I saw several messages about Hans Muench here. Basically the claim that
is offered is that Muench, in 1981, hadn’t any reason to lie since he wasn’t
submited to torture. I agree. Even during the Farben trial 35 years before he
couldn’t. He was a defense witness. His testimony during the Farben trial
was done in a way to excuse most of the defendants since they were supposed
to be unaware about gassings there. 33 years later, in an interview to a
sweidish T.V. team, he confirmed gassing. I could even say that a book was
published in german last year about this man, Muench is really becoming the
darling of the holo-hoaxers. However, he’s more than a poor eye witness. He’s
a liar. 33 years before he testified as an eye witness who saw people being
gassed. But Muench didn’t even bothered himself to build a coherent story
by picking up officials informations before to testify. He placed the crema-
toria and the gas chamber building one or 1 1/2 kilometer on the sout west
of Birkenau camouflaged in a small woods. It can’t be even a misunderstanding
with the 1942 farmhouse: Muench came in Auschwitz only in 1943 and there’s
no possibility to claim that the gassing he allegedly saw was anywhere else
that in the camp istself, within the crematoria buildings. No woods, no camou-
flage, as we know such a mistake was impossible to do for a true witness.
I believe he was in Auschwitz at a moment, but Birkenau, that is another
story… Muench is a strange case. It is hard to explain why Muench is still
lying. He can be a turncoat.
There is, not frequently, people who change their political opinion once in
their life. Those people can bring up revelations against their former cammarads.
Sometimes true allegations, sometimes calomnies. If Muench became an anti-nazi
activist, he was perhaps ready to lie since there was no risk to be prosecuted.
He was too usefull. The second possibility is that Muench is a kind of crack-
pot. We are crossing in the metro weird cases, people who talk to themself,
people who are members of the scientology church, or anything else, and I’m
not expecting that among hundreds of SS ‘witness’ who were prosecuted, who
had to live difficult times, who saw this story being systematically repeated,
who had in some cases to spend a lot of time in jail for a fictive crime, there
can’t be one or two who didn’t finally turned half crazy and trully start to
believe it, mixing post-war claims and real experiences. I’m not a psychologist
but I don’t see it as impossible. Over a large group, one or two isolated cases,
people who were in advance psychologicaly weaker couldn’t support the schock.
For some of them, who hadn’t any hope to restablish the facts, those events
could have look like a Kafka tale. In such a large group, I’m not so surprised
to see this.
The fact here is that accounting for his testimony at the Farben trial, it
is obvious that Muench never saw the gassing that he described. And, of course,
he couldn’t have see another one after 1947. Claiming that Muench testimony at
the Farben trial is a proof of something would be like to claim that a man
who say that he saw O.J. Simpson murdering Nicole Brown…in the heart of
Mexico city is credible because he was a member of O.J’s fan club a couple of
years before and thus hasn’t any reason to lie. But this won’t stop the Holo-
hoaxers. What we could expect here in the next days or weeks is an attempt to shift
the conversation on the reasons that can be behind Muench decision to testify
(no cohercition) rather than the credibility of his early testimony. Indeed,
there’s no proof that can be given to support one of the two reasons that I
gave before, or any other, and the only tactic that they could adopt is to
drive the conversation toward this issue because their position is impossible
to defend as soon as we take a look at the contain of his testimony. It’s a
cheap trick but I’m not expecting anything else. However, if they claim that
the coherence of a testimony has little weight here in front of the ‘how-could
you-explain-that-he-lied-since-he-hadn’t-any-reason?’, I’ve a bone for them.
Benjamin Friedman is a jew who spent most of his life to denounce a world jew-
ish plot. He was a millionaire and had contacts with proeminent people in
USA. For the jews, a renegate. He proposed many theories, and claimed that he
was aware back those days about several ‘inside aspects’ were the world jewry
had a dark role. We know here what was his claim about the first world war.
He embraced the Nazi doctrine. The hollohugers will immediatelly disclaimed
the testimony of this jewish and say that he was a liar. This is the expla-
nation. A renegade and a liar. An isolated case. I saw few paragraphs on him
on the Nizkor site, on this ‘secret census’ story, and if some people here
may have a high opinion of him, in my case, I’m more skeptical. I’m sure that
he saw durty inside aspects, but I think also that he was able to exagerate
or invent situations to support his political views. The testimony of a single
man is not necessarelly a formal proof of something if other events around
contradict that one. But anyway, my purpose here is not to say what respective
credibility I’m giving to each of his statements, but to offer a parallel.
If I’m told that the contain of a testimony hasn’t any importance if one can’t
explain what logical reason could have push someone like Muench to lie, than
I’ll conclude that Nizkor accept all the claims done by B. Friedman also.
Oh, you will say, but there’s many other SS who testified about the gas
chambers at the Farben trial. Ya. But in this case the situation was different.
It can’t be said that the were certanly not under cohercition to testify.
In spite of the usual attempt of the holo-hoaxers to deny the cases of torture
at the malmedy trial, I consider that there is suffisant proofs that were given
in the past about it. Of course, if one ask for a video taken secretally at
this moment, if it is his standard for a proof, I can’t do anything. Complains
were done. Judge Van Roden and Simpson backed the claim (see the testimony of
Hilberg at the Zuendel trial). US Lawyers who were present at Nuremberg backed
the charges in articles that were published in the Chicago Tribune at the end
of the 40’s. Or perhaps someone will claim that the Farben trial and the Malmedy
trial are two different things?
Well, perhaps not so much…. For those who are interested, I found an article
in the N.Y. Times recently, 30 september 1947, page 7, 6 th column. This one
is not about the malmedy trial, nor the Dachau trial, but the Farben trial,
about 2 years after. Things hadn’t changed so much apparently. For those who
have the time to take a look at it. Of course, there was no video taken. We
can hardly having the whole military staff admitting it, they hadn’t any rea-
son to do it. But the fact that a lawyer who wasn’t ready to shut up and who
decided to speak before being expelled fof Germany by the military authorities
for this reason say long about the ‘free-speech’ atmosphere in the situation
back those days.
codoh: http://www.webcom.com/
From [email protected] Sun Oct 6 08:48:48 PDT 1996
Article: 71988 of alt.revisionism
Path:news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!
n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!
news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.duq.edu!
newsgate.duke.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!
nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!news.abs.net!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!
news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Plunder of the Victims, V
Date: 5 Oct 1996 23:07:44 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 109
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne36.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Report by SS-Grupenfuehrer Globocnik listing items plundered
>from the Jewish victims of “Operation Reinhard” and delivered to
>various Nazi organizations. Attached is a detailed list, prepared
>by SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Wippern on February 27, 1943.
>[Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals –
>Washington, U.S Govt. Print. Off., 1949-1953, Vol. V, p. 704-709]
>—————————————————————–
>Valuation of Jewish belongings delivered up to 3 February 1943
>
>1. cash – RM 15,931,722.01
> Delivery SS Econ. Krakow – RM 31,500,000.00
> SS WVHA Berlin – RM 5,581,411.50
> —————-
> RM 53,013,133.51
>
>[At that time, 2.5 RM were equal to 1 US Dollar].
>
>2. Foreign currency, notes
>
> [Long list] total RM 1,452,904.65
>
>5. Other Valuables
> .
> .
>2,894 gold gentlemen’s pocket watches
> .
> .
>7,313 gold ladies’ wrist watches
> .
> .
>13,455 gentlemen’s pocket watches
> .
> .
>22,324 spectacles
> .
> .
>7,000 fountain pens
> .
> .
>51,370 watches to be repaired
> .
> .
>230 clinical thermometers
>
>[many items deleted]
>
>
> Total RM 26,089,800.00
>
>6. Textiles
>
>462 boxcars rags
>253 boxcars feathers for bedding
>317 boxcars clothes and linen
>
> Total RM 13,294,400.00
> Summary
>1. Delivered cash and cash on hand RM 53,013,133.51
>2. Foreign currency, notes RM 1,452,904.65
>3. Foreign currency, minted gold RM 843,802.75
>4. Precious metals RM 5,353,943.00
>5. Other items RM 26,089,800.00
>6. Textiles RM 13,294,400.00
>
>Total RM 100,047,983.91
The NO-060 is signed by Globocnik and look genuine. It is not a certified copy
at least. Since we’re dealing now with camps like Treblinka or Belzec, transit
camps, I wonder what happened to:
-gold teeths
-shoes
-luggages
-glasses
The items that you list do not proove an extermination policy. Globocnik died
before the end of WW ll if I remember well, no? So I’d expect something more
serious this time. Imagine, a document with his signature: on februrary 1943,
I would expect gold teeths, hundreds of thousands of shoes pairs, a lot of
glasses, a more minor point: luggages. There was perhaps 2 million Jews who
had been killed in the legend in those camps before february 1943: but again,
when a genuine document that bear a handwritten signature is bring here,
it is just demolishing your point.
Samething for NO-61 that you didn’y throw here up to now: A LOT OF DETAILS,
sometimes items like lighters or something, when I saw the long an exhaustive
list even some items that were taken in small quantities, 200 or 300, were
listed but nothing about shoes, or the other vital stuff above. Did Wippen
‘forgot’?
And what’s about NO-2003, imagine, a handwritten signature from gruppenfuehrer
Frank, but all we have up to the 30 of april 1943 among the ‘incriminating
stolen properties’ is textile and other goods that were not of a vital necessi-
ty for uprooted jews (if they had more than one shirt, evidently).
And with NO-064, NO-062, and all the other letters signed by Globocnik or
Himmler? again, nothing usefull for your case. I’m sorry for you Pit.
http://www.kaiwan.com/~ihrgreg/
(Page doesn`t exist)
From [email protected] Sun Oct 6 08:48:49 PDT 1996
Article: 71989 of alt.revisionism
Path:news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!
n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!
news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.duq.edu!
newsgate.duke.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!
ddsw1!news.mcs.net!news.abs.net!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Plunder of the Victims, III
Date: 5 Oct 1996 22:55:45 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne36.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Letter from SS-Gruppenfuehrer Katzmann to SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Kruger,
>regarding the “solution of the Jewish problem in Galicia”, and giving
>a breakdown of property taken from the Jews, June 30, 1943
>[Documents on the Holocaust – Edited by Y. Arad, Y. Gutman, A. Margaliot,
>NY, Ktav Pub. House in Association with Yad-Vashem, 1981, p. 335-341]
>——————————————————————-
>Valuables were secured and handed over to the special staff
>”Reinhard”. Apart from furniture and large quantities of textile,
>etc., the following were confiscated and delivered to special staff
>”Reinhard”:
>
>As of June 30, 1943:
> .
> .
>20.952 Kg – wedding rings – gold
>22.740 Kg – pearls
>11.730 Kg – gold teeth
>.
Since we know in advance that this document is a forgery I’ve not to be worry
so much about it, but for the new readers: my definition of a genuine document
is a document either a) which make sense either b) which would support the exter-
mination claim but which is signed by a SS who didn’t fall in the hand of the
allieds or especially the soviets. There’s a lot of those people. This is the
only one I wasn’t able to locate but you know Dan? I know in advance that this
one is a typewritten document that bears no signature or a typewritten signature.
In some very rare cases I consider that a SS (like Wetzel ) made a deal in exchan-
ge of immunity for such a post-war collaboration but most of the time, such
kind of incriminating documents are just ‘certified copies’. Why are you throwing
such scrap on the net if you know in advance that you havn’t anything serious
in the hands? A genuine document written by Globocnik 6 months later don’t
mention gold teeths for the Reinhard action. I’ll try toi check this reference
but there’s no suspense when I know in advance how the document will be descri-
bed…
From [email protected] Sun Oct 6 08:48:50 PDT 1996
Article: 71990 of alt.revisionism
Path:news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!
n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!
news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.duq.edu!
newsgate.duke.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!
ddsw1!news.mcs.net!news.abs.net!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Plunder of the Victims, IV
Date: 5 Oct 1996 23:01:46 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne36.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Report by SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl to Himmler’s office, February
>6 1943, listing items plundered from Jewish victims and delivered
>to various Nazi organizations
>[Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals –
>Washington, U.S Govt. Print. Off., 1949-1953, Vol. V, p. 699-703]
>—————————————————————–
>1. Reich ministry of economics
>
>Men’s old clothing without underwear 97,000 sets
>Women’s old clothing without underwear 76,000 sets
>women’s silk underwear 89,000 sets
> Total 34 cars
>Rags – 400 cars, 2,700,000 Kg
>Bed feathers – 130 cars, 270,000 Kg
>Women’s hair – 1 car, 3,000 Kg
>Scrap material – 5 cars, 19,000 Kg
>
>2. Office for Germanization
>
>Men’s clothing:
>
>Pants – 62,000
>Shirts – 132,000
> .
> .
>Shoes – 31,000 pairs
>
>Women’s clothing:
>
>Coats – 155,000
>Dresses – 119,000
> .
> .
>Panties – 60,000
>Brassiers – 25,000
>Underwear – 22,000
>Kerchiefs – 85,000
>Shoes – 111,000
> 211 cars
>[Many more organizations and items cited]
>
> Grand Total 825 cars
The NO-1257 is described as a ‘certified copy’ of Pohl’s letter. I don’t
know if it is genuine or not. Most of the other documents (15 or 20) that
appear in the next pages are genuine documents that have often a handwritten
signature of Himmler’s handwritten annotations on a page. But for this ‘certi-
fied copy’ this is another matter. I don’t know. But let’s take a look at the
contain:
First, this document deal exclusivelly with the Auschwitz complex (as described
in the green series, not in your text) and the Lublin camp. Since the action
Reinhardt was depriving Jews of their properties I’m not surprised to see clothes,
shirts, and so on…: they were carrying luggages and a part of their possesions
were grab on the way to eastern ghettos. Also, since this document concern
Auschwitz and Lublin, we may expect in february 1943 not only clothes but also
shoes from deceased people. Contrarely to Treblinka Auschwitz wasn’t a transit
camp only and dozens of thousands of people were working there, few dozens of
thousands had died from typhus in the previous year (I think it was 45,000
plus about 120,000 alleged ‘gassed jews’). If I’m taking in account that this
document concern also Madjaneck, the 31,000 men’s shoes do account for appro-
ximativelly the number of men who died from natural causes (about 2/3 of the
inmates were men). If I’m considering now women’s shoes, 111,000 is hight.
However, women have often more shoes or clothes than men. On a first glance,
such a document do not proove that women who were deprived of one of their 2
or 3 pairs of shoes were killed. If we consider the number of people allegedly
exterminated in those 2 camps, more than half of the men’s shoes are missing.
Does it sound to you like if they were not killed?
From [email protected] Sun Oct 6 11:05:49 PDT 1996
Article: 72118 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!
n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!
news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.duq.edu!
newsgate.duke.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!panix!news1.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!
clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hans Muench testimony:a sick joke
Date: 6 Oct 1996 14:07:53 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne25.vir.com
[email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
> > Complains
> > were done. Judge Van Roden and Simpson backed the claim
> They most certainly did not. “This [Simpson] commission and my own
> Administration od Justice Review Board found that improper methods had been
> used to obtain evidence in the Malmedy case. Members of the prosecution staff
> testified to the use of stage settings, stool pigeons, and similar measures to extract
> evidece. Extreme brutalities claimed by the prisoners, in manifest self-interest,
> were denied by the prosecution staff and not borne out by other evidence.”
> (Lucius Clay)
> > (see the testimony of
> > Hilberg at the Zuendel trial). US Lawyers who were present at Nuremberg
> backed
> > the charges in articles that were published in the Chicago Tribune at the end
> > of the 40’s. Or perhaps someone will claim that the Farben trial and the Malmedy
> > trial are two different things?
>
> The Simpson Report was made public in the early 1950’s. You quote
> not a word of its findings. There is a simple reason for that.
It found that not
> torture or physical brutality was used.
So? What you have here is a man (Clay) who decided to deny the charge
because they were embarassing. It’s like to say that if I complain about
a physical agression by someone a week ago my claim is disproved as soon
you decide to call me a liar. Obviously most of the prosecution staff
wasn’t interest to back the charges maden by defendants or defense
lawyers months or years after. But there’s an exception, a military:
(about Dachau)
“When the chief of the Dachau War Crimes Administration branch, Colonel
A.H. Rosenfeld, quit his post in 1948 he was asked by newspapermen
if there was any truth to the stories about the mock trials, at which
sham death sentences had been passed. He replied: “Yes, of course. We
couldn’t have made those birds talk otherwise…It was a trick, and it worked
like a charm.”
The Hoax of the twentieth century, page 24 (quoting Utley and the Chicago Tribune)
http://www.codoh.com/
From [email protected] Sun Oct 6 11:05:50 PDT 1996
Article: 72119 of alt.revisionism
Path:news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!
n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!
news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.duq.edu!
newsgate.duke.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news1.erols.com!
news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!
usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Einsatzgruppen Reports – OSR USSR #45
Date: 6 Oct 1996 13:28:14 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <324fd624.2[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne25.vir.com
“Annie Alpert, OFB” <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > > [email protected] (Ken Lewis) writes:
> > > On 29 Sep 1996 18:12:22 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
> > >
> > > #> [email protected] (Ken Lewis) writes:
> > > #> The Chief of the Security Police and the SD
> > > #>
> > > #> Berlin, August 7, 1941
> > > #Your point?
> > >
> > > I am not making one, Herr Belling. I will let the Einsatzgruppen Reports
> > > make the point for me.
> >>>>
> > First prove that these are authentic Reports.
>
> Oh, come ON! That’s most pathetic excuse for an argument I’ve ever
> heard from you. The authenticity of the Einsatzgruppen reports aren’t
> even questioned by Greg Raven, David Irving or Faurrison. Face it. The
> Nazis slaughters millions of innocent men women and children in cold
> blood and documented it.
> —
You are wrong. Greg Raven, as far as I know, do not question it on
his site but it doesn’t mean he consider that they are necessarelly genuine.
Somebody may be not sure you know? David Irving disclaimed the 363,211
Jew report during the Zundel trial, despite he believes that many Jews
were executed however. Faurisson didn’t claim that those reports were genuine:
he’s not talking about this subject.
I’m not sure myself is some may be genuine or not, I’m just saying:
many SS were killed on the russian front. A report that is signed
by a SS who died without being captured is something that I consider
seriously, if the signature appear on the incriminating page.
A report that is signed by a SS who was captured is not necessarelly
a forgery but the proof is less strong here. A report that do not
bear any signature is not necessarelly a forgery but is is a weaker
proof. The einsatzgruppen were sent there to kill people. They certanly
killed many civilian Jews in blind represails. It was a durty war on
both sides, but I’ve no doubt that russian Jews faced something which
wasn’t ‘good treatment’.
If you have a report that respect the first criteria, than I will
consider it seriously. Actually, my doubt about those reports is
mainly based on the fact that in many cities of USSR jews were
evacuated before the german invasion and such reports are sometimes
in conflict with the demographical figures for the remaining Jews (too low)
I’ve post the proofs of that 6 weeks ago.
with th
From [email protected] Mon Oct 7 07:33:02 PDT 1996
Article: 72194 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!
n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.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: The Cracow forensic study:another sick joke
Date: 7 Oct 1996 02:39:17 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 265
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne28.vir.com
One of Green’s preferate report is the 1994 ‘scientific’ report produced by
the Institute of Forensic Research, Cracow. I may remind some basical
elements before to speak about this one. In the early 80’s Dietlib Felderer
published the photos of the crema’s walls in Birkenau and those of a delou-
sing facility there. The first one didn’t show any blue stain, while the
second one was showing large blue spots, typically produced by the combination
of CN- ions and the iron that can be found in brick, prussian blue. Zundel
in his written version of what happened (after the Leuchter report) said that
he sent his own team to take samples there but was disatisfied and needed
someone to take it in a ‘more professional way’. I simply think here that he
needed a moral caution because many would have accuse him of a fraud if he had
present it without this caution. Neither Zundel, nor Faurisson, were aware back
those days that Leuchter hadn’t any degree in engineering but since he was
perhaps the only guy who had to maintain execution systems in USA and to provide
equipment for it, they couldn’t dream about a better prospect. Revisionism is
an opinion that is still not frequent, 1% of the population back those days,
and the usual accusation is that people who promote it are doing it to rehabili-
tate Nazism, something which is true for a fraction of them despite many are
also apolitical or lefters. The probability that the only(?) execution specialist
in USA could be a nazi in advance was almost null. Leuchter was thus the ideal
man in the mind of Faurisson.
Leuchter took samples from the remainings of Krema 2, Krema 3, Krema 1,
and the delousing facility in Birkenau and took back those one in USA where
they were analysed by a laboratory. The remaining ferro-cyhanide traces in
the krema material (brick and mortar) were 150 to 1,000 times less important
than those present for the delousing facilities (micro grams /kg), depending
of the sample. For the washroom of krema 1, ferro-cyhanide traces were equi-
valent to what was found on the walls of the ‘gas chamber’. The revisionist
explanation is simply that those buildings were deloused with zyklon B once
or twice during the war. The entire buildings.
Next to that Pressac wrote a ‘rebuttal’ of that claim, mainly based on the
false claim that ferro-cyhanide was disolved by water. In 1992, the Cracow
institute, to the request of the Auschwitz museum, produced a report which
didn’t disclaim the Leuchter report (the samples were taken from a delousing
facility which was repainted, not the same one that Leuchter visited so we
can expect evidently less traces in this case!).
the cracow report:
ftp://ftp.almanac.bc.ca/pub/orgs/polish/institute-for-forensic-research/
post-leuchter.report”>ftp://ftp.almanac.bc.ca/pub/orgs/polish/
institute-for-forensic-research/post-leuchter.report
(Page doesn`t exist)
Now we have this ‘scientific report’. A first remark, the Auschwitz Museum
has evidently no reason to conceed the gas chamber story: millions of visitors
have come there, and millions of others will continue to bring currencies in
Poland. The staff of the Auschwitz museum can hardly do anything else than
fight for their job. If we talk about the Cracow team now, evidently it is
not usual for people to work without being paid. I don’t see anything anormal
there, Leuchter was paid by Zundel also, simply because he had to travel in
Poland and to do a job, as the Cracow team did certanly not that expertise
freely during their working hours unless they are stupids. This fact doesn’t
mean neither that someone will be dishonest enough to forge the datas. But
since the blue stain is present in large spot, more blue at some places, I
certanly don’t believe that Leuchter chose a delousing sample that he saw as
less blue than another. For the krema however, Leuchter’s samples were purely
taken in a random way since no apparent blue stain exist there. For the
Cracow team, to not displeased their silent partner, they were certanly not
interest to take a too much blue sample in the delousing facility.
The first weird aspect in this story is the delay. It is unbelievable that
the Auschwitz museum didn’t ask for a forensic study right after the Leuchter
report, let say in 1989. They had all the reasons to be hostiles to revisionism,
and I’ve no doubt they checked immediatelly in 1989 if Leuchter’s sample in
the delousing facility contained really the residual prussian blue that was
claimed. The thing was easy since a video, produced almost at the same time,
showed the place were Leuchter took his sample. Leuchter asked back those day
for an international commission to check his results if people wanted to contest
it. However, the Auscwhitz museum was silencious. One year, two years, three
years, and then a weak attempt to disclaimed the Leuchter report, but unconvin-
cing. Another year, two years, and revisionism appeared as a growing movement.
The odd here is that another forensic inquiry made by a german chimist, Germa
Rudolph, confirmed the Leuchter report during this period.
The first obvious thing when one look at the Cracow study is that different
materials like brick, mortar or concrete to not react to the same level with
CN- ions. It is thus possible for someone to make a first study and detect
the elements of a building where the presence of ferro-cyhanide is much impor-
tant.
The Cracow team still use the 2 traditionnal arguments, first the gassing
delay and second rain. A rebutal of these one is given in the FAQ 2 that
I posted today.
For this statement now:
>the commission two days. The laboratory analysis of the
>material collected was conducted – to ensure full
>objectivity – by another group of Institute workers. They
I’m not contesting that, but I find a bit ridicoulous to say that a pure
objectivity existed since the problem is not about who analysed the samples,
but who took it and where.
Now, we are offered a ridicoulous claim:
>J. Bailer (1) writes in the collective work "Amoklauf gegen
>die Wirklichkeit" that the formation of Prussian blue in
>bricks is simply improbable; however, he takes into
>consideration the possibility that the walls of the
>delousing room were coated with this dye as a paint. It
>should be added that this blue coloration does not appear on
>the walls of all the delousing rooms.
It is really easy to determine if the color of a wall is due to painting
or to the presence of ferro-cyhanide: one has just to scatch the wall to
know it. If the blue spots outside the delousing facility were due to
the constant fumigations (as Pressac early noticed) the Cracow team could
have show it in a more convincing way. They know that this outside blue
texture is due to the use of Zyklon B, and this is why, rather than to present
this kind of evidence they choose to quote an author who may have not even
visited Birkenau. They were there for a forensic study, don’t tell me that
they were not able, in front of a camera, to scratch the wall and show their
point in a more convincing way. Of course this blue stain do not appear outside
for each delousing facility, simply because they were not necessarelly used
as often for fumigations. I can’t explain why this penetration capacity exist,
but it was mentionned by the manufacturer. However, in spite of their
effort, we have here a good demonstration of how prussian blue resist to
acid rain even after 5 decades.
Now the institute try to show how the presence of ferro-cyhanide traces
in the walls is only due to homicidal gassing:
> In the table l:
>TABLE I. CONCENTRATION OF CYANIDE IONS IN CONTROL SAMPLES
>TAKEN FROM DWELLING ACCOMODATIONS, WHICH WERE
>PROBABLY FUMIGATED WITH ZYKLON B ONLY ONCE (IN CONNECTION
>WITH TYPHOID EPIDEMIC IN 1942)
>
>Site Block No Sample No Concentration of
> CN- in ug/kg
>————————————————————
>Auschwitz 3 9 0
> 10 0
>————————————————————
> 8 11 0
> 12 0
>————————————————————
>Birkenau 3 60 0
> 61 0
> 62 0
> 63 0
>————————————————————
After that, in table II, they show that in the cellar where the first gassing
allegedly took place (bloc 11), that samples contains up to 20 ug/kg.
The reader must notice here that later, the samples taken in the kremas
will show are different materials absorbe in different ways HCN. Here,
the Cracow team _doesnt_ say what material is involved, neither if it was
taken from an outside wall, a wall that was repaint, or anything whatsover.
Furthermore, Danuta Czech’s chronicle show that Hoess asked for a general
delousing there (9 july 1943) for women camp and one for men’s camp a bit
later. Since this one involved a single gasing also, we should expect the
presence of ferro-cyhanide traces in those ‘random’ (sic) samples taken
from barracks in table 1, and there’s no reason to find more zyklon B
in a barrack that was allegedly used for a single homicidal gassing and
another one that was desinfected once or twice during the war. But the
Cracow datas don’t show this. Now you know why the nature of the sample is
not given here, nor the exact location in the barracks: because they spoted
in advance were and what they had to grab to get the necessary results.
If not, I wonder why a homicidal gassing leaves more cyhanide compounds
than a proven delousing gassing in another barrack.
I must say here that the Cracow team’s members, if they were aware about
the differences between materials and their approximative capacity of adsorp-
tion, didn’t control neither every aspect: I believe that they took the
samples as they could, a video was taken, despite this one is not availa-
ble to people in general. But despite they cared to present an appearent
objectivity, there was a way to drive to some extent the results toward a
direction: mortar react more than plaster an brick. This is also probably
why they don’t give the nature of the samples for the cremas in table III.
table IV now.
We were told that HCN was washed by rain in the cremas. We were told that
the homicidal gassing time was far much shorter. We were present many
reasons why cyanide compounds shouldn’t be find on the walls of the ‘gas
chambers’ while they had all the reason to be present in the delousing
facilities according to them. However, the more laughable aspect is the
datas they present for the delousing facilities in Auschwitz 1: almost
no cyhanide compounds except for one sample. Videos and photos show clear-
ly that prussian blue spot are very visible on the walls of delousing
facilities, and not visible on crema’s walls. However, by some kind of
miracle, samples do not (or fewly) show it here. Naturally, they do not
give the nature of the material for blocs 1 and 3. We don’t even know
if they were taken outside, or if they were taken from a room were the
gas wasn’t used for delousing (in some of theses ones, there was several
rooms)
Last, but not the least, the bath house B1-A. The best I can remember
the video, there was 2 delousing rooms in Birkenau, I don’t know if this
building is the one that Leuchter visited, but we will assume that. Here
they gives the material of each sample (table IV) and the only one which
is relevant (in part) is a sample taken inside, allegedly from a blue
stain spot, a plaster sample. Plaster react far less with HCN than mortar
according to the Cracow team. It seems here that they took this sample
from a very-very poorly blue spot, I mean, it could have been very lightly
blue, but this unique data contradict so much tre previous results
(Leuchter and Rudolph) that such a ‘discovery’, 6 to 7 years after the
Leuchter report is somewhat incredible. Indeed, the quantity of ferro-cyhanide
is almost comparable to samples taken at places where there’s no visible blue
spots (the kremas). This is why revisionist insist so much for an open
inquiry: if really those people havn’t anything to hide, why not a mixed
team going there to take samples in front of a camera to solve in front of
the whole world this issue? The video that showed Leuchter taking his
samples was sold back those days. I’m still asking if this ‘blue plaster
compound’ was that blue.
Now, the next part, CO2 compete with HCN to dissolve in water.
Ok. But if it is really what happened in the cremas, I wonder to know
why they are not able to find FAR MUCH ferro-cyhanide traces in the delou-
sing facility? They are now giving all the reasons in the world to show
that we must expect 1,000 times less ferro-cyhanide traces in the cremas,
acid rain, CO2, the gassing time, and so on, and they are just claiming
with the other sample that in the delousing facility the cyhanide remains
are just a bit more important???
Lets just consider basical facts: if you put together 500 persons in a
200 meter square room, you may expect a fantastic temperature increase,
such a number of people in a small room produce a lot of heat. Miloslav
Bilik have already done the calculus a while ago, it was about an increase
of 5 degrees each 20 seconds untill heat lost from the roof become too
much important. All those people during 20-30 minutes perspire a lot. A a
temperature of 35 or 40 celcius (more than 100 faranheit) especially when
they see people dying, they try to escape, their heart beat at an incredible
rate. Have you ever perspire in a sauna? We have 2 characteristics: an
underground room (a cellar)is often humid, much more than a delousing faci-
lity, but to that we must add human sweat, human sweat that is vaporizing,
and that is then sticking on the walls during the condensation process:
500 people who perspire just 1/4 liter of water in 25 minutes gives 125
liters. At 35 degrees (celcius) in a room of 500 meter cube, you just reach
a 100% humidity with 20 kg of water in the air. After that water will condense
everywhere, the wall, the ceiling, human skin. Obviously the gassing story
imply that those walls were much more humid than delousing facilitie’s walls.
Water favorized the reaction of CN- ions. There’s always
a bit of water, but more you have water, more you can dissolve ions.
The failure of the Cracow study here is that they want the reader to assume
that both kinds of walls have an equivalent quantity of water / meter square
in their scenario. That is not the case. Lets take just their own samples.
In the case of Table V, 48 hours after an experimental gassing, the volatile
part of HCN ( the gas which was adsorbed but which didn’t react with iron or
postassium) is no longer there, but the concentration for a dry sample of
old mortar is 176 ug, while a wetted sample has a 2700 ug concentration.
In the case of an experimental gassing with 1% CO2, the dry part is about
1000 ug and the wet ted 244 ug. In this case, the dry part have not yet
released the gas that will not react, something that explain the difference
with the 176 ug. However, according to the chemist Rothe, CN- react very
quickly to form prussian blue in a wet sample. Thus, if we compare in a
scenario a dry wall from a delousing facility and a wet wall from the
leichenkeller, even in presence of a lot of CO2 we may expect at least
equivalent conditions, if not better considions for such a reaction in the
‘gas chamber’.
The last part of the report is another screw. Table VII shows how CN-
ions are removed from a material like plaster. Indeed, water may remove
potassium cyhanide from a sample, but not ferro-cyhanide, which was the
component for which revisionist had an interest in 1988. Evidently, the %
of ferro-cyhanide is more important if a material contain more iron than
another one, here they chose a plaster sample rather than a brick or mortar
sample.
http://www.kaiwan.com/~ihrgreg/
(Page doesn`t exist)
From [email protected] Mon Oct 7 14:40:20 PDT 1996
Article: 72387 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!
news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!news.inc.net!
arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ac.net!chinook.generation.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!
Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: test
Date: 7 Oct 1996 02:31:24 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne28.vir.com
d
From [email protected] Mon Oct 7 14:40:21 PDT 1996
Article: 72388 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!
news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!
howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ac.net!chinook.generation.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: A revisionist FAQ (2)
Date: 7 Oct 1996 02:34:35 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 277
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne28.vir.com
The present FAQ was written by me in 1996 but Alexander Baron brought a
couple of suggestions and corrections and revised the english syntax. It
is modified sometimes.
1.0 U.S Gas chambers, how it works
2.0 Auschwitz gas chambers
3.0 The gassing 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 took place as follows:
Jews selected for gassing were taken as quietly as possible to
the crematoria, the men being separated from the women. In the
undressing room, prisoners of the special detachment, detailed
for this purpose, would tell them in their own language that they
were going to be bathed and deloused, that they must leave their
clothes neatly together and above all remember where they had put
them, so that they would be able to find them again quickly after
delousing. The prisoners of the special detachment had the great-
est interest in seeing that the operation proceeded smoothly and
quickly. After undressing, the Jews went into the gas chambers,
which were furnished with showers and water pipes and gave a
realistic impression of a bath house….The door would now be
quickly screwed up and the gas immediately discharged by the
waiting disinfectors through vents in the ceilings of the gas
chambers, down a shaft that led to the floor. This ensured the
rapid distribution of the gas…It can be said that about one-
third died straight away…The door was opened half an hour after
the induction of the gas, and the ventilation switched on.” from
pages 223-4 (Appendix 1).
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, despite a project for the
installation of an evantual ventilation system for krema 5 tardivelly is
discussed in another book but there’s no doubt that Hoess talk here
about those 2 main kremas. 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 gassing of Jews is supposed to have occur out of
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. 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 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.
In the case of Kremas 4 and 5, a coal-stove is even mentionned in the german
documents that described the rooms allegedly used to gas people, and the
exterminationist, probably embarassed by such a weird feature, say that
they were there…to heat the gas chamber!
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 gassing 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’. Were they piled up in the room were the ovens were
used? If this is the case, one could expect that the same Sonderkommandos 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.
It might be notice that Pressac’s tardive version, the transformation of
the morgues in gas chambers, is an attempt to avoid an important revisionnist
argument: the fact that those mortuaries were described as Leichenkellers
on the engineering drawings. This revisionnist argument appeared in the 70’s.
In the version that is commonly accept now, the Nazis didnt built the cremato
ries for an extermination purpose, but decided tardivelly to modifyu those
buildings. However, right after the war, the ‘confessions’ that were got from
SS were explicitelly refered to the construction of the buildings _for_
this purpose.
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) COMMANDANT OF AUSCHWITZ: The authentic confessions of a mass
murderer, by Rudolf Hoess, Introduction by Lord Russell of Liver-
pool, Pan paperback edition, (1961).
(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) See the same issue of the Journal of Historical Review issue at
the IHR
From [email protected] Mon Oct 7 14:40:22 PDT 1996
Article: 72390 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!
n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!n3ott.istar!imci2!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ac.net!chinook.generation.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!
Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: A revisionist FAQ (1)
Date: 7 Oct 1996 02:33:12 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 313
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne28.vir.com
The present FAQ was written by me in 1996 but Alexander Baron brought a
couple of suggestions and corrections and revised the english syntax. It
is modified sometimes.
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 for the period wich
is concerned by the death registers (excluding a big part of 1944).
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). Indeed, according to Pressac,
the 15 ovens of crema 2 were unusable and the 8 ovens of crema 4 were also
unusable at this moment. The origin of the document is the ‘Committee of the
Anti-fascist Resistance of the German Democratic Republic. There was no reason
for the SS to claim such an output at the moment that they had so many diffi-
culties with those crematoria: this document is a forgery.
The document appeared tardivelly, in 1981, and was sent to the Auschwitz museum
by this committee. However, it is described as a ‘certified copy’ but do not
bears Jahrling’s signature. Were is the original???
Also, Butz mentionned that in another document reproduce on page 224 of A.T.O
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] Tue Oct 8 08:34:02 PDT 1996
Article: 72612 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!
news.mindlink.net!van-bc!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!
tor.istar!east.istar!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!
news.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ac.net!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Lack of photographic evidence for the Holocaust
Date: 8 Oct 1996 01:38:18 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 102
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne64.vir.com
‘The approximately 40,000 negatives of photographs of prisonners made by the
Identification service of the political department (the camp gestapo) went
first to the polish Red Cross in Krakow and were turned over the state Auschwitz
Museum in Oswiecim in 1954 when the latter book over the research work..’
Auschwitz Chronicle, Danuta Czech, page XI (foreword)
The kind of photographic evidence that is ordinarelly offered for the Holocaust
can be classified in 2 categories. We have, on a hand, pictures taken by the SS
that shows the execution of inmates, often political prisonners who tried to
escape, or who were suspected of this, or who were charged for other reasons
(sabotage more often). Those executions were done by bullets, or with a gallow
often. We have also some photos of medical experiments. When we want to look
for gassing evidence however, the bulk of the alleged murders, than the photos
do not show it clearly. Try to open a book, one of the thousands or dozens of
thousands of books that were written on the holocaust, and search the photos
that are supposed to proove gassings. Ordinarelly what you will find is a pile
of bodies, with no details behind like walls, or above like shower heads, or
anything else. Compare now those photos with one of those which were taken
in Belsen Bergen when the camp was liberated. Due to the collapse of the rail-
road system, the mortality rates literally exploded at the end of the war in
those camps. Now, what is the difference between those photos and the one you
are shown as ‘jews who were gassed’ ? Are you sure that it is not one of these
ones?
There’s no photo that show a mountain of bodies in the krema 2 or 3. There’s
no photo that show elements around like the pillars, the light bulbs, shower
heads, or the walls of one of the kremas. We are told that there was about
10,000 gassings during all the war in all the camps. The SS took photos of
executions by hanging, of medical experiments (althought it’s not all the post
war tales about theses ones that are necessarelly true) , of firing squads.
The left a lot of ‘incriminating evidence’ behind them for such a matter.
But, coincidence(!), for those 10,000 gassings, nothing like a photo which
can seriously be described as an evidence for a gassing.
If we now look at other camps, like Treblinka, we have the same pattern.
Kurt Franz was captured years after the war and his album was seased. If
you read ‘Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka’ you will see that all the photos from
his album are not incriminating. An excavator, which was certanly necessary
as soon as the germans had to dig for the ceiling of buildings, several
photos of SS officers, few barracks, but none of the alleged ‘gas chambers’.
In ‘surviving Treblinka’ we are shown an excavator with a caption that claim
that corpses are now lift for the cremation, but no corpse is visible in
the jaws of the excavator. There is, in ‘The death camp Treblinka’ a picture
of nake women who walk somewhere, and the caption say ‘before to be gassed’,
but this one wasn’t take from Franz album (unknown source).
Lets now return to Auschwitz-Birkenau. 40,000 photos as Czech said. Many
photos appeared in thousands of different books after their released. The
odd here is not just that we havn’t any photo of jewish victims in the ‘gas
chamber’: we havn’t even a single photo that show krema 2 or the krema 3
after february 1943. We have miscellaneous photos that show prisonners,
barracks, the ramp, and there wasn’t more than a couple of dozens of barracks.
It is in february 1943 that the ceiling of cremas 2 and 3 was finished. It
is then, according to the legend, that the 4 roof vents of about 1 meter
height were installed for future gassings. We are present photos of the
cremas before this ‘event’. Not after. 40,000 thousands photos were taken
during all the war, but what we have to believe now is that a mysterious hole
exist after february 1943, and no photo of the krema were taken when they
were turned to the SS. No photo of inmates with, behind, the pictures of
the cremas and the roof vents. Or the photo of a group of SS with a part
of the kremas behind. No photo between february 1943 and the liberation of
the camp.
The only photo that is supposed to show that is not a photo taken by the
SS. It is a sery of cliches taken by the U.S. aviation in the summer of
1944. 5 of those photos exists, and some of them do not show the presence
of those roof vents. However, 2 others that were given to the press shows
little spots, an undefined shape. The photos were allegedly discovered
‘by accident’ in 1979 in the CIA files 5 years after Butz claim that these
ones were certanly existing. Since then, an air photo interpreter, John Ball,
have lead an analysis of it and concluded that those minuscule spots were
drawn. There’s many way to analyse such photos, stereo magnifying equipment
to see if the spot have a measurable height, the presence of a shadow,
but also other other elements in the photos like a (drawned) group of pri-
sonners ‘standing formation’ while an enlargement show that a part of those
small bluerred spots overlap the roof of a building, and so on. My purpose
here is not to argue with words about these photos, those wo want to take
a look at it can get for about 10 US dollars ‘Air Photo Evidence’, a 116
pages book sold by Samisdat publishers, 206 Carlton Street, Toronto, Canada,
M5A-2L1, (416)922-9850.
It is quite clear that it is far much easier to add 4 very little spots
of an irregular shape on a photo than to draw a roof vent. It is also possible
to add two elements together and to claim that they were taken from the same
photo but the technique is more risky. Let say that it was certanly far much
back those days. I wouldn’t be surprised that in 10 years or so someone claim
suddenly that such a photo is discovered ‘miracoulously’ but I wont speculate
about this. The fact is that during the first 50 years that followed 1945,
thousands if not dozens of thousands of books were published about the
Holocaust, and those 40,000 photos were analysed, develloped by the Auschwitz
museum and several hollo-hoaxers had access to it and used it as much as they
could to proove their case. However, the photos of crema 2 and 3 stopped
suddenly in february 1943. 40,000 photos. Or those which were selected for
release. Hundreds were used in the past.I don’t believe in coincidences.
Do you?
http://www.codoh.com/
From [email protected] Tue Oct 8 08:34:03 PDT 1996
Article: 72629 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!
n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!
news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.duq.edu!
newsgate.duke.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!
nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!news.abs.net!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!
news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hans Muench testimony:a sick joke
Date: 7 Oct 1996 12:29:10 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 71
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne9.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]> writes:
>
> # 33 years before he testified as an eye witness who saw people
> # being gassed. But Muench didn’t even bothered himself to build
> # a coherent story by picking up officials informations before to
> # testify. He placed the crematoria and the gas chamber building
> # one or 1 1/2 kilometer on the sout west of Birkenau camouflaged
> # in a small woods. It can’t be even a misunderstanding with the
> # 1942 farmhouse:
>
> He’s probably referring to Krema IV or V, which were surrounded
> by trees. Moreover, one of the “bunkers” was used again during
> the summer of 1944.
>
page 315:
Q- Would you describe briefly where this extermination was carried
out, particularly the locality?
A-The extermination plant was located at Birkenau. The crematoria and
gas chambers were located one to one and a half kilometer South
west of the Birkenau, camouflaged in a small woods.
Q-What purpose did the crematoria serve?
You have it folk. He’s supposed to talk about ‘krema 4 and 5’ ??
1,5 km Sout-West of Birkenau???? and he confused a small wood with
a couple of trees???
One of the farmhouse ‘equiped with crematorias’??? 1,0-1,5 km South
West of Birkenau???
> # The fact here is that accounting for his testimony at the Farben
> # trial, it is obvious that Muench never saw the gassing that he
> # described.
>
> Our desperate Nazi-apologists claim that they are the only ones
> who know what happened in the camps, although
>
> A) They were not in them during the war.
>
> B) There is not one single witness who was in them during the
> war, who supports the Nazi-apologetic version.
>
> They are left with nothing but the claim that everyone who was
> in the camps – Jew, Pole, German, Soviet, Gypsy – is a liar,
> and only they know the truth.
There is inmates who claimed that the gas chambers were a myth.
I remember that I saw an article a while ago about an ex-inmate
living in Australia. There is also another case that I’m aware,
and A. Baron mentionned this feature a day. Of course, the bulk
of those inmates who lived there 3 years were not interested
to disclaim the charges made by professional liars, because
they lost many relatives in miscellaneous circunstances, because
there was beating and forced labor, sometimes execution with
bullets for those who tried to escape, and also because they were
and they are still receiving an important monetary compensation from
the German government. When the story was ‘officialized’ in
Nuremberg, they saw where was their advantage. It doesn’t require
a large plot, but people who see that they can profite of a situation
established previously by other people to receive the label
‘heroic survivor’, money, and who are also for political reasons
interested to described their ennemies as dark as possible for the
public opinion.
From [email protected] Wed Oct 9 08:58:30 PDT 1996
Article: 72870 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!
nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: I’m lost here…
Date: 8 Oct 1996 03:14:22 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne55.vir.com
Hilberg claim that crema IV had many problems, but gives few details
and references.
Pressac is giving much more details, in the french edition (Les crematoires
d’Auschwitz) he based his claims on German documents: basically the
crema IV is not just submitted to few problems, but is no longer used
after may 1943. On page 81 he says that krema V is no longer used
after september 1943 because kremas 2 and 3 are suffisant.
I’ve try today to take a look at it again to see on what he base
his claim, but for Pressac it’s sometimes hard to know in advance
if a claim is really based on a document or not. The book was borrowed,
unfortunatelly, but I don’t believe he invented that totally.
Is there any documentary evidence, german documents, tha cremas 4 and
5 were used after sept 1943? Something that may contradict Pressac’s
claim?
From [email protected] Thu Oct 10 09:29:35 PDT 1996
Article: 72996 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!
laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!
www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!news.abs.net!
news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!
usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hans Muench testimony:a sick joke
Date: 9 Oct 1996 23:53:55 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne57.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> # There’s just few trees near this crema, and back, dozens of
> # meters away we can see trees, but what we don’t see in the photo
>
> Oh yes we do. Very, very clearly.
>
> https://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?camps/auschwitz/images/Krema4.jpg Broken link
>
> I see a great many trees there. Maybe you should have your
> eyes examined.
>
Do you contest that few meters away from this crema, approximativelly
from the place where the photographer took this picture, there was
dozens of barracks according to Birkenau map? YES or NO?
From [email protected] Thu Oct 10 09:29:36 PDT 1996
Article: 72999 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!
laslo.netnet.net!node2.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!
nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!news.abs.net!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!
news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Photograph: Brack’s Plan To Kill ‘Only’ 80 Percent Of the Jews
Date: 9 Oct 1996 04:47:08 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne62.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> https://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?people/b/brack.victor/images/ Broken link
> brack-to-himmler-0642.jpg
i
When someone run across the transcript of those trials, what is
amazing is to see how there’s thousands of letters written by
different people were the jewish question is mentionned. Most
of those letters are handwritten or bear a handwritten signature.
What is amazing is to see that hundreds of people talks about
jewish labor in Auschwitz, miscellaneous questions related to Jews
and so on. However, the words ‘gas chamber’, ‘gassing’ and so on
should be expect many times. But this is not what happen. In 99%
of those letters there’s no mention of that. It was supposed to be
the main feature of the extermination camps, and in the internal correspondance
of the Nazis we should expect a good proportion in the signed letters,
or the handwritten letters, of such references. I’m not saying that
all the letters that talks about liquidations of Jews are necessarelly
falses, but the Brack letter clearly refer to a mass liquidation
program. I’m making a difference between a report that talk about
the liquidation of x hundreds of jews in a represail action and that
kind of stuff. There’s a huge amount of internal correspondance
that was seased, a huge amount of signed letters also. In a normal
world, we should expect frequent references to mass gassing or extermi-
nations in those signed letters. There’s not. The number of signed
documents that speaks about mass extermination is ridicoulously
low: a handfull. Over thousands of letters that deal with the jewish
question. Now, we know also that this war was a butchery for the
germans: they lost millions of soldiers. A very large number of SS
were killed, and a couple of them escaped in South America.
Brack, like Wetzel, survived to the war. An interesting feature for
those letters is that they excuse, in a way or another, the man who
wrote it and can be use in court to diminush his responsability
and excuse him in a way or another. Those trials were not normal
trials. Many member of the staff protested about it years after
or resigned and explained why. Now, we have, indeed, few letters
signed by those guys but who were captured and what
we are told is that it is impossible that they were offered a deal
in exhange of immunity or a lighter sentence, or either that they
were tortured to get such collaboration. It was impossible to
forge thousands of handwritten letters. It was impossible to get
the collaboration of decesed people. I’m just saying something:
if I’m present let say 1,600 handwritten letters, with a half and
half mix of people who were captured and people who where not,
letters that do not talk about an extermination policy or gas
chambers, and then 500 typewritten letters, with 200 that talks
about an extermination policy, and finally 10 incriminating letters
, signed letters, but all signed by people who were captured, letters
who excuse in a way or another the person most of the times, than
I find it strange statistically speaking.
http://www.codoh.com/
From [email protected] Fri Oct 11 09:07:21 PDT 1996
Article: 73240 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news1.wtn.mci.net!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!
news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hans Muench testimony:a sick joke
Date: 11 Oct 1996 01:36:37 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne2.vir.com
Brian Harmon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Daniel Keren wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > # There is inmates who claimed that the gas chambers were a myth.
> >
> > Name one person from Birkenau, or Treblinka, or Sobibor, or
> > Chelmno, or Maidanek, or Belzec, who said that. Either an SS-men
> > or an inmate.
>
> They may name Thies Christopherson as an SS Officer who
> claims that there were no gas chambers.
>
> He wrote a book a while back about his experiences in Auschwitz,
> it’s rather a rather revealing text.
>
> A few things worthy of note:
>
> 1) the introduction to the book is an anti-semitic diatribe
> that would put our buddy Giwer to shame.
>
I read this introduction, indeed, he’s displaying a revisionist
opinion even at the begining of his booklet and he also deny the
gas chambers, something that can hardly mean anything else than
he’s an anti-semit who hasn’t any credibility. This lead us again to
the ontological problem of the revisionists: they are thus unable
to provide a _credible_ eye witness who deny the gas chambers.
> 2) Christopherson freely admits that he worked at Auschwitz
> camp number three, or ‘Buna’. This camp was a good distance
> from the killing center at Birkenau.
>
> To use Christophersen as an eyewitness for what did or did
> not happen in the gas chambers makes about as much sense as
> using my grandfather: both were alive at the time, and neither
> were around to witness a thing.
I doubt your grandfather visited Auschwitz 1 and Birkenau often
during 1944.
From [email protected] Fri Oct 11 16:51:47 PDT 1996
Article: 73374 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!
nic.win.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!
Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hans Muench testimony:a sick joke
Date: 9 Oct 1996 23:48:07 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne57.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]> writes:
> # [email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> # You have it folk. He’s supposed to talk about ‘krema 4
> # and 5’ ?? 1,5 km Sout-West of Birkenau????
>
> Yes – relative to the SS HQ of Birkenau.
>
An where did he say relative to the SS HQ? nowhere. He’s talking
about Birkenau. He’s talking about a small wood, and locate the
‘gas chamber’ IN this wood, not close to a couple of trees that
are in the vicinity of Birkenau. And he said that the ‘gas chamber’
was camouflated in this wood. Your explication is ridiculous.
If you have the pretention to read in the mind and transform
each of his words according to your will, that’s up to you. The
words that he used mean simply: starting from the SW corner of
Birkenau, 1 to 1,5 km away in a straight line. When I’m saying
1 km on the south of central park, this doesn’t mean ‘starting
from 680 meters on the north of the southern border of central park’
but 1 km on the south of the southern border.
> # There is inmates who claimed that the gas chambers were a myth.
>
> Name one person from Birkenau, or Treblinka, or Sobibor, or
> Chelmno, or Maidanek, or Belzec, who said that. Either an SS-men
> or an inmate.
>
One of your fellow have just talk about Christophersen, who visited
Birkenau several times in 1944 so I’ve not to search about him.
For the inmates, I wonder why you stopped to Birkenau and do not
include Auschwitz 1? The case I heard about was an inmate of Auschwitz
1, a gohim. I’ll try to search if it’s on the Zundel site or elsewhere,
but I didn’t pay attention 6 or 8 months ago. It wasn’t in a newspaper
but from a revisionist source. I’ll see if I can remember where I saw
that.
From [email protected] Fri Oct 11 16:51:48 PDT 1996
Article: 73375 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!
nic.win.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!
Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Cracow forensic study:another sick joke
Date: 10 Oct 1996 00:06:26 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne57.vir.com
[email protected] (Ken McVay OBC) wrote:
>
> In article <539qgl$bpf@Vir.com>, Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >present it without this caution. Neither Zundel, nor Faurisson, were aware back
> >those days that Leuchter hadn’t any degree in engineering but since he was
> >perhaps the only guy who had to maintain execution systems in USA and to provide
>
> Please name one gas chamber built by Leuchter.
> Please name one gas chamber maintained by Leuchter.
Please read carefully before to put words in my mouth: I said
execution systems. This mean all the execution systems existing
in USA. You will be able to find in ‘truth prevails’ (sic) the
name of the penitenciary were Leuchter provided equipment, here
I think it was a monitor, and the name of this other penitentiary
that he visited several times before to propose the design of a
new gas chamber. The project never materialized because of the price
he asked (the best I can remember) however he had interviews with
people there to learn the functionning of it before to do his design.
For the remaining, he provided execution material to other penitenciary.
If you noticed well I don’t feel the need to use the Leuchter report
when I want to show my point except for two essantial datas: the
general functionning of a gas chamber and the ferro-cyhanide traces
in Auschwitz-Birkenau. If you want to drag me into a discussion about
the explosivity of HCN, I don’t see your point: I didn’t use such
a data.
From [email protected] Fri Oct 11 21:07:50 PDT 1996
Article: 73396 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
news.umbc.edu!cs.umd.edu!news.abs.net!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hans Muench testimony:a sick joke
Date: 9 Oct 1996 02:48:30 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 105
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne62.vir.com
[email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>> > The Simpson Report was made public in the early 1950’s. You quote
>> > not a word of its findings. There is a simple reason for that. It found that not
>> > torture or physical brutality was used.
>> So? What you have here is a man (Clay) who decided to deny the charge
>> because they were embarassing.
> You’re an ignorant idiot. When he made that statement Clay was under
>attack for commuting the sentences. Confirming the alleged brutalities would not
>have been an “embarassment” but the cornerstone of his defense.
I don’t see it that way. A man can be under attack for something he did
previously and decide to not displease more those who attack him by such kind
of confirmation. In all the cases what you state now is that because the prose-
cution staff denied what the lawyer who were in contact with inmates during
those trials stated, while it is indirectly or directly ‘friends’ of the
prosecution which was under attack, then the case is disprooved!
Here’s an exemple of those charges taken from Hilberg’s testimony at Zundel’s
trial:
****************************************************
Christie produced an article in The Progressive written by Judge Edward L.
Van Roden in February of 1949 eentitled “American Atrocities in Germany”
where van Roden had written: American investigators at the U.S. Court in
Dachau, Germany, used the following methods to obtain confessions: Beatings
and brutal kickings. Knocking out teeth and breaking jaws. Mock trials.
Solitary confinement. Posturing as priests. Very limited rations. Spiritual
deprivation. Promises of acquittal. Complaints concerning these third degree
methods were received by Secretary of the Army Kenneth
Royall last Spring. Was that a false statement?, asked Christie.
“I could not confirm or deny it,” said Hilberg, “because it’s the first time
I am looking at it, and I have no independent knowledge of what happened.” Christie
pointed out tha that the pamphlet, which he believed Hilberg said he read, referred
to the floggings of these prisoners after which their sexual organs were trampled
on as they lay prostrate on the ground. Did Hilberg consider these to be false
statements? “Well, I consider that a bit fanciful because I have never seen it
corroborated, mentioned anywhere, the particular detail that you have just read,” said
Hilberg. Okay, said Christie, I am going to read on from the same article in The
Progressive where Judge van Roden wrote: Our investigators would put a black
hood over the accused’s head and then punch him in the face with brass knuckles,
kick him, and beat him with rubber hose. Many of the German defendants had
teeth knocked out. Some had their jaws broken. All but two of the Germans, in the
139 cases we investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. Are
you aware of those statements having been made sometime in 1949?, asked Christie.
“I am certainly not,” said Hilberg, “and if this is an official report, I
would certainly like to have been referred to see an official report, rather than
an article in a magazine called The Progressive, which I could then read… I
have no independent knowledge of the events alleged there.” (5-1015) Christie
produced the book Manstein: His Campaigns and His Trial written by Field-Marshal
Erich von Manstein’s defence lawyer R.T. Paget, K.C., M.P. At page 109, Paget
wrote: This commission, consisting of Judges Simpson and Van Roden, and Colonel
Laurenzen had reported among other things that of the 139 cases they had
investigated 137 had had their testicles permanently destroyed by kicks received from
the American War Crimes Investigation team. Hilberg testified that he had not
read this particular book and did not know Manstein’s defence lawyer. (5-1015,
1016) Would you agree, asked Christie, that this book tends to provide
confirmation of the statement in Did Six Million Really Die? that they were flogged and
their sexual organs were trampled? “All I can tell you,” said Hilberg, “is that
that you are reading words that re-appear in the pamphlet. The name Paget as the
author of, or counsel of Manstein, he is known to me in an entirely different
context, about comments made in the House of Commons about black people. That is
the context in which the name is known to me.” (5-1017)
****************************************************
What we have also is several lawyers or ex-members of the court where quoted
the Chicago Tribune at the end of the 40’s to complain about such things in
different ways.
What it looks now is that many prisonners complains to their lawyers and several
of them spoke at the end of the 40’s. I saw those articles, mentionned by Butz,
in the Chicago Tribune (at New York library) 3 months ago. There was perhaps 5
or 6 different people of the Nuremberg staff who spoke in this sery of articles.
What I would have to imagine now is that either these lawyers decided to lie
years after the trials, or either that inmates who had private conversations
with those lawyers lied a few years before. They confessed ‘gas chambers’ an
other atrocities in court (for Dachau), but in private they talked about those
treatments. This is the way I understand it, unless you have another hypothesis.
I cannot have read all the existing stuff on earth about this, there was many
trials and some transcripts of these ones are as long as 25,000 pages. I
read some parts of the Farben trial’s transcripts, and some other parts of
the NMT main trial, plus several books, that’s all. I never read the transcripts
of the Dachau trial or the Malmedy trials directly. Butz stated that the review
board confirmed all that Van Roden claimed, taking exception only in respect
to the frequencies of the brutalities but that in his book ‘Decision in Germany’
Clay denies the brutalities, in contradiction with his own review board.
Your whole point his to say that the prosecution’s word was pure truth or
that Clay couldn’t have juge that it was not a good approach when there was
an anti-nazi hystery in the public opinion to not appear as a kind of ‘nazi
apologist’. So this mean the those people in Nuremberg decided to lie seve-
ral years after the trials or that the defendant who confessed what was expec-
ted from them in court lied systematically on a large scale to give a coherent
story in private conversations with there lawyers? Explain please…
http://www.codoh.com/
From [email protected] Fri Oct 11 21:07:50 PDT 1996
Article: 73415 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!
news.mindlink.net!news.atl.bellsouth.net!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!news.uoregon.edu!
arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: I’m lost here…
Date: 11 Oct 1996 23:49:27 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <53cgue$[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne58.vir.com
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
> > Pressac is giving much more details, in the french edition (Les crematoires
> > d’Auschwitz) he based his claims on German documents: basically the
> > crema IV is not just submitted to few problems, but is no longer used
> > after may 1943. On page 81 he says that krema V is no longer used
> > after september 1943 because kremas 2 and 3 are suffisant.
> > I’ve try today to take a look at it again to see on what he base
> > his claim, but for Pressac it’s sometimes hard to know in advance
> > if a claim is really based on a document or not. The book was borrowed,
> > unfortunatelly, but I don’t believe he invented that totally.
> >
> > Is there any documentary evidence, german documents, tha cremas 4 and
> > 5 were used after sept 1943? Something that may contradict Pressac’s
> > claim?
>
> According to Pressac:
[snip]
I said _german documents_, not post war testimonies. I know that
you believe those eyewitnes accounts but I saw so many lies and
contradictions in F. Muller and R. Vrba testimonies, without accounting
for some others, that I attach little credibility to them, as much
as for ‘Hoess memoirs’. A german document written by Jahrling or
someone else, Prfurer or another, that’s another thing. Today I
was able to take a look at A.T.O. and this confirm the things I wrote.
I based my claim on the french book from Pressac, and the last part
of your response was the samething I said but from the english book.
In A.T.O. we talk about an effort that was done to repare a chimney but
nothing else related to documents. So accounting for his documents
kremas 4 and 5 were out of service in september 1943 untill the end of
the war, but he say also that ‘eye witness accounts’ described how
they were reactivated for the hungarian jew extermination. However,.
there’s no document anout this apparently. It doesn’t mean that they
were not necessarelly repeared, but since such works involved undoubtfully
an exchange of letters (there’s a cost associate with it!) the best
evidence up to now is that kremas 4 and 5 were not repared unless
I learn about some other document a day. There’s a lot of documents
that deal with the krema breakdown and the cost of reparations after
in the early 1943.
This is just a minor point: Muench came in Birkenau only in september
1943, so even if Keren’s explanation would make sense, let say for
someone who’s drunk, there’s few chances that krema 4 was active
during Muench presence in Auschwitz.
http://www.codoh.com/
From [email protected] Sat Oct 12 10:53:52 PDT 1996
Article: 73550 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!
laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!
www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!
news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.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: Re: The Cracow forensic study:another sick joke
Date: 12 Oct 1996 13:12:28 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<53e21m$jm[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne17.vir.com
[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
> On the contrary, I hypothesize the the revisionists cannot explain why
> cyanides are present in the homicidal gas chambers at levels above the
> background levels found in other dwellings (one of which, according to
> Mr. Beaulieu, was subject to a fumigation).
>
I’ve already state something about this few days ago, but as usual
your response was avoiding a simple,basical fact: The Auschwitz
Chronicle, from Danuta Czech, was written with the use of the Auschwitz
camp documentation. The autor stated that on the 9 of july 1943
a general desinfection was done in the women’s barracks and at
the end of the month, it was men’s barracks. Since a homicidal gassing
can hardly leaves more cyanide traces than a delousing of another
barrack, we may expect normally similar levels, wether the barrack
was used for a homicidal gassing (which is false) weter it was
simply desinfected. But the Cracow team found no cyhanide remains
for the other barracks. They give no precision about the mateial
they took from the other barracks, nor if they took it from inside
or outside, nor if they took it deliberatelly from a piece of wood
rather than a plaster sample, nor … there’s many ways to play
with such kind of datas to get biased results. How do I know that
they biaised it? Because there’s no reason, according to the events
that took place in tha camp (see Danuta Czech) to expect no cyhanide
compounds in a barracks that was subject to a delousing and traces
in another where one homicidal gassing was allegedly done. That’s
simple: they thought that they could play with the datas as much as
they wanted, but there’s a proof of their dishonesty: the general
delousing of the camp that is prooven.
From [email protected] Sat Oct 12 19:37:44 PDT 1996
Article: 73614 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!swrinde!nntp.primenet.com!
arclight.uoregon.edu!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘Wirth came to Treblinka and kicked up a terrific row’
Date: 12 Oct 1996 20:47:25 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne21.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> Willi Mentz testifies about his days in Treblinka
> [Quoted in ‘The Good Old Days’ – E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The
> Free Press, NY, 1988., p. 245-247]
> ———————————————————————–
> When I came to Treblinka the camp commandant was a doctor named Dr. Eberl.
> He was very ambitious. It was said that he ordered more transports
[snip]
transcript of the Iinternational Military Tribunal proceedings from 30 May,
1946 where Sauckel, one of the major accused, testified as follows:
SAUCKEL: I confirm that my signature is appended to this document. I a
ask the Tribunal’s permission to state how that signature come about. This
document was presented to me in its finished form. I asked to be allowed to read
and study this document in my cell in Oberursel and decide whether I could sign
it. That was denied me. During the conversation an officer was consulted who, I
was told, belonged to the Polish or Russian army; and it was made clear to me
that if I hesitated too long in signing this document I would be handed over to
the Russian authorities. Then this Polish or Russian officer entered and asked,
“Where is Sauckel’s family? We know Sauckel, of course we will take him with
us; but his family will have to be taken into Russian territory as well.” I am
the father of 10 children. I did not stop to consider; and thinking of my
family, I signed this document. When I returned to my cell, I sent a written message
to the commandant of the camp and asked permission to talk with him alone on
this matter. But that was not possible, because shortly afterwards I was brought
to Nuremberg.
From [email protected] Sat Oct 12 19:37:44 PDT 1996
Article: 73615 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news1.wtn.mci.net!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!
arclight.uoregon.edu!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘I could not imagine anything more disgusting and horrific’
Date: 12 Oct 1996 20:50:33 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne21.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> SS-Doctor Kremer about his days at Auschwitz:
> [Quoted in ‘The Good Old Days’ – E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The
> Free Press, NY, 1988, p. 258].
> ——————————————————————-
> I remember I once took part in the gassing of one of these groups
> of women [from the women’s camp in Auschwitz]. I cannot say how
>were herded into the gas chambers and gassed.
[snip]
excerp from :Did Six Million Really Die?:
Christie suggested to Hilberg that affidavits
affidavits such as that of Hans Marsalek appeared to be a very suspect kind of
evidence. “Well, suspect to whom?,” asked Hilberg. “In other words, to me it was a
document to be used very carefully, and I am not entirely sure that I used it more
than once with reference to a minor matter, but — it’s rather obvious that a
layman confronted with a fragment of history in the form of a document should be
careful in using it, because the document does not explain itself.” That’s your
view of the document, sir, said Christie. But a layman looking at it would
form the opinion, first of all, the man was dying; second, they interrogated him
for six to eight hours after he had been shot; and thirdly, they take the stateme
statement and they kind of put it in the policeman’s handwriting and he swears the
guy said it, right? “Yes,” said Hilberg. It looks suspicious, doesn’t it?, asked
Christie. “You mean as a forgery, or as an unfair thing to do to a wounded man?,
man?, ” asked Hilberg. Unfair thing to do, said Christie. “Well, as I said, I have
difficulty reconstructing what is fair or unfair in these circumstances. I
don’t know how badly wounded he was, what kind of care he had, whether physicians
were consulted. It is hard to say this. I, personally, would be reluctant to say
the least question of anybody who was in a state of discomfort, but that is,
you know…” (5-1039)
From [email protected] Sat Oct 12 19:37:45 PDT 1996
Article: 73628 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!
feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!
Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re:The porous pillars of Krema II
Date: 12 Oct 1996 04:21:03 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne5.vir.com
I’ve just think a bit to this one and I know now why I didn’t use
this argument a couple of months ago: I bet they will say that the
devices were introduced a bit before people were drag in the ‘gas
chambers’. Ok, no problem, I’ll use other arguments.
From [email protected] Sun Oct 13 08:51:18 PDT 1996
Article: 73614 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!swrinde!nntp.primenet.com!
arclight.uoregon.edu!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘Wirth came to Treblinka and kicked up a terrific row’
Date: 12 Oct 1996 20:47:25 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne21.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> Willi Mentz testifies about his days in Treblinka
> [Quoted in ‘The Good Old Days’ – E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The
> Free Press, NY, 1988., p. 245-247]
> ———————————————————————–
> When I came to Treblinka the camp commandant was a doctor named Dr. Eberl.
> He was very ambitious. It was said that he ordered more transports
[snip]
transcript of the Iinternational Military Tribunal proceedings from 30 May,
1946 where Sauckel, one of the major accused, testified as follows:
SAUCKEL: I confirm that my signature is appended to this document. I a
ask the Tribunal’s permission to state how that signature come about. This
document was presented to me in its finished form. I asked to be allowed to read
and study this document in my cell in Oberursel and decide whether I could sign
it. That was denied me. During the conversation an officer was consulted who, I
was told, belonged to the Polish or Russian army; and it was made clear to me
that if I hesitated too long in signing this document I would be handed over to
the Russian authorities. Then this Polish or Russian officer entered and asked,
“Where is Sauckel’s family? We know Sauckel, of course we will take him with
us; but his family will have to be taken into Russian territory as well.” I am
the father of 10 children. I did not stop to consider; and thinking of my
family, I signed this document. When I returned to my cell, I sent a written message
to the commandant of the camp and asked permission to talk with him alone on
this matter. But that was not possible, because shortly afterwards I was brought
to Nuremberg.
From [email protected] Sun Oct 13 08:51:18 PDT 1996
Article: 73615 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news1.wtn.mci.net!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!
arclight.uoregon.edu!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘I could not imagine anything more disgusting and horrific’
Date: 12 Oct 1996 20:50:33 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne21.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> SS-Doctor Kremer about his days at Auschwitz:
> [Quoted in ‘The Good Old Days’ – E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The
> Free Press, NY, 1988, p. 258].
> ——————————————————————-
> I remember I once took part in the gassing of one of these groups
> of women [from the women’s camp in Auschwitz]. I cannot say how
>were herded into the gas chambers and gassed.
[snip]
excerp from :Did Six Million Really Die?:
Christie suggested to Hilberg that affidavits
affidavits such as that of Hans Marsalek appeared to be a very suspect kind of
evidence. “Well, suspect to whom?,” asked Hilberg. “In other words, to me it was a
document to be used very carefully, and I am not entirely sure that I used it more
than once with reference to a minor matter, but — it’s rather obvious that a
layman confronted with a fragment of history in the form of a document should be
careful in using it, because the document does not explain itself.” That’s your
view of the document, sir, said Christie. But a layman looking at it would
form the opinion, first of all, the man was dying; second, they interrogated him
for six to eight hours after he had been shot; and thirdly, they take the stateme
statement and they kind of put it in the policeman’s handwriting and he swears the
guy said it, right? “Yes,” said Hilberg. It looks suspicious, doesn’t it?, asked
Christie. “You mean as a forgery, or as an unfair thing to do to a wounded man?,
man?, ” asked Hilberg. Unfair thing to do, said Christie. “Well, as I said, I have
difficulty reconstructing what is fair or unfair in these circumstances. I
don’t know how badly wounded he was, what kind of care he had, whether physicians
were consulted. It is hard to say this. I, personally, would be reluctant to say
the least question of anybody who was in a state of discomfort, but that is,
you know…” (5-1039)
From [email protected] Mon Oct 14 08:45:44 PDT 1996
Article: 74041 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news1.wtn.mci.net!
news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!news.rrnet.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: 2-Auschwitz, a secret? (repost)
Date: 14 Oct 1996 04:48:54 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 143
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne21.vir.com
We will take a look now at the usual propaganda over the war. The american
Arthur Butz, especially, was the first to do an exhaustive inquiry about
it. What is clear from his review of american newspapers is that the
propaganda about mass extermination started as sson as 1942. It was
mainly statements made by zionist officials, Chaim Weizman among others,
that were often related to an appeal for the opening of Palestine to
jewish immigration. Several camps or atrocities are mentionned, Belzec,
Chelmo, Sobibor, Treblinka, and the accusations take miscellaneous forms:
jews who are shot, report about mass electrocution of jews in Belzec,
gasing methos in Treblinka, poison, sometimes the use of wagons were
lethal gas is used. It looks like the usual scrap that any war is
normally generating: propaganda. Several of those accusations were drop
after the war.
I was able to find recently a rare book: ‘the black book of the polish
jewry’, publish at the end of 1943. This book is totally consistent
with the war propaganda that can be found in the newspapers: Chelmo,
Treblinka, story of atrocities, in some cases details: 250 jewish
children allegedly killed in a jewish sanatorium, elsewhere 50 jews
executed in a township, the book is a collection of war propaganda,
probably a mix of thruth an falsehoods, an over few hundreds pages
we have an idea of what kind of stories were used by several jewish
organisations which had their large network of informant across
Europe. Nowhere Auschwitz is mention, despite the mass gasing of jews
is supposed to have start in the spring of 1942. The index, that contains
a large amount of places were atrocities are allegedly comitted,
do not contain the name of Auschwitz. Several minor stories, but
nothing about the gasing of hundreds of thousand of jews there.
Enrique Aynat made a deep inquiry with the review published
by the polish government in exile in London, the ‘Polish fighting
review’. It is similar stuff. Several stories about atrocities
against jews were put in circulation by this review ( the informations
were received in the same way that what was explained earlier, from
the A.K.) but Auschwitz appear just few times before 1945. But
there’s more: when it appear, it is not in connection with mass
gasing of jews. It is about case of torture, hard work, the
tough conditions of the inmates who have to work for the military
production. An example of that can be find in the 1 july 1942 article
(n0 47) where it is mention that the German use syringue to kill
prisonners of Bikernau. There’s a base of thruth: the method
was at least used for the dying prisonners who were affect by the
catastrophic typhus epidemy of 1942, but there’s no evidence that
it was use to liquidate them because of an extermination policy:
euthanasy was the real purpose. In several other articles during
2 years, very ‘low level’ details about some inmates who died
are given, and in a case it is say that few hundred russian
prisonners were gased at a specific date. What is astonishing here
is that over 2 years and a half, the systematic murder of hundreds
of thousands of jews seems to be ignored while the polish resistance
is suppose to be aware of a single gasing of russian pows at a time.
There is also a reference to the gasing of polish childrens at the end of
1943, despite today we never speak about the gasing of poles. But
among the huge amount of propaganda that was published over those
years, this is all. Before the mid 1944, the atrocities were generally
not concerning Auschwitz and when it was th case, the mass gasing
of jews was not mentioned.
The story about the mass gasing of jews in Auschwitz began
really in the summer of 1944 in the allied newspapers, and then we
can say that the persons who were spreading the atrocities stories
had no choice: the other camps were shut down several months before.
First remark: such stories are not ‘a proof’ of mass gasing,
simply because propaganda and false accusations were always a
part of war, and second because those accusations were made
in connection with a call to allied countries for negotiations
with germans. The zionist leaders of that time had clearly an objective
in the mind: put pressure on the British and force them to allow
the opening of the Palestine borders to jewish immigration.
Israel was not existing yet, and the arabs were the majority there.
Several declarations in the newspapers let no ambiguity about it.
Second remark: the real problem is that it is hard to believe that
such mounstruous events, the gasing of hundreds of thousand of jews
over 2 years, could be absent of publications like the ‘black book
of the Polish jewry’ while minor stories about the executions of
50 jews in a small township are present. That book was published
expresselly for the sake of propaganda, to talk exhaustivelly about
the anti jewish persecutions. And it is not because Auschwitz was
‘secret’. We can have a clear indication of that with the anti-revisionnist
author Martin Gilbert in ‘Auschwitz and the allied’, p 340. After
an exhaustive review of the documentation, he conclude that Auschwitz
was absent of the war propaganda before the mid 1944.
There it’s like to say that events like those that happend in
Rwanda did exist over 2 years but that despite information was
collected on a daily based by A.K. agents in Bikernau and Auschwitz 1,
nobody seem aware of it. Imagine 2 Rwandas over 2 years and nobody
within that country noticed anything during this period except
at the end.
Third remark: such an absence of propaganda would be more acceptable
for camps like Belzec, simply because those one were isolated,
there was not an important towniship beside, there was not hundreds
of civilians who worked there, inmates were not frequently reshiped
in the vicinity of the camps and able to have contact with civilians,
Belzec was not of any strategical importance for the american
since it hadn’t any Buma plan industry: the inmates were suppose
to arrive there and to be killed quickly, nothing else.
But what we have in the WWII propaganda is the opposite: no possible
secret for Auschwitz, but it is there that an unexplanable silence
was keepen. It must be say also that according to the post war
confessions, Auschwitz was suppose to be the ‘metropol’ of the
extermination, the main camp. At Nuremberg, the bulk of the
extermination story was built on Auschwitz.
Fourth remark: The story about the ‘revelation of the secret’ is
of an uncommensurable absurdity. The WRB report, published in 1944,
is suppose to be an accurate description of the nature of Auschwitz.
The american press revealed that 2 inmates escaped and were able to go
in Switzerland to give a very accurate description of the gassing
procedure and the installations in Auscwitz. The authors of the WRB
report stayed anonymous during 16 years despite it had be more credible
to present those ones immediatelly. As Butz noticed they stayed anonymous
for 16 years and the jewish writter Reitlinger was a bit bothered in the
first edition of the final solution about this fact but those ones were
produced before the second edition of his book 150 miles away from his
Sussex domicile (London). Rudolph Vrba, author of a best seller a bit later,
‘I cannot forgive’. Vrba is suppose to had the false identity of Walter
Rosenberg in Auschwitz despite he wrote that the other inmates called
him ‘Rudi’.
Several, a lot of contradictions exist in Vrba’s ‘memories’, the description
of the ovens (number, location) is absolutelly wrong, despite he was supposed
to be in contact with a SK like Muller and that the purpose of his mission
was to bring informations about the crematorias. He invented a fictive bom-
bardment on Auschwitz in april 1944. Let say just that when I read Vrba’s book,
I saw that his escape had a specific purpose: give a warn to the whole world
about the fate of the jews in Auschwitz, ‘breaking the secret’ in other words.
One have just to read the previous message to realize that it is ridicoulous.
There was hundreds of escapes and liberations before him. Despite the incon-
sistences in his testimony, Vrba’s credibility is essantial. The defenders of
the legend can conceed that an obscur eye witness could have lie, but Vrba is
a kind of detonnator, a domino:
since he talk about his entertainment with F. Muller at the camp, since
the key eyewitness Sonderkommando F. Muller said also that he spoke
with Vrba several times in Auschwitz, if one of the testimony is false,
the other collapse. If Vrba testimony is false, then one would have
to explain why the real authors of the WRB report never challendge
Vrba’s story. And then we would conclude that the WRB report wasn’t
writen by an ex-inmate but by higher rank propagandist who had a large
amount of datas available: this is where the story began.
From [email protected] Mon Oct 14 08:45:45 PDT 1996
Article: 74132 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!swrinde!
howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Cracow forensic study:another sick joke
Date: 12 Oct 1996 23:19:43 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<53e21m$jm[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne12.vir.com
[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>,
> tom moran <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I think your response needs no reply. I trust what is said and
> >the record.
>
> Translation: Mr. Moran does not understand his own post and cannot
> respond to the criticism I have posted.
>
> > Just one point to highlight. Looks like Mr.Green has let go fo
> >the “background” level hypothesis.
>
> On the contrary, I hypothesize the the revisionists cannot explain why
> cyanides are present in the homicidal gas chambers at levels above the
> background levels found in other dwellings (one of which, according to
> Mr. Beaulieu, was subject to a fumigation).
>
Well, Green, I think you said earlier you don’t like to be called
Green but Mr Green, so your altess, despite my prior disgust led
me to not respond to your reply few days ago, if you allow me,
your splendor, I will complete my clarify message.
So, incandescent lighthouse, the Cracow team took samples from
miscellaneous barracks and got 0 results for the barracks were there’s
no official ‘gassing’ and few compounds, CN- compounds, for barracks
were there was allegedly one homicidal gassing. The way those CN-
ions were detected in a laboratory is another thing: I’ve just reread Tom
Moran post and I don’t now how many different mollecules other than
HCN can be dissociated or be present naturally in wood, plaster
mortar or brick. For the case or bricks and mortar, I suspect it is
very few. I don’t know how many CN- ions could be detected after
such a separation for a piece of material which was not submitted
to a gassing with HCN. Perhaps I will take a look into chemistry
books later during the week, but the datas for this are not easilly
avalaible.
However, I know at least 3 ways by which a material can adsorbe
HCN mollecules. Adsorbtion without dissociation, adsorbtion with a
dissociation by iron, and chemio-adsorption with potassium. To that
one must add other sources for the formation of mollecules from which
CN- ions can be extract later, but these ones I don’t know how much
in quantity. Your honnor, the problem to me is simple: the Cracow
team don’t say what was the material involved when they took samples
from different barracks. Obviously pure HCN which didn;t react was
released very soon after a gassing, not 50 years after. Potassium-
cyhanide mollecules were still there if the material wasn’t submit
to water too much. Ferro-cyhanide was there if the material they took
contained iron. And for the ‘natural ‘ presence of other derivatives,
that are not due to a gassing, I don’t know.
Your splendor, I’m facing here a strange situation were the Cracow
team want us to believe that they took sample with pure objectivity,
but we don’t know if the material for those samples wasn’t deliberatelly
choosen as different. They had all the time to study chemical books,
or to do tests, before to know which material could present the
highest proportion of CN- ions after separation. I beg your pardon,
oh commander of the believers, but it looks like a screw. ‘The Auschwitz
Chronicle’ was written around 1990, and obviously they were not aware
that it was perfectly possible to proove that a general delousing
was ordered in the camp. Of course, a homicidal gassing that take
few hours or even 1 day (?) will not produce MORE cyhanide remains,
you have so much insisted to state that the concentration for killing
lice need to be much more important, that the necessary delay is few
hours, it is impossible to explain why there’s so disparities.
It was possible when you wanted to claim that those other barracks
were not submitted to a delousing, but now that we know that such
a general delousing took place, your magnificence, this just show
how they have biaised the datas by a way or another.
From [email protected] Mon Oct 14 20:03:44 PDT 1996
Article: 74247 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-lond.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!
news.gsl.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!
feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.nationalism.white,
alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: HOLO-HOAX DESTROYED FROM THE AIR!!
Date: 13 Oct 1996 12:42:20 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <52t8jn$bs[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<325a38e[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne23.vir.com
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:74247
alt.politics.nationalism.white:33003 alt.politics.white-power:46553
alt.skinheads:39759
[email protected] (Rob Kowalewski) wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> (william c anderson) wrote:
>
> > The guy who played golf with Uncle Joe is Chuck, and he’s a mean
> > old curmudgeon.
>
> If OoberOoze isn’t careful, that mean old curmudgeon may have to pull out
> his rusty boathook again. And ol’ Chuck has developed some real creative
> uses for rusty boathooks!
>
> Actually, Chuck is a Holocaust-Denier’s worst nightmare. Somebody who was
> actually there, on the grounds, at the time.
>
> May he continue to quaff expensive wine for a long, long time.
>
Absolutelly not. He’s just a clown who was supposed to be everywhere.
I was suprised to not see him claiming that he was on the U.S.
liberty and that it was an accident. Perhaps he missed this thread.
From [email protected] Tue Oct 15 09:45:56 PDT 1996
Article: 74476 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!
nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: A typical false eyewitness: Filip Muller, the plagiarist
Date: 12 Oct 1996 20:40:06 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 296
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne21.vir.com
Excerp from ‘Did Six Million Really Die?, testimony of Raul Hilberg:
Christie turned next to the eyewitness account of Filip MŸller given in his book
Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers. Hilberg testified he was
familiar with the book. Do you regard this as a serious historical work?, asked
Christie. “No, it is not a historical work,” said Hilberg. “It is a
recollection of a person, his own recollection and his own experiences.”
Do you regard it as accurate?, asked Christie. “I regard it as rather accurate,
yes. I have been through this book page by page, and I am hard-put to find any
error, any material significant error in this book. It is remarkable,” said
Hilberg. I put it to you, said Christie, that it is more of a novel than a
book; would you agree? “No, I do not agree at all.” You consider this an
accurate historical account of an eyewitness?, asked Christie. “Yes.”
Christie referred to page 87 of the book, and the following passage: It was
obvious that the SS felt themselves once more to be masters of the situation.
Quackernack and Schillinger were strutting back and forth in front of the
humiliated crowd with a self-important swagger. Suddenly they stopped in their
tracks, attracted by a strikingly handsome woman with blue-black hair who was
taking off her right shoe. The woman, as soon as she noticed that the two men
were ogling her, launched into what appeared to be a titillating and seductive
strip-tease act. She lifted her skirt to allow a glimpse of thigh and suspender. Slowly
she undid her stocking and peeled it off her foot. From out of the corner of
her eye she carefully observed what was going on round her. The two SS men were
fascinated by her performance and paid no attention to anything else. They were
standing there with arms akimbo, their whips dangling from their wrists, and
their eyes firmly glued on the woman. Do you consider this an accurate historical
account?, asked Christie. (5-1139) “I consider this more seriously than other
accounts about the same incident. There are several accounts of the manner in
which, at the time when the victims were being prepared for gassing, a woman
seized a weapon and was able to mortally would an SS man who was stabbed, and
whose name was Schillinger. The Schillinger episode is recorded in a number of
accounts. The only – and I said this is a very accurate description of what
transpired – the only question one might have is whether the detail as described here
is exactly the same as might have occurred; but I would say that there are
other accounts that are substantially in accord with what this account has to
state,” said Hilberg. The short answer, said Christie, is that you regard this as a
serious historical account. “Moreover, this passage is substantially correct,”
said Hilberg. Christie turned to page 110 of the book where MŸller described a
scene in the gas chamber : Suddenly a voice began to sing. Others joined in,
and the sound swelled into a mighty choir. They sang first the Czechoslovak
national anthem and then the Hebrew song ‘Hatikvah’. And all this time the SS men
never stopped their brutal beatings. It was as if they regarded the singing as a
last kind of protest which they were determined to stifle if they could. To be
allowed to die together was the only comfort left to these people. Singing
their national anthem they were saying a last farewell to their brief but
flourishing past, a past which had enabled them to live for twenty years in a
democratic state, a respected minority enjoying equal rights. And when they sang
‘Hatikvah’, now the national anthem of the state of Israel, they were glancing into the
the future, but it was a future which they would not be allowed to see. Christie
suggested that this was a description of what MŸller alleged occurred inside
the gas chamber. “Well, in this area, yes…My recollection is that this is in
the process of preparation…In the same building. I am not quite sure about the
room. Okay. All right,” said Hilberg. (5-1141) Do you consider that an accurate
historical account?, asked Christie. “I cannot, on my own, confirm the
particular incident,” said Hilberg. “That’s why we read books. But it is a matter of
record that on more than one occasion — there is another occasion when French
deportees were conveyed to the gas chamber, who were Jewish, who sang the
Marseillaise. So the act of singing in a moment of anticipated death is a protest, a
gesture, the only gesture possible… That happened, and this is a plausible
account.” Judge Hugh Locke interjected to ask, “What is the Marseillaise?” and
was told by Hilberg that it was the national anthem of France. Christie suggested
to Hilberg that books published before MŸller’s also gave similar singing
incidents. “Well, I don’t doubt that,” said Hilberg. “I said I don’t recall another
account of the singing of the Czechoslovakian national anthem, but I do recall
something about the French national anthem – obviously a different episode.”
(5-1142) Christie produced a book entitled Verbrechens Handschriften which
Hilberg testified he had seen in an English edition. Hilberg agreed that it was
published in 1972 by the Auschwitz Museum. He also agreed that Filip MŸller’s book
Eyewitness Auschwitz was published in its German and English editions in 1979.
(5-1143, 1144) Christie referred Hilberg to page 121 of Verbrechens
Handschriften and read an English translation of the passage which appeared there:
Inside the gas chamber a certain young Polish woman made a short fiery speech in
front of all persons present who were stripped naked in which she stigmatized the
Naz Nazi crimes, and the impression which she concluded with the following words: ‘We
shall not die. Now the history of our people will make us eternal. Our desire
and our people will live and come into bloom. The German people will pay so
dearly for our blood as a form of barbarism with Nazi Germany. Long live Poland…
of the Sonderkommando. Be aware that the holy obligation of vengeance for us
innocents rests upon you. Tell our people that we face death consciously and
full of pride.’ Thereupon the Poles kneeled down on the floor and solemnly said a
prayer in…which made a tremendous impression. They then got back to their
feet and sang in a choir the Polish national anthem. The Jews sang the Hatikvah.
The common brutal fate blended at this out of the way cursed place. The lyrics
sound of various hymns into one entity. The deeply heart-moving cordiality they
expressed in this manner, their last sentiments and their hope. They finished
by jointly singing The International. While they were singing the Red Cross
arrived. The gas was thrown in the chamber and all gave up their ghost in song and
ecstasy and improvement of this world. Would you agree, asked Christie, that it
seems as if MŸller recounts a strikingly similar situation in the anteroom
with the exception of the elimination of the word “The International”? “Why
elimination?,” said Hilberg. “I don’t understand, sir, what you are asking me,
because these are two separate incidents. Here is a selection process going on. There
are Communists involved. There are Jews involved. The Communists sing the
International. The Jews don’t sing the International; the Jews are not Communists.
Why should Jews about to go into the gas chamber sing the International?” What I
I am suggesting, said Christie, is that, very clearly, MŸller seems to have
plagiarized an incident from that book. “No,” said Hilberg. “You seem to assume,
sir, that anything that seems to be a similar event that strikes people
similarly is plagiarism. If I held this view, sir, I would be in court twenty times
accusing people of plagiarizing from my work. They can have an independent idea of
my own. They can describe the same thing in words similar to mine.” You are
saying that this is one event that two different people described from their own
observation, is that it?, asked Christie. “It appears that way to me.” (5-1146)
May I suggest, said Christie, that if we look at the context, we don’t find the
the surrounding circumstances in any way the same. “No. The surrounding circum-
stances are not the same. I said so. They are two victims.” Are you suggesting, ask
asked Christie, that two different groups of victims sang the Hatikvah and the
International, or alternatively, say the Polish national anthem and the Hatikvah?
Hatikvah? “It is absolutely likely,” said Hilberg, “because there are repeated
accounts o of people singing a national anthem. I said to you that I remember an
account of of someone singing the French national anthem. Now here we have an
account of som someone singing the Polish national anthem. We also have an account
of someone in this group, the Jews only, singing the Hatikvah, which turned out to be the nat
national anthem of Israel but which was not, obviously, then. Now, in addition to
that they are singing the International, so all we are saying is that there was
was some singing.” Could you explain to me how, asked Christie, on these two
separate occasions, people would get out of the anteroom to the gas chamber to
recount what had happened? “Well,” said Hilberg, “I think such a — if there is a
survivor — incidentally, these are not necessarily survivors. These particular
accounts were written, some of them, in a clandestine way by people who did not
survive. I want to emphasize that from the book that you are reading, but in
any case, such an event, such a sight – I was not there; I am not the person who
could properly state things about it, but I can imagine how impressive it would
would be.” (5-1147) Judge Locke interjected: “Don’t imagine, witness, please.”
I suggest that is what the author did, is imagine those events, said Christie.
“I cannot share that suggestion, because the authors, unlike me, were there,” said
Hilberg. I suggest, said Christie, that the authors created literary exercises
and alleged that they were fact and you regard those authors as factual history.
history. “I said that I do not regard them as historians,” said Hilberg, “employing
the style that the historian or a political scientist or, for that matter, a
lawyer would use. These are people who record what they see and what they feel.”
How could either of the authors, asked Christie, see or hear the things he alleged
alleged he saw or heard without being in the gas chambers himself? “Or be in the
anter anteroom,” said Hilberg. He added that “of course” there was an anteroom to
the gas chamber. (5-1148) Christie suggested again that these were not historical
accou accounts but were novelistic interpretations. Would you agree?, he asked
Hilberg. “No, I don’t agree,” said Hilberg. Christie referred back to Eyewitness
Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers by Filip MŸller at page 113:
The atmosphere in the dimly lit gas chamber was tense and depressing. Death had
come menacingly menacingly close. It was only minutes away. No memory, no trace of
any of us would remain remain. Once more people embraced. Parents were hugging their
children so violently that it almost broke my heart. Suddenly a few girls, naked and
in the full bloom bloom of youth, came up to me. They stood in front of me without
a word, gazing at me deep in thought and shaking their heads uncomprehendingly. At
last one of the plucked up courage and spoke to me: ‘We understand that you have
chosen to die with us of your own free will, and we have come to tell you that we
think you your decision pointless: for it helps no one.’ She went on: ‘We must die,
but you still have a chance to save your life. You have to return to the camp and tell
everybody about our last hours,’ she commanded. ‘You have to explain to them
that they must free themselves from any illusions. They ought to fight, that’s
better than dying here helplessly. It’ll be easier for them, since they have no
children. As for you, perhaps you’ll survive this terrible tragedy and then you
must tell everybody what happened to you. One more thing,’ she went on, ‘you
can do me one last favour: this gold chain round my neck: when I’m dead, take it
off and give it to my boyfriend Sasha. He works in the bakery. Remember me to
him. Say “love from Yana”. When it’s all over, you’ll find me here.’ She pointed
at a place next to the concrete pillar where I was standing. Those were her
last words. I was surprised and strangely moved by her cool and calm detachment
in the face of death, and also by her sweetness. Before I could make an answer
to her spirited speech, the girls took hold of me and dragged me protesting to
the door of the gas chamber. There they gave me a last push which made me land
bang in the middle of the group of SS men. Kurschuss was the first to recognize
me and at once set about me with his truncheon. I fell to the floor, stood up
and was knocked down by a blow from his fist. As I stood up on my feet for the
third or fourth time, Kurschuss yelled at me: ‘You bloody shit, get it into you
your stupid head: we decide how long you stay alive and when you die, and not
you. Now piss off, to the ovens!’ Then he socked me viciously in the face so that
I reeled against the lift door.
Do you regard that as an accurate eyewitness account of a plausible event?,
asked Christie. “This is probably one of the most moving passages in the book,”
said Hilberg, “and when I read it I paused. Obviously, it is incredible, but not
incredible in the sense that one uses the word to describe something that is
unlikely to have happened. It is incredible that a
man who worked dragging out corpses was shoving people in, should want to die
in his early twenties. He was talked out of it by a young woman about to die.”
(5-111149 to 1151) Inside the gas chamber, right?, asked Christie. “Near the
door.” And she pushed him out of the gas chamber through the door?, asked
Christie. “That is his description. I think the passage is substantially correct…
I cannot imagine such a passage being invented,” said Hilberg. Because you think
it couldn’t be invented, suggested Christie, you can’t imagine it being
invented. “No.” You therefore believe it to be true?, asked Christie. “I
believe it to to be true in substance,” said Hilberg. Is there a difference
between it being true in substance and true in fact?, asked Christie.”There
is a difference if two feet matters, if a gesture matters. The man is writing
years afterwards.” Do you believe, asked Christie, that people in the gas
chamber, if that is described here, could push people out and the SS would be
standing there and the door would fly open? “It would be possible that when the
gassing took place, as in this case, not of an entire transport having come in
from the outside but people selected from the inside, that this large room was
not filled, that indeed it was possible for room to be inside the gas chamber to
stand around and, indeed, for space to exist between a person there and the door.”
(5-1152)
Christie turned back to MŸller’s book and read from a passage which appeared on
page 161:
Suddenly from out of the ranks of doomed prisoners stepped the young Rabbinical
student who had worked in the hair-drying team. He turned to OberscharfŸhrer
Muhsfeld and with sublime courage told him to be quiet. Then he began to speak
to the crowd:
‘Brothers!’ he cried, ‘it is God’s unfathomable will that we are to lay down
our lives. A cruel and accursed fate has compelled us to take part in the
extermination of our people, and now we are ourselves to become dust and
ashes. No miracle has happened. Heaven has sent no avenging bolts of lightning.
No rain has fallen strong enough to extinguish the funeral pyres built by the
hand of man. We must submit to the inevitable with Jewish resignation. It will
be the last trial sent to us by heaven. It is not for us to question the reasons
for we are as nothing before Almighty God. Be not afraid of death! Even if
we could, by some chance, save our lives, what use would that be to us now? In
vain we would search for our murdered relatives. We should be alone, without a
family, without relatives, without friends, without a place we might call our
own, condemned to roam the world aimlessly. For us there would be neither rest
nor peace of mind until one day we would die in some corner, lonely and forsaken.
Therefore, brothers, let us now go to meet death bravely and with dignity!’
Christie next produced the book Auschwitz: A Doctor’s Eyewitness Account by Dr.
Miklos Nyiszli and referred to a passage on page 143, which he suggested to
Hilberg was plagiarized by MŸller:
This was where the “Dayen” worked, or rather, whe where he did not work, for
all he did was watch the fires burn. Even so he was dissatisfied, for his
religious beliefs forbade him from participating in the burning of prayer books
or holy objects. I felt sorry for him, but could do nothing nothing further to
help him. It was impossible to obtain an easier job, for we were, after all,
only members of the kommando of the living dead. This then was the man who
began to speak:
“Fellow Jews… An inscrutable Will has sent our people to its death; fate has
allotted us the cruelest of tasks, that of participating in our own destruction,
of witnessing our own disappearance, down to the very ashes to which we are
reduced. In no instance have the heavens opened to send showers and put out the
funeral pyre flames. “We must accept, resignedly, as Sons Sons of Israel
should, that this is the way things must be. God has so ordained it. it. Why?
It is not for us, miserable humans, to seek the answer. “This is the fate
that has befallen us. Do not be afraid of death. What is life worth, even if,
by some strange miracle, we should manage to remain alive? We would return to
our cities and towns to find cold and pillaged homes. In every room, in every
corner, the memory of those who have disappeared would lurk, haunting our
tear-filled eyes. Stripped of family and relatives, we would wander like the
restless, shuffling shadows of our former selves, of our completed pasts, finding
nowhere any peace or rest.”
Hilberg agreed that a “Dayen” was a rabbinical student.
Do you see any similarity with the words?, asked Christie. “Very similar.”
(5-1156) In the case of MŸller, said Christie, he is saying that it was the
rabbinical student; in the case of Nyiszli it was a “dayen” which I suggest was
a rabbinical student, right? “Well, go ahead,” said Hilberg. In the case of MŸller
the the man is inside the anteroom or gas chamber; in the case of Nyiszli, the words
are attributed to him as part of the Kommando, right?, asked Christie. “Yes. It
is not clear what Kommando,” said Hilberg. Do you consider, asked Christie,
that it is possible that these emotionally-filled parts of one book might find
themselves, by accident, into Filip MŸller’s book? “No, I don’t think there are
accidents in this life,” said Hilberg, “but I do think that it is possible for
two people to have heard the same thing. It is also possible for someone to have
heard a repetition of it… It is even possible for two people to have made
substantially the same statements, because the nature of the language employed is
rather typical of what religious Jews would say in these circumstances, the
language of resignation.” How do you explain the fact that both these eyewitnesses
describe the situation to which they say the other eyewitness is not present?,
asked Christie.”Of course, I don’t know who was present and who was not
present. I cannot rule out, if you are suggesting that years after the event, when
a book is being written of accounts, a person may mix something he recollects
with something that he had read about, the same thing, of course this is possible
said Hilberg. (5-1157) I suggest, said Christie, that Nyiszli published his
book in 1960 and that the substance of that event was published by MŸller and
attributed to a totally different situation in 1979. “I don’t know whether it is
is a totally different situation at all,” said Hilberg, “nor would I jump to the
conclusion that it is any more than a very similar language of a very similar
account. I do not rule out the fact that someone writing decades after the event
about something, having in the meantime read about an event or the same event
somewhere else, will resort to language – he may think that he had heard it;
he may, indeed, have read it instead. That is not to be ruled out. I don’t think
that a particular speech was not made. I don’t think that it didn’t occur at
some point because it is common enough.” It’s common in the literature of the
eyewitnesses in different situations, is that right?, asked Christie.”It is
common enough in different situations, and even in different camps, for religious
Jews to have made speeches of resignation much, if not exactly, with language
such as that which you have read,” said Hilberg. “…I would be speculating as
the reason for the similarity of the language in the two accounts.” (5-1158)
Would you agree, asked Christie, that they do appear to be rather elaborate
literary accounts of events? “Well, I don’t want to qualify myself as a person in
literature, but no, I don’t think this is what I would call literary.” Would you
agree with me that your quoting selectively from Gerstein and Hoess was similar
similar in kind to the sort of selection of stories prepared by Filip MŸller in his
book?, asked Christie. “Well, I’d say that Filip MŸller as a witness, is a
remarkable, accurate, reliable person; not one who is learned, so far as I know – an
ordinary individual. I think that in any account written many years after an
event, with intervening years, with other books having been published, there is
always the possibility that somebody is influenced, not only by what he recollects
but by what he may have read in the meantime. I would not deprive MŸller of
his honesty… Plagiarism is a strong word,” said Hilberg. I suggest to you,
said Christie, that there is no other explanation for finding the same words in
exactly the same form in two different books in different circumstances, unless
there is something fishy. “Well, I don’t know whether the particular rendition
in MŸller’s book owes something or does not owe something to the Nyiszli descri
tion. It may very well owe something to it; but to say that he sat down and
simply copied is something else.” (5-1159)
http://www.webcom.com/~ezundel/english/
From [email protected] Tue Oct 15 09:45:57 PDT 1996
Article: 74483 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
news.umbc.edu!cs.umd.edu!newsfeed.gsfc.nasa.gov!centauri.hq.nasa.gov!
news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!mr.net!news.mr.net!
news.rrnet.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: 1-Auschwitz, a secret? (Repost)
Date: 14 Oct 1996 04:47:38 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 150
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne21.vir.com
The present article was written at the end of 1995 and the english syntax
was revised by Alexander Baron. 50% of my sources here are one of Enrique
Aynat article, and perhaps 25% of Butz findings. I put this stuff together
in a summary to which I added some elements that I found in few books.
First of all, the usual statement that the Germans have tried to keep secret
their extermination policy is completely ridiculous. This ‘attempt to preserve
the secret’ is often used to explain why the high level German documents
captured by the Allies refer to the ‘Final Solution’ as a program for the
expulsion of the Jews from Europe.
The Auschwitz complex was built close to an important agglomeration. Many ci-
vilians worked there during the day and went home in the evening. On page 62
of his 1993 study ‘Les Crematoires d’Auschwitz’, the anti-Revisionist author
Jean-Claude Pressac (who uses German documents) writes: “For the Birkenau
cremator- ies, the Germans gave the contracts to 12 civilian enterprises […]
Each working site was employed between 100 and 150 workers, a third of them
civilians.” The number of ovens was growing with years with the expansion of
the camp, and the maintenance was unavoidable. Auschwitz was critical for the
Allies: Synthetic rubber production was important for the Americans, and it is
not surprising that many air photo missions concerning this camp took place.
The huge backwardness of the Americans concerning the fabrication of synthetic
rubber after the lost of their usual source in Malaysia in 1941-42 didn’t permit
them any choice: they had to know everything about Auschwitz, and there’s no
doubt that they took measures to pick up as much information as possible. We
know, that the Americans had broken the German military codes. Over two and a
half years there was no mention of mass gassing in any intercept in spite of
the Germans being unaware that their codes had been cracked.
But there is even more, in ‘The Terrible Secret’, the Jewish historian Walter
Laqueur gives some hints in spite of being no manner of Revisionist. From him
we learn (page 25), that Auschwitz was an archipelago, that thousands of
inmates were frequently shipped to annex camps, mixed with civilians across
Silesia, that hundreds of civilians were working at Auschwitz 1, that journa-
lists were travelling freely in this region…This is the same author who says
that there were hundreds of liberations in 1942-4, among them several Jews
(page 169). But also there were hundreds of escapes in those years!
In ‘The Final Solution’, Reitlinger talks also of a a radio receiver that was
active in the inmate barracks over a period of months. Admiral Canaris, chief
of the counter-spying agency of the Third Reich, was a double agent. He gave
much information to the Allies during the war, but said nothing about alleged
mass liquidations at Auschwitz.
There was organised resistance in the camps. Groups of communists, Jews and
others were able to send information out of the camp. A fairly accurate picture
of this resistance is given by the book ‘Fighting Auschwitz’.
As stated, it was impossible for the Germans to avoid some contacts between
the inmates and the local population. Many Poles were, indeed, members of the
resistance, and some inmates had conversations with local populations when they
were brought out of Auschwitz to execute miscellaneous labour tasks. Sometimes
these civilians hid food and for the inmates. Often, the SS in charge of the
commandos were faking ignorance about those things in exchange for food or
gifts. (See for example Garlinski, ‘Fighting Auschwitz’, pages 43-5). The
contacts with the local population were developed in such a way that letters
and parcels could be sent out of the camp by the internal resistant cells of
Birkenau and Auschwitz on a regular basis. A group of the Cracovia resistance
was in regular touch via letters. In this town were preserved 350 of those
letters, ‘a small fraction of a very much more important total’ (Langbein,
‘Hommes et femmes a Auschwitz’, page 252). Letters successfully reached the
Netherlands also. In spite of this, such records are used to endorse the
extermination claim. As Butz pointed out, quoting L. Dawidowicz in her intro-
ductory chapter (page 221):
“One impediment was inadequacy of Jewish documentation in spite
of its enormous quantity… The absence of vital subjects from
the records may be explained by the predicament of terror and
censorship; yet, lacking evidence to corroborate or disprove, the
historian will never know with certainty whether that absence is
a consequence of an institutional decision not to deal with such
matters or whether it was merely a consequence of prudent policy
not to mention such matters. The terror was so great that even
private personal diaries, composed in Yiddish or Hebrew, were
written circumspectly, with recourse to Scripture and the Talmud
as a form of esoteric expression and self-imposed reticence.”
Garlinski mention also this story about the radio transmitter/receiver which
was active over 7 months in 1942 in Auschwitz and due to its contacts, the
direction of the Silesia local AK ceil (Armia Krajowa) was soon able to find
the wavelength used by the transmitter. (Garlinski, ‘Fighting Auschwitz’, page
126).
The Armia Krajowa, or the interior (or secret) army was formed in 1942 from
a previous resistance movement. It was organised like a real army. In 1944
the AK could count on about 300,000 members. In Birkenau there was a secret
organisation created in April 1942 by Colonel Karcz. Contact between the
Birkenau organisation and the main camp of Auschwitz took place on a daily
basis. The main task of the Karcz group was to provide information to the AK
elements outside. In 1942 the organisation of W. Pilecki, an ex-Polish officer,
could count on 1000 members between Auschwitz and Birkenau (Garlinski,
‘Fighting Auschwitz’, pages 97-8). In 1942-43 the resistant groups in Auschwitz
were so powerful that they controlled the Hospital, the kitchens, the main
office and had their agent in key positions.
The activity of the resistance in the camp had a specific purpose: feed the
Polish government in exile with exhaustive information about the events that
were occurring in the Nazi camps. The AK could count also on the complicity of
a few SS to transmit some messages outside (Garlinski, ‘Fighting Auschwitz’, pages
206-8). But often, messages were simply transmitted with the liberation of
inmates (Laqueur, ‘The Terrible Secret’, page 169 and Garlinsi, ‘Fighting
Auschwitz’, pages 54-5 & 112).
Communications between Poland and London were relatively easy for the Resis-
tance. The general Bor-Komorowski, commandant of the AK, said that clandestine
radio messages were regularly transmitted to London and that for the year
1942-43-44, there were almost 300 such messages per month. (T. Bor-Komorowski,
‘The secret Army’, page 150). Another source of information was the microfilms
which were sent to London on a monthly basis. The Polish Resistance had about
100 radio transmitters which were able to reach England. But other messages
were brought by newsmongers who were travelling to Sweden (neutral) and then
Great Britain.
Recently I obtained a copy of one of the most notorious Revisionist pamphlets:
‘The Auschwitz Lie’, by Thies Christophersen. Christophersen is an ex-German
officer who had worked in one of the camps peripheral to Auschwitz: Raisenko.
This booklet is not notorious not because one could qualify it as a big scien-
tific contribution to Revisionism, it’s just a small pamphlet where an
officer talks about his personnel experiences, (he visited Birkenau several
times in 1944).
The notoriety of this pamphlet, published in 1973, is mainly due to a false
reference that can be found: a fictive Red Cross report that is supposed to
claim that no more than 300,000 Jews died in WWII. Because of that, ‘The
Auschwitz Lie’ received immediately the status of ‘Bible of the Revisionists’,
and one still finds frequent reference in European books or magazine to this
pamphlet and this fictive reference with the development (hint as sth): this
is the Bible of the Revisionists, it contains a lie, so the Revisionist are
just liars and it is a good thing that Revisionist material is banned since
the public must be protected against those lies by people who will tell them
what they must read. What amazed me the first time I took a look at it wasn’t
the fact that this false reference was just an isolated one among several
others that were valid, it was to see that Christophersen didn’t invent it:
he just quoted a real Brazilian newspaper that didn’t check before publishing
this report about the ‘Red Cross Report’. Anyway, from Christophersen, we
learn that SS families were able to visit the soldiers without any major
problems in Auschwitz. We learn too that inmates from Birkenau were frequently
shipped to other camps and could establish contact with the local population.
This fact, as I said, was subsequently confirmed by the anti-Revisionist
historian Laqueur.
Now, first statement: Hoess, in his ‘confession’, supposedly given without
any coercion, testified that when Himmler ordered him to establish a program
of mass extermination in his camp (a verbal order to keep the secret) he
received also instructions not to discuss it with Gluecks, general inspector
of the camps, because absolute secrecy was necessary. Can you believe that?
From [email protected] Tue Oct 15 17:18:39 PDT 1996
Article: 74561 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!
nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: More on Goring’s Commission to Heydrich
Date: 13 Oct 1996 12:49:54 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne23.vir.com
[email protected] (Ken Lewis) wrote:
>
> From the interrogation of Friedrich Jeckeln:
>
> ” I would like to state for the record that Goring shares in the guilt
> for the liquidations of Jewish convoys that arrived from other
> countries. In the first half of February 1942 I received a letter from
> Heydrich. In this letter he wrote that Reich Marshall Goring had
> gotten himself involved in the Jewish question, and that Jews were now
> being shipped to the East for annihilation only with Gorings
> approval.”
>
excerp from:did six million really die?
Christie asked whether Hilberg took the same complimentary view of Mr. Justice
Wennerstrum of the Nuremberg Military Tribunal. “I’m sure that he did his
job as he saw fit. Remarks have been attributed to him… I am familiar with
the attributions, yes, which, not of a judicial temperament–” (5-1047 to 1049)
Christie produced the Chicago Tribune of February 23, 1948, where Wennerstrum
was quoted in an interview as saying: “Obviously,” he said, “the victor in
any war is not the best judge of the war crime guilt. Try as you will it is
impossible to convey to the defense, their counsel, and their people that the
court is trying to represent all mankind rather than the country which appointed
its members.” The initial war crimes trial here was judged and prosecuted
by Americans, Russians, British and French with much of the time, effort and
high expenses devoted to whitewashing the allies and placing the sole blame for
World War II upon Germany.”What have said of the nationalist character of the
tribunals,” the judge continued, “applies to the prosecution. The high ideals
announced as the motives for creating these tribunals has not been evident.
“The prosecution has failed to maintain objectivity aloof from vindictiveness,
aloof from personal ambitions for convictions. It has failed to strive to lay
down precedents which might help the world to avoid future wars.Germans Not
Convinced “The entire atmosphere here is unwholesome. Linguists were
needed. The Americans are notably poor linguists. Lawyers, clerks, interpreters,
and researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent years, whose
backgrounds were imbedded in Europe’s hatreds and prejudices.”
Christie suggested that in this last remark Wennerstrum was implying that there
were a large number of Jewish persons on the prosecution.
“Absolutely,” said Hilberg. “That was the implication and the attribution, and
it was, in fact, somewhat largely false.” (5-1050, 1051) Largely false in
your opinion, said Christie, but he was making these remarks? “Yes, but he was
assuming things of people being Jewish by things of this kind. People do not
go around in the United States, and people do not go around in the armed forces,
and people do not go around in the prosecution with yellow stars identifying
them,” said Hilberg. But it was his opinion, repeated Christie, and he ex-
pressed it publicly that he felt that a large number of Jewish persons were
involved in the prosecution? “That was his wrong opinion,” said Hilberg.
Christie continued reading from the Chicago Tribune article which quoted
Wennerstrum as saying: “The trials were to have convinced the Germans of the
guilt of their leaders. They convinced the Germans merely that their leaders
lost the war to tough conquerors.”
Hilberg did not remember this passage but agreed it was “certainly in keeping
with the man.” Christie continued reading: “Most of the evidence in the
trials was documentary, selected from the large tonnage of captured records. The
selection was made by the prosecution. The defense had access only to those
documents which the prosecution considered material to the case. “Our tribunal
introduced a rule of procedure that when the prosecution introduced an excerpt
from a document, the entire document should be made available to the defense for
presentation as evidence. The prosecution protested vigorously.” Hilberg testified
that the captured records referred to by Wennerstrum were not from Alexandria,
Virginia. “Long before those documents were at Alexandria, Virginia, they were in
other depositories – London, Paris, Berlin – and the documents were there. It
was later that they were shipped to Alexandria.” He agreed that the selection of
documents was made by the prosecution and that the defence could not have
access without permission from the prosecution. “Surely. But they had permission…
there always are complaints. I’ve heard them in courts often enough during the
From [email protected] Tue Oct 15 17:18:40 PDT 1996
Article: 74562 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!
nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: RBLACKMORE LIES AGAIN… Re: Add this one to the
Date: 13 Oct 1996 13:07:20 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<53lbvo$jef@juliana.sprynet.com> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne23.vir.com
[email protected] (Ken Lewis) wrote:
>
> On 11 Oct 1996 11:44:56 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >> [email protected] (Rajiv K. Gandhi) writes:
>
> >> In a recent email, later posted to the Usenet,
you made the following claim
> >> about the SWC:
>
> >I already answered this ages ago. Why do you keep
> >re-posting the same nonsense?
>
> Because your ‘answers’ haven’t answered the question.
Speeking about liars, Mr Lewis, I’m still waiting:
The 28 of august you claimed:
*************************************************************
> Speer claimed at Nuremberg that he wasn’t aware about an extermination policy.
> Since Speer is a credible source for you, this mean simply that a post-war
> claim from him is based either on the Numremberg documentation and the ‘con-
> fessions’ that were generated there, either by the atmosphere of the time
> which placed the gas chamber story as a dogma. Since Speer is not suppose to
> have ear about it from Hitler or Himmler, than a post-war opinion in his case
> hasn’t any further autority than the average german.
Duh!
Gee, I don’t know about you but I’ll bet that possibly Speer kept
quiet about what he knew at Nuremberg was so they didn’t slip a custom
made neck tie around his neck.
I’ll bet he kept quiet after he got out until all the other trials
were out of the way so he wouldn’t find his way back to Spandau.
In light of what he has said since I think it is all pretty clear.
It is amazing how Speer was the darling of the revisionist set until
he started marking statements that didn’t quite conform to what was
expected to him.
Of course, that doesn’t stop Mark Weber from fabricating quotes out of
thin air or attributing them to documents that do not contain them.
*********************************************************
And I’m saying that Speer was never the ‘darling’ of the revisionists
but, more important, that you throw in the air a statement claiming
that Mark Weber attributed fictive quotes to him. Will you finally
proove that it wasn’t a deliberate false statement? Which quotes
Mark Weber fabricated, please.
From [email protected] Thu Oct 17 07:25:57 PDT 1996
Article: 75068 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!news.insinc.net!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘I could not imagine anything more disgusting and horrific’
Date: 17 Oct 1996 00:54:05 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne27.vir.com
[email protected] wrote:
>
> > Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]> writes:
> > [email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
> > >
> > > SS-Doctor Kremer about his days at Auschwitz:
> > > [Quoted in ‘The Good Old Days’ – E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The
> > > Free Press, NY, 1988, p. 258].
> > > ——————————————————————-
> > > I remember I once took part in the gassing of one of these groups
> > > of women [from the women’s camp in Auschwitz]. I cannot say how
> > >were herded into the gas chambers and gassed.
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > excerp from :Did Six Million Really Die?:
> > Christie suggested to Hilberg that affidavits
> > affidavits such as that of Hans Marsalek appeared to be a very suspect kind of
> > evidence. “Well, suspect to whom?,” asked Hilberg. “In other words, to me it was a
> > document to be used very carefully, and I am not entirely sure that I used it more
> > than once with reference to a minor matter, but — it’s rather obvious that a
> > layman confronted with a fragment of history in the form of a document should be
> > careful in using it, because the document does not explain itself.” That’s your
> > view of the document, sir, said Christie. But a layman looking at it would
> > form the opinion, first of all, the man was dying; second, they interrogated him
> > for six to eight hours after he had been shot; and thirdly, they take the stateme
> > statement and they kind of put it in the policeman’s handwriting and he swears the
> > guy said it, right? “Yes,” said Hilberg. It looks suspicious, doesn’t it?, asked
> > Christie. “You mean as a forgery, or as an unfair thing to do to a wounded man?,
> > man?, ” asked Hilberg. Unfair thing to do, said Christie. “Well, as I said, I have
> > difficulty reconstructing what is fair or unfair in these circumstances. I
> > don’t know how badly wounded he was, what kind of care he had, whether physicians
> > were consulted. It is hard to say this. I, personally, would be reluctant to say
> > the least question of anybody who was in a state of discomfort, but that is,
> > you know…” (5-1039)
> Wasn’t this conversation referring to an officer who
> died a short time thereafter from the
> wounds which were inflicted upon him?
>
ya
From [email protected] Fri Oct 18 09:25:22 PDT 1996
Article: 75313 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!
news-out.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!
www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!
clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘Sometimes entire transports were gassed’
Date: 18 Oct 1996 02:19:06 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne1.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> Testimony of SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Hofmann, about his days at Auschwitz
> [Quoted from “Auschwitz: A Report on the Proceedings Against Robert
> Karl Ludwig Mulka and Others Before the Court at Frankfurt”, By Bernd
> Naumann, 1966, published by Frederick A. Praeger, NY, p. 50-1]
> ———————————————————————
> The Jews were asked to line up. It was my job to preserve calm and
> order. The selection was carried out by doctors. The instructions
> were issued by the commandants or by Grabner. Sometimes entire
> transports were gassed. At times many able-bodied workers were
> selected, at other times fewer. The percentage was specified in
> advance. It was determined by the need for workers.
>
I imagine another scenario: Hoess, who was tortured
dk> No he wasn’t stupid liar!
jb>Yes he was!
dk> No scumbag nazi boy!
‘confessed’ gas chambers 2 decades before. During 2 decades the
nazi atrocities were reported again and again in the allied press,
and this story became a ‘fact’. The juges were even as much fanatics
then Yale or you. We are not kidding. Ready for a lynch. These juges
were anti-nazis. They were there for that reason. The trial was organised
to make a show.
Now I have to imagine a man who know that SS before him in Nuerenberg
confessed gas chambers, under the conditions that we know, who is
described as a monster by the press, and he know also that many
martyr-witness will be bring against him. His word has little cre-
dibility. He received advices from his councel during months.
If he claim that the gas chambers didn’t exist, he can perfectly
imagine what will happen:
“What? People before you admitted it, we have witness against you,
the case is prooven and now you lie?”
He can’t claim that he wasn’t aware if his rank make such a defense
worthless. The whole german nation will be against him and call
him a liar. Even his lawyer may have laugh in his face if he denied
privatelly “Ok, ok, stop to lie, you know, it won’t help you in
court! are you crazy?” In spite of that, several of them at the begining
of the trial claimed to be unaware, and than retracted when they
saw how the court was run. Yes, we find many stories of SS who
confessed, but said that the commandant told them “if you don’t do
it you’ll have to share their fate!” or who shift the blame on
someone else. As soon as they saw that no expertise was required
to proove the gassing, and that the court considered that only their
‘involvment’ had to be judge, they knew what they had to choose.
Ya, some testimonies at the begining were an attempt to denie the
gassing in a certan way, or to claim ignorance, but they rapidly
learned who was running the court and under which rules.
http://www.codoh.com/
From [email protected] Sat Oct 19 10:43:45 PDT 1996
Article: 75587 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!
news.mindlink.net!uniserve!news.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!
nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!
Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Let’s Not Be Beastly to the Germans
Date: 19 Oct 1996 00:26:02 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<5426ks[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne31.vir.com
Brian Harmon <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well over a million people were transferred to Auschwitz
> by train. 200,000 were transferred out, and a few were released.
>
> The rest vanished without a trace.
>
> Given that Hoess, Eichmann, Broad, Mueller, Franke-Gricksch, Kammler,
> Fajnzylberg, Gurstein, Kramer and many others either testified or
> wrote (letters, memos, etc) that Jews were being murdered wholesale
> inside Auschwitz, what do you think happened to these people?
>
Christie asked whether Hilberg took the same complimentary view of Mr. Justice
Wennerstrum of the Nuremberg Military Tribunal.
“I’m sure that he did his job as he saw fit. Remarks have been attributed to
him… I am familiar with the attributions, yes, which, not of a judicial
temperament–” (5-1047 to 1049)
Christie produced the Chicago Tribune of February 23, 1948, where Wennerstrum
was quoted in an interview as saying: “Obviously,” he said, “the victor in
any war is not the best judge of the war crime guilt. Try as you will it is
impossible to convey to the defense, their counsel, and their people that the
court is trying to represent all mankind rather than the country which appointed
its members.” The initial war crimes trial here was judged and prosecuted
by Americans, Russians, British and French with much of the time, effort and
high expenses devoted to whitewashing the allies and placing the sole blame for
World War II upon Germany.”What have said of the nationalist character of the
tribunals,” the judge continued, “applies to the prosecution. The high ideals
announced as the motives for creating these tribunals has not been evident.
“The prosecution has failed to maintain objectivity aloof from vindictiveness,
aloof from personal ambitions for convictions. It has failed to strive to lay
down precedents which might help the world to avoid future wars.Germans Not
Convinced “The entire atmosphere here is unwholesome. Linguists were
needed. The Americans are notably poor linguists. Lawyers, clerks, interpreters,
and researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent years, whose
backgrounds were imbedded in Europe’s hatreds and prejudices.”
Christie suggested that in this last remark Wennerstrum was implying that there
were a large number of Jewish persons on the prosecution.
“Absolutely,” said Hilberg. “That was the implication and the attribution, and
it was, in fact, somewhat largely false.” (5-1050, 1051) Largely false in
your opinion, said Christie, but he was making these remarks? “Yes, but he
was assuming things of people being Jewish by things of this kind. People do
not go around in the United States, and people do not go around in the armed
forces, and people do not go around in the prosecution with yellow stars
identifying them,” said Hilberg. But it was his opinion, repeated Christie,
and he expressed it publicly that he felt that a large number of Jewish persons
were involved in the prosecution? “That was his wrong opinion,” said Hilberg.
Christie continued reading from the Chicago Tribune article which quoted
Wennerstrum as saying: “The trials were to have convinced the Germans of the
guilt of their leaders. They convinced the Germans merely that their leaders
lost the war to tough conquerors.”
Hilberg did not remember this passage but agreed it was “certainly in keeping
with the man.” Christie continued reading: “Most of the evidence in the
trials was documentary, selected from the large tonnage of captured records.
The selection was made by the prosecution. The defense had access only to those
documents which the prosecution considered material to the case. “Our tribunal
introduced a rule of procedure that when the prosecution introduced an excerpt
from a document, the entire document should be made available to the defense for
presentation as evidence. The prosecution protested vigorously.” Hilberg testified
that the captured records referred to by Wennerstrum were not from Alexandria,
Virginia. “Long before those documents were at Alexandria, Virginia, they were in
other depositories – London, Paris, Berlin – and the documents were there. It
was later that they were shipped to Alexandria.” He agreed that the selection of
documents was made by the prosecution and that the defence could not have
access without permission from the prosecution. “Surely. But they had permission…
there always are complaints. I’ve heard them in courts often enough during the
From [email protected] Sat Oct 19 10:43:45 PDT 1996
Article: 75604 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!
noc.van.hookup.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!
arclight.uoregon.edu!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: The plunder of the victims:retractation
Date: 19 Oct 1996 02:16:13 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne31.vir.com
Earlier in the month I wrote:
************************************************
>Valuables were secured and handed over to the special staff
>”Reinhard”. Apart from furniture and large quantities of textile,
>etc., the following were confiscated and delivered to special staff
>”Reinhard”:
>
>As of June 30, 1943:
> .
> .
>20.952 Kg – wedding rings – gold
>22.740 Kg – pearls
>11.730 Kg – gold teeth
>.
Since we know in advance that this document is a forgery I’ve not to be worry
so much about it, but for the new readers: my definition of a genuine document
is a document either a) which make sense either b) which would support the exter-
mination claim but which is signed by a SS who didn’t fall in the hand of the
allieds or especially the soviets. There’s a lot of those people. This is the
only one I wasn’t able to locate but you know Dan? I know in advance that this
one is a typewritten document that bears no signature or a typewritten signature.
In some very rare cases I consider that a SS (like Wetzel ) made a deal in exchan-
ge of immunity for such a post-war collaboration but most of the time, such
kind of incriminating documents are just ‘certified copies’. Why are you throwing
such scrap on the net if you know in advance that you havn’t anything serious
in the hands? A genuine document written by Globocnik 6 months later don’t
mention gold teeths for the Reinhard action. I’ll try toi check this reference
but there’s no suspense when I know in advance how the document will be descri-
bed…
**********************************************
I read a bit fast and made a mistake, there was a period, not a
coma and the numbers involved are something like 20 kg, not
20000 kg of gold teeths. So accounting for the 130,000 death
figure in Auschwit from ordinary causes, this is credible.
I’m still unable to locate the reference and see if it is a signed
document, but I don’t see anything special with this one except
that some moral concepts were violated, but it doesn’t proove
a mass liquidation in those camps.
From [email protected] Sat Oct 19 10:43:46 PDT 1996
Article: 75607 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!
noc.van.hookup.net!news.bctel.net!news-out.internetmci.com!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!
news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Cracow forensic study:another sick joke
Date: 18 Oct 1996 01:23:44 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne1.vir.com
[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
>
> In article <53o5fs$89f@Vir.com>, Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]> wrote:
> >[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
> >> On the contrary, I hypothesize the the revisionists cannot explain why
> >> cyanides are present in the homicidal gas chambers at levels above the
> >> background levels found in other dwellings (one of which, according to
> >> Mr. Beaulieu, was subject to a fumigation).
> > I’ve already state something about this few days ago, but as usual
> > your response was avoiding a simple,basical fact: The Auschwitz
> > Chronicle, from Danuta Czech, was written with the use of the Auschwitz
> > camp documentation. The autor stated that on the 9 of july 1943
> > a general desinfection was done in the women’s barracks and at
> > the end of the month, it was men’s barracks. Since a homicidal gassing
> > can hardly leaves more cyanide traces than a delousing of another
> > barrack, we may expect normally similar levels, wether the barrack
> > was used for a homicidal gassing (which is false) weter it was
> > simply desinfected. But the Cracow team found no cyhanide remains
> > for the other barracks. They give no precision about the mateial
> >they took from the other barracks, nor if they took it from inside
> > or outside, nor if they took it deliberatelly from a piece of wood
> > rather than a plaster sample, nor … there’s many ways to play
> > with such kind of datas to get biased results. How do I know that
> > they biaised it? Because there’s no reason, according to the events
> > that took place in tha camp (see Danuta Czech) to expect no cyhanide
> > compounds in a barracks that was subject to a delousing and traces
> > in another where one homicidal gassing was allegedly done. That’s
> > simple: they thought that they could play with the datas as much as
> > they wanted, but there’s a proof of their dishonesty: the general
> > delousing of the camp that is prooven.
>
> What’s proven is that whatever happened in the gas chamber must have
> been different than what happened in the barracks since they found HCN
> traces in the gas chambers, but not the barracks. The fumigation was
> not sufficient to leave behind measureble HCN traces. The repeated use
> of the chambers for homicide was.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rich Green
> —
> ——————————————————————
> Richard J. Green Dept. of Chemistry
> [email protected] Stanford University
> http://www-leland.Stanford.EDU/~redcloud Stanford, CA 94305-5080
(Page doesn`t exist)
> “Remember the days of yore,
> “Learn the lessons of the generation that came before you.”
> -Deuteronomy 32:7
You know perfectly that ONE homicidal gassing was allegedly
done there in the legend.
From [email protected] Sat Oct 19 10:43:47 PDT 1996
Article: 75610 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!
news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!
www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.total.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Cremation Furnaces for ‘Bath Installations’?
Date: 19 Oct 1996 01:35:31 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 92
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne31.vir.com
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>
> In article <544e8m$jmr@Vir.com>, Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > [email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
> > >
> > > The document in Prufer1.jpg and Prufer2.jpg, web page
> > > https://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?people/p/prufer.kurt/images/ Broken link ,
> > > is interesting. It discusses (in item 2) the construction of
> > > cremation furnaces at the “‘bath installations for
> > > special operations'” (sonderaktionen), in Birkenau.
> > >
> > > Why do bath installations require cremation furnaces? Any
> > > “revisionist” out there willing to explain this?
> >
> > I’ll check later this letter, but don’t be ridicoulous: he
> > state AT the bath installations, and kremas 4 and 5 were built
> > close to a preexisting steam bath building….
>
> [snip]
>
> Nice try, Mr. Beaulieu, but no cigar. Construction of the Zentral Sauna in
> Birkenau did not BEGIN until June 1943. Krema IV became operational on
> March 22, 1943, and Krema V on April 4, 1943. (Pressac, _Technique_,
> pp.65,379.)
>
> By my reckoning, Mr. Beaulieu, that means that people were already being
> murdered in Kremas IV and V before the ground was even broke for the
> construction of the Zentral Sauna.
>
> Oops. Another denier lie bites the dust….
You guys, are incredible. The construction plans for the crematory
furnaces are dated from january 1942, even before Birkenau was finished.
We are told that the germans had in the mind to built those crematories
for homicidal purposes (Keren often says: why 5 crematoriums for a
camp if it was not the case?) but the buildings were ordered only
7 months after. And between the order and the construction, there’s
a delay. What we are told now is that Pfurer wrote ‘at the bath
installations for special purpose’ to suggest were to built the
crematories. Well, if really he was talking about ‘gas chambers’
and this is not the words he used, there was no need to suggest the
contruction of crematories ‘at’ the bath installations since these
are supposed to be WITHIN the crematorium structures in the story.
This letter is dated from 21 august 1942. Furthurmore, we are told
also that the Nazis tardivelly transformed those crematorias to
turn the Leichenkellers into ‘gas chambers’, and this is supposed
to be the reason why the maps don’t show any ‘gas chambers’.
So we are told that the decision to construct five huge crematorias
is a proof of an extermination purpose, but that in august 1942
Pfurer suggested to built those ones ‘at’ bath installations but
that this meant ‘equipped with gas chambers were false shower
heads will be used’ but the germans were too stupid to pour
correctly the concrete roof 6 months later with the appropriate
holes: they cut it after. So if ‘at’ become ‘in’, if bath instal-
lations become ‘gas chambers’, if we suddenly decide that the
crematorias were never, up to august 21 1942, built for exter-
mination purposes, we must conclude that it is Pfurer (!!!)
who was the first to suggested the installation of gas chambers-
bath house in-at the crematoriums in contradiction with the
SS confessions that you will still continue to use as a ‘supple-
mentary proof’.
It’s much more simple, dunky: since there was a delay of 7-8 months
between the primary plans for the crematorias and the begining of
the construction, then the explanation is simply that such a delay
may have exist between the primary discussions about the location
of the sauna and the begining of its construction. Thus, it’s much
more plausible that the decision to built the sauna there was already
taken, and that Pfurer was informed about it. This is probably the reason why
he said ‘at the sauna installations’. ‘At’ is not ‘closed to’, but
since the sauna and the kanada were delimited in a square, this
subdivision or area was probably called ‘bath installations’ on
earlier maps. There’s other possibilities, but this is the one
which come up to my mind actually.
http://www.codoh.com/
nothing weird
From [email protected] Sat Oct 19 10:43:48 PDT 1996
Article: 75622 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!
noc.van.hookup.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!
arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!
Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Apology to Nizkor & Jamie M.
Date: 19 Oct 1996 04:12:10 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<5392hl$p[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne26.vir.com
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>
> In message <5392hl$[email protected]> – [email protected] (Kurt Stele)
> writes:
> :>
> :>[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
> :>
> :>>Please post even one scintilla of proof for this incorrect statement. Not a
> :>>single defendant at Nuremberg ever claimed to have been tortured, with the
> :>>exception of Streicher, who even his lawyer thought was deranged. Why do you
> :>>suppose that all these defendants, when they had been convicted and sentenced,
> :>>and therefore, were safe from recrimination, never claimed to have been
> :>>tortured? Not one.
> :>
> :>That’s interesting. There is also few complaints of coercion from the “witches” tried at
> :>Salem, who “confessed” (sic) to witchcraft.
>
> That is not the point, Matt, err… I mean Mr. “Stele”.
>
> :>If Hoess would have complained, the Allies would have sent his family to hell. A real
> :>threat to family tends to produce most anything you want.
>
> Bullshit. Where is your proof for that?
>
> Why did the many Nazis released (Doenitz, etc) not claim to have been tortured
> or misused?
>
Because he was probably not (Doenitz). But for others…
transcript of the Iinternational Military Tribunal proceedings from 30 May,
1946 where Sauckel, one of the major accused, testified as follows:
SAUCKEL: I confirm that my signature is appended to this document. I a
ask the Tribunal’s permission to state how that signature come about. This
document was presented to me in its finished form. I asked to be allowed to read
and study this document in my cell in Oberursel and decide whether I could sign
it. That was denied me. During the conversation an officer was consulted who, I
was told, belonged to the Polish or Russian army; and it was made clear to me
that if I hesitated too long in signing this document I would be handed over to
the Russian authorities. Then this Polish or Russian officer entered and asked,
“Where is Sauckel’s family? We know Sauckel, of course we will take him with
us; but his family will have to be taken into Russian territory as well.” I am
the father of 10 children. I did not stop to consider; and thinking of my
family, I signed this document. When I returned to my cell, I sent a written message
to the commandant of the camp and asked permission to talk with him alone on
this matter. But that was not possible, because shortly afterwards I was brought
to Nuremberg.
From [email protected] Sat Oct 19 10:43:48 PDT 1996
Article: 75632 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!
news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!
Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hoess Memoirs
Date: 19 Oct 1996 04:05:28 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <32548D[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]><[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne26.vir.com
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>
> In message <[email protected]> – [email protected] (Kurt Stele)Sun,
gord mcphee wrote:
> Bullshit. Former SS admitted that a Sonderaktion was a codeword for killing.
> Eichmann admitted it; I would assume he would know. Franz Suchomel admitted
> it–he was an SS guard.
London Times , Saturday, April 27, 1946:
Streicher statement:
Raising his voice to a shrill cry, he declared that after he found himself in
allied captivity he was kept for four days in a cell without clothes. “I was
made to kiss negroes’ feet. I was whipped. I had to drink saliva,” he declared.
He pause paused for breath, and then screamed: “My mouth was forced open with
a piece of wood wood, and then I was spat on. When I asked for a drink of water
I was taken to a la latrine and told, ‘Drink’. These are the sort of things the
Gestapo has been blam blamed for.”
Not that I find Streicher really sympathic, but really, we never know what
exist behind a trial organized by the winners of a war.
From [email protected] Sat Oct 19 10:43:49 PDT 1996
Article: 75633 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!
news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!news.total.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Apology to Nizkor & Jamie M.
Date: 19 Oct 1996 04:16:35 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne26.vir.com
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>
> In message <53s0bt$18[email protected]> – [email protected] Oct 1996
> 00:09:33 GMT writes:
> :>
> :>Why do you second guess me?
>
> I am not second guessing you. I am simply pointing out that you still have
> produced no primary evidence that the defendants at Nuremberg were tortured.
Well, this one is not from the main trial nor from Malmedy od Dachau but
>from the Farben trial: apparently more the time change, less..
New York Times, 30 septembre 1947
US LAWYER STIRS FARBEN TRIAL ROW
Frankfort on the main.
Thomas Allegretti, Chicago lawyer who offered to defend one of the I.G.
Farbenindustrie directors before a war crimes court, dropped from sight
tonight after publicly defying a United States Army order directing him
to leave Germany by noon.
Servants at his house said Mr Allegretti and his wife had left home early,
saying they were going to ‘take a trip’ and would not be back today. Army
officials said they did not know were Mr Allegretti was.
“I’m not going to leave Germany until they throw me out,” Mr Allegretti, a
former American Army captain, had said.
He asserted that he had volunteered to act as a councel for George von
Schnitzler in the I.G. Farben trial at Nuremberg “because his treatment
during his protracted retrial confinment has little or nothing to distinguish
the American occupation from Nazi domination.”
“The fact that immediately following my application to represent von Schnitzer
I was given seventy-two hours to get out of Germany is too significant to
require comments,” added the Chicagoan.
Mr Allegretti, who was employed as an attorney for the United States Army’s
European exchange service, exhibited a lettre from Frau von Schnitzler to
Mrs Allegretti, in which the I.G. Farben executive’s wife said that she
and von Schnizler and other I.G. Farben officials had been submitted to
treatment ‘worthy of a Nazi camp’. Frau von Schnitzler in the letter asked
for the ‘advice and help of Tom’ (Mr Allegretti)
From [email protected] Sun Oct 20 09:43:36 PDT 1996
Article: 75893 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!
news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!
Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sergeant Clarke
Date: 20 Oct 1996 13:37:03 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne41.vir.com
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
> And your point is? They did what they had to do to capture
> Hoess. I don’t see a special problem here. All this relates
> to his capture.
>
> Hoess was not told what to say and was not told what to write in
> his memoirs, period. The best proof for this is that he included
> in them things which are highly offensive to the Poles, Soviets,
> and the Allies.
>
> Just one of these things is sufficient to prove this point. Hoess
> gives a (rather accurate) figure of 1.3 million victims at
> Auschwitz. As we know, the Poles and Soviets gave a 4 million
> figure. Moreover, Hoess mocks the higher estimates, calling
> them “figments of the imagination”, and stating that they “have
> no foundation in reality”.
>
> Only a “revisionist scholar” can suggest that the Poles and Soviets
> told Hoess to give a much lower estimate than they have given, and
> to mock their own estimates!
Don’t see your point. He divided by 2 the previous number of Jews
but there was a necessity to keep a story not too much incoherent
in respect to death figures in other camps and the other figures
for Eins. SS. There was still a claim, for the sake of propaganda,
that 4 million Jews were killed there but even in the communist circles
it was clear that the ‘academic version’ needed to shift death figures
to other camps. It was certanly not a ‘problem’ for the Poles or the
soviets to have in Hoess memoir’s a reduction of Auschwitz death
figures simply because thse one could be shifted else where.
http://www.codoh.com/
From [email protected] Fri Oct 25 09:00:57 PDT 1996
Article: 76873 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!
news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!
news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sergeant Clarke
Date: 23 Oct 1996 23:21:35 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne54.vir.com
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>
> In message <[email protected]> – Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>20 Oct
> 1996 13:37:03 GMT writes:
> :>
> :>[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
> :>>
> :>> And your point is? They did what they had to do to capture
> :>> Hoess. I don’t see a special problem here. All this relates
s!
> :> Don’t see your point. He divided by 2 the previous number of Jews
> :> but there was a necessity to keep a story not too much incoherent
> :> in respect to death figures in other camps and the other figures
> :> for Eins. SS. There was still a claim, for the sake of propaganda,
> :> that 4 million Jews were killed there but even in the communist circles
> :> it was clear that the ‘academic version’ needed to shift death figures
> :> to other camps. It was certanly not a ‘problem’ for the Poles or the
> :> soviets to have in Hoess memoir’s a reduction of Auschwitz death
> :> figures simply because thse one could be shifted else where.
>
> It was not necessary to say that you didn’t see the point. You rarely do see
> a point.
>
> The point is this. If the Russians or the Poles, or whoever else you claim
> tortured Hoess made him tell the story he did, why did they permit him to
> revise _downward_ the number of Jews killed at Auschwitz? On the one hand,
> you claim they wanted to maintain the 4 million, or the 2.5 million figures,
> yet they allowed Hoess, _made_ him, according to “revisionists”, revise the
> figure downward to 1.3 million. Isn’t that kind of a funny way to mainatin
> the 4 million figure?
I’ve already respond in the first paragraph
> Thet also allowed him–no, _made_ him–state that the Russian prisoners were
> little more than cannibals and _made_ him tell stories about them having
> tortured him. Doesn’t that strike you as just a teensy bit illogical?
If I follow your logic the russians couldn’t have force him to
write this, or either write some parts themself. As I said, this
wasn’t a problem since the 2,5 million figure was simply transfered
in part to other camps. The amplitude of the alleged crime stayed
the same accounting for all the other camps. Since this figure was
incompatible with the alleged death in Treblinka, Belzec, etc..
the einsatzgruppen reports and finally the death by diseases, it
was necessary to get a minimum of consistency and shift death
figures elsewhere to reach 6 millions. In 1946, some people around
him decided of a high number but the frame of the story wasn’t yet
finished and it gave contradictions. This is the confession he was
forced to signed and it was necessary later to correct the figure
to avoid a contradiction. If really Hoess had write such numbers
voluntarelly and that it was a problem for the soviets, than they
were perfectly able to not publish it or to change the datas before
the publication. But it wasn’t a problem for them. An ‘academic’
version of more than a million was put in circulation, and the monument
was keepen high to impress the tourists.
http://www.codoh.com/
From [email protected] Fri Oct 25 09:00:58 PDT 1996
Article: 76919 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!
news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!
news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Hoess Testimony BITES THE DUST!!!!
Date: 24 Oct 1996 01:26:48 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <karlpov.845636135@access5><karlpov.845636135@access5>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne80.vir.com
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>
> In message <547uds[email protected]> – [email protected] writes:
> :>
> :>> [email protected] (Charles R.L. Power) writes:
> :>> [email protected] (Kurt Stele) writes:
> :>>
> :>> >Quoting further from the “interogation” of Rudolf Hoess:
> :>>
> :>> [Hoess records mistreatment by Allied personnel.]
> :>>
> :>> >(Commandant in Auschwitz-Introduction by Lord Russell of Liverpool, 1959,
> :>> >p. 173, 175.)
> :>> >——————————————————-
> :>> >So there you have it. So much for the Hoess “confessions” on which the “Holocaust” is
> :>> >built almost entirely on.
> :>>
> :>> Let me get this straight. The Allies forced Hoess to write memoirs
> :>> which detailed the Allies beating confessions out of Hoess? Duh,
> :>> uh….
> :>>
> :>Charles, are you feeling ok?
>
> I’m sure he feels fine, but you and your team must feel pretty stupid right
> now. You have implied that the Allies tortured Hoess and _forced_ him to
> write memoirs in which he
>
> – talked about them having tortured him
> – gave a _lower_ figure for people killed in Auschwitz than the Russians had
> given
I’ve already say to Morris and you why this figure’s reduction
wasn’t surprising. Now, perhaps you could take in acount the fact
that ‘he’ claimed to have been tortured BY THE BRITISH in a book
published in Poland during the cold war. This didn’t concern the
soviet. Evidently a claim about torture in the hand of soviets would
not have been published.
——————————————————
http://www.codoh.com/
From [email protected] Mon Oct 28 08:41:32 PST 1996
Article: 77505 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!
news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Cremation Furnaces for ‘Bath Installations’?
Date: 28 Oct 1996 04:24:32 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <326cd72e.1216[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne17.vir.com
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > You display your ignorance again. Multi-faceted ignorance
> > at that. These facilities all had shower/bath facilities, as
> > the people who worked near or in the cremation ovens handled
> > bodies all day, silly man. They also worked in autopsy rooms,
> > and with delousing, so “special operations” need not have
> > the sinister connotation you wish to assign to it.
>
> And? What exactly, Herr Schwarzesel, does this have to do with Mr.
> Beaulieu little lie regarding “kremas 4 and 5 were built close to a
> preexisting steam bath building” when said “preexisting steam bath
> building” wasn’t built until AFTER people were being murdered in the
> Kremas?
If you are so convince that I lied when I said ‘preexisting’ rather
than a mistake by ignorance when I checked the map all you have to
do is to send my post to nizkor and say: I got it! Beaulieu _lied_ HA
HA HA HA! He’s finished! I’ll post this FAQ each month with the title:
one question Beaulieu won’t answer, HA,HA,HA!!!! This is a unique
opportunity for you to convince the lurkers, if there’s really lurkers.
Everyone will conclude quickly that 99,9% of the population know that the
bathouse were built on may 12 1943 or june 10 1943 or anything whatsover you
said earlier. Even my plumber know that. It is in one paragraph
of a 400 or 500 pages Holocaust book, imagine. Nobody will believe
me. You won’t make a fool of yourself Mark, this is sure. As I said
earlier it change few things in account for the delay between a decision
to build a bathouse somewhere and the real begining of the work. For
the cremas, it seems that it took 8 or 9 months or so.
From [email protected] Mon Oct 28 11:03:12 PST 1996
Article: 77531 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!news.sprintlink.net!
news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!
nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: question for D. Keren
Date: 27 Oct 1996 22:46:23 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne42.vir.com
Recently, Daniel Keren wrote:
>Gaskammern.jpg
>Construction document which mentions a “gas chamber”
>(Gaskammer) in Krema no. 5 in Birkenau.
What’s this document? I’ve take a look and the image is very pale,
nowere I saw the word ‘gaskammer’ in the typewritten part and the
handwritten part is illisible. If you don’t have an equivalent that
you can send here, preferably in english but at least typewritten,
it’s hard to call that a proof of anything whatsover.
From [email protected] Mon Oct 28 13:36:30 PST 1996
Article: 77544 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!
news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!
news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!
news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!
feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!
Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars…
Date: 27 Oct 1996 17:54:42 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <Dzqp0[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne18.vir.com
[email protected] (Ceacaa) wrote:
>
> However part of the Treblinka story is that the
> corpses, once started and with old ladies on the bottom,
> burned on their own, ie. little fuel actually had to
> be gathered. I do not know if this is “official”
> Holocaust history or not. or what is the offical position
> on how the 900,000 bodies at Treblinka were burned.
Believe it or not, it is. It’s not just Steiner who gave this
story, but several other books with few variants, but minor ones.
There’s a classification between men and women, fat and thin persons
and this description of miscellaneous layers (obviously related to
the fat ratio) disposed ‘scientifically’ is suppose to have make
an enormous difference. I’m always stunned to see that it’s the same
people who claim that in Auschwitz fat wasn’t burning into the corpses
but was pouring out in such quantities that it was necessary to dig
larger trenches to collect it. Well, they don’t ay ‘larger trenches’,
but since fat can’t roll up from a pit to the ground level and with
the fantastic heat that we may expect few meters away, it is a necessary
conclusion.
From [email protected] Tue Oct 29 08:53:39 PST 1996
Article: 77661 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!
news-out.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!
Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Hoess Testimony BITES THE DUST!!!!
Date: 29 Oct 1996 03:32:36 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]><[email protected]>
<54qf9[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<550hd2$2i[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne131.vir.com
Greg Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Gord McFee wrote:
>
> Really? Who would you cite as German eyewitnesses to the gassing
> process, then? Hoess, Gerstein, maybe Kramer? Kramer clearly did not see
> the details of any gassing, assuming for the sake of argument that the
> “special action” of which he writes was a gassing (I think it was not).
>
> Gerstein was a nut, who left seven (?) different versions of his
> “confession.” Unfortunately, he died before he was able to make them all
> agree with one another.
>
> Hoess gives the best detail (including aspects of an alleged homicidal
> gassing that are contrary to the laws of physics and nature).
>
> It is commonly claimed that Hoess is the best SS witness to the alleged
> homicidal gassings. Without him, who do you have?
They have several others, but others who could hardly denie gassings
in court since Hoess brought the ‘proof’ before them. I read a couple
of times in the green series juge statements (to defendant) like:
‘since Hoess testified, and now that the gassing is an establish fact..’
and I saw such kind of declarations, but less direct, in a book
about the 1963-65 trial. I think Hoess is an essantial witness,
but not exactly for the same reason: a rock of dust on which the
remaining was built, when you read some transcripts it is obvious
that nobody of a sane mind who was in Auschwitz and who saw how
the court proceeded, with the use of Hoess testimony to ‘refresh
the memory of the defendant’, who saw such a high proportion of
Jews in the staff during some periods could deny stupidly if he
wanted to avoid the gallow. Evidently, I can hardly imagine the
councel of such a man encouraging him to adopt such an attitude
during the weeks that preceeded the trial. Hoess was the necessary
foundation. A ‘proof’ against which nothing was possible. The only
possibility was to bring a fictive story where
a defendant ‘played a secret role to save Jews’, ‘disagree with
Hoess but was afraid to share the same fate than Jews’ or tried
to stay away. The councels of these guys where really not agressives,
there was nothing else to do.
From [email protected] Sat Oct 5 13:14:33 PDT 1996
Article: 71929 of alt.revisionism
Path:news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news1.wtn!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!
news.mcs.net!news.abs.net!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!
rcogate.rco.qc.ca!Rezonet.net!Vir.com!usenet
From: Jean-Francois Beaulieu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Hans Muench testimony:a sick joke
Date: 5 Oct 1996 05:13:57 GMT
Organization: Communications Vir, Internet Access Montreal.
Lines: 102
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipdyne3.vir.com
