More senile shit from cowardly and dishonest CODOH moderator "Lily", not worth a comment.Lily wrote: ↑Fri Jul 14, 2017 8:18 pmHilarious, Roberto cites the thoroughly discredited phony Zionist database for this Rothstein that the CODOH Forum has easily debunked. Roberto just pretends it didn't happen.
In the end Roberto got hoisted by his own petard, yet again.
Then there's Roberto Muehlekamp & Andy Mathis's gay obsession over this 'Hannover' guy. Seriously, while I certainly own Mathis & Muehlnkamp, this 'Hannover' not only owns them, but has them going crazy 24/7, he has them eating out of his hand.
Andy Mathis & Roberto Muehlenkamp really should get new boyfriends.
And OUCH!!, here's the CODOH Forum's Moderator's recent scolding of Roberto:http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11224Roberto:
You continue to post redundant text, even irrelevant text, all the while you generally ignore what has been posted and the specific challenges put to you.
Please debate in good faith, please review our simple guidelines.
I guess in the end what Mathis & Roberto say here is useless since so very few people actually read their silliness at RODOH anyway; but tons of readers per day read their smackdowns at the CODOH Forum.
Life is good.
Meanwhile, I've submitted the posts on the CODOH forum's thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11231. Quite surprisingly, both were approved (meaning that Hannover Lily was either drunk and hit the wrong key or was replaced by a moderator with more sense and guts, the latter of which would be great. Just in case the latter is not the case and Hannover changes his mind after recovering from his hangover, I have taken a screenshot of the thread as it looks like.
After reproducing the posted messages, I'll have a look at the silly excuses invoked by "Lily" to disapprove my previous posts.
Roberto wrote:Hannover wrote:Roberto in response to my questions said:
[,,,] [Responses to questions not quoted, please look them up in my previous post on this thread.]Should one necessarily expect the relatively few air photos taken to show movements of people or vehicles in the direction of the crematoria? Such would only be the case if by coincidence an air photo was taken at a time when there were such movements, or if such movements occurred all day on a day on which one or more air photographs were taken so that an air photo taken at any time of that day would have captured them. The former (coincidence) need not have happened, the latter (constant movement all day) is unlikely to have happened.Hannover wrote:1. The aerial photos show no such thing.
Who said that mass extermination could be kept secret from inmates? It could not even be kept secret from the local population. Höss wrote about the problem in the already mentioned notes attached to the autobiography he wrote in Polish captivity (Rudolf Höß: "Die »Endlösung der Judenfrage« im KL Auschwitz", Staatliches Auschwitz-Museum (Hg.), Auschwitz in den Augen der SS. Rudolf Höß, Pery Broad, Johann Paul Kremer. Warszawa: Verlag Interpress, 1992, pp. 75–94):Hannover wrote: Of course other inmates would have seen them supposedly go in alive and not come out or according to Roberto, come out dead. Some 'secret' operation that would have been.
My translation:Schon bei den ersten Verbrennungen im Freien zeigte es sich, daß auf die Dauer dies nicht durchzuführen sei. Bei schlechtem Wetter oder starkem Wind trieb der Verbrennungsgeruch viele Kilometer weit und führte dazu, daß die ganze umwohnende Bevölkerung von den Juden-Verbrennungen sprach, trotz der Gegenpropaganda von Seiten der Partei und Verwaltungsdienststellen. Es waren zwar alle an der Vernichtungsaktion beteiligten SS-Angehörigen besonders streng verpflichtet, über die gesamten Vorgänge zu schweigen. Spätere SS-Gerichtsverhandlungen aber zeigten, daß von Seiten der Beteiligten doch nicht geschwiegen wurde. Auch erhebliche Strafen könnten die Schwatzhaftigkeit nicht verhindern.
And this was Oswald Kaduk at the Franfurt Auschwitz Trial (Herman Langbein, Der Auschwitz-Prozess, pp. 101f., my translation:Already during the first incinerations in the open it became apparent that things could not be done this way in the long run. When there was bad weather or strong wind the smell of burning spread over many kilometers and led to the whole surrounding population talking about the burning of Jews, despite the counterpropaganda by party and administration entities. It is true that all SS-men participating in the extermination action were under especially rigorous obligation to keep silent about these events. However, later SS-trial proceedings showed that the participants didn’t keep silent after all. Even considerable penalties could not impede the chattiness.
[Langbein:]Anger gets hold of Kaduk when one elegant gentleman after the other, former SS-Obergruppenführer who now can remember nothing anymore, is allowed to leave the witness stand unhindered:
Kaduk: When the ovens were burning there was a darting flame five meters high, which could be seen from the station. The whole station was full of civilians. Nobody said anything. Trains with soldiers on leave were also there. My wife arrived, and I pushed her away. I have no time for you, I told her. Often the trains with soldiers on leave had stopovers at Auschwitz, and the whole station was covered by a smoke screen. The Wehrmacht officers looked out of the window and asked why the smell, so sweet. But none of them had the courage to ask: What is going on here? This is no sugar factory, after all. Why the chimneys?
The Allies also knew. All they had to do was to demolish the railway connection. The thing with the Jews was the greatest of crimes. But unfortunately nobody knew anything. All the Gruppenführer and Obergruppenführer who testified here know nothing anymore. Well, then I say, then the Jews went to Auschwitz on their own free will.I don’t care about any "storyline" (whatever that is supposed to mean), I only care about evidence. That the mass extermination couldn’t be concealed even from the local population let alone "the camp in general" I have already mentioned above. The only ones who didn’t know what was going on were the new arrivals. A scenario in which the "next batch of Jews" might be waiting outside while the previous batch was being gassed might only occur on days on which the number of arriving deportees required more than one gassing cycle per crematorium, and then only if the "next batch of Jews" could not be kept in a secluded part of the camp, from which the crematoria could not be seen, until there was sufficient room in the gas chamber(s). Another defendant at the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial, Stefan Baretzki, stated that there was such a secluded part of the camp in the summer of 1944, called "Mexiko", during the peak time of gassing and cremation operations at Auschwitz-Birkenau:Hannover wrote:2, Indeed the storyline says an SS man stood on top of the crematorium / 'gas chambers' roof and dropped the alleged Zyklon-B into the alleged 'gas chambers'. Of course that would have been in front of the alleged next batch of Jews, thereby seen by them and the camp in general. Some 'secret surprise' that would have been.
(Langbein, as above, p. 89.)Baretzki: Im Sommer 1944 wurden sehr viele Leute nach Auschwitz geschickt. Sie sind alle nach Mexiko hineingeschickt worden; dort gab es keine Verpflegung, kein Licht, und sobald Platz in der Gaskammer war, sind sie von dort in die Gaskammer gekommen. Mexiko, das war offiziell ein Ausweichlager. Tausende sind dort hineingestopft worden.
SS-man Pery Broad, in the report that bears his name ("Broad-Bericht ", Auschwitz in den Augen der SS, pp. 95-139) mentioned occasions during the Hungarian operation in the summer of 1944 when the next contingent was taken into the undressing room right after the gas chamber had been emptied from the last contingent, but he did so in connection with crematoria III (IV) and IV (V), in which the gas was introduced not through the roof but through openings on the side of the building, and cremation was not done in cremation ovens one floor above but in open-air pyres behind the crematorium, which meant that the corpses could be removed from the gas chambers more quickly. Broad wrote:Baretzki: In the summer of 1944 very many people were sent to Auschwitz. They were all put into Mexiko; there they had no food, no light, and as soon as there was place in the gas chamber, they were sent from there into the gas chamber. Mexiko was officially a reserve camp. Thousands were stuffed in there.
My translation:Es ging pausenlos. Man hatte kaum die letzte Leiche aus den Kammern gezogen und über den mit Kadavern übersäten Platz hinter den Krematorien zur Brandgrube geschleift, als schon in der Halle die nächsten zur Vergasung ausgezogen wurden ...
In crematoria III(IV) and IV(V) operation was probably organized in such a manner that the new arrivals could see neither the introduction of the gas nor the dragging-out of corpses to the burning pits, which took place on the other side of the building. What they would see and smell was the smoke from the burning of corpses behind the crematorium. Also, the next contingent wouldn’t have to be taken from the trains or from "Mexiko" to the crematoria before the previous contingent had been moved to the burning pits. It was all a matter of coordination. According to Broad about 10,000 people per day arrived in the summer of 1944, and the camps roads were crammed with new contingents being taken to the crematoria as the reinforced Sonderkommando inmates feverishly worked to empty the gas chambers. But Broad’s estimate of daily arrivals is exaggerated, as is his estimate whereby a total of about half a million people were exterminated at Birkenau within a few weeks in the summer of 1944. According to Höss (as above) the highest number of people gassed and cremated within 24 hours at Birkenau was about 9,000, and that he stated to have happened only on one single day in which, due to train delays, 5 instead of the expected 3 transports arrived and these were also fuller than usual. But that number is probably also exaggerated. According to Pressac’s calculations (Les Crematoires d’Auschwitz. La Machinerie du Meurt de Masse, Portuguese translation by Editorial Notícias, Lisbon 1993, p. 215), the Birkenau gas chambers, crematoria and open air pyres could kill up to 300,000 people within 70 days with a daily capacity of 3,300, which could be enlarged to 4,300 if necessary, using the following installations:It was going on without a break. One had barely dragged the last corpse from the chambers and dragged it over the square covered by corpses to the burning pits behind the crematoria, when in the hall the next in turn were undressed for gassing ...
• Crematorium I(II) and II(III): 1,000 per day each, one single gassing run possible per day.
• Crematorium V - 1,000 to 2,000 per day, two daily gassing runs possible because the block of three gas chambers was ventilated and the cremation was done in open-air pits.
• Bunker 2 - 3,000 per day [the total numbers mentioned above suggest that Pressac meant to say "300" instead of "3,000"), non-ventilated gas chamber and cremation in pits.
Slightly more than 300,000 Hungarian Jews were killed in the late spring and summer of 1944 according to the research of German historians Christian Gerlach and Götz Aly (Das letzte Kapitel, pages 275 ff., 286 ff.) About 425,000 Jews arrived at Auschwitz within 16 May and 11 July 1944 (57 days), of which about 110,000 were selected as laborers according to Gerlach and Aly. The remaining 315,000 were gassed, though not necessarily within those 57 days. The "Mexiko" reserve camp mentioned by Baretzki made it possible to keep arrived non-laborers "in store" until there was enough gassing and cremation capacity for them. Pressac, see above, considers the killing to have been done within 70 days.
The above means that even during the Hungarian Operation, the most intensive killing period at Auschwitz-Birkenau, a scenario in which a next contingent was led to a crematorium before the dead from the previous gassing had been wholly removed from the gas chamber(s) would be a rare occasion, if it happened at all. No such case is held to have happened in crematoria I(II) and II(III), which had only one gassing run per day, so a scenario in which a "next batch" would watch an SS-man pouring Zyklon B into an underground gas chamber is unlikely.
The Hungarian Operation aside, arriving transports were quite manageable with only one gassing run per crematorium, and sometimes without even having to use more than one crematorium, during most days of the camps’s operation. According to a compilation of transports available under http://holocaustcontroversies.yuku.com/ ... t1806.html, the most intensive period bar the Hungarian Operation was between 1 and 6 August 1943, when 25,071 Jews were gassed – about 4,200 per day, requiring Pressac’s enlarged capacity scenario mentioned above, with more corpses being burned in the open if the crematoria were not working at full capacity. As the next transport arrived only on 10.8.1943, gassing and cremation could also be done at a more leisurely pace provided that there was a place in the camp to keep "excess" deportees until there was room for them. Also in this period, however, there would be no more than one gassing per day in each of crematoria I(II) and II(III).
The witnesses were SS-men and members of the Sonderkommando, and a scenario of "those waiting outside" was improbable even at peak times, as mentioned above. As to the gassing times, Hannover refers to a "storyline" or "current narrative" as if there were a single generally accepted narrative regarding every detail of the gassing and body disposal process. Actually there are several secondary sources on these subjects, and Hannover has identified none of them. A primary source mentioning a 30-hour period is Rudolf Höss, who in his above-mentioned notes stated that within 20 minutes at maximum after the gas was introduces no one was moving anymore and after 30 minutes the doors were opened and the forced ventilation was turned on.Hannover wrote:3. Yep, the current narrative says about half an hour, but Roberto denies there is an actual narrative. Roberto simply dodges what the story he's tying to defend actually claims.
Problem is that there are 'witnesses' that claim a few minutes, utterly impossible, as is the current laughable narrative.
And how would so called 'witnesses' have known when the alleged 'screaming' stopped? If they knew then those allegedly waiting outside would have known.Straw-man, as no historian or court of law based any findings of fact on Nyiszli’s numbers (Höss mentioned 9,000 per day on a single occasion, and even that is probably too high) , and Nyiszli was referred to not as concerns numbers but as concerns the dumping of cremation remains into the Vistula, regarding which he was in all probability right, as he was regarding other details according to Pressac , even if his numbers were widely exaggerated ("The description is entirely accurate, EXCEPT for certain FIGURES which are very WRONG indeed. " – AUSCHWITZ: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, p. 473 (http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... 0473.shtml)Hannover wrote:4. Roberto's own previously cited Nyiszli said 20,000 a day. Laughable impossibility
Actually one such occasion is mentioned in the diary of Dr. Johann Paul Kremer ("Tagebuch Johann Paul Kremer", Auschwitz in den Augen der SS, pp. 140–207.) The entry of 5 September 1942 includes the following information:Hannover wrote:He has no proof that others were "gassed on occasion".
My translation:Heute mittag bei einer Sonderaktion aus dem F.K.L31 (»Muselmänner«): das Schrecklichste der Schrecken. [Rand: *Truppenarzt] Hschf. Thilo* hat Recht, wenn er mir heute sagte, wir befänden uns hier am anus mundi.
At his trial in Cracow Höss explained what he had meant in the above diary entryToday at noon present at a special action from the F.K.L31 (»Muselmänner«): the horror of horrors. [marginal note * troop doctor Hschf. Thilo* is right when he told me that here we are at the anus mundi.
(Quoted under http://www.vho.org/D/atuadh/II24.html)Besonders unangenehm war die Vergasung von ausgemergelten Frauen aus dem Frauenlager, die allgemein als «Muselmänner» bezeichnet wurden. Ich erinnere mich, dass ich einmal beim Vergasen einer solchen Frauengruppe am Tage teilnahm. Wie gross diese Gruppe war, kann ich nicht angeben. Als ich in die Nähe des Bunkers kam, sassen sie angekleidet auf der Erde: Da sie in abgetragener Lagerkleidung waren, wurden sie nicht in die Ausziehbaracke gelassen, sondern sie zogen sich im Freien aus. Aus dem Benehmen dieser Frauen schloss ich, dass sie sich darüber klar waren, welches Schicksal sie erwartete, da sie bei den SS-Männern um Gnade flehten und weinten; jedoch wurden alle in die Gaskammer gejagt und vergast. Als Anatom hatte ich viele schreckliche Sachen gesehen, ich hatte viel mit Leichen zu tun gehabt, jedoch das, was ich damals sah, liess sich mit nichts vergleichen. Unter den Eindrücken, die ich damals empfing, schrieb ich am 5. 9. 1942 eben in mein Tagebuch: Das Schrecklichste der Schrecken. Hauptscharführer Tilo hat recht, wenn er mir heute sage, wir befänden uns hier am anus mundi, an der «Aftermündung der Welt». Diese Bezeichnung gebrauchte ich deshalb, weil ich mir gar nichts Abscheulicheres und Ungeheuerlicheres vorstellen konnte.
Especially unpleasant was the gassing of emaciated women from the women’s camp, which were generally called «Muselmänner». I remember that I once took part in the gassing of such a group of women during the day. How large this group was I cannot tell. When I came close to the bunker, they were sitting dressed on the ground: as they were in worn-out camp clothing, they were not let inside the undressing barracks, but had to undress in the open. From the behavior of these women I concluded that they were aware of what fate awaited them, as they begged the SS-men for mercy and cried; however they were all chased into the gas chamber and gassed. As an anatomist I have seen many horrible things, had to a lot to do with corpses, but what I saw back then could not be compared with anything. Under the impressions that I got at that time I wrote the following in my diary on 5.9.1942: the horror of horrors. Hauptscharführer Tilo is right when he told me today that here we were at the anus mundi, at the «anus opening of the world». This designation I used because I could not imagine anything more abominable and monstrous.I’m not saying that Hoess was never tortured. He was, by his British captors in March 1946, an experience he vividly described in his memoirs. But he didn’t mention having been tortured afterwards, and there’s no evidence that he was, especially as concern his period in Polish captivity. My source are notes attached to the autobiography, which were obviously written pursuant to his pre-trial interrogations as they suggest answers to questions. If you claim that Höss was in any way coerced by the Poles, you are hereby challenged to do the following:Hannover wrote:5. Roberto continues to cite the forced 'confessions' & horrific torture of commandant Hoess and the laughable things that Hoess said during his 'interrogations', again, Robert is in denial of the well known torture of Hoess.
In fact he has ignored my citations to that torture.
a) Provide any evidence for such coercion,
b) Explain why, despite such claimed coercion, Höss had the cheek to tell his captors the following and record it in the aforementioned notes (Rudolf Höß, "Die »Endlösung der Judenfrage« im KL Auschwitz", Auschwitz in den Augen der SS, pp. 75–94):
My translation:Ich selbst wußte nie die Gesamtzahl, habe auch keine Anhaltspunkte, um sie wiedergeben zu können.
Es sind mir lediglich noch die Zahlen der größeren Aktionen in Erinnerung, die mir wiederholt von Eichmann oder dessen Beauftragten genannt worden waren.
Aus Oberschlesien und GG [Generalgouvernement] 250000
Deutschland und Theresienstad 100000
Die Zahlen der kleineren Aktionen sind mir nicht mehr in Erinnerung, sie waren aber im Vergleich zu obigen Zahlen unbedeutend.
Ich halte die Zahl 2½ Millionen für viel zu hoch. Die Möglichkeiten der Vernichtung hatten auch in Auschwitz ihre Grenzen. Die Zahlenangaben ehemaliger Häftlinge sind Phantasiegebilde und entbehren jeder Grundlage.
(Emphasis added.)I myself never knew the total number, and also have no indications that would enable me to reproduce it.
I only recall the numbers of the larger actions, which were repeatedly mentioned to me by Eichmann or his representative.
From Upper Silesia und GG [General Government] 250,000
Germany and Theresienstadt 100,000
The numbers of the smaller actions I no longer recall, but they were insignificant in comparison with the above numbers.
I consider the number 2½ million to be much too high. The possibilities of extermination had their limits even in Auschwitz. Numbers stated by former inmates are products of fantasy and lack any foundation.
The partial figures mentioned by Höss add up to 1,130,000, a number considerably lower than the 2.5 million he claimed at Nuremberg, not to mention the 4 million claimed by a Soviet investigation commission, which had official status in Poland until the fall of the Iron Curtain. What is most important, however, is that Höss dismissed numbers stated by former inmates as "products of fantasy" that "lack any foundation". By "former inmates" he obviously meant inmates interrogated by the Poles, such as Henryk Tauber (Pressac, as above p. 501, http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... 0501.shtml) - with whose testimonies (conforming with the aforementioned Soviet investigation commission's estimate) he was probably confronted.
My questions to you are the following:
If - as you seem to be claiming - Höss was coerced or otherwise pressured by his Polish interrogators, why did he not obligingly confirm the 4 million figure they would have wanted him to confirm, or at least the 2.5 million figure he had stated at Nuremberg? Why did he openly challenge the credibility of figures suggested by his interrogators, even to the point of dismissing the four million figure stated by Tauber and others as a product of fantasy?
Please explain this obvious contradiction between your claim of coercion and Höss' everything-other-than-obliging statements quoted above.
I’m not in denial of anything, I just consider it unreasonable to assume that so-and-so-many Jews per "batch" were gassed at all times during the camp’s operation. How many were gassed depended on how many transports arrived on a given day or over a given number of days. If the number exceeded the capacity of one crematorium’s gas chamber(s) (or, more importantly, the daily capacity of the respective cremation ovens, which was the bottleneck in mass extermination) , gas chamber(s) of one of more other crematoria would be used. However, as the mentioned list of transports shows, there were also many days in which the number of gassed deportees was well below 2,000, or even below 1,000. Plus there were many days on which no transports arrived, and on which a backlog from earlier transports could be processed. Examples:Hannover wrote:Roberto is in denial of the current narrative is that up to 2000 were 'gassed ' per batch. yet he tries to defend the current narrative. Funny stuff.
2.2.43 Oranczyce (Pj 105) 1265 Jews (866 gassed)
2.2.43 Theresienstadt 1001 Jews (783 gassed)
4.2.43 Westerbork 890 Jews (790 gassed)
4.2.43 Berlin (Da 15) 1000 Jews (713 gassed)
5.2.43 Zamosc (Po 65) 1000 Jews (417 gassed)
11.2.43 Westerbork 1184 Jews (1005 gassed)
11.2.43 Drancy (46. Tpt) 1000 Jews (832 gassed)
(47. Tpt) 998 Jews (802 gassed)
(48. Tpt) 1000 Jews (689 gassed)
18.2.43 Westerbork 1108 Jews (847 gassed)
20.2.43 Berlin 1000 Jews (775 gassed)
23.2.43 Breslau 1000 Jews (994 gassed)
25.2.43 Westerbork 1101 Jews (1014 gassed)
27.2.43 Berlin 913 Jews (651 gassed)
So putting a fixed number on the people gassed "per batch" makes no sense. The size of each "batch" depended on the size of the transport(s) that arrived on a given day. On 11.2.1943, for instance, the 1,005 arrivals from Westerbork might be gassed while the 832 from Drancy had not yet arrived or were undergoing the selection process. If the gas chamber in which the former "batch" had been gassed was not yet available when their successors had undergone the selection process because the bodies had not yet been removed (which took a long time), the 832 from the latter "batch" would be directed to another gas chamber.
Yes, it took hours to remove the corpses from the underground gas chambers of crematoria I(II) and II(III). Days I don’t think, and I don’t know of any evidence in that direction (if Hannover thinks there is, he is hereby challenged to show it by quoting from a primary source, e.g. an eyewitness testimony). That was one of the reasons why, as pointed out by Pressac, neither of these crematoria could do more than one gassing run per day – unlike crematorium IV(V) during the Hungarian Operation and on other occasions when corpses were burned in the open.Hannover wrote:6. Oh my. Supposedly up to 2000 corpses, a few at a time, were placed on ONE 4 ft. X 9 ft. hand drawn elevator and hoisted above to the typhus abatement crematorium. This would have taken hours / days to accomplish and simply blows away the alleged batch times & rates.
Who exactly (meaning what primary or secondary source) "alleges" that bodies were "piled up outside" (which obviously refers to the times when open-air cremation complemented the cremation ovens)? The available photographs, shown on pp. of 422 of Pressac’s AUSCHWITZ Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers (http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... 0422.shtml), don’t show any piled-up bodies, as opposed to bodies lying side by side on the ground. And assuming that bodies were piled up, please explain why they should be visible on air photographs. Would they be so silhouetted against the ground on which they were piled up that a photo taken from several thousand meters above would necessarily show them, and that even where there was smoke from the open-air cremation sites? And what are such piled-up bodies supposed to look like on air photographs? Please explain.Hannover wrote:Roberto still ignores the claims that copses were allegedly piled up outside, not seen in the aerial photos
Again, what "storyline" are we talking about? What primary or secondary source? Where exactly are the bodies supposed to have been piled up? If behind crematorium IV(V) or at the "bunkers" reactivated during the Hungarian Operation, who (other than the SS and the Sonderkommando prisoners) is supposed to have seen them there, and why so?Hannover wrote:7. Again Roberto ignores the fact that the storyline says that corpses were piled up outside for everyone to see.
Ventilation may have been difficult if the bodies were piled up filling the whole chamber as in the model shown. But that was rarely if ever the case. Höss wrote that the gas chambers of crematoria I(II) and II(III) were never filled to capacity because the transports were not that strong. Pressac, see above, considers a gassing run of no more than 1,000 per day (corresponding to the daily capacity of the cremation ovens) even during the Hungarian Operation. Tauber’s description of his first view of a gas chamber after a gassing also doesn’t suggest that the chamber was filled to capacity:Hannover wrote:8. The ventilation method would have been impossible because the vents in the crematorum alleged to be 'gas chambers' were at the bottom of the crematorium, they would have been blocked by the alleged masses of corpses.
Here we go:
What the 'gas chambers' supposedly looked like upon completion of the alleged 'gassings'.
Try 'venting' that from below.
(Pressac, Auschwitz, p. 489, http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... 0489.shtml)We found heaps of naked bodies, doubled up. They were pinkish, and in places red. Some were covered with greenish marks and saliva ran from their mouths. Others were bleeding from the nose. There was excrement on many of them. I remember that a great number had their eyes open and were hanging on to one another. The bodies were most crushed together round the door. By contrast, there were less around the wire mesh columns. The location of the bodies indicated that the people had tried to get away front the columns and get to the door.
The fact that there were less bodies around the wire mesh columns and the bodies were most "crushed" together round the door doesn’t exactly suggest a gas chamber filled to capacity. Upon realizing that they were meant to be gassed those who hadn’t succumbed already would move towards the door and try to get out. They wouldn’t move towards the gas chamber’s walls (where the ventilation openings were installed) unless there was no room for them to move elsewhere. But this obviously not the case on the occasion described by Tauber, and also need not have been the case on any other occasion.
Again the unidentified "current storyline".Hannover wrote:Roberto tries to deflect from the current storyline which says that an SS man on the roof lifted still out-gassing cyanide containers from inside the alleged gas chambers .... thereby releasing the gas which would have been a massive danger to those allegedly waiting, and people at the site in general. Some surprise operations those would have been.
The theory that still out-gassing Zyklon B pellets were removed from the underground gas chambers to streamline the process goes back to three witnesses IIRC, Michal Kula (whose account Pressac’s drawing on page 487 of Auschwitz - http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... 0487.shtml - is based on), Henryk Tauber (as before, p. 484, http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... 0484.shtml) and Josef Erber (quoted in the article under http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... o-columns/, which contains some mistaken assumptions as concerns the configuration and function of the Zyklon B introduction columns in the underground gas chambers) .
As to the notion of a "massive danger" that the Zyklon B out-gassing in the open would have posed to the SS-men withdrawing the pellets' recipient (who would have worn gas masks) and to people at the site in general (what people are supposed to have been at the site of the crematoria when such withdrawal took place?), it is based on a misconception of how cyanide gas behaves in the open. As can be read under https://web.archive.org/web/20041020040 ... d/AC.shtml, the French used cyanide gas a chemical weapon during the First World War, but found it to be rather ineffective:
(Emphases added.)Its poisonous properties led to its early consideration as a chemical warfare agent, but during the First World War, hydrogen cyanide was employed only occasionally, primarily by the French. who dubbed it Forestite. Because of its high vapor pressure and low vapor density it tended to dissipate rapidly, and its low flash point meant that it would often (about half the time) ignite when released from artillery shells, limiting its military effectiveness. The French attempted to produce hydrogen cyanide-containing mixtures that would be more persistent, and so more useful. The best known of these is probably Vincennite, which was a mixture of 50% hydrogen cyanide with the smoke producers arsenic trichloride (30%) and stannic chloride (15%) along with chloroform as a stabilizer. Despite their best efforts, however, they were never able to produce a hydrogen cyanide munition that answered the needs of the period, and in a war in which the chemical industries of the world strained to produce enough deadly chemicals, usage of hydrogen cyanide was a relatively paltry 4000 tons.
The above quote doesn’t exactly suggest that cyanide gas is very dangerous outside closed spaces.
Again, what "storyline" are we talking about? What primary or secondary source(s)? As explained above, there was no reason for a "next batch" to be waiting outside while the previous "batch" was gassed. No would there be any reason to hurry up the gassings, which were the easy part of the process (the difficult part was the bodies’ removal and cremation). And such "waiting outside" would not have been necessary where a day’s arrivals could be processed by one or several gas chambers in one run, and neither possible where further transports arrived hours after the one currently being "processed" and the deportees had to undergo the selection process first.Hannover wrote:9. Roberto continues to change the very narrative that he tries to defend.
As state, the storyline says (in order to meet the time lengths claimed) that the next batch was waiting outside while the alleged 'gassing' operations were underway.
I don’t remember having read claims that Jews meant for gassing heard those inside "screaming" (at least as concerns Auschwitz-Birkenau; at Treblinka this is reported to have happened), so again the question is warranted what primary or secondary source claims this. Such source would not be realistic in this respect anyway, for the reasons explained above. The only ones who would hear screaming inside the gas chambers at AB, bar evidence to the contrary, were the Sonderkommando prisoners and SS men supervising their work.Hannover wrote:Roberto forgot that he claims that Jews actually heard those inside 'screaming', meaning they were in very close approximation.
I have never seen a correct straw-man argument, and the way Hannover’s question was formulated ("Why don't the very real aerial photos of time show the claimed gassings in progress? ") invited the answer I provided.Hannover wrote:10. The usual false strawman argument from Roberto.
I’ve never quite understood why what is claimed to have been necessarily visible on air photographs should have been necessarily visible on air photographs. Hannover is hereby challenged to provide a consistent demonstration that what he claims would have been viewable would necessarily have been viewable on the comparatively few air photos that were taken during the period in question. This applies especially to the movement of people towards the crematoria, which I think would be seen as thin lines on the road leading to the crematoria at best. As argued above, the capture of such lines would be visible on air photographs only due to a coincidence, unless such movements of people were going on throughout all daylight hours on the day a photograph was taken, which was hardly the case.Hannover wrote:No one says the aerials can show what occurs inside a structure, but they do not show anything that is alleged. The alleged occurrences would necessarily have been visible, IF they had actually happened.
We do not see actual corpses as alleged, we do not see lines of people as alleged, we do not see flaming chimneys as alleged; but we do see obvious amateur hour tampering with the photos, one even has 'marching Jews' drawn in on a rooftop.
If Hannover can refer our readers to Revisionist articles or forum discussions as concerns the air-photo issue (which I rather consider a non-issue), then I can also refer our readers to assessments of the issue by my fellow blogger Hans Metzner, who has posted here under his first name, knows a lot more about Auschwitz than I do and addressed the air photo (non-) issue in articles available under the following links:Hannover wrote:see here:
'Critique of Claims Made by Robert Jan Van Pelt'
'Altered Aerial Photos and the Shadows of Doom'
Air Photo Evidence
I also refer our readers to this CODOH Forum link for further debunking of Roberto and those like him:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... ues#p83723
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ation.html
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ce-on.html
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... sance.html
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... kenau.html
The second of these articles, if I understood correctly, addresses John Ball’s "marching on the rooftop" claims.
Roberto wrote:First of all, I don't believe. I accept what becomes apparent from conclusive evidence.Mortimer wrote:Roberto - As you believe that gassings occurred at Auschwitz can you give a brief explanation as to why you don't consider the Rudolf Report to be credible ?
Second, if you want to know why the Rudolf Report is worthless in a nutshell, the reason is that he didn't provide the proof incumbent upon him that, considering all that is known about gassings of human beings in Birkenau crematoria as opposed to disinfestation gassings, Prussian Blue would necessarily have formed on the walls of the homicidal gas chambers.
As concerns the details, there was a long discussion about this issue in 2007 between me and a former Revisionist who posted here as "Wahrheit". I'm currently reproducing this discussion on another forum. If you are interested in reading this discussion, feel free to send me a PM.
That's great, but did he provide the proof that Rudolf failed to provide (see above)? That would be new to me, but I'm always open to learning something new.Mortimer wrote:Anti revisionists who have critiqued the Leuchter Report often point out that Fred Leuchter was not a registered engineer. If this is a problem then what is wrong with The Luftl Report ? Walter Luftl was a registered engineer, expert court witness and president of the Austrian engineer's association -