Negationist Team 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Negationist Team 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »

Greetings to the Veritas Team and to all those interested in history, the Holocaust, and the truth!
Part I
The Self-Confessed Liar, Dr. Rudolf Vrba

Rudolf Vrba's perjury during the 1985 Zündel Trial in Toronto--the first trial--when he was under oath and had told the Court about the homicidal gassing chambers, even drawing a rather careful sketch of them and detailing the process for the systematic gassing of Jews at Birkenau's Krema II, is such a glaring piece of self-condemnation that only the most gullible of "True Believers" in the homicidal gas-chambers (HGCs) would take him seriously.

This same Vrba insisted to the Court that he was a meticulous, even fanatical, writer when it came to facts, with this characteristic being upheld by his co-writer, Alan Bestic, but yet, when Zündel's attorney led the cross examination of Vrba, Vrba finally admitted to having engaged in "licentia poetarum" (poetic license). This to me is better translated as "a Jewish license to lie about the German camp."

There is simply no other reasonable way to characterize Vrba's work than that of fraudulence. Add to this that countless Jewish and "Goy" fanatics have parroted his fraud, and that the US Holocaust Memorial Museum even has a model of the Vrba fraud as a key part of its "evidence" for HGCs, and we see that perjurious fraud are certainly NOT a hindrance to gullible and naïve believers in the Hoax of the Twentieth Century.

That several thousands of Jews died at Auschwitz-Birkenau and Monowitz and related sub-camps "due to all sorts of causes"--as Princeton Professor Dr. Arno Mayer (an atheistic Jew) put it, was a tragedy for those who died, but one may not be allowed to pretend that Vrba provided any sort of reliable evidence on behalf of HGCs that a serious analyst in the year 2004 may take seriously.

The 1985 Vrba deposition can be found here:
Certainly, the VT does not want to create an aura of deliberate embracement of fraudulent testimony in seeking to make its case on behalf of the agreed to debate statement.

As Captain of the NT, I urge the VT to retract any reliance on Vrba and even make a statement that confesses his perjury as a fact to be found in the authentic Court transcripts of 1985!
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Re: NEGATIONIST TEAM 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »

Part II
The Eyewitnesses

The Jewish author Josef G. Ginsburg:

These [German] war crime trials will not be a blessing for the German people. The hanging of those tried and sentenced to death by the International Military Tribunal should have made an end to this sad chapter. The victors were shortsighted and very poorly advised when they subjected the Bundesrepublik to this cruel spectacle, because the continuation of these so called war crime trials was dictated to the Bundesrepublik in the “General Treaty” with Germany. Germans were to sit in judgement against Germans in this vile form. This is no search for justice but a proven anti-German policy.
The Veritas Team has pinned all its hopes for the Homicidal Gas-Chambers (HGCs) of Auschwitz-Birkenau upon eyewitness testimony. What should we make of this?

Very little!

According to Manfred Köhler,
The Value of Testimony and Confessions Concerning the Holocaust

In academia as well as in the justice system of a state under the rule of law, there is a hierarchy of evidence reflecting the evidential value. In this hierarchy, material and documentary evidence is always superior to eyewitness testimony.[4] Thus, academia as well as the justice system regard eyewitness testimony as the least reliable form of evidence, since human memory is imperfect and easily manipulated.[5] According to Rolf Bender, a German expert on the evaluation of evidence, its unreliable nature renders eyewitness testimony merely circumstantial evidence, in other words, not direct evidence.[6]

What standards must be met for eyewitness testimony to be usable in court? [7]

1. The witness must be credible.

While making no claims to completeness, the following lists a few criteria for determining credibility:

a. Emotional involvement. If witnesses are emotionally too involved in the cases under investigation, this may distort the testimony in one direction or the other, without this necessarily being a conscious process.

b. Veracity. If it turns out that a witness is not overly concerned about truthfulness, this casts doubts upon his further credibility.

c. Testimony under coercion. The frankness of testimony may be limited if a witness is subjected to direct or indirect pressure that makes him deem it advisable to configure his testimony accordingly.

d. Third-party influence. A person’s memory is easy to manipulate. Events reported by acquaintances or in the media can easily become assimilated as ‘personal experience’. Thus, if a witness has been exposed intensively to one-sided accounts of the trial substance prior to testifying, this can very well affect his testimony to reflect these impressions.

e. Temporal distance from the events to be attested to. It is generally known that the reliability of eyewitness testimony diminishes greatly after only a few days, and after several months has been so severely influenced and altered by the replacement of forgotten details with subsequent impressions that it retains hardly any value as evidence.[8]

2. Testimony must be plausible.

a. Internal consistency. Testimony must be free of contradictions and in accordance with the rules of logic.

b. Correctness of historical context. Testimony must fit into the historical context established conclusively by higher forms of evidence (documents, material evidence).

c. Technical and scientific reality. Testimony must report such matters as can be reconciled with the laws of nature and with what was technically possible at the time in question.

[4] Cf. E. Schneider, Beweis und Beweiswürdigung, 4th ed., F. Vahlen, Munich 1987, pp. 188 and 304; additional forms of evidence are "Augenscheinnahme" [visual assessment of evidence by the Court], and "Parteieinvernahme" [the questioning of disputing parties, i.e., prosecution and defense], a particularly unreliable form of testimony.

[5] E.g., cf. §373, German Code of Civil Procedure.

[6] R. Bender, S. Röder, A. Nack, Tatsachenfeststellung vor Gericht, 2 vols., Beck, Munich 1981, vol 1, p. 173.

[7] Cf. also the detailed accounts of E. Schneider, op. cit. (note 4), p. 200-229, and R. Bender, S. Röder, A. Nack, op. cit. (note 6), v. 1 part 1.

[8] Cf. esp. R. Bender, S. Röder, A. Nack, ibid., pp. 45ff.
The Veritas Team instructs us:
Eight former members of the SS admitted to having seen the Birkenau gas chambers in operation with their own eyes: Richard Böck, Gerhard Hess, Karl Hölblinger, Dr. Johann Kremer, Dr. Konrad Morgen, Henry Storch, Franz Hofmann and Dr. Gerhard Wiebeck, seven of then as witnesses, Hofmann as defendant. The Birkenau bunkers were often mentioned in the course of the Frankfurt Trial, especially by former inmates Franciszek Gulba, Henryk Porebski, Milton Buki, Dov Paisikovic.
This is simply not true!

Facsimiles of the protocol can be viewed here:


Confessions from former SS-men during the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt, Germany.

Source: Hermann Langbein, (R. Mulka). Der Auschwitz-Prozeß. Frankfurt am Main: 1965.

SS-Unterscharführer Richard Böck

VT's star witness Böck testified as follows:

"One day during the Winter of 1942/1943 Hölblinger asked me whether I would like to accompany him to a gassing action. […] A transport train had arrived. All passengers were loaded up [on a truck] and driven to a former farm house. The door was closed after everybody was inside the building – there must have been 1000 people. Then an SS-man came – I believe that he was a Rottenführer – to our ambulance and picked up a gas tin. With this he went to a ladder. I notice that he wore a gas mask while climbing the ladder. He poured the contents of the tin into a hatch. After the lid was closed a horrible screaming started inside the room. This lasted 8 to 10 minutes, and then everything was quiet. Shortly after the door was opened by inmates and a blueish cloud floated over the corpses. I was surprised that the inmate Kommando which was assigned to remove the dead bodies, entered the room without gas masks, although there was this blue haze, of which I assumed that it was gas."

Since hydrogen cyanide gas is colorless, and the inmate commando cannot have been immune against the same poison gas that killed the victims within a few minutes just a few moments earlier, it is obvious that Böck cannot have seen what he claims to have seen.

Said Böck:
"In any case, during the entire time of my presence in Auschwitz I could observe that inmate corpses were cremated in the old crematorium. This decreased somewhat only toward the end of 1944. I could see every day how the flames shot two meters high out of the chimney. It also smelled intensively like burned flesh."

The old crematorium in the main camp was taken out of operation after the new crematoria in Birkenau went into operation in spring 1943. In early 1944, the old crematorium was converted into an air raid shelter. Thus, Böck cannot possibly have witnessed cremations at the main camp until the end of 1944.

For technical reasons, no flames can come shooting out of a crematorium chimney. Either Böck lied, hallucinated, or he talked himself into believing things he had heard from elsewhere.

Source: Staatsanwaltschaft beim LG Frankfurt (Main), Strafsache beim Schwurgericht Frankfurt (Main) gegen Baer und Andere wegen Mordes, ref. 4 Js 444/59; vol. 3, pp. 325-494, vol. 29, pp. 6677-6903. Lanbein ommitted this in his Auschwitz book.

SS-Rottenführer Karl Hölblinger

This SS-man was driver of an ambulance carand claimed to have witnessed the gassing in a bunker. He observed a medic who climbed up a ladder and emptied a can of Zyklon B into the chamber.

Q: How long did the gassing last?

A: About one minute. After the gas was poured in a horrible scream was heard. One minute later everything was quiet. The SDG brought the gas in tins.

SS-Hauptscharführer Gerhard Hess

He observed dead "gassed" bodies in the morgue of Krema I. How did he know that these bodies were gassed? Said Hess: "This was in Auschwitz an open secret."


SS-Untersturmführer Henry Storch

He saw through the open door in the morgue of a crematorium hundreds of naked dead bodies and that they were "gassed". He did not explain how he knew that they were gassed.

At another occasion he was requested to test chemically a room for rest HCN gas. He found in the room many dead people which were dressed. There was no trace of HCN.

Dr. Johann Paul Kremer

Kremer confessed having witnessed the gassing in old farm houses which were remodelled into bunkers. They were provided with a sliding door and the gas was introduced into the building through a hatch above by an SS-man who climbed up a ladder and had a gasmask on.

Kremer gives no further details!

Schutzhaftlagerführer Franz Hofmann

Hofman confessed that he was present at a homicidal gassing:

"The Jewish commandos drove the inmates with beatings and thrashings into the gas chambers which were camouflaged as shower rooms. The commando was afterwards also gassed. It was always a big mess, and I had to pay attention that the working inmates were also gassed. Yes, and sometimes we helped pushing. But what could we do? We were ordered to do this!"

This is all what the accused Hofmann could say about "gassings" and "gas chambers". It is not much and should have challenged the court for further detail questions.

Where was the gas chamber? How large was it? How was the gas introduced? How long did the gassing last? How was the chamber ventilated? Did the "Sonderkommando" wear protective suits and/or gasmasks while dragging out the corpses?

When attorney Kügler asked for more details, Hofman answered:

"I cannot give any further information."

According to Langbein Der Auschwitz-Prozeß, Hofman allegedly said "loud and shouting" the following:
"If I have to do it again, I would say nothing. I am going through trial after trial. If I would have known then what lay before me, I would not say anything. Everywhere they scream for Hofman: this is Hofman and that is not Hofman, everyone shouts that Hofman is guilty. I don't even know what they want from me."

The insignificance of his "confessions" as a contemporary historical source can hardly be more unambiguously emphasized.

SS-Hauptsturmführer Dr. Konrad Morgen

Testified "Everything was mirror like clean in this huge crematorium. Nothing indicated, that in the night before thousands of people were gassed and cremated. Nothing was left of them, not even a particle of dust on the oven hardware."

We remember that he testified during the IMT trial that Monowitz was the "extermination camp." In the meantime he evidently adjusted his memory to the current version, which of course did not cause the court to question the man's believability.

Morgen's testimony is clearly a lie. It is clearly impossible to destroy thousands of people in one night with leaving a trace, without a particle of dust.

Dr. Gerhard Wiebeck

Q: Were you once together with Dr. Morgen in a gas chamber?

A: Yes, Dr. Morgen took me once to a crematorium and showed me a gas chamber. A SS-Unterführer asked us: "What will happen to us when the war is over?" Dr. Morgen used this during the trial against Grabner. He called this statement as tragic.


Q: Did you investigate those who were responsible for the gassings?

A.: This did not interest us at that time. These were acts outside of the jurisdiction.


To sum up it can be said that not a single accused or witness during the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt, Germany could confirm believably the existence of "gas chambers" in this camp.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Re: NEGATIONIST TEAM 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »

Part III

Conspiracy Theory 101 (or Argumentum ad Ignorantiam)

The Exterminationist appeal to ignorance:
Then there is the lack of evidence supporting the assertions that make up this conspiracy theory, as we shall see hereafter.
We have merely shown alternative explanations for what the Exterminationists see as a self-evident hypothesis. We assert that these simplicities are neither logical nor probable given the unusual circumstances of the world war and the postwar period. The Holocaust is not a simple problem in either historiography or criminology.

Furthermore, we have no interest in deviating far afield from the subject of this Scholarly Debate: the homicidal gas-chambers (HGCs) of Auschwitz-Birkenau. The reader should focus on that.

For the Veritas Team and the Exterminationists in general, we suggest they take the advice of the late cosmologist and skeptic Carl Sagan and:

“Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified.”
And, last but not least, there are untruthful assertions in the description of this supposed conspiracy, which we shall also examine, and regarding which we give our opponents the benefit of attributing them to mere and sheer ignorance. The NT write:

By August 30, 1944 it was reported in the New York Times that the Germans had been running a "River Rouge" of assembly line extermination at Majdanek.

The hapless victims of National Socialism would find themselves expecting to be deloused, and boom, poison gas would come out of the showerheads instead of hot water! Herr Hitler was the Henry Ford of mass-murder with poison gas it would seem...

That these stories were suspiciously similar to the experiences of millions who actually had been deloused by wartime German authorities raised no alarm bells. Black propaganda was needed in wartime like bullets and bandages.

The NT are not exactly helping their already shattered credibility by the sloppy way in which they summarize W.H. Lawrence’s recollection of what he saw and heard at Majdanek concentration camp after its liberation by the Red Army, published in the New York Times on 30 August 1944, and the silly rhetoric they add to this summary. It is rather difficult to find anything in Lawrence’s article that matches its rendering in the middle paragraph of the above-quoted passage of the NT’s Response. Regarding homicidal gassing at Majdanek, Lawrence provides the following description, which is mostly corroborated by the subsequent research of historians and the findings of West German courts at murder trials related to that camp:

[…]As we entered the camp the first place at which we stopped was obviously the reception center, and it was near here that one entered the bath house. Here Poles, Russians and in fact representatives of a total of twenty-two nationalities entered and removed their clothing, after which they bathed at seventy-two showers and disinfectants were applied.

Sometimes they went directly into the next room, which was hermetically sealed with apertures in the roof, down which the Germans threw opened cans of “Zyklon B,” a poison gas consisting of prussic acid crystals, which were a light blue chalky substance. This produced death quickly. Other prisoners were kept for long periods; the average; we were told, was about six weeks.

Near the shower house were two other death chambers fitted for either Zyklon B gas or carbon monoxide. One of them was seventeen meters square and there, we were told, the Germans executed 100 to 110 persons at once. Around the floor of the room ran a steel pipe with an opening for carbon monoxide to escape at every twenty-five centimeters.
We were told that the victims always received a bath in advance of execution because the hot water opened the pores and generally improved the speed with which the poison gas took effect. There were glass-covered openings in these gas chambers so the Germans could watch the effect on their victims and determine when the time had come to remove the bodies. We saw opened and unopened cans of Zyklon gas that bore German labels.[…][emphases ours]

Nothing there about Henry Ford or poison gas coming out of the shower heads instead of water, as we can see. The NT apparently didn’t bother to read its own exhibit.

As to Lawrence’s account being “suspiciously similar to the experiences of millions who actually had been deloused by wartime German authorities”, we have no doubt about this in what concerns the bathing at seventy-two showers and application of disinfectants described in the first paragraph of the above-quoted excerpt from Lawrence’s article. Regarding what happened in the “next room” to some of the prisoners, however, we request the NT to provide a description of one of “the experiences of millions who actually had been deloused by wartime German authorities” (preferably one that Allied journalists and governments could have been familiar with, to give some substance to the NT’s allegation that “alarm bells” should have rung), to show our audience what “suspicious” similarity there was. The argument, if sustainable, is not necessarily favourable to the NT, by the way. A “suspicious” similarity to innocuous delousing procedure may be considered one of the reasons why the victims let themselves be deluded and offered no resistance.
The Veritas Team is quick to label us sloppy but they themselves are indeed ignorant, even of the subject matter they claim to have read better than we have. Lawrence makes reference to "River Rouge" in his article, which is online at RODOH here:

Nazi Mass Killing Laid Bare in Camp

Lawrence does so in reference to the famous River Rouge assembly-line of Henry Ford. This was clear to readers of the New York Times in 1944 and should have been clear to the Veritas Team, some of whose members are Americans. We apologize for any misunderstanding and suggest that the Veritas Team indulge in a smidgeon of Google search on the term” River Rouge.”
"By the mid-1920's," wrote historian David L. Lewis, "the Rouge was easily the greatest industrial domain in the world" and was "without parallel in sheer mechanical efficiency."
We also suggest that the Veritas Team indulge in some basic research on the ritual of delousing and the “totalitarian” efforts made by governments to control infectious disease in the first half of the 20th century. Simply put, the propagandists have confabulated assembly-line control of infectious disease with mass-murder. It is quite simple and yet sublime, as propaganda should be.

Sorry, but our original analysis stands. Lawrence was spreading Soviet propaganda. Whether he did so naïvely, as most Westerners of the time did, or deliberately--as in the recent revision of the propaganda journalism of the Pulitzer prize-winner Walter Duranty, who whitewashed the Ukraine Famine in the 1930s--it matters little to the Negationist Team and the subject matter here of the HGCs at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

As has been shown, however, the notion of assembly-line “factories of death,” i.e., the homicidal gas-chambers of the Nazis, have their origin in Allied propaganda from the 1942-1944 time period.

We trust that in the future the Veritas Team will focus their arguments more on the debate topic itself and less on the motivations and mendacity of their opponents. The easy resort to rhetoric and clichés are their own.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Re: NEGATIONIST TEAM 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »

Part IV

Believers and Deceivers

RE: VT 1st Response no.4 "Revisionist Science"

We are now half-way through the Negationist team's response, at which point they finally begin to construct an argument of their own, addressing the technology of the Auschwitz-Birkenau gas chambers. Finally, we can expect our opponents to show at least some measure of objectivity and keep their rhetoric to a minimum, right?

... Right?...

Well, not if one is to judge from the first paragraphs:

Any technology requires some engineering or development. At Auschwitz we have bunkers or crematoria basements with insecticide thrown in from holes chiseled into the roof or through windows. Any further technical considerations are heresy according to the Exterminationists.

One would expect that the design and construction of a gas chamber, where over one-thousand people are intended to be gassed at a time with poisonous hydrocyanic acid (HCN) from Zyklon B, would require the input from toxicologists, the fumigation manufacturers, chemists, the medical profession, and the input from an architect/engineering team consisting of all three major disciplines for the detail design/modification of the morgues.

This simply does not exist!

While it is certainly possible that one could crowd Soviet POWs slated for political execution into a room, toss in insecticide and simply wait for them to die, how does one turn this into a featured assembly line of slaughter, as alleged, without any engineering considerations whatever?

Contrary to what the NT try to make believe with their silly “heresy” and “Exterminationists” straw men, critics and opponents of “Revisionism” have no problem at all with technical arguments, which may be relevant where it is necessary to establish whether an event or procedure described by a witness was physically possible and technically feasible, and whether or to what extent the witness’s description can therefore be considered accurate.
In spite of the studied refusal of Veritas to get the point, the facts are that the historiography and the criminology are virtually nonexistent on technical matters relating to the Homicidal Gas Chambers. Prior to Revisionist objections there was zilch. And the Holocausters have little cause to be pleased with efforts by some Exterminationists like Jean Claude Pressac to address these issues. There must be no unholy Doubt.

Professor Michael Thad Allen writes:
Michael Thad Allen

The Degesch chambers eventually proved a failed investment, and the SS abandoned them. "In these normal chambers of 10 cubic meters there was nearly always something wrong," one Tesch & Stabenow specialist [zoologist Dr. Joachim Drosihn] testified. They were never actually installed at Auschwitz. Nevertheless they stimulated technological innovation and provided a conceptual blueprint for the gas chambers of Birkenau. First ZBL engineers consciously conceived the gassing process as one in which prisoners' bodies were managed as so much raw material in a modern factory. "The floor plan is so organized in order to make possible an assembly-line operation [Fließbetrieb] such that the flow of work is never interrupted," Auschwitz reported of the original fumigation building. In Crematoria II and III, ZBL engineers would also plan a continuous layout so that "the flow of work is never interrupted." Second, if more trivial, the Degesch chambers provided a precedent for how to engineer the ventilation system for Zyklon-B killing chambers.

After the war, the original Degesch chambers have often been mistaken for "the" gas chambers, and historians such as Pressac rightly caution us not to mistake one system for another. Again, Pressac's apparent motives stem from concern that Holocaust deniers will take every small historical error as evidence that all Holocaust scholarship is confabulation. Yet concern with the deniers' dubious standards of historical truth should not obscure substantial evidence that the Degesch chambers, which were installed at other camps, were in fact used from time to time to kill prisoners. Karin Orth's recent synthetic history of the concentration camp system notes that many camps gassed prisoners in the utter chaos that enveloped Europe toward the end of the war. They did so in an atmosphere in which many were willing to innovate spontaneously in the name of ongoing murder. This enthusiasm for mass murder was the flip side of the pride expressed by Auschwitz personnel over their "invention" of systematic killing technology, and it should be no surprise that chambers sometimes were used to murder prisoners, even though Degesch had not originally designed them for this purpose. Auschwitz is unique only in that here the SS tried to channel such exuberance into industrial discipline and created systems that went far beyond capricious adaptation.

The Degesch chambers seem, at an early point, to have become a focus for these ambitions. As part of his defense strategy, [SS architect] Walter Dejaco testified that Auschwitz designed the cellars of Crematoria II and III as delousing chambers. "The rooms, which were later employed as gas chambers, were designated by us as corpse storage rooms and delousing rooms and were so planned by us." Yet nowhere do ZBL plans depict the morgues as delousing chambers (though SS guards were wont to present them as such to the victims). That Dejaco either misremembered them or, more likely, consciously misrepresented them provides at least circumstantial evidence that the two distinct systems were linked in his mind. Other SS men also conflated the systems after the war, remembering the Degesch chambers as "the gas chambers." [Emphasis added.]

"The Devil in the Details: The Gas Chambers of Birkenau, October 1941," by Michael Thad Allen. Holocaust and Genocide Studies. v16:2, Fall 2002; pp. 195-196.
So it would seem that Degesch technology has relevance to mass-murder after all, at least according to one Exterminationist historian.
This is not the kind of technical reasoning the NT is invoking here, however. Their contention is that eyewitness depositions on homicidal gassing cannot be accurate because they do not coincide with what “one would expect” to have been the solution and procedure adopted, under the assumption that the organizers of the mass killing would necessarily have procured the “best” method from a technical point of view and invested a lot of technical and scientific expertise into implementing this solution.
Not quite. The "eyewitnesses" are not to be believed because their stories are improbable, ungrounded in the laws of nature and the expectations of science, and technically not merely inelegant but simply absurd.

Furthermore, this alleged scheme to exterminate the Jews was supposedly one of the top priorities of the Third Reich, if not its raison d'etre if the Exterminationist howlers are to be believed, and yet here the Nazi engineers did nothing. This cannot be a coincidence.
Let us first look at the “one would expect” argument in general.

According to this approach, the conclusion on whether or not a historical event occurred would depend not on how conclusive the evidence is, but on what “one would expect” to have occurred. The necessarily subjective “one”, not any evidence, would thus establish what is history and what is not, and this would vary according to what any given individual “would expect”.
No, it is a matter of probabilities and practicalities.

As outlined in Professor Allen's The Business of Genocide (NC: 2002), the Nazi engineers were very professionally invested with their pet projects and one of these was making Auschwitz a model camp in the service of Germany in wartime. The SS technocrats worked hard to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear with the same utopian and folkish idealism that had driven them before the war, that which had gone into the planning and development of model German communities. The SS engineers were not driven by the usual motives of "the businessman's point of view" but lived and breathed a folkish anti-Capitalist idealism. It just happened that exploiting the labor of Germany's enemies during the war was their present assignment, which they took seriously, and no one can deny that they applied zeal to it.

The SS even built a costly delousing facility using a Siemens microwave oven in order to save the costs of insecticide, also used in the fumigation of buildings. It is simply not plausible to suggest that they would not have employed any engineering principles to the execution of Himmler's and Hitler's presumed orders to kill Jews with poison gas. Where is all this engineering expertise that developed V-weapons and microwave ovens to sterilize clothing? Professor Allen thinks it is there, hidden somewhere; it must be. That anybody from the Auschwitz concentration camp administration at all executed the Final Solution without the engineering expertise of Kammler and Bischoff is laughable, and they were not amateurs besides.

Instead we are told that non-experts, incredibly, even someone ignorant in the art of fumigation like Eichmann, worked on this problem until Höß and Fritzsch on their own initiative had some corporals knock holes in the roof of the crematoria in order to dump in cans of insecticide already kicking about the camp:
Rudolf Höß (memoirs, ca. 1946)

The killing of the above-mentioned Russian POWs using Cyclon B was continued, but no longer in Block 11 because it took at least two days to air out the building.

We therefore used the morgue of the crematory as the gassing facility. The doors were made airtight, and we knocked some holes in the ceiling through which we could throw in the gas crystals.

Death Dealer (NY: 1996), p. 30.
So Krema I was converted to execute Soviet POWs with Zyklon gas.

Can the VT explain how the poison gas was removed from the morgue in Krema I, which had no windows and doors to the outside and no fan-driven exhaust system?

Incredibly, we are asked to believe that all the SS engineers had to do to mass-murder over a million was to put some holes in the roof of the morgue of the high-tech crematories II and III?

Sorry, but even Henry Ford had to engineer his assembly line using basic time-and-motion studies.

We have the process-engineering for delousing but not mass-murder--unless one believes, as Professor Allen does, that the two are synonymous.
Needless to say, this notion - that history is what every person is prepared to accept and believe - is the utter negation of the art and science of historiography. What “Revisionists” seek to impose, then, would replace history with a belief system built around what “one would expect” according to certain pre-conceived ideas.
No, on the contrary, mythologies must be amenable to natural principles and scientific analysis to be believed, i.e., ascribed as more probable by historiographers.

It’s counter-historical nature aside, is the NT’s “one would expect” approach even consistent in itself?

Would organized and systematic mass killing necessarily imply a quest for the “best” technical means of execution, with “the input from toxicologists, the fumigation manufacturers, chemists, the medical profession, and the input from an architect/engineering team consisting of all three major disciplines for the detail design/modification of the morgues”?
We are talking about the systematic murder of millions with poison gas directed by the State in accordance with a program of the highest wartime priority, considered equivalent to frontline service according to historian Gerald Fleming.

You're darn right it does depend on technical verisimilitude and much more!
No, it would not. It may, but it need not. The procedure and technical requirements for gassing with Zyklon B couldn't have been simpler. It only required a large room easily made gas tight with the addition of gas tight doors, a method to introduce the Zyklon B, and a means of ventilation. A killing machinery doesn’t have to be the best technical solution possible. It doesn’t have to be state of the art according to the technical knowledge and developments of its time. It doesn’t even have to be the most intelligent of possible applications of the resources at hand. It just has to do the job, which in the case under discussion it did. As a matter of fact, efficient mass murder requires no technology, engineering or science at all. In the hands of a sufficiently high number of dedicated killers, rifles, automatic weapons, or even machetes can be just as murderous as the most sophisticated of technical killing devices, see the massacres of the Nazi Einsatzgruppen in the occupied territories of the Soviet Union during World War II or the killing fields of Rwanda in 1994, to mention but two out of many possible examples.
We are not niggling over what worked better to kill numbers of people, poisonous gases from engine exhaust or insecticide. Our professor of the history of technology Allen points out that the inelegant technologies are sometimes the better solutions to specific problems; for example, a high-tech kiln installed by the SS at great capital cost at Sachsenhausen was unsuited for the low quality clay pits and the unskilled prison labor, while simpler but less elegant machines like the ring-kiln or sewing machines were much more suited to the job. This is not our point at all.

You see, it is not particularly difficult to barbecue a hamburger on a grill; millions do it every day. But does one expect to serve millions by simply scaling up? No. As I said, the art and science of process-engineering is a complicated problem. It is not a matter of knocking holes in the roofs of basements. The Germans were quite versed in the mechanics of processing millions of people through delousing installations, some 25 million were deloused during the war, a figure mentioned by sanitation expert Gerstein in his alleged confession, only this time applying to Nazi mass-murder through poison gas. But the figure also appears in the 1944 paper by engineer Emil Wustinger (Appendix I of F.P. Berg). It is simply laughable that the Germans put no further thought into killing millions than they would have to execute a company of Soviet POWs.

As part of the debate topic Veritas must show not ad hoc mass-murder but the systematic mass-murder of thousands. So far Veritas has shown no methodology here beyond the mythology which describes fooling the victims into thinking that they were heading into delousing showers.
Besides, evidence shows that it wasn’t even considerations of greater efficiency which led the Nazis to implement technical methods in alternative to mass shooting as the means to carrying out the genocide. The possibility of carrying out the killings at a few isolated places, with greater discretion and with a minimum of personnel and psychological burden, seem to have been the considerations leading to the large-scale adoption of a killing method that was discovered more or less by chance. From Constantine FitzGibbon’s translation of the autobiography of Rudolf Höss:

[…]While I was away on duty, my deputy, Fritsch, the commander of the protective custody camp, first tried gas for these killings. It was a preparation of prussic acid, called Cyclon B, which was used in the camp as an insecticide and of which there was always a stock on hand. On my return, Fritzsch reported this to me, and the gas was used again for the next transport.

The gassing was carried out in the detention cells of Block 11. Protected by a gas mask, I watched the killing myself. In the crowded cells death came instantaneously the moment the Cyclon B was thrown in. A short, almost smothered cry, and it was all over. During this first experience of gassing people, I did not fully realize what was happening, perhaps because I was too impressed by the whole procedure. I have a clearer recollection of the gassing of nine hundred Russians which took place shortly afterwards in the old crematorium, since the use of Block 11 for this purpose caused too much trouble. While the transport was detraining, holes were pierced in the earth and concrete ceiling of the mortuary. The Russians were ordered to undress in an anteroom; they then quietly entered the mortuary, for they had been told they were to be deloused. The whole transport exactly filled the mortuary to capacity. The doors were then sealed and the gas shaken down through the holes in the roof. I do not know how long this killing took. For a little while a humming sound could be heard. When the powder was thrown in, there were cries of ‘Gas!’, then a great bellowing, and the trapped prisoners hurled themselves against both the doors. But the doors held. They were opened several hours later, so that the place might be aired. It was then that I saw, for the first time, gassed bodies in the mass.

It made me feel uncomfortable and I shuddered, although I had imagined that death by gassing would be worse than it was. I had always thought that the victims would experience a terrible choking sensation. But the bodies, without exception, showed no signs of convulsion. The doctors explained to me that the prussic acid had a paralyzing effect on the lungs, but its action was so quick and strong that death came before the convulsions set in, and in this its effects differed from those produced by carbon monoxide or by general oxygen deficiency.

The killing of Russian prisoners-of-war did not cause me much concern at the time. The order had been given, and I had to carry it out. I must even admit that this gassing set my mind at rest, for the mass extermination of the Jews was to start soon and at that time neither Eichmann nor I was certain how these mass killings were to be carried out. It would be by gas, but we did not know which gas or how it was to be used. Now we had the gas, and we had established a procedure. I always shuddered at the prospect of carrying out exterminations by shooting, when I thought of the vast numbers concerned, and of the women and children. The shooting of hostages, and the group executions ordered by the Reichsführer SS or by the Reich Security Head Office had been enough for me. I was therefore relieved to think that we were to be spared all these blood baths, and that the victims too would be spared suffering until their last moment came. It was precisely this which had caused me the greatest concern when I had heard Eichmann’s description of Jews being mown down by the Special Squads armed with machine-guns and machine pistols. Many gruesome scenes are said to have taken place, people running away after being shot, the finishing off of the wounded and particularly of the women and children. Many members of the Einsatzkommandos, unable to endure wading through blood any longer, had committed suicide. Some had even gone mad. Most of the members of these Kommandos had to rely on alcohol when carrying out their horrible work. According to Höfle’s description, the men employed at Globocnik’s extermination centers consumed amazing quantities of alcohol.[…][emphases ours]

This deposition alone, we think, is enough to show how moot and ridiculous it is to ponder, as the Negationist Team do, about what more “efficient” or “technically sound” killing devices “one would expect” Himmler’s purported technical whiz-kids Kammler and Bischoff to have implemented instead of the solution discovered by Höss. Which was perhaps not as sophisticated and state-of-the-art as the “one would expect” theoreticians postulate it should have been, but perfectly suitable for the purposes at hand.
The story is not believable from the standpoint of state-policy. Höß claims (above) that doctors told him such and such about types of gases. But the methods discussed as though they were gossip are amazingly amateurish. Any engineer could have told one that the Monowitz chemical plant a few miles away produced tons of carbon monoxide; and the notion that CO poison, the silent killer, in fact the greatest killer of any kind of poisoning even today, is any less "humane" or ruthless than hydrogen cyanide is merely sophistry. The victims were not exposed immediately to high concentrations that would cause instant unconsciousness anyway but merely had insecticide poured into a crowded room--where it took time to release its active ingredient, hydrogen cyanide.

This valuable insecticide cost the SS great sums of money and was in demand by all the armed forces and even neighboring countries such as Norway for pest control. As noted by Doctor of Chemistry William Lindsey in his paper on the Tesch Zyklon B trial, for every kilogram of hydrogen cyanide produced, the active ingredient of Zyklon B, the Germans gave up several kilograms of other chemicals forming the raw materials for synthetic rubber production. It took 1 kilogram of Zyklon to fumigate 200 uniforms once.

Carbon monoxide was, however, cheap and available to the SS engineers at Auschwitz. Trains full of passengers marked for death could have been wheeled into fumigation barns, gassed with CO, and then driven to any location for disposal. The delousing and cremation installations at Birkenau would not have been up to the task and the SS engineers and administrators would have known this. Eichmann, who was involved in the deportations, certainly had heard of railway delousing protocols.
We therefore ignore the NT’s characterizations of SS-officers Kammler and Bischoff and their presumably accurate but irrelevant descriptions of contemporary fumigation technology inside and outside Nazi concentration camps. The evidence relating to the measures used by the Nazis and other governments to combat typhus are not something the Veritas team - or anyone representing normative history - disputes. The Negationist team provides us with photographs and diagrams of devices used for such disease control - some of which, such as the Degesch fumigation machinery, even have to do with Nazi Germany - and the Veritas team thanks them for adding a splash of colour to their presentation. The existence of such devices, and the fact that some of them employed Zyklon B, is further stipulated by the Veritas team. Indeed, all the Negationist team's information does is elaborate on why Zyklon B, as such, would have been relatively cheap and easy for the SS to procure.
Zyklon B would have been well-suited for mass-murder--albeit not the cheapest gas, which would be CO generated on-site or in the course of the chemical industry nearby--but the SS engineers certainly would have engineered according to the proven methods of the fumigation technology at their disposal. They would not have dismissed such an important problem to "corporals with chisels" or any other laymen.

And that is exactly what we are asked to believe has happened and is readily confirmed by studying the crematoria blueprints, as we shall expound upon again later.
We will therefore focus only on the NT's arguments regarding the following essential contentions:

1. The suitability of Zyklon B as an agent of mass killing in the gas chambers of Auschwitz-Birkenau
2. The importance of typhus as a cause of death at Auschwitz-Birkenau
3. The corpse cremation/incineration capacity of Auschwitz Birkenau.
Contrary to the opinion of some Revisionists, Zyklon B is in fact well-suited to homicide, but not if extrapolated on an ad hoc basis to an assembly line of mass-murder without the engineering stipulations that the Negationist Team and the Revisionists have pointed out.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Re: NEGATIONIST TEAM 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »

Part V

The Ventilation System of Kremas II and III

One of best examples of falsification, manipulation and "holocaust science" given by VT is available in this curious statement, which in itself proves the mental confusion of the pompous "Veritas" (sic!) state of mind:
VT Response 1
The Negationists elaborate on this allegedly inadequate ventilation system a few lines down:


The ventilation for the corpse undressing room and the morgue in both of the basements of Kremas II and III was about 9-16 exchanges per hour, certainly not any powerful extraction system.


Another hilariously dishonest sentence, rather akin to someone saying that the temperature in Athens and Oslo today is between 9-24 degrees—technically correct but functionally useless, and highly misleading if you happen to be in either Athens or Oslo. It was only L-Keller 1—the room designated by the Negationists as the "morgue"—in which Zyklon B is alleged to have been used to gas people, and hence it is only the ventilation rate of that room which is of relevance. The only possible reason why the Negationist team would see fit to include the undressing room in their consideration of the ventilation is to justify lowballing us with a range rather than a specific figure. If they wanted to express the same information honestly, they would have said that the ventilation rate was 9 exchanges per hour in the undressing room, and 16 in the "morgue". But such a construction would hardly have served their rhetorical purposes, as this contrast is itself of interest, especially when one considers that it reflects a curious revision from the original construction plan. The initial blueprint for a single morgue facility at Birkenau called for L-kellar 1 to have only a deaeration motor with a capacity of 4000 cu m/hr, that would have given L-Kellers 1 and 2 comparable ventilation rates. The revised version ultimately provided L-Kellar 1 (the gas chamber) with an 8000 cu m/hr deration [evacuation] motor, giving it almost twice the deration [evacuation] capacity of L-Keller 2 (the undressing room), adding as well an aeration chimney to L-kellar 1, making this the only room in the building with it's own aeration as well as deration [evacuation] system. These revisions were all made in the spring of 1942, within weeks of the period in which historians of Auschwitz generally agree the decision was made to use Birkenau as a site of mass murder.

"Certainly not any powerful extraction system"? The Negationists simply declare this to be so, and, offering no explanation as to why this would have been inadequate, expect us to take their expertise on the ventilation of gas chambers on faith. But an aeration/deaeration system with a throughput of 8000 m3/hr for a room with a volume of about 500 m3 means that all of the air in L-Keller 1 could be circulated by this air extraction system within 4 minutes. According to the witnesses already cited, the SS ran the ventilation system for about 20 minutes before opening the doors to begin extracting the bodies. In other words, all of the air in the room would have been exchanged already five times."
The VT claims "the enhancements made to the designs of the ventilation system of L-Keller 1 in the spring of 1942" as one of their 100+ “proofs” of the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Birkenau.

From where the data provided by the VT has been taken isn't clear. No references to German contemporaneous documents or secondary sources are indicated: only vague statements for an initial construction plan "for deaeration of L-Keller 1" of Krematorium II and Krematorium III, allegedly modified "in the spring of 1942 within weeks of the periods in which historians of Auschwitz generally agree the decision was made to use Birkenau as a site of mass murder" to support this claim.

So, according to VT:

From an initial planned capacity of deaerating (evacuating) of 4000 cubic meters per hour for Leichenkeller 1 (the alleged gas chamber) of Krema II, the Germans provided the supposed gas chamber with an upgraded 8000 cubic meter per hour evacuation motor. With this new powerful system, which gave—according to the VT statement—almost twice the ventilating capability of LK-2 (the undressing-cellar).

Furthermore, the Germans “added as well an aeration chimney to Leichenkeller 1, thus making this the only room in the building with it's own aeration as well as deaeration system."

Therefore a technically perfect instrument to kill human beings was built by the SS…

Pure fantasy!

It seems to us that our Veritas Team "engineers" don't have the foggiest idea what "air exchanges per hour" means. Their thinking is: at 16 exchanges per hour it takes 60 minutes/16 = 4 minutes to clear the room of the lethal gas.

Now, that’s Hilarious!

As chemist Germar Rudolf explains,
An imaginary experiment may perhaps assist in clarifying a somewhat complicated mathematical relationship: you have a bucket filled to the brim with sea water in front of you. You now take a second bucket filled with fresh water and pour it very carefully into the first bucket, allowing the excess flow over the edge. Now the question: when you have emptied the second bucket of fresh water into the first, containing sea water, what is the composition of the water in the first bucket? Pure fresh water? Of course not. It will be a mixture of salt and fresh water.

Rudolf Report: Introduction.
All data and propositions given are erroneous and the purest of manipulations by the VT.

In reality, the initial planned system of ventilation of Krematorium II (and therefore for its twin, Krematorium III), are according to Jean Claude Pressac as follows:

(cf. Les Crématoires d'Auschwitz, CNRS Editions, Paris, p.30 and n.13: ACM [=TCDIK] 502-1-327 letter from Topf firm dated 4 November 1941).

- A blowing ventilator (No. 450) for the B-Keller ( volume of 483 m3: the future Leichenkeller 1) with a capacity of 4,800 cu m/h;

- An aspirating ventilator (drawing air out) (No. 450) for the B-Keller (483m3); with a capacity of 4,800 cu m/h;

- An aspirating ventilator (No. 550) for the L-Keller (966m3: the future Leichenkeller 2) with a capacity of 10,000 cu m/h;

- An aspirating ventilator (No. 550) for the oven room (1.031m3) with a capacity of 10,000 cu m/h;

- An aspirating ventilator (No. 375) with a capacity of 3,000 (300m3) cu /h for the autopsy room.

Therefore, given the volume of the respective rooms, it is possible to calculate the number of air exchanges per hour estimated:

4,800 : 483 = 9.93 exchanges for the B-Keller;
10,000 : 966 = 10.35 exchanges for the L-Keller;
10,000 : 1,031 = 9.69 exchanges for the oven room;
3,000 : 300 = 10 exchanges for the autopsy room.

Continuing from Pressac:
Schultze [Topf engineer] assigned an hourly extraction capacity of 10 cubic meters for each cubic meter in each room to be ventilated. To achieve this, he proposed for the 483 cubic meter B. Keller, which was to be both aerated and deaerated, a double system run by two 2-hp blowers, which could bring 4,800 cubic meters of fresh air into the room each hour and extract 4,000 cubic meters from the room.

Jean-Claude Pressac, with Robert-Jan Van Pelt. "The Machinery of Mass Murder at Auschwitz," in Gutman-Berenbaum Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp. (Indianapolis: 1994), p. 201.
So in November of 1941 there was already planned a system for deaerating and aerating the B-Keller (the future Leichenkeller 1, i.e., the “gas chamber”).

Thus, the ridiculous statement of Veritas that "adding as well an aeration chimney to L-Kellar 1, making this the only room in the building with it's own aeration as well as deaeration system" is totally false!

Subsequently, says Pressac:
In mid-March [1942], Bischoff received new calculations from Schultz. After reviewing the original numbers, he had decided that it was better to increase the total capacity of the ventilation system of the new crematorium, now to be built at Birkenau, from 32,600 cubic meters of air per hour to 45,000 per hour. The room most affected by this was the B. Keller, which was to receive a system capable of aerating and deaerating 8,000 instead of 4,800 cubic meters per hour, that is, a 66-percent increase. Bischoff accepted Schultze's new proposal on April 2. He asked Topf to bring the designation on the firm's blueprints into line with the ones drawn up in the camp. [70] This meant that B. Keller became L. Keller 1 and L. Keller became L. Keller 2. The Topf design was modified accordingly and returned to Auschwitz on May 8. [71]

[70] Moscow [TCDIK], 502-1-312, letter Bauleitung April 2, 1942; Oswiecim, BW 11/1, 12.
[71] Moscow, 502-1-312, letter Topf May 8, 1942."

Jean-Claude Pressac, with Robert-Jan Van Pelt. "The Machinery of Mass Murder at Auschwitz," in Gutman-Berenbaum Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp. (Indianapolis: 1994), pp. 210, 232.
Thus, suggests Pressac, the capacity of the ventilators was increased as follows:

Pumping ventilator for the B-Keller: 8,000 m3/h (=16.56 air exchanges per hour); aspirating ventilator for the B-Keller: 8,000 m3/h (= 16.56 air exchanges per hour); aspirating ventilator for the L-Keller: 13,000 m3/h (=13.45 air exchanges per hour); aspirating ventilator for the oven room: 12,000 m3/h (= 11.64 air exchanges per hour); aspirating ventilator for the autopsy room: 4,000 m3/h (= 13.33 air exchanges per hour).

(cf. Pressac, Les Crématoires d'Auschwitz, op cit. p. 38.)

In reality, the capacity of the ventilators mentioned by Pressac is not certified by any document, so it is only a speculative assertion, without any technical basis and dismissed—as will be shown below—by documentary evidence.

Pressac obviously calculated ventilation performance based on of the power of the motors, and VT, without specifying their source, have manifestly copied these erroneous data, shown in the D59366 Topf plan of 10 March 1942 (Ibid, documents 13-15, np).

Now, it is important to note that contrary to arbitrary and historically unfounded statements of the Veritas Team, these modifications, refer to a period in which the crematory was being planned exclusively for hygienic purposes!

Pressac again:
"S'imposa fin octobre 1942 l'idée, somme toute évidente, de transférer l'activité 'gazeuse' des Bunker 1 et 2 dans une pièce de crématoire, équipée d'une ventilation artificielle, comme cela avait été pratiqué en décembre 1941 dans la morgue du crématoire"

"Towards the end of October 1942, the idea occurred, an obvious one when all was said and done, of transferring the 'gassing' activity of Bunkers 1 and 2 into a room of the crematory, equipped with artificial ventilation, as had been practiced in 1941 in the morgue of Crematory I."

Ibid, p. 60.

To phrase it another way,
“At the end of October 1942, the Zentralbauleitung began to consider transfer of the gassing from bunkers 1 and 2 to a room in a crematorium”

Pressac, Jean-Claude, with Robert-Jan Van Pelt, "The Machinery of Mass Murder at Auschwitz," in Gutman-Berenbaum Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp. (Indianapolis: 1994), p.223.
Robert-Jan Van Pelt and Debòrah Work seem to suggest December 1942 for this decision: see Auschwitz, 1270 to the Present. (NY: 1996), p.324.

So this change in the power of motors has nothing to do with any supposed intention to kill human beings, but is only, with any probability, a simple technical modification made because the initial planned power of the ventilation motors was wrong and insufficient to the hygienic necessities of Birkenau.

These hygenic necessities emerged subsequent to November of 1941, and were originally calculated on dimensions of rooms a little more reduced than the effective dimensions of LK1 and LK2.

According to the same French researcher, "Dimensions and volumes of the Krematorium II and III Leichenkeller" on the basis of the plans of the crematories were:
- Leichenkeller 1 measured 30 meters in length, 7 in width and 2.41 in height; therefore, it had an area of 210 m2 and a volume of 506 m3.

- Leichenkeller 2 was 49.49 meters long and 7.93 wide and 2.30 high, so its area was 392.5 m2, and its volume was 902.7 m3

Jean Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and operations of the gas chambers. (NY: 1989), p. 286.
In the first drawings they are calculated on the wrong basis:

LK1 483 m3,
LK2 866 m3.

Pressac (and VT accordingly) states that Leichenkeller 1 of Crematories II and III was actually equipped with ventilators with a capacity of 8,000 m3/h of air (Crématoires, p. 74 and p. 118), and even mentions the invoice of the ventilation system for Crematory III: invoice No. 729 of 27 March 1943 (Ibid, p. 105, note 184).

But the Topf invoice No. 729 dated 27 March 1943 cited by Pressac mentions that a ventilator with a capacity of 4,800 m3/h was required for the B-Raum, the supposed homicidal gas chamber, and that a ventilator with a capacity of 10,000 m3/h was needed for the L-Raum, the supposed undressing room. The same capacities are indicated by the invoice No. 171 of 22 February 1943 for Crematory II.

But the Topf invoice No. 729 dated 27 March 1943 cited by Pressac mentions that a ventilator with a capacity of 4,800 m3/h was required for the B-Raum, the supposed homicidal gas chamber, and that a ventilator with a capacity of 10,000 m3/h was needed for the L-Raum, the supposed changing room. The same capacities are indicated by the invoice No. 171 of 22 February 1943 for Crematory II.

(See: APMO, D- /Bau, nr. Inw.1967, and pp. 231-232 and pp. 246-247; for a photocopy of these documents.)

Consequently, for the supposed homicidal gas chamber, the SS had foreseen 4,800: 506 = 9.48 air exchanges per hour, while the supposed changing room 10,000: 902.7 = 11 air exchanges per hour.

The exactness of these data is also acknowledged by two “heroes” of the VT: Dr. Richard J. Green and Prof. John C. Zimmerman:

Dr. R.J. Green, "Report of Richard Green, Ph.D. submitted in Irving/Lipstadt/Penguin Books appeal," p.7. ... affweb.pdf

In other words, the Germans have used a gas chamber less ventilated than the changing room! This simple remark constitutes the proof that the Leichenkeller 1 wasn’t transformed into a gas chamber.

The different ventilation system (never modified or adapted for a supposed criminal use by the SS) between the LK1 and LK2 is clarified by the same Pressac in one passage and shows that the function of Leichenkeller 1 was that of one simple mortuary.
a. Leichenkeller 3 was to be the reception morgue, where the prison numbers of the corpses would be recorded;

b. Leichenkeller 2 was to be temporary storage for newly arrived and recorded corpses awaiting cremation (delay of 3 or 4 days);

c. Leichenkeller 1 was to take corpses several days old, beginning to decompose and thus requiring the room to be well ventilated, to be incinerated as soon as possible.

Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, op cit., p.284.
The ventilation system of LK1 and LK2 corresponds perfectly to parameters indicated by technical literature of the time: In a classic work on the planning of crematories, one reads that for morgues/mortuaries it was necessary to provide a minimum of five air changes per hour, and in case of intense utilization, up to ten exchanges.

W. Heepke, Die Leichenverbrennungs-Anstalten (die Krematorien) . Halle a.S.: Verlag von Carl Marhold, 1905, p. 104.

Another question which deserves an accurate examination is the claim of VT “that all of the air in Leichenkeller 1 could be circulated by this air extraction system within 4 minutes.”

Just another speculative assertion by VT!

In reality, as shown above, the changes of air would have occurred every 7 minutes. But also this “ideal” figure is impossible in the presence of various physical, technical and chemical obstacles.

The ventilation system of the supposed gas chamber was in reality appropriate for a mortuary that needed to be aired out in order to eliminate the bad odor produced by the decomposition of the corpses. But as Pressac acknowledges, the system was not the most appropriate for ventilating a gas chamber.
The ventilation system of Leichenkeller 1 had initially been designed for a morgue, with the fresh air entering near the ceiling and the cold unhealthy air being drawn out near the floor. Its use as a gas chamber really required the reverse situation, with the fresh air coming in near the floor and warm air saturated with hydrocyanic acid being drawn out near the ceiling.

Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, op cit, p.224.
Now, the air entered through the upper orifices, then was extracted through the lower ones, so the poison gas had to exit through holes located just above the floor, which led to a "ventilation conduit" (Entlüftungskanal).

But this system is absolutely inconsistent with a large-scale gassing.

For various eyewitnesses, reproduced by the French researcher, according to R. Höss and M. Nyiszli (p. 473), 3,000 people were crammed in the LK1; 2,500 people, according to H. Tauber (p. 494); and 2,000, according to C. S. Bendel (pp. 469 and 471).

After the gassing of a large number of people, the corpses, heaped one on top of another, would have blocked most—if not all—of the air-extraction orifices. With a room full of lethal cyanide gas, the members of the Sonderkommando, in an eventual attempt to clear the orifices, and also wearing gas masks, would have been immediately killed. This signifies that the rate of exchanges per hour must be multiplied at least two or three times.

This problem could easily have been avoided had the Germans merely reversed the intake and exhaust airflow when they converted the morgue into a gas chamber. No change was performed!

Furthermore, since the air intake and outlet at the same wall of the morgue were very close together (2 meters), contrary to those at the opposite wall (7.3 meters), this would have led to an aerial short circuit, drastically reducing the performance of the ventilation system!

Another factor which would have influenced significantly the ideal times is given by the low temperature in the room. There was no heating available in this morgue, and considering that the boiling point of hydrogen cyanide (HCN) is 26 degrees Celsius (or 78 degrees Fahrenheit) the process of release of poison gas was very slow and had to separate from its carrier material. That is, HCN vaporizes, or changes from liquid to gas, at this temperature; but if the temperature is below vaporization, there will thus be more condensation—much of the HCN will change from gas to liquid. Zyklon B consists of pure hydrocyanic acid in liquid form, chemically stabilized and absorbed into a porous and inert base, generally in the form of gypsum granules, diatomaceous clay, paper or wooden disks, or small cubes of wood pulp.

Zyklon B was invented to release its hydrogen cyanide only very slowly, about 10% in the first 10 min. This made it ideal for fumigation purposes.

R. Irmscher, "Nochmals: 'Die Einsatzfähigkeit der Blausäure bei tiefen Temperaturen'," Zeitschrift für hygienische Zoologie und Schädlingsbekämpfung, 1942, p. 35f.

Zyklon B also has another important specificity: It adheres to cold walls and penetrates more easily than other products to combat vermin, such as Areginal, Cartox, Ventox and other pesticides employed by Germans.

In addition to being cool year round, the Birkenau "gas chambers" were supposedly operated during the cold weather months of Fall, Winter and Spring. Due to its underground location, also in the presence of numerous people, the average temperature would hardly rise above 15°C.

Another problem is that because the inert carrier base containing the Zyklon may go on emitting hydrocyanic acid even after many hours of exposure, the manufacturers insist that the tins (Zyklon is marketed in tins) and all traces of the base material be removed before the treated area can be reoccupied (cf. Nuremberg Document NI-9912).

There is no testimony indicating that the Zyklon was removed by any means prior to the emptying of the gassed corpses in the chamber.

The text of a “special order” (Sonderbefehl) dated August 12, 1942 and signed by Obersturmbannführer und Kommandant of Auschwitz Rudolf Höß and distributed in 40 copies throughout the camp of Auschwitz proves the dangers of each fumigation operation with Zyklon B.
"Eine heute mit leichten Vergiftungserscheinungen durch Blausaure aufgetretener Krankheitsfall gibt Veranlassung, allen an Vergasungen Beteiligten und allen uebrigen SS.

"Angehoerigen bekanntzugeben, dass insbosondere beim Oeffnen der vergasten Raeume von SS-Angehoerigen ohne Maske wenigstens 5 Stunden hindurch ein Abstand von 15 Metern von der Kammer gewahrt werden muss. Hierbei ist besonders auf die Windrichtung zu achten.

"Die jetzt verwendete Gas enthaelt weniger beigesetzte Geruchstoffe und ist daher besorders gefaehrlich.

"Der SS-Standortarzt Auschwitz lehnt die Verantwortung fur eintretende Unglueckfaelle in den Faellen ab, bei denen von SS-Angehoerigen diese Richtlinfen nicht eingehalten werden.“


Today there was a case of illness due to slight symptoms of poisoning with Prussic acid [i.e., Zyklon B,].

This makes it necessary to warn all those involved with gassings, as well as all other SS personnel, that especially when opening gassed rooms, SS personnel not wearing gas masks must wait at least five hours and keep a distance of 15 meters from the chamber. In this regard, particular attention should be paid to the wind direction.

The gas now being used contains less odor additive, and is therefore especially dangerous.

The SS garrison physician refuses to accept responsibility for accidents that may occur in cases where SS personnel do not obey these guidelines.

(See Pressac for the photocopy of this document and his comments, Auschwitz: Technique and Operations of Gas Chambers, op cit, p. 201. TCIDK 502-1-32, p. 300.)
Pressac cites also the testimony of a former prisoner of Auschwitz, a certain A. Rablin, who participated in delousing with Zyklon B. This was done in an improvised gas chamber located in Block 3 of Auschwitz. The delousing chamber was approximately 300 cubic meters in volume and was equipped with an exhaust fan and seven windows for ventilation. The concentration of hydrocyanic acid used in the delousing process was from 0.05 to 0.1 percent. Under these conditions the ventilation lasted two hours (p. 25).

So due to cold and the particular characteristics of Zyklon B a very large amount—probably on the order of 95% of the amount employed—was still present when the ventilation was started, and only a small part had reached the gaseous state.

Thus, as shown by Germar Rudolf, the first exchange of air could have occurred only after 1hour and maybe even later.
The result is shown in the following graph with different b-values, where b-values higher than 6 min mean: the time required to reach a poison gas level equal to that when assuming a perfect ventilation without obstacles, i.e. no.1 after 6 min.

1. One air exchange in 6 minutes (lowest line): perfect mixing of fresh air with loaded air, no objects in the room, no air short circuit. One air exchange means: on time the air volume equal to that of the morgue (minus the volume of 2.000 corpses) replaced.

2. One air exchange equivalent in 12 minutes (2nd line from bottom): less perfect mixing of fresh air with loaded air, some objects in the room, only little air short circuit allowed.

3. One air exchange equivalent in 24 minutes (3rd line from bottom): medium perfect mixing of fresh air with loaded air, many objects in the room, and/or air short circuit.

4. One air exchange equivalent in 96 minutes (4th line from bottom): bad mixing of fresh air with loaded air, extremely many objects in the room, air short circuit.

Germar Rudolf, "Critique of Claims Made by Robert Jan Van Pelt, in the case of David John Cawdell Irving, Plaintiff." (Jan-Apr, 2000); part C, par. 5.
As a means of comparison, seventy-two air exchanges per hour were foreseen for the disinfestation gas chambers with the Kreislauf system. The warm-air circulation disinfestation chambers constructed by DEGESCH (DEGESCH-Kreislauf-Anlage für Entlausung mit Zyklon-Blausäure) had in effect a ventilator with a capacity of 12 m3 of air per minute, corresponding to 72 exchanges of air per hour.

G. Peters, E. Wüstiger, "Sach-Entlausung in Blausäure-Kammern", Zeitschrift für hygienische Zoologie und Schädlingsbekämpfung, Heft 10/11, 1940, p. 195; P. Puntigam, H. Breymesser, E. Bernfus, "Blausäurekammern zur Fleckfieberabwehr." Sonderveröffentlichung des Reicharbeitsblattes, Berlin, 1943, p. 50.

Under these circumstances, the Negationist Team does not see how one inadequate and surely not "powerful" system of ventilation could remove the HCN from the presumed gas chamber in twenty minutes in order to permit the entrance of the members of Sonderkommando.

The actual practice of such an operation would certainly have ended disastrously, with the death of all people in and around of the gas chamber.

We await further enlightenment from the Veritas Team.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Re: NEGATIONIST TEAM 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »

Part VI

The Church of Kreislauf

To Summarize from the work of Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers (NY:1989), the basement "Leichenkeller 1" of Krema II had a ventilation fan which drew air from vents in the attic of the building and discharged it into the subterranean room below from the triangular ducts in the upper ceiling corners.

The air exited the room through ventilation openings built into the brickwork of the wall at the bottom and discharged it from the attic vents in the upper building.

The reason that air was not drawn directly from the outside but was pre-heated slightly from the long feeder piping is quite obvious in that a morgue cannot be allowed to freeze. In addition, it must be kept cool--which is why it was built underground in the first place.

In Leichenkeller 1 of Krema II there was:

1) NO provision to heat the air,

2) NO provision to blow air through the pile of Zyklon pellets supposedly lowered into the chamber from a can, or otherwise dumped into wire-mesh introduction columns from holes in the roof, according to the "eyewitnesses," and

3) NO provision to recirculate the air in a closed-loop during the presumed gassing phase, as one would expect from a real gaschamber.

This is clearly explained in the important article by Revisionist Fritz Berg previously cited by the Negationist Team:

The German Delousing Chambers," by Friedrich Paul Berg.

The Journal for Historical Review Vol. 7:1 (Spring 1987); pp. 73-94. ISSN: 0195-6752.

F.P. Berg, "The German Delousing Chambers."

The Circulation Principle (Kreislaufprinzip)

The importance of good circulation to the proper operation of the German delousing chambers cannot be overemphasized. In the German literature, especially the material from the DEGESCH company itself, circulation of the air-cyanide mixture was always and still is emphasized as a major feature of all of the standardized gas chambers and of good gas chamber design in general.
A homicidal gas-chamber (HGC) would not be less designed!

In Appendix B: "Typhus and the Jews" by Friedrich Paul Berg, The Journal of Historical Review, v.8:4 (Winter 1988); pp. 433-481, is reproduced an article by Dr. Ludwig Gassner, Frankfurt on the Main, "Transportation Hygiene and Disinfestation (Verkehrshygiene und Schädlingsbekämpfung)," translated by F. P. Berg and E. Kniepkamp from: Gesundheits-Ingenieur, Vol. 66 (1943) Heft 15, pp. 174-76:
Dr. Ludwig Gassner

Probably the oldest published work on this subject was by Schumacher and is entitled "The Disinfection of Railroad Coaches in Repair Shops."[3] In Europe such chambers exist in Potsdam, Cologne-Nippes, Posen, Zagreb, Budapest, Bucharest, Sarajevo, Skoplje. The most ideal arrangement is a circulatory system, which can handle even the most poisonous substance with ease and safety. There are also fumigation tunnels, as in Sarajevo for example, which can handle two railroad cars at a time. Of importance is the rapid and uniform distribution of the gas by means of circulation ducts or blowers, at least partly because the speed of the operation is the very key to its efficiency. Only relatively small amounts of the gas are necessary for this work. A Zyklon container with 500 grams of hydrocyanic acid is already sufficient to delouse a modern express passenger railroad car (approx. 200 cubic meters); larger containers are used in the fumigation tunnels where 500 to 1000 grams of hydrocyanic acid, depending upon the temperature, are used per 100 cubic meters of interior volume—the higher the temperature, the greater the effect of any given amount of the gas.[4] [Emphasis added.]

[3] Schumacher, "Die Desinfektion der Eisenbahn-Personenwagen in den Werkstatten," Glasers Annalen für Gewerbe und Bauwesen, Vol. 66 (1910) Nr. 782.

[4] Gerhard Peters, "Durchgasung von Eisenbahnwagen mit Blausaure (Fumigation of Railroad Cars with Hydrocyanic Acid)," Anzeiger für Schädlingskunde, Vol. 13 (1937) Heft 3, pp. 35-41 and Gerhard Peters, "Eine moderne Eisenbahn-Entwesungsanlage (A Modern Railroad Disinfestation Facility)," Anzeiger für Schädlingskunde, Vol. 14 (1938) Heft 8, pp. 98-99.
Thus, according to Dr. Gassner, "of importance is the rapid and uniform distribution of the gas by means of circulation ducts or blowers, at least partly because the speed of the operation is the very key to its efficiency."

The Negationist Team insists that the point of our argument is not lost upon the reader: the supposed gaschamber LK-1 had no means of recirculating the air and gas mixture, nor heating the Zyklon pellets!

Even this Zyklon fumigation "gas-mobile" from 1922 employed the Kreislaufprinzip or recirculation-principle, as you can see from the ducting!

Berg explains further how real Degesch gaschambers worked...

F.P. Berg, "The German Delousing Chambers."

The Fumigation Cycle in the German Delousing Chambers

The fumigation cycle consisted of two phases: (1) a circulation (Kreislauf) phase, known in non-technical jargon simply as the "gassing" phase, and (2) a venting (Lotting) phase.

[Dr. Gerhard Peters, "Die hochwirksamen Gase und Dampfe in der Schadlingsbekampfung (The Highly Effective Gases and Vapors in the Field of Pest Control)," Sammlung chemischer end chemisch-technischer Vorträge (Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke Verlag, 1942), Neue Folge: Heft 47a, pp. 36-41.]

Switching from one phase to the other was accomplished by simply turning a crank handle 180 degrees on the outside of the chamber. The crank handle was linked to a special four-way valve located on the inside of the chamber (see figure 1 in the translation of the article by Emil Wustinger).

FIGURE 1: One of the four delousing chambers as it can be seen today in Dachau. (Note the heater, wire-mesh basket and other equipment visible through the open doorway.)
Berg continues...
F.P. Berg, "The German Delousing Chambers."

The terminology "DEGESCH circulatory device" was used to identify the mechanical equipment such as the four-way valve, heater, can-opener and blower which DEGESCH sold." [15]The structure-walls, floor and ceiling-without the mechanical equipment seems to have generally been built by the customer himself or by an independent contractor.

Zyklon-B and cyanide do not have magic properties. The cyanide does not hunt down living creatures "like radar" as has been advertised for at least one currently popular insecticide. On the contrary, cyanide must obey the same laws of nature that steam or hot air have to obey in a similar situation. The advantage cyanide has as far as its distribution is concerned is due primarily to its low boiling point and its small molecular size. Although cyanide does indeed have great penetrating power, the penetrating rate is severely reduced by obstructions such as clothing unless those obstructions are overcome by some means such as forced circulation through a well-designed chamber with good flow patterns for the gas. [Emphasis added.]

FIGURE 2: Development and distribution of the gas concentration in a filled gas chamber with and without circulation.

As you can plainly see from the family of curves measuring the gas concentrations in various locations of the chamber, without circulation it takes many HOURS for the gas to reach the far corners of the room.

In the alleged homicidal gaschamber the only heating and circulation of the air would be caused by the victims themselves breathing, and those away from the Zyklon source would die of suffocation long before the poison gas reached them, which would certainly not occur in a manner of minutes as described in testimony by Pery Broad and others.

Berg continues, following the evidence to its logical conclusion...
F.P. Berg, "The German Delousing Chambers."

Probably the most plausible description of a gas chamber using cyanide for mass murder is the following description from Filip Müller of the cellar in Krematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau in which 3,000 people were supposedly killed at a time:

"We left the mortuary and came to a huge iron-mounted wooden door; it was not locked. We entered a place which was in total darkness. As we switched on the light, the room was lit by bulbs enclosed in a protective wire cage. We were standing in a large oblong room measuring about 250 square meters. Its unusually low ceiling and walls were white-washed. Down the length of the room concrete pillars supported the ceiling. However, not all the pillars served this purpose: for there were others, too. The Zyklon B gas crystals [sic] were inserted through openings into hollow pillars made of sheet metal. They were perforated at regular intervals and inside them a spiral ran from top to bottom in order to ensure as even a distribution of the granular crystals as possible. Mounted on the ceiling was a large number of dummy showers made of metal. These were intended to delude the suspicious on entering the gas chamber into believing that they were in a shower-room. A ventilating plant was installed in the wall; this was switched on immediately after each gassing to disperse the gas and expedite the removal of corpses."[18] [Emphasis added.]

[18] Filip Müller, Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers (New York: Stein & Day, 1979), pp. 60-1.

Although a "ventilation plant" is mentioned by Müller, that does not mean there was anything even remotely comparable to the kind of ventilation and circulation which would have been needed.


The ventilation plant was supposedly "switched on immediately after each gassing." [emphasis added, FPB] In other words, during the gassing itself, the ventilation plant must have been off; there could have been no circulation of the air-gas mixture through the gas chamber during the gassing itself.

Although cyanide vapors would have gradually left the granules, their path would have been obstructed first by the "perforated" sheet metal pillars and then by those intended victims who were crammed into the spaces around the pillars. If one takes at all seriously the accounts of three thousand victims being killed at a time, the perforated pillars would have been surrounded rather tightly by the intended victims. Those who were in the immediate vicinity of the pillars would have probably been affected by the cyanide in just a few minutes but -- on the basis of figure 2 -- many, if not most, of the others would have been unaffected by the cyanide until hours later.

But let us give the benefit of doubt to the Exterminationists for the sake of this analysis. Perhaps Müller was somewhat mistaken and perhaps the "ventilation plant" had been switched on during the actual gassing. What then?

Even if the ventilation plant had been switched on during the gassing phase, there is no evidence that the necessary piping or ductwork was present to permit proper circulation. On the contrary, the bottom of each "perforated" pillar would have been, in effect, a cul-de-sac through which there could not possibly have been the kind of air or gas flow which circulated through the wire-mesh baskets in the standard delousing chambers even if there had been some provision for returning the ventilation plant discharge back to the gas chamber through some kind of closed-loop arrangement. Any conceivable closed-loop could not possibly have included the Zyklon granules themselves since they would have been isolated at the bottoms of the perforated pillars. The evaporation of the cyanide out of the Zyklon-B granules would have taken hours rather than minutes. And yet, according to the so-called confession of Rudolf Höss, the former camp commandant of Auschwitz, the gassing process was so short that after only half an hour the gas chamber doors were opened, the ventilating machinery was turned on, and workers without gas masks immediately began to remove the bodies.

Obviously, the Müller account and the Höss "confession" are nothing more than badly contrived horror stories. The mechanics, reminiscent of Rube Goldberg inventions, may seem plausible at first glance but simply do not stand up to critical examination.
Thus, without any provision to heat the granules or to recirculate and mix the gas and air in the chamber it would be just as effective to seal the room airtight and simply allow the victims to suffocate.

The Veritas Team has shown the degassing properties of Zyklon-B in the common chalky Ercco carrier, reproduced also as Graph 9 in Section 7.2 "Evaporative Characteristics of Zyklon B" in the Rudolf Report:
Graph 9: Evaporation rate of hydrogen cyanide from the Ercco carrier material (gypsum with some starch) at various temperatures and fine distribution, according to R. Irmscher/DEGESCH 1942.

R. Irmscher, "Nochmals: 'Die Einsatzfähigkeit der Blausäure bei tiefen Temperaturen'," Zeitschrift für hygienische Zoologie und Schädlingsbekämpfung, 1942, pp. 35f.; on the history of the development of Zyklon B, see Wolfgang Lambrecht, "Zyklon B-eine Ergänzung," VffG 1(1) (1997), pp. 2-5 as well as W. Lambrecht, O. Karl, op. cit. (note 105).
Notice that the HCN gas is NOT IMMEDIATELY discharged when dispersed and that depending upon the temperature it takes hours to COMPLETELY discharge the gas from the carrier granules.
Germar Rudolf, Rudolf Report Sec.

Before we analyze some of these testimonies more closely, a few remarks are necessary about the circumstances and the atmosphere in which these testimonies and confessions of alleged victims and perpetrators came about in the first couple of years after the end of World War II. It was in those years that the story of the conveyor-belt like extermination of human beings in Auschwitz and elsewhere was elevated to "common knowledge." Challenging this story led to a severe increase in legal penalty for any defendant, as it still does to this day in many countries in Europe.
The present Holocaust liturgy demands that the killings be accomplished rapidly--the HCN gas has to be quickly released and thoroughly distributed somehow, and then the gas (and the fuming Zyklon pellets) somehow has to be completely removed in minutes after merely switching on a ventilation fan--so that the expendable Sonderkommando can go inside without gasmasks, by some accounts, and while eating and smoking in others, to empty the victims from the gaschamber to violate them further and cremate the evidence.

This poignant and familiar story is not supported by the evidence, however.

It is Holocaust Science at its finest.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Re: NEGATIONIST TEAM 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »

Part VII

On Typhus

RE: VT 1st Response no. 2. The importance of typhus as a cause of death at Auschwitz-Birkenau

One of the tactics used by “Revisionists” in discussions about the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration and extermination camp is to extol the threat posed and mortality caused by typhus. This argument serves three purposes. The first is to explain away a large part of the camp’s mortality, where the evidence is such that denying it is not a promising approach, as having resulted from a communicable disease, a natural catastrophe against which the camp administration, despite all efforts to rein in the epidemic, was powerless.
The prevalence of wartime disease and the herculean efforts to combat it cannot be easily dismissed away by the Exterminationists. This is an inconvenient truth and we shalt NOT let them forget it!
The second is to exclusively relate the use of high quantities of the lethal fumigation agent Zyklon B to an intensive effort to get rid of typhus-spreading lice, thus making what was also an agent of mass murder look like a life-saving device.
Zyklon-Blausaure, used for fumigation of buildings and delousing of clothing and other articles, was so widespread in wartime Europe that an attempt to argue that it had no significant legitimate purpose or a downright malevolent presence at concentration camps is simply absurd. In fact, if the Germans had been able to procure more for the camps it would have saved many more lives. Most of the insecticide was used for legitimate purposes and even Exterminationists like Pressac concede this. Veritas is barking up the wrong tree here.

Woof, Woof.
The third, finally, is to explain away the camp’s enormous cremation capacity, which far exceeded that of any other German concentration camp, as having exclusively or mainly resulted from a concern about high mortality due to typhus.
Epidemics of typhus and most other communicable diseases can be contained with cremation of infected cadavers; this has been known since the times of the Black Plague in the 14th century without necessarily knowing exactly why and what precise vectors were involved in the spread of the disease. Once thought to be foul odors, the chief culprits are rats, lice, fleas, ticks, etc., which carry the disease germs between human hosts and victims.

With a deathrate of 200 - 300 per day in 1942 during the worst of the typhus epidemics at Auschwitz, the crematoria capacity allowed for by architect Dejaco seems rather UNDER-designed, actually, for its planned expansion of 200 thousand Soviet POWs. The British had to deal with a deathrate of 500 - 600 per day at Belsen after liberation and the crematoria capacity of Birkenau would have had difficulty dealing with this if the ovens had all been in working order and available for service at that location.

The Birkenau Lagerführer, Josef Kramer admitted that the death rate during the summer of 1944 was 50 - 70 per day and he admitted that hard labor was a relevant factor.

Josef Kramer
There were between 350 and 500 deaths a week. The death rate was higher among the men, the reason being that the influx from the working camp consisted mainly of sick people. When I speak of the death rate in Auschwitz, I mean that all these people died of natural causes, that is to say either from illness or old age. The death rate was slightly above normal, due to the fact that I had a camp with sick people who came from other parts of the camp. The only reason I can see for the higher death rate, not only at Auschwitz but at all concentration camps in comparison with civil prisons, was that prisoners had to work, whereas in civil prisons they had not to work.

Statement Of Josef Kramer.
Even in 1944, this is not an insignificant deathrate, especially considering that not all the crematories remained operational and repairs were very difficult to accomplish. Kommandant Höß notes in his memoirs that SS-engineers Kammler and Bischoff often exceeded their authority and illegally made materials available for Auschwitz that was intended for other industries. In fact, in terms of todays dollars there was a billion dollars' worth of sewage, drainage, dispensary, and cremation infrastructure at Auschwitz-Birkenau designed to *prevent* and contain the spread of endemic disease. Even with the understanding that forced-labor was itself brutal and inhumane, how can this be compatible with an "extermination through work" thesis?

Of course, some Exterminationists will argue that the sewage and drainage programs *themselves* were part of "extermination through work" rather than for disease-control. Everywhere one looks the Exterminationist will always see Genocide!

More sober analysis is required to see a picture of the truth, however.
The NT thus submit the following:

Typhus is rampant in wartime or other cataclysms--even today with great population movements, close quarters, privation and lack of hygiene and disrupted public infrastructure. A typhus epidemic hit German camps in 1942, and Auschwitz, located in a region of endemic typhus, was especially hard hit.


During and after World War I it is estimated that over twenty-million lost their lives from typhus in Eastern Europe.

From the first paragraph of “How Charles Nicolle of the Pasteur Institute discovered that epidemic typhus is transmitted by lice: Reminiscences from my years at the Pasteur Institute in Paris.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 93:10/1996, pp. 10539-40, by Ludwik Gross, he writes:

"After World War I, 20-30 million people died in Eastern Europe from this disease, and an additional several million died during and after World War II."

It would be interesting to know where the NT’s source Ludwik Gross got his enormous figures from.
Indeed, the methodology, if any, used by Dr. Gross would be interesting. However, the medical scientist here is of unimpeachable credentials, as is the academic journal he is writing in, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, "the world's most-cited multidisciplinary scientific serial."
Considering the wide public attention accorded to the post-World War I influenza epidemic, which killed about 20 million people worldwide, it seems odd that a mortality of similar magnitude caused by typhus in Eastern Europe alone should have gone virtually unnoticed.
Not necessarily.

The influenza pandemic was a factor in the West, and it may have killed from 20 - 50 million people, according to Michael B.A. Oldstone in Viruses, Plagues, and History (Oxford: 2000), whereas typhus was a problem in Eastern Europe and the "underdeveloped" world; that alone suffices to accord it less interest than influenza in the "civilized" world. Even the influenza pandemic itself is a little-known footnote in history that is dwarfed by World War One and mostly goes unrecognized as a significant contributor to the German defeat in 1918. Diseases are not as interesting as battles and atrocity-propaganda.
Data from other online sources dealing with typhus accordingly differ on the mortality caused by this disease:

"... In the aftermath of World War I and during the civil war between the White (Royalist) and Red (Communist) armies that followed the Bolshevik Revolution, typhus killed three million in a devastated and anarchic Soviet Union. It came closer to toppling Lenin than the White Army ever did..." [emphasis ours]

"Before World War II, epidemic typhus was a devastating disease for humans. Epidemics occurred throughout Europe from the 17th to the 19th centuries. It was common in prisons, where it was known as Gaol Fever. Before then there is little historical literature available. Widespread epidemics occurred during the Napoleonic Wars and the Irish potato famine of 1846 to 1849. During World War I the disease caused three million deaths in Russia and more in Poland and Romania. Even larger epidemics in the post-war chaos of Europe were only averted by the widespread use of the newly discovered DDT to kill the lice on millions of refugees and displaced persons. A vaccine was also developed in World War II, and today epidemics only occur in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and parts of Africa where living conditions and hygiene are poor." [emphasis ours]

... Typhus has always reigned as an endemic disease in the Eastern and Southeastern provinces of the former Polish state. This was especially true for the provinces of Wilna, Nowogrodek and Stanislawow. Here during severe outbreaks, about 5-10% and more of the population would fall ill annually whereas in the Western parts of Poland, the disease declined steadily over the years so that it was virtually unknown in the present Warthegau or else occurred only in isolated cases or clusters without any tendency to spread. During the last years before the present war, the pestilence had almost been eradicated within the central parts of the country, just as conditions in the Eastern parts were also improving. That the present wartime dislocations would again increase the frequency of typhus was to be expected since it had always been a typical plague of war, but the magnitude of the reoccurrence in 1940 was many times less than had been expected. If we adjust the number of previously reported cases [for all of Poland] in order to try to get numbers that only apply to the area of the present day Generalgouvernement--obviously, these values will be only rough approximations in order to be able to make comparisons with those for 1940--we get the following.

Table 1. Typhus occurrences per year in the present-day Generalgouvernement.
1919 44,000 1930 320
1920 34,000 1931 420
1921 10,000 1932 500
1922 8,500 1933 680
1923 2,200 1934 1,000
1924 1,500 1935 800
1925 800 1936 740
1926 700 1937 680
1927 600 1938 700
1928 500 1939 ?
1929 400 1940 7,900

Obviously, the statistics can not show all occurrences because it can be assumed that, at the very least, the undiagnosed, mild cases were not reported. It is quite possible that the true morbidity rates are actually double or triple the values which have been reported.


The mortality of the disease in all these years seems to be surprisingly low. For the years following the world war, the rate was 7%_9% with the exception of 13.4% for 1920. Thereafter, the mortality rate decreased to 5.2% in 1938 and in 1940 to 5.6%. However, many mild cases may not have been reported so that the hazards of the illness might, in fact, be even less.[…] [emphases ours]

Especially the last source quoted – the translation of German hygienist Dr. E. Zimmermann’s 1942 article Zur Epidemiologie des Fleckfiebers im Generalgouvernemtent by “Revisionist” author Friedrich Paul Berg – suggests that Ludwik Gross’s figures on typhus mortality in Eastern Europe after World War I are way too high. [...]

Considering the above-quoted sources on deaths by typhus in Soviet Russia after World War I (ca. 3 million) and the comparatively negligible figures for Poland according to Zimmermann’s article, this would mean that, for Gross’s figure to be accurate, the overwhelming majority of the 20 to 30 million typhus deaths in Eastern Europe he mentioned – 17 out of 20 or 27 out of 30 million, respectively 85 % and 90 % - need to have occurred not in the two most typhus-ridden countries of Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union and Poland, but in other countries like Hungary, Yugoslavia, Romania and Czechoslovakia. This seems to be rather improbable.
Professor E. Zimmermann is describing the successes used by the Polish and German governments in combating typhus, not to dismiss the threat of it, nor the wartime and postwar conditions that spread it.

Dr. John E. Gordon elaborates on these conditions and the inexact reporting methodologies:
John E. Gordon, "Louse-borne Typhus Fever in the European Theater of Operations, U. S. Army, 1945," in Rickettsial Diseases of Man (Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1948) pp. 21-7.

Louse-borne typhus fever is an acute infectious disease lasting from twelve to sixteen days and characterized by a continued temperature, a generalized maculopapular rash which may become haemorrhagic, severe toxaemia, and marked nervous manifestations. The disease is carried by lice and spreads with extreme rapidity especially through a badly nourished population. Thus in Russia during the period 1919 to 1922 the estimated number of cases was 10,000,000, with 3,000,000 deaths, in a population of 120,000,000. These are stupendous figures. Their scale can be realized to some extent by recalling that in the much-described typhus epidemic in London in 1856 only 1,062 cases were recorded as treated in the London Fever Hospital out of a population of 3,000,000 whereas in Russia in the year 1921 alone there were 4,000,000 cases in a population of 120,000,000. These figures can, of course, only be approximate, as many cases diagnosed as typhus were in reality instances of relapsing fever; on the other hand a vast number of cases of typhus were never admitted to hospital and so remained unrecorded. Of the cases admitted to hospital very many were never notified by the Russian medical officers owing to pressure of work. So uncertain were the statements that when we went into a new district to survey the amount of typhus present we found it more useful to base our estimate on the number of women with recently shaved heads seen in the streets, than to rely upon notification figures. All cases on admission to hospital for typhus were closely shaved and consequently it was possible to sit in a cafe and determine the proportion of women with closely cropped heads to the general population and so to estimate roughly the amount of typhus in the region.

Epidemic typhus fever, is, classically, associated with famine and overcrowding, but there is a third factor which, to my mind, is perhaps of even greater importance, namely, widespread movements of military or civilian populations bringing non-immunes into a district where the disease is endemic or carrying the disease into a typhus-free region. A third possibility is that such movements may introduce into an endemic region either a new strain of the disease or one of enhanced virulence. The first mode of infection I saw well demonstrated in the epidemic in North China two years ago which was due to the introduction of masses of non-immunes with the Army into areas where the disease was endemic. The second method occurred on the return of Polish prisoners of war to Poland from Siberia in 1919-1922. These men, women and children had been heavily infected with typhus in Russia, and passed into Poland at the rate of tens of thousands a day, going to regions in which the disease either was already endemic or did not exist previously; in both cases widespread epidemics resulted.

Apart from mass movements of the kinds instanced above, a striking feature of epidemics is the amount of local movements of the population that they initiate. Once typhus is really established in a district, fear of contracting the disease, combined with terror of the appearance and acts of delirious patients, is soon widespread. Transport of food and fuel quickly breaks down, starvation threatens, the sick are abandoned, often in the roads, the houses are deserted and the terrified population flees from the infected area into a neighboring village or another part of the town as the case may be, carrying the disease with them. Too often the hospital staffs may flee with the others. [Emphases added.]
Throughout history, epidemics of louse-borne typhus have caused more deaths than all the wars combined. The figure of three-million deaths from Russia is also supported by Hans Zinsser in his 1935 classic Rats, Lice, and History, which does not include Eastern Europe or the Balkans and may not include the Ukraine:
F.P. Berg

[...] Without Zyklon-B carrying on in the role it had established for itself in the early years of the war, the horrible scenes in isolated places such as Bergen-Belsen in the spring of 1945 would have certainly been repeated on a far more spectacular scale. What actually happened was bad enough.

There could have been a repeat of what had happened during and after World War I in Eastern Europe. The situation in Russia during that period had been described by the eminent American medical historian Hans Zinsser as follows:

"... Will historians of this period remember that, throughout the struggles which led to the establishment of the Soviet Republic, Russia suffered-in addition to war and armed revolution-from two cholera epidemics, from a famine unequaled since the Thirty Years War, from typhus, malaria, typhoid, dysentery, tuberculosis, and syphilis to an ex tent unimaginable except to those who were helpless spectators? Tarassewitch estimated (statistics of accuracy were impossible) that be tween 1917 and 1923 there were 30,000,000 cases of typhus with 3.000.000 deaths in European Russia alone."

The losses in the Ukraine, the Balkans and Poland were probably comparable to those suffered in Russia but the historians have forgotten.

Hans Zinsser. Rats, Lice and History (MA: 1963), p. 213.
What matters is that the death rate from typhus and related illnesses was in the MILLIONS, and this is supported from numerous sources.
Independently of overall data about deaths from typhus in Eastern Europe over a given period, however, what matters to the “Revisionist” argument is the incidence and mortality rate from the disease at the specific place and time in question, i.e. at the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration and extermination camp between 1941 and 1944. In this respect, however, the camp’s death books and other evidence show that, while typhus was a problem and a concern to the camp’s administration, it was not one they were unable to handle let alone a catastrophe against which they were powerless. In his online article, Body Disposal at Auschwitz: The End of Holocaust Denial ... y-disposal, John C. Zimmerman writes:

"[…]In 1989, the Auschwitz Archives in Moscow were opened for the first time since the Soviets liberated the camp in January 1945. These archives contain thousands of documents which survived destruction by the camp authorities when they fled the advancing Soviet forces. Among the items discovered were the Auschwitz Death Books. These books contain the death certificates of registered prisoners only. Nonregistered prisoners who were killed upon arrival did not receive a death certificate. The death books are incomplete. They contain the certificates of 68,864 registered prisoners who died from August 1941 to December 1943.There are no books for 1944 or periods prior to August 1941.They are either missing or were destroyed. Also, there are a number of missing books for the period August 1941 to December 1943. However, each book contains between 1400 and 1500 entries. [29] By interpolating 1500 entries into each missing death book we can arrive at approximately 80,000 deaths of registered prisoners for 1942 and 1943. [30] Dr. Tadeusz Paczula, a former Auschwitz inmate, was in the camp from 1940. He also kept the death registries for registered inmates. He later testified that for the two years following the summer of 1942, about 130,000 names were entered into the death registries. [31]

"Nevertheless, the nearly 69,000 death certificates available afford researchers the opportunity to see exactly what was killing registered prisoners. It is now known on the basis of these certificates that very few prisoners died from typhus. [32] They show that only 2060 of the 68,864 deaths were from typhus. While typhus can be lethal, it need not necessarily be so. Lucie Adelsberger, a Jewish prisoner and camp doctor, got typhus, was quarantined, and resumed her duties after recovery. [33] Similarly, Ella Lingens Reiner, a German doctor, who was also a prisoner, contracted typhus and survived. [34] One of the early Auschwitz memoirs, written in 1947, recounts an episode with camp doctor Josef Mengele, later to become known as the "Angel of Death" for his medical experiments. Mengele was disturbed about the typhus epidemic. The former prisoner wrote: "Alas, typhus epidemics did rage in the camp, but at this time we had comparatively few victims. The same day he [Mengele] sent us a large quantity of serum and directed mass vaccinations." [35] Petro Mirchuk, a Ukranian prisoner, wrote that a delousing in August 1942, the worst month of the epidemic, "eliminated the epidemic and the billions of fleas and lice ceased to exist. [36]

"Thus, it can be seen that people could recover from typhus and that the authorities did have means of combating the disease.[…]"
[emphases ours]

Thus Prof. [John] Zimmerman appropriately headed this section of his article “The Typhus Myth”. That myth having been debunked (to borrow a term “Revisionists” like to throw around on every inappropriate occasion), let us move on to the next set of canards.
It is very important for the Exterminationists to argue that typhus was a MYTH!

But let's look at some FACTS about typhus:

The comparatively recent epidemic of typhus in Burundi has been extensively studied.

Indeed, typhus is a MYTH only insofar that sufficient antibiotics, insecticides, and effective vaccines are available, not to mention adequate hygiene and delousing procedures, and lack of chaotic population movements that spread strains of disease:
"Outbreak of epidemic typhus associated with trench fever in Burundi," by D. Raoult, J.B. Ndihokubwayo, H. Tissot-Dupont, V. Roux, B. Faugere, R. Abegbinni, R.J. Birtles. LANCET, vol 352; August 1, 1998; pp. 353-358.

After a 12-year absence, epidemic typhus has re-emerged among the displaced population of Burundi. Following the outbreak of civil war in 1993, over 760 000 people now inhabit refugee camps, under appalling conditions. A typhus outbreak occurred among prisoners in a jail in N’Gozi in 1995. At the time, the disease was not recognised, and was referred to as sutama. Reports of sutama among the civilian population date back to late 1995 and, in association with body-louse infestation, the disease has subsequently swept across the higher and colder regions of the country.


Up to September, 1997, 45 558 typhus cases were clinically diagnosed, most of which occurred in regions at an altitude of over 1500 m. Serological testing of 232 individuals from different regions of Burundi provided microbiological evidence to support clinical diagnoses in seven provinces, confirming the widespread nature of the outbreak. Serum from 13 of the original 102 patients and 19 (8%) of the 232 uspected cases had raised antibody titres against B quintana. A fatality rate of 15% among jail inmates fell to 0•5% after administration of a single dose of 200 mg doxycycline to suspected cases.


At the time of this study, the social situation in Burundi significantly impeded investigation and management of the outbreak. Civil war, together with blockades imposed by surrounding countries, led to the suspension of all non-military aeroplane flights and a severe petrol shortage.

In February, 1997, the national refugee population was estimated to be over 700 000 (unpublished observations). At least 28 large camps had been established and, in most, no health care was available. Since most camps were set up in remote areas away from towns that were in strategic positions in the war, patients had to travel substantial distances for medical help. Most refugees had arrived at the camps with little more than their clothes, and, probably because ambient temperatures were low, the clothes were seldon changed or washed. Unsurprisingly, infestation by body lice had been prevalent in the populations of refugee camps since 1994 (unpublished observations). Cases of unexplained fever began to be recorded as early as August, 1995, in the provinces of Muramvya, Gitega, and Kayanza (unpublished observations; figure 1). The fever was often accompanied by severe headache and painful myalgia, and was generally referred to as sutama, which translates as “crouching”, since this was the preferred position of patients who found standing upright uncomfortable (unpublished observations).

Although clinical diagnosis of individual cases is complicated, a cluster of sudden-onset severe pyrexia among louse-infected people living in cold, crowded, and unhygenic conditions should immediately alert the clinician to typhus. The central highlands of Burundi are particularly remote, and sanitation is generally poor. In the colder regions, inhabitants wear several layers of clothing all year round, leading to a high prevalence of body-louse infestation; according to one estimate, as many as two in three people nationwide are infested. Living conditions in refugee camps are particularly difficult, and virtually all inhabitants are likely to have lice. The stressful, deprived conditions that lead to widespread louse infestation also provoke recrudescence of typhus. The fact that a single case of Brill-Zinsser disease can initiate a typhus outbreak is daunting. However, what we do not know is whether the nationwide outbreak originated from a single source or resulted from the combination of more localised independent outbreaks.


A nationwide treatment programme was initiated in March, 1997, with the administration of doxycycline (single dose 200 mg orally) to all cases and suspected cases. Distribution of antilouse insecticides began 3 months later after petrol became more widely available and blockades were removed. The inhabitants of refugee camps were treated with permethrin (1%) dusting powder according to WHO guidelines.


Surveillance of typhus among prisoners and estimation of epidemiological variables of outbreak:

Results of the surveillance programme of prisoners in three jails in Burundi between January and September, 1997, are shown in table 4. We were also able to calculate estimates of attack rates and death rates (table 4). In Gitega, all except one of the patients were treated successfully, and the patient who refused treatment died. Ten of the patients had coma, and five presented with hemiplegia. Five (2•5%) patients relapsed 8 days after receiving treatment, but recovered fully after administration of chloramphenicol (2 g per day for 3 weeks). In the jails at Ngozi and Bururi, attack rates were significantly higher than in Gitega (p<10e –7), with about half the inmates contracting typhus. The death rate at N’Gozi, furthermore, was also significantly higher (p<10e –6) than at Gitega. We also found serological evidence of B quintana infection among the inmates of N’Gozi (two of eight serum samples tested) and Bururi jail (two of 18), but not of Gitega jail (none of 20).

Table 4: Comparison of attack rates and death rates for sutama among inmates of three jails in Burundi:

Jail; Number of prisoners/number of typhus cases (attack rate); Number of deaths among typhus patients (death rate)

Gitega 1300/213 (16•4%) 1 (0•5%)
N’Gozi 1200/696 (58•0%) 84 (12•1%)
Bururi 1400/678 (48•4%) Unknown


Once sutama was established as epidemic typhus, and since knowledge of the syndrome was widespread, the disease could be monitored by health workers throughout Burundi. The outbreak was affecting mainly the refugee camps within the three highland provinces of the country (90% of cases), but did not significantly spread outside this region. Although almost 1000 cases were also diagnosed in the lowland province of Bujumbura, these cases were thought to have resulted from the migration of infected people from the highlands into Burundi’s capital city. Typhus was also rife in all three jails studied, irrespective of their geographical location.

The treatment of typhus is easy and inexpensive—a single dose of 200 mg doxycycline will usually cure patients.

(P.L Perine, D.W. Krause, S. Awoke, J.E. McDade, "Single-dose doxycycline treatment of louse-borne relapsing fever and epidemic typhus." Lancet v.2, 1974;pp. 742–4.)

In this study, the usefulness of doxycycline regimen in the treatment of patients and the reduction of the spread of disease was underlined by comparison of the outcome of outbreaks in the three jails. In Gitega jail, where treatment was administered, both the attack rate and the fatality rate were significantly lower than those in N’Gozi jail and Bururi jail, where no such treatment was available.

The general applicabilty of insecticides to the immediate control of epidemic typhus was established during the first N’Gozi jail outbreak in 1996, and a standard treatment protocol with 1% permethrin has been produced by WHO. Because treatment should be repeated every 6 weeks, a total of 3–5 tonnes of powder are required to treat 100 000 people on one occasion; 1 year’s supply is therefore ten times this figure. In practice, over-reliance on insecticides may be foolhardy; the severe limitations imposed by the war on Burundi’s distribution and communication infrastructures prevented the widespread availability of such quantities of insecticides until July, 1997—6 months after the scale of the outbreak was first recognised. The transient nature of the camps’ populations also presented logistical difficulties, since several delousing stations were required to ensure treatment was continued every 6 weeks.

There are substantially fewer drawbacks associated with the administration of doxycycline than with delousing. Antibiotics not only cure current infection, but also ease logistical difficulties, since transport of 100 000 doxycycline tablets is easier than the shipping of 50 tonnes of insecticides. However, although effective treatment can be administered in only a single visit to each camp, which removes the source of further infection from non-immune individuals, infected lice remain. Thus, the optimum control strategy against typhus must be delousing combined with antibiotic treatment, as emphasised in existing WHO guidelines for the control and prevention of louse-borne diseases.6 In addition, we stress that effective prevention also requires the provision of basic sanitation and hygiene to allow for changes of clothing, washing, and bathing, together with the establishment of effective surveillance programmes. Clearly, the availability of an effective vaccine would circumvent these difficulties, and should a suitable vaccine be produced a small team of health workers could vaccinate all refugees in Burundi within 2 months. A vaccination programme for typhus would, without doubt, remove an enormous threat to the health of people in central Africa.


[Emphases added.]
The above article illustrates the difficulties in diagnosing and treating typhus and related disease.

The Germans in WWII did not have antibiotics like doxycycline, and the Weigl vaccine for typhus was expensive, in great demand for the vaccination of fighting troops, and only marginally effective. The Germans made herculean efforts to control disease by improving camp sanitation, fumigation and delousing protocols, and they were largely successful in these efforts until the administration and logistical situation completely broke down at the end of the war. The efforts of the Germans to cordon and quarantine disease in Poland was of critical importance to the war-effort, and the concentration camps played no small part in this.

The typhus epidemic of 1941-42 itself is attributed to the massive intakes of infected Soviet prisoners-of-war. The invasion of the Soviet Union is one factor of significant change during the war not described in 1940 by Professor E. Zimmermann in his paper on the epidemiology of typhus in the Generalgouvernement. Through diplomatic channels the French were able to get their POWs held by the Germans innoculated with the Weigl vaccine, thus mitigating the effects of the epidemic. There was no similar relief effort for Soviet prisoners or Jews.

Hubert Duboc, "La mission Lemierre et Sohier dans les camps de prisonniers de guerre en Allemagne en janvier 1942." Histoire des Sciences Medicales. Tome 28:1 (1994); pp. 33-39.

The Allies had an enormous task as well to contain the spread of the disease after the war, but that goes beyond our topic, the Homicidal Gas-Chambers (HGCs) at Auschwitz and Birkenau from 1941-44.

It is clear that while typhus may indeed by "easy and inexpensive" to treat by today's standards, to argue, as the Exterminationists do, that typhus is a MYTH is of profound historical ignorance.

Well, in spite of Professor [John] Zimmerman trying to argue that typhus is a myth, that the mortality is not that high, we have cited two articles above which say that without an antibiotic administered the typhus mortality in a Burundi jail was 15 percent. Other sources give typhus mortality rates as high as 20 - 40 percent if untreated.
Mortality/Morbidity: Epidemic typhus has the most severe clinical presentation of the typhus group of rickettsial infections. In severe disease, gangrene may occur and lead to loss of digits, limbs, or other appendages. The vasculitic process may also lead to CNS dysfunction, ranging from dullness of mentation to coma, multiorgan system failure, and death. The mortality rate in untreated persons may be as low as 20% in healthy individuals and as high as 60% in elderly or debilitated persons. Since the advent of widely available antibiotic treatment, mortality rates have fallen to approximately 3-4%. The mortality rate for treated patients with murine typhus is 1-4% and is almost 0% for scrub typhus.
Some specific data we have comes from two additional articles:

The first one cites documents from the Sikorski Institute that says the Polish Home Army, which numbered up to 350 thousand, had the worst typhus epidemic in February of 1942. Of 7,346 cases of typhus in the Tockoje region evacuated to Teheran, some 1,290 died. That is a mortality rate of 17.56 percent!

Brzezinski, T. "Epidemia duru plamistego w Armii Polskiej w ZSRR (1941-1942)." [The epidemic of typhus in the Polish Army in the USSR (1941-1942).] Archiwum-historii-i-filozofii-medycyny-Polskii-Towarzystwo-Historii-Medycyny-i-Farmacji, V. 62 (3) (Poland: 1997); pp. 231-42. ISSN: 0860-1844.

The second article cites 4,119 cases of typhus in Tokyo in 1914 with 778 deaths. That is a mortality rate of 18.9 percent! It goes on to cite 1946 after the war, and here Japan clocked 32,366 diagnosed typhus cases with 3,351 deaths, a mortality rate of 10.4 percent. Not insignificant indeed.

Watanabe, M. ["An outbreak of epidemic louse-borne typhus in Tokyo 1914: a study on the prevention of epidemics."] Nippon-Ishigaku-Zasshi. [Journal-of-Japanese-history-of-medicine] V. 48 (4) (JAPAN: 2002 Dec); pp. 597-616. ISSN: 0549-3323.

And lest we think that typhus was only a concern among marginalized groups, in Serbia in 1915 of the 400 doctors treating the disease all 400 came down with the infection and of these 126 died, a morbidity rate of 100 percent and a mortality rate of 32 percent.

Paul B. Beeson and Walsh McDermott, eds. "Typhus Group" by John C. Snyder in Cecil-Loeb Textbook of Medicine, 11th ed. (PA: 1963); p. 123.

Typhus was but one lifethreatening disease facing the Germans. If we may refer again to the paper by Professor E. Zimmermann above (Appendix C of "Typhus and the Jews," by F.P. Berg) and also cited by Veritas, Professor Zimmermann notes the morbidity rate of Jews in the Generalgouvernement in 1940:
(1) The epidemiological circumstances of typhus in the Generalgouvernement in the year 1940 were examined thoroughly. (2) The results showed that the highest number of cases occurred within the age groups of 16-20, and that the percentage of Jews affected by typhus was on the average 70-80%, in some communities even 95-97%. (3) The mortality rate generally grew with increasing age. It was no less for Jews than for non-Jews.
If we apply this morbidity rate of about 75 percent to the 200 thousand inmates planned for Birkenau in 1941-42, we get about 150 thousand cases per year, certainly not an unrealistic figure considering that the sick were collected at "Krankenlagern" like Birkenau. This would mean about 15 thousand cases annually in "normal" years. If we then use a nominal mortality rate of 15 percent, again not unreasonable, that is over 20 thousand deaths from typhus alone each year, about 55 per day on average, or in line with what Kramer said for the year 1944. If we assume that the outbreaks will occur seasonally, custered mostly over three months of the year, then we can easily see a figure of 200 deaths per day (on average) is possible, about what was claimed during the epidemic of 1942 when the whole camp was shut down. The crematorias therefore had to be designed adequately to meet such peak loads. All the crematoria at Auschwitz-Birkenau would not have been able to cope with the epidemic at Belsen in 1945, which involved 500 - 600 dead per day in a camp population of only 60 - 80 thousand. Some 13 thousand died after the British liberated the camp.

Trepman, E. "Rescue of the remnants: the British emergency medical relief operation in Belsen Camp 1945." Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps. V. 147 (3), (CANADA: 2001 Oct.); pp. 281-293. ISSN: 0035-8665.

We have not even discussed the epidemiology of dysentery, cholera, malaria, or other hazards to the region, especially during wartime population movements. Not without exaggeration was Poland considered the cordon sanitaire to the West. To this extent infectious disease was "ideologized," as has been noted in various medical journals.

The Negationist Team does not therefore see how the Veritas Team can simply dismiss typhus and other diseases at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Re: NEGATIONIST TEAM 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »


On Cremation

RE: VT 1st Response no. 3. The corpse cremation/incineration capacity of Auschwitz Birkenau
NT: But why did the Germans build crematoria except for homicide?

First of all, the Germans built crematoria ovens and not industrial incinerators such as might be used to dispose of the carcasses of diseased cattle.

So what? Does this answer the question just put?

NT: Crematories are designed so that the fuel is not mixed with the ashes and bones of the corpses--so that the “cremains” of one body are kept separate from the next.

This is how they can be designed and are designed for civilian cremation practice, not how they must necessarily be designed. Keeping apart the cremation remains of the victims of mass gassing was the last thing the killers were concerned with.
Again, there was nothing special about the crematories at Birkenau. Kremas II and III were in fact the same Topf & Sons design used at Buchenwald.

As we noted, these were not industrial incinerators; the fuel was separate from the cremains and the combustion process was not necessarily the fastest nor the most fuel-efficient process possible as a result.

Cremation in crematoria ovens is not a matter of "spontaneous human combustion" using the corpses like cordwood but instead a highly technical process designed by civilian standards for the disposal of the dead, and not merely the expedient disposal of biological waste in wartime.

Short of fantastic stories about cremating multiple bodies at a time--Sonderkommando Henryk Tauber claimed that five were loaded into each muffle with each charge--there is no basis whatever for fantastic cremation capacity at Birkenau.

Here are Tauber's exact words:
"Each muffle [the receptacles of the ovens] could in principle hold four to five corpses. Up to eight muselmen could fit inside."

Deposition of Sonderkommando Member Henryk Tauber, 24th May 1945, in W.Dlugoborski-F. Piper, Auschwitz 1940-1945. Central Issues in the History of the Camp. Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum (2002); Vol.III, p.255. The full deposition is here pp. 244-269.
In addition to any problems caused by lack of the necessary skills to operate the complicated cremation process itself, the firebrick of the muffles was sensitive to heat and not made of the highest quality materials, which caused breakdowns from continuous and excessive use. The walls of the muffles could not come into contact with the material being reduced inside without becoming damaged, as Topf engineer Kurt Prüfer himself noted while in Soviet captivity.

It remains to be shown how five corpses could be cremated in each muffle at once. This was certainly not part of the design, and we are extremely skeptical of the purported Bischoff document (cited by Veritas) claiming that the four crematorias at Birkenau could dispose of 4,416 corpses per day altogether.

This is Holocaust math at its finest!

For even in the unlikely event that experience showed that each of Kremas II or III could dispose of 1,440 corpses in a twenty-four hour time period, according to Bischoff, it would be a mistake to extrapolate such figures--here amounting to four corpses per muffle per hour around the clock. It is probably a postwar falsification of an actual document.

In "Body Disposal at Auschwitz: the End of Holocaust-Denial," John C. Zimmerman writes:
Kurt Prüfer, the Topf engineer who built the 46 Birkenau ovens, stated in a letter on November 15, 1942 that the ovens he installed in the Buchenwald concentration camp had a one third greater output than had previously been thought. [134] Unfortunately, he does not say what number the one third is greater than. However, on the same day he informed the Bauleitung that five triple-muffle furnaces, 15 ovens, could incinerate 800 corpses in 24 hours. [135] This means that a muffle could burn about 53 bodies in a 24 hour period. Reducing the time by four hours means that 44 bodies per muffle could be burned in a 20 hour period.

[134]Text of a letter he wrote on November 15, 1942 in Pressac, Auschwitz, 99.
[135]Pressac, "Machinery of Mass Murder at Auschwitz" 212. ... -disposal/
Even Prüfer's more realistic estimate of 800 corpses in twenty-four hours for the fifteen muffles of either KII or KIII does not allow for any downtime, and each muffle here essentially reduces a corpse about every thirty minutes or 2.22 corpses per muffle per hour of operation.

Again, the question is how much body-disposal was designed for in 1942-43, and the answer is optimistic with our figure of one corpse per hour, which must represent peak cremation capacity only, and assuming an unrealistic duty cycle of 100 percent.

In Soviet captivity Prüfer told his interrogators that each muffle could only reduce one corpse per hour of operation.

From the interrogation of Engineer Kurt Prüfer by Soviet officers of "SMERSH" of the 8th Army, Captain Schatanwoski and Major Moruschenko on March 5, 1946:
Frage: Welche Anzahl von Leichen konnte in Auschwitz pro Stunde in einem Krematorium verbrannt werden?

Antwort: In einem Krematorium, das fünf Öfen oder fünfzehn Öffnungen (Muffeln) aufwies, verbrannte man in einer Stunde fünfzehn Leichen.


"Question: How many bodies could be cremated in Auschwitz per hour?

"Answer: In a crematorium with five ovens or fifteen muffles they cremated in one hour fifteen corpses."

Source: Verhörprotokolle Kurt Prüfers (Interrogation protocol of Kurt Prüfer)
Let's put this into comparative terms as a basic engineering problem. Let us say that we need to run a small hospital during emergencies such as hurricanes when the commerical power is knocked out. If all appliances that can be used in this clinic are in use the power demand is 100 kilowatts.

If the manufacturer recommends that the load on their diesel generator be 50 percent we will need to have a power unit of 200 kilowatts to handle this adequately.

So we install the 200 kW unit and the power is knocked off during the next hurricane. We soon discover, however, that most of the time the average usage of power is only about 20 kilowatts and not anywhere near the peak of 100 kilowatts of backup power that we needed to allow for.

So we are essentially running a 200 thousand watt unit to supply 20 thousand watts, just in case we happen to need the full 100 thousand watts during peak demand periods (and we will). But for most of the time our powerplant is ten times too large!

As a result, we must surely hope that the commercial power will be restored soon because if we figure out the fuel consumption for the bigger motor then we are paying a lot for emergency electrical power unless we are able to somehow scale down the engine during the average periods--perhaps by using a smaller auxillary unit such as 40 kilowatts except during the high-demand loads, or by bringing a series of smaller units online/offline in sucession as demand rises/falls.

To view this problem in another way, just as taking a motorcycle to work would be cheaper than driving a bus to transport one person, a 40 kW unit is likely to be a lot cheaper in terms of capital costs than a bigger motor, and of course more economical in fuel consumption per kilowatt hour generated because it is loaded at a more optimum percentage instead of the paltry ten-percent of the big motor.

Of course we will need to put more units online when the demand peaks or we will not be able to handle it, so there is more capital cost for additional units--and that could be a tradeoff if the peak demand usage becomes normative. In that case we are better off with the equivalent of driving a "bigger bus" and filling it with lots of people, so to speak, as long as the demand can justify it.

The point is that, as the technician, one is able to adjust what we have online operationally with what the demand is when we need it. We are able to put more or less units online to meet variable demands--whether motorcycles, generators or crematoria ovens.

Nowhere at Birkenau do we have an incineration equivalent of a "big bus," such as would be expected from a government plan of systematic and normative mass-murder.

Now, with the process of hygenic cremation instead of generating electrical power, the flexibility of "loading" from the unpredictable "demand" was accomplished with five (three-muffle) crematoria ovens in each of the Kremas II and III buildings. The KIV and KV units were a cheaper design but added sixteen more muffles total in four (four-muffle) ovens (two ovens in each building).

Thus, more ovens could essentially be fired-up and heated to operating temperature to be placed online to handle fluctuating disposal demands when they arose.

So to calculate the peak capacity and then claim that this was the the manufacturer's (i.e., Prüfer's) design criteria for the average load expected is simply absurd. No equipment is intended to be indefinitely operated at a maximum rating. It is also absurd to say that a peak load is the "recommendation" of the manufacturer.

To put it another way, even if a manufacturer claims that its sportscar can do 150 miles per hour, they certainly don't mean that this is a normative rate of operation.

Nor can Prüfer's peak figures account for the inevitable lack of skill of the available crematoria operators--let alone deliberate sabotage. (And who can blame them?) The SS had long discovered the hard way from other industrial processes as simple as baking bricks, digging tunnels and sewing uniforms that sensitive equipment was not skillfully operated by prisoner laborers and that allowances had to be made for this. Prüfer was obviously giving a best-case scenario.

To say that so many could theoretically be disposed of in one day still does not mean that it could be done in long-term practice, and no engineer would think otherwise.

We don't know exactly what the quiescent load the Nazis were expecting was for the crematories, but we do know that in 1942 the deathrate by disease could be 200 - 300 per day with a population of about 30 thousand and that the SS was gearing for a tremendous expansion of the camp of over six times to 200 thousand.

Using Prüfer's interrogation figures of 1 corpse per muffle per hour and a working day of 20 hours with a four-hour pause for maintenance, with Birkenau's 46 muffles we have a maximum daily disposal rate of 920. With an expansion of camp population of six times and the same deathrate as during the typhus epidemic in 1942 we would project a worst-case scenario of 1,333 - 2,000 daily deaths.

In other words, we would project just enough peak cremation capacity to handle possible peak demand, and the Nazis were not ones to underengineer anything.

We also know that the ovens were constantly breaking down in actual use and that bodies buried in massgraves contaminated the groundwater and had to be burned in the open. Either the Nazis grossly misgauged the demand their equipment would be carrying or they were simply unable to build, maintain, and operate suitable cremation capacity for the needs of the camp. This seems hard to believe if they PLANNED the capacity in the first place based on a scenario of mass-murder instead of merely attempting to predict the need for body disposal based on the vagaries of disease and future mortality in light of projected camp expansion.

If the Nazis had planned mass-murder they would have built industrial incinerators not scaled up civilian cremation ovens.

Let's see Tauber's "five corpses per muffle" in experimental scientific context with a crematoria designed for civilian use--as the Topf ovens were, the same model as used at Buchenwald--and then perhaps we can reconcile the actual cremation capacity at Birkenau with the Holocaust math! Until then the Negationist Team regards the exhaustive cremation studies by Carlo Mattogno as definitive (previously cited in our last response).

Sonderkommando stories make good novels but literary nonsense cannot substitute for science.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Re: NEGATIONIST TEAM 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »

Part IX

Exterminationist Smoke and Mirrors

Or, the Rorshach test...

A psychological test in which a subject's interpretations of a series of standard inkblots are analyzed as an indication of personality traits, preoccupations, and conflicts.
In response to our Allied aerial photograph from May, 1944 which shows no feverish activity consistent with the liquidation of the Hungarian Jews, Veritas presents an aerial photograph of Birkenau released recently by British Intelligence that purports to show smoke from the open-air burning of bodies behind Krema V.

One wonders why these wartime aerial photographs were not released to the public or published decades earlier. In any case, one cannot precisely tell what is being burned here.

As Krema IV and V were located near the Kanada section of the camp, where baggage and valuables were stored, sorted, recycled, or disposed of, we do not see any reason to suppose that it must necessarily be the burning of bodies. The Sauna or camp delousing installation is located near here as well. It might as well be trash burning, or infested clothing from cadavers that is not destined for fumigation and recycling. We know that garbage was incinerated in the trash incinerators inside each of the chimney structures of Kremas II and III.

Even if this is the open-air burning of cadavers, and does corroborate the famous Sonderkommando "spaghetti" photograph, we know that the crematoria ovens were frequently broken down. Krema IV appears to have been defective and hardly to have worked at all, for example.

According to Revisionist Carlo Mattogno, "Flames and Smoke from the Chimneys of Crematoria: Optical Phenomena of Actual Cremations in the Concentration Camps of the Third Reich," The Revisionist v. 2:1 (2004), pp. 73-78, the crematories might produce smoke when operational. Since no smoke from the crematories is observable, it is possible that all were broken down at the same time and they are burning cadavers in the photo or the Germans are simply burning trash.

We are not disputing the occasional open-air cremation of bodies, particularly before sufficient crematoria capacity was constructed, nor that human remains can be found forensically at the camp.

What we dispute is the Genocide of millions, primarily employing homicidal gaschambers. We feel that the forensic analyses come far short of quantifying the remains in a manner consistent with this primary claim.

In particular, what is more important than an aerial picture showing smoke is the LACK of it in all the other pictures available, including the one from May, 1944 at the height of the Hungarian action. We therefore consider these photographs inconclusive to the topic question, that thousands were murdered in homicidal gaschambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Fuzzy pictures, while interesting and (unfortunately) rare, serve mainly as Rorschach tests for Holocaust Belief.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm

Re: NEGATIONIST TEAM 2nd Response 6/22/2004

Post by Roberto »

Part X
The Alleged Gas Chamber in Krema I


The first documented gassing experiments took place at Auschwitz in the second half of 1941 - probably the first days of September - in the cellar of a building called "Block 11" of the Auschwitz main camp. Later a room of the main camp's crematorium was adapted as a gas chamber. [...]
The Veritas team does not base the alleged homicidal gassings in Krema I of the Auschwitz main camp on material- and/or on documentary evidence, but rather on the testimonies of three "eyewitnesses," namely: Rudolf Höß, Pery Broad and Stanislaw Jankowski. These people describe the alleged homicidal gassings inside the morgue of Krema I, a room which has no windows and doors to the outside, with two to six insertion holes in the roof depending on which "eyewitness" to believe, a room which is not equipped with a forced ventilation system. The death of the victims occurred allegedly within a few minutes according to Broad. The "Sonderkommando," wearing no gasmasks, then start to drag the dead bodies into the oven room for cremation after only 30 minutes, while the Zyklon B is still discharging poisonous HCN for more than 2 hours into the whole building. Furthermore, considering that Krema I is located adjacent to the SS Hospital at Auschwitz, the patients would be at risk of poisoning by the HCN gas, as the floor drains are connected to the main sewer of the camp, thus potentially allowing gas into every building at the facility.

We must conclude that there were no homicidal gassings in Krema I as alleged and that these three witnesses were lying with respect to the homicidal gas chamber in Krema I.

Detailed Response

The Veritas team referred in their opening statement to the first alleged homicidal gassing experiences in Krema I in the Auschwitz main camp. Our esteemed believing friends based this on "eyewitness" statements made by Auschwitz commandant Höß, by SS-man Pery Broad, and Stanislaw Jankowski (alias Alter Feinsilber, alias Kaskowiak, alias Alter Szmul Fajnzylberg). That guy has more aliases than a dog has flees! He also changed his age a few times!

Of course, as is to be expected, any material- or documentary evidence was not included in their voluminous opening statement about Krema I. Because there aren't any. Because Krema I was never used as a homicidal gas chamber!

They quote "eyewitness" Höß:
While the transport was detraining, holes were pierced in the earth and concrete ceiling of the mortuary. The Russians were ordered to undress in an anteroom; they then quietly entered the mortuary, for they had been told they were to be deloused. The whole transport exactly filled the mortuary to capacity. The doors were then sealed and the gas shaken down through the holes in the roof. I do not know how long this killing took.
The transport consisted of 900 men, and our gullible friends from the other side actually believe, and attempt to make us and others believe also, that while the Russian soldiers were disembarking, someone shoveled the earth free and quickly chiseled a couple of holes into the steel reinforced concrete ceiling which has an estimated thickness of 10 inches.


Rudolf Höß could never have used a hammer and chisel in his life if he makes such a dumb statement as to cut a hole in a 10 inch reinforced concrete ceiling on the fly.

Even the Holocaust guru and pharmacist by profession, J.-C. Pressac characterized the witness accounts about the alleged homicidal gassings in Krema I as being full of contradictions, technical impossibilities and of general incredibility. He observed about Krema I a "general tendency to exaggerate" and explains the gross errors and technical impossibilities in the eyewitness accounts and writings of camp commandant Höß by stating:

"He [Höß] was present, without seeing."

Let us take a look at the plan of Krema I:

Click Image for Enlargement!

Ground plan of crematorium I in Auschwitz I (main camp) in its original condition. The morgue was later alleged to have been used as a “gas chamber.”

1: Vestibule; 2: Laying-out room; 3: Wash room; 4: Morgue;
5: Oven room; 6: Coke; 7: Urns

Source: Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers. (NY: 1989).

After the Zyklon-B pellets were dropped through the alleged holes onto the heads of the unfortunate 900 guys who stood like sardines in a can inside the morgue, and after they were all dead, how on earth was the gas removed?

No documents exist concerning the installation of an electrical motor-driven forced ventilation system for this morgue. According to Mattogno a de-aeration pipe existed between the left underground flue of cremation oven No.2 leading to the stack and the morgue, which caused some air suction from the morgue.

The head of the Auschwitz Museum, Franciszek Piper has the opinion that:
"In the case of Krema I there were no ventilators. The doors were opened and the gas was allowed to ventilate by convection."

Source: D.D. Desjardin, "My Visit to Auschwitz-Birkenau, May 30-31, 1996," Interview with F. Piper.
What doors? What is this guy talking about? And the plan shows no windows either.

Are we supposed to believe that the HCN gas removed itself gradually through the only doors into the oven room and the wash room and from there into the free air? And this nonsense is believed (or has to be believed) by our "establishment" historians, and "guardians of the shrine" and similar types?

But maybe our clever court historians figured out that HCN could escape through the insertion holes in the roof, since HCN is lighter than air. Sorry fellows, this does not work either! Nitrogen is lighter than oxygen also, and it does not go up either, leaving us breathing pure oxygen. They cannot have been assured that the lethal gas would necessarily rise.

And what happened to the alleged insertion holes when Krema I was modified into an air raid shelter?

A very detailed description of this work was in a letter from the Auschwitz Air Raid Warden:

"Herstellung der für die Beheitzungsöfen, sowie für die Ent- und Belüftung erforderlichen Mauerdurchbrüche und Schläuche."

(Construction of the wall openings and ducts for the heating furnaces and air intake and outlet.)

Source: Letter from the Auschwitz Air Raid Warden, Aug. 26, 1944, TCIDK 502-1-401

There is no mention of any filling-in of any old existing holes pierced in the roof but rather of the incorporation of gas-tight windows and doors as well as the piercing of new holes:
Installation of gas-tight doors, window shutters, and windows, provision of the openings in the masonry necessary for the heating ovens, as well as for the ventilation outlets and intakes and pipes.
This is a strong indication that before this time there were neither gas-tight doors and windows nor any other openings for ventilation installations or for any other purpose like Zyklon introduction holes; otherwise such old openings would have been used for this purpose, or their filling would have been mentioned.

Let us see now what SS-man Pery Broad, the second "eyewitness" of our esteemed defenders of the established legend, had to say about Krema I:

Broad had a problem with a report which he prepared while working for the British shortly after the war. This report was transcribed and submitted to the court during the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt. This transcribed "Broad Report" is available from the Auschwitz Museum. The original report seems to be lost.

A witness with the name of Winter testified during the Frankfurt trial that the submitted transcribed report agreed word for word with the original, as he remembered after 15 years! The one submitted during the Frankfurt trial however seems to be doctored up by the Poles. According to Broad it contained information which he could not have known. Pressac states that this former SS-man according to this report comes across rather like a Polish patriot! (Broad described in this report Poles who were condemned to death as "patriots" and "martyrs" and the SS-men as "brutish SS-beasts.") And Dr. Stäglich feels that the German in the report is extremely poor and that the submitted report was probably written by a foreigner. Broad was considered "intelligent," with an excellent education, who even studied at the technical University in Berlin. He would not have committed such linguistic errors.

Broad mentioned an unrealistic time of two minutes gassing time until most of the victims became unconscious, and a further two minutes until they died.

He also mentioned exhaust ventilators. These, however, cannot be proven with documents. Nor are they mentioned by Pressac and Piper. He also does not mention the time interval between the end of the gassing and the clearing of the chamber. Nor whether the "Sonderkommando" were wearing gasmasks.

Now to Jankowski, the man with many names and different ages, who said that:

- The morgue in Krema I had no windows, but two flaps in the ceiling, electric lights, an entrance door from the hall and a second from the oven room.

- The morgue served to store dead bodies, and for the shooting of inmates.

- There were three ovens, each with two openings. Each opening could hold up to 12 dead bodies, but there were never more than 5 used at a time. They would burn faster that way.

- He states that there was still no gassing by the end of 1942 in Auschwitz and that he observed only one gassing in November or December 1942. He was locked together with the other Jews in the coke room, observed a bunch of 400 Jews approaching. After 30 minutes it was their job to drag the dead bodies to the adjacent oven room.

How is it possible, that the "Sonderkommando" could enter the morgue after 30 minutes while the Zyklon-B was still discharging the poison gas for another 2½ hours, without wearing gas masks?

The man Stanislaw Jankowski--alias Alter Feinsilber, alias Kaskowiak, alias Alter Szmul Fajnzylberg--is obviously lying!

Veritas Team:
One of its [the HCN poison gas] characteristics was that is was much more toxic for warm-blooded animals than for insects and could kill the former in much lesser quantities and time than the latter.
A gas density of 3000 to 4000 ppm released instantly was used during US gas executions with HCN. The condemned lost consciousness within two minutes and died after 10 to 15 minutes.

Zyklon-B discharges its HCN content only gradually over a period of about 3 hours. Without any air circulation equipment it becomes obvious that considerably more Zyklon-B is required to kill people than lice. It is estimated about 10 times as much.

Something for the Holocaust student:
Germar Rudolf:

It is obvious that the killing times reported by the alleged eyewitnesses of mass gassings with Zyklon B in Auschwitz and elsewhere, which are similar or shorter than those in U.S. executions, would have required similar concentrations as applied in the U.S. executions (0.3%-1%). As a matter of fact, Zyklon B releases its hydrogen cyanide only very slowly, about 10% in the first 10 min.[38] Furthermore, since there was obviously no appliance to distribute the poison gas quickly all over the entire room, more minutes would have passed before all victims would have been surrounded by high concentration of hydrogen cyanide (even those standing in the corners of the room). We must therefore assume that the minimum amount of Zyklon B to be introduced in these rooms would have been in the order of magnitude of ten times the amount normally used for delousing procedures, in order to reach a similar concentration already in the first 5 to 10 minutes of the execution even in the hindmost corner of that room.[39] This would have been the only way to make sure that all victims in such a room would have been killed in the first 10 minutes after the Zyklon B had started releasing its poison.

The difference between the concentration of hydrogen cyanide required to kill humans as given by toxicological handbooks and referred to by Prof. van Pelt (0.03%) and those concentration established here (1%) can be explained easily.

The toxicological literature gives mainly two threshold values of poisonous substances:

1. The lethal dose 100%, LD100, which gives the concentration or quantity of poison required to kill all (100%) individuals of an observed species. This value is used to make sure that all individuals are successfully killed.

2. The lethal dose 1%, LD1, which gives the concentration or quantity of poison required to kill 1% of all individuals of an observed species. This value is used to mark a threshold beyond which an exposition to that poison is definitively dangerous.

Obviously, both values differ enormously, i.e. the LD100 value is frequently much higher than the LD1 value. When talking about the quantity necessary to kill lice, the literature uses the LD100 value, because we want to make sure to kill all of them, whereas when dealing with security risks of humans, the LD1 or even lower values are used to make sure that no human is being killed. Therefore, it does not make sense to compare both values with each other: A louse in bad shape can be killed by only 0,03% hydrogen cyanide, as it is very well possible that a smart and healthy human can survive a 5 minute exposure to 1% of hydrogen cyanide. Finally, it is quite a difference if one has inhaled an amount of poison that is lethal, or if one has already died. Though the threshold value of some 100 mg of a soluble cyanide salt (or 300 ppm of HCN in the air) may most likely kill most people, it can actually take very long until one is dead. On the other hand, if one wants to kill or die quickly, one has to apply a big overdose to achieve that with certainty.

[Emphasis added.]
Data from some Eyewitness Testimonies
Source: F. Piper, "The Methods of Mass Murder," in W. Dlugoborski-F. Piper (eds.) Auschwitz 1940-1945: Central Issues in the History of the Camp, Vol. III. PMO (Oswiecim, POLAND: 2000), pp.127-132.

A) The number of openings in the roof of Krema I to insert Zyklon B:
6 by Filip Muller in Eyewitness Auschwitz.Three Years in the Gas Chamber(NY: 1979), p. 38.
6 by Pery Broad in KL Auschwitz Seen by the SS, (Oswiecim: 2002) p. 130.
4- by Adam Zlobnicki, APMO, Collection of Testimonies, vol. 96, p. 60.
3 for J.C. Pressac, "The Machinery of Mass Murder at Auschwitz," in Gutma-Berenbaum, p. 209.
5 for D.Keren, J.McCarthy and H.W. Mazal, "The Ruins of Gas Chambers: A forensic Investigation of crematorium at Auschwitz I and Auschwitz-Birkenau," in Holocaust and Genocide Studies vol.18, nr.1, part IV pp. 97ss.
2 (!)by Alter Feinsilber (former inmate) APMO, Hoss Trial, vol. 1, p. 14.

B) The capacity of the Gas chamber:
200-300 by Hans Stark, Archiv der Staatsanwaltschaft in Köln, cat. nr. Sk.Zst. II/3/14.
300 by Michal Kula (former inmate), APMO, Hoss trial, vol. 25, pp. 17-18.
600 by Josef Koczorowski (former inmate), APMO, Hoss trial, vol. 4, p. 32.
700 by F. Müller°, cit., p. 49.
Up to 800 for Erich Kulka (former inmate), Die Todesfabrik, Berlin, 1958, p. 110.
900 Rudolf Höß, KL Auschwitz Seen cit. p. 84.
1000 Tadeusz Pietrzykowski (former inmate), APMO, Höß Trial, vol. 27, p. 152.
+1000 Kazimierz Halgas (former inmate), APMO, Collection of Testimonies, vol. 95, p. 239.

C) Nationality of Victims
Only Russian POW's by R. Höß, APMO Hoss Trial vol. 27, p. 156.
Only Russian POW's and Jews by Jan Krokowski (former inmate), APMO, Hoss Trial, vol. 4 p. 21.
Polish POW's by Tadeusz Grabowski (former inmate), APMO, SS Staff Trial, vol. 4 p. 229; APMO Hoss Trial vol. 26, p. 30.

D) Start of Gassings
September 1941 by historian Danuta Czech, Auschwitz Chronicle (NY: 1990), p. 90.
October 1941 by Andrej Badenitz (former inmate), APMO, Hoss Trial vol.16 p. 89; January, 1942 for J.C. Pressac op cit. p. 209.

Happy Holocausting!
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest