Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
friedrichjansson
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 4:43 am
Contact:

Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by friedrichjansson » Fri Jun 07, 2013 2:36 pm

Sobibor is the central pillar of the holocaustic program "switch those gassing diesels over to gasoline engines pronto," and Erich Fuchs is the most important witness for the Sobibor engine. The cut-and-paste manifesto says as much, noting that Fuchs was charged with operating the engine and that
Fuchs’ admissions should therefore be given high priority because they relate most directly to the offence with which he was charged. He should also be given priority over Bauer in any matters of dispute between them because he was instructing Bauer. MGK’s methodology is therefore flawed because it fails to examine the relative expertise of the witnesses and their access to information about the engine.
Fuchs is therefore witness number one about the Sobibor engine. He is the most expert, and has the most access to information. So what did Fuchs say about the engine? In 1963 he stated the following:
On Wirth’s orders, I drove a truck to Lemberg and picked up a carburetor engine which I took to Sobibór. On my arrival at Sobibór, I could see, near the station, an area with a concrete structure and several solid houses. The local Sonderkommando was headed by Thomalla. Other SS men present were F., B., Stangl, F., Schwarz, B. as well as some more. We unloaded the engine. It was a heavy Russian gasoline engine (probably a tank or tractor engine) of at least 200 HP (V-engine, 8 cylinders, water-cooled). We placed the Motor on a concrete foundation and installed a connection between the exhaust and the piping. I then tested the engine. Initially, it did not work. I repaired the ignition and the valves and the engine finally started. The chemist whom I had already met at Belzec went into the gas chamber with a measuring device and tested the gas concentration.
Fuchs repaired the engine himself, and later operated it, so he clearly knew it well. Playing the "he made a mistake" game won't work here. The question is: was there any Russian engine at the time that fit the description?

As far as I can tell, the answer is no. Fuchs described an imaginary engine.

So, Roberto (or any other exterminationist who wants to answer): what V-8, water-cooled Russian engine of more than 200 HP did Fuchs install at Sobibor?

You can look here, or here, or here to see some data on Russian engines, or try wikipedia. There are also plenty of books on tanks that will give you the details on their engines.

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

Re: Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by Roberto » Sat Jun 08, 2013 1:14 am

friedrichjansson wrote:So, Roberto (or any other exterminationist who wants to answer): what V-8, water-cooled Russian engine of more than 200 HP did Fuchs install at Sobibor?
No idea, and assuming the witness was mistaken about the provenance of the engine and/or didn't recall certain particulars correctly: so what?
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).

friedrichjansson
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 4:43 am
Contact:

Re: Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by friedrichjansson » Sat Jun 08, 2013 2:30 am

Roberto wrote:
friedrichjansson wrote:So, Roberto (or any other exterminationist who wants to answer): what V-8, water-cooled Russian engine of more than 200 HP did Fuchs install at Sobibor?
No idea, and assuming the witness was mistaken about the provenance of the engine and/or didn't recall certain particulars correctly: so what?
It would mean, of course, that your beloved star witness Fuchs testified falsely, and therefore is not a particularly reliable witness.

The story doesn't end here, though. Perhaps the prosecutors (who generally shape the confessions in this kind of case; see the Frontline program "The Confessions") figured out that the Russians didn't use V-8s, because by 1965 Fuchs was telling a different story.
Screenshot-60.png
The engine was no longer a V-8, but an inline 4. Fuchs no longer mentioned the power of the engine, and no longer knew whether it was air or water cooled.

Since I haven't read all the trial records I can't exclude the possibility that this was supposed to be a different engine from the (totally imaginary) one he said he installed, but in that case we would have the bizarre circumstance that while they made a point of expanding the gas chambers, they also decided mid-operation to use a smaller engine - which is also hard to square with the Sobibor witnesses' description of a 15-minute gassing time.

If the story is that there was only a single Sobibor gassing engine, then Fuchs has contradicted himself in spectacular fashion. A genuine witness who worked on an engine and operated it for months would not be confused about whether it was a V-8 or an inline 4. That's an extremely visible difference - look at pictures of these types of engines if you aren't already familiar with this fact. Fuchs was enough of a mechanic to repair the valves of the engine, so he was familiar with engines, and would not have made such a mistake.

neugierig
Posts: 619
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:49 pm
Contact:

Re: Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by neugierig » Sat Jun 08, 2013 2:31 am

Well done friedrichjansson, and welcome to the forum. But sadly, Herr Muehlenkamp shot you down already, lets face it, how can anyone top "so what"? :mrgreen:

Regards
Wilf
Ohne Meinungsfreiheit gibt es keine Freiheit (frei nach I. Kant)

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

Re: Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by Roberto » Sun Jun 09, 2013 11:56 am

friedrichjansson wrote:
Roberto wrote:
friedrichjansson wrote:So, Roberto (or any other exterminationist who wants to answer): what V-8, water-cooled Russian engine of more than 200 HP did Fuchs install at Sobibor?
No idea, and assuming the witness was mistaken about the provenance of the engine and/or didn't recall certain particulars correctly: so what?
It would mean, of course, that your beloved star witness Fuchs testified falsely, and therefore is not a particularly reliable witness.
"Beloved star witness"? Try to do yourself the favor of refraining from such notorious displays of idiocy.
friedrichjansson wrote:The story doesn't end here, though. Perhaps the prosecutors (who generally shape the confessions in this kind of case; see the Frontline program "The Confessions") figured out that the Russians didn't use V-8s, because by 1965 Fuchs was telling a different story.
Outside "Frontline" programs and your conspiracy theories, prosecutors don't usually "shape" confessions, at least not in the German Federal Republic. Why on earth (assuming they were so inclined) should prosecutors at the Hagen trial have "shaped" a defendant's description of a gassing engine, by the way? Are they supposed to have looked into the future and been concerned that FJ would make a fuss about a Russian V8?
friedrichjansson wrote:
Screenshot-60.png
The engine was no longer a V-8, but an inline 4. Fuchs no longer mentioned the power of the engine, and no longer knew whether it was air or water cooled.
He may have considered a vaguer description more convenient as it pointed to less involvement on his part. Or then his memory had deteriorated since. Or then more than one type of engine was used. Or then a different engine was used at a different time, and at the trial he recalled the engine used at that other time. Note that he said that "in his opinion" ("meines Erachtens") the motor in question had been a Russian motor, meaning he was not sure about the motor's provenance. Another defendant thought the motor had been a Renault motor, with some different features, which again points to the possibility of different motors being used at different times. What all operators agreed upon, however, was that the motor(s) used at Sobibór had been (a) gasoline motor(s).
friedrichjansson wrote:Since I haven't read all the trial records I can't exclude the possibility that this was supposed to be a different engine from the (totally imaginary) one he said he installed,


"Totally imaginary" is nonsense. Even if there had been no Russian 8 cylinder V-motors at the time, as FJ claims, the likely explanation would be that Fuchs was simply wrong about the "Russian" provenance of the motor. As his statement in court suggests, he wasn't sure about the "Russian" provenance of the motor he described on that occasion.
friedrichjansson wrote:but in that case we would have the bizarre circumstance that while they made a point of expanding the gas chambers, they also decided mid-operation to use a smaller engine
Or an additional engine, and the use of a single smaller engine, if that was the case, could be explained by the former engine's having broken down and no equal substitute being found. Smaller engine also meant less gasoline expenditure, I guess. It may be that a bigger engine was used initially and later replaced by a smaller engine for fuel economy reasons, after it was realized that with a gas chamber packed full (the V8 had been used at a test gassing of 40 women or so, IIRC) the desired result could also be achieved with a smaller engine.
friedrichjansson wrote: - which is also hard to square with the Sobibor witnesses' description of a 15-minute gassing time.
What witnesses exactly did you have in mind, and what would it matter if they got the timing wrong? As there were no survivors from the "death camp" sector at Sobibór, direct witnesses to gassing can be only SS or Trawniki witnesses, who may have stated a killing time shorter than the actual one for self-serving reasons. And one generally shouldn't put much stock in what witnesses say about the duration of an event. It's the detail that witnesses are likeliest to be mistaken about, according to the findings of forensic psychology.
friedrichjansson wrote:If the story is that there was only a single Sobibor gassing engine, then Fuchs has contradicted himself in spectacular fashion. A genuine witness who worked on an engine and operated it for months would not be confused about whether it was a V-8 or an inline 4. That's an extremely visible difference - look at pictures of these types of engines if you aren't already familiar with this fact. Fuchs was enough of a mechanic to repair the valves of the engine, so he was familiar with engines, and would not have made such a mistake.
Which would make the possibility of several engines, or of one engine being replaced by another, more likely. Or Fuchs' having operated engines at different places and on different occasions, and the V8 engine actually having been an engine used at a trial run somewhere other than at Sobibór.
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).

rollo the ganger
Posts: 5976
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by rollo the ganger » Sun Jun 09, 2013 12:15 pm

Berg has said this hundreds of times before but it would have been cheaper, simpler and certainly less expensive to have simply burned in charcoal in a container with restricted oxygen to produce CO and blown it into the "gas chambers" to kill people. It would have produced greater quantities of CO than any engine and the Germans had developed the means of making "producer gas" to a high level. The Germans were not so stupid as to believe that in order to produce CO the only means would have been an internal combustion engine although some people may say so.

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

Re: Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by Roberto » Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:44 pm

rollo the ganger wrote:Berg has said this hundreds of times before but it would have been cheaper, simpler and certainly less expensive to have simply burned in charcoal in a container with restricted oxygen to produce CO and blown it into the "gas chambers" to kill people. It would have produced greater quantities of CO than any engine and the Germans had developed the means of making "producer gas" to a high level. The Germans were not so stupid as to believe that in order to produce CO the only means would have been an internal combustion engine although some people may say so.
Oh, that reminds me of an appropriate comment made by someone who read Berg's wisdom, which I quoted here:
Oh, god, why am I listening to this? Is this Berg mentally retarded? No, I mean really, why is it, that of all conspiracy whack jobs holocaust deniers seem to be the dumbest.

"This didn't happen, because I would have done it better." Yeah, congratulations, you are a total moron. Please kill yourself with your special fuel.
Whenever you wonder how normally thinking people see you conspiraloon true believers, re-read the above.
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).

rollo the ganger
Posts: 5976
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by rollo the ganger » Sun Jun 09, 2013 2:24 pm

Berg certainly has a Judeophobic agenda in his arguments which I totally disapprove of but the point of mentioning his name on the matter is so to not take undue credit for bringing up the matter of producer gas which he has discussed rather in depth. Putting Berg aside, the issue of whether to use an internal combustion engine or simply burning charcoal in an oxygen lean environment to produce CO is the real purpose of my comments. If you wish to diverge in an ad hominem attack on Berg be my guest but when you get over it please comment on the issue above.

User avatar
Friedrich Paul Berg
Posts: 3111
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 1:21 am
Contact:

Re: Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by Friedrich Paul Berg » Sun Jun 09, 2013 5:35 pm

Dear Rollo the Ganger,

When have I ever claimed that the use of producer gas had anything to do with burning charcoal--to generate CO for mass murder or for any other purpose?

Have you ever read anything that I wrote on this subject? Do you even know how to read?

Image
Friedrich Paul Berg
Learn everything at http://www.nazigassings.com
Nazi Gassings Never Happened! Niemand wurde vergast!

rollo the ganger
Posts: 5976
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:34 am
Contact:

Re: Sobibor gassing engine - what was it?

Post by rollo the ganger » Sun Jun 09, 2013 5:54 pm

Berg, I make it a point to try not to read anything you write since the main object of your writings is to let everyone know how much you hate Jews. Your spouting on that matter is unavoidable on this forum. What that has to do with the facts of the holocaust is beyond me but since burning charcoal is a very common way of making CO I made the assumption you would have made mention of that method. If you're saying it can't be done then don't expect an argument out of me. That's your issue.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alonso, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Nessie and 4 guests