It concerns the crematoria in camps alleged to be purpose-built 'extermination camps' like at Auschwitz-Birkenau, Majdanek, etc. I'd be grateful for any replies that follow this boards rules regarding providing references in support of any information, to a few questions.
Q1. Isn't it alleged that these crematoria had been purposefully designed for the purpose of disposing and hiding of the bodies of the victims of a planned genocide of approximately eleven million Jews? (Wannsee protocol)
Q2. If so, how to explain this irrefutable contradiction that the design of the still-existing crematoria presents?
Bradley Smith wrote:Meanwhile, Fritz Berg opened my eyes to two important points:
The design function of a crematory oven:
A crematory oven is designed so that the fuel used to consume its human load is located outside the oven itself. The reason for this is to keep separate the residue of the corpse as it settles on the clean bed of the oven from the trash left by the coke or coal that fueled it. The uncontaminated ashes and bone can then be collected and placed in a container for return to the deceased's family. The crematory oven, unlike a furnace, is designed to fulfil the needs of ritual and religion.
If the Germans had planned to destroy the remains of millions of murdered victims they would in all likelihood have designed furnaces capable of burning several, or even many, corpses at once, and would not have worried about the human residue falling into the fuel firing the furnace, as all of it was going to be done away with anyhow.
-- Bradley Smith. April/May 1990.
In support of this argument, there also exist contemporary photographs of urns for collecting the ashes of cremated inmates. This also appears to demonstrate that it is a false allegation that these crematoria were part of a purposefully designed and secret programme using 'factories of death' for killing and disappearing millions of Jewish people.Fritz Berg wrote:Note the fact that "COKE" was the fuel used for Nazi cremations. Coke is far more expensive than coal and made sense ONLY if one wanted an attractive cremain, largely free of any fuel ash. That makes no sense at all if one wanted to simply dispose of the remains of Jews as alleged — with NO trace.
Q3. Is there a 'holocaust history' explanation for this contradiction?Friedrich Paul Berg wrote:Note the fact that "COKE" was the fuel used for Nazi cremations. Coke is far more expensive than coal and made sense ONLY if one wanted an attractive cremain, largely free of any fuel ash. That makes no sense at all if one wanted to simply dispose of the remains of Jews as alleged — with NO trace.Cremation and Incineration in Kremas 2 and 3 with POISON GAS from CokeCremation and crematoria are misused to explain the fact that there simply is no forensic medical or scientific evidence (like autopsies) of any gassings. Supposedly, all of the physical evidence went up in smoke. How convenient for those who might otherwise be pressed for real evidence... Many thousands of dead bodies (from other causes, primarily disease) were found in the camps at the end of the war, but all of the “gassing” victims had been vaporised, supposedly.
Urns for containing individual's ashes photographed at the war's end at Buchenwald
Where one should expect huge crematory ovens, or incinerators to dispose of enormous numbers of bodies, with co-mingling of the remains and fuel ash — one finds instead, small crematory ovens designed to burn only one body at a time consistent with ordinary cremations as practiced around the world.
The remains from corpses were put into individual urns and returned to family members. In other words, there was nothing at all like the “assembly-line killing and/or disposal of bodies” that has been alleged. To appreciate the disaster that Germany and much of Europe, especially eastern Europe, were dealing with — one should read Earth-Burial and Cremation about disease and the necessity for cremation in nineteenth century America.
Urns from Natzweiler Cremation only makes sense if one intends to return a portion of the actual ashes of a corpse to the true family members; otherwise, cremation makes no sense at all.
Cremation is distinguished from incineration by the fact that cremation, in the West, allows recovery of the deceased person's ashes free of the ashes from other corpses or of the fuel. The clean ash that results is totally worthless compared to the far greater costs of the coal, or coke, needed to produce it. The claim that the Nazis made fertilizer from the bones is a bad joke indeed. Crematory ovens are specially designed to allow recovery of ashes from one corpse at a time free of any other ash, either from the coal or coke used as fuel or from another corpse. Such a careful recovery of ashes only makes sense if one intends to return something from the deceased to the family. In other words, the purpose of cremation is to preserve, at least some, evidence.
If one intended to merely destroy evidence of mass murder, incineration as is commonly practiced for garbage disposal would be many times quicker and more efficient in every respect, especially in terms of the amounts of fuel consumed. One could still gather enough ashes to fill urns and deceive family members but, oddly enough, it has never been claimed in any of the Holocaust literature that garbage incinerators were ever used for anything but garbage. Even the incinerators within Kremas 2 and 3 in Birkenau have never been implicated.
The startling fact is that by practicing cremation the Nazis and the SS went to considerable lengths and expense to treat the dead with genuine respect even when many of the dead were Jews. See also Documents F1 and F2 in Pressac, page 133.
Friedrich Paul Berg
They only one I know of is that it was part of a scam to earn money. Viz. That false ashes were being sent to the loved ones of the prisoners who died there for a fee. But that explanation doesn't seem credible concerning Birkenau-Auschwitz?
Urns appear in numerous photographs taken near the remnants of the 'new crematorium' at Majdanek in the weeks after liberation:After having paid a certain sum of money, family members of the deceased prisoners were sent urns containing the sham ashes of their relatives.
- Józef Marszałek et al., Majdanek, Lublin, 1971, p.37 [42 page booklet for visitors to the memorial]
Urns for containing individual's ashes photographed at the war's end at Majdanek
Q4. Is it even a credible explanation for Majdanek? For example is there any proof for this scam allegation? It seems to be a circular argument to explain away empirical evidence that does not support the mass-gassing, genocide narrative. I.e. it appears to be an allegation to explain away empirical evidence that actually contradicts the holocaust narrative.