Documents

Green Richard 1998-2

In article <[email protected]>,
Alex Vange wrote:
>
>
>Richard J Green wrote in article
>…
>
>
>> Actually not. I oppose the JDL because I believe in civil liberties.
>> You oppose themn because you are a Nazi-apologist. If your Nazi friends
>> ever gained power in this country we would lose those liberties.
>>
>> Do you remember the White Rose? Do you condemn what happened to the
>> leaders?
>
> The Students of the White Rose advocated that people rise up against
>Germany with smoke and with fire. During a time of war they would of been
>executed for treason in any country, and not just in Germany.

Mr. Vange is an opponent of free speech, but an advocate of Nazis
speech, just like his fellow Nazis.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon May 4 20:51:20 EDT 1998
Article: 172975 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.true-crime,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!

newspeer.monmouth.com!

ais.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Refutation of the Legend
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

<[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 02:57:37 GMT
Lines: 31
Xref: trends.ca alt.true-crime:90150 alt.revisionism:172975

Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]

From [email protected] Mon May 4 20:51:26 EDT 1998
Article: 173067 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.eecs.umich.edu!
newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!news-out.internetmci.com!
newsfeed.internetmci.com!
99.0.154.208!ais.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Zyklon B – Unlikely Agent
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 17:18:48 GMT
Lines: 1120
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:173067

The Chemistry of Auschwitz

Text Version 1.5.

A web-version of this article resides at:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/

This article is dedicated to a chemist, Primo Levi.

Abstract: Holocaust deniers base some of their arguments on the
public’s ignorance of history and science. Accurate information, not
censorship, is the best antidote to their claims. 1.1 to 1.5 million
people, most of them Jews, were murdered at the Auschwitz-Birkenau
camps. The predominant weapon of mass murder was Zyklon B, hydrogen
cyanide in a solid support. Early forensic analysis, shortly after
World War II supports this fact. Several pseudo-scientific reports,
most notably by Leuchter, Lu”ftl, and Rudolf have attempted to shed
doubt on the facts. A forensic analysis by the Institute for Forensic
Research in Cracow confirms the presence of cyanide in the buildings
said to have been exposed to it. The arguments made by deniers are
distortions of fact. The deniers misrepresent the statistics of the
dead, and misinterpret air photo evidence. The properties of hydrogen
cyanide from Zyklon B are consistent with its use as an agent of mass
murder. The fact that Prussian blue is prevalent in delousing
facilities but not in homicidal chambers is not evidence that no
gassings occurred. It is easier to tell a lie than to prove a lie to
be incorrect; nevertheless, accurate information and not censorship is
the best response.

I. Introduction

Holocaust denial, known in Germany as the Auschwitz lie, has been
gaining exposure in recent times, in part perhaps, because of the
growth of the Internet. Deborah Lipstadt in her thought-provoking book
_Denying the Holocaust_ argues persuasively that the existence of the
Holocaust is not a matter for debate: there is nothing to debate; it is
a historical fact. [1] In principle, I agree with her. The
pseudoscience of the deniers, however, has become so widespread,
particularly on the Internet that I do not think their material can be
left unanswered.

I strongly disagree with censorship. Whereas I agree that no
particular publisher, newspaper, or Internet provider is under any
obligation to publish the distasteful and false propaganda of the
deniers, I do not agree with government intervention to shut down sites
that choose to peddle such untruths. Rather, I believe such material
must be met head on with accurate information lest the gullible be
taken in. This essay is an attempt to provide such information
concerning some of the most persistent deceptions of the deniers as
well as to explain to the reader some of the context of those
deceptions.

Central to the claims of the deniers is the claim that the Nazis, the
SS and their accomplices did not commit mass murder with poison gas at
Auschwitz. One of the major methods used by the deniers is to play on
the public’s ignorance of chemistry as well as its ignorance of the
methods of mass murder employed at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

II. A Brief Description of Auschwitz.

Auschwitz was more than a camp; in fact it was a vast complex
consisting of more than 40 satellite camps: it was a prison camp, a
labor camp, an industrial center and a death camp. [2] The complex
included the I.G. Farben Buna rubber plant, the Monowitz camp where Primo
Levi was held [3], the main Auschwitz camp (Auschwitz I) and the
Birkenau (Auschwitz II) extermination camp, three kilometers Northwest
of the main camp[4], where the majority of mass murders by poison gas
took place.

In a recent estimate of the victims of the Auschwitz-Birkenau death
camps, Franciszek Piper estimates that at least 1.3 million people
were deported to Auschwitz-Birkenau among whom 1.1 million were Jews.
He estimates that of these 1.3 million at least 1.1 million were killed
or died. Piper estimates a maximum of 1.5 million dead including 1.35
million Jews.[5]

It is a fact that an early Soviet estimate placed the victims of
Auschwitz-Birkenau at 4 million and that the communist regime in Poland
adhered to this number long after it was known to be untrue. It is a
favorite tactic of deniers to claim that the untruth of this number
should somehow affect estimates of the total number of Jews killed in
the Final Solution. This claim is invalid.[6] With a few notable
exceptions[7], historians did not take the 4 million number seriously.
Additionally, estimates for the number of dead were generally made by
the overall European demographics and therefore would not depend on an
error in a single camp even if it were made. Both of these points are
demonstrated by the conservative estimates of Raul Hilberg who
estimates that 1 million Jews were killed in Auschwitz-Birkenau and
that 5.1 million Jews were killed in all. Hilberg first made his
estimate in 1961 and reaffirmed it in 1985 with the revised and
definitive edition of his seminal work, _The Destruction of the
European Jews_.[8]

Murder by poison gas took place at several installations in Auschwitz
Birkenau:

On 3 September 1941 a trial gassing was conducted in block 11 [of
Auschwitz I]. Later, one room of the base-camp crematorium was
equipped as a gas chamber [Krema I in Auschwitz I]. After these
trials, in 1942, two abandoned thatch-roofed cottages in a wood at
Birkenau were transformed into gas chambers; they were known as
“the bunkers.” In the spring of 1943 construction of four modern
crematoria [Kremas II-V] was completed on the site of Birkenau
itself. Each was divided into three parts: a section for the
crematory ovens, a place for prospective victims to undress, and a
gas chamber. The bunkers were no longer used except in
emergencies.[9]

III. Zyklon B: A Pesticide and an Agent of Homicide.

Raul Hilberg states:

TESTA sold Zyklon in different concentrations. Invoices presented
to municipal or industrial clients for fumigation of buildings
were printed with columns headed C, D, E, and F, each denoting a
category of potency and price. As explained in a letter to
Osland, strength E was required for the eradication of specially
resistant vermin, such as cockroaches, or for gassings in wooden
barracks. The “normal” preparation D was used to exterminate
lice, mice, or rats in large, well-built structures containing
furniture. Human organisms in gas chambers were killed with
Zyklon B.

Hilberg notes in a footnote that the same preparation was used for the
delousing of clothes.[10]

The agent of mass gassing at Auschwitz-Birkenau was Zyklon-B, hydrogen
cyanide (HCN), and a warning agent impregnated into a solid support.
According to Kogon the solid support was diatomite and the appearance
of Zyklon-B was of gray-blue pellets.[11] In the instructions for
the use of Zyklon B, published by its manufacturer, Degesch, three
possible solid supports are mentioned: “Wood fibre discs, a reddish
brown granular mass (diagriess –Dia gravel) or small blue cubes (Erco)
are used as carriers.”[12]

There are also patents for a porous support, a felt support, a
Diagriess support, and an ERCO support.[13] Silica Gel has also been
mentioned as a possibility notwithstanding the patent’s declaration
that such a support would be unsuitable.[14]

Hydrogen cyanide (HCN), also known as hydrocyanic acid, prussic acid or
_Blausa”ure_ was the toxic agent in Zyklon B. Strictly speaking, the
term hydrogen cyanide should be used for the pure compound and the term
hydrocyanic acid reserved for its aqueous solutions, but this
convention has been ignored so much that it is pointless to insist upon
it. HCN is a high vapor pressure liquid; the Merck index lists its
boiling point as 25.6 degrees Celsius (78.8 degrees Fahrenheit),
significantly less than human body temperature.[15] At room
temperature (25 d C, 77 d F) the equilibrium vapor pressure of HCN is
750 Torr (760 Torr= 1 atmosphere), corresponding to 987,000 ppm. At 0
C (32 F) it is 260 Torr corresponding to 342,000 ppm.[16] The Merck
index warns, “Exposure to 150 ppm for 1/2 to 1 hr may endanger life.
Death may result from a few min exposure to 300 ppm”[17] Clearly, it
is not necessary to reach equilibrium vapor pressure in order for the
fumes of the liquid to be quite deadly.

HCN is explosive at 6% (60,000 ppm.);[18] it is not necessary
to reach such concentrations in order to murder. In its pure state,
HCN is very dangerous to transport or to store; the Material Safety
Data Sheet (MSDS) states:

Polymerization: Can occur violently in the presence of heat, alkaline
materials, or moisture. Once initiated, polymerization becomes
uncontrollable since the reaction is autocatalytic, produce heat and
alkalinity (NH3). Confined polymerization can cause a violent
explosion. HCN is stabilized with small amounts of acid to prevent
polymerization. HCN should not be stored for extended periods unless
routine testing confirms product quality.[19]

HCN kills by binding cytochromes, enzymes important in respiration at
the cellular level, and preventing them from functioning properly.[20]
HCN has a slight odor that has been described as being like almonds.
The odor, however, is very difficult to detect and requires training.
Zyklon B, accordingly, contained irritants to warn of the presence of
HCN. The irritants were designed so that one irritant would be present
sooner than the HCN and that another would linger around later.[21]

Zyklon B at Auschwitz-Birkenau was used mainly for two purposes,
delousing and murder. The eyewitness testimony to murder by poison is
overwhelming.[22] Pressac reconstructs a gassing that took place March
13, 1943:

That same night, 1,492 women, children, and old people,
selected from a convoy of 2,000 Jews from the Krakow ghetto, were
killed in the new crematorium. Six kilos of Zyklon B were poured
into the stacks that opened into the four grillework columns implanted
between the pillars that supported the ceiling. Within five minutes,
all the victims had succumbed. The aeration (8,000 cu m an hour) and
deaeration system (same strength) were then started up and, after 15 to
20 minutes, the atmosphere, which had been practically renewed every
three to four minutes, was sufficiently pure so that members of the
Sonderkommando could enter the stiflingly hot gas chamber. During this
first gassing [in the new Krema II gas chamber], the Sonderkommandos
wore gas masks as a precaution. The bodies were untangled and dragged
to the goods elevator. Hair was clipped, gold teeth pulled out, wedding
rings and jewels removed.[23]

IV. History of Forensic Reports

>From shortly after the war to the present there have been a number of
forensic analyses conducted on facilities at Auschwitz-Birkenau
including legitimate investigations as well as those conducted by
Holocaust deniers. This section will give a brief history of those
reports. Section V. will address in more detail the chemistry
involved. In 1945 the Cracow Forensic Institute did a forensic
analysis of the criminal traces left by the murderers. Pressac
summarizes some of their findings:

Toxicological analysis were carried out in 1945 by the Cracow Forensic
Institute (7 Copernicus street) on 4 complete plates and 2 damaged
ventilation orifices found in the ruins of Krematorium II. After
scraping the white substance that covered these objects back to the
metal, 7.2 grammes of scrapings were collected and subjected to two
_qualitative_ analysis, which established the presence of cyanide
compounds. The report, signed by Dr. Jan Z. Robel, was written on 15th
December, 1945 and transmitted to the Examining Judge, Jan Sehn.[24]

Strzelecki describes other early forensic examinations including the
following:

In 1945, an examination by the Institute of Judicial Expertise in
Krakow of a sample of hair found in Auschwitz revealed the presence of
compounds of prussic acid, the basic component of Zyklon B gas used in
the gas chambers of Auschwitz. Traces of the acid were also found in
metal objects found in the hair, such as pins, clasps, and gold-plated
spectacle holders.[25]

In 1988, Holocaust denier, Ernst Zundel, was preparing for his defense
in Toronto. With the help of Holocaust denier Faurisson and soon-to-be
Holocaust denier David Irving he procured the services of a self-styled
“engineer,” Fred A. Leuchter for the price of $35,000.[26] Lipstadt
states:

The group spent three days in Auschwitz-Birkenau and one in Majdanek
surreptitiously and illegally collecting bricks and cement fragments-
Leuchter called them “forensic samples” -from a number of buildings,
including those associated with the killing process. On returning to
Massachusetts, Leuchter had the samples chemically analyzed. (He told
the laboratory that the samples had to with a worker’s compensation
case.) He summarized his findings in _The Leuchter Report: An
Engineering Report on the Alleged Execution Chambers at Auschwitz,
Birkenau, and Majdanek Poland_, which was published by Zundel’s
Samisdat Publications and David Irving’s publishing house, Focal Point
Publications in London.[27]

Lipstadt adds a footnote that states in part:

The London edition was entitled _Auschwitz:The End of the Line: The
Leuchter Report-The First Forensic Examination of Auschwitz_[28].

The title itself is, of course, an untruth; the first forensic
examinations were done in 1945 as mentioned above.. For the purposes of
this article I will refer to Leuchter’s report as _the Leuchter Report_.
As the Leuchter Report is one of the founding documents for the
pseudoscientific claim of Holocaust deniers, it is worth checking on
whether Leuchter represented his expertise as an engineer correctly.
In fact, in 1991, he himself admitted otherwise:

Leuchter, 48, of suburban Malden, was to face trial later this month on
charges of practicing engineering without a license, a violation of
Massachusetts law. But on June 11, he signed a consent agreement with
the board that licenses engineers.

In it, Leuchter acknowledged that, “I am not and have never been
registered as a professional engineer” and that he nevertheless had
represented himself as an engineer in dealings with various states that
use the death penalty and to which he supplied equipment or advice.[29]

More evidence of Leuchter’s lack of expertise is collected in one place
at the Nizkor web site.[30] In a document available on the Zundel
website, Leuchter summarizes his findings on the gas chambers:

The results published in the Leuchter Report are the important thing.
Categorically, none of the facilities examined at Auschwitz, Birkenau
or Lublin could have supported, or in fact did support, multiple
executions utilizing hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide or any other
allegedly or factually lethal gas. Based upon very generous maximum
usage rates for all the alleged gas chambers, totalling 1,693 persons
per week, and assuming these facilities could support gas executions,
it would have required sixty-eight (68) years to execute the alleged
number of six millions of persons. This must mean the Third Reich was
in existence for some seventy-five (75) years. Promoting these
facilities as being capable of effecting mass, multiple or even
singular executions is both ludicrous and insulting to every individual
on this planet. Further, those who do promote this mistruth are
negligent and irresponsible for not investigating these facilities
earlier and ascertaining the truth before indoctrinating the world with
what may have become the greatest propaganda ploy in history.[31]

The obviously specious reasoning here is typical of Leuchter’s style.
No one has claimed that six million people were killed at
Auschwitz-Birkenau. The number is closer to one million. His rate of
“1,693 persons per week” is arbitrary. Notice how accurately he states
the precision of that number. As far as Leuchter’s estimate of the
killing rate goes, one need only refer to the passage form Pressac
quoted above in which almost 1,500 were killed in half an hour.
Ironically enough, it is by estimating the throughput of the gas
chambers that the Soviets arrived at the erroneous figure of 4 million
killed.[32] Leuchter’s estimate is discussed in more detail below.

Leuchter also summarizes the results of his forensic tests:

Forensic samples were taken from the visited sites. A control sample
was removed from delousing facility 1 at Birkenau. It was postulated
that because of the high iron content of the building materials at
these camps the presence of hydrogen cyanide gas would result in a
ferric-ferro-cyanide compound being formed, as evidenced by the
Prussian blue staining on the walls in the delousing facilities.

A detailed analysis of the thirty-two samples taken at the
Auschwitz-Birkenau complexes showed 1,050 mg/kg of cyanide and 6,170
mg/kg of iron. Higher iron results were found at all of the alleged gas
chambers but no significant cyanide traces. This would be impossible if
these sites were exposed to hydrogen cyanide gas, because the alleged
gas chambers supposedly were exposed to much greater quantities of gas
than the delousing facility. Thus, chemical analysis supports the fact
that these facilities were never utilized as gas execution
facilities.[33]

Leuchter’s primary mistake is his initial assumption that exposure to
HCN must result in the formation of Prussian blue.[34] Another error is
his claim that that the delousing facilities were exposed to less HCN
than the homicidal chambers. It turns out that it is more difficult to
kill lice than it is to kill humans. Leuchter’s sensitivity is not good
and it is doubtful that his samples were chosen carefully in regard to
being sheltered from the elements. Concentration of cyanide in the gas
chambers are at levels less than 1 mg/kg.[35] Additionally, Leuchter
should have taken as his control an ordinary building at Auschwitz-Birkenau,
such as a barracks. Do the homicidal gas chambers contain more cyanide
compounds than an ordinary barracks? The answer is yes as discussed below.
A later investigator, Germar Rudolf[36] has made many of these same
mistakes albeit more carefully; these issues are discussed in more depth in
section V. A point for point refutation of the arguments in the Leuchter
Report can be found on the Nizkor website.[37]

Another report that deserves mention is the Lu”ftl Report even though
it is not strictly speaking a forensic report. The author of the
report, a real engineer, Walter Lu”ftl, makes arguments concerning the
supposed physical impossibility of using Zyklon B to murder. He
conducts a largely irrelevant simulation concerning the ability of
humans to heat a gas chamber and attempts to deceive the reader with
the claim that the figure of six million Jews murdered should be
lowered to 3.5 million with the recognition that 4 million were not
murdered at Auschwitz-Birkenau. I have already discussed the basis of
this fallacy above but further information may be found in an article
on the Nizkor site.[38]

An English version of the Lu”ftl Report was published by a journal
specializing in Holocaust denial, _The Journal of Historical Review_
without the permission of the author, ostensibly to protect him from
prosecution in Austria.[39] Sarah Rembiszewski writes that Lu”ftl was

president of the Austrian Engineers’ and Architects’ Association,
which [sic?] conducted a “study,” disseminated today through the
Internet, “proving” that the Holocaust could not have happened. Lu”ftl
conducted his study at the request of a German lawyer and published his
conclusions in the Viennese paper _Die Presse_ under the title
“Holocaust – Belief and Facts.” He was forced to resign from his
position in the Engineers’ and Architects Association; _Su”ddeutsche
Zeitung_, March 15, 1992.[40]

I will now turn to discussing the background of a report of someone I
consider to be one of the more clever and therefore more dangerous of
the Holocaust deniers, Germar Rudolf. Rudolf was a graduate student in
chemistry working at the prestigious Max Planck Institute (MPI). Owing
to the fact that he actually has some understanding of chemistry many
of his deceptions are more sophisticated than other Holocaust deniers.
Nonchemists should be somewhat careful in addressing his arguments.
Ultimately, he engages in the same deceptions and specious arguments as
Leuchter and Lu”ftl, but the case he makes for those deceptions and
arguments involve more difficult chemistry. Below, I will address in
more detail why the chemical arguments of the deniers regarding the use
of Zyklon B in Auschwitz-Birkenau are not valid, but first I will
discuss some of the history of the Rudolf Report as I have done for the
Leuchter and Lu”ftl Reports.

The story of the Rudolf Report begins with Otto Remer. Remer was a
general during the Nazi regime and put down the attempted coup against
Hitler in 1944.[41] Remer was a Holocaust denier and was on trial in
Germany for inciting race hatred.[42] Remer’s lawyer Hajo Hermann
commissioned Rudolf to write the Rudolf Report.[43] Just as Leuchter
had done before him, Rudolf collected samples from gas chambers as well
as delousing facilities:

He traveled to Auschwitz in summer 1991, and took samples from the
walls of one of the gas chambers and one of the delousing chambers.
Using Max Planck stationary, he sent the samples to an analytical
laboratory in Taunusstein, the Fresenius Institute.[44]

Rudolf had an understanding with Remer that his report was only to be
used in the court case. The report was never used in that case, but
Remer began distributing the report claiming “it had the support of
the Max Planck Society.”[45] Subsequently, Rudolf found his own
publisher. In June 1993, Rudolf was forced to leave MPI for improperly
using its name.[46] In a March 1994 legal settlement Rudolf’s
dismissal was reworded as an “ending of the contract through mutual
agreement.”[47] A statement from MPI on the affair is available on the
Nizkor web site.[48] Rudolf’s legal troubles were far from over.
Gerald Fleming writes in the foreword to Sarah Rembiszewski’s work:

On June 23, 1995, following a seven months’ trial, the Superior-Lomt
(Landgericht) in Stuttgart sentenced Germar Scheerer to fourteen months
imprisonment for spreading premeditated, offensive, mendacious and
racist propaganda. The accused is now reportedly a fugitive from
justice.[49]

Rembiszewski explains that Rudolf changed his name to Scheerer after he
got married in 1994.[50] If this name change were the only one that
Rudolf used, it would be understandable. Sheerer is not the only
alternate name Rudolf uses. In many of his reports he cites the
papers of “Dr. Ernst Gauss” as an expert on chemistry. It came to light
during Rudolf’s 1994 trial that “Dr. Gauss” was a graduate student
whose PhD. thesis was never accepted. That graduate student is named
Germar Rudolf.[51]

I do not believe that Rudolf’s offense would be criminal in the United
States of America where citizens enjoy the protection of the First
Amendment (a protection that would be lost were people like Rudolf and
his hero Remer ever to come to power here). Not only do I disagree
with such criminal prosecution on principle, but I think that it is
counterproductive in that it gives people like Rudolf the ability to
claim persecution. My task here, however, is to discuss the history of
claims concerning the chemistry of Auschwitz-Birkenau and evaluate
their validity. The fact that I think that people ought to be
permitted to spread untruths does not make untruths into truths.

Next I will turn to what I will refer to as the IFRC Report, a paper by
Jan Markiewicz, Wojciech Gubala, and Jerzy Labadz of the Institute of
Forensic Research, Cracow (IFRC).[52] In 1989, these researchers
entered into discussions with the management of the Auschwitz-Birkenau
museum about the possibility of detecting evidence of exposure to
cyanides in the gas chambers; they were skeptical about the
possibilities of such detection, but made the attempt anyway in 1990 in
a preliminary study of 10 samples and 2 control samples. They were
able to confirm the presence of cyanide in Krema II but nowhere else in
this preliminary investigation. The results from their control samples
were negative indicating that their results were meaningful.[53]

After learning of the Leuchter Report, these authors decided to make a
more extensive study.

Samples, about 1-2 g in weight, were taken by chipping pieces from
bricks and concrete or scraping off [sic], particularly in the case of
plaster and also mortar. The materials taken were secured in
plastic containers marked with serial numbers. All these activities
were recorded and documented with photographs. Work connected with
them took the commission two days. The laboratory analysis of material
collected was conducted- to ensure full objectivity -by another group
of Institute workers.[54]

The samples underwent qualitative analysis by means of a
spectrophotometer. Cyanides were found in many of the samples, but
this method was not suitable for quantitative analysis.[55]

A significant concern in choosing a method for quantitative analysis is
the presence of blue-staining in the delousing chambers, that is not
obviously present in the homicidal gas chambers. I have written a
brief article available on the world-wide web that discusses the
chemistry of this staining and its relevance to forensic analysis.[56]
The important points of this chemistry are discussed in section V. of
the current article. For reasons discussed below, the IFRC workers
chose a method of detecting cyanides that discriminates against the
compounds that form this staining, the iron blues. Additionally, they
used a calibrated method:

The calibration curve was constructed previously and standards were
introduced into each series of determinations to check the curve and
the course of the determination.[57]

The IFRC researchers found significant levels of cyanide in bunker 11,
all five Kremas, as well as a facility used to fumigate prisoners’
clothing. In contrast, no cyanides were found in dwelling facilities
that were “probably fumigated with Zyklon B only once (in connection
with typhoid epidemic in 1942).” They summarize their findings as
follows:

The results of analyses are presented in Tables I-IV. They
unequivocally show that the cyanide compounds occur in all the
facilities that, according to the source data, were in contact with
them. On the other hand, they do not occur in dwelling accommodations,
which was shown by means of control samples.[58]

V. A Critique of the Forensic Reports

This section will examine the validity of claims made by the deniers as
well as further elucidating the significance of the findings of the
IFRC researchers. Some of the claims made in the reports of the
deniers are not directly relevant to the chemistry of Auschwitz-
Birkenau. Nevertheless, a few of these arguments are so pervasive and
so easily exposed as specious that they merit a brief discussion. The
claims that do involve the chemistry of Auschwitz-Birkenau are divided
into two categories: 1) claims of the impossibility of gassing, 2)
claims that chemical analyses of forensic samples prove that no
gassings could have taken place. For the most part, I will not address
claims involving other camps at this time; I will also not address
claims concerning the cremation furnaces and the cremation in ditches.
These issues deserve a more complete treatment on their own.

The deniers like to play the numbers game. They state that it is
impossible for 6 million people to have been killed in gas chambers at
Auschwitz-Birkenau. They are quite right the death toll at Auschwitz
is closer to 1 million. The others murdered in the Final Solution were
killed in other camps, ghettos, as a result of the _Einsatzgruppen_
mobile killing squads, by death marches and other means.[59]

Nevertheless, Leuchter underestimates the capacity of
Auschwitz-Birkenau. Leuchter’s assumptions about the capacity for
murder of the gas chambers assume

that the people could occupy the gas chambers at a density of maximum 1
person per 9 square feet (!!) and that it would take a week (!!) to
ventilate the gas chambers before they could be used for another mass
execution. These assumptions are absurd.[60]

Deniers also like to take credit for debunking the incorrect claims of
the Soviets that 4 million were killed at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
Unfortunately for them, it was the respectable historians who provided
the evidence for more accurate numbers. They also make the false claim
that this change in the death toll of Auschwitz-Birkenau should
drastically reduce the death toll of the final solution. This argument
has been thoroughly discredited elsewhere.[61]

Another claim is to echo Faurisson’s notorious statement, “No vents, no
holocaust.” Air photos are supposed to show that vents in Krema II
that were used, according to eyewitness testimony, to introduce Zyklon
B in the gas chamber. Michael Shermer, editor of Skeptic Magazine,
writes:

Thanks to Dr. Nevin Bryant, supervisor of cartographic applications and
image processing applications at Caltech/NASA’s Jet Propulsion
Laboratory in Pasadena, California, I was able to get the CIA
photographs properly analyzed by people who know what they are looking
at from the air. Nevin and I analyzed the photographs using digital
enhancement techniques not available to the CIA in 1979. We were able
to prove that the photographs had not been tampered with, and we indeed
found evidence of extermination activity.[62]

Shermer reproduces a 1944 aerial photo of Krema II (figure 23) and a
1942 picture taken from the ground (figure 24).

The aerial photograph in figure 23 shows the distinctive features of
Krema II. Note the long shadow from the crematorium chimney and, on the
roof of the adjacent gas chamber at right angles to the crematorium
building, note the four staggered shadows. [Holocaust denier, John C.]
Ball claims these shadows were drawn in, but four small structures that
match the shadows are visible on the roof of the gas chamber in figure
24, a picture taken by an SS photographer of the back of Krema
II…[63]

John Ball, at least, seems to be aware that his claims do not stand
up. He offered on his web page a $100,000 for anyone who could get
three air photo experts to disagree with the accuracy of his claims.
When John Morris inquired about accepting Ball’s offer, Ball did not
respond even though Morris made every effort to communicate his
interest. Details are available on the Nizkor website.[64]

The primary claims made by the deniers concerning the supposed
impossibility of gassing with Zyklon B center on the rate of
evaporation of HCN from Zyklon B. It evaporates too slowly, they
claim, so that either it will not kill as fast as is claimed, or
alternatively it will be too dangerous to the operators of the gas
chambers. Lu”ftl writes:

Hydrocyanic acid vapors are not released immediately after the cans are
opened. The evaporation of Zyklon B requires as many as 32 hours or as
few as six hours, depending on whether the ambient temperature ranges
from five to 30 degrees Celsius. The evaporation rate is not exactly
proportional to time.[65]

Jamie McCarthy has addressed this claim:

[Lu”ftl] ripped those figures from their context and cited them
dishonestly. The “six to 32 hours” figure comes from the Degesch
manual, but it refers _only_ to the total exposure time required for
lice. Since the metabolism of lice, like all cold-blooded creatures,
is much slower at 5 C than at 30 C, the exposure time is necessarily
longer.[66]

In other words, Lu”ftl is mixing apples and oranges. The times he
quotes have nothing to do with the release time from Zyklon B. They
have to do with the necessary fumigation times to kill lice. In answer
to a criticism of the Leuchter Report that human body heat would be
sufficient to raise the temperature to the “temperature of evaporation”
of HCN Lu”ftl responds:

Like so many Holocaust writers, Auerbach is mistaken. An experiment
was carried out by this writer to simulate the heating of a chamber
by human beings…

The chamber took an hour to heat using an 1.8 Kw electric convection
heater, after which the room was “ventilated” for 30 minutes…

Even [in a room] with people “tightly packed crushed together,” an air
temperature in excess of 30-32 degrees Celsius would not be attained.
In addition, the gassings are supposed to have taken place quickly and
on a quasi- industrial basis.[67]

This simulation would be a comedy of errors were it not in the service
of denying a tragedy of barely imaginable proportions. First of all,
1.8 kW is roughly equivalent to the heat output of 18 people, far fewer
than would have been in the 5.43 square meters of floor space in the
simulation. Secondly, and more importantly, it is not at all necessary
to come near (or over!) the boiling point of HCN for it to evaporate
rapidly. The boiling point of a liquid is the temperature at which its
equilibrium vapor pressure is equal to the pressure of the atmosphere.
Below the boiling point the vapor pressure of a liquid can be quite
large. HCN has an extremely high vapor pressure even at very cold
temperatures. Anyone who doubts this fact should obtain some diethyl
ether, open a small amount, and observe it evaporating. Ether boils at
34.6 Celsius; in other words its boiling point is greater than HCN.[68]

This discussion is worthwhile because it shows how the deniers play on
the public’s relative ignorance on such technical details. The
argument, however, is moot because Gerhard Peters, who was the general
director of Degesch, the company that sold Zyklon B has written a book
on the topic, in which he gives the evaporation times of Zyklon B.[69]
Ulrich Roessler translates:

The development of the gas from the Zyklon sets in with great
vehemence immediately following the pouring out of it. The thinner
the layer of the disseminated support material the faster will be the
development of the gas. Depending on the species of the pests to be
controlled, and on the characteristic of the rooms to be gassed, one
may choose to reach the maximum of the gas concentration to arise very
quickly or more slowly by the thickness of the disseminated layer.
Usually, the material will be disseminated in a layer of 1/2 to 1cm
thickness, then the greatest part of the HCN will have developed
already after half an hour at normal temperature. [i.e. 20 degree
C].[70]

Roessler comments further:

Now, _der gr”o”ste Teil der Blaus”aure_ is by no means only 50% -it
means rather NEARLY ALL of the HCN. [71]

Even at -10 C Peters states that the evaporation is essentially
complete in 1 hour with an upper bound for complete evaporation of 2
hours.[72]

These facts should not be taken to mean that gassing with Zyklon B was
100% safe. Kremas II and III were equipped with ventilation systems;
the gas chambers in Kremas IV and V were built above ground to allow
natural ventilation. Pressac in the quote near the beginning of this
article states:

the Sonderkommandos wore gas masks as a precaution. [73]

If the Nazis and their accomplices were smart enough to handle the
hazards of Zyklon B for delousing purposes, it is reasonable to suppose
that they were smart enough to handle those hazards when committing
murder. In Nizkor’s Leuchter FAQ another spurious objection is
answered swiftly and accurately:

2.09 If the gas chambers were ventilated, the gas would kill people
outside.

Nonsense; it is all a question of concentration. Once the gas is
released into the atmosphere, its concentration drops and it is no
longer dangerous. Also, HCN dissipates quickly. The execution gas
chambers in US prisons are also ventilated directly into the
atmosphere. Furthermore, if this argument would hold for the
extermination chambers, it would hold for the delousing chambers as
well, and one would have to conclude that no delousing chambers existed
either.[74]

Another claim is refuted merely by reference to the Merck Index. In
order to be explosive HCN requires a concentration of 6% (60,000
ppm).[75] There is simply no reason to add enough Zyklon B to allow
such a concentration to build up.

In considering the forensic measurements, I will make the not
necessarily warranted assumptions that Rudolf and Leuchter can be
trusted to have handled their samples carefully and honestly. What
they claim to measure is a large discrepancy between the levels of
cyanide in the blue-stained delousing chambers compared to the
homicidal gas chambers that do not have obvious staining in
Auschwitz-Birkenau (the Madjanek chamber is an interesting exception
that deserves some comment below).

These measurements are essentially meaningless. The information
content is not more than the fact that some of the delousing chambers
have blue-staining and the homicidal chambers do not.

There are three conceivable explanations for this difference.

1) The presence of Prussian-Blue staining is a necessary consequence of
exposure to HCN and the fact that it is not present in the homicidal
chambers proves they were not used for homicidal gassing.

2) The Prussian-Blue staining is present for reasons having nothing to
do with the exposure to HCN. For example Bailer has suggested it may be a
pigment from paint.[76]

3) The Prussian-Blue staining indeed owes its presence to exposure to HCN,
but the conditions under which it formed were not universally present in all
facilities exposed to HCN. The rate of Prussian-Blue formation may
be very different under the conditions used in homicidal chamber
versus the conditions in delousing chambers.

Answer number one is, of course, untenable. We know that homicidal
gassings occurred from historical evidence independently of the
chemistry involved. Nevertheless, I will suspend my disbelief for a
moment. If the lack of Prussian Blue is supposed to prove that no
gassing took place, possibilities 2 and 3 must be disproven. If it is
not possible to do so, then the impossibility of gassings at the Kremas
has not been shown.

My article on Prussian Blue discusses some of the issues involved in
its possible formation.[77] The iron in Prussian Blue exists in two
oxidation states Fe(II) and Fe(III) (the Roman numeral in parenthesis
denotes the formal positive charge on iron). The significant question
is how the Fe(III) present in construction materials forms Fe(II).
Such a process is called reduction and requires a reducing agent, viz.,
something that gets oxidized when Fe(III) gets reduced. (Oxidation
means the formal loss of electrons, i.e., negative charge, whereas
reduction means the gain of electrons.)

Bailer could not think of a possible reducing agent and looked
elsewhere for a reason for the Prussian-Blue stains.[78] I consider
his explanation unlikely but not disproven.

Rudolf has suggested HCN acts as the reducing agent,[79] and I suppose
that suggestion is possible. I have suggested what I consider to be a
more plausible reducing agent, namely water.[80] This suggestion is
reasonable considering that de Wet and Rolle have presented evidence
that Prussian Blue can be formed in such a manner.[81] It should be
mentioned that Rudolf tried and failed to produce Prussian Blue.[82]

The difficult part comes into play in understanding the kinetics of how
Prussian Blue forms. How fast does it form and under what conditions?
The exposure conditions of the delousing chambers and the homicidal gas
chambers were quite different, if the Degesch directions for delousing
were followed. The walls in the delousing chambers may have been
exposed to HCN for over 20 hours at a time at levels up to 16,000 ppm.
Additionally, the amount of water present, the amount of carbon dioxide
present (from humans exhaling) and the temperature are crucial to
understanding the differences. I suspect that the kinetics are too
difficult to model without resort to experiment. In order to prove his
thesis, Rudolf must demonstrate that it is necessary for Prussian Blue
to form under the conditions employed in the homicidal gas chambers.

The control used in the measurements of Leuchter and Rudolf is
biased. They contain Prussian Blue as the major form of cyanide and
the kinetics of Prussian Blue formation are far from obvious. Cyanide
residues, not in the form of Prussian Blue are far more susceptible to
weathering away. The IFRC researchers experimented with exposing
building materials to HCN and found that the cyanides were easily
removed with exposure to water. [83] The samples that they found
containing cyanides from the Kremas were carefully taken from places
in the chambers that were as sheltered from the elements as
possible.[84] Leuchter and Rudolf, collecting their samples illegally
could not afford that luxury.

The IFRC being aware of the problems using a biased control containing
Prussian Blue used a method that discriminated against such compounds
that only measure other cyanides present. The IFRC found traces of
cyanide at levels significantly above background in all 5 Kremas as
well as bunker 11. They also measure concentrations in bath-house B1-A
in Birkenau, which was used for delousing prisoners’ clothing. Samples
>from the bath house did indeed have higher concentrations of cyanides,
but it is not the case that every sample from the bath-house had higher
concentrations than every sample in the Kremas. For example, sample
number 25 from Krema II had measurements of 640,592, and 620 ug/kg.
Sample 46 from Krema V had measurements of 244, 248, and 232 ug/kg.
In contrast sample 53 from the bath-house camp B1-A in Birkenau had
measurements of 24, 20, and 24 ug/kg. Overall concentrations for the
fumigation chambers ranged from 0-900 ug/kg. In the Kremas they ranged
>from 0-640 ug/kg. So it is true that the highest measurements were
higher in fumigation chambers (discriminating against iron blues), but
not by much. There is another important fact. Concentrations in
control samples from dwelling accommodations were 0 +/- 1 ug/kg. In
other words, there is no doubt that the Kremas were exposed to a
source of HCN. If the intent is to prove that the Kremas could not
have been homicidal gas chambers, it has failed.[85]

Before concluding it is worth mentioning the case of the gas chamber at
Majdanek. This chamber has Prussian Blue staining. Pressac has
interpreted this fact to mean that delousing must have taken place in
this chamber.

The red-ochre bricks stained with dark blue were for him [Mai^tre
Jouanneau] material and visible proof of the existence of homicidal
gas chambers. The problem , for there is one, is that the gas chamber
presented all the characteristics of a DELOUSING installation. I am not
saying that it was never used to kill people, for that is still
possible, but the traces of Prussian Blue are an absolutely certain
indication of use for delousing purposes….[86]

Pressac believes that the presence of Prussian Blue proves that the
chamber was used for delousing. Whereas he does not view Prussian
Blue as proof that the chamber was not used for homicidal purposes, he
implies that homicidal purposes alone would not produce Prussian Blue.

Happy to be logically inconsistent as long as they can spread a bit of
confusion to obfuscate the truth, at least one denier has claimed on the
basis of Pressac’s statement that the chamber in question was only a
delousing chamber.

I am not yet convinced of Pressac’s reasoning. I do not think it is
obvious that homicidal gassing can never produce Prussian Blue stains,
and I would suggest that a counter assertion demands the same kinetic
arguments that the deniers are unable to produce.

VI. Conclusion

In this article I have discussed some of the history as well as the
chemistry of mass murder at Auschwitz-Birkenau. I have shown that the
arguments of the deniers do not hold up when shown the light of day.

It is much easier to tell a lie than to expose one. Perhaps, that is
one of the unspoken reasons that motivates people to advocate censoring
hate-speech. Whereas I am opposed to censorship and hate speech laws, I
am not embarrassed to call Holocaust-denial hate speech. That is what
it is. People who are smart enough to obfuscate using pseudoscientific
arguments are also smart enough to know what they are doing:
propagating a lie. Although some people may be attracted to Holocaust
denial because of gullibility and/or mental illness, these people are
not the same people who write these clever but mendacious
pseudoscientific reports. The people who write these reports are
motivated by a desire to rehabilitate Nazism, an ideology of hate.
Hate-speech is what it is and in calling it that I am merely exercising
my right of free speech.

The arguments made by the deniers are, of course, repulsive, but they
can only have an effect if the public is not educated enough to see the
poor scholarship disguised with footnotes. It is because of this
restriction on the possibility of the deniers to have an effect that I
believe that accurate information is the best possible response.
The Chemistry of Auschwitz notes:

[1]Deborah Lipstadt, _Denying the Holocaust, the Growing Assault on
Truth and Memory_, New York: The Free Press, 1993 p. 1.

[2] Yisrael Gutman, “Auschwitz-An Overview” in Y. Gutman, and
M. Berenbaum,, _The Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp_,
Bloomington: Indiana University Press and Washington DC: The
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 1994, p. 6.

[3]Primo Levi _The Drowned and the Saved_, New York: Random House,
1988.

[4]Eugen Kogon, Hermann Langbein and Adalbert Ru”ckerl,_ Nazi Mass
Murder: A Documentary History of the Use of Poison Gas_ ,New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1993, p.139.

[5]Franciszek Piper, “The Number of Victims” in _Anatomy_ , Op. Cit.,
pp. 61-74.

[6]Brian Harmon,”The Auschwitz Gambit: The Four Million Variant”
https://nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/four-million-01.html

[7]For example, Eugen Kogon, _The Theory and Practice of Hell: The
German Concentration Camps and the System Behind Them_, translated
from the German by Heinz Norden,New York: Berkeley Books, 1980

Originally published in German as _Der SS Staat_, 1948.

[8]Hilberg, _The Destruction of the European Jews_, New York: Holmes
and Meier, 1985, pp. 1201-1220

[9]Kogon, Nazi Mass Murder, Op. Cit., p. 139, notes in brackets are
mine (RJG).

[10]Hilberg,Op. Cit., p. 888

[11]Kogon, Nazi Mass murder, Op. Cit., pp. 206-9

[12]Degesch publication, “Directives for the Use of Prussic Acid
(Zyklon) for the Destruction of Vermin (Disinfestation),” NI-9912 as
cited in Jean-Claude Pressac, _Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the
gas chambers_ The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, 1989, Library of
Congress 89-81305, p.18.

[13]Ulrich Roessler, private communication. The patent numbers are:
The original patent was D.R.P. 438 818 (Heerdt, 1922) The
porous support: D.R.P. 447 913
The felt support: Fr.P. 636 425; and E.P. 292 547
“Diagriess” support D.R.P. 499 316 “ERCO” D.R.P. 499 316
Warning agents: D.R.P. 524 261 ( Ga/3ner [or Gassner], 1928).

[14] Harry Mazal, private communication.

[15]Susan Budavari, Maryadele J. O’ Neil, Ann Smith, Patricia E.
Heckelman, Joanne F. Kinneary (editors), _The Merck Index, An
Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs, and Biologicals_,
Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merkt & Co., Inc., Twelfth Edition,
1996, p. 822, index number 4836.

[16]DuPont, Read from a plot in DuPont’s “Hydrogen Cyanide: Uses,
Storage, and Handling” ppm by volume was calculated.

[17]Budavari Op. cit.

[18]DuPont, Op. Cit.

[19]DuPont, Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), Hydrogen Cyanide,
1130CR, CAS 74- 90-8, Du Pont Chemicals, 1993.

[20]Brian Harmon, _Technical Aspects of the Holocaust: Cyanide,
Zyklon-B, and Mass Murder_,
https://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/cyanide/cyanide.001,
1994.

[21]Roessler, Op. Cit.

[22]Franciszek Piper, , “Gas Chambers and Crematoria”, in _Anatomy_,
Op. Cit. ,pp. 157-18.

[23]Jean-Claude Pressac with R.-J. Van Pelt, “The Machinery of Mass
Murder at Auschwitz”, in _Anatomy_, Op. Cit. pp. 183-245, notes
in square brackets mine- RJG.

[24]Jean-Claude Pressac, _Technique_, Op. Cit., p.233, emphasis
Pressac’s.

[25]Andrzej Strzelecki, “The Plunder of the Victims and Their Corpses”,
in _Anatomy_, Op. Cit., p.261.

[26]Lipstadt, Op. Cit. pp.161-162.

[27]Ibid. ,pp.162-163.

[28]Ibid., p. 163n.

[29]Christopher B. Daly, “Holocaust Revisionist Admits He Is Not
Engineer” in
_The Washington Post_ ,June 18, 1991, Final Edition p. A6.

[30]Kenneth McVay, Daniel Keren, and Jamie McCarthy “Holocaust FAQ:
The Leuchter Report,” Available via anonymous ftp from
ftp.almanac.bc.ca in the directory pub/people/l/leuchter.fred as
leuchter.faq1 (and ~.faq2), 1996, see also
https://nizkor.org/faqs/leuchter/leuchter-faq-22.html.

[31]Fred A. Leuchter, “Inside the Auschwitz Gas Chambers”
http://www.webcom.com/ezundel/english/incorr/incorrect.005.html.

[32]Mark Van Alstine, private communication.

[33]Leuchter, Op. Cit.

[34]Richard J. Green, “Leuchter, Rudolf and the Iron Blues,”
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/blue, 1997.

[35]Markiewicz, Gubala, and Labedz, Z Zagadnien Sqdowych, z. XXX,
1994,17-27 Available at
https://nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/polish/institute-for-forensic-research/

[36]Germar Rudolf, _The Rudolf Report_, Ruediger Kammerer – Armin
Solms (Hg), Das Rudolf-Gutachten, Gutachten ueber die Bildung nach
Nachweisbarkeit von Canidverbindungen in den “Gaskammern” von
Auschwitz, Cromwell Press, London 1993. This report is banned in
Germany and therefore somewhat difficult to find. I am grateful
to Margret Chatwin for obtaining and Gord McFee for translating
the original German version of section 2.5 and note 16.

A massively abridged English translation has appeared as _The
Rudolf Report_, London: Cromwell,1993. The Rudolf Report.

A 1997 version in German is present at
http://www.vho.org/D/rga/rga.html

A woefully incomplete document that claims to be a translation
of the Rudolf Report that omits footnotes appears at
http://www.codoh.com/rudolf/rudreport/rudreport.html, the link to
a German version on the Zundel site appears to be incorrect.

[37]McVay, Op. Cit.

[38]Harmon, “Four Million” Op. Cit.

[39]Walter Lu”ftl, “The Luftl Report, An Austrian Engineer’s Report on
the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz and Mauthausen,” The Journal of
Historical Review, vol. 12, no. 4, Winter 1992-1993. A copy of
this version is available online at
https://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/l/luftl.walter/luftl.report.

[40]Sarah Rembiszewski _The Final Lie, Holocaust Denial in Germany, A
Second- Generation Denier as Test Case_, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University
Print Shop, 1996 ISBN 965-7033-04-7 p.48-49 n 161.

[41]Allison Abbot, Holocaust Denial Research Disclaimed,” _Nature_
v.368 (1994), p. 483.

[42]Ibid.

[43]Rembiszewski, Op. Cit., p.30.

[44]Abbot, Op. Cit.

[45]Ibid.

[46]Rembiszewski, Op. Cit.,p.29.

[47]Abbot, Op. Cit.

[48]Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, press release March 28,
1994. Available at
https://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/r/rudolf.germar/rudolf-press-release-ad.

[49]Gerald Fleming forward to Rembiszewski, Op. Cit.,,p.1.

[50]Rembiszewski, Op. Cit., p.29.

[51]Ibid. p.56.

[52]Markiewicz, Op. Cit.

[53]Ibid.

[54]Ibid.

[55]Ibid.

[56]Green, Op. Cit.

[57]Markiewicz, Op. Cit.

[58]Ibid.

[59]Hilberg, Op. Cit.

[60]McVay, Op. Cit.

[61]Harmon, “Four million,” Op. Cit.

[62]Michael Shermer, _Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience,
Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time_, New York: W.H.
Freeman and Company, 1997, p.233

[63]Ibid.

[64]John Morris, “The Ball Challenge. Where is John Ball?”,
https://nizkor.org/features/ball-challenge/

[65]Lu”ftl Op. Cit.

[66]Jamie McCarthy, alt.revisionism, Subject: Lueftl’s dishonesty and
cross-linking Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 18:13:01 -0400 Message-ID:
Available at
https://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/l/luftl.walter/evaporation-measurement-lie

[67]Lu”ftl Op. Cit.

[68]Pitch Block, appendix, “Zyklon B” in Pierre Vidal-Naquet, _Assasins
of Memory, Essays on the Denial of the Holocaust_, New York, Columbia
University Press, 1992 p.61

[69]Gerhard Peters: _Blaus”aure zur Sch”adlingbek”ampfung_ (=Sammlung
chem. und chem.-techn. Vortr”age; N.F. 20) Verlag von Ferdinand Enke,
Stuttgart 1933, p.64f Available on the web at
http://www.holocaust-history.org/~dkeren/

[70]Ulrich Roessler, alt.revisionism, Sat Dec 9 17:35:51 PST 1995
Subject: Re: Luftl’s ‘Report’ Again (Re: Comments and Questions
to Ulri Message-ID: <[email protected]> Available at
https://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/r/rudolf.germar/rudolf-report.001

[71]Ibid.

[72]G. Peters and W. Rasch, _Die Einsatzf”ahigkeit der
Blaus”aure-Durchgasung bei tiefen Temperaturen._Zeitschrift f”ur
hygienische Zoologie und Sch”adlingsbek”ampfung, 11 (1941) pp.133-
Available on the web at
http://www.holocaust-history.org/~dkeren/

[73]Pressac, _Anatomy_ Op. Cit.

[74]McVay, Op. Cit.

[75]Budavari, Op. Cit.

[76]J. Bailer, Amoklauf gegen die Wirklichkeit. Praca zbiorowa (B.
Gallanda, J. Bailer, F. Freund, T. Geisler, W. Lasek, N. Neugebauer,
G. Spenn, W. Wegner). Bundesministerium fuer Unterricht und Kultur Wien
1991.

[77]Green, Op. Cit.

[78]Bailer, Op. Cit.

[79]Rudolf, Op Cit.

[80]Green, Op. Cit.

[81]J. F. de Wet, and R. Z. Rolle, Anorg. Allgem. Chem.,336, 96,1965.

[82]Rudolf, Op. Cit.

[83]Markiewicz, Op. Cit.

[84]Ibid.

[85]Ibid.

[86]Pressac, _Technique_, Op. Cit., p. 555.

For recommended further reading see:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/reading.shtml

—
—————————————————————————–
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]

From [email protected] Mon May 4 20:51:27 EDT 1998
Article: 173119 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.he.net!
Supernews60!supernews.com!coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: New address for Greg Raven’s Web site
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 20:53:47 GMT
Lines: 21
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:173119

In article <[email protected]>,
IHRGreg wrote:
>Because Kaiwan has announced its intention to cease operations by the end of
>June, my Web site for revisionist materials has temporarily been relocated to:
>
>http://members.aol.com/ihrgreg
>
>Anyone wishing to see revisionist materials dealing with the Holocaust and
>other historical matters is welcome to visit my site.

Any new news on which Nazis will end up with Carto’s money?

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon May 4 20:51:27 EDT 1998
Article: 173145 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.true-crime,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!
newspeer.monmouth.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!
news.bbnplanet.com!news-peer.sprintlink.net!
news-backup-east.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!199.125.85.9!
news.mv.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Refutation of the Legend
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 23:04:35 GMT
Lines: 39
Xref: trends.ca alt.true-crime:90321 alt.revisionism:173145

In article <[email protected]>,
Alex Vange wrote:
>
>
>steve mock wrote in article
><[email protected]>…
>> > >
>> > Not at all. I am only for removing the Jews from controlling the
>> > media. Your twisting of the facts as shown here is an example of why
>the
>> > Jews should not control the media.
>>
>> In other words, you claim the right to arbitrarily decide who should be
>> permitted access to the media and who should not. Sorry, Vange. That is
>not a
>> free-speech position.
>
> Right now the Jews are in control of the media. This situation
>should change. Good people should be making the movies so they are free of
>evil propaganda.
>
> The plan of just letting things happen by nature is not working in
>the area of the media. Money talks and those who have it rule. This is not
>the way to have a superior culture. This system is wrong and those who
>support are serving mammon or money.

Translation: Vange suppostrs free speech for Nazis but not for Jews or
anyone else who disagrees with him. In other words, he is opposed to
free speech.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon May 4 20:51:30 EDT 1998
Article: 173202 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.true-crime,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!Supernews73!
Supernews60!supernews.com!uunet!in5.uu.net!
world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Refutation of the Legend
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 04:10:39 GMT
Lines: 62
Xref: trends.ca alt.true-crime:90375 alt.revisionism:173202

In article <[email protected]>,
Alex Vange wrote:
>
>
>Richard J Green wrote in article
>…
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Alex Vange wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >steve mock wrote in article
>> ><[email protected]>…
>> >> > >
>> >> > Not at all. I am only for removing the Jews from controlling
>the
>> >> > media. Your twisting of the facts as shown here is an example of why
>> >the
>> >> > Jews should not control the media.
>> >>
>> >> In other words, you claim the right to arbitrarily decide who should
>be
>> >> permitted access to the media and who should not. Sorry, Vange. That
>is
>> >not a
>> >> free-speech position.
>> >
>> > Right now the Jews are in control of the media. This situation
>> >should change. Good people should be making the movies so they are free
>of
>> >evil propaganda.
>> >
>> > The plan of just letting things happen by nature is not working in
>> >the area of the media. Money talks and those who have it rule. This is
>not
>> >the way to have a superior culture. This system is wrong and those who
>> >support are serving mammon or money.
>>
>> Translation: Vange suppostrs free speech for Nazis but not for Jews or
>> anyone else who disagrees with him. In other words, he is opposed to
>> free speech.
>>
> The post above admits that the only real free speech belongs to those
>who have media access. Then if the Jews did not have access to the media
>they would not have free speech. This is acknowledging that the free speech
>of most people is nothing and that speech over the media is the only speech
>that matters.

There is no law preventing anyone from starting his/her own newspapers,
theatres etc. You Nazis are allowed your rags (Spotlight, JHR etc.).
The fact that your ideology does not sell is no one’s fault but your own
for holding onto a bankrupt ideology. That you would like to create such laws
against the rights of others to have newspapers, movies etc. says enough on
its own.

Best,

Rich Green
—
—————————————————————————–
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]

From [email protected] Fri May 8 19:07:34 EDT 1998
Article: 174060 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.true-crime,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.eecs.umich.edu!
newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!
newsm.ibm.net!ibm.net!uunet!in4.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Free speech opponent “Natalia” is too cowardly to post to a.r.
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]nsc03.worldnet.att.net> <[email protected]> <#1/3> <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 01:22:25 GMT
Lines: 117
Xref: trends.ca alt.true-crime:91331 alt.revisionism:174060

Greetings all,

John Morris has stated that he does not read alt.true-crime; yet “Natalia”
does not followup to alt.revisionism which he does read. Why do you
suppose that is?

In addition to this cowardly behavior “Natalia” still has not apologized
for intentionally misquoting me under the guise of “Robert.”

Best,

Rich Green

In article <[email protected]>,
wrote:
> Greetings Readers!
>
>
>In article <[email protected]>#1/3,
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>> When speaking of the co-operation between the Einsatzgruppen and local
>> militias, it is well to remember that the Einsatzgruppen sponsored and
>> encouraged actions against Jews by these militias, and some militia
>> groups, such as the militia from Kiev placed themselves under the
>> command of the Einsatzgruppen.
>>
>
>Actually, the German authorities tried to restrain and repress the anti-Jewish
>pogroms in Eastern Europe. This from Arthur Butz, who in turn gets his
>information from Berg and Raschhafer.
>
>> If the militia volunteers placed themselves under the command of the
>> Einsatzgruppen and carried out executions at their behest, then the
>> Einsatzgruppen share in the responsibility for those deaths.
>>
>
>My claim has never been that the Einsatzgruppen do not have any
>responsibility. I have only said that the actual numbers of Jewish victims
>have been greatly exaggerated.
>
>>
>> Ah, Paget. I was wondering when Paget would pop up.
>>
>>snip<
>
>> Paget’s argument is that given the number of trucks issued to the
>> Einsatzgruppe and the return trip time to the execution site (about 10
>> km out of town), Paget estimated that the Einsatzgruppen could not
>> have killed 10,000 Jews in one day but, rather, that it would have
>> taken them three weeks. The argument is based upon Ohlendorf’s
>> statement that the normal procedure was to take the Jews by truck to
>> the execution site.
>>
>
>>snip rest of lengthy discussion of Paget<
>
>Mr. Morris goes to great lengths trying to demonstrate that 10,000 Jews were
>killed in and around Simferopol. Supposing it to be true, it does absolutely
>nothing to undermine my claim that the Einsatzgruppen reports in regards to
>actual numbers of Jews killed were greatly exaggerated. Let me give you one
>striking example where the figures are so inflated that normal common sense
>would reject them.
>This is Report 51 which dealt with a 4 month period in the Bialystock area,
>which would put it in the jurisdiction of Einsatzgruppe C. Einsatzgruppe C
>had 750 men at its disposal. This report claims that 1337 partisans were
>killed in battle, and 8565 were captured and later executed. Furthermore, an
>additional 14257 partisan auxiliaries (Bandenhelfer) were executed as well as
>16553 captured.
>But reader, this is not all – those 750 men also had time and energy to round
>up and execute 363,211 Jews! It is no wonder that Himmler complained that 95%
>of the reports were grossly exaggerated, this being admittedly by far the
>worst one.
>
>
>> [On being asked to prove that “resettlement” could be a euphemism for
>> execution, Michael Newton wrote]:
>>
>> >>> “On the resettlement site there are two pits. A group of ten leaders
>> >>> and men will work at each pit, relieving each other every two hours….
>>
>> >>Yes. More resettlement. And pits. So what? What were they for? The rest
>of
>> >>the sentence, please!
>>
>> >>> “The following persons are responsible for giving out the bullets at
>> >>> the transportation site….”
>>
>> >>Yes. Bullets. What were they for? Who were they given to? The Jews? The
>> >>soldiers? A hunting party? The rest of the paragraph, please!
>>
>> If anyone is as perplexed and dumfounded as “Natalia” about why Jews
>> should dig a pit and stand at the edge and why bullets would be
>> necessary in such a situation, they are invited to read the Australian
>> archeologist Richard Wright’s account of his exhumations of a mass
>> graves left by the Einsatzgruppen at Serniki and Ustinovka in the
>> Ukraine:
>
>From the information given to us by Mr. Newton, we cannot at all infer that
>Jews were even involved here. Read the collection of fragmented sentences
>again, Mr. Morris. You have conveniently assumed we are dealing with Jews,
>however we would be better served with the complete document and not a bunch
>of sentences ripped out of context.
>
>Natalia.
>
>—–== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==—–
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

From [email protected] Fri May 8 19:07:35 EDT 1998
Article: 174062 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!
news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-backup-east.sprintlink.net!
news.sprintlink.net!
199.45.255.100!coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Moranic Math HiLite (Or: Moranic Fractals) (was: Re: Zykl
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 01:36:52 GMT
Lines: 31
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:174062

In article ,
Daniel Keren wrote:

>Alas you said that it is 3/4. But that would mean that 4 equals
>8. But unfortunately we mathematicians are very unimaginative
>people.

Now I can prove that Tom Moran is Albert Einstein!

4 = 8

Divide both sides by 2.

1 = 2

Now, out of the set of two objects {Zeyde, Albert Einstein}; they are
one. Therefore, Zeyde is Albert Einstein, QED.

Dr. Keren, you are arguing about math with Albert Einstein!

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Tue May 12 17:01:08 EDT 1998
Article: 174361 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
newsm.ibm.net!ibm.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Moranic Math HiLite (Or: Moranic Fractals) (was: Re: Zykl
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 01:58:17 GMT
Lines: 126
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:174361

In article <[email protected]>,
tom moran wrote:

> Mr.Green, a number of your co-brethren are out clamoring that the
>human body once ignited will continue to burn on its own. You have not
>joined in. Does this mean that you disagree, or do you, in your
>emminent position have something to support your co-brethren’s
>attempts?

They are right. I demonstrated this fact once on this newsgroup about
two years ago when your better, Matt Giwer, brought it up. Below I
include the demonstration. BTW- I just spent some time in the emergency
room, one of the other patients was in because his hands had caught on
fire.

Here is the demo:

It has been asserted in this news group that burning a body is not
exothermic. As evidence we are told that one cannot light a hamburger
on fire with a match. The proponents of this view do not understand the
meaning of the word exothermicity. Exothermicity means that the
reaction releases heat. It is also impossible to light a large log on
fire with a match; yet that log releases heat when burned. The
difficulty in lighting the log is a kinetic issue rather than a
thermodynamic one. Energy is needed to overcome an activation barrier.
This barrier is why one uses tinder and kindling or else lighter fluid
to start a fire.

Let’s do a few calculations to prove the point. Any errors are mine.

1) Let us first show roughly that burning a hamburger is exothermic under a
gross approximation. We will do a better job when treating the human body.

Suppose we have a 100 g hamburger. Suppose that 80% is water.
Suppose that 20% is combustible.

Let’s treat the 20% as if it were methane. This is not quite right, but
it should give a correct order of magnitude. We will fine tune when
we address the human body.

Let’s combust the methane:

The enthalpy of combustion of methane is -890.4 kJ/mol.

20 g * 1 mol/16 g = 1.25 mol methane

1.25 mol * (-890.4) = -1113 kJ

Let’s vaporize the water:

The heat of vaporization of water at 100 C is 40.656 kJ/mol.
The heat capacity of water (Cp) is 4.184 J/g*K

Let’s suppose our burger starts at 25 C (since it has no
residual body heat, clearly we will be overestimating
the amount needed for a warmer body).

To heat the water to 100C we will need:

80 g * 75K * 4.2 J/gK = 25200J = 25.2 kJ

Now to vaporize this water we will need:

80g * 1 mol/18g * 40.7 kJ/mol = 180.6 kJ

So to vaporize all the water takes:

180.6 kJ + 25.2 kJ = 205.8 KJ

The total heat given off by entirely burning the burger is:

205.8 kJ – 1117 kJ = – 911 kJ

2) Let’s extend our rough model to a human. We will fine tune it
afterwards. Suppose a human weighs 75 kg. Our burger weighed .1 kg.

750 * (-911) = – 683,250 kJ

Certainly a more accurate calculation can be done. I have from M.
Bilik:

A) He suggests 50-70% water may be a better estimate.
B) He suggests 14% and 22% fat for the avearge man and woman
respectively.
C) He suggests a minimum of 16.8% proteins.

3) Let us do an underestimate: assume the body is 80% water and 14%
fat.

Mark Van Alstine gives us an example fat:

The combustion equation for the fat glyceryl trimyrisate, C45H86O6,
for example, is:

C45H86O6(s) + 127/2 O2(g) -> 45C02(g) + 43H20(l); H = -27820 kJ/mol

The molecular mass of this fat is:

M = 45*12 + 86 + 6*16 = 540 + 86 + 96 = 722.

So 1 g. of this fat has a heat of combustion:

H = -27820 kJ/mol * 1 mol/ 722 g. = -38.5 kJ/g.

Suppose that the human body is 14% fat and 80 % water. In 100 g of a
body we have 14 g of fat that release

14 g * (-38.5 kJ/g) = – 539 kJ when burnt. 205.8 kJ are needed
to evaporate 80 g water.

So every 100 g of a body releases -333 kJ ignoring the presence
of proteins, urea etc., which also burn exothermically.

A 75 kg person releases about (750) * (-333) = 249,750 kJ. from fat
alone taking into account the necessity of evaporating water.

Best,

From [email protected] Tue May 12 17:01:08 EDT 1998
Article: 174656 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!denver-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!
news.bbnplanet.com!
coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Moranic Math HiLite (Or: Moranic Fractals) (was: Re: Zykl
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 01:54:00 GMT
Lines: 20
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:174656

In article ,
Daniel Keren wrote:

>I have made some rough estimates that the wood would account
>for perhaps 400,000 BTU, leaving about 400,000 for the body;
>is this in accordance with your figures?

Dr. Keren, our estimates are the same order of magnitude (a BTU is about
a kJ). Mine appears to be a slight underestimate and yours a slight
overestimate, but we are in the ballpark.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Tue May 12 17:01:09 EDT 1998
Article: 174657 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!Supernews73!
supernews.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!
news-backup-east.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!199.45.255.100!
coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Moranic Math HiLite (Or: Moranic Fractals) (was: Re: Zykl
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 01:55:18 GMT
Lines: 30
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:174657

In article <[email protected]>,
tom moran wrote:
>
>Moran had asked:
>>> Mr.Green, a number of your co-brethren are out clamoring that the
>>>human body once ignited will continue to burn on its own. You have not
>>>joined in. Does this mean that you disagree, or do you, in your
>>>emminent position have something to support your co-brethren’s
>>>attempts?
>
>Green:
>>They are right. I demonstrated this fact once on this newsgroup about
>>two years ago when your better, Matt Giwer, brought it up. Below I
>>include the demonstration. BTW- I just spent some time in the emergency
>>room, one of the other patients was in because his hands had caught on
>>fire.
>
> Mr.Green, when you say this persons hands “caught on fire” what
>do you mean by that?

Having trouble with English, Zeyde?

Best,

From [email protected] Tue May 12 17:01:09 EDT 1998
Article: 174658 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!
newsm.ibm.net!ibm.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Moranic Math HiLite (Or: Moranic Fractals) (was: Re: Zykl
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 01:56:54 GMT
Lines: 35
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:174658

In article <[email protected]>,
tom moran wrote:
>
>Moran:
>>> Mr.Green, a number of your co-brethren are out clamoring that the
>>>human body once ignited will continue to burn on its own. You have not
>>>joined in. Does this mean that you disagree, or do you, in your
>>>emminent position have something to support your co-brethren’s
>>>attempts?
>
>Green:
>>They are right. I demonstrated this fact once on this newsgroup about
>>two years ago when your better, Matt Giwer, brought it up. Below I
>>include the demonstration. BTW- I just spent some time in the emergency
>>room, one of the other patients was in because his hands had caught on
>>fire.
>
>>Here is the demo:
>
>>It has been asserted in this news group that burning a body is not
>>exothermic. …
>
> Mr.Green, could you show where it was “asserted” that “burning a
>body is not exothermic”?

Is Zeyde now acknowleging that it is exothermic?

Best,

From [email protected] Tue May 12 17:01:10 EDT 1998
Article: 174659 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.gte.net!uunet!in4.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Moranic Math HiLite (Or: Moranic Fractals) (was: Re: Zykl
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 01:58:55 GMT
Lines: 47
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:174659

In article <[email protected]>,
tom moran wrote:
>
>Moran had noted:
>>> Mr.Green, a number of your co-brethren are out clamoring that the
>>>human body once ignited will continue to burn on its own. You have not
>>>joined in. Does this mean that you disagree, or do you, in your
>>>emminent position have something to support your co-brethren’s
>>>attempts?
>
>Mr.Green joining his co-brethren:
>>They are right. I demonstrated this fact once on this newsgroup about
>>two years ago when your better, Matt Giwer, brought it up. Below I
>>include the demonstration. BTW- I just spent some time in the emergency
>>room, one of the other patients was in because his hands had caught on
>>fire.
>
>>Here is the demo:
>
>>It has been asserted in this news group that burning a body is not
>>exothermic. As evidence we are told that one cannot light a hamburger
>>on fire with a match. The proponents of this view do not understand the
>>meaning of the word exothermicity. Exothermicity means that the
>>reaction releases heat. It is also impossible to light a large log on
>>fire with a match; yet that log releases heat when burned. The
>>difficulty in lighting the log is a kinetic issue rather than a
>>thermodynamic one. Energy is needed to overcome an activation barrier.
>>This barrier is why one uses tinder and kindling or else lighter fluid
>>to start a fire.
>
> Now Mr.Green you have summarized, “Exothermicity means that the
>reaction releases heat.” You then went on to pose an array of
>equations. Now do your equations conclude that a body once ignited
>will continue to burn on its own

Yes, if it gets hot enough.

>or that heat applied to a body causes heat to be released?

Yes.

From [email protected] Tue May 12 17:01:10 EDT 1998
Article: 174664 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.tasteless
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!
news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-backup-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!199.45.255.100!
coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Perhaps the most offensive thing I’ve ever read
(was Re: why can’t aryan men deal with aryan women)
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 03:09:11 GMT
Lines: 47
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:174664 alt.tasteless:49515

Finally an honest Nazi. Too bad he is too cowardly to post under his
own name.

Best,

Rich Green

In article <[email protected]>,
Anonymous wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Alfred Strom
> wrote:
>
>> (He’s not even careful: in one post he states
>> the “Holocaust” actually occurred; in another he calls it the
>> “Holohoax.”)
>
>No conflict here. I have no doubts whatsoever that the Holocaust occurred
>in substantially the form described in mainstream historiography (i.e.
>6,000,000 Jews exterminated, Einsatzkommandos, concentration camps, slow
>starvation, psychological terror, gas chambers, disease, babies’ heads
>smashed against walls, sadistic death marches). I actually *admire* Nazi
>Germany for devising a true 20th century solution to an age-old problem. I
>even go so far as to say that the Holocaust should serve as the inspiration
>and a model for an eventual culling of America and, eventually, the entire
>world of racial garbage: anyone not up to White Aryan racial standards,
>including, Stromsky-boy, you. On the other hand, the Jews, who were only
>being dealt what they deserved by the Germans, have made the Holocaust into
>a holohoax by not letting us forget about it, making it into a lucrative
>business, and, while cheerfully bulldozing Palestinian villages and
>collectively punishing entire populations, making us think that the
>Holocaust was somehow uniquely evil. The only thing unique about the
>Holocaust was the German (= White Aryan) effectiveness with which it was
>done, the genocidal wizardry which created a system, run and entirely
>self-financed by its victims, which has allowed us to enjoy a world with
>6,000,000 fewer kyke-j*wes than it would otherwise have.
>
>
>PATRIOT
>
>”My race is red hot, other races ain’t diddly squat.”

From [email protected] Tue May 12 17:01:11 EDT 1998
Article: 174760 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!
newspeer.monmouth.com!
nntp.giganews.com!uunet!in5.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: The Importance of Holocaust Revisionism
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 19:30:01 GMT
Lines: 21
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:174760

In article ,
ORAC wrote:
>The only “importance” of Holocaust revisionism is as a tool for a bunch of
>Aryan nationalist Nazi wannabes to use to try to “prove” that Hitler
>wasn’t such a bad guy after all, thereby making their adulation of and
>association with him seem less odious to the uninformed.

I forget who said this first but…

Holocaust “Revisionism” is both true and important; it’s just that the
true parts aren’t important, and the important parts aren’t true.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Tue May 12 17:01:11 EDT 1998
Article: 174936 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.true-crime,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.IAEhv.nl!newsfeed.wli.net!ais.net!uunet!
in5.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Refutation of the Legend
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 03:10:13 GMT
Lines: 198
Xref: trends.ca alt.true-crime:92088 alt.revisionism:174936

Hello all,

“Natalia” has posted nothing new. A claim without support that 1 ug/kg
is insignificant. The IFRC demonstrated its significance. She posts a
claim without support that PB must have formed in the homicidal
chambers. I have already refuted both of those claims.

Markiewicz, Gubala, and Labedz of the Institute of Forensic Research,
Crakow, demonstrated that HCN was present in the homicidal gas chambers at
levels above background.

I quote from their paper available at:

https://nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/polish/institute-for-forensic-research/

The results of analyses are presented in Tables I-IV. They
unequivocally show that the cyanide compounds occur in all the
facilities that, according to the source data, were in contact with
them. On the other hand, they do not occur in dwelling accomodations,
which was shown by means of control samples.

The IFRC researchers used a calibrated method that they checked against
samples of known concentration as they went along. They discriminated against
Prussian blue whose origin is not clear. Leuchter and Rudolf did not do so,
and their attempt to disprove the possibility of homicidal gassings
fails.

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/blue
https://nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/forensic.html
https://nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/polish/institute-for-forensic-research/

Not furthermore that the cowardly free speech opponent fears to post to
alt.revisionism and that “she” has not apologized for deliberately lying
about what I claim under “her” other pseudonym “Robert.”

[snip]

>Maybe you should start reading the Polish report again because you will not
>find any assertion there to the effect that the people doing the testing of
>the probes did not know which the control samples were.

“The laboratory analysis of the material collected was conducted -to
ensure full objectivity – by another group of laboratory workers.”

Natalia is grasping at straws if he wishes to claim that this does not
mean to say that they were unaware of which samples were controls and
which not. I remind you that the controls gave unequivocal 0 values.

[snip]

>As I have repeated time and time again – the Polish measurements are
>meaningless because the levels of cyanide found in all the facilities are so
>low that these could have occurred at random, eg. Rudolf has demonstrated in
>his brick experiment.
>

Maybe if you repeat it enough times that will make it true Natalia.
Their controls and calibration curve are sufficient to prove the
significance of the results.

What Rudolf proved is that it is possible to expose a brick to HCN
without leaving cyanide traces. That disproves his entire report right
there.

[snip]

>He never claimed that PB must form in these bricks under these conditions and
>in such a short time. You are completely misrepresenting Rudolf’s claims.
>The “gas chambers” were much different from the brick experiment in that they:
>1) Were allegedly exposed to much more HCN over a much longer time period.
>2) There was plenty of water and humidity.
>3) Fresh mortar is much more likely to leave cyanide residue than dry brick.

Show the kinetics, Vlad. Include the effects of CO2.
>
>
>> >In the delousing chambers, PB formed in a relatively short time, not
>radically
>> >different from the time it had a chance to form in the “gas chambers”.
>>
>> The conditions were not identical.
>>
>
>They were more favorable in the “gas chambers”.

Prove it. Show the kinetics including the effect of carbon dioxide.
Give me a rate constant.

[snip]

>Not easy to do before they have been tested by an independent laboratory. It
>is amazing how you manage to get so many things backwards. To select both
>blue stained and unstained samples shows a lack of pre-selection and therefore
>an unbiased, objective approach. Both Rudolf and Leuchter showed this
>objectivity and therefore conformed to a true scientific approach.
>Rudolf would have absolutely no reason to dope any samples because in the
>delousing facilities the cyanide compound is so concentrated that it is
>clearly visible. To dope samples which came from the “gas chambers” would
>undermine his own cause.

He could easily have added cyanides to the delousing samples or
collected sample from the gas chambers that were not really from the gas
chambers. You are quite wrong in your claim about sample collection.
Collecting blue-stained samples form the delousing chambers and
non-stained samples from the gas chambers makes the information content
of your measurements nil. You are telling me something I know from
looking. The only objective comparison is to avoid the blue-staining
either in sample collection or chemically.

[snip]

>> Your reasoning is akin to saying that because astronomers don’t waste
>> their time refuting the arguments of the flat-earthers that the flat
>> earth hypothesis must be correct. You cannot defend Rudolf’s Report
>> against my refutations; so you have engaged in the very tactic that you
>> accuse others of: attacking the people rather than the argument.
>> >
>> >
>No – what I am saying is that Rudolf has written a scientific report, which
>has been attacked by several people, among them Prof. Dr. G. Wellers, w.
>Wagner, Dr. J. Bailer, Prof. Dr. G. Jagschitz, Dr. B. Clair. Read the Rudolf
>report, Mr. Green and see for yourself how easily Rudolf refutes these people,
>mostly by referring their ignorance to the relevant technical literature. Let
>me give you a more accurate analogy. Like Galileo, Rudolf is being prosecuted
>for expressing the truth – where arguments fail, repressive legislation,
>coercion and terrorization are deemed necessary to suppress facts which are
>unpalatable for the establishment.

Rudolf is a failure and a distortionist. His arguments fall flat on
their face and he refutes them himself.
>
>
>
>> Not feigning ignorance, admitting ignorance. If you can demonstrate the
>> necessity of Prussian Blue formation under the conditions of the AB
>> chambers be the first. Do so now.
>>
>
>In this regard the only items you seem to have difficulty with is
>1) the oxidation reduction process.
>To repeat myself, iron III can be reduced and will be reduced by CN to iron
>II. J. Bailer was the first to raise this objection, ie. the argument that
>the iron III could not be reduced to iron II. Rudolf in his report disproves
>this by referring Mr. Bailer to the necessary technical literature. Read the
>report Mr. Green and then get the text to convince yourself.

Rudolf’s references are to himself “E. Gauss.” I agree that iron II can
be reduced but water is the likely agent as I have shown by references
to the real literature.

Nevertheless, that is not my point. Since you do not know what reduction
is that must not be clear to you.

>2) The kinetics in the “gas chambers”.
>Rudolf quotes the necessary technical literature to show that PB will form
>quite quickly under the conditions found in the gas chambers.

No he does not. Be the first to demonstrate such a necessity right
here.
>
>Both of the above processes are enhanced and intensified by humid, wet
>conditions, which were exactly the conditions found in the cellars at
>Birkenau. Don’t tell me that the addition of human beings in the chambers
>made the difference, because by your own admission the chamber in Majdanek DID
>produce Prussian Blue.

Yes, but Majdanek was not the same. The conditions are different. In
particular there may have been delousing in the chamber and there could
be sources of reduced iron. You do know what reduced iron is don’t
you?

[snip of more endless repetition]

>> You are a Nazi-apologist, Vlad. Protestations to the contrary convince
>> no one, Nazi-boy.
>
>I am supporting the facts. You, on the other hand, are a Jewish-boy, who
>suffers from a severe case of anti-German bigotry.

I have nothing but respect for Germans. The German people overwhelmingly
see you Nazis for what you are and reject you. I have no respect for Nazi
opponents of free speech who find it necessary to lie about the claims
of those they disagree with. Such as you, Nazi-boy.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon May 25 05:57:26 EDT 1998
Article: 177261 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.true-crime,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.eecs.umich.edu!
newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!newsfeed.nyu.edu!btnet-peer!btnet!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!uunet!in4.uu.net!
world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Refutation of the Legend
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 18:57:58 GMT
Lines: 283
Xref: trends.ca alt.true-crime:94204 alt.revisionism:177261

Hello all,

[repetitive and unsupported speculation from Natalia snipped]

>You are contradicting your own assertions in earlier postings, where you have
>admitted that the Prussian Blue found in the delousing chambers was most
>likely due to HCN applications. Since painting has been ruled out, the
>cyanide in the Prussian Blue could ONLY have been due to HCN application.

Natalia’s reasoning here is so specious that it needs no comment from
me.

> Not furthermore that the cowardly free speech opponent fears to post to
> alt.revisionism and that “she” has not apologized for deliberately lying
> about what I claim under “her” other pseudonym “Robert.”

>>Instead of endlessly boring the reader with your whining, you should deal with
>>the issues at hand.

The fact that Natalia is a proven liar _is_ the issue at hand.

>> “The laboratory analysis of the material collected was conducted -to
>> ensure full objectivity – by another group of laboratory workers.”

>The Polish report is everything BUT objective. The introduction of the report
>already makes this clear. They write “As early as the first year after the
>end of WW II, single publications began to appear in which the authors
>attempted to “whitewash” the Hitlerite regime.” This hardly reveals an
>unbiased frame of mind.

Notice how Natalia sticks to the issues and avoids ad hominem attacks.
As long as we are discussing the objectivity of writers need I remind
you that the Rudolf Report was introduced to defend Rudolf’s friend
Otto Remer who was the man who put down the attempted coup against
Hitler. If Rudolf is so objective, why did he write for _Junge
Freiheit_ before becoming an active denier?

>> Maybe if you repeat it enough times that will make it true Natalia.
>> Their controls and calibration curve are sufficient to prove the
>> significance of the results.

>Please, Mr. Green, explain to us all what relevance the calibration curve has.
>Does it justify the Poles using a ridiculous measurement procedure? Also,
>what difference do the control samples make if your measurement methodology is
>completely meaningless?

They were able to measure standards accurately, proving the validity of
their detection limits. Read the paper Natalia.

>Rudolf has demonstrated that these measurements are
>meaningless.

On the contrary, as already shown he has proven his own measurements
meaningless.

[snip]

> Show the kinetics, Vlad. Include the effects of CO2.
>

>Kinetics is not a big deal – according to Mr. Green, it is a measure of the
>rate the reaction takes place.

If it’s no big deal, write down the rate constant and the relevant
concentrations of CO2, HCN, Fe(III) and H2O, and derive a rate.

>As I have pointed out repeatedly, WATER, or
>the presence of humidity is by far the single most important factor which will
>intensify or speed up the rate that cyanides are able to form. The Poles seem
>to show, in their report, that CO2 impedes this process by dissolving in water
>and therefore making less water available for cyanide production.

Learn some chemistry Natalia, CO2 is an acid anhydride. It’s extremely
relevant when examining the references you’ve given.

[snip of claim without support that the homicidal chambers should have
had higher levels of cyanides anyway. Saying so does not make it so
Natalia]

>> He could easily have added cyanides to the delousing samples or
>> collected sample from the gas chambers that were not really from the gas
>> chambers. You are quite wrong in your claim about sample collection.
>> Collecting blue-stained samples form the delousing chambers and
>> non-stained samples from the gas chambers makes the information content
>> of your measurements nil. You are telling me something I know from
>> looking. The only objective comparison is to avoid the blue-staining
>> either in sample collection or chemically.
>

>Give it up Mr. Green – you are so confused that you are starting to contradict
>yourself within one sentence. “……or collected sample from the gas
>chambers that were not really from the gas chambers.”

My meaning is clear enough.

>Mr. Green, you have admitted in the past the blue staining in the delousing
>chambers is most likely due (and it is RIDICULOUS to assume it came from
>anywhere else) to the application of HCN. It took a lot of HCN to form those
>cyanides. Now, if we are going to compare the amount of HCN which was used in
>this facility to the amount of HCN used in the “gas chambers”, you cannot
>simply ignore all the HCN in the delousing chambers which went into making
>Prussian Blue.

On the contrary, it is necessary to do so, if a measurement is to have
any meaning whatsoever. I remind you that most cyanides that are not
ligands to iron or similar metals are water soluble and will weather
away. If we wish to compare water soluble cyanides- and we must if we
wish to provide any information not available by merely looking- we must
discriminate against the iron blues. The fact that cyanides were
present in the homicidal chambers is enough to invalidate the claims of
Leuchter and Rudolf. The fact that Rudolf demonstrated that it is
possible to expose a brick to HCN without detecting cyanides is also
sufficient to invalidate Leuchter and Rudolf. Taken together, they
refute Leuchter and Rudolf twice.

> >Rudolf is a failure and a distortionist. His arguments fall flat on
> >their face and he refutes them himself.

>This has yet to be your most ridiculous assertion to date. Rudolf’s report
>has you so flustered that you contradict yourself and vacillate between
>exterminationalist and revisionist points of view.

Liar. My claims have been quite consistent. It’s your inability to read
and comprehend what I wrote that is the problem.

[snip]

>> Rudolf’s references are to himself “E. Gauss.” I agree that iron II can
>> be reduced but water is the likely agent as I have shown by references
>> to the real literature.

>The references are the following:
>M.A. Alich, D.T. Howarth, M.F. Johnson, J. Inorg. Nucl.Chem. 1967, 29,S.
>1637-1642

This paper is quite interesting. The authors investigate the reduction
of [Fe(CN)6]3- by aqueous and ethanolic solutions of CN-. They suggest
that CN- is indeed the reducing agent, but their inability to observe
CNO- must suggest that this suggestion is inconclusive. More
importantly, they show that Prussian Blue does not form in water unless
there is and excess of CN- ions compared to Fe(III) or very basic
conditions.

I quote from p. 1640:

“The dilution of the absolute stock solutions of Fe(III) and Fe(CN)6^3-
with absolute ethanol gave the red complex which persisted for about 1
hour, as compared to the disappearance of the red complex in the aqueous
media at a dilution of 3.3 * 10^-4 M. The red complex in ethanol
darkened within the hour and reduction to Prussian Blue was complete in
2 days (Fig. 3).”

Now comes the important part:

“It is to be noted that the complex in aqueous solution, under the same
conditions, decomposes immediately, the spectrum reverting to that of
the Fe(CN)6^3- ion. Furthermore, addition of as little as 13% water (by
volume) caused the red complex to decompose, giving a spectrum of the
Fe(CN)6^3- ion.”

In other words, Prussian blue only forms with very high concentrations
of CN-. 3*10^-4 moles/L is quite high. I doubt whether given the
Henry’s Law constant of HCN and the concentrations used in the homicidal
chambers that such concentrations would have been reached. Perhaps, if
the Degesch instructions for delousing were followed in the delousing
chambers, such concentrations would have been achieved.

Furthermore, these researchers found a strong pH dependence to the
reaction. CO2 is an acid anhydride and there would have been a lot of
it in the homicidal chambers. Even atmospheric concentrations of CO2
(at 330 ppm) are sufficient to cause pure rain water to have a pH of
5.6. Low pH inhibits the reaction.

>The relevant pages cited here show that cyanide is a reducing agent and that
>it will react with the unreduced iron cyanide complex to form Prussian Blue.
>The following text demonstrates that the process in fact happens quite
>quickly, if the environment is alkaline (alkalisch):

>J.C. Bailar, Comprehensive Inorganic Chemistry, Vol 3, Pergamon Press, Oxford
>1973 S. 104.

My library did not have this one; perhaps, you’d care to quote the
relevant passages. Specifically, what concentration of CN- relative
to Fe(CN)6^3- was used and what was the pH?

>There are more texts I could refer you to, but I do not want to bore the
>reader.

Please do provide the references; you may help me write another
article on the topic yet.

>Notice now, Mr. Green, that the names listed above are not “E.
>Gauss”.

Are you denying that Rudolf references “E. Gauss?”

>> Yes, but Majdanek was not the same. The conditions are different. In
>> particular there may have been delousing in the chamber and there could
>> be sources of reduced iron. You do know what reduced iron is don’t
>> you?

>Mr. Green, you are heading in the right direction. (ie. the direction of
>Holocaust “denial”). The “Deniers” have been saying all along that the
>Majdanek chamber was a delousing chamber. The above will no doubt prompt you
>to demand more apologies, but I can tell you, Ms Green, none will be
>forthcoming.

Last time your accusation was based upon dishonesty: you intentionally
misquoted me. This time it’s merely based on your inability to
comprehend basic logic and is therefore excusable.

Pressac claims that the Majdanek chamber was used for delousing because
of the staining. He may be right and he may be wrong, but as he
acknowledges such use is not mutually exclusive with the possibility that
the chamber was used for murder.

>> I have nothing but respect for Germans. The German people overwhelmingly
>> see you Nazis for what you are and reject you. I have no respect for Nazi
>> opponents of free speech who find it necessary to lie about the claims
>> of those they disagree with. Such as you, Nazi-boy.

>I don’t believe it. Remember you are claiming that the German government
>deliberately murdered 6 million Jews. This government, may I remind you,
>received overwhelming support from the German people until the very end. The
>only logical way to respect the German people would be to become a Holocaust
>Denier – admittedly sometimes you display tendencies in this direction.
>No doubt with all the respect you have for the German people you must be
>completely opposed to the idea that Germany ought to pay compensation to the
>Jews – after all these respectable people have done nothing wrong – it is only
>those wicked Nazis.

Scratch the surface of a denier and find a Nazi. Is anyone surprised?
Luckily the vast majority of Germans have better sense than you and your
Nazi heroes, Natalia. They overwhelmingly reject Nazism and Holocaust
denial. The German people detest your Hitler who ruined Germany. If
you have contempt for modern Germans, who is the bigot, Nazi-boy?

Markiewicz, Gubala, and Labedz of the Institute of Forensic Research,
Crakow, demonstrated that HCN was present in the homicidal gas chambers at
levels above background.

I quote from their paper available at:

https://nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/polish/institute-for-forensic-research/

The results of analyses are presented in Tables I-IV. They
unequivocally show that the cyanide compounds occur in all the
facilities that, according to the source data, were in contact with
them. On the other hand, they do not occur in dwelling accomodations,
which was shown by means of control samples.

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon May 25 05:57:26 EDT 1998
Article: 177264 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.true-crime,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.eecs.umich.edu!enews.sgi.com!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!ais.net!uunet!in5.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Exposing Nizkorite Flatulence
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 20:03:43 GMT
Lines: 28
Xref: trends.ca alt.true-crime:94216 alt.revisionism:177264

In article <[email protected]>,
wrote:

[snip]

>> >In addition to this cowardly behavior “Natalia” still has not apologized
>> >for intentionally misquoting me under the guise of “Robert.”
>>
>
>Mr. Green, you are indeed a persistent whiner; tell me, are you a Jewish boy
>or a Jewish girl?

Scratch the surface of a denier and find an antisemite. Anyone
surprised?

BTW- “Natalia’s” history of lying on these newsgroups is certainly
relevant.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Tue May 26 20:50:33 EDT 1998
Article: 178057 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!rill.news.pipex.net!
pipex!uunet!in4.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: ANDREW ALLEN’s CIA MOSSAD TIES OUTLINED
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 03:30:07 GMT
Lines: 28
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:178057

In article ,
Mark Van Alstine wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:
>
>> ALLEN’s CIA, MOSSAD TIES OUTLINED
>> =================================
>
>[snip]
>
>ROTFLMAO!

Watching a bunch of Nazis fight over Edison’s money does have its
amusing moment.

14 words:

Rolling on the floor laughing my ass off at these nazi lunatic power
rangers.

Best,

Rich Green

—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]

From [email protected] Fri May 29 11:56:32 EDT 1998
Article: 178537 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!
newspeer.monmouth.com!btnet-peer!
btnet!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!uunet!in5.uu.net!
world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: More defenders of Stalin
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 02:50:52 GMT
Lines: 20
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:178537

In article <[email protected]>, wrote:

>Holocaust Uniqueness = Rehabilitating Stalin and Dr. Green is a defender of
>one of Stalin’s worst crimes.

Liar. Both Dr. Green and his mother, Professor Green regard Stalin as a
mass murderer.

It’s no wonder you are regarded as a third rate hack; you don’t know how
to read English.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Fri May 29 11:56:32 EDT 1998
Article: 178546 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
ais.net!uunet!in4.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: More defenders of Stalin
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 03:02:24 GMT
Lines: 44
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:178546

In article <[email protected]>, wrote:
>I take Mr. Green’s use of vulgarity and threats to be an admission of victory
>on my part. It is obvious he has no arguments capable of refuting the fact
>that the Ukrainian famine was deliberately intended and created by the Stalin
>regime. Nor does he have any to prove that the famine was deliberately
>targeted at Ukrainians. Mr. Green’s lack of understanding of the fact that the
>Ukrainian famine was created over a year after collectivization and
>dekulakization as oppossed to the Kazakh tragedy is typical of defender of
>Stalinist crimes. To state that the Ukrainian famine was unintentional is the
>moral equivalent of saying that the Shoah was unintentional.

The vulgarity came because you said something nasty about my mother.
Functionalist, interpretations of the Shoah are not the same thing as
Holocaust denial. You accused my mother of being equivalent to a
holocaust denier. Either you are ignorant about the content of the
arguments of Holocaust denial or you are merely a liar.

>I hope you do try to sue me Mr. Green. It will expose Dr. Green and other
>Stalinist revisionist before the world and give publicity to the very real but
>supressed (in this country) crimes committed by Stalin.

Professor Green praises those who brought the crimes of Stalin to
light and agrees that the truth was suppressed. Do a little reading
before you go accusing people of being the same as Holocaust deniers.

I never said that *I* would sue especially, if the best you can do is
post polemics to an obscure newsgroup devoted to liars and kooks.

I suggested that you contact a lawyer before publishing your libel
elsewhere.

>I win.

I guess that’s as close as you get to peer-review these days, eh?

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon Jun 1 10:45:53 EDT 1998
Article: 179056 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.ukrainian
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!fu-berlin.de!newshub.northeast.verio.net!news.pn.com!
nntp.pn.com!uunet!in4.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: More defenders of Stalin
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 03:44:06 GMT
Lines: 354
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:179056 soc.culture.ukrainian:36053

In article <[email protected]>,
Mike Curtis wrote:

[snip]

>True then why don’t you email or fax me a copy. But then Dr. Green is
>faxing me a copy.

Did so this evening,

>
>> She goes beyond saying that the Holocaust is unique
>>because the Nazis tried to kill all Jews for being Jews to arguing that there
>>was never any other state sponsored mass killing of other ethnic group.
>
>This is a deceptive statement on your part. The piece you seem to be
>most concerned with doesn’t sound like a state sponsored mass killing
>of an ethnic group.

Here is the content of what Mr. Pohl is referring to:

The meaning of genocide and the uniqueness of the Holocaust are revealed
in a few characteristics. The Holocaust was aimed at the extermination
of an entire people because they were that people. The extermination
was not a means to an end; it was an end in itself. It was not an act
of demonstrative violence in which some were killed in order to terrify
the other members of the people into submission. It was not intended
to affect behaviour. It was not a pogrom or the result of uncontrolled
mass violence. It was, rather, an intentional, systematic effort to
exterminate an entire people utilizing modern technology to ensure
efficiency.

>
>> She
>>starts by claiming that the Ukrainian famine is not an example of state
>>sponsored ethnic murder. She portrays the famine as a completely unintentional
>>side effect of Soviet industrialization. Thus she removes all criminal
>>responsibility for the famine from the Stalin regime.

This is a lie:

In this chapter I will argue that the deaths of millions of Ukrainians
and other Soviet peoples in the famine of 1932-1933 are *directly
attributable* [emphasis mine: RJG] to Stalin’s attempt to totally
reconstruct society through rapid industrialization, an effort in which
he was determined that nothing would stand in his way. In the process,
he instituted a totalitarian system permeated by terror.

>
>What you quoted (an have not included in this post) doesn’t read that
>way, Mr. Pohl.
>
>> I take it from Mr.
>>Curtis’s last post that he does believe there is criminal responsibility for
>>the actions that led to the famine.
>
>Of course. I also say what else about it Mr. Pohl? Why don’t you leave
>my exact words in the post so we both can look at them?

>> Am I correct in this assumption?
>
>I think I made it pretty clear how I stood. Too bad you cut my words
>from your response. Sort of the type of thing you do with Ms. Green’s
>and Ms. Lipstadt’s below.
>
>> If this
>>is the case we agree. The Stalin regime sought to crush Ukraine and part of
>>this included starving them into submission.

In other words, there was a goal to crush the Ukraine into submission.
This fact is evidence that my mother’s distinction is valid.
The Holocaust was “not an act of demonstrative violence in which some
were killed in order to terrify the other members of the people into
submission. It was not intended to affect behavior.”
>
>And they submitted and it was over after tragic events brought them to
>their knees. If it was Hitler the rest would have been shipped to the
>gas chambers just in case such a thing raised its head again. This
>didn’t happen. But Himmler’s words in various speeches mentions the
>chance of revenge taken by the survivors. They all had to be taken
>out. This makes the holocuast different from this other history. The
>differences in various histories is what makes them powerful in their
>lessons.

The evidence for a difference is that there is still a Ukraine. The
only reason that there are Jews living in Europe is that Germany lost
the war.
>
>> This event has a similar place in
>>the Ukrainian psyche to the Shoah in the Jewish psyche or the 1915 Genocide
>>to the Armenian psyche.
>
>And so it should. No one here is saying that it should not.

And my mother agrees that it is:

In the case of the Ukraine, forced collectivization was seen as a war by
the non-Ukrainian urban population against Ukrainian villagers. As
peasants and as Ukrainians they resisted collectivization by whatever
means they could. Resistance was met by increased force. There was a
disparate impact on Ukrainians- not because they were Ukrainians but
because they were peasants.

>
>> The title of this newsgroup is alt.revisionism not
>>soc.culture.jewish.holocaust. If you wish to only to discuss revisionism
>>pertaining to the Shoah I suggest you post there.
>
>I think you are ignorant of the founding of this newsgroup. So before
>you make these bald assertions I strongly suggest you learn a little
>bit about the group you are posting in and also consider the kind of
>history discussed in that group. This group, Mr. Pohl, was founded to
>allow the holocaust “revisionists” a place to post rather than
>invading other newgroups with their insulting propaganda. So don’t be
>fooled by the revisionism in the title. It has a whole different
>meaning to the majority who frequent here and I’ve been posting in
>this group for at least 3 years(?). I now suggest you keep your
>posting suggestions to yourself until you learn a little more history
>concerning this newsgroup. Is that understandable, Mr. Pohl?

One ought to note also that this newsgroup is not a forum for legitimate
discussion of real revisionist views (Mayer, Goldhagen etc.). It is a
group for people who argue that Zyklon B cannot be used effectively for
murder, that the Nazis did not kill 5-6 million Jews and that even if
they did the Jews deserved it.

>
>> Revisionism (in the
>>sense of denial) regarding Stalin’s crimes and Armenian genocide is every bit
>>as real as neo-Nazi revisionism.
>
>The latter is what takes place in this group. No one here has denied
>the Armenian Genocide or the famine. What is denied here is the Nazi
>holocaust. Read the group a bit before you post, Mr. Pohl.
>
>> A large amount of this revisionism comes from
>>Jewish Holocaust scholars seeking to show that the Holocaust is unique. Other

My mother is not a “Jewish Holocaust scholar” she is a scholar in the
field of Soviet, post-Soviet, and East European politics. She does not
deny the crimes of Stalin; she does not deny that they were crimes. She
argues that they were crimes of a different nature from those of the
Nazis. Both regimes engaged in Totalitarian Terror. The Nazis sought
to eliminate a people from the face of the earth, not to terrorize them
into submission. They both created horrors beyond the imagination.
They both killed millions. Stalin killed more.
>
>Oh, crap on that. You haven’t proven this point with anything but your
>own personal opinions based on an article you barely quote. My point,
>and you ignored it, Mr. Pohl, is that histories of various events ARE
>DIFFERENT in their meanings, goals and concepts. That is acceptable on
>various levels but it is not acceptable to the detailed discussions
>going on in this newgroup.
>
>>than Israel Charney there has been no protest about this from other Holocaust
>>scholars.
>> Nobody claims that Stalin’s goal was to kill all Ukrainians, just enough to
>>crush all potential opposition to Moscow.

Exactly what my mother claims! Mr. Pohl agrees with her main point.
Unless, perhaps, he means to claim that the Nazis did not intend to kill
all the Jews.
>
>You can’t have it both ways, Mr. Pohl. It either was EXACTLY like the
>holocaust or it wasn’t? Do you know what the holocuast was vs. the
>Holocuast? Have you any clue?

Touche Mike! You have just demolished Mr. Pohl’s entire thesis here!
>
>> It was largely successful. Ukrainian
>>nationalist movements after 1933 all originated in the Western regions of the
>>country which was under Polish rule in the 1930s.
>
>What happens next is curious. Pohl will now switch his arguments to
>another tragidy since the Famine doesn’t quite meet his end goal of
>trivializing the holocuast with other historical tragidies. What is so
>sad about this method is that it takes a lot of power away from the
>history he is concerned with. It would be stronger standing on its own
>and on its own merits. But Pohl doesn’t want that.
>
>> Of course if killing all
>>members of a single ethnic group by a state for racist reasons is the corner
>>stone of the uniqueness argument it also fails.
>
>So you’ll change the argument to a different history. Which is it you
>want to discuss, Mr. Pohl? Either the Armenian history or the Famine.
>Which is to be Mr. Pohl. Try to stick with one historical event at a
>time.

Touche! I take it that Mr. Pohl will now be issuing an apology since it
turns out that he agrees with my mother after all.

>
>> The Turkish Genocide of
>>Armenians,

Melson’s arguments are strong here.

>
>So we’ve left the Soviets, folks, for the actions of anothr country.
>
>> Nazi Genocide of Gypsies (Porrajamos),
>
>This is a part of the holocaust, Mr. Pohl. They are a part of the 12
>million innocents murdered by Hitler’s minions.

Right, but it was a separate effort to kill a people because they were
that people. It seems to fit my mother’s definition above.

Of course, it is not her expertise and it is not what she is writing
about. Mr. Pohl may choose to requote “the nature of the uniqueness”
quote out of context again, but BBG is addressing a narrow question only
if you bother to read the article carefully.
>
>> the Khmer Rouge slaugher of
>>ethnic minorities such as the Cham, Chinese, Lao, Thai, and Vietnamese all of
>>which sufferred proportionately much more than native Khmers (The Vietnamese
>>population of Cambodia was completely eliminated by Pol Pot), and the Tutsi
>>genocide of the Hutu all equally qualify on the same level as the Shoah.
>
>I don’t see it, Pohl. There are vast differences in these events. But
>that’s not waht you want to learn is it, Mr. Pohl. You want to obscure
>each event and blur its important differences. There are major
>differences. The Khmer Rouge slaughter of of people was performed by
>the young against the old and as you stated they involved many and not
>just one particular group. They were localized events.
>
>> There
>>are no monthly television specials on these people, however. “Third World
>>People of Color” such as the Gypsies, Chams, and Hutus do not have the
>>incredible political influence that the Jewish lobby has in the US. With only
>
>The Jewish Lobby doesn’t control how I view or discuss history. This
>also has nothing to do with the hsitory I thought you wanted to
>discuss.

He’s acknowledged losing. He himself made exactly the distinction that
my mother pointed out in the issue at hand. He is now struggling to
maintain a semblance of credibility.
>
>>2% of the population Jews have far more influence than Blacks who make up 15%
>>of the US population. By concentrating on the Shoah to the total exclusion of
>>other attrocities you trivilize and justify these crimes. “Never Again” rings
>>real hollow in Rwanda.
>
>Let me make something clear to you. Each history is important. It is a
>fact that within this newgroup no one denies the events you want
>everyone to deny. We are not all Jewish. I dare say that the majority
>of us are not Jewish. So you Jewish lobby nonsense falls flat as far
>as this group is concerned.
>
>[snip]
>
>>While the Stalin regime did not seek to kill every last one of them
>
>But the Nazis did seek to kill every last Jew. It was their goal. So
>we have an agreed difference in the history that might go to make the
>Nazi holocuast unique.
>
>>on the basis of ethnicity, they did deport every last one of them on the basis
>>of ethnicity. The places they deported them had very high mortality rates.
>
>Except for those who cooperated. Why do you cut most of my posting.
>You aren’t very honest are you?
>
>[snip]
>
>>worse people like Deborah Lipstadt brazenly assert, “In contrast no citizen of
>>the Soviet Union assumed that deportation and death were inevitable
>>consequences of his or her ethnic origins.” *Denying the Holocaust* (Free
>>Press, 1993), p. 212.
>
>Let’s quote the whole thing shall we:
>
>”The historians’ attempt to create such immoral equivalences ignored
>the dramatic differences between these events and the Holocaust. The
>brutal Armenian tragedy, which the perpetrators still refuse to
>acknowledge adequately, was conducted within the context of a ruthless
>Turkish policy of expulsion and resettlement. It was terrible and
>caused horrendous suffering but it was not part of total annihilation
>of an entire people. The Khmer Rouge’s massacre of a million and a
>half of their fellow Cambodians, to which the Western world turned a
>blind eye, was carried out, as Richard Evans observes, as a means od
>subduing and eliminating those whom Pol Pot imagined had collaborated
>with Americans during the Previous hostilities. . . . What they did
>was quite different from the Nazis’ annihilation of thebJews, which
>was ‘a gratuitous act carried out by a prosperous, advanced,
>industrial nation at the height of its power.’
>
>These historians also seem intent on obscuring the crucial contrasts
>between Stalinism and Nazism. Whereas Stalin’s terror was arbitrary,
>Hitler’s was targeted at a particualr group. As the German historian
>Eberhard Jaeackel observed in an attack on Nolte and his compatriots,
>never before in history was a particualr human group–its men, women,
>children, old, young, healthy, and infirm–singled out to be killed as
>rapidly as possible using ‘every possible meansof state power’ to do
>so. The fate of every Jew who came under German rule was essentially
>sealed. In contrast, no citizen of the Soviet Union assumed that
>deportation and death were inevitable cosequences of his or her ethnic
>origins. People in the USSR did not know who might be next on Stalin’s
>list. This uncertaintly terrorized them. By contrast, during thje Nazi
>assault on the Jews ‘every single one of millions of targetted Jews
>was to be murdered. Eradication was to be total’. . . . .

Note the preceding sentence. ‘every Jew’ in other words, it was an
inevitable consequence that every Jew would be deported and killed.
No citizen of the SU “assumed…” does not mean that no citizen was
deported and killed because of ethnic origin. Mr. Pohl, in his
dishonest quoting, attempted to obscure that fact.
>
>> My whole remaining family in Ukraine was murdered by
>>Stalin for the crime of being German speaking Soviet citizens in the Fall of
>>1941, before Auschwitz existed.
>
>This seems to be ANOTHER issue.
>
>> But, neither Russia or Israel (Kaganovich was
>>Jewish and if they can get reparations for Jewish victims they can pay
>>reparations for Jewish crimes)

Does Mr. Pohl mean to say that the crimes of Stalinism were “Jewish
crimes?” Let’s be very clear here, Mr. Pohl. Israel should pay
reparations because you can find an example of a Jewish Stalinist?

>>has ever offered any reparations. Why are Jews
>>so special? How come its okay to murder Ukrainischer Deutsche?
>
>Maybe it isn’t a matter of being special, Mr. Pohl. Maybe it is matter
>to understand post war history and the fall of the iron curtain. Maybe
>it has to do with the actions of the Soviet Union. Ever think of that?
>I suggest you try.

[sigs snipped]

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon Jun 1 10:45:53 EDT 1998
Article: 179193 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.nyu.edu!btnet-peer!btnet!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Gassing at Dachau
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 03:00:05 GMT
Lines: 32
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:179193

In article <[email protected]>,
Dieselzykl wrote:
>Well now, Mr. Mock,
>
>Could you possibly be just a little bit more specific or is that beneath you?
>”Auschwitz: 1270 to the present” is such a big book. Couldn’t you give us a
>page number or a quote or something?
>
>Better yet, point us to an actual report or forensic analysis by qualified
>experts–dont just smear Lueftl for telling the truth. Show he’s wrong by
>producing or at least identifying the expert report. Of course, you wont do
>that because you can’t.

Perhaps, Mr. Berg would like to comment of Lu”ftl’s claim that 6 million
people could not have been gassed at Auschwitz.

Doen’t it strike Mr. Berg as odd that Lu”ftl would refute something that
no one ever claimed. Doesn’t it strike Mr. Berg as a bit dishonest?

Doesn’t it strike Mr. Berg as dishonest that Lu”ftl used the
disinfection time for lice to claim that Zyklon does not evaporate fast
enough especially in light of the paper by Irmscher?

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon Jun 1 10:45:54 EDT 1998
Article: 179333 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.giganews.com!korova.insync.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Gassing at Dachau
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 22:45:21 GMT
Lines: 32
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:179333

In article <[email protected]>,
Dieselzykl wrote:
>Dear Mr. Green,
>
>Please give me more info about the “paper by Irmscher.” Source please?

You ought to know it by now as it is your pal Rudolf’s favorite source.
Hold your horses and the full text will be available.

>
>Does he or anyone else seriously dispute the evaporation rates given long
>before the war by DEGESCH, Peters and many other professional pest control
>specialists?

It agrees roughly with Peters and shows that there is absolutely no
reason why Zyklon B could not have been used as was documented.
>
>As to refuting things which no one ever claimed, Danny Keren does it all the
>time.

You are dodging the question. Is Luftl’s claim honest or was it written
to decieve. Answer the question, coward.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon Jun 1 10:45:54 EDT 1998
Article: 179372 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
18.24.4.11!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Why can’t the revisionists tell me where all the
revisionsists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites are?
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 18:49:08 GMT
Lines: 40
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:179372

In article <[email protected]>,
Daniel Swan wrote:
>Richard G. Philllips ([email protected]) wrote:
>
>> Where are the revisionists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
>
>Well, I don’t know much about revisionism itself, however, as a
>military historian, I definitely support it in principle. I
>don’t believe any area of history should be exempted from the
>arena of discussion and criticism.
>
>Of course, this comes down to the crux: Is Holocaust Revisionism
>necessarily bigotry? It definitely can be a tool of bigots, but
>is not always necessarily so.

Perhaps, you’d be willing to share with us who the bigots are and who
the nonbigots are.

Is Greg Raven a bigot?
Is Bradley Smith a bigot?
Is Bellinger a bigot?
Is Al Baron a bigot?
Is Tom Moran a bigot?
Is David Irving a bigot?
Is Carto a bigot?

Somehow I doubt that any “revisionist” will be willing to answer
these questions.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon Jun 1 10:45:55 EDT 1998
Article: 179448 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!
newshub.northeast.verio.net!
cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!denver-news-feed1.
bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!
coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: The Auschwitz Album – Ceacaa, Mattogno
and the ventillation of L-keller 1 (II)
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 02:22:23 GMT
Lines: 32
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:179448

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

>Does the fact that Cyanide gas rises confuse you?? Does that
>make it hard to understand why a ventilation system that pulls
>in air from the floor wouldn’t be effective in getting cyanide
>gas from a room? Guess what Leichenkeller 1 was equiped with?

Yes, it does confuse me. Please explain why nitrogen doesn’t rise?
Big Hint: gases are miscible, the density of an air parcel may cause it
to rise or fall (depending on the lapse rate), but temperature is the major
factor.

Perhaps Mr. Allen could answer a few simple questions?

What is the density of air with 12g/m^3 HCN?
What is the density of clean tropospheric air?

Is the difference significant?

Now go back to the books and learn a little about laminar vs. turbulent
flow.

Best,

Rich Green

From [email protected] Mon Jun 1 10:45:55 EDT 1998
Article: 179452 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
netnews.com!europa.clark.net!204.253.208.250!
korova.insync.net!uunet!in5.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Why can’t the revisionists tell me where all the
revisionsists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites are?
Message-ID:
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 02:32:35 GMT
Lines: 54
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:179452

In article <[email protected]>,
Anonymous wrote:
>[email protected] (Richard J Green) wrote:
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>Daniel Swan wrote:
>>>Richard G. Philllips ([email protected]) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Where are the revisionists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
>>>
>>>Well, I don’t know much about revisionism itself, however, as a
>>>military historian, I definitely support it in principle. I
>>>don’t believe any area of history should be exempted from the
>>>arena of discussion and criticism.
>>>
>>>Of course, this comes down to the crux: Is Holocaust Revisionism
>>>necessarily bigotry? It definitely can be a tool of bigots, but
>>>is not always necessarily so.
>>
>>Perhaps, you’d be willing to share with us who the bigots are and who
>>the nonbigots are.
>>
>>Is Greg Raven a bigot?
>>Is Bradley Smith a bigot?
>>Is Bellinger a bigot?
>>Is Al Baron a bigot?
>>Is Tom Moran a bigot?
>>Is David Irving a bigot?
>>Is Carto a bigot?
>>
>>Somehow I doubt that any “revisionist” will be willing to answer
>>these questions.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Rich Green
>>
>
> I don’t know the motives behind all of the people who refuse to
>believe the Holocaust stories, but if bigotry is refusing to believe
>stories that defy common sense and everyday experience, put me down as a
>bigot.

As I said no “nonbigoted revisionist” will have the courage to answer
these questions directly.

Best,

Rich Green

The Aktion Reinhard Death Camps

Auschwitz Birkenau

Bergen-Belsen

Buchenwald

Chelmno

Dachau

Maidanek (Majdanek)

Mauthausen

Nordhausen

Belzec

Treblinka

Mittelbau Dora

Gusen

Westerbork

Matthias Giwer

John Hron

Ken McVay

Steve Thomas

Fairview Technologies

Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Muslim Brotherhood: Islamic Extremists and the…

The Heritage Front

The Anti-Defamation League

Green Richard 1998-2

Latest article

Who’s On First: The Fairview Server

Fairview Technologies: BC Response

Fairview Technologies

The History of Lies

Materials