It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

One Third Of The Holocaust:More Compelling Evidence It Never Happened

page: 10
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Truth4hire
My opinion as I mentioned earlier is that I do not think Auschwitz was a death camp and that most victims died of malnutrition and disease at the latter stages of the war due to insuficcient supplies reaching the concentration camps which, in turn was caused by a breakdown of the German railway infrastructure caused by Allied bombings.

The video uses Jewish historical data, and within the first twenty minutes it beoms clear that their own information on the death tolls does not even come close to the "6 Million figure". For Auschwitz the "official" number of casualties is around one million, Jews and gentile together. Bad enough in itself ofcourse.

Add: noone can deny the pictures of the skeletons and starving survivors, but this does not deter me from my belief mentioned above. Fact is there was a swimming pool located inside the prisoner´s compound. There was a theatre in Auschwitz. A hospital. Nurses. The Red Cross visited Auschwitz numerous times and have never once mentioned genocide or gassings. People were writing letters from inside Auschwitz. There was a music group. There were study groups.

If you just look at the pool. Why o why have a pool in a death camp? It is there, watch the doc. We have been lied for over sixty years about Auschwitz I say. And if the current trend continues in Europe, I might go to jail for up to five years if I say so in public in the near future. Interesting, don´t you think?

[edit on 1-2-2007 by Truth4hire]


So what about the gas chambers and people saying they smelt bodies burning and people disappeared? I guess that's just them being crazy from lack of nutrition? Oh please the Red Cross visiting doesn't mean anything. It's like with Guntanamo Bay today. Authorities have visited them as well but we know other wise due to pictures and witness testimony that there was abuse at Guntanamo Bay and innocent people brought there all the time. I suggest you check out the new HBO documentary "Ghosts of Abu Grhaib" for the whole thing with prisoner abuse. I know it's not Guntanamo Bay but it shows the abuse going on still. You can have someone visit a place and it appear to be nice. And just because you claim these places had those things it doesn't mean the prisoners got to use them now does it? For all we know it could have just been for the Nazi's entertainment and/or to torture the prisoners even more with.




posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by whitewave
I once took care of an old man in the ICU and saw the number tatoo on his forearm. He was in and out of consciousness and didn't make a lot of sense when he was awake. My other patient was actively dying and the whole code team was in there shocking his heart to keep it beating. The family of the dying man were unwilling to admit he was dying and told us to "do everything" to keep him alive. We kept shocking him, temporarily snatching him away from death's door but eventually the electrical current began to burn his flesh. This was extremely distressing to all of us and we begged the family to accept the inevitable. What finally turned the tide in this tragic case was the smell of burning flesh permeating the ICU. The old man with the number tatooed on his forearm suddenly became alert and began screaming hysterically in (what we assumed was) Hebrew. His wife explained that he thought he was back in Auschwitz. It took a lot of Ativan to calm him down. I'm fairly sure he wasn't in on the "cover-up conspiracy" to make us all believe there were unspeakable horrors for which no evidence exists. HE was evidence enough for me. (G_D rest his tortured soul.)


Oh how sad and I also agree he was probably speaking in Hebrew as well and I don't think he would have been screaming if he had been swimming in a pool or enjoying a silent movie at a theatre or whatever. There was torture there and I think this guy is another piece of proof. I have read plenty of information regarding the holocaust and this is the first time I've ever heard of there being swimming pools and theatres.



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hvitserk
short questions to you all

before i ask my question and to make things clear i'm pro freedom of speech even if it sometimes may shock

ok now to the point : in most european countries , denying the holocaust is considered as "thought crime" and punished by fines and even prison sentences

i'd be curious to know about similar laws in your respective countries of origin

and maybe if you agree or not


PS : for people in the US who can make it or have the opportunity , visit the holocaust memorial museum in Washington DC , i did a few years ago , it is definitely worth it


I don't think you should put a crime to it. If someone wants to deny something that's so clear in history and enough evidence than let them. Here in this country if I question Pearl Harbor or 9/11 or JFK's assassination or even the Boston Massacure I could be under this camp. The right to free speech is very precious and I wouldn't restrict it for anybody even those people I think are crazy so I think Germany takes that too far. I understand where they are coming from however and I'm glad they've learned from their past mistake but this is something a dictatorship would do in my opinion.



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by the smoking beagle

Originally posted by kenochi
This is real life we're talking about, not a Hollywood screenplay.


What's your opinion on "Der ewige Jude" ?


Originally posted by kenochi
This is a terrible event, but has been grossly exaggerated by the allies and then some historians, for a number of reasons.


And these reasons are ?


Originally posted by kenochi
The fact is that there is not one solid piece of evidence to support the gas chamber / 11 million claim.


So the Nazis did not target any particular group of people ?

Not the claimed 6 million Jews ?

Or the claimed 5 million non Jews?

Only.......


Originally posted by kenochi
those who were identified as enemies of the state


under what criteria were they identified ??


Sorry to be such a crashing boor Kenochi old fruit, but any chance of a few answers to my questions ??

regards

beagle

pip pip !!


[edit on 2-3-2007 by the smoking beagle]



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Hi beagle,

1) 'Der Ewige Jude' is a Nazi anti-semitic propaganda film. I said in my first post that the Nazis were anti-semitic. I don't deny that for a second. I'm getting bored of having to repeat myself.
2) The Allies exaggerated Nazi war crimes for two reasons. Firstly as part of the process of wartime propaganda, whereby one nation will always play down its own atrocities and hype and exaggerate those of the enemy. This would have gone on throughout WW2. In addition, by the time the Nuremburg Trials came about, the handover of Palestine had already been agreed and the Allies needed an extreme reason for allowing mass Jewish immigration there, as it basically meant displacing the Muslim peoples who were there before. For this reason the gas chamber story was invented. Nazis were then tortured to confess to this 'crime'. The transcripts of the trials show that the Allied prosecutors also accused the Nazis of boiling Jews alive, 'steaming' them to death, electrocuting them in 'electro chambers', burning them alive and gassing them. All of these claims were presented with the same supporting evidence (confessions from Nazis and eyewitness testimony) yet all except one are now dismissed as pure fabrication. This is the genesis of the gas chamber story. The 6 million number was originally given a long time before the holocaust happened and continues to be proclaimed despite numerous revisions of the figures. Again, if you read the historians, none of them agree on numbers. This is because the 6 million number was literally plucked out of the air. With Europe in utter chaos and millions of displaced civilians roaming around it was nigh on impossible to track individuals or groups. The 5 million non-Jews was originally suggested in a statement by Simon Wiesenthal in the 1970s. It was never mentioned before. Again it has little evidence to support it and many mainstream historians (not deniers) question it.
3) The Jews were identified among others as 'enemies of the state' for two reasons. Firstly because the Nazis were anti-semitic and blamed them for many of Germany's troubles. Secondly, because the 'World Jewish Congress' a powerful group in the 30s and 40s issued a statement on behalf of the world's jews 'declaring war' on Germany in 1933. This was in response to Nazi anti-semitic rhetoric, but was unwise at it had the effect of instantly making internal enemies of all German Jews. As a result Nazi anti-semitic activity intensified.



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Thanks for taking the time the reply Kenochi.

It makes a change to read an articulate person's contrary views on this subject.

Very informative.

regards

beagle

pip pip !!



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by kenochi
I didn't say that Hilberg and Pressac denied the existence of gas chambers. I said that even they accept that evidence for them is virtually non-existent.

And yet they are the very sources that cite the photographs, blueprints, etc. And other sources site the forensic evidence for using cyanide gas in those chamers.



People seem to be having trouble reading what I'm writing without inventing extra stuff that I didn't actually say.

If you intend to say something, and no one understands it, perhaps its YOU that needs to rethink and be clearer.


Anyone objective reading this thread will see who is trying to
be logical and present rational arguments and who is arguing with hysteria and irrational hatred.

Indeed. Can you cite any evidence that shows there weren't homocidal gas chambers? That refutes the confessions of captured nazis, the testimonies of released prisoners, even the diaries written before the war was over by nazi commanders?


The Allies exaggerated Nazi war crimes for two reasons

How about demonstrating that they actually 'exxagerated' it before giving a rationalization for it?


Secondly, because the 'World Jewish Congress' a powerful group in the 30s and 40s issued a statement on behalf of the world's jews 'declaring war' on Germany in 1933.

That declartation of war was a boycott on German goods, placed by jews OUTSIDE of germany on germany because it was engaging in anti-semitic attacks on Jews. Germany attacked and vilified the jews, and some individuals responded by not doing business with germany.
The germans didn't throw them into ghettos and then concentration camps to prevent a boycott, that'd be STUPID of the germans, how can you prevent a boycott internally by throwing everyone in JAIL! You can't! They threw them into the camps becuase the next step was to throw them into the gas chambers and the ovens.



southernbelle82
Oh please the Red Cross visiting doesn't mean anything. It's like with Guntanamo Bay today

Infact, the Red Cross didn't visit the death camps, they were brought to POW camps and the like, but the nazis kept them from the crime.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 12:47 AM
link   
I'm a bit suprised that no one mentioned the acts of Josef Mengele, The Angel of Death and his cruel experiments to the twins in the camps...



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Nygdan,
Once again, I feel like I'm having to repeat myself to answer most of your points, which is quite frustrating. If we're going to debate this, which I'm happy to do, I'd appreciate it if you could make the effort to read what I write more carefully, so that we can actually get somewhere.
With regard to Hilberg and Pressac, you're right in one sense, they do obviously cite evidence in their books, including documents, eyewitness testimony, photographs etc. But what a critical thinker must do (and this is how history is supposed to work - and does, for all other topics except this one) is look at the individual pieces of evidence and ask 'evidence for what?' In other words, what specifically does that piece of evidence show. A photograph of inmates in camp uniform at Belsen, or lying on crowded bunks at Dachau, or getting off the train at Auschwitz doesn't prove anything about gas chambers. It proves that many people were imprisoned in the camp system in Germany. A document which talks vaguely about moving people around and uses terms like 'besonderhandlung' (special handling, special treatment) indicates that people were chosen for some sort of particular course of action, but again, it doesn't prove anything about gassing. A blueprint, which is of a crematoria with a morgue attached, shows that the camps were equipped to deal with inmate death, but doesn't prove anything about gassing. Eyewitness testimony which discusses train journeys, life in the camps and various forms of mistreatment proves that the Nazis were anti-semitic, but doesn't prove anything about gassing.
This is the nature of the evidence that Hilberg and Pressac and other historians present, because it is the only evidence that exists. In other words it is evidence for a 'Holocaust' if you want to call it that, in the sense that the Jews, among others were chosen to be removed from the German Reich to the East, via a network of camps, in which the conditions were often appalling and caused many of them to die. But I fail to understand how any rational human being can see this as evidence for the gas chambers.
In terms of the forensic evidence which you mention, there are many inconsistencies, tied up with which rooms are tested. Rooms which were used to disinfect and delouse clothing and bedding, which was the real purpose of Zyklon B - it was a fumigant and delousing agent, in common use in Europe at that time - obviously contain traces of it. There are many anomalies with most of the rooms alleged to be gas chambers (which were all either shower rooms, morgues or air-raid shelters) and this was picked up on in the Leuchter report, the report of Germar Rudolf and also an independent enquiry comissioned by the Polish government which corroborates Leuchter's findings, despite the campaign by the Holocaust industry to discredit him.
The question near the end of your post is a bizarre one and is indicative of the confusion and irrationality of one who blindly clings to a belief for emotional or personal reasons and is not prepared to listen to arguments to the contrary.
You ask me to prove that there weren't gas chambers!
This flies in the face of all epistemology and standard investigative method. Something has to be proven to have existed in order to be believed. That's how this sort of thing works. Its like me asking you to prove that aliens don't exist or that Atlantis didn't exist.
Investigation just doesn't work like that, Nygdan. If, like me, you contend that the case for the existence of gas chambers was never proven, because the evidence for them is so feeble, then you don't believe they existed. Serious, academic, unemotional history demands that we believe only that which can be proven to be true. As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, even historians on your side accept that we can't prove that gas chambers existed. For me, this is argument over.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 02:20 AM
link   
ran out of space there...
In terms of refuting the confessions of Nazis, I already mentioned a book called 'Legions of Death' in which the men who obtained some of the most famous Nazi confessions admit that they gained them through torture and death threats to families. The mere fact that this was done should raise susipicion. If a legal process has to resort to torture in order to prove its case, it suggests the lack of real proof.
Once you accept that the Nuremburg process was utterly corrupt, you can dismiss it as a valid source of evidence. This removes the confessions from the debate.
The eyewitness testimonies are much the same story. Firstly, there are hardly any that actually mention gas chambers and those that do are contradictory and unreliable. Again, this is accepted by standard holocaust historians and again I refer you to the quote I made in a previous post.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by kenochi
In terms of the forensic evidence which you mention, there are many inconsistencies, tied up with which rooms are tested. Rooms which were used to disinfect and delouse clothing and bedding, which was the real purpose of Zyklon B - it was a fumigant and delousing agent, in common use in Europe at that time - obviously contain traces of it. There are many anomalies with most of the rooms alleged to be gas chambers (which were all either shower rooms, morgues or air-raid shelters) and this was picked up on in the Leuchter report, the report of Germar Rudolf and also an independent enquiry comissioned by the Polish government which corroborates Leuchter's findings, despite the campaign by the Holocaust industry to discredit him.

www.holocaust-history.org...

Previously you have said yes, there were no gas chambers associated with crematoriums. Read through the link and it will show your a complex of 5 gas chambers associated with the crematorium at Dachau. 4 of them were undoubtedly used to delouse clothes and blankets. The other one was larger and uniquely different from the rest. Here's an excerpt:

A larger room adjacent to the four dis-infestation chambers is also a gas chamber but this one was designed specifically for homicidal purposes. Any doubts that this chamber is a gas chamber are rapidly dispelled upon viewing the exhaust vents on the ceiling of the room , the exhaust chimney on the roof , and the metal doors that are identical in design to those used by the dis-infestation gas chambers . It would appear that the fake shower heads on the ceiling of the chamber , the sign over the door stating Brausebad (shower room) and the smooth brick finish simulating tiling (see below) were part of an elaborate ploy to make the victims believe they were going to take a bath after having deposited their clothes in the passageway connecting the disinfestation chambers with the homicidal chamber.

Further evidence of its design as a homicidal chamber are the two bin-like drawers leading from the gas chamber to the exterior. The only possible explanation for these bins is that they were designed to receive the granules of Zyklon-B (or some other lethal volatile poison) from a small tin. The person in charge of a homicidal gassing need only don a gas mask, open the two bins, and dump part of a small tin of Zyklon-B into each one. Having done this, the operator would close the bins, which are protected from interference from the victims by a protective grating, and wait a few minutes until all the victims were dead. At this point, the powerful mechanical extractor could be energized sending the poisonous fumes into the atmosphere, drawing fresh air through a small hatchway located above the bins. The bodies could then be moved into the mortuary chamber to await incineration in the adjoining crematory furnaces.

.......A suspicious and heretofore unexplained structure bears mentioning.
photo 42

What appears to be a wooden screen blocking the area where the bin-like drawers are located on the eastern wall of the new crematorium (Baracke X) can be observed in photographs taken immediately after the camp was liberated by the Americans. (See also above.) This screen seems to be about 16 feet wide and six feet deep. It does not appear to have any roof-covering. If it was indeed a screen, it would have allowed operation of the bin-like drawers by one or more perpetrators without any possibility of being observed by any casual bystanders.



Riddle me this Kenochi, not only are there 5 gas chambers present with a crematoria, one of them is designed to look like a shower complex and is radically different from the others. If you read, the shower heads had no water lines attached to them. It also had a Zyklon B dispenser mechanism that is intentionally hidden from view from people on the outside of the building. On the inside the Zyklon B is protected by heavy metal grating, I guess so the clothes that were being fumigated could not reach in and throw the pellets out, right? It is plain that his one was designed for homicidal purposes.

To be fair to you, there is not overwhelming evidence that this chamber was used much if at all at Dachau. Never the less, it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Nazi's at Dachau designed and built a Gas Chamber which looked like a shower and was attached to a crematorium that was specifically designed for homicidal purposes.


Neither the reports by the U.S. Army, Father Hess nor Sack prove conclusively that the homicidal chamber was used to kill people. Until further evidence is discovered, historians will have to conform themselves with the knowledge that it was technically possible to have murdered human beings with poison gas in that room, and that the room, some 16x16x12ft high, was designed for the exclusive purpose of carrying out such a grim task. This circumstance does not free the perpetrators of their crimes. No matter in what manner the tens of thousands of unfortunate people in Dachau lost their lives, they were murdered as surely as if they had been placed in a gas chamber and asphyxiated with hydrogen cyanide gas. The intentional destruction of human life by whatever means is still murder. It is quite sufficient, for the moment, to demonstrate that the Nazis intended to use a homicidal gas chamber in Dachau, and that they designed, built and equipped such a chamber in the Dachau Concentration Camp.



Just on a side note, have you ever visited a Concentration Camp or Death Camp? I've have, it's quite an eye opener, I suggest you and everyone reading this do so, if you have not already.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Hi Pavil,
the gas chamber at Dachau is the subject of considerable controversy. Visitors to the camp now see a plaque on the door of the room which reads 'GAS CHAMBER - disguised as a 'shower room' - never used as a gas chamber.' This, in itself, is quite curious, but above this is a another sign which says 'Brausebad' (shower room).
This obviously is intended to create the impression that it was a disguised homicidal gas chamber, as per the Holocaust story. However, pictures of the room taken when the Americans liberated the camp in 1945 show a skull and crossbones on the door, with the words 'Gaskammer! Vorsicht Lebensgefahr!" which means 'Gas room! Danger to life!' (roughly). It appears that some tampering has gone on. As we already know (as admitted by Francisek Piper) that fake gas chambers were built at Auschwitz and other camps post war, by the allies (mainly the Poles and Russians) it is fairly likely the same thing happened there. At the very least, the signs on the door have been altered to fit the story. No-one would believe they are being taken for a shower in a room with a skull and crossbones on the door!
Anyway, even if we forget all that - and make the rather large leap of
faith required to assume that it is a genuine Nazi gas chamber - it would make it the only one they found, mysteriously left undestroyed, unlike all the others, and yet no-one thinks they used it. Doesn't that strike you as odd? Even Simon Wiesenthal, of all people, publicly stated in 1975 that 'there were no extermination camps on German soil'. (He and virtually all other holocaust spokesmen / historians believe all the extermninations were in Poland).
Originally, however, after the Nuremburg circus, Dachau was part of the legend. Nazis were tried and hanged for exterminations there. So why the change? I'm confused - I thought the story was set in stone. Does this make Wiesenthal (or Hilberg / Pressac / Lipstadt) a denier? Quick, arrest him! He's challenging the holocaust story! He's obviously an anti-semite! Or is that only some people are allowed to revise this piece of history?
And yes, coincidentally I've actually been to Dachau, as well as Sachsenhausen near Berlin. At the latter I was taken on a tour and shown the 'extermination facilities'. It seems no-one has told them that the legend doesn't include them any more.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by kenochi
A photograph of inmates in camp uniform at Belsen, or lying on crowded bunks at Dachau, or getting off the train at Auschwitz doesn't prove anything about gas chambers.


And thus you ignore the evidence for the gas chambers, and refute 'non-evidence'. Good job.



It proves that many people wer e imprisoned in the camp system in Germany.

Which, of course, is a terrible crime in the first place. And what were they there for, eh? Why would the nazis, after saying that 'we need to exterminate the jews', start rounding up jews. Why would they build gas chambers that are set up like showers, and connected to the camp morgue?


A document which talks vaguely about moving people around and uses terms like 'besonderhandlung' (special handling, special treatment) indicates that people were chosen for some sort of particular course of action, but again, it doesn't prove anything about gassing.
Correct. Its the gas chambers that prove that, its the requisition orders for air tight doors, the building of fake showers, the use of cyanide gas, the admissions from the nazis, etc, that shows that there were gas chambers.


A blueprint, which is of a crematoria with a morgue attached, shows that the camps were equipped to deal with inmate death,

And the attachement of gas chambers to it shows that they were dead via gassing.


Eyewitness testimony which discusses train journeys, life in the camps and various forms of mistreatment proves that the Nazis were anti-semitic, but doesn't prove anything about gassing.

The eye witness testimony from inmates and operators about gassing people to death certainly does. Again, you are 'refuting' arguements that aren't being used to show that there are gas chambers.



This is the nature of the evidence that Hilberg and Pressac and other historians present,

That is false. They present evidence for materials and structures that was for gassing human beings to death.


in which the conditions were often appalling and caused many of them to die.

6 million jews and 5 million non-german non-jews didn't die accidentally because of camp conditions. They were systematically exterminated.


But I fail to understand how any rational human being can see this as evidence for the gas chambers.

Any rational human being can see that the nazis were infact gassing them as part of a plot to exterminate them.


Rooms which were used to disinfect and delouse clothing and bedding, which was the real purpose of Zyklon B - it was a fumigant and delousing agent, in common use in Europe at that time - obviously contain traces of it. There are many anomalies with most of the rooms alleged to be gas chambers (which were all either shower rooms, morgues or air-raid shelters) and this was picked up on in the Leuchter report,


The Leuchter report is wrong, as has repeatedly been shown. And yet the holocaust deniers continue to prop it up, as if its accurate and correct. Leuchter infact was a fraud who claimed to have qualifications and degrees and standings that he never had.


www.nizkor.org...
with no formal training in either chemistry or toxicology (he obtained a BA in history in 1964), and yet he claims to be a professional engineer [...] unfamiliar with the most basic facts about the lethal gas Hydrogen Cyanide, including its flammability and the concentrations required for delousing purposes.




and also an independent enquiry comissioned by the Polish government which corroborates Leuchter's findings

The polish government independantly rejected Leuchter's findings.

www.nizkor.org...
& www.nizkor.org...
In his reasoning Leuchter (2) claims that the vestigial amounts of cyanide combinations detected by him in the materials from the chamber ruins are residues left after fumigations carried out in the Camp "once, long ago"(Item 14.004 of the Report). This is refuted by the negative results of the examination of the control samples from living quarters, which are said to have been subjected to a single gassing, and the fact that in the period of fumigation of the Camp in connection with a typhoid epidemic in mid-1942 there were still no crematoria in the Birkenau Camp. The first crematorium (Crematorium II) was put to use as late as 15 March 1943 and the others several months later.





The question near the end of your post is a bizarre one and is indicative of the confusion and irrationality of one who blindly clings to a belief for emotional or personal reasons and is not prepared to listen to arguments to the contrary.

Feel free to present them and I will listen to them.


You ask me to prove that there weren't gas chambers!
This flies in the face of all epistemology and standard investigative method.

You can show that there were no gas chambers by refuting the evidence FOR the gas chambers. If you aren't familiar with the evidence for the gas chambers then you're not really in a position to reject it now are you?


As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, even historians on your side accept that we can't prove that gas chambers existed.

That is flatly false. They never said that they didn't exist, they never said that they can't be shown to exist, they presented evidence demonstrating that they did exist, and they specifically concluded that they did exist.



In terms of refuting the confessions of Nazis, I already mentioned a book called 'Legions of Death'

"Legion of Death" can be safely rejected.


www.nizkor.org...
Deniers depend very heavily upon Hoess supposedly being coerced and fed a story. But they only have two pieces of evidence:


A lurid book by one Rupert Butler called Legions of Death. Butler tells of seeing Hoess beaten when he was first found. He makes no mention of the interrogators being Jewish agents in British uniform, of course.
And most importantly, Butler's version of what happened contradicts the deniers' hypothesis that Hoess was fed a story. Butler's book nowhere mentions Hoess being given a particular story to tell, it simply says Hoess was beaten.




in which the men who obtained some of the most famous Nazi confessions admit that they gained them through torture and death threats to families

How did they manage to torture the camp staff's requisition records and independent forensic evidence? How did they manage to beat a story out of Hoess that was confirmed by other witnesses and that was corroborated by all other lines of evidence?


www.nizkor.org...
The real answer is that this claim of "Jewish interrogators in British uniform" appears nowhere else in Holocaust-denier literature. This claim appears only in the "Q&A." There is no evidence whatsoever to support it.

In other words, someone just made it up. Later, someone else decided they'd better quietly drop the whole thing. How many of the other 65 Q&A are similar? We can't know, because they don't provide any evidence to back any of them up.

Regarding the Höss confession:
We must consider all information in context. There are numerous other testimonies which confirm the essential facts of Höss' confession. There are captured documents which speak very clearly of gassing and mass shooting

And

www.holocaust-history.org...
If there was an attempt by his Polish captors to falsify these memoirs or to have Höss lie, this information would have never appeared.[...]It appears that his harsh treatment was caused by Jewish sergeants in the arresting party whose parents had died at Auschwitz.[...]Höss was turned over to the International Military Tribunal to testify because the defense attorney for accused war criminal Ernst Kaltenbrunner, the former head of Reich Main Security, wanted him as a witness. Höss writes (180) that compared to where he had been before, "imprisonment with the IMT was like staying in a health spa." He was then handed over to the Poles to stand trial in Cracow, Poland. He describes (181) his first weeks in prison as "quite tolerable." However, the attitudes of the guards changed for the worse. Both he and Polish prisoners were mistreated. The prosecutor's office intervened and things changed. "I have to openly confess that I never would have expected to be treated so decently and so kindly in a Polish prison as I have been since the intervention of the prosecutor's office."




If a legal process has to resort to torture in order to prove its case, it suggests the lack of real proof.

Since they weren't tortured to give their confessions, it clearly can be accepted.

Again, this is accepted by standard holocaust historians

This is, once again, false. It might be accepted by holocaust denial "historians", like Leuchter, who have no qualifications and are clearly dishonest.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 02:29 PM
link   
jewish agents? that's funny. who would they have worked for? Jewtopia? Israel didn't exist at the time and I highly doubt there was some secret task force set up by the united synagogues.

Nygdan, thank you for responding in the three threads. It's not just the facts your posting but the willingness to even respond to some of these comments.
it's impressive on both fronts.

keep up the good fight.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Hi Nygdan,
I’m going to go through your reply point by point, as you did.

“And thus you ignore the evidence for the gas chambers, and refute 'non-evidence'. Good job.”
No, once again, you struggle with your reading. I am saying that this sort of evidence represents the vast majority of what Hilberg and Pressac present. There is very little evidence for the existence of gas chambers presented in their books. I will come back to this point later.

“Which, of course, is a terrible crime in the first place. And what were they there for, eh? Why would the nazis, after saying that 'we need to exterminate the jews', start rounding up jews. Why would they build gas chambers that are set up like showers, and connected to the camp morgue?”

I agree with you on the first bit – it was a terrible crime. Just perhaps not terrible enough to take territory in the Middle East to establish a Jewish state. The Nazis imprisoned Jews as part of the process of moving them East, into Russia and therefore off German soil. This is what the Final Solution was, as confirmed by the minutes of the Wannsee Conference.
Why would they build gas chambers that are set up like showers? They didn’t. Rather than making baseless assertions, go and find some real evidence or proof for the existence of homicidal gas chambers. You obviously have some that Hilberg, Pressac etc don’t. I haven’t seen any yet and I’ve been interested in this subject for a long time and I’ve read plenty of books from both sides of the debate.

“Correct. Its the gas chambers that prove that, its the requisition orders for air tight doors, the building of fake showers, the use of cyanide gas, the admissions from the nazis, etc, that shows that there were gas chambers.”

But Nygdan, there are no original gas chambers at any of the extermination camps. The requisition orders for air tight doors were for delousing rooms and air raid shelters. The building of fake showers is a vacuous allegation, which you can’t prove. The use of cyanide gas was part of the camp’s routine fumigations and the admissions from Nazis were made under duress.

“And the attachement of gas chambers to it shows that they were dead via gassing”
But none of the blueprints have homicidal gas chambers on them. They have morgues, delousing rooms etc.

“The eye witness testimony from inmates and operators about gassing people to death certainly does. Again, you are 'refuting' arguements that aren't being used to show that there are gas chambers.”
This kind of testimony is scant. Of the reams and reams of holocaust eyewitness statements, only a handful mention the gas chambers. They contradict each other and are unreliable. Here is the views of one of the judges from the War Crimes Trials…

‘The determination of guilt has, however confronted the court with extraordinarily difficult problems. Except for a few not very valuable documents, almost exclusively only witness testimonies were available to the court for the reconstruction of the deeds of the defendants. It is an experience of criminology that witness testimony is not among the best of evidence...Even the ideal witness, who only wishes to tell the truth and takes pains to explore his memory is prone to memory gaps and lapses. He risks the danger of of projecting onto other persons things which he actually has experienced himself and of assuming as his own experience things which were only related to him by others.
Usually, in such a trial there is available for the court's deliberations the corpse(s), the record of post mortem examination, the expert opinions of scientists on the causes of death and the manner in which the death occurred. There is available the murder weapon and fingerprints to identify the perpetrator and many more details at hand which provide proof to the court that the individual was the perpetrator of the deed.
All this was missing in this trial. We have no absolute evidence for the killings. We have only witness testimonies. However sometimes these testimonies were not as exact and precise as is necessary in murder trials...We have heard witnesses who at first appeared so reliable to the court but in examinations it was found that their declarations were not sound and did not correspond to objective truth...’

this is quoted in two books, Naumann p.412-413 and Laternser, p. 85.

Moving on…

“Deniers depend very heavily upon Hoess supposedly being coerced and fed a story. But they only have two pieces of evidence.”
Beisdes those two pieces of evidence if we analyse Hoess’ statement we see that…
In his Nuremburg affidavit, Hoess confessed to killing 3 million Jews and 1 million non-Jews while commandant at Auschwitz. The Auschwitz museum now states that 1.1 million people in total died there, mostly Jews. Why would Hoess exaggerate his own crimes unless he was being coerced?

Hoess states in his confession that it took ‘from 3 to 15 minutes’ to kill Jews in the gas chambers. And that the ‘sonderkommando’ would then enter the room to remove the bodies. No mention is made of gas extraction facilities and none can be seen at the ‘gas chamber’ shown to tourists at Auschwitz 1. Half an hour would not have been enough time for the gas to disperse, even with extraction fans. If Hoess’ statement were to be enacted, the sonderkommando would also have died, as would anyone standing in the vicinity when the door was opened. In another separate statement he said the sonderkommando performed this task ‘while smoking’ even though Zyklon B is flammable!

Hoess states that the time he was ordered to turn Auschwitz into a concentration camp in June 1941 and that at that time 3 other camps were already operating as extermination centres – Belzec, Treblinka and Wolzek. The fact is that Belzek and Treblinka did not open until 1942 and Wolzek is apparently something Hoess made up, it never existed and is not listed on any map.

There is more, but I won’t dwell on it too much. The Hoess affidavit is a ridiculous document!

I’m not going to start debating the Leuchter report with you, because it’ll just be a tedious ‘yes it is…no it isn’t’ conversation. I’ve read a translation of the Polish government’s report and can confirm that it broadly (not exactly) corroborates Leuchter despite what Nizkor say. Will try to find that for you.


With regard to the gas chambers and the plan to exterminate the Jews, you say…“That is flatly false. They never said that they didn't exist, they never said that they can't be shown to exist, they presented evidence demonstrating that they did exist, and they specifically concluded that they did exist.”
I am assuming you haven’t read Pressac’s or Hilberg’s books. Neither contains so much as a photograph, nor a drawing, nor a sketch, nor a model of a homicidal gas chamber. The few pages that actually discuss gas chambers do so purely on the basis of eyewitness testimony. Anyway, as I’m sure you don’t have the time to do the reading to support your semi hysterical nonsense, I will quote a few bits for you. I have their (and other relevant) books right here.

Read these and then tell me its ‘flatly false’. All of these are regular holocaust historians (not deniers).

“Sources for the study of gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable” Jacques Baynac
“what began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures. They [these measures] were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus -- mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy. In the final analysis, the destruction of the Jews was not so much a product of laws and commands as it was a matter of spirit, of shared comprehension, of consonance and synchronization.” Raul Hilberg
“At the Nuremberg Trials the judges failed to obtain unambiguous technical information on the machinery of mass murder" Jean Claude Pressac
“the history of the genocide and the homicidal gas chambers is mainly in the form of oral or written witness testimony, which is always fallible" Jean Claude Pressac
“On the 20th January the conference called "the Wannsee Conference" took place in Berlin. Even if an operation to remove the Jews to the east was planned which might entail the "natural" elimination of some through labor, no one there spoke of industrial mass-liquidation. In the days and the weeks that followed, the construction office at Auschwitz received no call, telegram or letter requesting the planning of an installation intended for this purpose” Pressac.
“At Auschwitz-Birkenau there was a high-performance sanitary complex due to be equipped with four rooms for disinfestation by hot air (document 23), three industrial autoclaves (document 24), a room for hair cutting, a room for medical examinations and fifty showers. With this complex the SS intended to deter the resurgence of typhus in Birkenau "definitively". The inmates were to be shaved, examined, disinfested and showered while their effects were disinfected.” Pressac again – sounds like a lot of trouble to go to, to stop people who you want to exterminate from getting typhus, don’t you think?
"In tens of thousands of [Nazi] documents, people were resettled or the Jewish problem was ‘solved' but the word killing was never used in reference to Jews." Raul Hilberg
"Hardly anything remains of entire structural complexes such as ghettos, camps, or mass graves. Most of these no longer exist. [...] The complexes of the three extermination camps in Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka were leveled to the ground before the advance of the Red Army. The bodies in most of the mass graves of Eastern Europe were systematically exhumed and burned by a special SS unit. Several sites, which were not destroyed by the Nazis, were immediately or subsequently redeveloped by the victorious Allies. [...] The mass graves at the Babi Jar gorge near Kyiv, where thirty thousand people were shot, are no longer in existence" Hilberg again – trotting out the standard story of why there is no evidence for gas chambers or exterminations.
As I have said several times now. Standard holocaust historians accept that the evidence is virtually non-existent. They just work their theories around this.
My contention is that the evidence is non-existent because the gas chambers were non-existent.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 03:59 PM
link   
this is an image of the sign over the gas chamber at dachau. the english translation - Shower bath. Not delousing room.



a close up of a "showerhead" in the gas chamber at dachau.




plan of gas chamber at Auschwitz. "entluftungskanal" means air extraction duct, and "Beluftung" means ventilation. Remains of the air-extraction system can still be seen in the ruins.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   
neither of the pictures you've posted of Dachau contradict anything I've said about it. The fascinating thing about your Auschwitz gas chamber bleprint is that its labelled with the word 'leichenkeller'. That means 'morgue'.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   
why have delousing rooms that are masked to look like showers?

why put the delousing room adjacent to the morgue and crematorium?

the blueprint is that of krema 2 at auschwitz. the nazi's might have labeled it differently on the document to mask what they were doing. much like their plan to relocate the jews was actually a plan to exterminate them.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   
stutter finger double post. my apologies


[edit on 3-3-2007 by Crakeur]



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 04:45 PM
link   
quote: Originally posted by kenochi

Hi Pavil,
the gas chamber at Dachau is the subject of considerable controversy. ....This obviously is intended to create the impression that it was a disguised homicidal gas chamber, as per the Holocaust story. However, pictures of the room taken when the Americans liberated the camp in 1945 show a skull and crossbones on the door, with the words 'Gaskammer! Vorsicht Lebensgefahr!" which means 'Gas room! Danger to life!' (roughly).

Please provide documentation for that claim.


It appears that some tampering has gone on. As we already know (as admitted by Francisek Piper) that fake gas chambers were built at Auschwitz and other camps post war, by the allies (mainly the Poles and Russians) it is fairly likely the same thing happened there.

Sorry, that line of logic does not work at Dachau.

Plans were drawn up in April, 1942 for a more efficient four-furnace crematory which, from its early planning days, incorporated five gas chambers. 14 On July 23, 1942, the order was issued from the SS Headquarters in Berlin to commence construction of the crematorium at a cost of RM150,000. 15


Unless the Allies were able to build them in Germany proper in 1942, I'll have to assume it was the Germans doing it.


Anyway, even if we forget all that - and make the rather large leap of
faith required to assume that it is a genuine Nazi gas chamber - it would make it the only one they found, mysteriously left undestroyed, unlike all the others, and yet no-one thinks they used it. Doesn't that strike you as odd? Even Simon Wiesenthal, of all people, publicly stated in 1975 that 'there were no extermination camps on German soil'. (He and virtually all other holocaust spokesmen / historians believe all the extermninations were in Poland).

Cmon, we both know the history of Dachau, it was one of the first concentration/labor camps, first started in 1933. It was not a Death Camp/Extermination Camp in the manner the term is used which is why Mr. Wiesenthal can make the claim that he did.

Dachau was not used to exterminate people, just cruelly starve and work them to death. That is still had the capabilty to carry out mass killings of prisoners via the chambers and crematoria should show that other camps had the same facilites, yet you deny this simpy from the fact that German guards at other camps destroyed the evidence by blowing up the buildings. What exactly were the buildings the Germans blew up in your opinion?


Originally, however, after the Nuremburg circus, Dachau was part of the legend. Nazis were tried and hanged for exterminations there.

Forgive me for my ignorance on the exact details of the Dachau Nazi's. My best guess is that they were charged with the willful neglect, murder and starvation of somewhere between 20,000 and 230,000 people. That gets them the gallows as far as I care, regardless of the method of death.


And yes, coincidentally I've actually been to Dachau, as well as Sachsenhausen near Berlin. At the latter I was taken on a tour and shown the 'extermination facilities'. It seems no-one has told them that the legend doesn't include them any more.


Good for you, at least you have seen them first hand. You still doubt that the Nazi's had deadly intentions for the inmates of most of these camps?


Extract from the trial of Anton Kaindl, former commandant of Sachsenhausen Death Camp
Public Prosecutor: What kind of exterminations were committed in your camp?
- Kaindl: Until mid of 1943, prisoners were killed by shooting or hanging. For the mass exterminations, we used a special room in the infirmary. There was a height gauge and a table with an eye scope. There were also some SS wearing doctor uniforms. There was a hole at the back of the height gauge. While a SS was measuring the height of a prisoner, another one placed his gun in the hole and killed him by shooting in his neck. Behind the height gauge there was another room where we played music in order to cover the noise of the shooting.
- Public Prosecutor: Do you know if there was already an extermination procedure in Sachsenhausen when you became commandant of the camp?
- Kaindl: Yes, there were several procedures. With the special room in the infirmary, there was also an execution place where prisoners were killed by shooting, a mobile gallows and a mechanical gallows which was used for hanging three or four prisoners at the same time.
- Public Prosecutor: Did you change anything in these extermination procedures?
- Kaindl: In march 1943, I introduced gas chambers for the mass exterminations.
- Public Prosecutor: Was it your own decision?
- Kaindl: Partially yes. Because the existing installations were too small and not sufficient for the exterminations, I decided to have a meeting with some SS officers, including the SS Chief Doctor Baumkotter. During this meeting, he told me that poisoning of prisoners by prussic acid in special chambers would cause an immediate death. After this meeting, I decided to install gas chambers in the camp for mass extermination because it was a more efficient and more humane way to exterminate prisoners.
- Public Prosecutor: Who was responsible for the extermination?
- Kaindl: The commandant of the camp.
- Public Prosecutor: So, it was you?
- Kaindl: Yes.
- Public Prosecutor: How many prisoners were exterminated in Sachsenhausen while you were commandant of the camp?
- Kaindl: More than 42,000 prisoners were exterminated under my command, this number include 18.000 killed in the camp itself.
- Public Prosecutor: And how many prisoners died by starvation during this same period?
- Kaindl: I think 8,000 prisoners died by starvation during this period.
- Public Prosecutor: Accused Kaindl, did you receive the order to destroy any evidence of the murders committed in the camp?
- Kaindl: Yes. On February 1st, 1945, I had a conversation with the chief of the Gestapo, Muller. He ordered me to destroy the camp with artillery bombing, aerial bombing or by spraying gas. But due to technical problems, this order coming directly from Himmler was impossible to fulfill.
- Public Prosecutor: Suppose that there was no technical problem, would you have carried out this order?
- Kaindl: Of course. But it was impossible. An artillery or an aerial bombing was impossible to hide from the local population. And spraying gas was too dangerous for the local population and the SS.
- Public Prosecutor: What did you do then?
- Kaindl: I had a meeting with Hohn and some others SS and I ordered to exterminate all the ill prisoners, those who were unable to work and, the most important, all the political prisoners.
- Public Prosecutor: Was this order fulfilled?
- Kaindl: Yes, partially. During the night of February 2th, the first prisoners were killed. There were plus or minus 150 prisoners. Until end of March 1945, we succeed in killing more than 5,000 prisoners.
- Public Prosecutor: Who was in charge of this operation?
- Kaindl: Accused Hohn was in charge of this operation.
- Public Prosecutor: How many prisoners were in the camp at this time?
- Kaindl: Approximately 45,000. On April 18th I was ordered to embark all the prisoners on barges and to conduct the barge on the Baltic sea where I had to sink it. But we had not enough time to find enough barges for so many prisoners because the Red Army was advancing too fast.
- Public Prosecutor: What happened then?
- Kaindl: I ordered the evacuation of all the prisoners able to walk, first in direction of Wittstock, then to Lubeck where they had to embark on ships and sunk.
- Public Prosecutor: Did the prisoners received any care during this evacuation?
- Kaindl: No. 7,000 prisoners received nothing because we had nothing to give them.
[url=http://www.jewishgen.org/forgottencamps/Camps/SachsenhausenEng.html]http:/



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join