He lists 12 witnesses including their testimony ( for some ) in respect of the type of engine used in the gassing procedure . They all appear to be of the opinion that the engine was diesel (apart from Fuchs, but BT has classed him as a 'diesel' witness anyway based on other rationale ).
My first question to Been There is :
1) Which of these 12 witnesses does he believe to be liars ( or 'lie witnesses' as he referred to them in his opening sentence) ?
As Been There has not provided us with a conclusion in this section, unlike the others , it leaves us guessing as to the purpose of providing such a list. Considering that all of these 'eye/lie witnesses' he has listed are all of the opinion the engine was diesel, one can only guess that Been There is still keen for 'diesel' to be the official line from the 'holocaust industry' . If this is the official stance then it makes it easier for BT and his ilk to unleash attacks on the 'hoaxers' , since it has been long been established that diesel engines are not really that effective in the 'Jew gassing' department .
Second question for Been There :
2) What was the purpose for listing these witnesses who all mentioned the engine being diesel ?
Now, lets look at his eye/lie witnesses and what they actually said :
In summary, 2 of them ( Gley and Semigodov) say it was either diesel OR gasoline/other. 1 other (Gomerski) admits to being unsure because he has little knowledge of engines. Another (Dubois) admits to knowing only through hearsay, then we have the infamous Gerstein who has been dismissed by deniers for being insane. More importantly, these 5 mentioned and the remaining 7 others (apart from Fuchs) would have had no direct involvement with the engines ( eg a bookeeper and hygienist !! ) so this brings me to my third question for Been There :
3) What makes you assume that these 11 witnesses (not inc Fuchs) , would have the necessary knowledge and ability to be 100% certain of the type of engine that they either saw with their own eyes or just heard about from others ?
Basically, it appears that all BT is doing is creating a straw man argument. He is desperate for the witnesses to claim diesel for reasons I pointed out just above my question number 2 . Unfortunately for him, the witnesses he quotes are of a more 'inferior' level compared to the more 'expert' witnesses in regards to this issue, ie individuals who actually OPERATED the engines, being Fuchs, Bauer and Hodl who all claimed the gassing engine was gasoline . Note Hodl ( from Sobibor) even categorically denied that the diesel engine was used , even though one existed in the camp !! Here is a quote from his testimony that appears in the HC blog http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... _9432.html
So, to conclude it appears BT's post regarding the 'diesel' witnesses appears to be pretty worthless really , unless he could demonstrate otherwise. The witnesses who claimed the engines were gasoline were more qualified than the other motley crew of 'don't knows' 'hearsay merchants' 'bookkeepers' and 'the insane' , so it should be these witnesses who help us determine the nature of the gassing engine used by the Nazi serial killers to murder hundreds of thousands of innocent Jewish civilians. end of story. What say you, BT ?In the engine room there were indeed two engines. There was a petrol engine, probably from a Russian tank, and a diesel engine. The latter was never used, however.[