – called a crematory operator and asked.
>
>The answer was that, if you don’t use a coffin and you don’t
>mind if the remains are not “whitened”, you can drastically
>reduce the cremation time. There’s also the matter of the
>continuous cremation – you save time if the furnace is already
>blazing hot.
For the case of John Morris first, I will remind you that for the crematory
operator to whom he ‘promissed to not reveal his name’, Morris was never
able to back his claim that the destruction of the coffin could take the
largest part of the cremation. First, as I have already said, wood do
not contain 66% of water like the human body and offer a large surface/volume
in this case, so it doesn’t take a genious to guess that at 1400 degrees it
doesn’t take more than 20 minutes before the dislocation of the coffin.
If you claim the opposite, I’ve already suggest an experience with a torsh
an a piece of wood if someone doubt. Over 2 hour or 2 hour 1/2, this is not
the major part of the cremation. For his other claim on the Nizkor site:
(http://www.almanac.bc.ca/features/qar/- (Page doesn`t exist) Question 42
> <p>For example, Legace is bound by Canadian law to use a coffin, and to
> incinerate it so thoroughly that the ashes of the wood are
> indistinguishable from the ashes of the human body. This is a lengthy
> process. Legace forgets that such cosmetic concerns were not of
> importance to the Nazis.
I’ve already say that several crematory operators told me simply that
there was no ashes left by the coffin, plus the fact that it’s easy
even if very few would be left to keep just the bones with a sieve and
to crunch it after. It’s not all the crematory operators who said ‘no
ashes left by the coffin’, but no one was are about the problem that is
mention above. I must remind also that I asked 3 times to J. Morris which
law was forcing crematory operators to deliver ashes in such a way that
coffin ashes are indistinguishable from the ashes of the wood, and he never
respond. Since there’s no ‘lenghty process’ associated to this problem,
my first impression was that possibly such a reference in a law could exist
but that this law was unusefull. But since he never gave the text of this
law despite my request, I gradually draw my conclusion, e.g. a pure
invention.
For M.P. Stein, I did accept partly his argument, when he said that
this crematory designer told him that the cremation of a body (without
a coffin in both cases) could take one hour rather than 2 if the purpose
was to reduce the flesh in some extent in the fictive scenario of an
epidemy where mass production is need just to avoid the putrefaction (and
epidemies). However, I was told before that when the cremation process
is not over carbonized flesh surround the bones (1 hour, 1 hour 1/2)
and that some photos of human remains in ovens do not support that claim.
But this one is a minor point: the main problems with such a method is
that bones are less friables (so less easy to crunch) especially if
carbonized flesh is left on it, and the best I can remembering one of
Van Alstine posting the eye witness who claimed that they crunch the bones
didn’t mention the presence of carbonize flesh (it wasn’t in his post).
Also that if the normal purpose of a crematoria is the total reduction of
a body in ashes in such a way that the ashes of 2 persons are not mixed
together. If the purpose is not a total reduction, nor the isolation of
the ashes of each corpse for a restitution to the behaves, than burning
bodies with gasoline and wood is certanly less costing. Finally I will
add that even with 1 hour per body, if we account for the breakdown
of crematories that occured for long periods, the regular clean up that
are necessary and the period of operation, it is not suffisant to cover
1 million deaths or so. I do believe that the Nazis did not try to get
something esthetic for the Jewish victims of epidemies, but with the
question of the carbonized flesh and the friability of bones, I dont
see how they could have reduce the cremation time as much as to an
average of 1 hour.
From [email protected] Fri Apr 26 07:07:39 PDT 1996
Article: 32739 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!
loki.tor.hookup.net!nic.wat.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!
arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: AUSCHWITZ: Revisionnist FAQ (1)
Date: 26 Apr 1996 02:17:00 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 158
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4l6[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne49.vir.com
[email protected] (John Morris) wrote:
>
>> For the case of John Morris first, I will remind you that for the crematory
>> operator to whom he ‘promissed to not reveal his name’, Morris was never
>> able to back his claim that the destruction of the coffin could take the
>> largest part of the cremation.
>That is what the gentleman told me, or, at least, what I recorded in
>my notes about our conversation. As for not revealing his name, that
>was my suggestion as I felt I owed it to the man not to make him the
>subject of harrassment by deniers simply because he was kind enough to
>speak to me.
>Perhaps I overestimate the threat of harrassment, but we do have two
>neo-Nazi skinheads in jail in Alberta who beat and partially blinded a
>radio announcer for an anti-Nazi editorial delivered about ten years
>prior to the attack.
Well, you still claim that this man told you that the destruction of
the coffin take the largest part of the cremation. However, you say
later in your posting that you have admitted your error and that
you suggested a revision of the answer to reflect more accuratly
the cosmetic and legal concerns (paragraph below). Morever, bodies
cremated without a coffin take close to the same time (and even there
it can be due to the difference in air intake) according to an artcle
that someone posted here several weeks ago (I kept a copy of this one).
I’m unsure if you wrote several months ago that your man though he could
cremate a body in 1/2 hour rather than an hour without a coffin, but
since no crematory in Canada can reduce a normal body in ashes in less
than 2 hours, than I will not call you a liar and claim that you wrote
that, probably that I just dreamed about it.
Since the question of the ashes texture (wood vs bones) do not exist,
since the coffin do not take the largest part of the cremation time,
than it seems that the claims he did were not usable against the
revisionnist. I wonder how he could be afraid about retaliations in
that case. You used another figure with a name (Springer) but all
you got from him is exactly the answer that M.P Stein got, and I’ve
already comment on that. It seems that the neo-nazis in USA are less
dangerous then here??? This question about a non-complete cremation of
the body was absent from your post before M.P. Stein intervention, or
at least I never saw this argument from you last year. It’s not your
crematory operator in Alberta who suggested you that. Zundel’s headquarter
was bombed, arson, there was murder attempt against him, trials, he
face deportation and those who had a business and side with the revisionnist
were victims of intimidation and their name put on a black list apparently.
Leuchter, Irving, Notin (in France) and several others. It’s more dangerous
to side with the revisionnist than the opposite. I don’t believe that
this crematory operator feared for his life. This idea came to my mind a
day but I quickly rejected it days after.
>Mr. Springer told me, just as you found in your investigations, that
>the casket is destroyed as a consequence of the burning, but also
>that, as Michael Stein discovered, the cremation time is considerably
>lengthened by whitening the bones.
For your information bones are always white, it is the carbonized
flesh that surround it that is black. And of course the cremation
time is considerably lenghtened by the ‘whitening’ of the bones since
it is cremation too. You apply heat, water need to be boil up and the
flesh need to be reduce and carbonize till it has gone. I could also
reduce the crematiuon time by 3/4 rather than 50% if I’m cutting a
lenghtly process: I’ll just have more carbonized flesh after 30 or
40 minutes than after an hour and less after an hour than after 1 hour
30. It is call cremation. What I will do with the carbonized flesh
and how I will crunch the less friable bones is another question.
Especially if the eye-witness who had to crunch the bones did not
mention that those one were surround by carbonize flesh. In that case,
may I suggest a more economical way than the construction of crematoria?
Since it wasnt necessary to recover the ashes individually (one of the
main purpose of a crematoria) since it wasn’t possible to expect
complain from the neigborhood about the horrific vision of bodies being
cremate on a public place in a township, since noone was interest to
recover the ashes and since in this case the human remains left were as
much important than what can be left in funeral pyres, how about a
cremation with gasoline and wood outside? Like in 1942 and the ‘107,000’
you know? No need to slow down the extermination process if the
crematory break down, no need to delay the extermination process if the
crematory are not ready, no need to spend a lot of money and give contracts
to civilian enterprises, no need to schedule the gasing according to
the crematorie’s capacity. Stupid germans, no?
>> First, as I have already said, wood do
>> not contain 66% of water like the human body and offer a large surface/volume
>> in this case, so it doesn’t take a genious to guess that at 1400 degrees it
>> doesn’t take more than 20 minutes before the dislocation of the coffin.
>> If you claim the opposite, I’ve already suggest an experience with a torsh
>> an a piece of wood if someone doubt. Over 2 hour or 2 hour 1/2, this is not
>> the major part of the cremation. For his other claim on the Nizkor site:
>>
>> (http://www.almanac.bc.ca/features/qar/- (Page doesn`t exist) Question 42
>>
>>> <p>For example, Legace is bound by Canadian law to use a coffin, and to
>>> incinerate it so thoroughly that the ashes of the wood are
>>> indistinguishable from the ashes of the human body. This is a lengthy
>>> process. Legace forgets that such cosmetic concerns were not of
>>> importance to the Nazis.
>Yes. And subsequent to my conversation with Mr. Springer, and on your
>prompting, I have suggested a revision to this answer to reflect more
>accurately the actual cosmetic and legal concerns faced by crematgory
>operators, since that part of the answer is based upon information
>from me.
I noticed that you gave a name this time, however the information that
you brough is not really different from what M.P. Stein brought.
>In any case, I have admitted my error, and I would be grateful if you
>would stop calling me a liar.
I’m not doing an obsession of that John, but there’s a difference between
a public post an an article that is place on a site by you, when you
expect that thousans of peoples will read it each month. I’ve see over
months any error that was maden by a revisionnist taken up with the title
XXX lie again! It can be a reference that the guy remember badly, an error
that he’s doing, or something. In some cases I was clearly able to see
that there was no motivation behind those ‘lies’. I’m not claiming that
no one lied here, nobody on earth never lied, but it is clear that some
want to offer as much lies as possible from the ennemy.
The question 42 was signed, if I remember well, by you, Ken McVay and D.
Keren. The construction of the sentence can lead anyone to believe that
there’s a Canadian law that state that the coffin ashes must be overburned
because they must be of the same texture than the bones. Keren is not
Canadian I think. I don’t believe that he wrote that, so there’s just
2 other peoples who may have write that. You mean
that no one check that there was such a reference in the law before to
put this on the site? Ok, an ‘error’ which is admit should not be bring
again and again, or let say not more than what I see in front. After
all you are able to do right claims also, all you need is to be in shape.
I hope you’ll recover soon and enjoy good health.
PS: By the way John, stop to say that revisionnist claim that no crematory
were built in Auschwitz or that they claim that nobody was cremated in
Birkenau. I’ve just see your posting to Al Baron and you know perfectly
that none of the scholar revisionnist and the proeminent figures claim
that. I don’t know why you are writting that again, I can’t even claim
that its a lie since it is so unskill that nobody can believe it.
I don’t know if you have a tendency to exagerate and pump yourself when
you do not controll your character, but really it’s not your best stuff.
But I promiss that I will no longer talk about this question of the ashes.
I will let you sleep quietly and stop with my insinuations. I’m a
bit shamefull about such an attitude. I won’t bother you again, I
swear.
PS2: Oooops! I’ve just take a look at the Nizkor site and the response
to question 42 wasn’t change! What happen with your suggestion Joh
John, it seems that you have less weight than I thought…Or either
there’s some unexpected delais about this question on the coffin
ashes… ooopps! ah no,no, that’s not what I wanted to say, forgive
me.
From [email protected] Fri Apr 26 07:07:41 PDT 1996
Article: 32753 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci4!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ac.net!news.cais.net!van-bc!news.rmii.com!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!
usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Jesus is everywhere
Date: 26 Apr 1996 03:25:33 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <8280[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<828299241sn[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne59.vir.com
The subject was: The Road to Cowschiwtz
[email protected] (Daniel Mittleman) wrote:
>
> [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
> >Chuck Ferree <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>Alexander Baron <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>[email protected] “Mike Curtis” writes:
> >>>
> >>>> Jesus existed, Mr. Baron. What he really was may be in dispute.
> >
> >>Of course Jesus existed. Only a moron would deny this fact.
> >>>
> >>>No he didn’t.
> >
> >>Baron. Your opinion…only that nothing more. You can’t prove a thing,
> >>you are being a real turkey. You know better. Why oh why, do you get
> >>your ass in the sling so often? Are you sick, or just stubborn. Man, oh,
> >>Man. You r something else. Facts, Baron, history, Baron, not your
> >>opinions.
> >
> > For someone who can understand the internet and who makes silly
> >threats you should not make a further fool of yourself by
> >announcing your faith in your Jesus.
>
> Well, strange as it might seem, I find myself in Al Baron and Matt
> Giwer’s camp on this one. I certainly can’t assert that Jesus didn’t
> exist, but I can assert that there is a whole lot less evidence (and
> most or all if it simply testimony) for Jesus’s existence than there is
> for the existence of the Holocaust.
>
> Hasn’t there been some academic research into this question? Isn’t
> there a revisionist (to use the word correctly) position that Jesus did
> not exist
The title is simply due to the fact that even if one scan a
newsgroup about cooking and food, I bet that the question of
the existence of God will appear somewhere, sometimes from one
of those christians who want to convert their agnostic before the end of
the world. Amen.
There was very interesting and serious research on that question,
and I read some books about it several years ago. There’s no
reason to believe that Jesus didn’t exist, the Gospels were
written about 30 to 50 years after Jesus death and if someone
study this story seriously I think that it’s hard to claim
that Jesus is a fiction. However, the question of the miracles
is another one, since I’m agnostic (let say 98% atheist) I no
longer believe in those ones. But most of the historians believe
that Jesus did exist, even the majority of the atheist historians
who are specialist in the christian religion. You could be surprise
how it is possible to deal with the oldest greek version of the
Gospels and trace back the circunstances of their writting, even
mathematics can be use! The thing is that in the Jewish religion,
most of the claims were written hundreds of years after and
it is hard to do a serious historical study with extra-biblical
sources, it is a question of faith. The origin of the gospels
can be define more accuratly mainly due to the fact that they
were written few decades after and that some historical events
can help in that case, despite most of those good studies have
a default: they are subjective and consider Jesus divinity as a fact,
but this doesn’t mean that all the stuff written on that is stupid.
But this is not really related to al.revisionism, perhaps we
will talk about it another in another newsgroup.
From [email protected] Sat Apr 27 09:32:14 PDT 1996
Article: 33083 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!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!
usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Grand gas experiment
Date: 27 Apr 1996 12:39:19 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4lmvic$s0[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne6.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> Matt Giwer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> # We know from eyewitness testimony
> #
> # 1) Treblinka was gassing people with engine exhaust in 15-20
> # minutes before the first Auschwitz experiment.
>
> No, this is false. Again, you prove that you are, plain and simple,
> either a drunkard, senile, or simply retarded. The first gassing
> in Auschwitz took place at the end of 1941. The Treblinka gas chambers
> began operating after mid-1942.
>
> You make so many errors like this – there are errors like this
> in every article you post.
I’ve already say that this was wrong according to Hoess affidavit
In that case, he claimed that he visited Treblinka and that
a lot of Jews had been gased there before he decided to adopt a
new way. And you know as me that this could have happen only
after the summer of 1942 at least, or after July 1942.
One could suggest that Hoess did an error with a date, but
an error with a fictive visit?….
From [email protected] Sat Apr 27 10:58:57 PDT 1996
Article: 33103 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!
newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Van Alstine: a serial liar
Date: 27 Apr 1996 14:47:59 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<4lmlf3$[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne32.vir.com
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
States the disease is not prevalent.
>
> Head lice prefer to live on the hair of the head although they have been
> known to wander to other parts of the body. The body louse prefers to
> remain on the clothing of the host, and feed on the body. A person
> infested with hundreds of body lice may remove his clothes and not find a
> single louse on his body.
I’ve already respond to that but I think I’ll change my method
and wait 2 days after an email to sea the message appearing publically,
before to send my response, that is less confuzing
From [email protected] Sat Apr 27 16:35:24 PDT 1996
Article: 33183 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!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!
usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Grand gas experiment
Date: 27 Apr 1996 18:55:24 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne14.vir.com
[email protected] (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>
> One of many reasons why the Hoess affidavit should be handled with extreme
> care, IMHO.
Indeed, That’s probably why of the first method that a good anti-revisionnist
must follow is to NEVER talk about the first gasing in 1941 and
the Hoess affidavit in the same week.
From [email protected] Sun Apr 28 10:09:06 PDT 1996
Article: 33213 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!
news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!lexis-nexis!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!
usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: AUSCHWITZ: Revisionnist FAQ (1)
Date: 27 Apr 1996 23:21:47 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 131
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4l6[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne28.vir.com
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>
>> Is it possible, even likely, that cremating someone in a
>> wooden coffin would reduce the time of cremation seeing how it would
>> put the firey inferno into a higher degree.
>Evidently not according to Beaulieu, who insists that when multiple
>corpses were put into the muffles at Auschwitz that it took up more
>volume, thus increasing the cremation time. Putting a person into a coffin
>would also take up more of the muffle’s volume, thus, according to
>Beaulieu’s illogic, increasing the cremation time.
It’s a fact. And I’ve seen also several anti-revisionist who claimed
that a baby take less time than an adult to burn, and an emaciate person
less than an obese personn, and they are right.
>Of course, one could argue that the coffin is combustable, thus releasing
>more heat energy into the muffle, and thus speading up the incineration.
>But then the same can be said for corpses, which are also combustable.
I think so also, despite I’m not sure what to think after Al’s posting.
However, wood do not need to be dry, it doesn’t contain a great amount of
water and offer a larger surface /volume than a body if we talk about
a coffin. But I’ll stop that here since I suspect you’ll ask me a calculus
for a thing that everybody know.
>In fact, the amount of energy liberated by burning a corpse would reduce
>the amount of coke needed to keep the furnaces hot enough to cremate the
>corpse. Fats, in general, when burned, release (on average) 37.7 kJ/g of
>heat energy. That’s more than coal does, which is (on average) 32.8 kJ/g.
>Carbohydrates and proteins yield about 17 kJ/g when burned. Assuming the
>”average” corpse incenerated at Auschwitz weighed 50 kg, and had a mean
>body of 14%, and if whe assume that the skeleton comprises 11% of body
>weight, this should mean that the the body should have the energy
>equivalent of about 27 kg of coal, or about 786,000 Btu’s. This is simply
>a rough assumption, of course, but it gives a general idea to the amount
>of energy locked up inside a human body.
Very rough indeed. I don’t know how you got your calculus but I’ll try:
‘and had a mean body of 14%’ is probably for ‘and had a mean proportion
of fat of 14%’, otherwise, I can’t understand your sentence. So for
the 50 kg body, you meant perhaps 7 kg of fat, 37.5 kg ( or 100%-11%-14%
=75% of proteins and carbohydrates times 50 kg) of carbohydrates and
proteines, so around 265,000 Kj for fat and 637,000 for the remaining
part, or the equivalent of a bit less than 30 kg of coke according to
your calorimetric datas, which are higher than those that I have for
fat and coke. However, a great part of the human body consist of water
and I wonder if you used that in your calculus also of if you took
proteins and carbohydrate calorimetric figures that already contain
this % of water. This make a big difference. You can take the calorimetric
figure for a tea-bone and apply that for the musles, but steak do contain
fat which mean that you count fat twice in that case. You must take extra-meager
meat if you count fat separatly. If you account for that with a 70 kg
you’ll et a far lower figure which can account for the heat loss over
2 hours. Now you state that several bodies would produce more
heat. Agree. But take care: if they do it too fast and too much, you
will simply break the oven, brick can vitrify when it is expose to too
much heat. However, the main thing here is simply that this increase
in heat production will be spread over a longer period, which mean more
heat loss also.
M.P. Stein’a artcle several weeks ago contained that paragraph:
> According to B&L President Steve Looker, who designed the Phoenix II,
>the average body gives off a modest 1,000 Btu per pound of meat (burning
>wood, by comparison, gives off 6,000 Btu). But an extremely obese corpse
>- like the one Rapp recently had to burn in its casket because it was wedged
>in so tightly – can run to 17,000 Btu. “That’s like burning kerosene,”
17,000 BTU is extremelly high, it is almost pure fat, it’s the equivalent
of 4,250 kCal per pound, or 39,000 kJ/kg. I’ve the impression that there
was some exageration there, however this 1,000 BTU per pound of meat
seems on the contrary, to low: the only explanation that I have is
that the author was refering to all the parts of the body except the
fat. But the total if we take those datas from a crematory expert, is
far less than yours.
Now I’ve something new. Jeff sent me by mail Carlo Mattogno’s book
recently and I’ll reproduce this paragraph:
“Regarding the consumption of coke in the gasogene ovens, incomparably the
most important fact to be found in the specialized German literature of
the time, is the cremation experiment conducted by Engineer Richard
Kessler, one of the top specialists on the cremation during the 20’s and
the 30’s. This experiment occured 5 January 1927 in Gebruder Beck, Offenbach
system oven, at the crematory of Dessau(1). The results of the experiment,
displayed in 2 thermotechnical diagrams, for each of the 8 corpses cremated
one after the other, were an average consumption of 29.5 kg of coke,
plus the casket. These diagrams are of an exceptional importance in
understanding the operation of a gasogene crematory oven. With the oven
at thermal equilibrium (in a hypothesis of 20 consecutive cremations)
the consumption of coke would have been reduced to 23 kg, plus the casket.
A casket averaging 40 kg produced an actual quantity of heat equal to
that produce by 15 kg of coke…”
(1) R. Kessler, “Rationelle Warmewirtschaft in den Krematorien, nach Massgabe
der Versuche im Dessauer Krematorium”, Die Warmewirtschaft, 4.
Jg, Heft 8-11, 1927
This quotation is from ‘The end of a legend’. Can you imagine that
Van Alstine?
There’s a crematory specialist who experimented on that in the 20’s
with several bodies in sery, and his conclusions long before WWII
were that an average cremation take 30 kg of coke for a
single cremation plus the casket, and 23 kg of coke plus the casket
if you cremate them in sery. If I had receive that before no self
inquiry with crematory operators would have be necessary but the
Canadian customs apparently ceased it the first time I asked it from
the IHR .
Prior to this paragraph, page 16:
“In a gasogene oven, heated with coke, the casket delayed corpse
water vaporization by 5 to 6 minutes, acting in a way as a thermal
shield until breaking apart by the effect of flammes. Simultaneously,
the heat produced by casket , which raised the temperature of the
chamber to 1,100 Celcius, accelerate the vaporization process,
therefore cremation without a casket did not take less time than
cremation with a casket”.
The samething Al. Baron was told in 1994. You can use Hoess confession
or eyewitness testimonies, this will not be convincing except for those
who support this story for political reasons. Time is working for us
Mark. And I’ve bad news: it’s hard to deport in Germany any revisionist
in Canada or to jail them, you can be sure that the stupids who decided
that it was a must to use this threat against Zundel will not solve their
problems even if they suceed.
Post and email
From [email protected] Sun Apr 28 10:09:07 PDT 1996
Article: 33386 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!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!news.interlink.net!
Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Faurisson’s ‘Historical Research’
Date: 28 Apr 1996 14:27:03 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 71
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <DpKB[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<Dq6E[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<DqB4[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne30.vir.com
[email protected] (Miloslav Bilik) wrote:
>
> How could these testimonies be so concordant ?
I can’t comment on Suchomel before few weeks for the reason that
you know but for the question of the concordance, this is plainly wrong.
I’ll post an article (that I didn’t write) this afternoon about
it, there was more contradictions than you think right after the
war.
>
> And if all this people is lying in the same way, in the same details,
> in the same words, where are the Jews? Statements show invariably
> trains full when incoming, and free when returning. The camp was
> small, and hadn’t the capacity for thousands people, even for a few
> days. Where are the Jews who have gone to Treblinka if not
> exterminated? Do you have some documents to explain this mystery?
>
The problem is that it is the prosecution who could decide which
documents were accesible, and you have a sery of bureaucratic
stages for which military officers, US or Russians, had all
the lattitude to select which documents were to be preserved.
It is a fact that in the process of denazification it wasn’t
wishable for the winners of the war to present documents that
could excuse the Nazi in any circunstance since they had to
deal with a big problem: most of the Germans were still behind
their ex-leaders. It is your belief that the Nuremberg trials
were establish to punish the Nazis but it’s hard to deny that
they had also as a purpose to show to the Germans how their
leaders were mad. Denazification. In that case it is not unbelievable
that if documents that were dealing with the eastern ghettos
were found or either telegrams that were speaking not just of
the arrival of Jews in Treblinka but also of their departures from
there then it wasn’t wishable to keep the last ones.
I’ll repost the Luther Memorendum this afternoon also.
For the demographical question, this is another question.
Most of the Jews deported to Treblinka were Poles and those ones
were Russians before WW I. I’ve recently post something, an article
from the Gazette that show how the 16,000 refugees figure that
was claimed by Jewish officials for the number who immigrated
in Canada was under estimated by a factor 3. There’s thus no
reason to believe that the other claims that can be found in Hilberg’s
book for countries like USA are a proof of anything. But in the
case of Treblinka, as I said, most of them were Poles and if
the economic conditions were better in USSR after their ressetlement
in the East, since they had no longer any property in Poland,
nor family, I’m not surprise that most of them didn’t return.
Jews in France may sometimes feel as ‘French first, Jew after’
but in a country like Poland, often described by them as anti-semitic
I would be surprise if they had any reason to return there.
It was say previously that the post war figures given by the communist
autorities for the Jewish population were not trustables,
and the discovery of a large number of extra-Jews recently can
show it. Those extra Jew are not necesserelly all descent of
Poles who were deported there, but since the Jewish officials
claimed themselves that the real number of Jews in USSR could
not be know before a while, than the post war communist figures
are unusables.
But anyway, I’m just finishing a very long article on Treblinka
soon and I’ll translate it in english gradually at the end of
the week and post it in several pieces days after days, there’s
*a lot* of vulnerable points in that story, a lot of contradictions.
From [email protected] Sun Apr 28 14:16:15 PDT 1996
Article: 33430 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!
news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!lexis-nexis!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!
usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: TREBLINKA
Date: 28 Apr 1996 17:20:06 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 576
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne67.vir.com
TREBLINKA
Wartime Aerial Photos of Treblinka Cast New Doubt on Death Camp Claims
by Mark Weber and Andrew Allen
Treblinka is widely regarded as the second most important German wartime
extermination center. Only Auschwitz-Birkenau is supposed to have claimed
more lives.
Treblinka became the focus of worldwide attention in 1987-1988 during the
14-month trial in Jerusalem of John (Ivan) Demjanjuk, a Ukrainian-born American
factory worker. As Treblinka’s Ivan the Terrible, Demjanjuk
supposedly operated the machinery used to gas hundreds of thousands of Jews
there. Citing testimony by Jewish survivors, the Israeli court that condemned
him to death in April 1988 declared that more than 850,000 Jews were killed
at Treblinka between July 1942 and August 1943.
After the death sentence was handed down, Demjanjuk’s family was able to
discover previously suppressed evidence — much of it from Soviet Russian
archives — indicating that the real Ivan the Terrible was another
Ukrainian named Ivan Marchenko (or Marczenko). This new evidence discredited
the courtroom testimony of five Jewish camp survivors, each of whom had
positively identified Demjanjuk as the sadistic mass murderer
of Treblinka. (note 1)
As historians know, and as common sense would suggest, such decades-old
testimony is far less trustworthy than contemporary records or forensic
evidence. (note 2)
And yet, Treblinka’s reputation as a mass extermination center is based
almost entirely on precisely such subjective and unprovable testimony by
former prisoners — evidence that has proven to be notoriously unreliable
in several major trials of alleged Nazi war criminals. (note
3)
There is no documentary evidence that Treblinka was an extermination center.
In fact, contemporary records suggest that the camp had a very different
function.
Aerial reconnaissance photographs taken in 1944 of the Treblinka death
camp site — and forgotten for almost 45 years in the National Archives
in Washington, DC — cast serious doubts on the widely accepted story that
it was a mass extermination center.
Discovered in 1989, and published here for the first time in the United
States, these German reconnaissance photos corroborate other evidence indicating
that Treblinka was actually a transit camp. (note 4)
These photographs indicate that the remarkably small camp was not isolated,
or even particularly well guarded. (They clearly show that fields where
Polish farmers planted and cultivated crops were directly adjacent to the
camp perimeter.)
Moreover, the camp’s burial area quite obviously appears too small to contain
the hundreds of thousands of bodies supposedly buried there. (Casting doubt
on the widely accepted story of hundreds of thousands of Treblinka victims,
these photos suggest instead that only those deportees who died during the
sometimes protracted rail journey to the camp were buried there.)
‘Steam Chambers’
The generally accepted story today is that hundreds of thousands of Jews
were killed at Treblinka in gas chambers with poisonous exhaust from engines.
But the original Treblinka extermination story was that Jews
were steamed to death there in steam chambers.
According to an eyewitness account received in November 1942
in London from the Warsaw ghetto underground organization, Jews were exterminated
in death rooms at Treblinka with steam coming out of the
numerous holes in the pipes. (note 5) In August 1943, the New York
Times reported that two million Jews had already been killed at Treblinka
by steaming them to death. (note 6)
The Treblinka steam story is also given in detail in The Black Book of Polish
Jewry, a work published in New York in 1943 and sponsored by
Albert Einstein, Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, Congressman Sol Bloom, New York
Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, and other personalities. (note 7) Another book,
Lest We Forget, published in New York in 1943 by the World Jewish Congress,
describes in detail how Jews were steamed to death, and provides a diagram
showing the location of the purported boiler room that produced
the live steam. (note 8)
According to a 1944 eyewitness account compiled by the OSS,
the principle US intelligence agency, Jews at Treblinka were in general
killed by steam and not by gas as had been at first suspected. (note
9)
At the main Nuremberg trial of 1945-1946, two conflicting stories were given:
steaming and gassing. Former Treblinka prisoner Samuel Rajzman testified
that Jews were killed there in gas chambers. (note 10) (To confuse matters
still more, a few months earlier Rajzman claimed that during the time he
was in Treblinka, Jews were suffocated to death there with a
machine that pumped air out of death chambers.) (note 11)
American prosecutors at the main Nuremberg trial supported the steam story.
As proof, a Polish government report dated December 5, 1945, was submitted
as prosecution exhibit USA-293. It charged that Jews were killed at the
camp by suffocating them in steam-filled chambers. This report,
which says nothing about poison gas killings, was published in the official
Nuremberg trial record as document PS-3311. (note 12) An American prosecutor
quoted from this report during his address to the Tribunal on December 14,
1945. (note 13)
Although no reputable historian now supports the steam story,
and little has been heard of it during the last several decades, it was
revived in a widely-circulated booklet published in 1979 and 1985 by the
influential Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith. (note 14)
There may have been a factual basis for the steam chamber stories.
It is quite possible that there was indeed some kind of steaming operation
at Treblinka — but one designed to kill disease-carrying lice, not people.
Such disinfection steaming was commonly used in German camps for Allied
prisoners of war. (note 15)
Shortly after the war, the World Jewish Congress published The Black Book,
a 559-page volume of real and imagined wartime atrocities against Jews.
At Treblinka alone, the book alleges, three million persons were killed.
Three diabolical techniques, including poison gas and steam, were supposedly
used there to kill some 10,000 Jews daily. But the most widespread
method consisted of pumping all the air out from the chambers with
large special pumps. (note 16) A former inmate testified shortly after
the war that Treblinka’s victims were poisoned by the different gasses
or asphyxiated when the chamber was turned into a vacuum and all the air
sucked out. (note 17)
In the Nuremberg trial of Oswald Pohl, U.S. Judge Michael A. Musmanno declared
that death was inflicted here [at Treblinka] by gas and steam, as
well as by electric current. Citing Nuremberg document PS-3311, Musmanno
declared: After being filled up to capacity the chambers were hermetically
closed and steam was let in. (note 18)
Adolf Eichmann, the wartime head of the SS Jewish affairs section, said
in 1961 during pre-trial interrogation in Israel that during the war he
was told that Jews were gassed at Treblinka with potassium
cyanide. (note 19)
One of the strangest Treblinka extermination stories, which appeared in
September 1942 in a Polish underground periodical, claimed that Jews were
killed there with a delayed action gas: (note 20)
H2>BLOCKQUOTE>They enter it [the gas chamber] in groups of 300-500 people.
Each group is immediately closed hermetically inside, and gassed. The gas
does not affect them immediately, because the Jews still have to continue
on to the pits that are a few dozen meters away, and whose depth is 30 meters.
There they fall unconscious, and a digger covers them with a thin layer
of earth. Then another group arrives. H2>/BLOCKQUOTE>
According to the testimony of yet another eyewitness, a Jew
named Oskar Berger who escaped from the camp, many Jews were systematically
put to death at Treblinka by shooting them with rifle and machine-gun fire.
(note 21)
Diesel Gassing
In recent years, the most widely-circulated story has been that Jews were
gassed at Treblinka with carbon monoxide from the exhaust of a diesel engine.
(note 22)
However, as American engineer Friedrich Berg has established, this story
is improbable for technical reasons. (note 23) In spite of the obnoxious
odor of diesel exhaust, diesel engines produce much smaller quantities of
toxic carbon monoxide than ordinary gasoline motors. (note 24) It would
thus be difficult efficiently to gas large numbers of people using diesel
exhaust. A normal gasoline engine would be much more logical. (note 25)
It is important to keep in mind that the evidence now usually
cited for diesel gassing at Treblinka is no more credible than the evidence
that was once presented for steaming and suffocating. Apparently the steaming
and suffocating stories have been dropped for the sake of credible consistency.
Solid evidence for gassings at Treblinka has proven to be very elusive.
For example, it turned out that none of the witnesses in the 1951 West German
Treblinka court case ever actually saw anyone being gassed.
The type of gas used to kill the people there [Treblinka] cannot be
determined with certainty because none of the witnesses was able to witness
this procedure, the judges declared in their verdict. (note 26)
At least some former Treblinka prisoners testified in postwar West German
trials that they not only never saw a gas chamber, but did not even hear
about gassings from others. (note 27)
Holocaust historians today are not able to agree about the number of homicidal
gas chambers at Treblinka. Raul Hilberg maintains that there
were three at first, but because they were allegedly not adequate for the
job, more were built later on. There were eventually six or perhaps ten
chambers, he reports. (note 28) Others have reported the existence of 13
gas chambers at Treblinka. (note 29)
Bomba’s Testimony
One of the most memorable testimonies about Treblinka presented in Shoah,
the nine-and-a-half-hour Holocaust film by French Jewish film maker Claude
Lanzmann, is that of Abraham Bomba. He told how he and other Jewish barbers
cut the hair of the naked Jews who were about to be gassed. They worked
inside the gas chamber (he always spoke of one chamber), which
was around four by four meters (about 12 feet by 12 feet). Bomba
also reported that 140 or 150 women, with children, as well
as 16 or 17 barbers, were inside this small room. In addition, there were
benches where the women sat while their hair was cut, as well as two or
more German guards.
The barbers had to leave the chamber for five minutes while the victims
were gassed, Bomba said, and it took just one minute to clear out the 140
or so corpses, and clean the floor and walls, before everything was ready
for the next batch of victims. (note 30)
Bomba’s moving testimony, which conservative writer George Will called the
most stunning in this shattering film, is simply not credible.
Treblinka Labor Camp
About one mile (1.5 km) from the extermination camp, which was
known as Treblinka II, was a penal labor camp for Poles and
Jews known as Treblinka I. It was not at all secret. The 1941
directive announcing the establishment of the Treblinka Labor Camp
was published in both Polish and German in widely distributed official journals.
(note 31) Poles and Jews worked in a large sand and gravel quarry at the
Treblinka labor camp. (note 32)
As wartime aerial reconnaissance photographs clearly show, the Treblinka
T-I labor camp was located at the end of the rail spur on which the Treblinka
T-II extermination (transit) camp was also located. This fact
strengthens the thesis that the T-II camp was not particularly secret, since
penal labor prisoners being taken by train to and from the publicly known
T-I camp passed directly by the supposedly top secret T-II extermination
camp. (note 33)
Documentary Evidence
Documents found after the war confirm that large numbers of Jews were deported
to Treblinka in 1942 and 1943. German railway records report the transfer
of trainloads of settlers (Umsiedler) and workers
to Treblinka from various places in Poland and from other countries. (note
34)
In July 1942, a senior German railway official reported to the chief of
Himmler’s personal staff that 5,000 Jews were being transported daily to
Treblinka. (note 35) An August 3, 1942, German Ostbahn railway
directive similarly reported that special trains would be carrying resettlers
>from Warsaw to Treblinka daily, until further notice. (note 36)
Interestingly, it was not until September 1, 1942, that the Treblinka train
station was closed to passenger rail travel by the general public (to
permit a smooth handling of the special resettlement trains), which
suggests that German officials were not particularly concerned with keeping
the deportations or the station secret. (note 37)
Other records mention trains to Treblinka in March 1943 from Vienna, Bulgaria
and Greece. (note 38) From Vienna and Luxembourg, Jews reportedly arrived
at the camp in passenger train coaches, and the deportees were given food
and medical care during their journey. (note 39) In at least one case, a
train with sleeping cars and a dining car arrived at Treblinka. (note 40)
German railway records have been cited as evidence that hundreds of thousands
of Jews were exterminated at Treblinka. (note 41) While there is little
doubt that these documents are genuine, and that they confirm transports
of Jews to Treblinka, they are not proof of an extermination program. (note
42)
Transit Camp
If Treblinka was not an extermination center, what was it? As already mentioned,
the balance of evidence indicates that Treblinka II — along with Belzec
and Sobibor — was a transit camp, where Jewish deportees were stripped
of their property and valuables before being transferred eastwards into
German-occupied Soviet territories. (note 43)
The generally-accepted story is that Treblinka II was a pure
extermination center, from which no Jew was permitted to leave alive. (note
44) However, credible reports of deportations of Jews from Treblinka refute
the allegation that all Jews sent there were destined for extermination,
and indicate instead that the camp functioned as a transit center.
In the aftermath of the April 1943 Warsaw ghetto uprising, for example,
Jews were transported from Warsaw to Treblinka II. As some of the deportees
later confirmed, after a selection in the camp, trainloads of
hundreds of Jews were taken from Treblinka to Lublin (Majdanek), and possibly
other camps. (note 45) Several thousand Jews (at least) were transferred
by German authorities from Treblinka to other camps, a postwar German court
determined. (note 46)
Letters and postcards that arrived in the Warsaw ghetto from Jews who, by
all accounts, had been deported to Treblinka, indicate that the camp was
a transit center from where Jews were resettled in the occupied Soviet territories.
These messages, which arrived from settlements and camps in Belarus (Byelorussia),
Ukraine, and even Russia proper (near Smolensk), were written by Jews who
had been deported in 1942. Some letters and cards had been sent by mail
and some had arrived through the underground. Many mentioned that the senders
were working hard, but confirmed that they (and often their children) were
being fed. (note 47)
Completely contrary to its supposed character as a top secret extermination
center, Treblinka was neither secret nor even closely guarded, as both former
inmates and officials have confirmed. Secrecy? Good heavens, there
was no secrecy about Treblinka, Jewish prisoner Richard Glazer later
testified. All the Poles between there and Warsaw must have known
about it, and lived off the proceeds. All the peasants came to barter, the
Warsaw whores did business with the Ukrainians — it was a circus for all
of them. Polish farmers worked the fields that directly adjoined the
camp. And many others, said Jewish survivor Berek Rojzman, came
to the fence to barter, mostly with the Ukrainians, but with us too.
(note 48)
Even regular German concentration camps such as Dachau and Buchenwald were
much more closely guarded than Treblinka. As already mentioned, aerial reconnaissance
photographs taken in 1944 confirm that the area around Treblinka was not
cleared. The photos show that one perimeter of the camp passed through a
wooded area, and that cultivated fields where Polish farmers worked were
directly adjacent to the camp perimeter. (note 49)
How Many Victims?
Shortly after the end of the war, the World Jewish Congress and at least
one former Treblinka prisoner alleged that more than three million Jews
had been exterminated there. (note 50) More recent estimates of the number
of people allegedly killed at Treblinka range from between 700,000 (Leon
Poliakov and Uwe Adam), 750,000 (Raul Hilberg and Encyclopaedia Judaica),
870,000 (Yitzhak Arad), to more than 900,000 (Wolfgang Scheffler and Washington
Post). (note 51)
There is no documentary or physical evidence for any of these figures, which
are simply conjectural estimates.
Layout and Size
Diagrams published in recent years that show Treblinka as a neatly organized,
rectangular-shaped camp are not accurate. (note 52) As already mentioned,
though, wartime aerial reconnaissance photographs confirm that the Treblinka
II camp was actually unsymmetrically four-sided and irregularly shaped.
(note 53)
One of the most remarkable features of the Treblinka death camp
is its small size. The entire Treblinka II camp area was only 32 or 33 acres
(13 hectares), or about onetwentieth of a square mile. (note 54) Even smaller
was the alleged extermination area of the camp, which was 200
by 250 meters in size (or five hectares) according to purportedly authoritative
sources. (note 55)
Poland’s Central Commission announced shortly after the war
that the burial or ditches area where the bodies of Treblinka’s
victims were buried (before they were supposedly later dug up for burning)
was about two hectares or five acres (or some 20,235 square meters). (note
56) And according to a diagram in a book about Treblinka by Jewish Holocaust
historian Alexander Donat, the camp’s ditches area was not more
than 80 or 100 meters in length and about 50 meters wide — that is, a maximum
of 5,000 square meters or half a hectare. (note 57)
By comparison, the mass graves area in the Katyn forest (near Smolensk),
which held the bodies of some 4,500 Polish officers who had been killed
by Soviet secret police and buried there in 1940, measured about 500 square
meters. (note 58)
In short, it is very difficult to accept that anything like 700,000 or 800,000
bodies could have been buried in the minuscule area allegedly set aside
at Treblinka for this purpose.
Cremation Inconsistencies
Between April and July 1943, the corpses of Treblinka’s hundreds of thousands
of victims were allegedly dug up from the burial pits and burned with dry
wood and branches on grids made of rails in batches of 2,000 or 2,500.
The residual ash and bits of bone were dumped back into the
burial pits, and covered with a layer of sand and dirt two meters deep.
This was done, it is said, in order to eliminate the physical evidence of
mass extermination. (note 59)
Although enormous amounts of fuel would have been needed to cremate the
hundreds of thousands of alleged corpses, there is no documentary record
or witness recollection of the great quantities of firewood that would have
been required. According to Polish-Jewish historian Rachel Auerbach, fuel
to burn bodies was not needed at Treblinka because the bodies of woman,
which had more fat, were used to kindle, or more accurately put, to
build the fires among the piles of corpses. Even more incredible,
blood, too, was found to be first-class combustion material,
she wrote. (note 60)
Missing Remains
A wartime Warsaw ghetto internee, Dr. Adolf Berman, testified in the 1961
Eichmann trial that he visited the Treblinka camp site shortly after the
Soviet occupation of Poland. He told the Jerusalem court that he saw an
area of several square kilometers covered with bones and skulls, and nearby
tens upon tens of thousands of shoes, many of them children’s shoes.
(note 61)
Berman’s testimony, which was considered one of the most emotionally moving
of the Eichmann trial, is completely inconsistent with known facts. For
one thing, the entire Treblinka camp was much smaller than one square kilometer
in size, and no other witness has confirmed the presence of tens of
thousands of shoes.
Jewish historian Rachel Auerbach, a member of an official Polish commission
that inspected the camp site in November 1945 — that is, a few months after
the end of the war — reported finding large human bones, rotted masses
of corpses, pieces of half-rotted corpses, and fully
dressed corpses, at the Treblinka camp site. (note 62)
In the area where the gas chambers were supposed to have been located, the
commission’s team of 30 excavation workers reportedly found human
remains, partially in the process of decay, and an unspecified amount
of ash. Untouched sandy soil was reached at 7.5 meters, at which point the
digging was halted. An accompanying photograph of an excavated pit reveals
some large bones. (note 63)
Poland’s Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes
reported that large quantities of ashes mixed with sand, among which
are numerous human bones, often with the remains of decomposing tissues,
were found in the five acre (two hectare) burial area during an examination
of the site shortly after the end of the war. (note 64)
The presence of uncremated human remains is not consistent with the often-repeated
allegation that all such remains were thoroughly destroyed. Significantly,
none of the Polish reports specifies the quantity of human remains, the
numbers of corpses, or the amount of ash found at the camp site, which suggests
that evidence of hundreds of thousands of victims was not found. (note 65)
In spite of its often inconsistent, contradictory and implausible character,
testimony indicating that many Jews lost their lives at Treblinka cannot
easily be dismissed. Many Jewish prisoners doubtless perished during their
rail journey to the camp site, and were almost certainly buried there. Furthermore,
it is plausible and even likely that hundreds and perhaps thousands of Jews
who were too weak or ill to continue the eastbound journey from the camp
were killed there by officials acting on their own authority.
All the same, there is no hard or compelling evidence that Treblinka was
a mass extermination center where hundreds of thousands of Jews were systematically
put to death. To the contrary, credible reports of transfers of Jews from
Treblinka eastwards to the occupied Soviet territories, the relative lack
of secrecy and security in the camp, and the small size of the area where
the bodies were supposedly buried, all suggest instead that this was a transit
center.
Notes0H2>/H2>
<OL>
<LI>F. Dannen, How Terrible is Ivan?, Vanity Fair (New York),
June 1992, pp. 132 ff. New Evidence: Demjanjuk a Nazi Guard, Probably
Not ‘Ivan’, Los Angeles Times, January 16, 1992. C. Haberman, Soviet
Files Are Presented… , The New York Times, June 2, 1992, p. A6.
<LI>On the unreliability of such testimony, see John Cobden’s review of
Witness for the Defense (by E. Loftus and K. Ketcham) in The Journal of
Historical Review, Summer 1991, pp. 238-249. Samuel Gringauz, a Jewish
historian who was himself interned in the Kaunas ghetto during the war,
wrote: Most of the memoirs and reports [of Holocaust survivors] are
full of preposterous verbosity, graphomanic exaggeration, dramatic effects,
overestimated self-inflation, dilettante philosophizing, would-be lyricism,
unchecked rumors, bias, partisan attacks and apologies. (Jewish Social
Studies, New York, January 1950, Vol. 12, p. 65.).
<LI>On the unreliability of such eyewitness testimony in the
illustrative case of Frank Walus, who was falsely accused of murdering Jews
as a Gestapo officer in Poland, see, for example, The Nazi Who Never
Was, The Washington Post, May 10, 1981, pp. B5, B8.
<LI>These aerial reconnaissance photos are on file in the National Archives
(Washington, DC), Cartographic Division (Record Group 373).
<LI>Several of these reconnaissance photos were published in Germany in
1990 by Udo Walendy in the booklet Der Fall Treblinka, Historische
Tatsachen, Nr. 44, 1990. (Postfach 1643, D-4973 Vlotho, Germany). See especially
pages 13, 31, 34, 35, 38. In this booklet, Walendy cites specific archival
source references from the US National Archives for these photographs. Unfortunately,
these specific references are not always quite accurate. The specific source
references cited by Walendy are:
GX 12225 (or 122225?), Exp. 257 (and 258, 259?). (November or May 1944)
GX 180 D F 934/44 SK , Exp. 246 (May 18, 1944)
GX 12299 B A -2249, Exp. 014 (July 10, 1944)
GX 72 F 933/44 SK, Exp. 139, 140 (May 13, 1944)
GX 1946 F 2926 /44 SK, Exp. 062 (Sept. 18, 1944)
GX 937 F 13 A 6099, Exp. 74
GX 12250 F 2795 SK, Exp. 045 (Sept. 2, 1944)
GX 12290 F 3086 SK r 2600, Exp. 68 (Oct. 16, 1944)
GX 1946 / 44 SD, Exp. 076.
GX 12373, Exp. 11 (Sept. 2, 1944)
The most important of these Treblinka aerial photographs were made public
for the first time in the United States in January 1991 at a meeting in
Palo Alto, California. (IHR Newsletter, Feb. 1991, p. 3.).
<LI>We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the Polish Historical Society
(Stamford, Connecticut) in compiling this essay.
<LI>Soviet wartime aerial reconnaissance photographs of the Treblinka camp
site almost certainly exist, and are very probably still held in Russian
archives. If so, they should be made public.
<LI>Likwidacja zydowskiej Warszawy, Treblinka, Biuleytn Zydowskiego
Instytutu Historycznego (Warsaw), Jan.-June 1951, pp. 93-100. Quoted in:
Carlo Mattogno, The Myth of the Extermination of the Jews, The
Journal of Historical Review, Fall 1988, pp. 273-274, 295 (n. 16).
<LI>New York Times, Aug. 8, 1943, p. 11. Reprinted in: The Record: The Holocaust
in History (New York: ADL, 1985), p. 10. (The Record was also distributed
as an advertising supplement to the New York Post, April 17, 1978.)
<LI>Jacob Apenszlak, ed., The Black Book of Polish Jewry (New York: 1943),
pp. 142-143, 145.
<LI>World Jewish Congress, Lest We Forget (New York: 1943), pp. 4, 6-7.
See also the reference to killings at Treblinka by hot steam
in Hitler’s Ten-Year War On the Jews (p. 149), a book published in New York
in 1943 by the Institute of Jewish Affairs, an agency of the
American Jewish Congress and the World Jewish Congress.
<LI>OSS document, April 13, 1944. National Archives (Washington, DC), Military
Branch, Record Group 226 (OSS records), No. 67231.
<LI>International Military Tribunal, Trial of the Major War Criminals Before
the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg: 1947-1949, (blue series),
Vol. 8, p. 325. (Feb. 27, 1946)
<LI>Rajzman text in: Yuri Suhl, ed., They Fought Back (New York: 1967),
p. 130. This story also appears in: Isaiah Trunk, Jewish Responses (New
York: 1982), p. 263.
<LI>IMT, Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military
Tribunal (IMT blue series/ 1947-1949), vol. 32, pp. 153-158
Also published in: Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression (NC&A red series/
1946-1948), Vol. 5, pp. 1104-1108. See also: NC&A (red series),
vol. 1, pp. 1005-1006.
<LI>IMT, Trial of the Major War Criminals (blue series), vol.
3, p. 567-568.
<LI>The Record: The Holocaust in History. (The NYT report of Aug. 8, 1943,
is reproduced here.)
<LI>Major S. G. Cowper, A Note on a Disinfestation Plant Used in a
Typhus Hospital for Prisoners of War in Germany, Journal of the Royal
Army Medical Corps, Sept. 1946, Vol. 87, No. 3, pp. 173-176. Typhus,
1922 supplement to Encyclopaedia Britannica. Facsimile reprint in: Carlos
Porter, Made in Russia (1988), p. 364. Globocnik reported in Jan. 1944
that textile goods seized in the course of Aktion Reinhardt
were disinfected. See: 4024-PS. IMT blue series, vol. 34, p.
84. Jacob Seewald, a Polish Jew, spent the war years working as a forester
in a German labor camp. When he came down with a severe illness, he was
transferred to a hospital, where he recovered. After the war he emigrated
to the United States. In a 1983 interview, he recalled that the camp authorities
took us [Jewish workers] into a shower for the steam to kill lice.
There we got no clothes, just a bundle with our names on them. Naked. Then
they turn on the water for a second — scalding water. (John C. Bromely,
Stories from the Darkness, The Denver Post Magazine, Sunday,
June 12, 1983, p. 20.) Similar events at Treblinka may perhaps have provided
a basis for the camp’s steam legend.
<LI>Jewish Black Book Comm., The Black Book (1946), pp. 407-408.
<LI>Isaiah Trunk, Jewish Responses (New York: 1982), p. 263.
<LI>Trials of the War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals
(NMT green series/ Washington, DC: 1949-1953), vol. 5, pp. 1133-1134.
<LI>Jochen von Lang, ed., Eichmann Interrogated (New York: 1983), p. 84.
See also: R. Aschenauer, ed., Ich, Adolf Eichmann (1980), pp. 179, 183.
<LI>Information Bulletin, Sept. 8, 1942, published by the command
of the Polish underground Armia Krajowa. Quoted in: Yitzhak
Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka (Bloomington: 1987), pp. 353 f.
<LI>E. Kogon, Theory and Practice of Hell (New York: Berkley, pb., 1981),
pp. 183-185.
<LI>Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (New York: 1985),
p. 878. Treblinka, Encyclopaedia Judaica (1971), vol. 15, p.
1368. Eugen Kogon, et al., Nationalsozialistische Massentötungen (1986),
p. 163 Yitzhak Arad, Treblinka, in: I. Gutman, ed., Encyclopedia
of the Holocaust, pp. 1483, 1484.
<LI>F. Berg, The Diesel Gas Chambers, The Journal of Historical
Review, Spring 1984, pp. 15-46.
<LI>R. Schmidt, A. Carey, and R. Kamo, Exhaust Characteristics of
the Automotive Diesel, Society of Automotive Engineers Transactions
(New York), Vol. 75, Sec. 3, 1967, pp. 106, 107. (paper 660550).
<LI>Even more logical and efficient than a gasoline engine — in the view
of engineer Friedrich Berg — would have been the Holzgas generator,
which were in very widespread use in Europe during the war years. See: F.
Berg, The Diesel Gas Chambers, The Journal of Historical Review,
Spring 1984, pp. 38-41.
<LI>Case against J. Hirtreiter, LG Frankfurt, 1951. Justiz und NS-Verbrechen
(Amsterdam: 1972), Band 8, p. 264 (270 a-4).
<LI>Hans Peter Rullmann, Der Fall Demjanjuk (Sonnenbühl: 1987), p.
149. Source cited: Adalbert Rückerl, NS-Vernichtungslager (1977).
An unsatisfactory explanation has been offered for this remarkable testimony:
these witnesses must have been inmates of the nearby Treblinka labor camp,
or for some other reason were never in the extermination section
of the T-II camp.
<LI>R. Hilberg, Destruction (1985), p. 879.
<LI>Central Commission…, German Crimes in Poland (Warsaw: 1946-1947),
vol. 1, p. 97. Yitzhak Arad, Treblinka, in: I. Gutman, ed.,
Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, pp. 1483, 1485.
<LI>Shoah (Paris: Fayard, 1985), pp. 126-129. (I am thankful to Dr. Faurisson
for pointing this out.) See also: Bradley R. Smith, Shoah: Abraham
Bomba, the Barber, The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1986,
pp. 244-253.
<LI>Directive of Nov. 15, 1941. Amtsblatt für den Distrikt Warschau,
Dec. 16, 1941, p. 116. Facsimile reproduction in: S. Wojtczak, Karny
From [email protected] Sun Apr 28 14:16:17 PDT 1996
Article: 33431 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!
news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!lexis-nexis!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!
usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: The Luther memorendum (Repost)
Date: 28 Apr 1996 17:21:56 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 173
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne67.vir.com
For a while I wanted to present that, probably that several peoples
here have read it entirelly before, but perhaps some did not.
Marthin Luther was occupying a key position in the foreign office,
and this memorendum was redact in august 1942. I’ve not actually the
books that were dealing with the story surrounding the Luther memorendum
redaction, I’ve not take a deep look to that part for years. The closest
book that I have here is the hoax of the twentieth century, page 205.
But the best I can remember it was for the preparation of a meeting
of high rank SS officers for the discussion surrounding the progress
of the final solution.
The reader may put himself in the context and ask ‘why did the german used
a coding terminology in their high level documents?”.
Hilberg quote only few parts of the original documents, which is suppose
to refer to an extermination policy. Some paragraph, especially the 2 last
ones of the long post, are interesting if we have to imagine that the man
who wrote that knew what was the real sense of the final solution. In
that case, for an obscur reason he used a coding terminology rather than
to talk about an extermination policy in a document which was classified
in a private file. I’ve not the time to retype it entirelly, but I’ll
show with a ****cut***** where I’m skipping a long ,boring and irrelvant
part and go there to the end. I’ve not the time to type all that stuff
today:
Date of the signature: 21 August 1942.
“1) The principle of the German Jewish policy after the seizure of the
power consisted in promoting with all the means the Jewish emmigration.
For this purpose the 1939 Field Marshall Goerring in his capacity as
Plenipotenciary for the Four Year Plan established a Reich Central
Office for Jewish Emigration and the direction was given to SS lieutenant
General Heydrich in his capacity as chief of the Security Police.
The Foreign Office is represented in the committee of the Reich
Central Office. The draft of a letter to this effect to the Chief of
the Security Police was approved by the Reich Foreign Minister as
83/24 B in February 1939.
2) The present war gives Germany the opportunity and also the duty
of solving the Jewish problem in Europe. In consideration of the
favorable course of the war against France, D lll (department Gemrmany
lll) proposed in July 1940 as a solution – the removal of all Jews
from Europe and the demanding of the Island of Madagascar from
France as a territory for the reception of the Jews. The Reich Foreign
Minister has basically agreed to the begining of the preliminary work
for the deportation of the Jews from Europe. This should be done in close
cooperation with the offices of the Reichfuehrer SS (compare D lll 200/40)
The Madagascar plan was enthusiastically accepted by the RSHA which in the
opinion of the Foreign Office is the agency which alone is in the position
technically and by experience to carry out a Jewich evacuation on a large
scale and to guarantee the supervision of the people evacuated, the
competency agency of the RSHA thereupon worked out a plan going into
detail for the evacuation of the Jews to Madagascar and for their
Settlement there. This plan was approved by the RerichFuhrer SS SS
lieutenant General Heydrich submitted this plan directly to the Reich
Foreign Minister in August 1940 (compare D lll 2171). The Madagascar
plan in fact had been outdated as the result of the political
devellopment.
The fact that the Fuehrer intends to evacuate all Jews from Europe
was communicated to me as early as August 1940 by Ambassador Abetz after
an interview with the Fuehrer (compare D lll 2298).
Hence the basic instruction of the Reich Foreign Minister, to promote
the evacuation of the Jews in closest cooperation with the agencies of the
Reichfuehrer SS, is still in force and will therefore be observed by D lll.
3) The administration of the occupied territories brought with the problem
of the threatment of Jews living in these territories. First, the military
commander in France saw himself compelled as the first one to issue
on 27 September 1940 a decree on the treatment of the Jews in occupied
France. The decree was issued with the agreement of the German Embassy in
Paris. The pertinent instruction was issued directly by the Reich Foreign
Minister to Ambassador Abetz on the occasion of a verbal report.
After the pattern of the Paris decree similar decrees have been issued
in the Netherlands and Belgium. As these decrees, in the same way as German
law concerning by foreign powers, among others protest by the Embassy of
the United States of America, althought the military commander in France
through internal regulation had ordered that the Jewish measures whould
not be applied to the citizens of neutral countries.
The Reich Foreign Minister has decided in the case of the American protests
that he does not consider it right to have military regulations issued for
making an exception of the American Jews. It would be a mistake to reject
objections of friendly states (Spain and Hungary) and on the other hand
to show weakness toward the Americans. The Reich Foreign Minister considers
it necessary to make these instructions to the field commanders retroactive
(compare D lll 5449).
In accordance with this direction the Jewish measures have been given
general application.
4) In his letter of 24 June 1940 – Pol X ll 136 SS Lieutenant General
Heydrich informed the Reich Foreign Minister that the whole problem
of the approximately three and a quarter million jews in the areas under
German control can no longer be solved by emigration -a territorial final
solution would be necessary.
In recognition of this the Reich Marshall Goering on 31 July 1941
commisioned SS Lieutnant General Heydrich to make, in conjunction with
the interested German Control agencies, all necessary preparations
for a total solution of the Jewish problem in the German sphere of
influence in Europe (compare D lll 709 secret).
On the basis of this instruction, SS Lieutenant General Heydrich arranged
a conference of all the interested German agencies for 20 January 1942,
at which the State Secrataries were present from the other ministeries
and I myself from the Foreign Office. In the conference General Heydrich
explained that Reich Marshall Goering’s assigment to him had been made
on the Fuehrer’s instruction and that the Fuehrer instead of the emigration
had now authorized the evacuation of the Jews to the East as the solution
(compare page 5 of the enclosure to D lll 29/42 Secret). State Secretary
Weizsaecker had been informed on the conference, because SS Lieutenant
General Heydrich agreed to holding a new conference in the near future
in which more details of the total solution should be discussed. This
conference has never taken place due to Lieutenant General Heydrich’s
appointment as acting Reich Protector of Bohemia and Moravia and due to his
death.
In the conference on 20 January 1942 I demanded that all questions
concerned with countries outside Germany must first have the agreement of
the Foreign Office, a demand to which SS Lieutenant General Heydrich
agreed and also has faithfully complied with, as in fact, the office of
the RSHA handling Jewish matters has from the beginining carried out
all measures in frictionless cooperation with the Foreign Office.
The RSHA has in this matter proceeded indeed almost over cautiously.
5) On the basis of the Fuehrer’s instruction mentionned under 4 (above),
the evacuation of the Jews from Germany was begun. It was urged that
at the same time these Jews should also be taken who were nationals
of the countries which had also undertaken Jewish measures. The RSHA
accordingly made an inquiry of the Foreign Office. For reasons of
courtesy, inquiry was made by way of the German Legislation in
Bratislava (Slovakia), Zagreb (Croatia), and Bucharest (Rumania)
to the governments there as to whether they wanted to recall their
Jews from Germany in due time or to agree to their deportation to
the ghettos in the East. To the issuance of this instruction agreement
was given before dispatch by State Secretary, the Under State Secretary
in charge of the Political Division, the Director of the Division
for Economic Policy and the Director of the Legal Division (compare
D lll 336 Secret).
The German Legation in Bucharest reports with reference to D lll
602 Secret, that the Rumanian Gouvernment would leave it to the
Reich Government to deport their Jews along with the German Jews
to ghettos in the East. They are not interest in having the Rumanian
jews return to Rumania.
The Legation in Zagreb has informed us that the Croat Government expresses
gratitude for the gesture of the German Government; but it would appreciate
the deportation of it Jews to the East ( compare D lll 624 Secret).
The Legation in Bratislava reported with reference to D lll 661 Secret
that the Slovak Government is fundamentally in agreement with the
deportation to the eastern ghettos. But the Slovak claims to the proper-
ty of these Jews should not be endammaged.
The wire reports have also been submitted, as customary, to the Reich
Foreign Minister’s Bureau.
********************** cut ********************************
[….]
*********** last part *********
The intended deportations are a further step forward on the way of the
total solution and are in respect to the other countries (Hungary) very
important. The deportation to the Government General is a temporary
measure. The Jews will be moved on further to the occupied Eastern
Territories as soon as the technical conditions for it are given.
I therefore request approval for the continuation of the negociations
and measures under these terms and according to the arrangement made.
Signed: LUTHER
I’ve not yet understand totally why the document wasn’t falsified
as some others (see Carlos Porter articles posted by Jeff) but
my instinct tell me that in the case of such a high level document,
things were more risky. But I’ll explain my idea later, if someone
come back on that.
From [email protected] Tue Apr 30 23:40:09 PDT 1996
Article: 33710 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.jumppoint.com!
news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Van Alstine: a serial liar
Date: 27 Apr 1996 00:57:17 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<4lhe7[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne60.vir.com
[email protected] (John Morris) wrote:
>
> On 23 Apr 1996 02:10:51 GMT, Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >[email protected] (Richard Schultz) wrote:
> >>
> >> Jean-Francois Beaulieu ([email protected]) wrote:
> >> : I prefer to split M. Van Alstine into several parts
> >>
> >> Ouch!
> >
> > I’m protesting energically in advance for those who would suggest
> > that I did a linguistic error. It is call a lapsus.
>
> Please try and have a little sense of humor about these things.
>
> You know that no one is going to start flaming you for your English
> usage. You have been exempt from such flames because English is not
> your native language.
That WAS an attempt of humour, in the sense that some could have
figure that it was due to a translation error rather than a lapsus
of the kind ‘I would like to split Van Alstine in several parts’.
But apparently I missed it.
From [email protected] Tue Apr 30 23:40:10 PDT 1996
Article: 33711 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.jumppoint.com!
news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Van Alstine: a serial liar
Date: 27 Apr 1996 00:59:59 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 127
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne60.vir.com
[email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>> [email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>>
>> What do you mean? Typhus was bring by lice, and I can bring a lot
>> of data that can proove it, revisionnist, anti-revisionnist…
>>
> Perhaps I did not make my meaning clear. Body lice are indeed the
>vector for typhus. But you should note it is not because the lice are “carriers” of
>typhus. They are, in fact, *infected* by typhus and their feces carry the microbe.
>While there is a substantial danger to those working with typhus victims even
>without contact with the lice as it is the feces of the louse which are dangerous. In
This almost what I said when I stated earlier that lice was the ‘vector’
of typhus, e.g. that it was carrying the germs.
>fact, one typhus researcher in the 1930’s contracted and died from typhus
>*without* being bitten by a louse. Thus it is *not* sufficient to eliminate the louse to
>eliminate the danger of the spread of typhus by those who have contact with
>victims of typhus. To prevent the spread of typhus by those in contact with the
>bodies of those who died from typhus you *must* use thorough bathing and
>delousing of those who have contact with the bodies. The bathing is, in fact,
>much more important than the delousing. Those methods were *not* used in the
>morgues.
First: How can you be so sure that those methods were not used?
Second: The main danger with typhus is to catch it from lice’s feces.
do you deny that killing the lice was the first thing to do to
stop the epidemy? If not, how can this quotation proove that it
was unecessary to use Zyklon B in a morgue? It was necessary if
the Germans wanted to avoid the scenerio that I described above.
Wether they took additional measures for the remaining dangers
is another question. There’s often a remaining danger with several
diseases in addition with the main source of propagation. It
doesn’t mean that the other way to catch it are so much important.
I will probably soon check in a medical encyclopedia but I suspect
strongly that human skin contacts can’t give an efficient way of
propagation.
Third: I was close to send you this message when I received an email from
Van Alstine. Don’t take it bad Yale, but this time Van Alstine argument
was more intelligent than your’s. I’m just inserting my reply to his
long and interesting (si,si!) posting. He’s main argument is to say:
> The key points here, Mr. Beaulieu, are: “Rickettsia is transmitted by the
> human body louse, Pediculus humanus” and “[t]he body louse prefers to
> remain on the clothing of the host, and feed on the body. A person
> infested with hundreds of body lice may remove his clothes and not find a
> single louse on his body.”
>Remove the clothes and you remove the Typhus vector.
I have a couple of remarks:
a) Van Alstine bring datas that say that head louse is not carrying typhus
as much as body louse, far less. Body louse can be found in clothes
generally, simply because hygienic conditions are not respect by some
peoples. However, what this mean simply is that head louse do not
go into clothes that are clean after the infestation of the hairs,
it doesn’t mean that the kind of lice that can be find in the non hygienic
clothest never jump in the hairs neither. I migh recall here that the
Germans were not doing so much the difference: they were shaving the
heads of the new inmates upon their arrival during the great typhus
epidemy, but not over all the war. If they were not making the difference
for the shaving procedure, why would they have do the difference for a
morgue desinfection?
b) If really ‘removing the clothest’ would be suffisant Mr Van Alstine,
I wonder why the Germans proceeded to the disinfection of barrack
inmates. Rassinier described how in Buchenwald they had drive the
inmates out of the barracks during a disinfection and how they had
to stand up while it was raining during the disinfection procedure
(a fumigation of the barracks)
c) The bodies were not the only infection agen for a morgue, the crematory
operators, the SK were also potential agents. In an infect barrack, you
can find lice in the hairs, the clothest but also on the ground or
elsewhere, lice that is expelled when someone scratch his clothest,
lice that is searching a new victim. Well Mr Van Alstine, I’ve not
just serious reasons to doubt that the ‘lice-typhus’ specimen was
absent from the mortuaries, I’ve also with the shaving procedures
and the barrack disinfections serious indications that the military
officer in Auschwitz did not bother themselves to read your article
and decided to take no risk.
Now I return to Yale:
> Leuchter did *not* maintain the Jefferson City gas chamber. There is a
>rather complete account of a devastating investigation of his alleged credentials in
>Lipstadt’s “Denying the Holocaust.” There is no evidence that he either designed
>or maintained a working gas chamber.
I’ve see the name of Jefferson City somewhere but I wasn’t able to find
Lipsdat book this time as 3 years ago, they removed it from the racks.
However, ‘Truth Prevail’ was still there and I got some supplementary
informations:
page 20:
Missisipi penitenciary spokesman Ken Jone:
“We have not contracted on a consulting basis at any time with Mr Leuchter.
He did visit our facility. He initiated the request, but we did not enter
into financial agreement; He did making recommendations after viewing the
facilities.”
Elsewhere it is say that he provided some equipement once for a gas chamber
elsewhere and that the recommendations for the Missisipi penitenciary was
a drawing for a new gas chamber. He was in contact also with several
penitenciaries prior to that to do the maintenance on other execution
systems. In that case, it is an anti-revisionnist source that provide that
and the may underestimate some aspects. However, even with what they
provided, it is clear that Leuchter knew how a US gas chamber was working,
it is say elsewhere that the project of a new gas chamber was drop in
Missipi simply because a law was voted to replace the system of execution
for lethal injection, not because Jone kicked off Leuchter out of his
office when he ‘discovered’ his incompetence. Before the 1988 story and
his support to Zundel, he had no trouble. I’m not claiming here that
any statement that he’s doing is a ‘proof’, I’m saying that he had to
take informations, that he visited those penitenciaries and knew how a
gas chamber was working, and this is suffisant for the use that I did
of the Leuchter report: a description of how a US gas chamber was
working.
Post and email to Yale Eideken, Mark Van Alstine
From [email protected] Tue Apr 30 23:40:11 PDT 1996
Article: 33712 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.jumppoint.com!
news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Van Alstine: a serial liar
Date: 27 Apr 1996 01:03:35 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 130
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne60.vir.com
[email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>> [email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>>
>> What do you mean? Typhus was bring by lice, and I can bring a lot
>> of data that can proove it, revisionnist, anti-revisionnist…
>>
> Perhaps I did not make my meaning clear. Body lice are indeed the
>vector for typhus. But you should note it is not because the lice are “carriers” of
>typhus. They are, in fact, *infected* by typhus and their feces carry the microbe.
>While there is a substantial danger to those working with typhus victims even
>without contact with the lice as it is the feces of the louse which are dangerous. In
This almost what I said when I stated earlier that lice was the ‘vector’
of typhus, e.g. that it was carrying the germs.
>fact, one typhus researcher in the 1930’s contracted and died from typhus
>*without* being bitten by a louse. Thus it is *not* sufficient to eliminate the louse to
>eliminate the danger of the spread of typhus by those who have contact with
>victims of typhus. To prevent the spread of typhus by those in contact with the
>bodies of those who died from typhus you *must* use thorough bathing and
>delousing of those who have contact with the bodies. The bathing is, in fact,
>much more important than the delousing. Those methods were *not* used in the
>morgues.
First: How can you be so sure that those methods were not used?
Second: The main danger with typhus is to catch it from lice’s feces.
do you deny that killing the lice was the first thing to do to
stop the epidemy? If not, how can this quotation proove that it
was unecessary to use Zyklon B in a morgue? It was necessary if
the Germans wanted to avoid the scenerio that I described above.
Wether they took additional measures for the remaining dangers
is another question. There’s often a remaining danger with several
diseases in addition with the main source of propagation. It
doesn’t mean that the other way to catch it are so much important.
I will probably soon check in a medical encyclopedia but I suspect
strongly that human skin contacts can’t give an efficient way of
propagation.
Third: I was close to send you this message when I received an email from
Van Alstine. Don’t take it bad Yale, but this time Van Alstine argument
was more intelligent than your’s. I’m just inserting my reply to his
long and interesting (si,si!) posting. He’s main argument is to say:
> The key points here, Mr. Beaulieu, are: “Rickettsia is transmitted by the
> human body louse, Pediculus humanus” and “[t]he body louse prefers to
> remain on the clothing of the host, and feed on the body. A person
> infested with hundreds of body lice may remove his clothes and not find a
> single louse on his body.”
>Remove the clothes and you remove the Typhus vector.
I have a couple of remarks:
a) Van Alstine bring datas that say that head louse is not carrying typhus
as much as body louse, far less. Body louse can be found in clothes
generally, simply because hygienic conditions are not respect by some
peoples. However, what this mean simply is that head louse do not
go into clothes that are clean after the infestation of the hairs,
it doesn’t mean that the kind of lice that can be find in the non hygienic
clothest never jump in the hairs neither. I migh recall here that the
Germans were not doing so much the difference: they were shaving the
heads of the new inmates upon their arrival during the great typhus
epidemy, but not over all the war. If they were not making the difference
for the shaving procedure, why would they have do the difference for a
morgue desinfection?
b) If really ‘removing the clothest’ would be suffisant Mr Van Alstine,
I wonder why the Germans proceeded to the disinfection of barrack
inmates. Rassinier described how in Buchenwald they had drive the
inmates out of the barracks during a disinfection and how they had
to stand up while it was raining during the disinfection procedure
(a fumigation of the barracks)
c) The bodies were not the only infection agen for a morgue, the crematory
operators, the SK were also potential agents. In an infect barrack, you
can find lice in the hairs, the clothest but also on the ground or
elsewhere, lice that is expelled when someone scratch his clothest,
lice that is searching a new victim. Well Mr Van Alstine, I’ve not
just serious reasons to doubt that the ‘lice-typhus’ specimen was
absent from the mortuaries, I’ve also with the shaving procedures
and the barrack disinfections serious indications that the military
officer in Auschwitz did not bother themselves to read your article
and decided to take no risk.
Now I return to Yale:
> Leuchter did *not* maintain the Jefferson City gas chamber. There is a
>rather complete account of a devastating investigation of his alleged credentials in
>Lipstadt’s “Denying the Holocaust.” There is no evidence that he either designed
>or maintained a working gas chamber.
I’ve see the name of Jefferson City somewhere but I wasn’t able to find
Lipsdat book this time as 3 years ago, they removed it from the racks.
However, ‘Truth Prevail’ was still there and I got some supplementary
informations:
page 20:
Missisipi penitenciary spokesman Ken Jone:
“We have not contracted on a consulting basis at any time with Mr Leuchter.
He did visit our facility. He initiated the request, but we did not enter
into financial agreement; He did making recommendations after viewing the
facilities.”
Elsewhere it is say that he provided some equipement once for a gas chamber
elsewhere and that the recommendations for the Missisipi penitenciary was
a drawing for a new gas chamber. He was in contact also with several
penitenciaries prior to that to do the maintenance on other execution
systems. In that case, it is an anti-revisionnist source that provide that
and the may underestimate some aspects. However, even with what they
provided, it is clear that Leuchter knew how a US gas chamber was working,
it is say elsewhere that the project of a new gas chamber was drop in
Missipi simply because a law was voted to replace the system of execution
for lethal injection, not because Jone kicked off Leuchter out of his
office when he ‘discovered’ his incompetence. Before the 1988 story and
his support to Zundel, he had no trouble. I’m not claiming here that
any statement that he’s doing is a ‘proof’, I’m saying that he had to
take informations, that he visited those penitenciaries and knew how a
gas chamber was working, and this is suffisant for the use that I did
of the Leuchter report: a description of how a US gas chamber was
working.
Post and email to Yale Eideken, Mark Van Alstine
From [email protected] Fri Apr 19 07:04:16 PDT 1996
Article: 31861 of alt.revisionism
Path:news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!news.fsu.edu!nntp.cntfl.com!imci4!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!
newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: AUSCHWITZ: A REVISIONNIST FAQ (2)
Date: 19 Apr 1996 02:27:03 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 247
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne39.vir.com
