Hunts Majdanek film.

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
User avatar
Nessie
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Nessie » Tue Dec 09, 2014 8:13 pm

I watch Eric Hunt's Majdanek film

http://holocausthoaxmuseum.com/majdanek ... mber-myth/

and have come to the conclusion that he makes a very good case that it was not a death camp where people were gassed in homicidal gas chambers.

Discuss.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1176
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Mary Q Contrary » Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:53 am

Nessie wrote:I watch Eric Hunt's Majdanek film

http://holocausthoaxmuseum.com/majdanek ... mber-myth/

and have come to the conclusion that he makes a very good case that it was not a death camp where people were gassed in homicidal gas chambers.

Discuss.

I guess nobody wants to talk about Madjanek. Maybe everybody thinks you've crossed over to the darkside and so they're shunning you. Maybe everybody watched the video and are thinking "Holy crap! Madjanek really wasn't a death camp. This is terrible. We must not draw attention to this information or it's over for us." So you're getting the silent treatment. Some people are no doubt wondering why you suddenly started hating Jews. Or maybe the call to "discuss" is too generic. What specific points about this video do you find credible?
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19641
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby scrmbldggs » Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:55 am

Mary Q Contrary wrote:...
I guess nobody wants to talk about Madjanek. Maybe everybody thinks you've crossed over to the darkside and so they're shunning you. Maybe everybody watched the video and are thinking "Holy crap! Madjanek really wasn't a death camp. This is terrible. We must not draw attention to this information or it's over for us." So you're getting the silent treatment. Some people are no doubt wondering why you suddenly started hating Jews. Or maybe the call to "discuss" is too generic...

Udder nonsense.
Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26383
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Dec 11, 2014 2:40 am

Mary Q Contrary, the holocaust denier wrote:Maybe everybody thinks you've crossed over to the darkside and so they're shunning you.
No. It uses the 1972 Hollywood movie, Slaughterhouse Five to describe the "showers" at Majdanek. That is, in fact a film set. Eric is quite mad.

The rest of the film is the same footage from his previous films. Have you watched this film yourself Mary? Are you prepared to answer questions about it?


That's a "No" isn't it?
:mrgreen:

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:34 am

Mary Q Contrary wrote:I guess nobody wants to talk about Madjanek. . . .

Except for here in a post I made on the IMT and Majdanek, remember?, where you went quiet after your attempt to defend David's lies fell flat.

And here and here and here and here and here and the dozen or so other posts I've made discussing aspects of the Majdanek camp and the numerous spots in the Arad's Goof thread where I posted on Majdanek and even here, in the first thread on this topic. Or is it necessary that we have two threads on this topic - and that all of us reply in both of them?

That said, while I have comments to make about Majdanek, and have made a number in this subforum, I haven't seen Hunt's latest video - I'm prioritizing my time, and his earlier videos were such rubbish that, based on that experience, I am not keen to waste more time on his stuff right now. So, unlike you guys who witter on about the "official" histories you haven't read, I don't have anything to say about a video I haven't watched - or about Nessie's opinion of it. Sheesh.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26383
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:55 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote: I haven't seen Hunt's latest video
It's almost the same video as the last one, talking about steam rooms and other insane rubbish.

David and Mary haven't watched any of them. That's what makes them so funny.

User avatar
Nessie
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Nessie » Thu Dec 11, 2014 11:39 am

I say that his point about reversing the direction of travel from the way the museum has it and the combining of the chambers with the rest of the building, which was not the case during the war is very good evidence the museum has been very dishonest.

http://holocausthoaxmuseum.com/wp-conte ... lublin.jpg

If you put the gas chambers back as they were here

http://www.majdanek.eu/images/media/maj ... s/0051.jpg

and separate from the rest of the building, entry is from the right (fence side), undress, clothes back out to be disinfected, shower, dress again, out in to the camp.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby David » Fri Dec 12, 2014 1:34 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:where you went quiet after your attempt to defend David's lies fell flat.


??? Hitting the Eggnog, SM?
You should watch Mr. Hunt's video and learn something.
The background is that various media and the Soviets claimed that
1.5 million people had been murdered at Majdanek; there was human fertilizer
being produced and that hundreds of thousands of bodies were buried at the
Camp.

The Nuremberg Tribunal repeated the "Human Fertilizer" Tale in its Judgment.
It accepted into evidence the rest of the Soviet exhibits including the crap about
1.4 million dead.

I know, "Hilberg got the figures for Jewish deaths long ago (50,000)"
You totally miss the obvious. Yes, anyone who looked at the Camp records
could see how dishonest and exaggerated the evidence accepted by the
Nuremberg Tribunal was.
So the new figure is a tragic but "normal" 78,000, not 1.4 million or Crazy Judge Lukaszkiewicz's 360,000.

As the official death toll dropped, so did the number of "gas chambers."

The Human Fertilizer Factory Tale has been sent to the Memory Hole.
And the Tale of Seven "gas chambers" killing people around the
clock has transmogrified into a tale of 1 part-time Gas Chamber-
That would be Bath and Disinfection 1

Mr. Hunt has done a very good job of using documents, photographs, physical
evidence, and the layout of the Camp to show that Bath and Disinfection 1 could not have been a mass "gas chamber."

But this is only logical given the huge drop in the official Death Toll.


User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 12, 2014 2:08 am

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:where you went quiet after your attempt to defend David's lies fell flat.


??? . . . You should watch Mr. Hunt's video . . . The background is that various media and the Soviets claimed that 1.5 million people had been murdered at Majdanek; there was human fertilizer being produced and that hundreds of thousands of bodies were buried at theCamp.

But, David, that isn't what we were discussing. The claim you made was not about accusations advanced after the war and/or at the IMT but about conclusions drawn by the IMT in its final judgment - as you put it when you claimed:
At the Nuremberg Tribunal the Court entered into its Judgment the supposed fact that 1,400,000 people were killed at Majdanek and turned into fertilizer.

Does Hunt's video say where the IMT judgment stated these conclusions?

David wrote: The Nuremberg Tribunal repeated the "Human Fertilizer" Tale in its Judgment.

Citation please. Page number and quoted text from the judgment - showing where the judgment stated that the bodies of those killed at Majdanek were used as fertilizer. Simple, David, page number and quote.

David wrote: It accepted into evidence the rest of the Soviet exhibits including the crap about1.4 million dead.

David, is this your way of admitting you lied about what's in the judgment?

No, it is not lost on me that you're back-pedaling now to saying you weren't talking about what "the Nuremberg Tribunal" "entered into its Judgment" but rather you want us to believe that you were referring to the IMT's allowing a charge to be made and evidence admitted - and then the IMT's not citing the accusation or evidence about it in its judgment. So when you wrote that the IMT stated 1.4 million murdered in its judgment you were trying to say that the IMT didn't state this in its judgment? Kind of weird but . . .

By the way, isn't that what courts do - decide about charges against people, accepting what's proven and not accepting what isn't proven? Do you imagine that if a court hears a charge and looks at evidence it thereby accepts the charge?

David, yes or no, is it true that, as you wrote
At the Nuremberg Tribunal the Court entered into its Judgment the supposed fact that 1,400,000 people were killed at Majdanek . . .

A simple answer . . . yes or no.

David wrote: I know, "Hilberg got the figures for Jewish deaths long ago (50,000)"
You totally miss the obvious. Yes, anyone who looked at the Camp records could see how dishonest and exaggerated the evidence accepted by the Nuremberg Tribunal was.

Only (a) the IMT's hearing a charge is not the same as the IMT's accepting the accusation as true, of course, which means that the IMT judgment didn't provide what you think of as an "official" number of victims, and (b) Hilberg's estimate was made in 1961, so, contrary to your implications, not only do we have no official, IMT estimate but we have an "early" estimate that is very close to the museum's current estimate. In 1961 the leading "Believer" historian was using basically the same "revised" numbers of 2014 . . . Your whole gambit has fallen apart.

David wrote:Mr. Hunt has done a very good job of using documents, photographs, physical evidence, and the layout of the Camp to show that Bath and Disinfection 1 could not have been a mass "gas chamber."

Go ahead. Summarize for us. But recall, the number of gas chambers wasn't established by Hunt. Have you even read Kranz's book?

David wrote:But this is only logical given the huge drop in the official Death Toll.

Which never existed.

An important issue here, which should not get lost in your hand-waving, is that the continuing study of Majdanek, confirming some of Hilberg's 1961 conclusions, leaves us with 5+ million Jews killed in the Holocaust, given that Hilberg's 5.1 million estimate included the low estimate for the camp.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby David » Fri Dec 12, 2014 6:00 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Does Hunt's video say where the IMT judgment stated these conclusions?


Hello SM- You should watch the video and learn something.
Statistical Mechanic wrote:But, David, that isn't what we were discussing.


"we?" You have a mouse in your pocket, SM?
We (as in following the thread) were discussing the last Majdanek Gas Chamber.
Rather than babbling on about the IMT or Hilberg maybe you should reread
Nessie's comment and then watch the video?

If you find anything inaccurate in Mr. Hunt's video, I am sure you will let us know.


David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby David » Fri Dec 12, 2014 6:07 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote: David wrote: The Nuremberg Tribunal repeated the "Human Fertilizer" Tale in its Judgment.


Citation please. Page number and quoted text from the judgment


"After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer, and in some instances attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap.

IMT, vol. 1, p. 252.



User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19641
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby scrmbldggs » Fri Dec 12, 2014 6:21 am

:yawn:




BTW, David... Hellooooo, over here...
David wrote:...
"we?" You have a mouse in your pocket, SM?...

...yes, there are other people posting on this board, talking to you. You never noticed while talking to yourself?
Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26383
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Dec 12, 2014 6:42 am

David, the lying holocaust denier wrote:If you find anything inaccurate in Mr. Hunt's video, I am sure you will let us know.
Former psychiatric patient and convicted criminal, Eric Hunt, uses footage from the 1972 Hollywood movie "Slaughterhouse Five" as his example of real showers. It's a film set.

Have you watched Eric Hunt, the loony's, propaganda film yourself Yes or No?
Dopey the holocaust denier.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
iwh
Poster
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby iwh » Fri Dec 12, 2014 9:12 am

David wrote:
"After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer, and in some instances attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap.

IMT, vol. 1, p. 252.




Where does it mention that the ashes were from 1.4 million bodies and that, moreover, they originated from Majdanek?

Thanks.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 12, 2014 10:39 am

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Does Hunt's video say where the IMT judgment stated these conclusions?


Hello SM- You should watch the video and learn something.

I asked you a question: Does Hunt's video answer the question I asked you about what's in the IMT's judgment? You are dodging my question.

David wrote:"we?" You have a mouse in your pocket, SM?
We (as in following the thread) were discussing the last Majdanek Gas Chamber.
Rather than babbling on about the IMT or Hilberg maybe you should reread Nessie's comment and then watch the video?

David, as always, let's finish old business before taking up new business. Yes, I asked you, and then discussed this with Maryzilla who was stupid enough to challenge me, about your twin claims on what the IMT said in its judgment about 1.4 million deaths at Majdanek and the use of humans killed at Majdanek for fertilizer.

Also, you repeated your claim and then reformulated it in this thread, in the post I was replying to.

It's clear to us all that you lack the guts to answer what I asked you:
David, is this your way of admitting you lied about what's in the judgment? . . . By the way, isn't that what courts do - decide about charges against people, accepting what's proven and not accepting what isn't proven? Do you imagine that if a court hears a charge and looks at evidence it thereby accepts the charge?

And:
David, yes or no, is it true that, as you wrote
At the Nuremberg Tribunal the Court entered into its Judgment the supposed fact that 1,400,000 people were killed at Majdanek . . .

A simple answer . . . yes or no.

For your continued lying about your claim that the IMT cited the use of corpses from Majdanek for fertilizer, see next post.

Mainly, stop waffling and pretending you don't know what I'm asking you. Grow a pair and give a direct, honest reply.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 12, 2014 10:44 am

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote: David wrote: The Nuremberg Tribunal repeated the "Human Fertilizer" Tale in its Judgment.

Citation please. Page number and quoted text from the judgment


"After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer, and in some instances attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap.

IMT, vol. 1, p. 252.

David, please do not ever again quote out of context to support one of your lies.

You wrote:
At the Nuremberg Tribunal the Court entered into its Judgment the supposed fact that 1,400,000 people were killed at Majdanek and turned into fertilizer.

And I asked you to give a citation and, as though I knew you'd try to pull this crap, I specifically requested that you provide the
Page number and quoted text from the judgment - showing where the judgment stated that the bodies of those killed at Majdanek were used as fertilizer.

(boldface added)

You quoted a statement from the IMT's judgment making statements about Auschwitz and other camps, and not even mentioning Majdanek, to answer a question you were asked about Majdanek. And thought you'd get away with it?

I will help out here by quoting from the relevant passage in the IMT's judgment, at some length. To assure you, prior to where the quoted text begins, on pp 250 and 251, the judgment discusses, in this order, German implementation of ghettos and the yellow star, Eichmann's office and role in the final solution, Stroop's report on Warsaw, the Einsatzgruppen extermination of Jews in the Baltics, German army collaboration with police units in the murder of Jews in the East, and police unit killings at Rowno and Dubno (for example).

Please tell us where in the passage you cited the tribunal addresses the use of corpses of those killed at Majdanek (boldface added to highlight your dishonest quoting):
[page 251]. . . Certain concentration camps such as Treblinka and Auschwitz were set aside for this main purpose. With regard to Auschwitz, the Tribunal heard the evidence of Hoss, the commandant of the camp from 1May 1940. to 1 December 1943. He estimated that in the camp of Auschwitz
alone in that time 2,500,000 persons were exterminated, and that a further 500,000 died from disease and starvation. Hoss described the screening for extermination by stating in evidence:
"We had two SS doctors on duty at Auschwitz to examine the incoming transports of prisoners. The prisoners would be marched by one of the doctors who would make spot decisions as they walked by. Those who were fit for work were sent into the camp. Others were sent immediately to the exterinination plants. Children of tender years were invariably exterminated since by reason of their youth they [page 252] were unable to work. Still another improvement we made over Treblinka was that at Treblinka the victims almost always knew that they were to be exterminated and at Auschwitz we endeavored to fool the victims into thinking that they were to go through a delousing process. Of course, frequently they realized our true intentions and we sometimes had riots and difficulties due to that fact. Very frequently women would hide their children under their clothes, but of course when we found them-we would 'send the children in to be exterminated."
He described the actual killing by stating:
"It took from three to fifteen minutes to kill the people in the death chamber, depending upon climatic conditions. We knew when the people were dead because their screaming stopped. We usually waited about one half-hour before we opened the doors and removed the bodies. After the bodies were removed our special commandos took off the rings and extracted the gold from the teeth of the corpses."
Beating, starvation, torture, and killing were The inmates were subjected to cruel experiments at Dachau in August 1942, victims were immersed in cold water until fheir body temperature was reduced to 28 O Centigrade, when they died immediately. Other experiments included high altitude experiments in pressure cham- bers, experiments to determine how long human beings could sur- vive in freezing.water, experiments with poison bullets, experiments with contagious diseases, and experiments dealing with sterilization of men and women by X-rays and other methods.
Evidence was given of the treatment of the inmates before and after their extermination. There was testimony that the hair of women victims was cut off before they were killed, and shipped to Germany, there to be used in the manufacture of mattresses. The clothes, money, and 'valuables of the inmates were also salvaged and sent to the appropriate agencies for disposition. After the extermination the gold teeth and fillings were taken from the heads of the corpses and sent to the Reichsbank. After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer, and in some instances attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap. Special groups traveled through Europe to find Jews and subject them to the "final solution" German missions were sent to such satellite coun- tries as Hungary and Bulgaria, to arrange for the shipment of Jews to extermination camps and it is known that by.the end of 1944, 400,000 Jews from Hungary had been murdered at Auschwitz. Evidence has also been given of the evacuation of 110,000 Jews from part of Rumania for "liquidation". Adolf Eichmann, who had been put in charge of this programme by Hitler, has estimated that the policy pursued resulted in the killing of 6,000,000 Jews, of which 4.000.000 were killed in the extermination institutions.

same citation as yours, but here's a link: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/judwarcr.asp#persecution

Now, one more time, please tell us where in this passage, or anywhere else, the IMT judgment states that bodies of those killed at Majdanek were used for fertilizer.

After you do that, since you've now shown us you do know what the judgment is, please tackle the request made of you concerning the IMT's supposed inclusion in its judgment of a murder toll at Majdanek of 1.4 million.

(To be clear, fact-checking you is not the same as "defending" all the points made in the IMT's judgment; that's a different topic - the question here concerns your claims about the so-called official story about Majdanek - and you're failing, lad.)
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Nessie
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Nessie » Fri Dec 12, 2014 12:03 pm

I say that Hunt has presented sufficient evidence to say that the museum authorities have gone with doctored delousing facilities and propaganda to claim that there were homicidal gas chambers at Majdanek.

This is what happened

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org ... ylife.html

"As in every concentration camp, the newly arrived were subjected to the ritual of reception.
After passing through the camp gate, the new arrivals were directed to barrack 44, where they had to surrender all they had with them and on them.
Naked – whatever the season of the year or weather conditions – they were rushed, with shouting and beatings to the nearby bathhouse, where all their body hair was removed, most frequently with dull razors, which caused acute pain.
From there they were taken to the neighbouring room to take a bath. They first underwent disinfection by submerging in concrete tubs filled with a Lysol solution. Next came the bath proper, which according to prisoners accounts, rarely occurred without various harassments.
For example, hot water alternated with cold water, and so on. After such a “purification” , the prisoners were issued with rags, most often in the wrong size, to replace the clothes worn previously.
Division lll, which thenceforth took responsibility for the prisoner, directed them to the assigned compound and barrack. There followed registration, where numerous forms were filled in with personal details."

This needs to be accepted as the case for all of the supposed gas chambers;

"There was one further possible gas chamber in the bath barrack. It adjoined the shower room and may have been adapted for the use of Zyklon B, as indicated by two openings in the roof through which the gas could be poured, and openings in the wall through which hot air could be blown. It was a makeshift chamber which may have begun functioning before the other three chambers were commissioned. Even today it is not known for certain if this gas chamber was used for extermination purposes."
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 12, 2014 4:59 pm

Nessie,

I confess that I can't follow your points in this thread. I think you need to flesh them out a bit for me to understand what's persuaded you.

First, you've concluded that the Majdanek state museum is "very dishonest" (your words) and that there is, you write,
sufficient evidence to say that the museum authorities have gone with doctored delousing facilities and propaganda to claim that there were homicidal gas chambers at Majdanek.

What is your basis for making such charges? What is this evidence?

Your reasoning isn't clear to me. You seem to confuse the memorial and how the bunker complex is presented today with historical evidence for what went on at the complex. Are you arguing that the reconstruction is the basis for the museum's conclusion that there was a bunker for gassing people at the end of the bathhouse barracks?

I ask in part because museum director Tomasz Kranz (The Extermination of Jews at Majdanek Concentration Camp, p 47) states forthrightly that the reconstruction differs to the actual contemporary configuration of the gas chambers and bathhouses (more below on this). On his website, Hunt himself notes that signage at the camp also explains that the structures were modified after the war, although Hunt describes this, without evidence, as covering for Soviet machinations. Even the tour guides, according to Hunt, inform visitors of these modifications.

Not only is it a curious propaganda attempt that "admits" its technique and "warns" viewers about them, but also, as I read Kranz’s book, he doesn't rely on the museum installation as evidence. He has other sources, which he enumerates and which you don't mention.

As an aside, let’s talk a bit about dishonesty and who is being dishonest. I am thinking of Hunt’s website in suggesting we do this. For example, Hunt claims kudos for revs:
Holocaust Revisionists or “Holocaust Deniers” claim they were simply rooms used for delousing inmate clothing and no inmates, Jewish or otherwise were “gassed” with the insecticide Zyklon B here.

Really? But so, strictly speaking, does the museum’s director, a point Hunt neglects to mention. Kranz (pp 46-47) writes that the rooms outfitted for Zyklon B were most likely not used in the homicide program, only the rooms for murder using CO, so Hunt’s point here is a strawman and deceit by omission.

Hunt also says that
These alleged “homicidal gas chamber doors” are and were able to be seen directly outside by any Poles in the surrounding suburb of the city of Lublin. 
These rooms were not secret at all. They were the first structure one could see from the outside of the camp entrance.

According to Kranz (pp 46-47), however, the bunker with the gas chambers “was fenced off with barbed wire and a wooden fence. There was a gate in the fence on the south side, wide enough to allow a truck through.” The absence today of the fencing described by Kranz tells us nothing about the camp when it was being operated. Again, Hunt is being disingenuous. He doesn’t even mention Kranz’s detail on this or attempt to rebut it. You might also look at Kranz's further discussion of murder-camouflage measures, including night-time killings and the use of tractor or engines to drown out noise, pp 59-61.

Now, to Hunt’s major point:
The Soviet Union’s propaganda artists, seemingly in 1946 ( a year after the end of WW2) modified the structure to join the clothing delousing gas chambers with the bath barracks in order to connect them, to imply they served a homicidal rather than hygienic purpose. These were separate buildings before the Soviet Union’s convenient “storm” which destroyed parts of the original structure allowed them to modify the buildings to further frame the Germans.

This argument loses me, Nessie. Yes, as the museum director and signage state, the complex was modified after the war. But Hunt doesn’t share the following detail: according to Kranz (p 47), the women’s barrack (no. 42) was connected to the gas chambers by a wooden landing but it was only the men’s bathhouse (barrack no. 41) that was not connected during the camp's operation and where the postwar modifications/walls joining the two structures were made. Here is what Kranz says,
The exit from the female bathhouse (barracks No. 42) and the doors to both chambers were connected by a 1.5 metre-wide wooden landing. . . . The bunker itself was not - as can be seen today - connected to the male bathhouse (barracks No. 41) with wooden walls. They were erected during repair and conservation work.

I don't know whether Kranz is correct (more below).

Furthermore, an argument that people weren’t gassed in the bunker because of the current configuration and what tourists see is rather unconvincing. The conclusion Kranz draws, for example, that people were gassed in the bunker isn’t based on the current layout of the memorial with the attaching walls - who would base historical work on a memorial layout without looking at the site's history? As I’ve suggested, Kranz explicitly dismisses the memorial as a source and uses other evidence. It is that evidence, not the current layout, you need to address to understand what happened at the site when it was in operation.

Can you disentangle for us the memorial versus evidence for/against the bunker as where people were killed by gas? Why do you think that the memorial's presentation is dispositive for what occurred at the site during the war?

(Three more asides: 1) Kranz discusses that the CO containers used in the gassing were missing from the complex by liberation - p 56; again, Hunt seems to be arguing with a chimera, the memorial presentation rather than the history. 2) Hunt’s diagrams do not align with what Kranz has written: according to Kranz the large gas chamber to the west was for CO gassing, not Zyklon B. One of the two small rooms to the east was for Zyklon B - not used, the other for CO. 3) Also, as to Hunt’s reasoning that this bunker with its gas chambers must have been used for disinfection, because prison camps disinfect, which reasoning you seem to have adopted, it should be noted that Kranz has identified, following Marszalek’s 1969 study and citing prisoner testimony, a number of structures as disinfection chambers, such as ones in the two interfields formerly thought to have been for murder, pp 41-44; in other words, that the camp can be expected to have some disinfection sites doesn't mean that this particular site was for disinfection.)

Second, I couldn't follow your reasoning, which you supported with a photo of the gas chambers, about the route taken by inmates through the bathhouse-bunker complex. I can't understand your post on this without a fuller explanation of why you leap from "postwar reconstruction" to dishonest frame-up.

To begin to make sense of what you wrote, as I've not studied this camp layout in detail you have, could you please explain what we are seeing on the photo of the gas chambers which you described as shown historically accurately ("the gas chambers back as they were")? What is the orientation of the structure relative to the bathhouses, what are the features we can see? Why in your view is this photograph determinative of anything to do with whether people were gassed and the route taken by inmates through this complex?

Also, Hunt claims that the path taken by tourists today differs to the route taken by inmates of Majdanek. Since Hunt doesn’t tell us how he knows the historical route, but you agree with him, and since you both find the memorial's logistics significant to determining the facts of what happened in the 1940s, please share with us your source for what route prisoners took through the bathhouse-bunker complex.

It would also be good to understand better why the postwar conjoining of one barracks for undressing to the gas chambers weighs so heavily with you: I fail to see how this postwar change - adding walls for the barracks nearest the gas chamber - suggests anything about the use of the two structures.

Thanks in advance for providing more of your thinking and evidence, so I can understand why you find convincing what seems to me anything but.

(edits for typos and clarity)
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sat Dec 13, 2014 1:47 am, edited 3 times in total.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Human Fertilizer

Postby David » Fri Dec 12, 2014 9:26 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Page number and quoted text from the judgment - showing where the judgment stated that the bodies of those killed at Majdanek were used as fertilizer.


So you are confused about the reference in the Judgment?
After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer,
IMT, vol. 1, p. 252.
Do you THINK that it refers to anything else besides the "evidence" presented by
the Soviets.
Please don't play dumber than you are.

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby David » Fri Dec 12, 2014 9:37 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:You seem to confuse the memorial and how the bunker complex is presented today with historical evidence for what went on at the complex.


You can't be THAT stupid, SM. How the bath house is
"presented today" is presented as evidence of what went on at the complex.
Even you have to admit that having glass windows in a mass gas chamber
doesn't make sense.
Putting a few canisters of CO2 in a room and calling them "Carbon-monoxide"
is pretty lame.

You really should watch Mr. Hunt' film.
As a starting point look at how the two bath houses have mirror image construction.
Think the Germans were trying to save on architect fees?

And how about the distance to the cremation area?
Let's drive the bodies around the Camp a few times!





User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Human Fertilizer

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 12, 2014 9:38 pm

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Page number and quoted text from the judgment - showing where the judgment stated that the bodies of those killed at Majdanek were used as fertilizer.


So you are confused about the reference in the Judgment?
After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer,
IMT, vol. 1, p. 252.
Do you THINK that it refers to anything else besides the "evidence" presented by
the Soviets.
Please don't play dumber than you are.

Excuse me. It doesn't refer to Majdanek. Show us otherwise.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 12, 2014 9:47 pm

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:You seem to confuse the memorial and how the bunker complex is presented today with historical evidence for what went on at the complex.


You can't be THAT stupid, SM. How the bath house is "presented today" is presented as evidence of what went on at the complex.

We're not talking about what tourists and visitors see but about evidence for the what happened during the war. Do you think that the reconstructions are evidence of that?

I cannot think of a single historian who would base his or her conclusions about what happened in 1942 and 1943 at the camp on a reconstruction for tourists. That would be like watching a TV dramatization to write a history of Lincoln's assassination. Only revisionist liars play such games.

Show us, for example, where Kranz has relied on the present-day exhibit to draw his conclusions.

David wrote:Putting a few canisters of CO2 in a room and calling them "Carbon-monoxide" is pretty lame.

Are we discussing the curatorial practices of the museum directors or evidence for what happened when the camp was operating? You seem very confused. Remember, I told you that the CO area had been dismantled . . . what's there today, therefore, doesn't help us understand what was there in 1942-1943.

David wrote:You really should watch Mr. Hunt' film.

It seems that you can't answer any of the questions I asked. Really, David, they're pretty basic.

David wrote:As a starting point look at how the two bath houses have mirror image construction.
Think the Germans were trying to save on architect fees?

This is what is known as a non sequitur.

David wrote:And how about the distance to the cremation area?
Let's drive the bodies around the Camp a few times!

I see you can't abandon your coulda-shoulda-woulda approach - you're always full of advice for the Nazis on how best to kill and dispose of their enemies, aren't you? Get serious, I asked a few questions aimed to help me understand what Nessie found so compelling. If you can't do anything other than offer sarcastic, tangential points, please shut up and let Nessie explain.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Tampering with the Evidence

Postby David » Fri Dec 12, 2014 10:27 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:We're not talking about what tourists and visitors see but about evidence for the what happened during the war. Do you think that the reconstructions are evidence of that?


You really are goofy, SM.
The building is the "evidence." What has happened is called "Tampering with
the Evidence."
This tampering is obvious from a review of the design and building documents
and photographs. No one, including the Administration, seems to be arguing
about the "reconstructions."

But we could all chip in and buy you a tinfoil hat that says,
"I am a Believer in the Last Gas Chamber at Majdanek."



David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby David » Fri Dec 12, 2014 10:35 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
David wrote:
So you are confused about the reference in the Judgment?
After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer,
IMT, vol. 1, p. 252.
Do you THINK that it refers to anything else besides the "evidence" presented by
the Soviets.
Please don't play dumber than you are.

Excuse me. It doesn't refer to Majdanek. Show us otherwise.


Hmmmm. You know you could be right.
Do you think that the august Tribunal was referring to cigar ashes or something like that?
And they had forgotten about the Soviet "evidence" about Majdanek?
Great explanation, SM. You are really knocking 'em out of the park today!



User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Tampering with the Evidence

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 12, 2014 10:46 pm

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:We're not talking about what tourists and visitors see but about evidence for the what happened during the war. Do you think that the reconstructions are evidence of that?


You really are goofy, SM.
The building is the "evidence."

The current state of the building is evidence of what was done to the building subsequent to liberation - and only by knowing and laying out each step of the maintenance and restoration work can it shed light on 1942-1943. Hunt hasn't even attempted to do this. So I don't see what Nessie finds compelling.

David wrote:What has happened is called "Tampering with the Evidence."

Were any other features besides the connecting walls "tampered with"?
What was the condition of the complex at the time of liberation?

David wrote:This tampering is obvious from a review of the design and building documents and photographs. No one, including the Administration, seems to be arguing about the "reconstructions."

Indeed. And only Hunt, Nessie, and you think that you can leap backwards from restorations and reconstructions to what the complex was like in 1942-1943. That's daffy.

David wrote:But we could all chip in and buy you a tinfoil hat that says, "I am a Believer in the Last Gas Chamber at Majdanek."

Of course, I am not arguing a conclusion here - but asking why one should no longer conclude that Jews were gassed at Majdanek. Now, I've pointed out problems I think exist in Nessie's approach and asked a number of questions - most of them to establish some baseline for further discussion. I've also said quite clearly that "I don't know if Kranz is correct" and "I've not studied this camp layout in detail [as Nessie has]." I've also said that once again Hunt is being disingenuous, and I've shown how, by quoting specifics.

Now, you apparently can't answer the questions I've asked - but have your mind made up. Interesting. You are again trying to muddy a straightforward discussion of particular issues with your machine-gun approach, tossing in diversionary points, making sarcastic remarks, and generally trying to confuse issues. Please have the decency to allow Nessie to reply to my questions if you're incompetent to do so.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 12, 2014 10:52 pm

David wrote:Hmmmm. You know you could be right.

Actually, David, I am right.

David wrote:Do you think that the august Tribunal was referring to cigar ashes or something like that?

Nope. Do you still want us to believe you think the tribunal was referring to Majdanek in what you quoted?

David wrote:And they had forgotten about the Soviet "evidence" about Majdanek?
Great explanation, SM. You are really knocking 'em out of the park today!

I only know what the tribunal stated, and that is all that matters.

David, the entire passage mentions Majdanek exactly zero times. Since the judgment doesn't mention Majdanek in this context, only "creative reading" can get Majdanek into the picture. That's something you like doing, reading what is not there into what is there.

So, we now have it clear that the judgment did not mention fertilizer made from corpses of those killed at Majdanek.

How about showing us where you think the judgment mentioned 1.4 million people being murdered at Majdanek? Come on. Try some more BS.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19641
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby scrmbldggs » Fri Dec 12, 2014 10:55 pm

LOL... looks like David hit a wall of his own making again and is even more desperate as usual to prove something to someone.
Hi, Io the lurker.

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby David » Fri Dec 12, 2014 11:00 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:David wrote:
As a starting point look at how the two bath houses have mirror image construction.
Think the Germans were trying to save on architect fees?

This is what is known as a non sequitur.


No, it is an allusion to the design and construction of the two
bath complexes. Parallel to the Bath and Disinfection 1 complex is Bath and Disinfection 2, which is a similar complex, without brick and concrete delousing chambers that have been "attached" at B and D 1.

The Camp officials state that B and D 2 was designed, built, and used as a bath/disinfection complex. What that means (given your continued support for
Soviet propaganda) is that some modifications had to have been done to
the B and D 1 building to "adapt" the building into a "gas chamber."

So, rather than you meaningless nattering why don't you try and support your
"Last Gas Chamber" claim?
Care to tell us when these adaptations were made?
Please give us cites.
Thank you



David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

And the Tribunal was just randomly talking

Postby David » Fri Dec 12, 2014 11:02 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:David wrote:
Do you think that the august Tribunal was referring to cigar ashes or something like that?

Nope. Do you still want us to believe you think the tribunal was referring to Majdanek in what you quoted?


Nope. I like your theory that the Tribunal was randomly writing.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:06 am

David wrote: Parallel to the Bath and Disinfection 1 complex is Bath and Disinfection 2, which is a similar complex, without brick and concrete delousing chambers that have been "attached" at B and D 1.

Thanks but I know about the two Bad und Disinfektion barracks. Their existence is plain from aerial photos of the camp, from the camp plan, and from other evidence including Kranz's description. Heck, I even mentioned the two barracks in my post to Nessie and the differences between them noted by Kranz. Kranz describes the two as men's (no. 41) and women's (no. 42), with the women's having a wooden landing leading to the gas chamber bunker. (This is what I asked Nessie about as Kranz's numbering seems different to others.)

Do you have a point other than trying to impress people that you know something?

David wrote: some modifications had to have been done to the B and D 1 building to "adapt" the building into a "gas chamber."

The building you refer to, if I follow you, was not a gas chamber, it was a bathhouse barracks leading to a gas chamber, which was housed under a pavilion to its north. Kranz says that the chambers in this bunker were designed as a disinfection facility and were modified to create three gas chambers for killing people (book cited above, pp 45-46).

David wrote: So, rather than you meaningless nattering why don't you try and support your "Last Gas Chamber" claim?

David, I've asked Nessie questions about what makes the diagram and photo shown above persuasive. I've not laid out any claim at all in this thread.

David wrote: Care to tell us when these adaptations were made?
Please give us cites.

Whoops I just did. I will again, Kranz, The Extermination of Jews at Majdanek Concentration Camp, pp 45-46. Where he says that "During the construction of the bunker, which probably lasted from August through to September 1942, several changes were made to the project relating to the decision to use these gas chambers for the purposes of extermination." Kranz describes the modifications and also discusses the absence of detailed specifics.

David wrote: Thank you

That's it for now, David. I asked some questions aimed, as I told you, at establishing a baseline. You've not answered the questions I raised. Unless you answer my questions, we're done for now. Of course, the questions were really directed to Nessie - and it is Nessie's thoughts I'm interested in.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:56 am, edited 2 times in total.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: And the Tribunal was just randomly talking

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:10 am

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:David wrote:
Do you think that the august Tribunal was referring to cigar ashes or something like that?

Nope. Do you still want us to believe you think the tribunal was referring to Majdanek in what you quoted?


Nope. I like your theory that the Tribunal was randomly writing.

Excuse me. The tribunal was giving its viewpoint on the evidence and argumentation it had heard. It definitely made mistakes. The trouble is that the claims that Majdanek had 1.4 million victims and their corpses were used to fertilizer don't happen to be among the tribunal's errors.

Come on - where do you think the IMT's judgment stated 1.4 million people were murdered at Majdanek? Stop stalling and tell us.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:16 am

scrmbldggs wrote:LOL... looks like David hit a wall of his own making again and is even more desperate as usual to prove something to someone.

Indeed, his carrying on about this is about as beyond stupid . . .
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Dec 13, 2014 2:56 am

For anyone who cares, you can read Smirnov's argument before the IMT in Vol VII of the Blue Series, he mentions fertilizer on pp 561 and 590 and 1.5 million killed at Majdanek on p 590. That is, Smirnov's argument, not the tribunal's judgment.

By the way, I can't find where Smirnov mentions human fertilizer in the context of Majdanek. On pp 590-591 he does allege German coverup of crimes at Majdanek by burning of corpses in ovens and "special primitive cremation installations"/"pyres." He gives grossly inflated numbers of corpses burned at Majdanek. On p 560, Smirnov is recorded saying that
from 1943, fearing retribution for the crimes committed, the Hitlerites began to destroy the traces of their crimes. They exhumed and burned corpses, ground bones, and strewed the ashes on the fields; they also used the slag formed by the corpses cremated, as well as the bone flour, for repairing the rogds and fertilizing the fields.
To be clear, this comment was made in the context of
presentation of evidence of mass exterminations of the peaceful population in the territory of the U.S.S.R. by the Germans.
Smirnov's immediately following example was Kiev (Babi Yar); to the best of my knowledge, Majdanek was located in Lublin, not "in the territory of the U.S.S.R."

Count 3 of the indictment included this same concept but without specific examples:
Count Three: Beginning with June 1943, the Germans carried out measures to hide the evidence of their crimes. They exhumed and burned corpses, and they crushed the bones with machines and used them for fertilizer.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/count3.asp

The IMT judgment, as we've seen, has a somewhat different statement about this:
Evidence was given of the treatment of the inmates before and after their extermination. There was testimony that the hair of women victims was cut off before they were killed, and shipped to Germany, there to be used in the manufacture of mattresses. The clothes, money and valuables of the inmates were also salvaged and sent to the appropriate agencies for disposition. After the extermination the gold teeth and fillings were taken from the heads of the corpses and sent to the Reichsbank.

After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer, and in some instances attempts were made to utilise the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap.

As to the "1.4 million" murdered appearing in the judgment, I cannot find it there but, as noted above, in Smirnov's argument:
I quote the corresponding passages from the Polish-Soviet Extraordinary Commission's report on Maidanek. The Tribunal will find this quotation on Page 66, reverse side, of the document book, second column of the text, Paragraph 6. I begin the quotation:

"The Polish-Soviet Extraordinary Commission has ascertained that during the 4 years' existence of the extermination camp at Maidanek the Hitlerite hangmen, following the direct order of their criminal government, exterminated by mass shooting and mass killing in gas chambers approximately 1.5 million persons: Soviet prisoners of war, prisoners of war of the former Polish Army, and nationals of various countries- Poles, Frenchmen, Italians, Belgians, Dutch, Czechs, Serbs, Greeks, Croats, and a great number of Jews."

With this document I conclude that section of my statement which concerns the concentration camps and pass on to the last section entitled, "Concealment of Traces of Crimes."

As noted by nearly everyone, this death toll is wildly exaggerated. It was not "accepted" or repeated, to the best of my knowledge, in the judgment. The exaggerated Majdanek death toll was also itemized in the indictment, in count3. The published version of the judgment repeats the indictment word for word; that is the only place I can find in the judgment anything mentioning the figure of 1.5 million murdered at Majdanek - the inflated 4 million figure for Auschwitz was also in the indictment in the same sentence (see count 3 above also). The court's judgment itself did not repeat these estimates.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

Mary Q Contrary
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1176
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:30 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Mary Q Contrary » Sat Dec 13, 2014 6:51 am

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:You seem to confuse the memorial and how the bunker complex is presented today with historical evidence for what went on at the complex.


You can't be THAT stupid, SM. How the bath house is
"presented today" is presented as evidence of what went on at the complex.
Even you have to admit that having glass windows in a mass gas chamber
doesn't make sense.
Putting a few canisters of CO2 in a room and calling them "Carbon-monoxide"
is pretty lame.

You really should watch Mr. Hunt' film.
As a starting point look at how the two bath houses have mirror image construction.
Think the Germans were trying to save on architect fees?

And how about the distance to the cremation area?
Let's drive the bodies around the Camp a few times!

He might be that stupid but I think it's more a function of the fact that he simply doesn't care about accuracy. It's hilarious to watch him argue that deceptive inaccurate reconstructions are OK because nobody goes to a museum expecting to see authenticity anyway. He then quotes extensively from Kranz's The Extermination of Jews at Majdanek Concentration Camp in an effort to set the record straight. But who published this book? The Madjanek Museum. Who is Kranz? The director of that museum. The same museum that botched the reconstruction of the camp. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah, he can't fix the exhibits at his camp but I'm sure his book is well researched and spot on accurate. I wonder how times he cites judicial proceedings of one form or another in that book?
Thanks from:
Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Satan, Tinky Winky

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: And the Tribunal was just randomly talking

Postby David » Sat Dec 13, 2014 6:52 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Excuse me. The tribunal was giving its viewpoint on the evidence and argumentation it had heard. It definitely made mistakes. The trouble is that the claims that Majdanek had 1.4 million victims and their corpses were used to fertilizer don't happen to be among the tribunal's errors.
.


"Viewpoint?" You can't be that clueless about Criminal Judgments, SM.
The Tribunal stated what it considered the facts upon which it based its Judgment.
In the case of the Nuremberg Court, hanging people.

In an action tried on the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court must find the facts specially and state its conclusions of law separately. The findings and conclusions may be stated on the record after the close of the evidence or may appear in an opinion or a memorandum of decision filed by the court
.

In an action tried on the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court must find the facts specially and state its conclusions of law separately. The findings and conclusions may be stated on the record after the close of the evidence or may appear in an opinion or a memorandum of decision filed by the court.


When the Tribunal wrote "After cremation the ashes were used for fertilizer"
it was stating the facts upon which it was ordering people hanged.
You claim that the Tribunal was not referring to Majdanek.`
You mention Smirnov's "argument" but neglect to mention the actual "evidence" admitted ie. Document USSR-93. That Document mentions the Human fertilizer
Tale of Majdanek.

If the Human Fertilizer Tale was only mentioned in connection with Majdanek,
on what do you base your claim that the tribunal was NOT referring to
Majdanek in its findings of fact?













David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

1.5 must of died---The defendants didn't say anything

Postby David » Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:42 am

Mary Q Contrary wrote:
David wrote:
You really should watch Mr. Hunt' film.
As a starting point look at how the two bath houses have mirror image construction.
Think the Germans were trying to save on architect fees?

And how about the distance to the cremation area?
Let's drive the bodies around the Camp a few times!

/quote]
He might be that stupid but I think it's more a function of the fact that he simply doesn't care about accuracy. It's hilarious to watch him argue that deceptive inaccurate reconstructions are OK because nobody goes to a museum expecting to see authenticity anyway.


Hello MQC- I don't know. SM made an attempt at claiming
that the distance between the alleged "gas chamber" and the crematorium isn't
"evidence" Quote- "you're always full of advice for the Nazis on how best to kill and dispose of their enemies, aren't you?Get serious,
so practicality, common sense, and logic don't mean anything to him. His Belief is undaunted by the disappearance of the 6 other "gas chambers" of Majdanek.
He seems in love with the Nuremberg Tribunal and doesn't even wonder
WHY NONE OF THE DEFENDANTS CHALLENGED
THE SOVIET EVIDENCE OF 1.5 MILLION MURDERS IN MAJDANEK.

SM is a Believer. That says it all.


Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26383
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Dec 13, 2014 8:39 am

David, the lying holocaust denier wrote:Hmmmm. You know you could be right.
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Actually, David, I am right.


That made me laugh. The holocaust denier, David tried to use a quote about another camp and got caught again, as per usual.

David is such a clumsy liar.

:D

User avatar
Nessie
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Nessie » Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:40 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Nessie,

I confess that I can't follow your points in this thread. I think you need to flesh them out a bit for me to understand what's persuaded you.

First, you've concluded that the Majdanek state museum is "very dishonest" (your words) and that there is, you write,
sufficient evidence to say that the museum authorities have gone with doctored delousing facilities and propaganda to claim that there were homicidal gas chambers at Majdanek.

What is your basis for making such charges? What is this evidence?

Your reasoning isn't clear to me. You seem to confuse the memorial and how the bunker complex is presented today with historical evidence for what went on at the complex. Are you arguing that the reconstruction is the basis for the museum's conclusion that there was a bunker for gassing people at the end of the bathhouse barracks?


I say Hunt has made a compelling case that the Soviets/Poles/museum authorities took what they found and modified it to make it look like the delousing chambers were gas chambers. If you stripped away the modifications and had tourists go the opposite way through the bath and disinfection buildings, they could not sustain any of the claims of homicidal gas chambers.

I ask in part because museum director Tomasz Kranz (The Extermination of Jews at Majdanek Concentration Camp, p 47) states forthrightly that the reconstruction differs to the actual contemporary configuration of the gas chambers and bathhouses (more below on this). On his website, Hunt himself notes that signage at the camp also explains that the structures were modified after the war, although Hunt describes this, without evidence, as covering for Soviet machinations. Even the tour guides, according to Hunt, inform visitors of these modifications.


They should return the buildings back to their original condition. Visitors will remember what they see better than the words of any tour guide or plan on a plaque.

Not only is it a curious propaganda attempt that "admits" its technique and "warns" viewers about them, but also, as I read Kranz’s book, he doesn't rely on the museum installation as evidence. He has other sources, which he enumerates and which you don't mention.

As an aside, let’s talk a bit about dishonesty and who is being dishonest. I am thinking of Hunt’s website in suggesting we do this. For example, Hunt claims kudos for revs:
Holocaust Revisionists or “Holocaust Deniers” claim they were simply rooms used for delousing inmate clothing and no inmates, Jewish or otherwise were “gassed” with the insecticide Zyklon B here.

Really? But so, strictly speaking, does the museum’s director, a point Hunt neglects to mention. Kranz (pp 46-47) writes that the rooms outfitted for Zyklon B were most likely not used in the homicide program, only the rooms for murder using CO, so Hunt’s point here is a strawman and deceit by omission.


OK, so only CO was used at Majdanek, not Zyklon B. In that case Majdanek is the worst example of mixed up information as to what exactly happened of any camp I have looked at. For example, from Wiki

"According to the Majdanek museum, the gas chambers began operation in September 1942.[6] and when killings were carried out, the methods used were either using Zyklon B or with the fumes from the captured Soviet tank engines."

From the Jewish Virtual Library

"although Majdanek has the only Nazi homicidal gas chambers preserved in their original condition,"

From USHMM

"In the winter of 1941-1942, camp authorities began to use Zyklon B gas to murder prisoners too weak to work in a makeshift gas chamber. Mass murder operations using poison gas began at Majdanek in October 1942 and continued until the end of 1943. There appear to have been three gas chambers at Majdanek; at least two were shower rooms reconfigured for use of Zyklon B gas. At least one of these two was used to kill human beings. Some sources refer to a third gas chamber, which reportedly used carbon monoxide gas as a means of murder."

For those reasons I say Majdanek needs a major information accuracy over haul before it can gain any credibility.

Hunt also says that
These alleged “homicidal gas chamber doors” are and were able to be seen directly outside by any Poles in the surrounding suburb of the city of Lublin. 
These rooms were not secret at all. They were the first structure one could see from the outside of the camp entrance.

According to Kranz (pp 46-47), however, the bunker with the gas chambers “was fenced off with barbed wire and a wooden fence. There was a gate in the fence on the south side, wide enough to allow a truck through.” The absence today of the fencing described by Kranz tells us nothing about the camp when it was being operated. Again, Hunt is being disingenuous. He doesn’t even mention Kranz’s detail on this or attempt to rebut it. You might also look at Kranz's further discussion of murder-camouflage measures, including night-time killings and the use of tractor or engines to drown out noise, pp 59-61.


My problem is the level of tampering with the evidence and misinformation means that lacks credibility.


Now, to Hunt’s major point:
The Soviet Union’s propaganda artists, seemingly in 1946 ( a year after the end of WW2) modified the structure to join the clothing delousing gas chambers with the bath barracks in order to connect them, to imply they served a homicidal rather than hygienic purpose. These were separate buildings before the Soviet Union’s convenient “storm” which destroyed parts of the original structure allowed them to modify the buildings to further frame the Germans.

This argument loses me, Nessie. Yes, as the museum director and signage state, the complex was modified after the war. But Hunt doesn’t share the following detail: according to Kranz (p 47), the women’s barrack (no. 42) was connected to the gas chambers by a wooden landing but it was only the men’s bathhouse (barrack no. 41) that was not connected during the camp's operation and where the postwar modifications/walls joining the two structures were made. Here is what Kranz says,
The exit from the female bathhouse (barracks No. 42) and the doors to both chambers were connected by a 1.5 metre-wide wooden landing. . . . The bunker itself was not - as can be seen today - connected to the male bathhouse (barracks No. 41) with wooden walls. They were erected during repair and conservation work.

I don't know whether Kranz is correct (more below).

Furthermore, an argument that people weren’t gassed in the bunker because of the current configuration and what tourists see is rather unconvincing. The conclusion Kranz draws, for example, that people were gassed in the bunker isn’t based on the current layout of the memorial with the attaching walls - who would base historical work on a memorial layout without looking at the site's history? As I’ve suggested, Kranz explicitly dismisses the memorial as a source and uses other evidence. It is that evidence, not the current layout, you need to address to understand what happened at the site when it was in operation.

Can you disentangle for us the memorial versus evidence for/against the bunker as where people were killed by gas? Why do you think that the memorial's presentation is dispositive for what occurred at the site during the war?


My issue is that so much time has been spent by the authorities trying to prop up a crumbling narrative based on physical evidence of homicidal gassings that lacks credibility. Crudely chiseled out holes, CO2 bottles, chambers that are stained and positioned such their use was clearly for clothing. The openness of the buildings to the rest of the site, the issue of body disposal.

If I was a court, Hunt has done a defence job that means I would never convict as the prosecution's evidence is so dubious.

(Three more asides: 1) Kranz discusses that the CO containers used in the gassing were missing from the complex by liberation - p 56; again, Hunt seems to be arguing with a chimera, the memorial presentation rather than the history. 2) Hunt’s diagrams do not align with what Kranz has written: according to Kranz the large gas chamber to the west was for CO gassing, not Zyklon B. One of the two small rooms to the east was for Zyklon B - not used, the other for CO. 3) Also, as to Hunt’s reasoning that this bunker with its gas chambers must have been used for disinfection, because prison camps disinfect, which reasoning you seem to have adopted, it should be noted that Kranz has identified, following Marszalek’s 1969 study and citing prisoner testimony, a number of structures as disinfection chambers, such as ones in the two interfields formerly thought to have been for murder, pp 41-44; in other words, that the camp can be expected to have some disinfection sites doesn't mean that this particular site was for disinfection.)


It clearly was for disinfection and functioned as such with its layout and showers. If it was purpose built as a homicidal gas chamber, the layout and location far away from the crematorium is very odd. I thought you said Karnaz accepts Zyklon B was not used for killing? Above you say he does.

Second, I couldn't follow your reasoning, which you supported with a photo of the gas chambers, about the route taken by inmates through the bathhouse-bunker complex. I can't understand your post on this without a fuller explanation of why you leap from "postwar reconstruction" to dishonest frame-up.


I do not see it as a leap. The timeline of the orthodox narrative clearly shows that the last supposed chambers have also fallen in doubt.

To begin to make sense of what you wrote, as I've not studied this camp layout in detail you have, could you please explain what we are seeing on the photo of the gas chambers which you described as shown historically accurately ("the gas chambers back as they were")? What is the orientation of the structure relative to the bathhouses, what are the features we can see? Why in your view is this photograph determinative of anything to do with whether people were gassed and the route taken by inmates through this complex?

Also, Hunt claims that the path taken by tourists today differs to the route taken by inmates of Majdanek. Since Hunt doesn’t tell us how he knows the historical route, but you agree with him, and since you both find the memorial's logistics significant to determining the facts of what happened in the 1940s, please share with us your source for what route prisoners took through the bathhouse-bunker complex.

It would also be good to understand better why the postwar conjoining of one barracks for undressing to the gas chambers weighs so heavily with you: I fail to see how this postwar change - adding walls for the barracks nearest the gas chamber - suggests anything about the use of the two structures.

Thanks in advance for providing more of your thinking and evidence, so I can understand why you find convincing what seems to me anything but.

(edits for typos and clarity)


Sorry for the lack of detail. I'll have to come back to this. Basically I say the credibility of Majdanek's gas chambers, which was weaker than anywhere else, has now been reduced to that of the Dachau chambers, as in there was no mass gassings.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Hunts Majdanek film.

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Dec 13, 2014 1:47 pm

Oh my, another joker without answers to simple questions.
Mary Q Contrary wrote:He might be that stupid but I think it's more a function of the fact that he simply doesn't care about accuracy.

That must be why I asked Nessie to help me understand the argument being made and to give more details about it.

Mary Q Contrary wrote:It's hilarious to watch him argue that deceptive inaccurate reconstructions are OK because nobody goes to a museum expecting to see authenticity anyway.

Surprise us and quote where I did this.

Mary Q Contrary wrote:He then quotes extensively from Kranz's The Extermination of Jews at Majdanek Concentration Camp in an effort to set the record straight. But who published this book? The Madjanek Museum. Who is Kranz? The director of that museum. The same museum that botched the reconstruction of the camp. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Well golly gee, I also said I didn't know if Kranz was right. Golly gee, I tried comparing what the director of the museum, as I referred to him, by the way, had to say with what Nessie and Hunt are saying - in the interests of, er, accuracy.

Or are you of the opinion that, no questions asked, the museum itself is a conspiracy reaching back to the postwar reconstruction? Why don't you show where Kranz is wrong in what I quoted from his book?

Mary Q Contrary wrote:I wonder how times he cites judicial proceedings of one form or another in that book?

One thing is for sure: you'll never pick the thing up and read it to find out.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: 1.5 must of died---The defendants didn't say anything

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Dec 13, 2014 2:01 pm

David wrote: SM made an attempt at claiming
that the distance between the alleged "gas chamber" and the crematorium isn't"evidence"

Where did I do that, David? It matters, of course, whether the distance was affected by the restoration and reconstruction work.

David wrote: "you're always full of advice for the Nazis on how best to kill and dispose of theirenemies, aren't you?Get serious, so practicality, common sense, and logic don't mean anything to him.

Oh my. Improvisation, making the best of a situation, getting by, reuse and recycling, adapting: David's never encountered such things in his life.

David wrote:He seems in love with the Nuremberg Tribunal

That must be why I keep saying that the judgment made lots of mistakes.

You guys really need to calm yourselves down and get a grip. I asked a few questions of Nessie, and I am certain Nessie will reply with actual answers to them. And then an actual discussion can ensue. Instead, you're hopping all around and waving your grand conspiracy theories and generalizations at me as though I'd written a detailed study of everything about Majdanek. It is quite comical.

Likewise, I've shown how you tried to distort what the IMT said about Majdanek in its final judgment - on two specific points you tried to use to make a dishonest case - and now you think I am writing a general defense of the IMT! LOL

David wrote:and doesn't even wonder
WHY NONE OF THE DEFENDANTS CHALLENGED THE SOVIET EVIDENCE OF 1.5 MILLION MURDERS IN MAJDANEK.

Honestly, I have no idea what you're trying to say here. I was telling everyone, including you, how you'd lied about what the judgment says about the number of deaths at Majdanek and the use of corpses for Majdanek for fertilizer - which is nothing. Defense pleadings don't enter into this.

David wrote:SM is a Believer. That says it all.

I showed where you lied, you are unable to respond to specifics, you handwave and try to obfuscate by tossing in irrelevancies, that says it all.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest