Quantcast
Channel: Holocaust Controversies
Viewing all 610 articles
Browse latest View live

Viewer's Guide to "Auschwitz - The Surprising Hidden Truth" (Minutes 10 - 16)

$
0
0

Minutes 10 - 16
Minutes 16 - 22

 

Arrangement of the Undressing Room and the Gas Chamber

[10 min] Elongated rooms perpendicular is pretty stupid design. Any thinking person would have elongated rooms side by side...

Let's suppose for the moment that the elongated rooms perpendicular to each other is suboptimal design, and think about the consequences if this assumption holds.

As pointed out in the section "The Underground Gas Chamber" in the first part of this series, crematorium 2 was not planned as mass gassing site from the scratch. It was meant as an “ordinary” concentration camp crematorium (possibly with small scale killings to be carried out) and was only adapted later on at the end of the planning phase or already during its construction for mass gassings of people. The time window when the functional change or addition was decided is considered to be summer - winter 1942. The facility was mainly finished by February 1943. The late implementation of the gassing function would entirely explain if some design were not optimal for mass murder.

Furthermore, it is evident from numerous sources that the elongated, perpendicular underground chambers did not pose a problem for the gassing procedure. There was no difficulty in filling the homicidal gas chamber, there was a low risk of an uprising and it did not substantially slow down the extermination process. In other words, the design of the basement - even if we assume it was not optimal - was already sufficient. Enhancing the supposed suboptimal design would not have resulted in a much higher "throughput". The rate determining step was the body disposal, which took way more time then the killing.

To be specific, improving the loading time of the gas chamber from say 2 hours to 1 hour did not translate into doubling the extermination rate, since the incineration of the corpses lasted the entire day anyway. And since the start of the next extermination batch was usually determined by the arrival time of the next transport and not by the time the previous batch was finished, even this 1 hour gain would have been often irrelevant.

The premise is therefore a toothless tiger not providing any evidence against the reality of homicidal mass gassings in Auschwitz, but it is also not without its problems itself. First, it is important to recognize that the SS was focusing on two decisive points to control the situation: the entrance to the undressing room and the entrance to the gas chamber.

In this supposed enhanced design with the undressing room and gas chamber next to each other with multiple connections between them, also the number of required guards had to be multiplied or conversely with a fixed number of guards, the actual design of elongated perpendicular rooms with only one entrance allowed to concentrate the guards on fewer decisive locations.

Risk of Revolt + Denierbuds's Own Concept

[10 min] ...this improved design has just 100 Jews going in an undressing room, since 2000 people is too ??? and hard to control, in particularly if there is a revolt.The undressed go into a shower room which in contrast to this is actually a convincing shower room where steel guillotine doors shut, in other words, doors that open towards the sky and shut towards the ground.

[11 min] The gas chamber fills with gas and afterwards steal guillotine doors open at a conveyor belt to a continuously operating oven. The bodies are all ready at short distance to the conveyor belt. The floor's ??? is slightly ??? conceptually a little bit like this. A gassing could happen every hour and a half and the strong point of this design is bodies are put into the oven steadily throughout the day and night. Because cremating the bodies is the hardest part of the process. It could do 13 gassings a day killing 13 hundred people. It is also small and easy duplicable.

The probability of a revolt among the victims with the actual designs of the extermination sites can be estimated from the available data. As a rough estimation derived from the Auschwitz death toll and an assumed average gas chamber loading of 1000 people, we may say that about 800 mass gassings of Jewish people were carried out in Auschwitz. Two serious cases of what one may classify as revolt by victims in the undressing room and gas chamber complex are known:

  • On 23 October 1943, the SS man Schillinger was fatally wounded and as a consequence the victims were gunned down in the basement. The key moment leading to the uprising seemed to be an individual act of resistance by a Jewess seizing the gun of a SS guard probably coupled with misbehavior of the same, but not a collective, concerted revolt that degree of danger was scaling with the number of victims. There is no reason to believe that the fatal shooting would have been prevented by downsizing the crowd from say 1000 to 100 victims. Moreover, the incident shows that striking down a revolt of a mostly unarmed mass of people not familiar with the place was not posing a big problem.

  • Sonderkommando researcher Andreas Killian mentions a mass escape of Hungarian Jews in June 1944 because of an improperly closed door (due to the lack of published and properly referenced evidence, the historical reality of the event is unclear, but will be accepted here for the sake of argument). The escape as such would not have been avoided by a reduced number of victims, but only by properly closing the door. There were apparently no causalities among the SS.

The overall statistical risk of a mass revolt was thus about 0.25% (2 on 800). Moreover, at the time the crematoria were planned and constructed (1942 - 1943), the SS had - as far as we know - experienced not a single mass revolt among the gassing victims.

Given the low risk of a revolt and its relatively easy abolition (using bats, guns, machine guns and due to the confinement of the people within the crematorium basement with only few exits and within barbed wire fencing), it stands to reason that the SS would not have gained much by downsizing the number of victims per gassing.

But not only does denierbud's own concept of the killing site does not provide a significant benefit, it is actually introducing severe disadvantages for the SS. 

In his concept, the victims stay around in Auschwitz for the whole day and night, which would have required SS men dispatched for their guarding and supervision for the entire day. In contrast, as it was actually done, guarding of the victims was only necessary for the first few hours after their arrival until they were locked in the gas chamber. 

And even worse, in denierbud's concept valuable medical SS personal needed elsewhere is also bound to the killing site for the entire day. In contrast, as it was actually done, the presence of SS medical orderly and SS doctors was limited to something like 1 hour per 1000 - 2000 victims. By needlessly delaying the killing process, denierbud's flawed concept is to some extent actually thwarting a main intention behind the choice of mass gassings as killing technique, to minimize the involvement of German paramilitary forces in the murder.

Foreknowledge

[11 min] Woman 1: "And when we were in the train we were afraid, we never knew what will be our future."

Among Jews rumors of gas chambers abounded during the war as can be seen in this testimony.

[12 min] Woman 2: "I was standing naked before the doctor and looking very proud into his eyes and so that he is seeing how a proud Jewish women is go into die because most of us knew that in Auschwitz and from the taps there didn't come any water but the gas and from the taps came fine warm water afterwards we dressed up and returned to our train it was a very relieving experience after we were ready to die there"

She soberly accepted her fate but that couldn't have been every person's reaction who didn't believe the shower story. Some would have become hysterical and under proverbial yelling ??? in the crowded theater.

[...]

[13 min] Her testimony shows us that gassing rumors existed among Jews.

The degree of foreknowledge among 100,000s of people cannot be reliably decided based on a single account of a Hungarian Jewess given decades after the event (memory fading and memory manipulation is increasing with time).

The German historians Götz Aly and Christian Gerlach have published a comprehensive work on the fate of the Hungarian Jews and according to their study of the testimonies (mostly unpublished accounts given immediately after the war when the memory was still fresh), the Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz
"...did not grasp, where they were. They had heard that the Germans had persecuted the Jews for years and killed many of them, but a lot of this was hopefully rated as rumor. Auschwitz did not mean anything to many of them and the fewest knew about the gas chambers... most of the Hungarian Jews gave the impression of ignorance to prisoners who stayed already for a long time in the camp. Few guards were therefore necessary for the march to the crematoria."
~ Götz Aly and Christian Gerlach, Das letzte Kapitel, p. 289, my translation


Actually, if there had been extensive foreknowledge among the Hungarian Jews as denierbuds presumes that even the body abled Jews believed there will be gassed, and if this had triggered severe resistance among the people as denierbud also presumes, then the Hungarian authorities would have had enourmous trouble to get them on the train in the first place, or the Germans in Auschwitz the able bodied Jews in the real showers. Neither was the case.

Gas Chamber Loading

We thus expect some level of non-cooperation from them. On a football field the Auschwitz gas chamber would be this size, that little flashing white line being the door. To see how crowded it would be, we have this be a head and these are shoulders. We make one row of 14 people across 23 feet. And bring it up into the gas chamber. That would be how crowded the gas chamber would be.

Gabbai: "And after that, you know, when after 15, 20 minutes they open up the thing, the first thing I see, I saw the people I saw 15 minutes before alive, I saw the mothers with the children standing up, because the gas chamber will take maybe 500 people was used to make 2500 people everybody standing up, there was no room for anything else than standing up."

[14 min] This density implies no resistance at all, it implies total cooperation.

Gabbai: "From time to time, we were tell very few words that they are going to die."

It's hard to believe that 2000 people would go in there without resistance or outright rebellion. Because that's a little over 1 feet² per person which would make them skeptical of the shower story in particularly with no soap dispensers anywhere. 

High crowd densities are usually not achieved by total cooperation, since these are near or above what is the critical density, where the individuals are forced into physical contact, loose control over their movement and feel uncomfortable. It is not a state people spontaneously create and sustain on the basis of cooperation, but they are forced into it by pressure and confinement.

We do know from concrete evidence that confining a large number of people at densities of 10 people per m² specifically for mass murder is possible without difficulty, namely from the mass extermination in Auschwitz with its excessive body of evidence and from the mass killings with gas vans. The latter case can be established by strictly relying only on contemporary German documents without any eyewitness accounts whatsoever (not that this would be methodologically reasonable, but it is a damning argument for people frivolously discarding testimonial evidence as historical source). According to one of these documents in total 97,000 people were killed in the gas vans with an estimated average crowd density of 9 to 10 people per m².

Now, if denierbud does not understand how exactly this was possible, he is urged to think harder rather than suggesting it never happened at all (argument from personally incredulity [thanks to Nathan]). Here is some food for his thought:

The victims inside the Auschwitz gas chambers were usually physically and mentally exhausted from a long journey without much food and water, intimidated by a place and environment they did not know, physically the weakest of mankind (mostly children, women, elderly and sick), separated from the fit men and women that ought to protect and lead them, naked (which certainly added to a feeling of defenseless) and they were confronted with strong (Sonderkommando), lightly armed (Kapos) and heavily armed (SS) men.

Given these circumstances, it is no surprise that there was only very limited, if any at all, resistance among the victims, even in the case they had foreknowledge about what was going to happen. They were an easy target for the Germans at the extermination sites. People who looked like troublemakers and potential leaders for a revolt were taken out from the crowd and separately executed with a small calibre rifle.

The victims were told to receive food and water after the alleged shower, which provided a strong driving force for the hungry and thirsty people to enter the gas chamber. According to crowd psychology, leadership is an important issue for crowd behavior. Since the people were separated from their natural strong leaders like husbands, mothers, elderly brothers and sister, they were either helpless or understood the Jewish Sonderkommando, Kapos and SS as new leader for the moment  - who guided them straight into the gas chamber.

If neither the prospect of food and water, nor the authority of those in charge of the extermination, nor herd behavior just following what the others were doing did work, then violence was sufficient to make them entering the gas chamber. Once they were inside the gas chamber, there was no way of escape as the crowd was pushing them deep inside the basement. Even if an individual decided to revolt at this point, it was hopeless, just consider the forces exerted by a single person and by the crowd.

If there was a flight response from the crowd, it would rather push deeper into the gas chamber away from the door where the concrete danger (armed SS, Kapos, Sonderkommando) came from, hoping for an exit in the back, while those in the back had nowhere to go. Generally, flight behaviour is also inducing a higher crowd density on an intentional basis as people sharing the same fate tend to feel more safe close together when they are in a situation of danger.

Jewish "Accomplices" at the Extermination Sites

[14 min] Commentator: "The Nazis had largely increased the number of Jewish prisoners in the Sonderkommando, prisoners who were forced to work in the crematoria, to deal with the massive numbers the Nazis planned to murder. So much so that the crematorium and gas chamber like this was operated by around 100 Jews and just 4 Germans." 

[15 min] It's not believable that Jewish men would do that and not believable that the Germans would assign so few Germans.
1. Argument from personal incredulity.

2. There is whole bunch of possible explanations for why Jewish prisoners would not refuse in assisting in the extermination procedure of innocent Jewish people, the most important one being the instinct of self preservation, the idea that the more smooth the killing procedure means less suffering for the victims and emotional blunting.

Once the German SS men had established a reliable team of Kapos and foremen that could do most of the job inside the basement for them, it is clear they would dispatch as few as possible Germans for this unpleasant duty. However, it should be also kept in mind that they could quickly call for reinforcement from outside the crematorium yard in case of problems.

Kapos

[15 min]Interviewer: "Why were you doing this, who was overseeing all this who was there?

Gabbai: "Well, the Kapos of the crematorium."

A Kapo was a Jewish worker put in charge.
Only some of the Kapos were Jewish. Many Kapos, in particular head Kapos (Oberkapos) were German and Polish prisoners.

It should be noted that while Kapos may have assisted in getting the naked victims inside the gas chamber, the actual killing, i.e. what actually led to the victims death (the closing of the door and the pouring in of the poison gas), was done by German SS men. 

Some Repetition

[15 min]Gabbai: "We only had 1 or 2 guards there. Wasn't too many SS...outside the crematorium heavily ??? 3, 4 ??? about half a dozen well equipped SS just moving around but inside the crematorium were only a couple of SS 2 or 3 SS. The Kapos were doing the job."

[16 min] And in a layout like this, it's hard to believe that they could get people to move all the way to the back in particulary if you find out that it was Jewish workers running the operation.


1. Argument from personal incredulity.

2. Already addressed above.

Jürgen Graf keeps on giving

$
0
0
Apparently beside himself with rage about our contemptuous reaction to MGK’s monster pamphlet ([large PDF]) in the blogs Jürgen Graf at his best and The Steaming Pile of MGK Manure is Here, Jürgen Graf let fly in some publication of the extreme right with this stuff (not sure how to categorize it, maybe it was meant to be a satire), which will be translated hereafter for what it further reveals about the intellectual level, mindset and character of one of the world’s leading "Revisionists".

Graf isn’t stated to be the author of this pearl, but the rank stupidity of it alone would point to him even if it were not for the puerile bragging about the aforementioned monster pamphlet and for another of Graf’s "Lieber Esel" e-mails, which I received last Friday evening.



The e-mail reads as follows:

Lieber Esel Muehlenkamp,

Nun hat eine aufrechte Antifaschistin Ihnen endgueltig die Maske vom Gesicht gerissen und Sie als trojanischen Esel der Neonazis entlarvt!

Viel Spass bei der "Widerlegung"; sie wird Sie und die anderen vier Esel bestimmt sechs Jahre lang in Anspruch nehmen.

J. Graf

My translation:
Dear donkey Muehlenkamp,

Now a righteous anti-fascist has finally torn the mask off your face and exposed you as a Trojan donkey of the neo-Nazis!

Have fun with the "refutation"; it will surely keep you and the other four donkeys busy for six years.

J. Graf

Graf’s glory in the "NationalJournal" translates as follows:
Holocaust-Denier Roberto Muehlenkamp: The grisly truth

By Lesbileila Dummermuth, President of the Antifascist League against Holocaust Denial

[Photo] Roberto Muehlenkamp, secret Nazi, born in the jungle to bring down the Holo. His father gassed three million Lichtenstein Jews on the day after Hitler’s taking power.

We male and female antifascists of the Antifascist League against Holocaust denial know that one should never ever enter into a discussion with the racist, anti-Semitic and neo-fascist neo-Nazis, who cynically deny with pseudoscientific arguments the commonly known historical fact of the world-historically unique murder of six million Jews by the inhuman Nazi regime. For these deniers produce their pseudoscientific arguments in such a diabolically able manner that no normal person can refute them. For this reason we of the Antifascist League against Holocaust Denial basically hold the position that the most effective and hard-hitting argument against Holocaust denial is Section 130 of our Criminal Code, which punishes said crime with up to five years imprisonment.

Unfortunately there are still antifascists foolish enough to try refuting the deniers on an objective level. Experience shows that this leads to no good results, as the deniers are hereby given an aura of respectability. Much more dangerous, however, is the fact that some Holocaust-denying neo-Nazis ably disguise themselves as antifascists in order to damage the true antifascists' reputation. The worst of these Trojan donkeys is a certain Roberto Muehlenkamp, who together with several of his companions from the brown swamp conducts the blog "Holocaust Controversies". On this blog they constantly produce arguments against Holocaust denial, which are so feeble-minded as to create confusion among fellow humans with insufficient historical knowledge and arouse the impression that the deniers may be right.

Together with four other neo-Nazis disguised as antifascists – Jonathan Harrison, Jason Myers, Sergey Romanov und Nicholas Terry – Roberto Muehlenkamp put a thick screed in PDF-Format on the Internet, which claims to refute the Holocaust deniers Carlo Mattogno, Jürgen Graf and Thomas Kues, who cynically deny the existence of gas chambers in the camps Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka ("Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka. Holocaust Denial and Operation Reinhard. A Critique of the Falsehoods of Mattogno, Graf and Kues"). It beggars description what idiocies are produced here especially by Muehlenkamp. Among other things he claims that 28 people can stand on one square meter! Hereby Muehlenkamp maliciously creates the impression that opponents of Holocaust denial are a bunch of hollow-heads.

Now Mattogno, Graf und Kues published a response ("The 'Extermination Camps' of Aktion Reinhard. An Analysis and Refutation of Factitious 'Evidence', Deception and Flawed Argumentation of the 'Controversial Bloggers'"), in which the idiotic arguments of Muehlenkamp and his brown accomplices are taken apart on over 1500 pages and the five supposed "antifascists" are exposed to ridicule. That was the objective of this false flag operation from the beginning.

Who is Roberto Muehlenkamp? Thanks to years of research carried out under constant threat of life, in which she again and again infiltrated the neo-Nazi scene under false identity, our comrade Andrea Röpke brought to light the whole grisly truth about this man. Roberto Muehlenkamp is the son of the worst of all Nazi criminals, SS-Ober-Unterrottenführer Adolfo Muehlenkamp, who on 31 January 1933, the day after Hitler’s taking of power, with his own hands gassed three million Lichtenstein Jews in the giant swamps by Vaduz. (See Schmul-Habakuk Flunkerich, "Adolfo Muehlenkamp, the gas hangman of the Vaduz swamps", Manure Editors 2013). After the war Adolfo Muehlenkamp fled with the help of reactionary circles in the Vatican to South America and erected a training camp for right-wind radical terrorists in the Colombian jungle. In this camp his son Roberto was born. (Our comrade Andrea Röpke was there, disguised as a midwife.)

On 1 September 2001, the 62nd anniversary of Adolf Hitler's march into Poland, Adolfo Muehlenkamp flew to Afghanistan and met Osama Bin Laden in a cave, to concoct the attacks on the twin towers. (Our comrade Andrea Röpke was there, disguised as a djihadist.) Ten days later, in the night of 10 to 11 September, Osama Bin Laden and Adolfo Muehlenkamp met in a New York striptease bar, in order to put the final touches on their terror plan over whiskey and gin. (Our comrade Andrea Röpke was there, disguised as a nude dancer.) After the towers collapsed Adolfo Muehlenkamp flew back to Colombia and built a training camp for Holocaust deniers in the jungle, which was attended by, among others, his son Roberto as well as his neo-fascist companions Jonathan Harrison, Jason Myers, Sergey Romanov and Nicholas Terry. (Our comrade Andrea Röpke was there, disguised as a Shoa-denier.) Thereafter Roberto Muehlenkamp, together with his neo-Nazi accomplices, founded the website "Holocaust Controversies" and issued the mentioned ridiculous pamphlet against Mattogno, Graf und Kues, in order to make a mock of all righteous antifascists.

We appeal to all antifascists and opponents of Holocaust denial to under no circumstances visit the website "Holocaust Controversies" and to beware of the Trojan donkey Roberto Muehlenkamp and his brown accomplices!

I wouldn't be surprised if one of Graf's companions were not too happy about Graf's shooting himself and them in the foot with beer-hall hollering like the above. While Mattogno is prone to similarly illustrative utterances, I can picture Thomas Kues, who seems to be the least hysterical of the three (at least when writing in English), trying to talk some sense into his co-author Graf, sort of like: "Look, Jürgen, I know you’re mad, but stuff like that shows too clearly what we’re after and makes us look like a bunch of idiots, so please control yourself."

I for my part hope for further self-portraying freakouts from Jürgen Graf. The free publicity for HC will be an added benefit.

Viewer's Guide to "Auschwitz - The Surprising Hidden Truth" (Minutes 16 - 22)

$
0
0

Crowd Density

[16 min] [...] This level of crowding would take military discipline, total compliance and a lot of practice.

The argument seems to be taken from Germar Rudolf's The Rudolf Report, p. 204, where it reads:

"How did they get these 1,000 people to pack themselves tightly together, as one can expect from soldiers who have practiced this for weeks on a parade ground? The only solution is that this must have been practiced just as intensively and disciplined as soldiers do it. And of course, at some point in this alleged scenario, people had to realize that they were not gathering for a shower, thus resulting in panic and lack of orderly cooperation with their murderers’ procedures."
 ~ Germar Rudolf, Rudolf Report, 2011

Note that denierbud considers a packing of 8 people per m² impossible, while Rudolf even denies that a "packing" as low as 5 people per m² was feasible in the gas chambers.

The issue of crowd density in the homicidal gas chambers can be broken down into three questions:
  1. What is the range of the gas chamber crowd density as estimated by eyewitnesses?
  2. What is necessary to densify crowds?
  3. What densities can be achieved in practice?

According to the estimations of the former Sonderkommando prisoners, the capacity of the gas chambers of crematorium 2 was 2000 (Jaacov Gabbai, Josef Sackar, Leon Cohen) to 3000 (Marcel Nadsari, Filip Müller, Miklos Nyszli, Dov Paisikovic) people. With an area of 210 m² (neglecting the space of the concrete support pillars and gas introduction devices) this yields a crowd density of 10 to 14 people per m². Possible sources for the figures are hearsay knowledge from SS men (also via Kapos), deduction from the oven capacity based on the ovens loading scheme and crude estimation of the masses by themselves.

The Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß was overseeing and organizing the mass extermination and should have been in a good position to estimate the gas chamber capacity. In his Nuremberg interrogation of 1 April 1946 he estimated that the gas chambers "could accommodate 2,000 persons". In a note on the technical realization of the mass murder to the Nuremberg prison psychologist Gustave Gilbert, Höß wrote that "it was possible in one gas chamber to put to death up to 2,500 persons". These figures translate into crowd densities of 10 to 12 people per m².

The second question was already addressed in the previous posting in the section "gas chamber loading": High crowd densities can be obtained when confined people are compacted by some external force (such as crowd pressure). Accordingly, highly packed crowds require neither any military discipline, nor any practice, nor any compliance.

Lastly, what is the maximum crowd density then? There is no single figure, since the density of a crowd when its individuals are in contact is depending on the physical constitution of the individuals. For example, a group of obese persons dressed in Winter clothing will need significantly more space than a group of the same size of anorexic, skinny persons in swimming trunks. Men take more space than women than children. Western Europeans in average more than East-Asians. People in 2013 more than in 1913. Etc.

The term "super dense crush load" with up to 16 persons per m² has been coined with regards to the Mumbai (India) public railway system:
"Against the original design offering a capacity of 1,800 passengers (900 sitting plus 900 standing) per nine-car train, at present a nine-car train, carries 5,000 passengers (900 sitting plus more than 4,000 people in standing condition) during peak hours. This has resulted in, what is known as, super dense crush loading conditions in Mumbai resulting in a passenger loading of 16 passengers per square metre, which is the highest in the world."
~ Sehgal and Surayya, Innovative Strategic Management: The Case of Mumbai Suburban Railway System

The figure should be taken with a pinch of salt, as people may also overcrowd the seats, which was apparently not considered here and determining the number of people in a train rushing home or to work seems somewhat challenging (and the figures may be just a crude estimate).

The range of practically achievable crowd densities has been studied both by laboratory experiments and analysis of film and photo footage from mass gatherings.

  • Peak densities of 8 - 10 m² have been estimated for the so called "Love Parade" in Duisburg on 24 July 2010 (expert report of Keith Still, 9 December 2011). The crowd forces were high and resulted in 21 deaths.
  • During the pilgram gathering at the Jamaraat Bridge in Saudi Arabia, peak crowd densities of "10 persons per square meter or slightly more" were determined from film footage (Johansson, Helbing, Al-Abideen, Al-Bosta, From Crowd Dynamics to Crowd Safety: A Video-Based Analysis Advances in Complex Systems, 11, 4, 2008). The crowd forces were high and resulted in numerous injured and dead people.
  • For the Hillsborough disaster on 15 April 1989 in England with 96 deads, a peak density of 10 people per m² was estimated from photographs (Nicholson and Roebuck, The investigation of the Hillsborough disaster by the Health and Safety Executive, Safety Science, 18, 1995)
  • Experiments performed by the British Health and Safety Executive with adults of both sexes "suggested that crowd densities of 10 persons/m² could be achieved for periods of 2 minutes without distress." (source as before)
  • Japanese researchers have measured peak densities of about 10 persons per m² for crowds of Japanese students compacted only by relatively moderate crowd forces (Shimada and Naoi, An Experimental Study on the Evacuation Flow of Crowd Including Wheelchair Users, Fire Science and Technology, 25, 1, 2006). 

Since the average weight and height of the gas chamber victims was most likely lower than in either of the incidents and experiments and taking into account that they were naked (plus that higher crowd forces were acting in the gas chamber than in the Japanese study), it stands to reason that the practical peak density in the gas chamber could have been even higher than 10 people per m² and thus that the average density may have very well been around 10 people per m². This is in fact corroborated by a contemporary German document from 5 June 1942 that provides an empirical figure of 9 - 10 people per m² specifically for homicidal mass gassings.

In conclusion, the lower estimate of the crowd density provided by the eyewitnesses seems feasible and this already rebuts the Revisionist argument. This does not rule out that also the upper range of the estimations of 12 and 14 people m² was also achievable and realized, but this specific technical detail is not relevant anymore for the question if there had been homicidal mass gassings in Auschwitz (with a high proportion of emaciated people and/or children, even such crowd densities may have been possible/there is no reason to assume that they were not possible under favorable circumstances).


  Jews in the Sonderkommando

[16 min] And it’s not believable that the Germans would have Jews of all the ethnicies of Europe run the killing operation since they are the ethnic that was most likely to format a revolt and a mutiny.

1. Argument from personal incredulity vs. concrete evidence

2. The presence of Jewish Sonderkommando workers, especially when originating from the same country as the victims, may have eased the Jewish victims at the extermination sites resulting in a more smooth killing process.

3. Jews were the most practicable workers to recruit for the Germans for the extermination sites, as they were outlawed and could have been most easily liquidated if nessecary and also most easily replaced from the stream of deported Jews to Auschwitz.

Moreover, according to the National Socialist ideology, the Jews were racially the lowest and most inferiour people. If you are holding this view, it stands to reason to pick them as slave laborers for the most gruesome work you are dealing with.

Obviously, mutiny was no significant concern for the German paramilitary forces. The predecessor of the Jewish Sonderkommando in Birkenau was a small prisoner detail working in the crematorium in the Auschwitz main camp. Most of prisoners were Jewish, in particular those clearing the gas chamber. At these early trials, the SS experienced that Jewish prisoners were unlikely to "format a revolt and a mutiny" when forced to clear a gas chambers of Jewish victims and carry out the body disposal.

Crowd pressure vs. Gas Chamber Door

[17 min] At some point in the gassing operation people would panic and search towards the door. How hard could they push? Consider the Heysel Stadium disaster of 1985, where 39 people were killed [...] They pushed over a concrete wall, so in the gas chamber how hard could they push on this door and what does the door look like.

[18 min] In the movie potrayed it looks strong. But if we have actual photos of the cremation ovens under construction and finished, might there be a photo of a gas chamber door somewhere? To find out we to the US Holocaust Memorial Museum website and look up gassing operations. And scroll down to further readings to find auther Jean-Claude Pressac. In his book Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers we find numerous photos of the type of door used though not the actual door.

Gabbai: "You know it takes about 4, 5 minutes to die except the peopel who are infront where the gas is coming there it takes about a couple of minutes."

We see wood slads, this is tape to keep the gas from coming out through the cracks. This flimsey rod iron band is what would hold 2000 panicking people inside. It pivets there, swinging this way. The doors were mate by the inmates themselves. On page 46 we read, 'this type of gas tight door, with the same method of closing was to be used as it stood in the homicidal gas chambers'.

[19 min] But up here it says that this is 'the gas tight door of the Kanada I delousing gas chamber'. In other words, behind this door would be a room full of blankets and clothes to be fumigated. But we are supposed to believe that the same door design with no added fortifications would be used to hold 2000 panicking people in a gas chamber

Gabbai: "They get undress and right away they were going direct to the chambers. And since it takes a few minutes to die, then they realized that they were dying. So you always would find when you open the door some scratches in the walls of blood, they were going with their fingers scratching the walls to get safe at some place, there was no way."

[20 min]Müller: "Secondly, most people tried to push their way to the door. It was psychological: they knew where the door was, so maybe they could force their way. It was instinctive in the death struggle."

If a surge of panicking people pushed on such a flimsy door the people nearest the door would be crushed to death and then the latches would give and the door would burst open. And how believable is it that a door for 2000 people to go through on a regular basis is the size of a household door.


At the Heysel Stadium disaster, there were mostly men of the age 16 - 40 one can suppose, the strongest of man kind. On the other hand, the victims in the gas chamber were the weakest of man kind. The wall that collapsed in the stadium was free standing and people were on top of it. Further, the wall was already structural defective:
"...the collapse of a defective wall was a major contributory factor to the deaths”
~ Dunning, Sport Matters: Sociological Studies of Sport, Violence and Civilisation, p. 172

"The wall, no more than four feet high and twenty feet long, was more than 50 years old, its cement cladding crumbling away from the rotting brickwork"

The collapse of a wall at the Heysel stadium shows nothing but that certain crowds can make certain constructions collapse. It does, however, not demonstrate and not even indicate that the crowd in the gas chamber would have to burst open its door.

What actually needs to be done by Revisionists is to estimate the forces of the crowd on the door and the resistance of the door and door parts. Was not done by denierbud.

The issue of crowd forces on the gas chamber door is not trivial. It is not the force that can be exerted by one person multiplied by 2000. Only a fraction of the potential muscles forces could have been exerted on the door simply due to lack of space in the dense crowd and poor friction between possibly moist feet and concrete floor.  

Moreover, only a fraction of the victims could have actually exerted their muscle force on the door. Forces of people in a chain do not accumulate infinitely but are inevitable capped by an upper limit, the pressure that is fatal for human beings. A dead or faint person cannot exert any force actively anymore. Provided that the door could resist the pressure that is just fatal or fainting for human beings, which seems intuitively a reasonable assumption, it would have been unlikely that the door was burst open just by the muscles forces of the crowd.

Crowds can also exert leaning forces. The concrete pillars and gas introduction columns were screening the door from most of the victims; leaning forces may have only effectively accumulated from the first concrete pillar to the door. But if the crowd collapsed at some point, it was screening the door from those farther back. On the other hand, if the gas chamber was packed so dense that the people could virtually not collapse, the bodies also had not much angle to exert large leaning forces.

Generally, forces in highly dense crowds are difficult to predict and up to day, there is no founded estimation specifically for the crowd forces on the gas chamber door and the latter's resistance.

However, we know from the fact that numerous witnesses have testified on homicidal gassings in Auschwitz without any reported incident of a door failure, that the crowd pressure on the gas chamber doors was always - or more conservatively: usually - less than the failure pressure of the same. There is no evidence presented by denierbud or any other Holocaust denier refuting this finding.


Crowd pressure vs. Gas Introduction Column

[20 min] And these columns through which Zyklon B was poured, Pressac’s book as a schematic diagram of it, which Pressac drew himself based on eyewitness claims. It looks like chicken wire. They would have been destroyed by the crowd also.
,
Same as before. Without knowledge of the crowd pressure and resistance of the column, no conclusion can be drawn whether it "would have been destroyed". Reportedly, certain crowd forces can bent free standing guard rails, but it is unclear whether the victims in the gas chamber could have destroyed the presumably fastened 5 cm thick iron bars and network of wire mesh.

Elevator

[20 min] Jean-Claude Pressac's book has a photo of the elevator too. It says “a provisional 300 kg capacity goods hoist used in Krematorium II".

[21 min] So the bodies would go on here, and this is a triangular bar with a stabilizing piece of wood here. How flimsy. Imagine you have 2000 bodies in the basement but maximum capacity 661 pounds. So with seven bodies going up at a time, you would have to make 285 trips. Why not just have a conveyer belt on an incline here. Like this. It says provisional as in temporary, but Carlo Mattogno in his book Auschwitz: The Case for Sanity makes a strong case that this was the elevator that remained for the entire war period.



It is false that the “maximum capacity” of the provisional elevator was 300 kg/660 lbs. This figure actually referred to the “minimum capacity” ordered from the metal workshop (see Pressac, Technique, p.488); the maximum or actually used capacity may have been well above this.

The idea of a conveyer belt is pretty much senseless in this context. Since the central construction office in Auschwitz did not even manage to purchase a simple goods elevator for crematorium 2 on time and were forced to install a provisional makeshift one, it is safe to say it was hopeless to obtain a proper conveyer belt.

Even the provisional elevator was sufficient to handle the number of gassed corpses in the basement in relation to the cremation rate of the ovens, as such a bottleneck is not evident from the sources.

The assumptions made by Mattogno to estimate its daily capacity seem unreasonable. It is entirely unclear why say two strong men would take more than a few seconds to displace a single corpse by less than a metre.

It is certainly possible to imagine a scenario that worked for the mass extermination. Assuming that 8 corpses were transported with each load, that each transfer of the elevator to the next level took 1 minute and that each corpse was loaded and unloaded in 10 s, it would have taken some 5 min to transfer 8 corpses or 20 hours for 2000 corpses - less or equal the time needed for the cremation part. 

Denierbud asserts that Mattogno did make "a strong case that this was the elevator that remained for the entire war period" but in the cited book it merely reads "it is not clear" whether a more powerful elevator was installed after May 1944 (Mattogno, Auschwitz - The Case for Sanity, p. 51). So how Mattogno could make a "strong case" that the elevator was not upgraded when he says "it is not clear" is beyond me. Or why Mattogno did not urge for a correction when he viewed the clip (the so called "peer review"), and instead considered it "superb".

Hasty Generalization

[21 min] Germany is the country of BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, Volkswagen, Krups and Braun. Industrial design is part of their culture.

[22 min] So much so that in North America sometimes this is made into a parody. [...] Yet, the design at Auschwitz is so poor that it can't be believed.
This argument is so poor that it can't be believed.

That because some of the finest engineering originates from Germany, that conversely anything engineered by Germans must be fine too, is just hilarious. This is now hard to say for me - as a German - and it may come to surprise to denierbud, but some Germans have actually engineered crap in the past. It's just that you do not get a big player when you engineer crap, you vanish from the market.

Secondly, Germany's top engineers were hardly to be found among SS clerks in a prison camp, but rather in the industry.

Thirdly, conditions for developing and construction were not the best in 1942 - 1944, especially for non-armament industries. Furthermore, the conspirative and ethically questionable nature of the task to design mass murder facilities was a severe constraint. The point is, with restrictive conditions set, you obtain only the most feasible solution under these conditions even with the best people, but not the technologically and technically summit.

And last but not least, the design at Auschwitz was not poor. The cremation site was state of the art at the time. The killing site was engineered to cope with the pace of the body disposal.

Viewer's Guide to "Auschwitz - The Surprising Hidden Truth" (Minutes 22 - 38)

$
0
0

Capacity of the Crematoria in Auschwitz-Birkenau

[22 min] Cremation - most people don't know how long it takes. It is a key issue because while a wall of 15 ovens seems like a lot it's not even close to being able to handle the 2000 bodies downstairs. To illustrate, let's think of the process in terms of time. Let's say everyone undressing and then going into the gas chamber takes a half hour.

[23 min] Now we jump to the gas chamber and let's say the time to kill everyone with poison gas also takes half an hour. So now we are one hour into the killing operation. In hour number two, 15 bodies are taken upstairs to the 15 ovens and cremated. Each body is put on a stretcher and placed in the oven. On average it takes an hour to cremate a body. So in hour number one, two thousand Jews are killed. In hour number two, 15 Jews are cremated with 1,985 left to go. In hour number three, 15 more are cremated with 1,970 left to go.

[24 min] And at this snail's pace, at hour number 133, or 5 days later, you cremate 15 bodies and have only 5 left to go. You cannot do another gassing until the sixth day, cause there is nowhere to put the bodies. The point is, the Germans would have never had a system with a ration like this, where the cremation holds up the killing for almost a week. Another way to look at it. The 15 ovens take about a row of bodies in one hour. But look how many rows you have left. How does Dario Gabbai make it work?

Gabbai: "And then, we went upstairs into the second floor and but them on stretchers. And put them in the oven. And just from the body fat, they didn't have to do anything, they started the ovens but afterwards the body fat of each person was given the flames."

[25 min] He makes it working by focusing on the fat content of the body ignoring the water content.

Gabbai: "And actually they had to put outside the women and inside the men because the women have more fat and could burn the bodies."

The bigger issue is that both bodies are around 60% water, evaporating this water takes the first half of the cremation time. And after that the female body has more fat and will burn faster. But only 3% faster in total time, a negligible difference. How else does he make it work?

Interviewer: "So, after taking the bodies out of the gas chamber and putting them on these elevators, then what would happen?"

Gabbai: "You put them in the ovens."

[26 min] Interviewer: "Who would put them in the ovens?"

Gabbai: "Two ??? people, you know, put them on stretchers, three four of them on stretchers and put them in the oven."

He makes it work by putting three or four bodies in each opening.

Interviewer: "How many people were you actually able to put inside each oven?"

Gabbai: "?? put about four."

How else does he make it work?

Interviewer: "And how long again would it take to burn..."

Gabbai: "20 to 30 minutes."  

By not having it take very long.

Interviewer: "Did they give you any kind of instructions of how to do things or give you tools to work with?"
      
Gabbai: "They give you all the tools, you know, every 20 minutes you have to turn them around, takes 30 - 40 minutes to burn them."

He makes it work by having 3-4 bodies take 30-40 minutes, which averages to 10 min per body. Whereas we said the average is one hour for one body. With an average of 10 minutes per body you can clear out the gas chamber a lot faster than six days.

[27 min] So what do the cremation experts say? Does it take an hour an body or could you put three to four bodies in an opening and have it to take 30 to 40 min?...We look for cremation information on tube and find Elisa Krcilek. Elisa is a funeral director who works for the Cremation Society of Illinois as their Vice president.

Interviewer: "And could you tell us something about the cremation process itself?"

This video was never meant to support the Auschwitz gas chamber being a myth, but under fair use we can use it as that. Because cremation of one body at the same time is illegal, we can think of three to four bodies as an equivalent to a 300 to 400 pounds person.   

Interviewer: "And could you tell us something about the cremation process itself?"

[28 min]Krcilek: "Certainly, the cremation process on the average takes about two to three hours. There is a lot of variations that would, um, cause a cremation to take more time or less time, um, size of an individual is a big factor in that." 

The number is high, but she is probably including heating the oven and cooling the remains which aren't factors for us. So it does take time to cool the remains. Patrick O'Neal is a funeral director featured on a National Geographic TV program about the cremation. Neither he nor National Geographic ever intended their information to be used in this context either. 

Narrator: "What are the unique features of this funeral home is the inclusion of a crematorium on site.

O'Neal: "This is where I like to show off what I do for the living. These machines are actualy 38,000 pounds, cost around 100,000 Dollars a piece."

[29 min]Narrator: "Process. He estimates the time it takes to time cremate a body is an hour for 45 kg."

45 kg is about 100 pounds. So that's one hour for an 100 pounds person which is the number we used. The National Geographic video shows a cremation oven manufacturing plant.

Narrator: "In steel retorts the monitoring of the combustion process is automated. Temperature sensors are installed in the chamber. These sensors are wired to the control panel and they provide the data to regulate the fuel and air flow for the cremation."

Putting four bodies in an oven might be equivalent to one large body and this company says that it takes extra requirements. 

Narrator: "Currently B&L makes six different types of cremation retorts. Some of these models are for very large bodies up to 385 kilos.

[30 min]It takes 5 months to make ones of these large sized models and 18 workers can be involved in the process. Two months longer than a regular model. A mammoth crane is needed to lift anyone of these machines for transport. They weight 18 tons."

We go to the website and find the Phoenix II oven. It gives a cremation rate of 150 pounds per hour. In hour calculation we used a hundred pounds an hour. For ovens built 70 years earlier. With the average person weighting 100 pounds based on data in the book Auschwitz: The Case for Sanity...

Gabbai: "It put about four...takes 30, 30- 40 minutes to burn them"

...That would take more like four hours. He lies about the cremation rate to obscure the fact that 15 ovens isn't enough to handle 2000 bodies.

[30 min] And when that's established, the overall number of 1/2 a million can't be true either.

[31 min] Because Holocaust historians tells us that crematorium 2 wasn't in operation until spring 1943 and ending in November 1944. It was only supposedly in operation for a year and a half. They tell us that 500,000 were killed in this building. But because of the slow cremation rate, that's not enough time to kill that many people. 15 ovens would not have been enough even if there had been these computerized ovens. This is Carlo Mattogno. In his book Auschwitz: Case for Sanity he shows that four bodies would not even fit in that opening and that the vapourizing water, 96 gallons for 12 bodies would overwhelm the oven bringing the temperature down to much for to work properly. A muffle is the opening in the oven.

[32 min]
For instance, here the middle muffle opened faster than the left. Now the right muffle is opening up. Mattogno tells us can't go in lenghtwise because the depth of the muffle 6 feet 11 inches. You can't do two stretcher boats either, because here we look at the underside of the stretcher. There are the rollers. Mattogno tells us that if you drop one body in and than load the stretcher with three more, this part of the stretcher would hit the body and block the stretcher. You thus have to put four bodies here and use the stretcher to slide them into this opening, which wouldn't fit. At Mauthausen, Carlo Mattogno found the type of muffle they had in crematorium 2 at Auschwitz. There is the stretcher, some flowers and a red candle have been placed in the back. This candle is this candel right here.


[33 min] We look at this muffle. Someone has placed some flowers and green cellophane right there. If a body was put in, and the stretcher pulled out, the body would come up to here. The second body would come up to here. There is little room after that. These ovens are at Buchenwald, there you see the rollers. But it's the same muffle that they had in Auschwitz. These are liberated prisoners in 1945 demonstrating for the Americans. Lawrence Rees is the world's most well known Auschwitz historian.

Rees: "The normal experience of going to this place was to die."

He wrote and produced a six part series on Auschwitz for the BBC. 

Narrator: "This is the site of the largest mass murder in history in the history of the world - Auschwitz."

[34 min] And he wrote this companion book to the BBC series which won the book of the year in Britain in 2006. How would he solve the slow cremation rate problem? "On the ground floor was a large crematorium with three mufflers capable of burning five corpses each." Mufflers is a misprint for muffles, but the main point is he says they put five corpses in each opening. Or on another page: "The ovens...each capable of holding several bodies." The reader is getting the emotional impression of urban barbarity. But never questioning if it's even possible.

The issue of cremation capacity of the crematoria in Auschwitz is one of the most favorite playing fields of Holocaust denier. The almost classic argument is to cite modern day crematoria operators, as denierbud did in this episode too. But the comparison between civilian cremations and the industrial-military incinerations performed in Auschwitz is moot:

  1. Civilian crematoria ovens are operated to cremate the corpses until full calcination of the bones is achieved, but which is mainly an aesthetic aspect.
  2. Civilian crematoria have to separate the remains of the individual corpses, whereas in Auschwitz the practice of multiple cremations was possible.

To illustrate the point: In 1942, some ovens from the company Ignis Hüttenbau were erected in the Theresienstadt concentration camp. According to the preserved records, a male corpse was cremated in 36.5 minutes in average. Thus, these ovens back in 1942 had a ≥ 60% higher cremation rate than those modern, computer-controlled cremation systems built some 70 years later featured in the video clip. The lesson learned here is that cremation rates from civilian crematoria cannot be simply transferred one-to-one on paramilitary cremation techniques.

The above cited information on the Ignis Hüttenbau ovens in Terezin was taken from Carlo Mattogno, Auschwitz: The Case for Sanity (ATCFS), p. 390. That's exactly the publication denierbud is referring to throughout the documentary. In fact, exactly this page and even the paragraph is cited at 25:40 minutes, apparently without bothering him to think about its implication that it is debunking his lengthy argument. 

A lot has been said about cremation capacity and rates of the crematoria in Auschwitz, which allows to screen the testimonies for corroborating and converging features. Carlo Mattogno has compiled a list of 17 accounts in ATCFS, p. 319. Following the former Jewish Sonderkommando and SS men, the cremation capacity of all 4 crematoria in Birkenau was 4,000 - 10,000 corpses per day, which was achieved by loading each muffle opening with 2 - 5 corpses every 15 to 30 minutes.

Two principle arguments have been brought forward by denierbud (from Mattogno) against this operation technique of the ovens as reported by the eyewitnesses: that it was spatially not possible to load multiple corpses into the muffle and that it was thermochemically not possible to dehydrate multiple corpses in the muffle.

The inner dimensions of the muffle were reportedly 70 cm wide and 80 cm high at the maximum (the top formed an arch), the size of the opening was 60 cm wide and high at the maximum (ATCFS, p. 377). Two average adults would have certainly fit on top of each other on the stretcher through the opening, also if two dehydrated, shrunken and somewhat displaced corpses were already in the inside. Note that the use of rollers to slide in the stretcher is not a criterion necessary to consider as the stretcher could have been introduced also by using a solid bar hold in front of the muffle by two prisoners as shown on a 1945 drawing by Sonderkommando prisoner David Olere.

Three corpses directly on top seems spatially impossible. But if alternations of the feet-head direction as well as lengthways and transverse displacements of the corpses on the stretcher are taking into account, the height of the batch is reduced and three adult corpses might have fitted on the stretcher and through the muffle opening. Higher figures seem only conceivable if very emaciated, small adults or children are considered.

Carlo Mattogno has provided some energy balance of the presumed simultanous cremation of 4 corpses in each opening of the tripple-muffle furnaces in ATCFS, p. 386 ff (it should be pointed out that the figure of 4 corpses taken from Sonderkommando prisoner Tauber is not the lower limit of what it is reported). According to this, 474,500 kcal are needed to evaporate the water of the 12 corpses, while only 116,200 kcal are supplied by the coke combustion. He elaborates that the energy difference would have led to a drop in the muffle temperature resulting in "mere carbonization of the corpses instead of a cremation" (p. 286).

The argument is a straw man, simply speaking. The difference between the straw man scenario assumed by Mattogno and what was actually the case in Auschwitz is that an additionally source of energy was inside the muffles in the latter case: the previous batch of already shrunken and dehydrated corpses. Mattogno neglects, ignores, denies - take your choice - this aspect, but it makes a difference.

While the dehydration of a fresh corpse is consuming energy in form of heat, the combustion of a dehydrated corpse is releasing energy. The simultaneous cremation of a fresh and an already dehydrated corpse yields a more even heat balance than either individual process and is stabilizing the temperature in the muffle (apart from the temperature drop when opening the main door of the muffle). It is apparently because of this more balanced heat release and absorption upon overlapping the cremation cycles that enabled the crematoria ovens in Auschwitz to dehydrate multiple fresh corpses at once per opening as consistently reported by numerous eyewitnesses and that led to the comparable low coke consumption per corpse.

So both denierbud's arguments against the high throughput incinerations in Auschwitz are flawed. There is a neither any reason why multiple corpses should not have fitted into the muffles nor why their dehydration was thermochemically not possible with the heat supply from the coke combustion AND from the previous batch of already dehydrated corpses.

This is at least true for the lower loading figures of 2 - 3 corpses at the same time. For higher loadings, it is getting increasingly difficult to imagine how they were introduced in addition to the dehydrated batch already inside. At some point fresh air supply and exhaust gas removal could become a further problem. But it is beyond the scope of this rebuttal to establish what the maximum achievable cremation capacity in Auschwitz was. Here it is sufficient to note that the lower eyewitness' estimations seem feasible and that these were already sufficient for the mass murder carried out in the crematoria.

The capacity of the crematoria in Auschwitz-Birkenau is also addressed by three contemporary German documents. 

 "As a result of the sizeable occupants (125,000 prisoners), a Crematorium is being constructed. It contains 5 [crematory] muffel ovens each [oven] with 3 muffles for 2 men, so that in one hour 60 men could be cremated."

~ Explanatory report of 30 October 1941, cited from Carlo Mattogno, The Auschwitz Central Construction Headquarters Letter dated 28 June 1943: An Alternative Interpretation 

"I told him that at this time 3 double-muffle ovens are in operation, with a capacity of 250 per day.  Further, currently under construction are 5 triple muffle ovens with a daily capacity of 800.  Today and in the next few days, 2 eight-muffle ovens, each with a daily capacity of 800, will come on consignment, redirected fromMogilew."

~ Memo from Kurt Prüfer of 8 September 1942 

 "Performance of the now available crematoria at 24 hours of operation time:

1.) old crematorium I 3 x 2 muffle ovens 340 persons

2.) new crematorium in the POW camp II 5 x 3 muffle ovens 1440 persons

3.) new crematorium III 5 x 3 muffle ovens 1440 persons

4.) new crematorium IV 8 muffle ovens 768 persons

5.) new crematorium V 8 muffle ovens 768 persons"

 ~ Letter draft of Karl Bischoff to Hans Kammler of 28 June 1943 (draft), my translation, reproduced in Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 460.

The first two documents are predicting cremation capacities for Birkenau. Also, there must be a typo/mistake in the second document as the 5 three-muffle ovens could not have had the same capacity as the eight-muffles ovens.

The third document was set up after the crematoria were already in operation. But since it is using as basis for the cremation capacities of the crematoria in Birkenau exactly the same figure as already in the first document, this raises the suspicion that the draft was meant to confirm what was ordered rather than precisely reporting what was practically obtained. On the other side, it can be argued that members of the central construction office would unlikely set up a document exactly confirming what was ordered, if it was not at least in the range of what could have been achieved.

What is important to note is that the documents explicitly (1st) and implicitly (2nd, 3rd) corroborate the technique of multiple cremations (i.e. multiple loadings and/or overlapping cremation cycles) for Auschwitz-Birkenau as already established by testimonial evidence.

The 2nd and 3rd documents also provide figures from the Topf engineer Kurt Prüfer and from the central construction office for the crematorium 1 in the Auschwitz main camp. The figure of 250/340 corpses per day for six muffle openings yield a cremation rate of 35/25 min per corpse (assuming that Prüfer was referring to a 24 h operation, but which is not necessarily the case).

Since the dehydration and combustion of an individual corpse is unlikely achieved within such short time at the operation temperature of 700 - 800°C, the figures imply multiple cremations in the form of overlapping of cremation cycles (multiple cremations without overlapping cremation cycles is discarded as it seems like a thermochemically unfavourable procedure for the Topf ovens).

Moreover, multiple cremations are reported in a letter of the Topf engineer Fritz Sanders to the Topf management of 14 September 1942:

"So they help themselves by numerous ovens/muffles and by stuffing the individual muffle full with several corpses."
(my translation)

Sanders remark that they "help themselves...by stuffing the individual muffle full with several corpses" not only confirms multiple cremations, but also that multiple cremations did have a significant beneficial impact on the cremation capacity.

Bones Outside the Crematorium

And he devotes four pages to Dario Gabbai. Gabbai has never told his story to anyone until the 1990s. What was he doing before that? He had a brief and minor skit as an actor in the Hollywood movie called the glory brigade. He went from the worst profession in the world to the most glamorous one.
[35 min] 18 years after his supposed job in Auschwitz. And we even didn't get into the crazier stuff he said.

Gabbai: "You know, when we came in the crematorium all the streets in the crematorium outside were all from the bones."

It is unclear from the short extract what exactly Dario Gabbai is meaning here, but he is possibly referring to the cremation remains deposited outside in the crematorium yard or the use of cremation remains as grit for roads in Winter.

The former Auschwitz prisoner Yehuda Bacon testified at the Frankfurt Auschwitz trial he was employed with the latter work:
"One of the duties was to take the ash from crematorium 3 and spread in on the frozen paths in what was the women camp BIIc at the time."
~ Yehuda Bacon, testimony of 30 October 1964, Frankfurt Auschwitz trial, taken from the Auschwitz trial DVD, my translation.


Gas Chamber and Oven Loading

We said that 2000 people wouldn't have gone into a room of that size and we say that four bodies wouldn't fit in that opening, could it all be possible in Auschwitz because everybody was so thin? We go to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum website and read: Of the new arrivals in auschwitz the majority were sent immeadiately to the gas chambers. The point being, they wouldn't have had time to get thin.

[36 min] Now we learn where most came from.

Narrator: "The vast majority of those who were murdered in Auschwitz in 1944 came from one place: Hungary. In March 1944 the German troops entered Budapest, for the Nazis Hungary was a rich country right for plounder. although were already allied with Nazis, the Hungarians were unreliable partners as far as Hitler was concerned. At least in their refusal to deport the 760,000 Hungarian Jews."

So they came from a rich country and have been free up to now. Lawrence Rees' documentary shows pictures of Hungarian deportees and they don't look thin. The starvation happened more in the last few months of the war and Auschwitz was closed by that.

[37 min]Narrator: "On average, 75% of the people of each transport from Hungary was selected to be murdered immeadiately."

In Hungary, Jews have been hearing Nazi extermination rumors for most of the war and yet when packed like this in an unfamiliar underground 2000 person shower room when other Jews told them to - not believable. And where they thin from hunger like many would assume? No.


Argument from personal incredulity vs. concrete evidence and already addressed previously.

2000 persons in the underground gas chamber does not necessarily has to assume emaciated people as pointed out previously. 4 corpses in the muffle openings does not necessarily has to assume emaciated people either, if children are considered as victims.

Corpse Cellar vs. Gassing Cellar

[37 min] Here is crematorium 2 from the air, so what was this building if it wasn't a gas chamber facility? The answer is on the blueprints of the Auschwitz archives. The text is small, but it says Leichenkeller 1, Keller means cellar as in wine cellar, Leichen means dead bodies. A cold underground place for storing dead bodies. And the other side was never an undressing room. It's labeled as Leichenkeller 2 corpse cellar number 2 cold to keep the bodies from spoiling until they can be cremated. 

Denierbud claims that the crematorium 2 basement "wasn't a gas chamber facility...was never an undressing room".

But the so called corpse cellar 1 was referred to as "gassing cellar" by the head of the SS central construction office in Auschwitz and as "gas cellar" by the Topf engineer Fritz Sanders. It was equipped with a "gas door...with double 8 mm glass and peephole". The so called corpse cellar 2 was labeled as "undressing room/cellar" by the head of the SS central construction office as well as by a Topf engineer.

"wasn't a gas chamber facility...was never an undressing room" (denierbud on the crematorium basements)

"gassing cellar...undressing room"(contemporary German documents on the crematorium basements)

These supposed corpse cellars were clearly converted into undressing and gassing sites by the SS according to contemporary German files, which is seriously corroborating the eyewitness accounts on the homicidal gassings in the crematorium.

At the very end of the video clip, denierbud is showing a text slide (number 10) actually citing the "gassing cellar" document and trying to explain it away with Carlo Mattogno's flawed and historically unfounded delousing chamber hypothesis. Whether this slide was denierbud's own idea or whether he was asked to include it by say Mattogno is unclear. But the grave deception "it wasn't a gas chamber facility...was never an undressing room" directly refuted by German documents remained in the main part of the video.

The Underground Gas Chamber

[38 min] Underground never makes sense for a gas chamber.

Argument from personal incredulity vs. concrete evidence and already addressed previously.

Viewer's Guide to "Auschwitz - The Surprising Hidden Truth" (Minute 38 - end)

$
0
0

Camp Sections in Auschwitz-Birkenau

[38 min] We find crematorium 2 in satellite view. It's at the edge of this huge community, cause it's of those for cremating the bodies of those who die there. The community called Birkenau was the population centre of Auschwitz. 100,000 people mostly Jewish. One would assume that these are able bodied men selected for labour. This building is the entrance building right here. We see dismantled housing in the background, salvaged after the war for materials. The BBC documentary shows what it might have looked like before. 

Interviewer: "When you arrived at Auschwitz after this nine day journey, can you describe for us the very first thing you remember when that door opened up  to the wagon?"

Gabbai: "The first thing I remember is that the SS said schnell schnell."

[39 min]

Gabbai: "We got into line and Mengle was there making this selection, always with those two fingers. Most of the fingers were to the right which is going directly to the crematorium and to left...he was selecting 10 % of the young of every transport 10 % went to work the other direct to the crematorium. And I knew that after a while."

One would assume that these are barracks for able bodied men selected for labour, so it's surprising to find out that the majority of barracks are women and medical. These are women, these are medical. This is a family camp for Jewish families from the Czech republic. This is the gypsis camp. This is men's quarantine and just this small section was the men's camp.

[40 min] The selection to live or die story doesn't fit with the division of barracks in the population centre of Auschwitz.

The following camp section supposedly contradict the systematic extermination of the unfit European Jews in Auschwitz:

Female's camp

The argument implies that women are not capable of work. This definitely deserves a nomination for the most stunning and idiotic claim made by denierbud throughout video.

Actually, the SS leaders and policy makers were more pragmatic and considered able bodied Jewish women suitable for forced labour, even for the construction of underground fighter factories:

"My dear Pohl! Of course, the Jewish women are to be employed. One will have to worry only about good nourishment. Here the important thing is a supply of raw vegetables. So don't forget to import plenty of garlic from Hungary."

~ Heinrich Himmler to Oswald Pohl, 27 May 1944, from Hilberg, Destruction of the European Jews, p. 1001.

It is no surprise that a large number of Jewish women were imprisoned and sent through Auschwitz-Birkenau.


Hospital's camp

The policy of immediate killing of Jews considered unfit for work referred to Jews freshly deported to Auschwitz with RSHA transports and selected at the ramps in Auschwitz. It did not refer to Jews who were already registered in the camp and became unfit for work.

"Obergruppenführer Pohl was forced to resort also on Jews who became unfit for work because of the increasing use of prisoners for the armament industry pushed by the Reichsführer-SS. It was ordered to treat and feed all unfit Jews, who could have become healthy and fit again within six weeks, particular well. Previously, all unfit Jews had been gassed with the next transport or killed by injection if they were laying sick in the hospital blocks."

~ Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß, manuscript the Final Solution of the Jewish Question, from the Auschwitz trial DVD, my translation.

Jewish Family's camp

The genesis of the so called Family Camp of Jews deported from Theresienstadt to Auschwitz-Birkenau in September and December 1943 seems not entirely cleared up yet, but it is likely related to attempts of the SS to camouflage and delude the fate of the European Jews. The exclusion of unfit deportees from Theresienstadt from the usual extermination procedure was an exception from the rule.

Their later mass murder shows the rule was only temporarily suspended. The September 1943 transports were liquidated on 8 March 1944 (for a detailed discussion of this incident see Miroslav Karny, Fragen zum 8. März 1944, Theresienstädter Studien und Dokumente, issue 9, 1999, p. 9 ff.), the unfit people deported in December 1943 were killed in July 1944 (Der Ort des Terrors, volume 5, p. 115). 


Excessive Cremation Capacity

[41 min] We pull back from Birkenau to see the greater Auschwitz area and overlay with a map of the US Holocaust Memorial website. Those minority of inmates who did work in Birkenau walked a mile in the morning to the SS workshops and armament industries here. The whole Auschwitz area was around 22 square miles. Crematorium 2 had a mirror facility called crematorium 3 these two buildings are the same in mirror formation. That seems like way to many cremation ovens and body storage space, but Carlo Mattogno explains: "The increase in cremation units at Birkenau depended on two concomitant factors...The first was the order given by Himmler during his visit of Auschwitz on July 17 and 18, 1942 to bring the camp capacity up to 200,000 detainees."

[41 min] We see plans to expand the camp that were never completed. Mattogno gives the second reason of why there are so many ovens. The second was the mortality of the detainees. August 1942 was the month with the highest death rate iin the history of the Auschwitz camp, caused by a terrible typhus epidemic. Some 8,600 detainees died during that month, almost twice as many as died the month before (about 4,400 deaths); there were peaks of 500 deaths per day. The average strength of the camp at the time was little more than 40,000 inmates. Just imagine what could have occurred with a strength of 200,000 detainees! The ovens would therefore have to be able to cope with any future emergencies." Here is crematorium 2 and 3. Here we have a complex for killing lice, the small bugs that spread typhus. 

[42 min] These two buildings are for people giving showers upon arriving. And for fumigating cloths with Zyklon-B, tour buses over here help us to see how big this desinfestation facility is. But the Germans obviously didn't do enough and are responsable for this Typhus tragedy. Because they put the Jews here in the first place.


The capacity of the crematoria was - anticipated and practically - at least 3000 - 4000 corpses per day (see previous posting). Such rates are utterly excessive for "natural deaths" of a carefully and in advance planned camp of 200,000 prisoners, who were mostly living under good conditions prior their detention. Anticipating such a death rate in the planning phase indicates sinister intentions, either by mass dying due to poor treatment or directly by killing.

According to the explanatory report of 30 October 1941, the future crematorium 2 with its expected capacity of 1440 corpses per day was originally intended for 125,000 Soviet POWs. The death rates among Soviet POWs were generally very high, which was caused by the poor treatment but also by systematic killings carried out among Soviet POWs specifically in concentration camps: 
"The executions [of "politically unacceptable elements" among Soviet inmates, see operation order number 8] are not public and have to be carried out in the next concentration camp without attracting attention."

~ Operation order number 9 of Heydrich, 21 July 1941, Klein, Die Einsatzgruppen in der besetzten Sowjetunion, p. 340, my translation.

In fact, at the time the explanatory report was set up, Auschwitz had already carried out mass killings of Soviet POWs as well as of sick prisoners (see also Dr. Joachim Neander responds to Carlo Mattogno regarding the September 1941 gassing in Block 11 of Auschwitz).

Now, if a cremation capacity of 1440 corpses per day was considered sufficient for poorly treated 125,000 Soviet POWs subjected to systematic killings, it is unlikely that a higher ratio cremation capacity to prisoners was anticipated for poorly treated Jewish prisoners also with a high mortality rate but supposedly not subjected to any systematic killings.

But then already the two crematoria 2 and 3 should have been sufficient for a strength of 200,000 Jewish prisoners and at least the construction of crematoria 4 and 5 remains unexplained both by a high death rate and the planned camp expansion. The excessive cremation capacity in Auschwitz is, however, well explained within the framework of the systematic extermination of Jews considered unfit for forced labour.

It should be also noted that the high death rate in Auschwitz in summer 1942 was not only from natural deaths but included killings and mass killings in particular among Jews. The fact that the death certificates issued in Auschwitz for the deceased prisoners were systematically falsified  (see also Evidence on the systematic falsification of death causes in Auschwitz) is usually conveniently ignored by Holocaust deniers.

Insight into the Extermination Sites I

[42 min]

Gabbai: "They put the railroad cars on the steps where the chambers to undress was just in the crematorium. Everybody was coming direct, you know. When I was there, 600,000 people mostly from Hungary, from Budapest I remember 70,000 from Lodz, Holland, beautiful people, it's undescribable."

[43 min] According to the story, crematorium 2 is not related to Birkenau, rather it's for gassing Jews all over Europe. But then why have it to be so close to this primarily Jewish community. This is the women's food preparation building. One of the women looks out the window and sees some mysterious guy dumping something into an opening or looks past this underground room and sees 2000 people ? to go down the narrow stairway into the undressing room never to emerge again. These trees were not there during the war as an American air photo of August 25 1944 shows us. Auschwitz had a recreational soccer field for the inmates, which is bad design to put next to a top secret genocide operation.

[44 min]

Cahn: "Of course what we did is for the weekends we got together a group of us together and we made a soccer team, we played soccer."

Interviewer: "It's amazing that there has been a soccer team that there be enough energy left to do something like that."

Cahn: "Well, I don't think we were quite as energetic as we were the other regular team, but we did something to, it kept our mind off the problems we had." 

So a Jewish man is playing soccer after work. He looks to see 2000 people waiting to descend into the undressing room of crematorium 3. Here is another perspective. These are gypsy barracks. A gypsy looks out his window accross the soccer field. Here is the soccer field.

First of all, Jewish people were not expected to leave either Auschwitz-Birkenau or some other concentration camp alive. Therefore, any considerations among the SS planners about what they could have seen was only of limited relevance in this context. 

Secondly, the SS men in charge of Auschwitz did have the option to enforce a block's closure during a gassing operation, as it was in fact done in the Auschwitz main camp previously. The SS did have the power to ban anybody nearby the crematoria if it was considered necessary.

Thirdly, the SS was planning to plant trees around the crematoria obviously to obscure the view on them:
"According to an order of the Auschwitz commandant SS-Obersturmbannführer Höss, a green belt has to be erected at the crematoria I and II in the POW camp as a natural conclusion to the camp."

~ letter Bischoff to Caesar, 6 November 1943
Forthly, in summer 1944, when the Hungarian Jews were murdered in Auschwitz, a thick “camouflage fence” made of “reed matting” was erected around the crematoria (memo Jothann of 17 June 1944, Auschwitz 1940-1945, Volume 3 p. 183), as can be also seen on the aerial photographs 31 May 1944 and later. 

Insight into the Extermination Sites II

[44 min] With 22 square miles to work with and so nobody in Auschwitz-Birkenau would find out.

[45 min] Why not have crematorium 2 and 3 about a half mile away behind these trees. And then to transport Jews from all over Europe to get gassed why not built the last part of the rail line coming from this side.

Well meant is not the same as well done.

Denierbud's preferred position is just 800 m from the river bank, where civilians could have had an unobscured view on the extermination facilities. In fact, civilians were already able to observe some of the activity at the Bunker extermination sites further away and partly shielded by vegetation, which was a problem actually known to the SS in Auschwitz (see also the Broad report).

Thus, the location proposed by denierbud did not reduce but increase the problem of secrecy towards the outside world, in particular since his own design of an enormous blast furnace fed by a conveyer belt is just yelling for attention. Terribly bad design. It is worth to mention that the crematoria actually used for the mass extermination were much more discrete.

Telling the Outside World During the War

[45 min] Narrator: "Fueled partly by these prejudices, Höß prepared for the arrival of the Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz-Birkenau. 2 miles away from Auschwitz main camp. He oversaw the completion of a railway line allowing new arrivals being brought directly into Birkenau."

Right through the middle of the camp. bad design heaped upon bad design. But how many of the Birkenau inmates could have told the outside world. To answer that we come to Dr. Franciszek Piper, he was the senior curator of the Auschwitz State Museum, shown here in 1991.

[45 min] David Cole asked him some interesting questions.

Cole: "Who initially came up with the figure of 4 Million people died in Auschwitz." 

Piper: "??? estimates by Soviets."

But we are interested in a book Piper wrote where he said that in 1943 19,859 Auschwitz inmates were transfered to other camps and 139 escaped. And in 1944, a 163,000 were transfered from Auschwitz, 500 were released and 300 escaped. This large number is because people were constantly coming in Auschwitz and then leaving for other camps.

Narrator: "Fueled partly by these prejudices, Höß prepared for the arrival of the Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz-Birkenau. 2 miles away from Auschwitz main camp. He oversaw the completion of a railway line allowing new arrivals being brought directly into Birkenau."

[47 min] So how many people could have told the outside world. A 183,798.


Those prisoners transferred were usually just sent to another concentration camp and remained in German capture. They could not have told the outside world.

Those released were mostly from the Auschwitz main camp not from Birkenau, where these extermination sites were located, and even if there were previously imprisoned in Birkenau one can assume that the German authorities kept an eye on them and that they would have been immediately detained again when they really tried to tell the outside world.

Some escaped prisoners indeed reported about the atrocities in Auschwitz and they are one reason we know about these. But their escape was obviously not anticipated by the SS.

Loss of Reality

[47 min] From bad design, to how small it is, how crowded it would be, to all the lies about cremation, it's clear that Auschwitz gas chambers are a myth.

Actually the video clip did not come close to provide a single coherent, consistent, founded and reasonable argument showing that the Auschwitz gas chambers are a myth.

Quote Mining

[47 min] And the strategy to keep the myth in place...

Lipstadt: "Ultimately and with this I conclude, our objective should be to create a society where denial of the genocide is seen as so outrageous, and so despicable that anyone who engages in it would be rendered a pariah."
The full speech of Deborah Lipstadt can be found here and she is advocating and practicing the strategy to fight Holocaust denial by arguments:

"Most importantly, however, genocide denial laws suggest that we do not have the facts and the documentation to prove that these people are liar. We defeated David Irving...in the courtroom not with law but with facts. We followed the footnotes and demonstrated...Irving's work on the Holocaust was a tissue of lies. Our defeat of Irving is far more powerful commentary on his work because it is rooted in facts..."

~ Deborah Lipstadt, Holocaust denial and freedom of speech.

Already in 1993 she published the book "Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory", which was also addressing Holocaust denier arguments.

The Ustasha and Vatican's Silence - Part 3

$
0
0
Read the Part 1 and Part 2. This text was originally translated into Portuguese here. The book was originally written in Spanish.

The Ustasha and Vatican's Silence - Part 3
The crimes of the Croatian Ustashis (NDH)

HASTILY ESCAPE. THE VATICAN IN THE END OF WORLD WAR II

Far from being a historical mystery, the escape of thousands outlaw Nazis to South America and other parts of the world is a fact broadly documented in what the Holy See took part actively. Sinister Characters such as Pavelic, Klaus Barbie or Joseph Mengele went into exile making a prior scale in Vatican. Meanwhile, in Croatia, the last Ustasha men hoped that a timely intervention of Vatican diplomacy propitiated the creation of an independent Croatian state off of Yugoslavia.

Ustasha soldier displays proud his macabre trophy, the decapitated head of a Serbian Chetnik. (Photo)

When it became clear that Zagreb would be liberated by Allied troops, the Ustasha men tried to save what they could. In late April 1945, Pavelic, with the full consent of his friend Stepinac, ordered that they be taken to the Franciscan monastery in Zagreb thirty-six coffers with a macabre loot (gold teeth and jewelry, mainly) confiscated of the victims of the slaughter of Serbs, Jews and Gypsies.[23] However, Pavelic himself retained other thirteen coffers to ensure his escape and a comfortable retreat. [24]

First, the monks hid the treasure in the crypt beneath the main altar and later in a hole dug under the confessionals, where it remained until to be recovered by the troops of the Marshal Tito. After burying his loot, Pavelic went commanding fifteen hundred loyal men towards Austria, [25] hoping to have the support of the British and the Vatican. But he didn't wait to be taken prisoner by the Americans, who had been following his track since his arrival in Austria. They got to arrest him near Salzburg.

However, when they were already finalizing the arrangements for the prosecution of war crimes, Stepinac and the Archbishop of Salzburg interceded for Pavelic was released. Finally, the war criminal found shelter among the same walls of the Vatican, though his stay was short. To avoid the scandal, Pius XII, conscious that the Allied victory had given a turn in the political world, inveted Pavelic to go to the Holy See embassy disguised as a priest in a car with diplomatic plate. Pavelic maintained the false identity for a time under the name of Father Benares or Father Gomez. [26]

The Americans followed the slippery Pavelic, but they decided not to act for deference of the Holy See. The counterintelligence military agents in charge with the subject well clarified it in a report:
"The current Pavelic's contacts are of such a high level, and his present situation is so compromising to the Vatican, that his extradition could be a big problem for the Catholic Church."[27]
More or less by those dates, Father Krunoslav Draganovic, secretary of the Croatian Confraternity of San Girolamo, who was part of the Pontifical Assistance created by Pius XII, an institution of the Vatican in Rome, received from Croatia over four hundred pounds of gold [28] that should be employed "in the work of assistance and pastoral care of refugees in Croatia."

(In other words, this will help the former Croatian Ustashis to escape from the Allied authorities and the partisans of Tito in particular.) In honor of the truth, it's fact this gold wasn't part of the looting of Serbian and Jewish victims, as Monsignor Simcic says, currently permanent specialist of the Ecciesia Dei Pontifical Commission, and then collaborator of Draganovic:
This charity operation had its disposal two boxes of gold ingots drawn by the Army retrating from the front forehead, before the advance of the Tito's partisans. These boxes were of the Croatian National Bank, while the assets seized from Jews were administered by the Division of the Ministry of Public Security. They Two very different administrations. [29]
CHARITY OPERATION

On July 31, 1942, the Ustashis kill in the Orthodox Church in Sadilovac, Kordun, 314 Serbian adults and 149 children under 14 years. They killed children in front of the church wall.

Part of the Draganovic's "operation charity" - who was subordinate to the secretary of state Giovanni Battista Montini, Montini later would become Pope Paul VI - was to get personally the escape to Argentina for a big number of German war criminals and Croats. [30] The Croatian Franciscan Draganovic wasn't in a good situation in those days since he had been an Ustasha officer and he have done forced conversions of Serbs. [31] In 1943, Draganovic left behind her hectic life as Ustasha soldier and joined the Vatican. [32] So it's not surprising he showed some interest in saving his former comrades.

There was a time not less than thirty former Ustasha, including himself Draganovic, congregated at the seminary of St. Jerome (San Girolamo degli Illirici), five of which, including a priest, were on the list of most wanted war criminals. "Other ones were refugees in different Catholic institutions, such as the Oriental Institute. There are confidential reports of U.S. intelligence services at the time in fact, they bluntly qualified the seminary of St. Jerome as the headquarters of what was left of the Ustasha. [33] the Allies Intelligence couldn't do anything about that, since San Girolamo, despite being outside the Vatican walls, had the status of territory of the Holy See.

The most illustrious guest of St. Jerome was Klaus Barbie, the Butcher of Lyon, which was delivered to Draganovic at the train station in Genoa by Intelligence American officers who expected to take advantage of Barbie in the future. Draganovic obtained documents from the Red Cross with a fake name for him and his family. Barbie and other Nazis embarked for Genoa, in March 1951, bound for Buenos Aires, later passing through Bolivia. In early 1948, when tensions with Soviet Union were increasing, British and Americans began to look with better eyes these Vatican's hiding operations, since some of the fugitives had technical, scientific, military and Intelligence knowledge and it could be helpful during the cold war.

In fact, the Americans established their own smuggling operation of war criminals - under the name of Operation Paperclip - by which they took advantage of the services of leading scientists such as Werner von Braun, who should have been tried at Nuremberg by experiments with humans in the center of Aeronautical Research of Peenemunde (Germany) or General Reinhard Gehien, which came to occupy a position of high importance in the CIA before taking position in the intelligence services of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Ustasha soldiers bearing decapitated head of the Serbian Jovan Blaženović.

The brutal practice of cutting heads and flaunt them as prize was an outstanding practice of the Ustasha.

Other war criminals who obtained refuge behind the walls of the Vatican were Franz Stangl, commandant of the death camp of Treblinka (Poland), Eduard Roschmann, The Butcher of Riga, SS General Walter Rauff, the inventor of the gas chamber portable, Gustav Wagner, commander of the Sobibor camp, and especially Dr. Joseph Mengele, the Angel of Death of Auschwitz.

A curiosity, those refugees who were hiding in religious convents were mostly disguised as nuns. So in many convents happenned a sudden increase in the number of sisters. However, this group carried a muff 'surprise': neither more nor less than the war criminal Gerhard Bohne, in charge of the Reich Euthanasia Program.

Draganovic also collaborated with the Argentine government to allow the arrival in this country of the technical people that German designer Kurt Tank needed for the aircraft factory of Cordoba. They also received passports of the Red Cross and were housed in the nun convent of Centocelle until take a plane in the Air Fleet Merchant of Argentina bound for Buenos Aires. (Out of curiosity, we say that those refugees who were hiding in religious convents did, mostly disguised as nuns. So much so that in several convents one can prove a sudden increase in the number of sisters, many with serious hormonal problems judging by the noise of his voice and the gestures, as well as his vello facial.) However, this group carried a muff "surprise": neither more nor less than the war criminal Gerhard Bohne, in charge of the Reich euthanasia program.

So a whole gallery of sinister characters, from Pavelic to Adolf Eichmann, got their tickets to Argentina through the Holy See In the Pavelic case, Draganovic made ​​an exception giving him a Red Cross passport and personally accompaning him to Buenos Aires close to a large group of former Ustashis.

Among those who escaped were also some few genuine war heroes weren't persecuted for their extraordinary zeal on the battlefield, as Colonel Hans Rudel who in the commands of his Stuka bomber destroyed over five hundred Soviet tanks and sank several boats. He lost a leg in combat, but that wasn't deterrent to keep fighting until the end of the war. Rudel was wanted by the Soviet Union and appeared in Bariloche (Argentina) where he immediately became known for his great qualities as a skier.

THE HOMOPHOBIC DOCTOR

Others hadn't a glorious past as Dr. Kari Vaernet, famous for 'experiment' sessions with homosexuals in the concentration camp of Buchenwald, where, among other things, he dedicated during a season for castration of Gauss to replace your testicles by metal balls. Arriving to Argentina, the homophobic doctor went to work for the Ministry of Health held a consultation on the Uriart street in Buenos Aires (Argentina Capital). The second-ranking Nazis, without the resources nor the necessary contacts to enjoy the quirky 'travel agency' which unofficially worked at St. Jerome, had to act on their own to escape for many countries as Spain, Syria, Egypt, USA, United Kingdom, Brazil, Canada and Australia. In total it's estimated that no less than thirty thousand fugitives avoided the action of justice.

The U.S. Secret Services have always suspected the Nazis have obtained the passports from Vatican, that allowed them to settle in their gold retreat in South American previously paid for a very high amount. [34] On the other hand, not even this whole money ended up in the coffers of the Church. Declassified documents of U.S. State Department in 1998 indicate the priest Draganovic enriched personally with this "charity operation," charging large money amounts to those whom he provided the false documents.

U.S. intelligence services have dubbed the escape corridor the Vatican used for Nazi and former Ustashi flee from Justice of "ratline", [35] a nautical term that refers to the ratlines, 'horizontal strings related to shrouds, half a meter away from each other that serves as steps for seamanship to climb and perform maneuvers on top of the masts'. [36]

As it was said, the last part of the boat just sinks when the vessel sinks entirely. The use of this term to describe the operations were conducted and the networks established for the redemption of some of the most bloody murderers of European History couldn't have been more suitable.

Argentine documents show that in 1946 Monsignor Giovanni Battista Montini contacted at least twice with the ambassador of Argentina to the Holy See. On the second occasion, delivered to him the Pope's concern with "all Catholics prevented from returning to their homes because of the likelihood of being subject to political persecution", proposing the development of a joint action plan between Argentina and the Holy See. None of these documents has got specific references to deleting the plane of responsible for war crimes.

Other important character of this plot was the Austrian Bishop Alois Hudal who in 1948 wrote to Juan Domingo Peron asking him five thousand visas for German and Austrian soldiers. In an anecdote during Christmas celebration in 1947, Hudal told a group of about two hundred Nazi fugitives hiding under his protection at the Vatican: "You can trust the police won't find you, it's not the first time people hide in the catacombs of Rome."

The mechanism for obtaining visas worked simply: the Department of Immigration in Argentina gave permission of landing under an assumed name to the requestor, with which the fugitive got from the Red Cross a "travel document." Therefore, he no longer had to request a visa in the Argentine Consulate and to submit himself a "certification of identity" to get to Buenos Aires. In 1949, Juan Peron decided not even to worry about appearances and approved an amnesty whereby those who filed a false name in the country could regain their real identity. Due to Peron, the most wanted fugitives in the world were able to start a new life free of worries. Among these war criminals were Erich Priebke member of SS in Rome, accused of killing 335 people in the Fosse Ardeatine, who escaped under a false name and regained his identity in 1949 living as a model citizen in Bariloche until one team of a North American television discovered him in 1995, precipitating his extradition to Italy .

During this process Licio Gelli stepped in, one of the key characters of wrost Vatican admissible managements in the second half of the Twentieth Century. Gelli had the ideal profile to participate of the Nazi export operation because he wan't an official and an intermediary in the Hermann Goering SS division, ans he had multiple contacts with the Mafia, very useful to take a man from Italy mocking the curiosity of the authorities or providing them all kind of false documentation. [37] There's evidence Gelli could act in this time as an intermediary between Italians elements of the ratlines and the ODESSA and Die Spinne (The Spider), two underground organizations of former Nazis who managed the escape and the replacement of these war criminals.

Just one example: in only one day in June 1949, the Pope received in separate audiences five high-ranking American Generals.

WAITING FOR THE CAVALRY

Meanwhile, in Croatia, Stepinac had convened a conference of bishops in Zagreb which resulted in the proclamation of a pastoral letter in which the bishops urged the population to rise up with arms against the new Government. The Ustashis who had not been executed or who had not fled the country gathered in the field forming a terrorist organization with the eloquent name of "Crusaders". The flag of the organization was consecrated in the chapel of Stepinac. Many priests and monks were part of the organization, as well as armed militants performing Intelligence services and communication. Much of the information collected by these cleric spies was held by the U.S. secret services through the Vatican. [38]

The collaboration between Americans and Ustasha rebels it's not surprising if we consider these people expected a North American intervention in Croatia. Stepinac himself was convinced that sooner or later this would happen. [39] Maybe Stepinac had reason to think so. In the end, for those days, Pius XII had a very close relationship with the U.S. American military leadership. Just one example: in one day in June 1949 the Pope received in separate audiences five U.S. generals first line.

Source: Biografía no autorizada del Vaticano(Non Authorized Biography of the Vatican); Chapter 5; Author: Camacho, Santiago

Notes

[23]. Manhattan, Avro, The Vatican Holocaust, op. cit.

[24]. Goñi, Uki, La auténtica Odessa. La fuga nazi a la Argentina de Perón, Paidós, Barcelona, 2002. The Real Odessa.

[25]. "Supreme Allied HQ to 6th and 12th Army Groups. Apprehension of Croat Quislings", June 5, 1945. Declassified document from the U.S. Army.

[26]. Aarons, Mark, op. cit.

[27]. U.S. Army Counter Intelligence Corps. Detachment in Rome. September 12, 1947. case number 5650-A.

[28]. Dorril, Stephen, MI6; Inside the Covert Worid of Her Majesty's Secret Intelligence Service, Touchstone, New York, 2000.

[29]. "Where is Croatian gold? Vatican sources accuse the U.S. of historical superficiality." Zenit News Agency, June 5, 1998.

[30]. Loftus, John; Aarons, Mark; The Secret War against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the jewish People, St. Martin's Griffin, New York, 1997.

[31]. Headden, Susan, Hawkins, Daña e Rest, Jason, "A vow oí silence", U. S. News and Worid Report, March 30, 1998.

[32]. Cockburn, Alexander; St. Clair, Jeffrey; Without: The CIA, Drugs and the Press, Verso, Londres, 1998.

[33]. Phayer, John Michael; The Catholic Church and the Holocaust, 1930-1965, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 2000.

[34]. "Rome Área Allied Command to the CIC", August 8, 1945. Declassified document from the U.S. Army.

[35]. Aarons, Mark; Loftus, John; "Ratlines". William Heinemann, Londres, 1991.

[36]. "The Fate of the Wartime Ustashi Treasure", U.S. Department of State report. June 1988.

[37]. Dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy.

[38]. Yailop, David, op. cit.

[39]. Manhattan, Avro, The Vatican Holocaust, op. cit.

[40]. New Statesman and Nation. London, October 26, 1946.

More Photos of Ustasha atrocities and other massacres in the Balkans (attention, very graphic):
Link1 Link2 Link3
______________________________________________________________

An observation: in the early parts of this text Roberto Muehlenkamp made ​​an interesting comment about a Serbian historian Milán Bulajic and the number of deaths of the Holocaust in the Balkans. You can read the discussion here. The link about Bulajic is here.

As a result, I've reread the entire text of the Chapter 5 of this book, who I've thought sensationalist though his general text about the Ustasha atrocities contains the essence of the method of massacre, and I've seen there are several errors in the text. Precisely for this reason I was brooding to translate the third and last part of it because looking for more sources on the massacre in the Balkans, I've found more detailed and serious sources such as texts of other Serbian Historian called Dusan Batakovic (Dušan T. Bataković) over the period of the Ustasha government and the Independent State of Croatia (NDH).

The text of Dusan Batakovic (he's a Diplomat and Historian) is infinitely superior than this "The Ustasha and Vatican's Silence", but most of his texts are in French and there's a translation to Portuguese about his text on Ustasha [link1, link2, link3] that I did some time ago.

Therefore I'll make a post pointing errors of this text, also citing the book Balkan Holocausts?: Serbian and Croatian Victim Centered Propaganda and the War in Yugoslavia (Edition by David Bruce MacDonald) who reports all political dispute over genocide with both sides and about mistakes of historian M. Bulajic (who R. Muehlenkamp mentioned in the link above), especially after the fragmentation of the former Yugoslavia and the war between Serbs and Croatian in the nineties.

Mattogno: Conclusion

$
0
0
Our White Paper obliged Mattogno to discuss sources that he usually prefers to ignore. When confronted with chains of documents that refer to extermination we can see him resort repeatedly to a set of tricks. Those identified above include:

1) Stating that the use of an exterminatory term was rhetorical or hyperbolic

2) Stating that a proposal was only hypothetical, or the opinion of one person

3) False emphasis on a non-operative part of a phrase

4) Misleading and perverse reading of a phrase, such as "if released."

5) Omission of key words, phrases and passages from his interpretation of a document

6) Misrepresenting an entire chain of documents

7) Deflection of attention on to a red herring.

8) Demanding an unreasonable degree of precision

9) Setting false goalposts

10) Failing to properly account for German motives, in cases such as sterilization, mass shooting, and the deportation of children.

These tricks are too systematic to merely result from error or unintended bias. They are a deliberate strategy to falsify the historical record of exterminatory Nazi Judenpolitik.

Mattogno's 'Riposte', 2013

$
0
0
In December 2011, we published the first edition our White Paper, exposing MGK's dishonesty, antisemitism and fallacious reasoning concerning the Aktion Reinhard camps. One of our motives was to compel Mattogno to discuss documents that he had previously ignored or minimized. His contributions to MGK's 'riposte' of 2013 did discuss these documents at inordinate length, but primarily in a mode of obfuscation interspersed with blatant lying. I now turn to a detailed discussion of his Chapter 5 of that riposte.

a) Double Standards of Interpretation

Mattogno is only able to maintain his approach by applying blatant double standards regarding whether to read a word or phrase in a document literally. A general pattern can be documented whereby, on the one hand, he treats euphemisms for killing as if they literally referred to resettlement, but then, on the other hand, he interprets literal killing words such as 'Vernichtung' and 'ausrottung' as cases of rhetoric, hyperbole and figurative language.

The tables below quantify such instances in Chapter 5 of MGK's 'riposte' to our White Paper. Table 1 gives several instances of euphemisms interpreted as resettlement:

Table 1

Page
Document
Euphemism Interpreted as Resettlement
273f
Greiser-Himmler 1.5.42 (link)
Sonderbehandlung
276f.
Greiser-Himmler 21.11.42 (link)
Sonderbehandlung
314f.
Soldau 1558 mental patients (link)
Evacuated
355f.
Wannsee protocol (link)
Endlösung
404f.
Rintelen to Luther, 19.8.42 (link)
Sonderbehandlung
422
Lutsk meeting 28-30.8.42
Aktionen
  

This literalism is abandoned by Mattogno when the contents of the document do not employ any euphemisms, as in the following cases:

Table 2


Page
Document
Phrase
Mattogno's interpretation
203f.
Reichenau order (link)
“complete annihilation” and “pitiless extermination”
"the intended “victims” are “false bolshevistic doctrine” and “treachery and cruelty” not Jews as a race.
210f.
Hitler, 16.7.41 (link)
"shooting anyone who even looks sideways at us."
Hyperbole
218f.
Rasch 17.9.41 (link)
“gradual liquidation of the Jews.”
"recommendation", not policy
228
Bräutigam 18.12.41 (link)
"Economic concerns shall generally be disregarded"
""This does not necessarily refer to an extermination, but rather to an exclusion of the Jews from the economic life of the state."
253
Heydrich Prague 10.10.41 (link)
"decimated"
Rhetorical emphasis
280
Goebbels diary 19.8.41
"worked over in the harsh climate"
"a colloquial, feisty expression"
285f.
Goebbels 12.12.41
"annihilation of Jewry" and "must pay with their lives"
"a cruel rhetorical comment"
294f.
Frank speech 16.12.41 (link)
"exterminate them yourselves!"
""only Frank’s cruel rhetoric"
281f.
Rosenberg 18.11.41 (link)
"biological eradication”
"purely figurative"
308f.
Uebelhoer 4.10.41
"decimation ghetto"
Hyperbole
334f.
Himmler 30.11.41 [link]
"keine Liquidierung"
[citing Butz]: "liquidation is to be understood in the sense of ‘cancellation’ or ‘disbandment’ of the transport.”
359f.
Hitler 24.2.42
[link]
"annihilated" and "exterminated"
"It is obvious that the term annihilate (vernichten) did not refer to an utter physical elimination of all the Aryan people in the world, and so neither did the term exterminate (ausrotten) refer to a complete physical destruction of the Jews."
362f.
Goebbels 27.3.42
[link]
"barbaric procedure"
Resettlement
388f.
Goebbels 15.5.42
"liquidated"
"harsh rhetoric"
389f.
Dannecker 13.5.42
"Vernichtung"
"figurative"
411f.
Bismarck 21.7.42
"elimination"
"only an allusion or insinuation as to a possible fate"


b) Omission of Crucial Words or Phrases from his Interpretation

Mattogno frequently quotes a long passage that includes a word or phrase that refers to extermination. These words or phrases often the fulcrum of the entire document's meaning. Mattogno then omits those key words or phrases from his interpretation. The following table lists examples from MGK's 'riposte'.

Table 3

Page
Document
Word or Phrase Omitted from Mattogno's Interpretation
179f.
EC-126 (pages 295-306 of this link)
"The issue will be to redirect the population to the Siberian areas. As railway transportation is out of the question, this problem will also be an extremely difficult one."
192f.

Ciano diary
"It was impressive when he spoke about the Russians eating each other and who have also eaten a German watch guard in a prisoners of war camp. He did it with the utmost casualness. However he showed heart and when he spoke about Udet and Mölders [two heroes of the German air force], deceased in these days, tears appeared in his eyes."
203f.
Reichenau order
"Jewish Untermenschentum."
216
Stahlecker 6.8.41
“ruthless exploitation” that would produce “a significant easing of the later transportation of Jews.”
218
Rasch EM 52
Jews "can be expended."
222f.
Bechtolsheim
"we can dispose of them"
227f.
Lohse 15.11.41
[link]
“I prohibited the wild executions of Jews in Libau, because in the way they were performed they were irresponsible. I ask to inform me if your request of Oct. 31 is to be understood as a directive to the effect that all the Jews in the Ostland are to be liquidated?"; and "Of course the clearing of the Ostland of the Jews is a predominant task"


These omissions occur because Mattogno cannot fit them into the explanatory frameworks which he is hawking to his readers. For example, his framework for the USSR is that Jews were killed on the assumption they were Bolsheviks or partisans, whereas starvation was a necessary evil, embarked upon reluctantly, to supply the troops and homeland. Mattogno must therefore pretend that there was a realistic Siberia option in EC-126, which the sentence about rail transportation effectively rules out, and that there was a passage in Ciano's diary that was less callous than the one we cited in the White Paper, whereas in reality Ciano simply highlights Goering's "utmost casualness" and heartlessness when telling stories about starvation.

In his discussion of the Reichenau order, Mattogno even perverts the significance of the emphasis in the phrase "just atonement of Jewish Untermenschentum" by focussing on the word "just", as in fair, rather than on the clearly racist "Untermenschentum", meaning subhuman and unworthy of life. Mattogno somehow believes that Reichenau is here weighing up the moral merits of an execution rather than delivering a racist ideology. There is an strong undercurrent of antisemitism in this interpretation, given that it entertains the possibility that a whole race can be rightly found guilty of a crime.

His discussion of the USSR in August 1941 has to overlook clear references to working Jews to death that are contained in the Stahlecker and Rasch documents. Blindness to "death through labour" at this point is necessary for Mattogno because the formulation is repeated at Wannsee in the paragraph concerning the reduction of labour in the East.

His discussion of Lohse presumes that Lohse had no prior knowledge of extermination. However, this can only be sustained by ignoring the fact that Lohse was merely objecting to the manner in which the killings were done, and was also seeking clarification as to whether work Jews were still exempted from the executions, a fact made clear by Bräutigam's reply of 18th December that "Economic concerns shall generally be disregarded", which Mattogno falsifies on page 228 with the pathetic claim that "This does not necessarily refer to an extermination, but rather to an exclusion of the Jews from the economic life of the state."

c) Contradictory Accounts of Nazi Motives

Mattogno's contradictory interpretations of documents lead to bizarre assumptions concerning motive. For Soldau, he assumes that the Germans would literally evacuate 1,558 mental patients despite the fact he admits they operated a policy of euthanasia elsewhere. For the Bendorf-Sayn mental patients deported to Sobibor, Mattogno assumes they were literally sent to Izbica, despite that clearly being a camouflage destination (as shown by the fact that, in another cited Sobibor document, the transport reported by Fischmann was 'supposed' to terminate at Izbica but did not).

These tangles result from a deeper issue that all deniers cannot face, namely that the trajectory of Nazi policy made killing a far more plausible motive than resettlement. At a time when German soldiers were dying in large numbers in the East, and western bombs were falling on German cities, a regime that blamed Jews as a race for these events might be expected to wish to kill Jews as a race. Numerous statements made by senior figures after mid-1941 indicate this genocidal mindset being gradually radicalized, with Hitler referring to them as a "race of criminals" and Goebbels stating that "even the harshest punishment imposed upon them would still be too lenient."

Similarly, it is easier to see the Nazis escalating to killing rather than resettlement from the measures that Mattogno does admit the Germans attempted to pursue, namely the sterilization of work Jews and the killing of Soviet Jews who were living in pre-1939 Polish territory. Sterilization shows an intent initially to exterminate the Jews as a race within the current generation. Immediate extermination was therefore a quickening of the process towards this end goal, not a replacement for it. The killing of Soviet Jews begs the question as to why the Nazis would regard other Jewish populations as worthy of the right to survive, especially at the expense of the Germans having to guard and feed them in the East. This question-begging is increased by Mattogno's acceptance of the extermination of all but 1,000 Jews in Pinsk on 'military' grounds. If the military situation in late 1942 necessitated the extermination of Polesie Jews, why not all Polish Jews, and by extension, why not all European Jews, rather than resettling them in similar military regions? Indeed, Mattogno has so failed to join the dots that he regards the Pripet marshes as a resettlement site, despite their proximity to Pinsk and despite their being mentioned in the killing order that Mattogno cites.

d) Repeating A Claim That Has Already Been Refuted

Mattogno shows a great deal of inconsistency and dishonesty in his interpretation of Greiser's use of the term “special treatment [Sonderbehandlung]” in his correspondence with Himmler, Koppe and Blome concerning Poles who had terminal tuberculosis. Sergey Romanov had already collected and posted all the links to scans and translations of each of these documents back in 2006 in this article, so we had these documents available to view for several years before Mattogno decided to distort them. Mattogno's deceptions proceeded in several stages. On the one hand, in MGK's book on Sobibor, Mattogno had conceded:
On 1st May 1942 (NO-246) Gauleiter Greiser proposed to Himmler to kill them, but on 18 November this problem was still being discussed (NO-249), and in the end these patients were not killed. (“The Medical Case,” op. cit. (note 828), pp. 759-794, “Project To Kill Tubercular Polish Nationals”), although it would have been easy to send them to Chelmno.
Greiser's letter (link) had begun with noting the on-going "special treatment of about 100,000 Jews in the area of my Gau" and then connected this same procedure to his proposal to deal with the incurable Poles. Mattogno did not quote this part of the letter in the Sobibor book because his concession that Greiser wanted to kill the Poles would have exposed the fact that Sonderbehandlung in relation to the 100,000 Jews also meant the killing of those Jews. Mattogno therefore in Sobibór appears to have accepted the proposed killing of the Poles, as a kind of mercy killing, but disconnected it from the Sonderbehandlung of Jews.

However, in his study of Chelmno (link), Mattogno adopts a different tactic. To deflect the connection between Sonderbehandlung and killing, Mattogno claims on page 31 that "This “special treatment” was merely an extension to the Jews in Warthegau [sic] of the order that Hitler had sent to Greiser on 28 September 1941, concerning the expulsion of the Jews of the Reich proper and the Protectorate via the ghetto of Lódz during “next spring,” that is, spring 1942." In other words, Mattogno here insisted that Sonderbehandlung referred to a territorial solution, namely resettlement to a reservation. Mattogno must therefore by extension have been claiming that the treatment of tubercular Poles would also have been a resettlement, despite his concession in Sobibór that "Greiser proposed to Himmler to kill them."

Pages 116-117 of our White Paper showed that this resettlement interpretation of Sonderbehandlung made no sense because the other documents in the Medical Case sequence cited by Mattogno clearly show the word Sonderbehandlung being used as an alternative to a territorial solution. To prove this, we cited Blome's letter of November 18, 1942 (link), which states:
Therefore, something basic must be done soon. One must decide the most efficient way in which this can be done. There are three ways to be taken into consideration:

1. Special treatment of the seriously ill persons.

2. Most rigorous isolation of the seriously ill persons.

3. Creation of a reservation for all TB patients.
Mattogno has therefore read our clear refutation of his argument yet he simply repeats it on page 274 of his riposte by stating that, in the letter of Blome, "the isolation of the sick Poles within a specially designated area was considered as a “Sonderbehandlung.”" He has therefore ignored or entirely misread the Blome letter, or is lying about its contents.

Moreover, Mattogno distorts other features of this documentation. Greiser's letter of November 21 (link) states that Sonderbehandlung can only take place after the whole population has been screened by an X-ray-battalion to identify those cases which are incurable. This makes no sense if the diagnosed incurables were simply to be sent to a special territory alongside the other patients before any screening had taken place, as Himmler states in his reply. The screening was clearly intended to identify those who would be killed, therefore Sonderbehandlung here must have meant killing. Incredibly, Mattogno does not discuss Greiser's letter of November 21 in the section that addresses the other documents in the Greiser-Himmler-Blome-Koppe chain that discusses the tubercular Poles. Instead, he shunts the document into a later section in which he pretends that Greiser's letter only refers to Blome's objections concerning "the problem of the extension of the euthanasia operation to persons who did not have the German citizenship." This is a blatant deception because Blome's letter, and thus Greiser's response, clearly equates the proposed Sonderbehandlung with euthanasia:
I could imagine that the Fuehrer, having some time ago stopped the program in the insane asylums, might at this moment consider a "special treatment" of the incurably sick as unsuitable and irresponsible from a political point of view. As regards the Euthanasia Program it was a question of people of German nationality afflicted with hereditary diseases. Now it is a question of infected sick people of a subjugated nation.
Greiser's response never refers to euthanasia; it only refers to objections made by Blome to the proposed Sonderbehandlung action. Blome was simply using the euthanasia controversy in Germany as a parallel to what may occur in Poland. Mattogno is therefore simply lying by claiming that Greiser was responding to a euthanasia issue separately from the Sonderbehandlung of the Poles.

Moreover, Greiser's letter of November 21 states "I personally don`t think, that we have to consult the Führer again in this matter, all the more since he told me at the last interview concerning the jews, that I should act according to my own judgement." This can only be a reference to Hitler giving Greiser permission to kill Jews. Mattogno attempts to blur this fact in two ways: by splitting this letter from Greiser's May 1 letter, and by claiming that Greiser is referring to a time period later than that which corresponds to the opening of Chelmno. The second ploy is as false as the first, because Greiser does not state when his "last interview" took place. Even if it was after Chelmno opened, Hitler's permission could have referred specifically to the killing of the Reich Jews, which commenced later than that of the Polish Jews.

Mattogno's statement in Sobibór was also wrong to claim, of the tubercular Poles, that "it would have been easy to send them to Chelmno" because this ignores the fact that Himmler had rejected the proposal on the grounds that the technology to screen the incurable Poles in order to separate them from other patients was not yet ready.

In summary therefore, Mattogno commits multiple deceptions with this documentation, including the repetition of claims already refuted by our White Paper, because Mattogno needs to bury the linkage between the killing of 100,000 Jews in the Warthegau and the proposal to kill tubercular Poles.

e) Setting False Goalposts

Mattogno repeatedly distorts the nature of Nazi orders and when they had to be given. He shows no cognizance of the literature that discusses how Hitler was able to encourage exterminatory designs to be produced from below without himself issuing written orders. He ignores, for example, the citation we gave in our White Paper concerning how Brandt and Bouhler obtained Hitler’s verbal authorization for extralegal abortions. He never acknowledges the ways in which leaders can give a "green light" to a murderous proposal in a way that gives them plausible deniability, and he evades the fact that Hitler needed such deniability due to the controversy over euthanasia, for which he had given a written order.

He compounds this fault with crass insistences that orders must be issued at every stage of a process, such as his claim that there had to be Hitler orders issued that correspond with Hoess's reference to a summer 1941 'decision' and Wisliceny's reference to an order transmitted by Himmler to Eichmann in April 1942 implementing extermination but exempting working Jews. This is flatly wrong on several counts. Firstly, it has been shown that Hoess mistakenly dated his evidence to summer 1941 when the events to which he refers must have taken place in 1942. Secondly, as was noted above, Wisliceny's testimony from prison in Bratislava stated that the original Fuehrer decision to exterminate the Jews was made just after the declaration of war against the USA in December 1941 and that Himmler later added the labour exemption. Mattogno thus fails epically to connect two Wisliceny testimonies despite having read them both.

Such false setting of goalposts is also evident in Mattogno's treatment of shootings. He states on page 176 of the 'riposte' that all documented shootings of Jews must be "performed against Jews for being Jews, and not for other contingent reasons." This is crass and absurd because it ignores the reality that the Nazis were carrying out the extermination alongside the task of trying to win a global war and had to plan accordingly, so shootings could encompass war aims as well as antisemitic ones. It also ignores the fact that Jews could be shot in fulfillment of quotas, such as occurred in Serbia. Moreover, the first edition of our White Paper repeatedly stated that there were goals aimed at the entire Soviet population, such as starvation planning, that nonetheless placed Jews at the front of the queue as part of a political economy of racial value. Such contingency is always a feature of genocides anywhere in the world: Mattgno's formula would necessitate the denial that genocide has ever occurred, because no genocide ever occurs purely for a racial motive "and not for other contingent reasons."

f) Failing to Connect and Correctly Interpret Related Pieces of Evidence

On February 24, 1942, Hitler made a speech in which he stated that “through this war, Aryan humankind will not be annihilated, but the Jew will be exterminated.” This was reported the following day in The Front newspaper, in the phrase "Am Ende dieses Krieges wird die Ausrottung des Judentums stehen." In his diary entry of April 27, 1942, Goebbels recorded a similar threat by the Führer, who stated that “the hardest punishment that one can impose upon [the Jews] is still too lenient.”

Mattogno denies on page 360 of the 2013 riposte that the term "Aryan humankind will not be annihilated" is a reference to physical extermination of all Aryans, despite the fact that he acknowledges on pages 522-523 that "the Germans believing in this story responded accordingly" to the book "Germany Must Perish" by Theodore N. Kaufmann, which proposed “a comprehensive plan for the extinction of the German nation and the total eradication from the earth, of all her people.” Mattogno seems to be asking us to believe that Hitler did not believe Kaufmann's threat was serious, nor indeed that the threat alone was suffiecient provocation to justify an exterminatory response.


g) Omission of Key Paragraphs

Failure to connect crucial documents is often combined with omission of key paragraphs from documents that form part of the chain of proof. This is most evident in how Mattogno deals with the treatment of Reich Jews deported to Minsk. Mattogno firstly blatantly lies about the reasons why transports were suspended at the end of November 1941: "In reality, as is well documented, the opposition to these transports resulted only from the disastrous conditions prevailing in Minsk at the time." He simply ignores the reason given by Braemer on November 20th, namely that "The influx of German Jews, far superior in intelligence to the bulk of the Belorussian population constitutes a severe danger for the pacification of White Ruthenia."

Mattogno then lies about Kube's letter to Lohse of December 16, 1941, by claiming that "The killing of the deportees was therefore a mere possibility, dictated by a sort of euthanasia policy." This is clearly false because Mattogno's own chosen translation of Kube's letter states:
Is the slaughter to be carried out by the Lithuanians and Letts, who are themselves rejected by the population here? I couldn’t do it. I beg you to give clear directives [in this matter], with due consideration for the good name of our Reich and our Party, in order that the necessary action can be taken in the most humane manner.
Mattogno pretends that Kube was asking for clarification of whether the Jews would be killed, but the text clearly shows that he is asking for clarification of how they would be killed, and by whom. It refers to killing as "the necessary action," not "a mere possibility."

However, Mattogno then makes the crucial concession that documents authored by Hofmann and Kube on January 29 and February 6 did indeed refer to killing, but he gives an implausible reason:
I accept the intention appearing in the two documents mentioned above to kill the Jews deported from the Reich. The above examined documents show that is was a local initiative dictated by circumstances, but this stands in contrast to the alleged Hitler order of total extermination of mid-December 1941.
This appeal to "local initiative" ignores the fact that the central authorities in Berlin clearly knew that they planned to send 25,000 Jews to place that could not accommodate or feed them, as clearly shown in the text that Mattogno himself quotes from Kube's letter referring to the fact that "It is not possible to suddenly accommodate 25,000 people in a destroyed city." The centre clearly did not stumble blindly into a scenario that would have necessitated the killing of most of the 25,000 deportees had the suspension of transports not occurred.

Mattogno then commits multiple dishonesties in his treatment of Kube's report to Lohse of July 31. He gives the impression that he is quoting the whole of the document in the text that he quotes on pages 345-346 of the Riposte, taken from pages 192-193 of NMT IV. However, Mattogno's quotation stops abruptly, with no explanation, at the words "cease to exist." He thus omits the remainder of that paragraph, and the whole of the following paragraph, which are crucial to the document's meaning:
I myself and the SD would certainly much prefer that the Jewish population in the district general of White Ruthenia should be eliminated once and for all when the economic requirements of the Wehrmacht have fallen off. For the time being, the necessary requirements of the Wehrmacht who is the main employer of the Jewish population are still being considered. The clear anti-Jewish attitude of the SD and the difficult task of the units in White Ruthenia to deliver again and again new Jewish transports from the Reich to their destination, both put an undue strain on the physical and spiritual strength of men of the SD and diverts them from their real purpose, which lies in the White Ruthenian region itself.

I should therefore be grateful if the Reich Commissioner could see his way to stop further Jewish transports until the partisan threat has finally been overcome. I must make 100 percent use of the SD against partisans and against the Polish Resistance Movement, both of which demand the use of the full strength of the SD units, which are none too strong as it is.
This is crystal clear and unambiguous about the killing of Jews in two ways. Firstly, the personnel of the SD were suffering undue stress from their role in the killing process. The passage can have no other plausible meaning, unless Mattogno would like us to believe that brave SD men would suffer "an undue strain on [their] physical and spiritual strength" when they delivered a train to a terminal. Secondly, there were no units available for dealing with transports because they were needed "100 per cent" for anti-partisan actions. This would clearly rule out their use in resettlement actions east of Minsk.

The passages Mattogno does quote also cause him severe problems that he ignores. Most of the 3,500 Reich Jews killed in the Grossaktion of July 28-29 were from the 7,000 deported in the Autumn, leaving only 2,600 remaining in the ghetto. This leaves a huge hole where those deported in the second wave seem to be absent from the ghetto population. If these had been transported east, why weren't the 3,500 Reich Jews shot on July 28-29 transported east with them instead of being shot? If the second wave deportees were not transported east, where were they located, if not killed?

h) Other Evasive Techniques Regarding Sources Referring to Extermination

We have already shown above, in the discussion of tubercular Poles, the lengths to which Mattogno will go to distort the use of Sonderbehandlung. His use of the term is inconsistent, because occasionally he concedes its use in shooting contexts, but his evasions are otherwise perverse. For example, he deflects the use of Sonderbehandlung by Mueller in reference to the shooting of 630 Jews in Minsk by citing a document that refers to a request for special treatment in the form of financial assistance by the Evangelical Lutheran Church. A church is clearly not a human being so it is a pure diversion to regard this reference as a comparable example of usage.

A more flagrant diversion occurs with regard to the proposals to kill non-working Rumanian Jews. We cited Luther's letter noting that:
Starting on 10.9.1942, it is intended to bring the Jews from Romania to the Lublin district, where the portion fit for work will be employed, and the rest is to undergo special treatment.
Mattogno accuses us falsely of not knowing the document and then cites a section of his beloved Luther memo:
The German legation Bucharest reports to D III 602 g that the Romanian government leaves it up to the Reich government to deport their Jews together with the German Jews into the ghettos to the East.
However this memo does not contradict the earlier document because the selection procedure Luther describes could have taken place after the arrival in the ghettos. Moreover, even if the language in the memo referred to a genuine belief in resettlement eastwards, this belief would not be Luther's because Luther is here simply paraphrasing a report from the German legation Bucharest, which was operating from a different level of knowledge than Luther's or was using appropriate camouflage.

The selective use of Luther's documents is also related to how Mattogno perverts the meaning of the Wannsee Protocol. There are four features of the Protocol that Mattogno omits or distorts. Firstly, the Protocol is silent on the fate of non-working Jews. Given that the document claims to be concerned with resettlement, this is a case where silence implies intent to kill. Secondly, the fate of the working Jews also makes this inference the only plausible one:
Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labour in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.

The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history.)
Mattogno perversely interprets 'if released' to mean the freeing of a person from confinement, when infact there is a clear implication that the only way to guarantee no Jewish revival is to kill the remnant. Moreover, "treated accordingly" converges with the meaning of Sonderbehandlung that Heydrich had been using since 1939, and with his statements during 1941 such as the sifting described in Einsatzbefehl 8 and his stated preference to send Jews to "camps built by the Bolsheviks." Fourthly, Mattogno ignores the implication of the sentence, "SS-Gruppenführer Hofmann advocates the opinion that sterilization will have to be widely used, since the person of mixed blood who is given the choice whether he will be evacuated or sterilized would rather undergo sterilization." This clearly implies a shared knowledge that evacuation was a fatal measure.

Finally, Mattogno ignores the sentence that "State Secretary Dr. Bühler stated that the General Government would welcome it if the final solution of this problem could be begun in the General Government, since on the one hand transportation does not play such a large role here nor would problems of labor supply hamper this action." This shows that the final solution regarding Jews from the General Government was to take place within the General Government. Frank and Bühler knew that Jews would be eliminated without leaving Poland.

Mattogno is equally clueless on the exterminatory content of the statements that followed Wannsee. On March 27, 1942, Goebbels revealed the fate of the non-working Jews, whilst also repeating The Wannsee Protocol’s formulation for the workers:
The Jews are now being pushed out of the General Government, beginning near Lublin, to the East. A pretty barbaric procedure is being applied here, and it is not to be described in any more detail, and not much is left of the Jews themselves. In general one may conclude that 60% of them must be liquidated, while only 40% can be put to work. The former Gauleiter of Vienna [Globocnik], who is carrying out this action, is doing it pretty prudently and with a procedure that doesn't work too conspicuously.
Mattogno would have his readers believe that the words "pretty barbaric procedure" referred merely to evacuations over the Bug. To do this, Mattogno simply expunges the only rational interpretation of the word "liquidated" that can be applied to a population of human beings. Mattogno commits a similar fallacy by choosing to adopt Butz's reading of Himmler's "keine Liquidierung" in relation to the transport was killed in Riga in November 1941:
Butz opined that the expression “keine Liquidierung” “applies to the transport itself, so that the liquidation is to be understood in the sense of ‘cancellation’ or ‘disbandment’ of the transport.” This was likely justified, since the first five transports directed to Riga were redirected to Kauen due to logistical difficulties, while the one of 30 November 1941 was the first to reach Riga.
This is clearly absurd as there is simply no dictionary usage that equates liquidate to cancel. Similarly, one does not 'disband' a transport. Moreover, Mattogno had previously, in his review of Denying History (link), accepted that Liquidierung referred to killing in this document but claimed that "only certain individuals with contagious diseases were killed in individual cases", citing the sentence from the Einsatzgruppe A report of January 1942 that "In rare cases, contagious Jews have been removed and shot, under the pretext of taking them to a clinic or a Jewish hospital." However, this is a sleight of hand with timelines because Einsatzgruppe A was referring to a situation that pertained after Himmler had reprimanded Jeckeln and suspended the shooting of Reich Jews due to its political sensitivity at that time.

Mattogno similarly has a problem with the briefing of Rosenberg of November 18, 1941. Mattogno claims:
Beyond the mention of the destination of the Jewish deportations, it is worth mentioning here the purely figurative meaning of “Ausmerzung des Judentums” (extirpation of Jewry); even with the connotation of “biologische Ausmerzung” (biological extirpation): it designated the eradication of Jewry from the soil of the Reich and from the European soil.
This is again false because Rosenberg's actual formulation was "it is necessary to expel them over the Urals or eradicate them in some other way." Rosenberg therefore saw pushing over the Urals as a measure that would also bring about biological extermination through the incredibly harsh conditions the Jews would encounter in the expulsion. The proposed evacuation was not therefore any less lethal than direct killing.

Conclusion

Mattogno's Failure to Evolve, 2000-2010

$
0
0
Mattogno was hyperactive in the first decade of the new century, producing a body of work that included his 'trilogy' on the Aktion Reinhard camps. On the subject of policy, I would identify four developments, which are really indicative of Mattogno's failure to adapt in an evolutionary way to how historians were discussing the Final Solution. Firstly, Mattogno began to tackle shootings in the East, but these were framed against a straw man which assumed that the "orthodox historiography" regards the Einsatzgruppen as forces that only shot Jews because they were Jews, and for no other reason. Secondly, Mattogno elaborated a theme, which he had introduced back in the 1980s, that there was continuity between the emigration policies of 1939-1941 and the Final Solution, and the only change was the destinations of the 'emigrants' and the manner of their emigration. Thirdly, Mattogno set out to neutralize the statements of leading Nazis such as Hitler, Himmler and Goebbels, prompted seemingly by the use of those statements in Shermer and Grobman's Denying History and perhaps by Irving's defeat in the Lipstadt court case. Finally, Mattogno in Sobibor reignited his discussion of the Hitler Order by confronting historians whom he had largely ignored to that point, such as Gerlach, Browning and Kershaw. This attack would continue in his riposte to our White Paper in 2013.

The discussion of shootings began in Chapter VII of Treblinka, leading to some concessions that would undermine his later attempts to downplay shooting actions. Most notably, on page 206, he conceded that in eastern Poland, "The “Soviet Jews” were shot, while the great majority of the remaining resident Jewish population was ghettoized." This immediately begs the question as to why the same shooters were not then instructed to kill all the Soviet Jews they found farther east in the pre-1939 borders of the USSR, especially as there was far less need for labour in the Soviet interior, due to Soviet evacuation and dismantling measures having destroyed more industry in the pre-1939 USSR that farther west. Mattogno then shoots himself in both feet by accepting at face value the excuse given in one Einsatzgruppen report that "It was frequently found that Jewish women displayed especially rebellious behavior. For this reason, 28 Jewesses in Krugloye and 337 Jewesses in Mogilev had to be shot." Mattogno simply offers incredulity that these Jews were shot on any slender pretext.

With regard to the western Jews deported to Riga and Minsk, Mattogno did not, in Treblinka, address most of the Nuremberg documentation relating to these deportees, such as Kube's letter to Lohse of July 31st, 1942. We had to wait until the 'riposte' of 2013 for a lengthy, albeit dishonest and partial, analysis of this document, which is discussed below.

The other notable policy feature of Treblinka is the frankly bizarre chapter entitled "National Socialist Policy of Jewish Emigration." This is Mattogno's first discussion in detail that connects such figures as Zeitschel, Rademacher and Luther to a timeline of emigration policy that sees no real breaks in the policy except for Hitler's decision to deport the Reich Jews in September 1941. Mattogno makes no attempt to analyze Hitler's motives for this deportation, as this would have required him to confront the fact that Hitler expected them to be "worked over in the harsh climate", as he revealed to Goebbels on August 19.

The year after Treblinka was published, Mattogno confronted Shermer and Grobman's Denying History. Part of his review first appeared here at the Adelaide Institute site in 2003, with translation and editing credited to Russ Granata, before a more formal release of the full work in The Revisionist in 2005 (see here). In this article, Mattogno introduces his systematic waving away of euphemisms. For example, in his discussion of Wannsee, Mattogno states that “in case of release” literally means released from custody, but if this meaning were correct, we would have to assume that the Nazis planned to keep surviving Jews in captivity for their full lifespan after working the others to death, a rather pointless and expensive exercise given that they could just kill the unfit and exhausted Jews in one procedure. This in turn exposes another insurmountable problem, namely Mattogno's inability to provide plausible motive.

Mattogno then discussed Hitler's speeches and asked rhetorically, "Does this mean that Hitler literally believed the “Aryan peoples” would be physically annihilated in case the war was lost?" Mattogno simply forgets that this was indeed the message of Nazi propaganda from August 1941 onwards, starting with Goebbels' exploitation of Kaufmann's Germany Must Perish. I will return to this problem below.

Mattogno showed even greater blindness in passing over the meaning of Goebbels' entry of February 14, 1942, which he translated as “together with the annihilation of our enemies they shall experience their own annihilation.” Mattogno simply denied that Vernichtung in this context means physical destruction when applied to human beings. Mattogno then made his first attempt to wave away the diary entry of March 27, 1942, by making the ludicrous claim that Goebbels used the term "barbaric procedure" to refer purely to evacuations.

Finally, Mattogno dealt with Himmler's Posen speech by stating that “most of you will know what it means when 100 corpses are lying together, when 500 are lying there or when 1000 are lying there” refers to actions such as the repression of the Warsaw ghetto uprising. He also bizarrely argued that in the statement, “I am now talking of the evacuation of the Jews, of the extermination of the Jewish people,” Himmler had intended that “Ausrottung” was a synonym for “Evakuierung” rather than the latter being a pseudonym for the former. Mattogno repeats this idiocy on page 573 of the riposte.

In MGK's Sobibór, the main innovation was his erection of a Straw Man from the work of such historians as Browning and Kershaw on the Hitler order. For example, section 8.1 of Sobibór is a series of unfounded assumptions and fallacies of the excluded middle concerning the historiography of Hitler’s decision-making during 1941. Mattogno was deeply unhappy that many historians no longer rely upon a single Hitler order, so he pretended that all such historiography “borders on parapsychology.” This pretence in turn relied upon the false assumption that, if the "orthodox historiography" were true, there would have had to be a single moment when “the policy of emigration/evacuation was abandoned in favour of extermination.” This is a fallacy of the excluded middle because it ignores the fact that radicalization from deportation plans that were already decimatory to a policy that included homicidal gas chambers could be achieved by evolution, not a sudden moral leap.

The assumption of a false dichotomy between orders and ‘parapsychology’ ignores the ways in which historians have advanced their understanding of decision-making, not just with regard to the Third Reich but to all complex organizations. The relationship between centre and periphery is no longer viewed as always dominated by the former, but is instead understood by many historians to be a network of proposals, counter-proposals and requests for radical measures to resolve local problems.

Furthermore, Mattogno himself gives importance to consensual decision-making below Führer level when it suits his purposes to do so. Nearly all the policies proposed by Mattogno in Chapter 7 of Sobibór are driven by Hitler's underlings, who seem to be ‘working towards the Führer’ rather than in response to his orders; for example, in Mattogno’s discussion of the Madagascar Plan, the initiative  comes from below and Hitler gives his agreement (Mattogno hypocritically uses Ribbentrop's Nuremberg testimony in which Hitler supposedly referred to North Africa or Madagascar, but Mattogno omits the fact that Ribbentrop had a motive to exaggerate Madagascar's significance at Nuremberg). Mattogno also in that chapter gives importance to actors on the periphery such as Zeitschel, to the extent that he argues that “Zeitschel's proposal was thus accepted some months later by Hitler himself.” This contradicts Mattogno's assumption elsewhere that policy has to be viewed top down, with the peripheral actors merely as implementers.

Mattogno's Riposte 2013

Lying about the dating of Orders: the Wisliceny Testimonies

$
0
0
Mattogno began writing about Nazi policy in the 1980s. A recurrent theme in that writing has been his attempts to demonstrate that Hitler could not have given an order to exterminate Europe's Jews by the dates claimed by what he calls the "orthodox historiography." Two of the sources he has repeatedly used to make this case are the testimonies provided by Wisliceny at Nuremberg and from prison in Bratislava. Mattogno's devious sleight of hand with these sources shows a long-term technique being perfected of "bait and switch", whereby a testimony is quoted by Mattogno but then an entirely different précis of its contents is given afterwards.

Mattogno's Bratislava testimony (which is copied here) was quoted by Mattogno back in 1988 in The Myth of the Extermination of the Jews, where Mattogno stated that:
In a report drawn up in Bratislava November 18, 1944 [the year was actually 1946: JH], Dieter Wisliceny, former Hauptsturmführer and Eichmann's representative in Slovakia, affirmed that to his knowledge "the decision of Hitler that ordered the biological extermination of European Judaism [sic]" must be dated back to "after the beginning of the war with the United States," that is, it would have been after 11 December 1941.
In his Olocausto: dilettanti allo sbaraglio (see the full work in Italian here), Mattogno provided a longer excerpt from the Bratislava testimony, which still clearly implies a cumulative radicalization starting after the US entry into the war. The translation below comes via Google Translate:
[118] The second wave of tightening--continues Wisliceny--occurred after the US entry into the war. [...]. In this period, after the outbreak of war with the United States, must fall, in my belief, Hitler's decision that ordered biological extermination of European Jewry [...]. The order of Himmler that Eichmann showed me in August 1942 dated back to the spring of 1942; certainly the order of Hitler had been given some time before, because in the order of Himmler the exemption [Zurückstellung] of the Jews able to work constituted the main object.
This excerpt clearly refers to two orders: the Hitler order then a later order by Himmler exempting essential labour from immediate extermination. However, in his 2013 riposte to our White Paper, Mattogno brazenly falsified this context by declaring, on page 268, that:
Harrison lies without reservation in saying that “Wisliceny referred to an extermination order by Himmler in April 1942, because Himmler explicitly referred to the Führer order for the “final solution of the Jewish question,” which for Wisliceny was given by Hitler at that time and for the first time.
The liar here is Mattogno, because the text of Wisliceny's Nuremberg affadavit (see here) concurs with his Bratislava one quoted above:
I was sent to Berlin in July or August 1942 in connection with the status of Jews from Slovakia, which mission is referred to more fully hereinafter. I was talking to Eichmann in his office in Berlin when he said that on written order of Himmler all Jews were to be exterminated. I requested to be shown the order. He took a file from the safe and showed me a top secret document with a red border, indicating immediate action. It was addressed jointly to the Chief of the Security Police and SD and to the Inspector of Concentration Camps. The letter read substantially as follows:

"The Fuehrer has decided that the final solution of the Jewish question is to start immediately. I designate the Chief of the Security Police and SD and the Inspector of Concentration Camps as responsible for the execution of this order. The particulars of the program are to be agreed upon by the Chief of the Security Police and SD and the Inspector of Concentration Camps. I am to be informed currently as to the execution of this order."

The order was signed by Himmler and was dated some time in April 1942. Eichmann told me that the words "final solution" meant the biological extermination of the Jewish race, but that for the time being able-bodied Jews were to be spared and employed in industry to meet current requirements. I was so much impressed with this document which gave Eichmann authority to kill millions of people that I said at the time : "May God forbid that our enemies should ever do anything similar to the German people". He replied : "Don't be sentimental-this is a Fuehrer order". I realized at that time. that the order was a death warrant for millions of people and that the power to execute this order was in Eichmann's hands subject to approval of Heydrich and later Kaltenbrunner. The program of extermination was already under way and continued until late 1944. There was no change in the program during Kaltenbrunner's administration.
There is nothing in this statement that says Hitler's order was given at the same time as it was transmitted to Wisliceny. Himmler's order refers to a decision to implement the Final Solution with immediate effect, but implementation is not the same as the original decision. Both of Wisliceny's statements are compatible with a Hitler decision in December in principle to murder the Jews, followed by a further decision by Hitler or Himmler in April to begin full-scale implementation, which Himmler then modified by temporarily exempting labour that was now needed in SS camps to replace Soviet POW labour.

Moreover, Mattogno totally ignores another section of the Bratislava testimony, in which Wisliceny states that decision-making leading to the Final Solution "did not take place from today to tomorrow, but gradually, and it only culminated in spring 1942" (translation in Donald Bloxham, The Final Solution: A Genocide (Oxford University Press, 2009), p.186). This is clearly an expression of the concept of "cumulative radicalization", yet Mattogno insists that Wisliceny was describing a snapshot moment when policy was fixed in April 1942 "at that time and for the first time."

Why did Mattogno lie? Mattogno wishes his readers to believe that the term Endlösung was used to refer to resettlement from July 1941 onwards, with no change of meaning thereafter. This entire baiting and switching of Wisliceny's accounts was therefore done to deny the real meaning of the Wannsee document, in which Endlösung clearly meant killing. Mattogno chooses to believe Wisliceny's account when Mattogno can twist his dating to give a false picture that Hitler did not give an extermination order until after Wannsee. This is then used by Mattogno to attack Hilberg for supposedly suppressing the Wisliceny affadavit. For example, in Olocausto: dilettanti allo sbaraglio, Mattogno writes:
we understand easily why Hilberg and his colleagues did not mention Wisliceny's memorandum, which would force them to admit that the term Endlösung at the Wannsee Conference referred to the final solution of the Jewish question "in the form of resettlement."
This is pure fantasy on Mattogno's part, caused by his falsification of Wisliceny's testimonies. Such a modus operandi can be found throughout Mattogno's works.

Mattogno's Failure to Evolve 2000-2010

Mattogno's Deceptions on Nazi Policy: An Updated Analysis

$
0
0

We are currently preparing the 2nd edition of our White Paper, which will update our analysis of the lies, distortions, evasions and pro-Nazi rhetoric in the work of MGK on the policy and camps of Aktion Reinhard. This current blog series previews some of the arguments in my contribution, which will primarily be my response to the ludicrous claims by Mattogno in Chapter 5 of MGK's 'riposte', published in September 2013, which can be read here.

Mattogno's approach the history of Nazi policy follows the same trajectory that Elizabeth Strakosch identified here in the writing of Rassinier:
Instead of basing his history on the convergence of evidence (overwhelming oral testimony, documents, etc), he based it on a convergence of doubt. Unable to cast doubt on the undeniable fact of the camps, he made isolated attacks on various aspects of the seemingly unified narrative of the Holocaust. He concluded that these various errors were linked together by a political conspiracy of the victors, rather than by the fact of the Holocaust. Thus he established the basic pattern of denial - dividing the event into its component parts and attacking smaller targets, thereby casting doubt on the whole without confronting it [Elizabeth Strakosch, 'The Political Methodology of Genocide Denial', Dialogue , 2005, 3/3, p.9].
Mattogno's writing strategy on the three Aktion Reinhard camps was to establish a "convergence of doubt" regarding the "official version." This convergence is then combined with a paranoid epistemology, defined by the exaggerated powers that the paranoiac gives to the forces of darkness. It is a form of chimeria which ignores the fact that the evidence of extermination of the Jews rests on thousands of pieces contained in archives built across continents and decades; documents, testimonies and excavations that converge to a positive conclusion, not a negative. The first edition of our White Paper presented only a fraction of the total volume because no work could contain it all without expanding to tens of thousands of pages and millions of words. Equally, the paranoid mind of Mattogno refuses to grasp what is obvious to any neutral, namely that it would be impossible to silence thousands of witnesses to a Jewish resettlement in the East; that a vast number of false confessions by SS officials cannot go unexposed indefinitely without someone retracting; that no resettled population entirely disappears in modern times without leaving a trace of how it disappeared; that no bureaucracy has yet been devised that could construct a body of thousands of pieces of evidence that converge on one conclusion, namely that the Nazis said they were going to exterminate the Jews and then regularly left traces in documents and physical evidence of this extermination.

The strategy of convergence of doubt can be quantified. Mattogno's Belzec spends 96 pages on negation before only 12 pages on his alternative account. In MGK's Sobibór, the ratio is 346 to 54. In MG's Treblinka the ratio is 176 to 124, but many of the 124 pages of alternative explanation spent either on events that occurred before September 1941 (pp.179-183) or on casting doubt on documents such as the Ereignismeldungen (p.204) and the Stroop Report (p. 283). Moreover, these pages display an extraordinary double standard of doubting the exterminatory aspects of the documents whilst displaying extreme gullibility in looking favourably on the Nazis' stated reasons for killing Jews. For example, Mattogno here callously excuses the claim in Activity and Situation Report no. 6 that "in Mogilev 337 Jewesses had to be shot" because they "displayed especially rebellious behaviour." Mattogno sweeps these murders under the blanket assertion that, in eastern Poland: 
The “Soviet Jews” were shot, while the great majority of the remaining resident Jewish population was ghettoized. But also many other eastern Jews were killed: on account of sabotage, anti-German activities, as carriers of diseases, and above all as retaliatory measures for partisan attacks.

This is both gullible in how it accepts the murder of 337 women on the grounds of the Nazis' own claims about "rebellious behaviour" (whilst not querying why the Nazis did not spell out how that behaviour was defined) but also dishonest in omitting the fact that the ghettos of eastern Poland were mostly liquidated in 1942.

Lying about the dating of Orders

Rosenberg on Reprisals

$
0
0
It seems clear to me that his diary entry of September 12, 1941 (pdf posted by Irving here), can only mean that Rosenberg wished for central European Jews to be killed in reprisal for the "murder" of Volga Germans. Note also that Rosenberg clearly sees Siberia as a place of murder for deportees not resettlement:
12.9.41 Als die Mitteilungen eintrafen, dass Stalin nun auch die noch verbliebenen 400 000 Wolgadeutschen nach Sibirien verschleppen, d.h. morden lassen wird, da ist in uns allen der Hass gegen Moskau erst recht wieder emporgestiegen. Ich gab Anweisung, für eine sehr scharfe Stellungnahme u. sandte sie formuliert an den Führer. Der sie noch verschärfte. Gestern liess ich einen Vorschlag ausarbeiten, durch Rundfunk nach Russland, England u. USA mitteilen zu lassen, dass wenn dieser Massenmord durchgeführt werden sollte, Deutschland die Juden Zentraleuropas dafür büssen lassen würde. Dies mit vollster Berechtigung, da soeben noch der Jude Schertok auf einer Palästinakonferenz erklärt habe, an dem Bündnis zwischen Moskau – London – Washington hätten die Juden besonderen Anteil, da sie stets dafür gearbeitet hätten.

Three Hitler Speeches from 1942

$
0
0
January 30, 1942 [Domarus, p.2574]
We are fully aware that this war can end either in the extermination of the Aryan people or in the disappearance of Jewry from Europe. I said as much before the German Reichstag on September 1, 1939. I wish to avoid making hasty prophesies, but this war will not end as the Jews imagine, namely, in the extermination of the European-Aryan people; instead, the result of this war will be the annihilation of Jewry. For the first time, the old, truly Jewish rule of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” will obtain.  

February 24, 1942 [source and source]:
Today the idea of our National Socialist, and that of the fascist revolution, have conquered great and powerful states, and my prophecy will find its fulfillment, that through this war Aryan humankind will not be annihilated, but the Jew will be exterminated. Whatever the struggle may bring with it or however long it may last, this will be its final result. And only then, with the removal of these parasites, will a long period of understanding between nations, and with it true peace, come upon the suffering world

November 8, 1942 [source and source]:
There is only one thing left, that is to fight. Just as I said at a certain moment to the internal enemies: "It is not possible to come to an understanding with you peacefully; you want force, so now you'll get it." And these internal enemies have been taken care of.

Another power, too, which was very strong in Germany has meanwhile been able to learn from experience that the National Socialist prophecies are no mere phrases; it is the main power to which we owe all this misfortune-international Jewry. You will recall the Reichstag session at which I declared: "If Judaism imagines by any chance that it can bring about an international world war for the extermination of the European races, the result will not be the extermination of the European races, but the extermination of the Jews in Europe."
German originals of these speeches are also on-line such as here and here .

Violence and Threats against Jews 1923-1931 as reported by the JTA

$
0
0
In the 1920s, a steady stream of antisemitic threats, some of an exterminatory nature, were made across central Europe, as reported by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. On February 4, 1923, the JTA reported from Bucharest that: 
Wholesale pogroms on Jews are urged as a means of providing corpses [for] the dissection rooms of the Klausenburg University, in an article appearing in the students’ publication there. The writer predicts that the pogroms will serve a two-fold object: the extermination of the Jew, and the supply of corpses. The University authorities have taken the student publication’s assertion under advisement. 

A month earlier it had reported from Vienna that a "pitiless extermination" of Austrian Jews was being promised:
A typical letter which the "Wiener Morgenzeitung" handed over to the authorities has this peroration: "In the near future the Aryan people will arise and mercilessly put and end to the Jewish domination. The Jews will first of all be stricken down, then indiscriminately murdered, exterminated and hung, their bodies being thrown in the Danube. Then and then only shall Vienna be free of this vampire. Help us, oh God of the Germans, in this task."
In Germany, the Nazis carried out violence against Jews repeatedly in certain places. For example, in May 1927 and September 1931 there was violence against Jews in Kurfuerstendamm. On the former occasion, the JTA reported
Anti-Semitic disturbances took place last night on Kurfuerstendamm. A group of 100 members of the National Socialist Party, the anti-Semitic organization disbanded by the police, distributed anti-Semitic leaflets and sang Hakenkreuz hymns. The hooligans attacked many Jewish passersby. The police intervened, arresting twenty.
On the latter occasion, the “Angriff”, edited by Goebbels, published"a cartoon showing Jewish heads rolling in the ground before the Hitlerist hurricane."

Goebbels himself had promised a pogrom a year earlier, when he stated that"When a single Hitlerite leader falls we shall answer with a pogrom on the Jews." Thus eight years before Kristallnacht, pogroms were already part of the Nazi package of violence and threats with which German Jews had to contend. Furthermore, this was allied with vicious antisemitic lying propaganda, such as the claim that "Jews were systematically corrupting Christian girls, and spreading venereal disease among them as part of a calculated plot to exterminate the Christian population."

Nazi Policy Timeline January-June 1941

$
0
0
The evidence presented below clearly shows that that the USSR was chosen as the 'resettlement' destination for European Jews from January 1941 onwards. More importantly, the aim of resettlement was to decimate the Jews; decisions after June 22, 1941, were simply changing the nature of this mass murder to other means and to during the war with the USSR not after a final victory.


January 21st: A memo by Dannecker notes that:
The Chief of the Security Police and the Security Service [Heydrich] has already received orders from the Fuehrer through the Reichsfuehrer-SS, to submit a project for a Final solution" and that "This will extend to the work preceding the wholesale deportation of the Jews as well as to the planning to the last detail of a settlement action in the territory yet to be determined (cited by Browning, pp.6-7).
March 20th: Eichmann refers to the conversation between Hitler and Heydrich In January but says that "the General Government is not at present is not at present in a position to receive one Jew or Pole from the Old Reich" (Kay, p.110, citing IfZ, MA 423). However, on March 17th, Hitler had promised Frank that the GG would be Jew-free (Kay, p.110, citing Frank diary 26.3.41). Thus the GG was to be an interim point between the Reich and the USSR for deported Jews.

March 26th: Heydrich meets Goering and discusses proposals that included a draft concerning the Jewish Question. Heydrich noted in his report:
10. Bezüglich der Lösung der Judenfrage berichtete ich kurz dem Reichsmarschall und legte ihm meinen Entwurf vor, dem er mit einer Änderung bezüglich der Zuständigkeit Rosenbergs zustimmte und Wiedervorlage befahl.
One of the recipients of a copy of Heydrich's report was Eichmann, therefore clearly this concerned resettlement. As the meeting was discussing the Ostministers, clearly the resettlement zone was to be in the USSR. (Full German document is in VEJ, 7, Dok. 1 pp.113-117; translation of quote is by Kay, p.109; Eichmann's name as recipient is noted in VEJ 7, p.113n.3 and by Kay, p.109).

Carlo Mattogno (in the Riposte, p.199) cites Goetz Aly's discussion of this passage and even quotes Aly on the meaning: "daß sich Heydrichs Überlegungen für die ‘Lösung der Judenfrage’ spätestens seit März 1941 auf das Territorium der Sowjetunion bezogen." However, Mattogno bizarrely views the concentration of Jews into the USSR as a mere preliminary to deporting them on to Madagascar after the war (Riposte, p.536), based on an opportunistic reading of Goebbels' diary entry of March 7th, 1942, that would have made no economic or military sense.

April 2nd: Rosenberg also proposes Russia as the resettlement area, calling it a dumping ground: 
In this way all other areas would be offered at the same time the possibility of making extensive use of that part of Russia con- trolled by Moscow as a dumping ground for undesirable elements of the population (1017-PS, NCA III, pp.674-681, here p.676).

April 7th: Rosenberg discusses the prospects of extermination in Leningrad and Moscow:
In addition, it will eventually become necessary to occupy with troops not only Petersburg, but also Moscow. This occupation will definitely differ considerably from that in the Baltic provinces, in the Ukraine and in the Caucasus. It will be accomplished by suppressing any Russian and Bolshevik resistance and will necessitate an absolutely ruthless person, both as regards the military representation and also the eventual political direction. The problems arising from this need not be detailed here. If it is not intended to maintain a permanent military administration, the undersigned would recommend the Gauleiter of East Prussia, Erich Koch as Reich Commissar in Moscow (1019-PS, NCA III, pp.681-685, here p.682).
May 2nd: Discussion [of the] Staatssekretaere 2.5.41: "x million people will doubtlessly starve, if that which is necessary for us is extracted from the land." (Kay, p.124)

May 7th: Rosenberg argues for decimation of Ukrainian Jews via pogroms, ethnic cleansing by the Ukrainians, and ghettoization:
After the customary removal of Jews from all public offices, the Jewish question will have to have a decisive solution, through the institution of Ghettos. Insofar as the Jews have not been driven out by the Ukrainians themselves, the small communities must be lodged in large camps, in order to be kept busy by means of forced labor, in the same way as it has already been the practice in [Lodz] (1028-PS, NCA III, p.690).
May 23rd: Report by the Agriculture Group, based on recommendations by Backe. The USSR would be split into two (a productive and an unproductive zone) and surplus populations redirected to Siberia, even though “railway transportation is out of the question”. The document stated further that "The consequences will be cessation of supplies to the entire forest zone, including the essential industrial centers of Moscow and St. Petersburg." For these areas, the document noted, "It will be necessary to divert the population into the Siberian spaces. Since rail transport is out of the question, this too, will be an extremely difficult problem." The report then admitted that “This will inevitably result in an extinction of industry as well as of a large part of the people.” (EC-126, IMT XXXVI, pp.135-57. English translation in NCA, VII, pp.295-306, here pp.297, 298 and 305)

June 20th: Rosenberg speaks of extermination in Russia: 
The job of feeding the German people stands, this year, without a doubt, at the top of the list of Germany's claims on the East; and here the southern territories and the northern Caucasus will have to serve as a balance for the feeding of the German people. We see absolutely no reason for any obligation on our part to feed also the Russian people with the products of that surplus territory. We know that this is a harsh necessity, bare of any feelings.

A very extensive evacuation will be necessary, without any doubt, and it is sure that the future will hold very hard years in store for the Russians. A later decision will have to determine to which extent industries can still be maintained there (wagon factories etc.). The consideration and execution of this policy in the Rus- sian area proper is for the German Reich and its future a tremendous and by no means negative task, as might appear, if one takes only the harsh necessity of the evacuation in consideration. The conversion of Russian dynamics towards the East is a task which requires the strongest characters. Perhaps, this decision will also be approved by a coming Russian later, not in 30 but maybe in a 100 years. For the Russian soul has been torn in the struggle of the last 200 years. The original Russians are excellent artistic craftsmen, dancers and musicians. They have certain hereditary talents, but these talents are different from- those of the Western people. The fight between Turgnjew and Dostejewsky was symbolic for the nation. The Russian soul found no outlet either way. If we now close the West to the Russians, they might become conscious of their own inborn, proper forces and of the area to which they belong. A historian will maybe see this decision in a different light, in hundreds of years than it might appear to a Russian today (1058-PS, NCA III, pp.716-717).

Nazi Policy Timeline July 1941

$
0
0
This timeline is a work-in-progress and will be regularly updated and revised. Comments and suggested additions are welcome.

July 2: Heydrich passes on a summary of his instructions to the four HSSPF. He explicitly lists “Jews in party and state positions” as a group to be executed, and also called for the incitement of pogroms, euphemistically dubbed "self-cleansing attempts", but "without trace" of German involvement (Klein, pp.323-328).

July 7th: Fritzsche depicts Barbarossa as a war in which "culture, civilization, and human decency make a stand against the diabolical principle of a sub-human world" and thus infers that "It was only the Fuehrer's decision to strike in time that saved our homeland from the fate of being overrun by those sub-human creatures, and our men, women, and children from the unspeakable horror of being their prey." (Official B.B.C. translation of radio speeches of Hans Fritzsche, monitored by the British Broadcasting Corporation, p.2069 and p.2070, 3064-PS, NCA, vol. V, p.879).

July 8th: Hitler states that Leningrad and Moscow should be leveled so that the population would not have to be fed (Halder's diary; cf. Aly, p.189). Ergo there would be no food for millions of Jews sent east.

July 13th: Einsatzgruppe B summarizes its activities: 
A civilian prison camp was built in Minsk by the first troops passing through. Almost all the male inhabitants of the town were placed into it. The Einsatzgruppe was asked to screen the camp together with the Secret Field Police. Only persons were set free who were able to clear themselves beyond reproach and who were neither politically nor criminally implicated. The remainder, left behind in the camp, will be subjected to careful investigation. 1050 Jews were subsequently liquidated. Others are executed daily. With regard to non-Jews left in the camp, liquidation of the criminals, the officials, the Asiatics, etc. was started. A Jewish committee was also formed, a ghetto was set up, and the identification of Jews on outer garments started. The Bolsheviks set free the inmates of the Minsk prison except the political ones. These were shot by the Bolsheviks before their retreat. A search has been started for the criminal prisoners who had been set free.

In Vilnius by July 8th the local Einsatzkommando liquidated 321 Jews. The Lithuanian Ordnungsdienst which was placed under the Einsatzkommando after the Lithuanian political police had been dissolved was instructed to take part in the liquidation of he Jews. 150 Lithuanian officials were assigned to this task. They arrested the Jews and put them into concentration camps where they were subjected the same day to Special Treatment. This work has now begun, and thus about 500 Jews, saboteurs amongst them, are liquidated daily. About 460,000 rubles in cash, as well as many valuables belonging to Jews who were subject to Special Treatment, were confiscated as property belonging to enemies of the Reich (Source: EM 21).
July 16th, a): Hitler reveals his real aims:
Nobody shall be able to recognize that it initiates a final settlement. This need not prevent our taking all necessary measures-shooting, resettling, etc.-and we shall take them.

But we do not want to make any people 'into enemies prematurely and unnecessarily. Therefore we shall act as though we wanted to exercise a mandate only. At the same time we must know clearly that we shall never leave those countries (source: Vermerk über die Besprechung am 16.7.1941, L-221, IMT XXXVIII, pp.86-94, here p.87; English translation NCA VII, pp.1086-1093, here pp.1086-1087).
July 16th, b) Höppner to Eichmann:
4. This winter there is a danger that not all of the Jews can be fed anymore. One should weigh honestly, if the most humane solution might not be to finish off those of the Jews who are not employable by means of some quickworking device. At any rate, that would be more pleasant than to let them starve to death.

5. For the rest, the proposal was made that in this camp all the Jewish women, from whom one could still expect children, should be sterilized so that the Jewish problem may actually be solved completely with this generation (T/219, also published in VEJ 4, pp.680-681; English translation in Hilberg, 1971, pp.87-88)
July 16th, c) Einsatzgruppe A reports that "The arrested Jewish men are shot without ceremony and interred in previously prepared graves. Until now the EK 1b has shot 1150 Jews in Daugavpils." Einsatzgruppe C states that, in Lvov, "Approximately 7,000 Jews were rounded up and shot by the Security Police in retaliation for inhuman atrocities." (Source: EM 24).

July 17th: Heydrich's Einsatzbefehl Nr. 8, on executions in POW camps, states that "when making any decisions the racial origin has to be taken into consideration." (NMT, IV, pp.123-132, here p.130).

July 19th: Ribbentrop states that "one day all the Jews in America will be beaten to death" (source: Documents on German Foreign Policy, series D, volume XIII, p.201)

July 22nd: Hitler tells Kvaternik that, as paraphrased by Burrin, "‘asocials’ and criminals must be exterminated; when a country sends its best to risk their lives at the front, it need not spare the scum" (cited by Burrin, p.139). Hitler believed Jews were a "race of criminals" (source) so it follows that they, too, had to be exterminated. Consequently although Hitler mentioned Siberia and Madagascar to Kvaternik, his aim could only have been to kill them. Indeed, he states to Kvaternik that no Jewish family should remain in any country because they would be "the germ center for fresh sedition" (cited by Fest, p.651; and Wistrich, p.122) an idea repeated by Heydrich at Wannsee.

July 24th: Goebbels begins a loud and prolonged propaganda campaign that exploits Kaufman's book "Germany Must Perish" (source)

July 27th: Himmler informs the Kommandostab on July 27 that people who were "racially and humanly inferior" were to be shot if they were suspected of supporting the partisans; their villages were to be burned down and the women and children removed. (Source: Henning Herbert Pieper, 'The SS Cavalry Brigade and its operations in the Soviet Union, 1941-1942', PhD dissertation, University of Sheffield, June 2012, p.128, citing Kommandosonderbefehl. Richtlinien für die Durchkämmung und Durchstreifung von Sumpfgebieten durch Reitereinheiten, 28.7.41, in Unsere Ehre heisst Treue. Kriegstagebuch des Kommandostabes Reichsführer SS. Tätigkeitsberichte der 1 und 2. SS-Infanterie-Brigade, der 1. SS-Kavallerie-Brigade und von Sonderkommandos der SS, Vienna, 1965, pp.210-213; cf. Martin Cüppers, Wegbereiter der Shoa. Die Waffen-SS, der Kommandostab Reichsführer-SS und die Judenvernichtung 1939-1945, Darmstadt, 2005, pp. 138-139; Yitzhak Arad, The Holocaust in the Soviet Union, Lincoln, 2009, p.167. Excellent article by Hilberg here).

Nazi Policy Timeline: August 1941

$
0
0
This timeline is a work-in-progress and will be regularly updated and revised. Comments and suggested additions are welcome.

August 1st, a): Himmler order to the SS cavalry regiments: "Ausdrücklicher Befehl des RFSS. Sämtliche Juden müssen erschossen werden. Judenweiber in die Sümpfe treiben"; "Explicit order of the RFSS. All Jews must be shot. Jewish women to be driven into the swamp." (VEJ 7 Dok 51 p.228, n.10; Longerich, 3.1.1).

August 1st, b): Lombard reiterates Himmler's orders: no male Jews to be left alive, no families left in the villages, although he acknowledges that some Jewish labour must be temporarily spared to do work for the military:
Der heut. Funkspruch des Kdr. betr. Judenerschießung soll nicht als Rüge gelten, da
bisher in Dörfern keine Juden. Judendörfer bisher sämtlich im Gebiet des 2. Rgts. Ausnahme Bereska-Kartuska, wo 221. Div. dringend Juden für Herstellung Rollbahn benötigt. Trotzdem sind besonders Spähtruppführer nochmals schärfstens zu ermahnen. Es bleibt kein männl. Jude leben, keine Restfamilie i. d. Ortschaften. (VEJ 7 Dok 51 p.228).

August 7th: Goebbels states that Jews in the Warsaw ghetto are carriers of infectious diseases and must be locked up and left to themselves or liquidated (source)

August 11th: Goebbels writes that the beating to death of Jews in the Baltic states is fulfilling Hitler's prophecy that Jews would cease to exist if they provoked another war (source)

August 19th, a): Hitler states that Jews deported to the USSR “will be worked over in the harsh climate there.” (source: Evans, n.27; English translation Browning, p.35)

August 19th, b): Hellmuth Koch of 350. Inf.Rgt. (Ia) calls for extermination:
Die Judenfrage muß radikaler gelöst werden. Ich schlage Erfassung aller auf dem Lande lebenden Juden in bewachten Sammel- und Arbeitslager[n] vor. Verdächtige Elemente müssen beseitigt werden (VEJ 7 Dok. 61, p.253).
August 21st: Oberstleutnant Helmuth Groscurth informs Generalfeldmarschall Walter von Reichenau about the shooting of 90 children at Bila Tserkva (VEJ 7 Dok 62, pp.253-257).

August 23rd: Goebbels bemoans the fact that the euthanasia program has become too controversial in view of Galen's opposition. Goebbels writes that it is It is intolerable that during a war, hundreds of thousands of people who are completely stupid and can never can be cured are allowed to use up valuable resources. (source)

August 30th: Jeckeln informs Himmler that 23,600 Jews were killed at Kamenets-Podolsk (VEJ 7 Dok 70, pp.270-271; see other sources on this massacre, summarized by Roberto, here.)

"The Tide is Turning"

$
0
0
It seems in recent years that deniers have increasingly proclaimed victory and congratulated themselves for... well, nothing.

They like to trumpet an increasing skepticism towards the Holocaust as an indication of their success. Nearly a decade ago Robert Faurisson clamored that a "serious calling into question of one of the greatest lies in history" was underway, and that in the West the "the scales are falling off some people's eyes." The moderator of the CODOH Revisionist Forum, Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis, has declared that the "tide is turning" nearly three hundred times in the last year, nearly once a day.

The problem with all of this? The tide is not turning for them, as shown by the recent ADL global antisemitism survey.


The famed social psychologist Leon Festinger observed the interesting phenomenon whereby the invalidation of a fringe group's prophecies actually had the effect of strengthening that same group's beliefs as a coping mechanism. They continued to (wrongly) believe because they were too invested in the project, and sought to bring as many others in line with their beliefs as possible. Unfortunately, they remained in the extreme minority, and thus could only resort to increasingly disconnected statements about the popularity of their own beliefs.

In a nutshell, that is where we stand with Holocaust denial.

The recent data made available from the ADL sponsored survey (conducted by First International Resources), which would go out of its way to sniff out the slightest perceived antisemitism, rejects such feign hope. Among the topics examined by their survey, which polled more than 500 people in each country, was perceptions and beliefs about the Holocaust. 

There were two questions related to the Holocaust:

1) "Have you heard about the Holocaust in Europe during World War Two?"

2) For those who affirmed knowledge about the event, the survey asked: "Which of the following statement comes closest to your views about the Holocaust in Europe during World War Two?" Possible answers:
A) The Holocaust is a myth and did not happen.
B) The Holocaust happened, but the number of Jews who died in it has been greatly exaggerated in history.
C) The Holocaust happened and the number of Jews who died has been fairly described in history.
D) Don't know.

Below I will provide the results from several countries relevant to the Holocaust, mainly to highlight just how few consider the Holocaust a "myth," and thus the core constituency of denial. Even the number who believe it to be exaggerated is not substantial, although it is roughly one-quarter in France and Russia (two countries with higher antisemitism rankings and displays in their recent history). 

Germany (93% awareness)
Myth: 0%
Exaggerated: 11%
Accurate: 85%
Don't Know: 4%

Italy (98% awareness)
Myth: 0%
Exaggerated: 6%
Accurate: 86% 
Don't Know: 8%

Sweden (99% awareness)
Myth: 0%
Exaggerated: 2%
Accurate: 96%
Don't Know: 2%

Switzerland (96% awareness)
Myth: 0%
Exaggerated: 6%
Accurate: 90%
Don't Know: 4%

United Kingdom (99% awareness)
Myth: 0%
Exaggerated: 6%
Accurate: 83% 
Don't Know: 10%

France (87% awareness)
Myth: 2%
Exaggerated: 24%
Accurate: 67%
Don't Know: 7%

Russia (87% awareness)
Myth: 2%
Exaggerated: 24%
Accurate: 67%
Don't Know: 7%

United States (89% awareness)
Myth: 1%
Exaggerated: 6%
Accurate: 89%
Don't Know: 4%

Canada (91% awareness)
Myth: 0%
Exaggerated: 8% 
Accurate: 90%
Don't Know: 3%

Australia (93% awareness)
Myth: 0%
Exaggerated: 8%
Accurate: 88%
Don't Know: 3%

Readers can check out all of the data themselves on the ADL's survey website, which gives breakdowns of survey results across the globe.



Germar Rudolf's True Feelings about Jews

$
0
0
Can be read on page 39 of this report, which quotes Germar thus:
If the Holocaust is seen as a unique collection of lies, then the sole pillar supporting international Judaism's legitimacy will collapse. The idol of substitute religion will disintegrate. The possibility of extorting more billions from Germany on account of its alleged obligation will likewise collapse. The possibility of obligating America to eternally rescue the Jews from new Holocausts through endless donations of money will likewise collapse. World sympathy for the greatest liars and swindlers in the history of mankind will likewise collapse. Europe's second attempt to establish a lasting enclave in Palestine against the will of the Arabs, similar to the crusades, will likewise collapse. And finally, the future Arabia, which will be unified and self ruling without Jewish, American or European occupiers and colonial powers, will develop irresistibly. This explains why the Jews and Jewish dominated media and politicians everywhere defend these (Holocaust) lies and repress the prophets of truth by all means possible.

Auschwitz-Birkenau selection list of 21 August 1943

$
0
0
If you've never heard a phrase like "give the name of just one gassing victim" - you are lucky enough that you did not come across Revisionist extremists such as Gred Gerdes yet. Their obsession, that only evidence for individual gassings victims known by name establishes the reality of homicidal gassings, aims to exploit the anonymous nature of the mass murder. 

Most victims were treated as an anonymous mass and only total number of people killed were recorded, but not the individual names anymore. In some cases, however, name lists of Jews sentenced to the gas chamber were actually produced in Auschwitz.

This was the case for Jewish victims already properly registered in the camp books as detainees at the time they were subjected to mass murder. It should be noted that this accounts only for a small fraction of the victims, since most were killed directly after the arrival of their transport in Auschwitz without registration in the camp records.

These selections lists have been destroyed by the Germans, with the exception of carbon copies smuggled out by the Auschwitz resistance movement during the existence of the camp. One such carbon copy is dated 21 August 1943 and has the names of 498 female prisoners.

The document (or at least some page of it) has been already published in 1957 in Jan Sehn's "Concentration Camp Oswiecim-Brzezinka" (according to here). The first page of the document is also reproduced in the publication "Death books from Auschwitz" (1995). The document consists of pages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (scans from the Auschwitz State Museum). The last page is signed by the female Auschwitz guard Maria Mandel (Mandl).

The subject line on the first page reads "G.U. v. 21.8.43", followed by the list of 498 names with prisoner's registration numbers. Without further context, the purpose and meaning of the list is entirely unclear. This is already suspicious. There was enough space in the reference line to write out "G.U." and the list contains the full names of 498 people, so that writing out "G.U." would have been very little additional effort. 

A comparison with documents from the Auschwitz labour deployment department on the fate of incoming transports in Auschwitz (here and here) and from SS officials of the special squad Zeppelin (Nuremberg War Crimes Trials documents NG-5220 to 5223) shows that G.U. is most likely the abbreviation of "gesonderte Unterbringung" (special accomodation), which was a variant of "Sonderbehandlung" (special treatment). The abbreviation fits linguistically (gesonderte Unterbringung) and contextually (description of the fate of selected prisoners in Auschwitz). Furthermore, also the variant "Sonderbehandlung" was used as obscuring abbreviation in numerous Auschwitz documents (e.g. here).

The meaning of "Sonderbehandlung" in the files of German police and paramilitary forces is well established. It was used to designate killings without juridical decisions. It was also used in concentration camps and specifically in Auschwitz in this sense, see here. According to this, the document of 21 August 1943 is a list of 498 female Jewish prisoners selected for killing. The German authorities had employed several killing methods in Auschwitz, but only homicidal gassings were suitable for such a large number of people.

This interpretation is supported by a clandestine message of the Polish Auschwitz prisoner Stanislaw Klodzinski of 21 November 1943 on the document (Auschwitz 1940-1945: Studien zur Geschichte des Konzentrations- und Vernichtungslagers Auschwitz. Widerstand, p. 347, my translation):
"Use the two original lists of gassed people as good as you can. You can sent them as originals to London to get the matter moving; the first list was signed by the sadist camp leader of the female camp Mandel, we don't know who has signed the second list."
It can be discarded that the document has been forged by the Auschwitz resistance precisely because the mass murder is not spelled out explicitly, but can only be understood taking into account other evidence.

Numerous eyewitness accounts corroborate the selection of registered prisoners and transport to the killing sites, e.g. former Auschwitz prisoner Helene Cougno on 17 July 1964 at the Frankfurt Auschwitz trial (my translation):
"I know this from my own experience, since I was in Birkenau for some time....The female guard Mandel...walked by and selected the people according to the personnel discretion to the right for work or to the left....Then the block elderly had to write down numbers, names and nationalities. These lists were typed in the office with the machine and were sent to the Political Department, where we had to check there were no Aryans...these [selected] people were sent to the isolation block and were only gassed when we could confirm that there had been no Aryan relatives. Or no Gestapo prisoners."
_____________________________________

Revisionist Carlo Mattogno has published his own, very special interpretation of the document in his book "Auschwitz: Assistenza Sanitaria, 'selezione' e 'Sonderbehandlung' dei detenuti immatricolati", a book consisting of "bizarre arithmetic based on false assumptions" as a reader has put it. Unfortunately, it is available only in Italian. Here is my translation of the relevant paragraph (powered by babelfish),  p. 130-131:
"Returning to our document, it must be noted that it does not come from the prisoner's hospital of the women's camp Birkenau, so that nothing proves that the listed prisoners were really  sick and not capable of work. And nothing demonstrates that they died in August 1943. Indeed, it can be proven otherwise. For 1943, Sterbebücher number 19 and 20, with up to 3,000 deaths, covering the period from 20 August to 7 October are missing, therefore it is impossible to ascertain whether the 498 prisoners with the names in question were indeed killed. However, according to the well-known letter of Pohl to Himmler of September 30, 1943, a total of 2380 deaths, in 1442 male and  938 females, occured in August in Auschwitz.. According to this document, the mortality rate of women was 3.61% (938 deaths with an average strength of 26,000), while the previous month it had been 5.15%; in contrast to this, the men's camp had recorded a mortality rate of 3% in August and 2.96% in July. In this month the average strength of the women's camps was approximately 20,000 and 3255 new registrations occurred, so the average strength in this month was not higher, in round numbers, than 23000 prisoners and the mortality was not exceeding (23000 x = 0.0515) 1200 prisoners. The mortality of August (938 deaths) with a rate of 3.61% is therefore perfectly compatible with this data. This means that it is not possible that these 938 deaths contain the alleged gassed 498, because in that case the natural mortality would have been dropped from a minimum of (20000 * = 0.0515) 1030 (938-498 =) to 440 deaths. According to Czech, there were no selections made in the women's camp in July, so all the deaths were natural. Therefore, these 498 prisoners did certainly not die in August 1943, and the necessary conclusion is: they were transferred to other camps."

a) Mattogno provides not a shred of direct, positive evidence that the people "were transferred to other camps".

b) Mattogno provides no evidence/reason/explanation that a drop of > 1030 to 440 deaths among the female prisoners is supposed to be "impossible". While such a reduction in the mortality would be unexpected and unexplained and therefore may be regarded as not likely, it is certainly within the range of what is possible. Hence, Mattogno has not "proven otherwise" anything. At best, he has shown that the interpretation of the document as killing list suffers some unlikelihood. But its worse, see c)

c) Mattogno assumes that those female Jewish prisoners selected for killing would have death certificates issued by the Auschwitz authorities and would have been necessarily included in the official camp death rate reported to Berlin. But as even Revisionist Nick Kollerstrom is close to grasp here, many Jewish deaths among registered prisoners were not registered anymore at the registrar's office in 1943. If the figures in the report from Pohl to Himmler of 30 September 1943 are based on the death certificates, they are unreliable with regards to Jewish death. And arithmetic with unreliable figures yields an unreliable result. 

In short, Mattogno failed to demonstrate that these "498 prisoners did certainly not die in August 1943".
Viewing all 610 articles
Browse latest View live