"they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21116
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby scrmbldggs » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:15 pm

Ah, they were seeking to cure typhus once and for all in those rickety facilities, were they not? Bless their hearts.
.

Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7045
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:33 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Höss testified on 15 April 1946 that "In the summer of 1941 I was summoned to Berlin to Reichsfáhrer SS Himmler to receive personal orders. He told me something to the effect--I do not remember the exact words--that the Führer had given the order for a final solution of the Jewish question. We, the SS, must carry out that order. If it is not carried out now then the Jews will later on destroy the German people. He had chosen Auschwitz on account of its easy access by rail and also because the extensive site offered space for measures ensuring isolation." He wrote substantially the same thing in the mss published as Death Dealer 9p 27).


From what I read from Rees and other places Hoess was off by a year, Hoess talked about other Extermination Camps open at that time.


The order in question is from March 1941 and pertains to establishment of a camp near Auschwitz for POWs. Höss recalls the order from Himmler coming "before the war" and writes (p 29) of Himmler's "announcement during his visit in March 1941" to make Auschwitz into a "tremendous prisoner defense center" including a camp for 100,000 POWs.

So, maybe I'm not following, Höss received the POW order from Himmler about half a year later than he said. The point of the museum publication is to show that Höss's mss (as well as his trial testimony on this) are misdated, using documents to prove that Höss was wrong.



The one I’m thinking of was the order to establish the POW camp at Birkenau. Did Himmler order that in March of 1941 or later in 1941, in the Fall sometime?

Sorry if I’m being confusing.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7045
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:36 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:A sentence could even be added to clarify that the SS's life-saving measures, which kept people alive, sometimes failed - and so the blessing of euthanasia was instituted; it is such humanitarian action that has been turned upside by exterminationists into devices for mass extermination.



You know, Hoess and Himmler, really all of the Nazis, were sadly misunderstood.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:04 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Höss testified on 15 April 1946 that "In the summer of 1941 I was summoned to Berlin to Reichsfáhrer SS Himmler to receive personal orders. He told me something to the effect--I do not remember the exact words--that the Führer had given the order for a final solution of the Jewish question. We, the SS, must carry out that order. If it is not carried out now then the Jews will later on destroy the German people. He had chosen Auschwitz on account of its easy access by rail and also because the extensive site offered space for measures ensuring isolation." He wrote substantially the same thing in the mss published as Death Dealer 9p 27).


From what I read from Rees and other places Hoess was off by a year, Hoess talked about other Extermination Camps open at that time.


The order in question is from March 1941 and pertains to establishment of a camp near Auschwitz for POWs. Höss recalls the order from Himmler coming "before the war" and writes (p 29) of Himmler's "announcement during his visit in March 1941" to make Auschwitz into a "tremendous prisoner defense center" including a camp for 100,000 POWs.

So, maybe I'm not following, Höss received the POW order from Himmler about half a year later than he said. The point of the museum publication is to show that Höss's mss (as well as his trial testimony on this) are misdated, using documents to prove that Höss was wrong.



The one I’m thinking of was the order to establish the POW camp at Birkenau. Did Himmler order that in March of 1941 or later in 1941, in the Fall sometime?

Sorry if I’m being confusing.

No worries, lots of orders, lots of dates. I misread your post to mean that Höss dated this one to September 1941.

The Auschwitz Museum publication I referenced aims to work out - Hans style, using documents - when Höss was ordered to open a POW camp. They start out noting which historians and researchers have questioned Höss's dating - and which stick with it - and saying that the purpose of the volume is to "resolve the doubts." I myself have long thought that Höss tended to be half a year or more early with these key dates. I found the volume interesting in how tightly the case was made - and for the subsequent twists and turns until the start of the gassing program, all laid out with documents.

Höss, as noted, said that he received the order for the POW camp in March 1941. The Museum uses documents to prove that this cannot be correct.

The Museum publication shows that (basically because nothing was done to receive large shipments of POWs (plans, budgets, construction orders, reinforcement of garrison complement, kitchen/food needs, bakeries, etc, until late September 1941) the March 1941 date doesn't hold up. A conference on the topic, for example, is documented having taken place 26 September 1941.

The Museum doesn't give a date for the Himmler "announcement" to Höss - just saying that "it has not proved possible to find information indicating the existence before September 1941 of plans to prepare Auschwitz to receive large numbers of new inmates in the shape of POWs" (p 36).
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:47 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Höss testified on 15 April 1946 that "In the summer of 1941 I was summoned to Berlin to Reichsfáhrer SS Himmler to receive personal orders. He told me something to the effect--I do not remember the exact words--that the Führer had given the order for a final solution of the Jewish question. We, the SS, must carry out that order. If it is not carried out now then the Jews will later on destroy the German people. He had chosen Auschwitz on account of its easy access by rail and also because the extensive site offered space for measures ensuring isolation." He wrote substantially the same thing in the mss published as Death Dealer 9p 27).


From what I read from Rees and other places Hoess was off by a year, Hoess talked about other Extermination Camps open at that time.

Interesting testimony, which challenges Höss' recollection, and which I am sure has been cited many times: SS officer Maximilian Grabner - "One day, I think in 1942 or 1943, [Höss] got orders from Berlin (allegedly) stating that there should not be any Jews in the camp. In connection with this, Höss issued an order to report that the camp was free of Jews. The Jews who were still alive were either gassed or killed by the criminals who held the posts of Kapo or block elder. . . . Höss said at that time that on orders from Berlin Auschwitz was set up as an extermination camp, and that he was authorized to kill every prisoner who did anything wrong."

Hans on the value (and biases) of Grabner's testimony: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ilian.html
Sergey Romanov's article on the GARF file portion of Grabner's testimony: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... abner.html and his assessment of the testimony in light of Mattogno: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ement.html
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 360
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby BRoI » Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:32 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:In The Origins of the Birkenau Camp in the Light of the Source Materials, Bartosik, Martyniak, & Setkiewicz use 100 documents to show that Höss was mistaken when he dated Himmler's order to him to build a camp (Birkenau) for 100,000 POWs to 1 March 1941.

Statistical Mechanic wrote:The Auschwitz Museum publication I referenced aims to work out - Hans style, using documents - when Höss was ordered to open a POW camp.


Hans clearly wasn't overly impressed by their previous book:

Hans wrote:The document collection from Bartisek et al. (The beginnings of the extermination of Jews in KL Auschwitz in the light of the source materials) [...] some of the docs have been clearly misinterpreted by Bartisek et al.

Hans wrote:According to Bartosik et al., the term burning sites refers to "burning of corpses retrieved from the mass graves". However, in this specific context (work to be done by electricians), it actually means electrical contacts/sockets/lightening outlets:


Does their new book contain any acknowledgement of their earlier errors?
Sender Jaari: And in another statement by you, made at another place, you said you visited Treblinka in 1942. Which year is correct?
Rudolf Hoess: 1941 is correct. If I said 1942, it was incorrect.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7045
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:37 pm

Wow, two whole errors. I guess what is invalidated in part is invalidated entirely........

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:48 pm

BRoI wrote:Does their new book contain any acknowledgement of their earlier errors?

Yes, several of the authors mention that they underwent intense criticism/self-criticism, and they even acknowledge your posts in this forum and your shitty video on Majdanek.

Hans' piece urges revisionists to wipe any smirks they may have off their faces about the first error, as Mattogno also struggled with the term burning sites, and says, "The document collection from Bartisek et al. (The beginnings of the extermination of Jews in KL Auschwitz in the light of the source materials) contains a number of previously unknown and for Revisionists inconvinient German contemporary sources (some - but not all - have been highlighted in a previous posting). Other documents in the collection have been known already, in particular from Revisionist Carlo Mattogno's works."

Kudos as always to Hans for his knowledge and corrections. I certainly hope he tells us about any errors in the new volume - and that the authors endure more humiliation.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7045
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:59 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Does their new book contain any acknowledgement of their earlier errors?
Yes, several of the authors mention that they underwent intense criticism/self-criticism, and they even acknowledge your posts in this forum and your shitty video on Majdanek.


I don’t think that’s good enough. I think they need to be publicly flogged for their misinterpretation of two texts and then sent to a re-education camp.

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 360
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby BRoI » Wed Jan 17, 2018 11:10 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Related . . . expanding on what was asked and dodged in the Kitty Hart thread, any viable hypothesis about these actions must account for evidencethat is available and well known about various roles in the disposition of Jewish property, for example, SS-Main Economic Administrative Office, Kanada, VoMi, Winter Relief, Todt, the Reichsbank, the Reichshaupkasse, what Höss called social welfare, property refurbishing operations, DAW, dental metal, fertilizers, and recipients of human hair from the camps (Teppichfabrik G. Schoeffler AG, Haaverwertungbetrieb and Bremer Wolkämmerei). Quantities and disposition must be described and accounted for. It will need to be explained how this evidence supports a hypothesis of a purely rogue operation, the sole purpose of which was accumulating personal wealth.

What's the evidence for fertilizer, aside from testimony and Soviet findings [see: Auschwitz 1940-1945, v.2, p.412-4]. Surely there's a few documents on it, even if the Soviets did exaggerated the figures.
Sender Jaari: And in another statement by you, made at another place, you said you visited Treblinka in 1942. Which year is correct?
Rudolf Hoess: 1941 is correct. If I said 1942, it was incorrect.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:24 am

was thinking of both prisoner (I think Tabeau and Wetzler/Vrba mention it among others) and SS recollections
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

Balmoral95
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1307
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Balmoral95 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:32 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:was thinking of both prisoner (I think Tabeau and Wetzler/Vrba mention it among others) and SS recollections


Iirc Vrba did mention this although I thought it was during his stint at Majdanek (something about a cabbage patch there, or some such.

There's an old thread at AHF about this in which an agronomist participated. Can't remember if that ever bore fruit..

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:44 am

ok, I was arsed to look at Vrba-Wetzler:
11. The New Birkenau Crematoria and Gas Chambers.

At the end of February 1943 the newly-built crematoria and gas chambers were opened in Birkenau. The practice of gassing and burning corpses in the birchwood was stopped and bodies were taken to the four new crematoria built for the purpose. Ashes had been utilized as fertilizer previously on the Harmansee Estate, so that it is difficult to find traces of the mass murders.


http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf ... lish45.pdf
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

Balmoral95
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1307
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Balmoral95 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:58 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:ok, I was arsed to look at Vrba-Wetzler:
11. The New Birkenau Crematoria and Gas Chambers.

At the end of February 1943 the newly-built crematoria and gas chambers were opened in Birkenau. The practice of gassing and burning corpses in the birchwood was stopped and bodies were taken to the four new crematoria built for the purpose. Ashes had been utilized as fertilizer previously on the Harmansee Estate, so that it is difficult to find traces of the mass murders.


http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf ... lish45.pdf


AHF:

https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic ... 35#p292935

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:59 am

I forgot Werth, yes, also SS man Muhfseldt is quoted or cited by someone somewhere as having discussed this too, at Majdanek.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

Hans
Poster
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Hans » Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:21 pm

BRoI wrote:
Hans clearly wasn't overly impressed by their previous book:


I think the book "The beginnings of the extermination of Jews in KL Auschwitz in the light of the source materials" is a good collection of documents related to extermination activities. It's not without its flaws, as I pointed out at the blog, I guess those two mentioned were the only one's obvious too me at first sight (I don't know if there are any more). I believe the authors made these mistakes because they did not put the two docs into sufficient context. Like, it's perfectly understandable that they read "Brennstellen" as burning sites at first reading, but anyone's eyebrows should go up to the sky when one thinks about there supposedly being "19 burning sites" in Birkenau in August 1942. Then one should have gone back and check the contemporary meaning of "Brennstelle".

I was personally not that impressed with the book as most of the docs were already known to me (and even some new one's were already known to Nick, IIRC) - but then I know slightly more Auschwitz docs than average Joe- and my high expectation from advertising it like "a range of interesting and previously unknown documents has been identified. The majority of them (over 70) are presented in the book" was not exactly met.

However, for most people interested in the issue there are surely a lot of new and interesting docs. I would not trust that all of them have been properly contextualized and interpreted though. Always make up your own mind.

Hans
Poster
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Hans » Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
BRoI wrote:Does their new book contain any acknowledgement of their earlier errors?

Yes, several of the authors mention that they underwent intense criticism/self-criticism, and they even acknowledge your posts in this forum and your shitty video on Majdanek.

Hans' piece urges revisionists to wipe any smirks they may have off their faces about the first error, as Mattogno also struggled with the term burning sites


Small correction, Mattogno did misinterpret the document, but in a different way then Bartosik et al. He understood "Brennstellen" correctly, but was mistaken that the electricians were the Sonderkommando (in trying to prove the impossible that there was no sinister SK in Auschwitz), instead the electricians were performing work for the Sonderkommando.

Hans
Poster
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Hans » Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:41 pm

There is corroborotive evidence that human ash was used as fertilizer from Chelmno extermination camp, see paragraph and references after this footnote, especially Piller's testimony.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:42 pm

Hans wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
BRoI wrote:Does their new book contain any acknowledgement of their earlier errors?

Yes, several of the authors mention that they underwent intense criticism/self-criticism, and they even acknowledge your posts in this forum and your shitty video on Majdanek.

Hans' piece urges revisionists to wipe any smirks they may have off their faces about the first error, as Mattogno also struggled with the term burning sites


Small correction, Mattogno did misinterpret the document, but in a different way then Bartosik et al. He understood "Brennstellen" correctly, but was mistaken that the electricians were the Sonderkommando (in trying to prove the impossible that there was no sinister SK in Auschwitz), instead the electricians were performing work for the Sonderkommando.

ah thanks, yes, looking back at your post you made that clear . . .
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:31 pm

So, from old notes of mine and from this thread, on uses of ash for fertilizer, I know of only the following:

* Chełmno: testimony of SS-Hauptscharführer Piller and staff member Fritz Ismer
* Auschwitz: Tabeau, the Vrba-Wetzler report, SS man Johann Gorges, inmates Zofia Knapczyk for Birkenau; also witnesses from the Strem company (IIRC the SEC had documents from this factory, too)
* Majdanek: SS NCO Muhsfeldt, reporter Werth
* Sobibór: inmate Kurt Thomas Sobibór
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1778
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Denying-History » Thu Jan 18, 2018 8:35 pm

Soviet's took photographs I believe from Majdanek showing human remains in a cabbage patch.
« Lies written in ink cannot disguise facts written in blood. »
- Lu Xun

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:59 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Hypothesizing zone / Not for discussion now / No evidence will be provided:
VFX wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:Have I been disrespectful? I think not.
I simply want to know where you are coming from. I’d like to know what you believe in so that we can figure out where we go from here.

OK without going into the necessary evidence and we are not making a formal proposition at all but gathering information: the hypothesis we have is that there was no intentional systematic gassing of the Jews or anyone as a Government decree. We know the Einsatzgruppen murdered many partisans who were 5th columnists but also executed many innocent victims. Auschwitz was never used as an extermination camp though Typhus killed many and gas trials were carried out in the little red and white houses using Zb. This was the commandants decision for the ill and infirm as a form of euthanasia and often carried out in the early hours of the morning. The thinking among some members including myself was that there was a criminal group within the SS masterminded by the intelligentsia of a member of the SD who set up the Reinhart camps for the sole purpose for gathering personal wealth. The victims were gassed by asphyxiation and trachea damage using large diesel engines and no Carbon Monoxide. It is estimated about 1 million perished at the hands of these criminals unknown to Berlin at the time. Camps such as Treblinka were erased not to hide potential evidence from the Russians, but to stop the Fuhrer from getting wind of this dastardly deed. There was indeed a holocaust but not as depicted. Hope this helps so when I answer posts this is basically the position I and the team hold. Note this is very similar to the conclusions Mr Irving has reached as well.

This guy VFX went through the Kitty Hart thread the day after making a number of posts on this - perhaps forgetting that some of those posts had been quoted - and edited these posts. Anyway, Jeffk, it seems like he wasn't really interested in discussing his hypothesis as he claimed at one point. And he has the temerity to rant and rave about Codoh, such a easy target.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7045
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:04 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:This guy VFX went through the Kitty Hart thread the day after making a number of posts on this - perhaps forgetting that some of those posts had been quoted - and edited these posts. Anyway, Jeffk, it seems like he wasn't really interested in discussing his hypothesis as he claimed at one point. And he has the temerity to rant and rave about Codoh, such a easy target.


I was surprised that he didn’t know about Rassinier’s guest and the discussion about Belzec.

Oh, well. He did give me an idea about a new thread.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7045
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:07 am

BTW, there is some discussion from rollo that VFX/NSDAP is my sock puppet. He is not. If I’m going to make a denier sock puppet I’m going all in (ahem, CODOH).

Balmoral95
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1307
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Balmoral95 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:21 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:BTW, there is some discussion from rollo that VFX/NSDAP is my sock puppet. He is not. If I’m going to make a denier sock puppet I’m going all in (ahem, CODOH).


Folks still do that? Not that I have anything against trolling Hargis.... but he's such an easy mark doesn't seem like it would be fun anymore...

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7045
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:46 am

Balmoral95 wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:BTW, there is some discussion from rollo that VFX/NSDAP is my sock puppet. He is not. If I’m going to make a denier sock puppet I’m going all in (ahem, CODOH).


Folks still do that? Not that I have anything against trolling Hargis.... but he's such an easy mark doesn't seem like it would be fun anymore...


I sorta lost interest in it but if I have a few minutes here and there I like to pop in:

https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10639&p=86853#p86853

https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4332&start=30

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 18964
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:57 pm

I made a list of some of the destinations/descriptions for deportations of Jewish transports referred to in the sources included in Piper's Jews in Auschwitz collection, to add to notes I've kept on this:

Emanuel Mink, French Jew, deported from Drancy 30 March 1942: "Before departure, they informed us that we were going to work on German territory" (p 63)

Erwin Bartel, Polish prisoner who worked in registration of new arrivals to the camp, 1942: "Notification of the arrival of [the RSHA] transports came several days in advance. . . . Our office was among the recipients of this correspondence, which announced the arrival of a transport of Jews being 'evacuated to the East' (Evakuierung nach Osten). In other documents it was reported that such and such a country was subject to evacuation to the East. It began with the Slovakian Jews. . . ." (p 86)

Alfred Wetzler, Slovkian Jew, deported from Sered 12 April 1942: "At the moment of the departure of our transport no one knew the place they were taking us to." (p 77)

Eichmann secret letter to Rademacher in Foreign Ministry, 22 June 1942: "The daily transport on special trains of 1,000 people at a time of about 40,000 Jews from occupied French territory, 40,000 Jews from the Netherlands, and 10,000 Jews from Belgium to the camp in Auschwitz for the purpose of assigning them to work is planned for mid-July or beginning of August this year. The circle of people to be registered encompasses at this time Jews capable of labor, so long as they are not living in mixed marriages and do not hold citizenship of the United Kingdom, the USA, Mexico, hostile Central- and South-American states, or neutral or allied states." (pp 280-281)

David Lieberman, Belgian Jew, deported from Malines, summer 1942: "gathered in the Malines barracks without knowing where they would be transported to," ostensibly for labor (p 65)

Deborah Brandel, Dutch Jew, deported from Westerbork, 22 July 1942: to "make my way to labor in Germany under the supervision of the German police" (p 68)

Telegram sent by Günther of RSHA Dept IVB4 to chief of Security Police for occupied France, 13 August 1942: "Jewish children placed in the Pithiviers and Beaune-La Roldande camps may be incrementally allotted to planned transports to Auschwitz. In no case should closed children's transports be dispatched (emphasis)." (pp 290-291)

Urgent telex from SS in Paris to Eichmann, 31 August 1942: "Aug 31, 1942 at 0855 hrs. transport train no. 901/21 with a total of 1,000 Jews departed the station at Le Bourget-Drancy and left in the direction of Auschwitz. . . . Provisions supplied as usual for one Jew for 14 days." (pp 292-293)

Secret letter to RFSS sent by commander of SS and Police in the Hague on 24 September 1942: "To this date together with the Jews deported as punishment to Mauthausen we have sent a total of 20,000 Jews to Auschwitz." On 15 October, it was reported, the SS in the Netherlands planned "that Jewry in the Netherlands will be outlawed, that is, a great police operation will commence for which not only the German and Jewish police organs will be mobilized, but also the NSDAP labor districts, the party structure, NSB, Wehrmacht, and so on. Every Jew found anywhere in the Netherlands will be sent to one of the great camps for Jews." (pp 278, 279)

Radiogram from Liebehenschel head of office DI in WVHA to Auschwitz Office of Commandant sent and received on 2 October 1942 giving approval for 5-ton truck to make trip to Dessau company and back "for the purpose of delivering material for resettlement of Jews." (pp 318-319)

Undated, signed "Pledge Document" acknowledging death penalty for theft of "formerly Jewish-owned property" and promising "to maintain absolute silence, including with my fellow soldiers, about all actions taken during the evacuation of the Jews." (p 321)

Letter from SS Untersturmführer Rothe Dept IVJ of Security Police in Paris to Eichmann 31 October 1942 alerting him of plans for 3 deportation trains in November: "In reference to: removal of Jews from the Drancy camp outside Paris tp Auschwitz concentration camp, Upper Silesia . . . it is planned to send 3 trains of 1,000 Jews each to Auschwitz" to be met by Security Police in Neuberg using "usual" protocol there (pp 294-295)

Telex from Stapo in Stettin to Inspector of Concentration Camps 30 November 1942 concerning 532 Norwegian Jews: "destination Auschwitz" (on 1 December 1942 SS man Hans Stark of Political Department at Auschwitz made out a receipt that shipment was received) (pp 300-301)

Telegram from SS officer Schwarz of labor department at Auschwitz informing WVHA DII in Oranienburg of results of selection of Jews sent to Auschwitz from Theresienstadt, 20 February 1943, noting "Jews . . . selected for labor" as against those designated for "Special quartering of men because of excessive infirmity, women because the majority were with children" (pp 314-315)

Radiogram from Liebehenschel head of office DI in WVHA informing Höss of deportation of "armament Jews" from Berlin, 2 March 1943: "15,000 healthy Jews completely fit for work, who until now worked in the Berlin armaments industry. All means should be used to ensure their capacity for use at labor." (p 313)

Primo Levi, Italian Jew, deported from Fossoli, February 1944: "Our destination? Nobody knew" before departure; perhaps before loading or maybe during transit, however, "We had learned of our destination with relief: Auschwitz: a name without significance for us at that time, but at least it implied some place on earth." (pp 70-71)

Elie Wiesel, Romanian Jew, deported from Sighet IIRC May 1944: "We realized that we were not staying in Hungary" when the train stopped at Košice, a town on the border; "'Auschwitz'. Nobody had hear that name." (p 83)

Pery Broad, SS man, on Hungarian action, spring 1944: "In these times, the reputation of Auschwitz had spread far and wide. . . . it was too late to tell them [arriving Hungarian Jews] any fairy tales." (p 116)

Halina Birenbaum, Warsaw Jew sent to Auschwitz from Majdanek, worker in Kanada, on an incident she observed during the Hungarian action: a father, whose baby needed milk for his bottle asked Birenbaum's group as the new arrivals passed by on their way to the gas chambers, "whether it was far to the Jewish settlement in Birkenau. . . . No one answered his question." (p 129)

Imréné Kun (Olga Feld), Hungarian Jew, deported from Misolc collection ghetto, May or June 1944: "we knew we had arrived in Auschwitz" (p 79)

Karl Glattau, from Austria, on a selection conducted on 20 September 1944 of Jewish prisoners in Auschwitz I: "I was one of those on the left side [gas chambers]. . . . the block clerk called out my number and told me to report to block 10, which was known as the 'death block.' They also called it the resettlement block . . ." (p 199)
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 360
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby BRoI » Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:30 am

There's apparently "railroad shipping documents":

The Soviet commission that investigated war crimes at Auschwitz determined that bones from corpses burned in the crematoria were sold, after being crushed, to the "Strem" firm in Strzemieszyce (near Dabrowa Gornicza), for use in the manufacture of fertilizer. At least 100 tons of crushed human bones were shipped from Auschwitz to the "Strem" firm in 1943 and 1944.[44]

The German management of "Strem" was to make regular deliveries of crushed bones to the Rendziny chemical factory in Rudniki (near Czestochowa), which manufactured fertilizer. The workers there found burned metal buttons, clips from suspenders, belt buckles, zippers, hair pins and other objects among the crushed bone. The heaps of bone powder left behind when the German management fled from Rudniki contained such items, as well as numerous human teeth and fragments of jaws.[45] A significant portion of the bones and ashes shipped to Rudniki probably came from the corpses of Auschwitz victims. This seems to be corroborated by the account of a former prisoner: "Once ... we took the ashes of burned corpses from the crematorium to the train station. We loaded them on freight cars. I heard someone say they would be used as fertilizer."[46]

[...]

44. Communique of the Soviet Extraordinary State Commission for the Investigation of War Crimes by the German-Fascist Aggressors, May 8, 1945, APMAB, Hoess Trial, vol. 8, p. 6; vol. 11, p. 55; findings of the Soviet forensics expert General Dymitri Ivanovich Kudriavtsev, APMAB, SS Staff Trial, stenographic record, vol. 7, pp. 180-181; findings by General Kudriavtsev, APMAB, Materials/22; statement by the Soviet prosecutor L.N. Smirnov, Prozess gegen die Hauptkriegsverbrecher, vol. 7 pp. 644-645.

45. Soviet documentation of the supply of crushed bones by the "Strem" firm to the Rendziny factory in Rudniki (testimony by factory employees, findings from the examination of bone ash found there, and railroad shipping documents), APMAB, IZ-1/Soviet Commission/4 catalogue no. 149228; see also APMAB, SS Staff Trial, stenographic record, VII (VI), pp. 18-181. One worker employed in the processing of bone ash into fertilizer at the Rendziny factory in Rudniki was told by a railroad employee that the bone ash was shipped from Auschwitz, and other workers regarded this theory as credible.

46. Account by former prisoner Wladyslaw Bujewicz, APMAB, Collection of Testimonies, vol. 94, p. 5. See also forensic expert General Kudriavtsev's opinion on the account by Oswiecim rail-road station employee Jan Mrowiec, APMAB, SS Staff Trial, stenographic record, vol. 7, p. 181.

- Auschwitz 1940-1945, v.2, p.412-4
Sender Jaari: And in another statement by you, made at another place, you said you visited Treblinka in 1942. Which year is correct?
Rudolf Hoess: 1941 is correct. If I said 1942, it was incorrect.

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 360
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby BRoI » Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:52 am

As early as the summer of 1943, British interrogators were being told stories about enormous amounts of fertiliser being made from gassed Jews:

M.I.19. (R.P.S. [Royal Patriotic School]) /1768.
3rd September, 1943.
REPORT
CRACOW.
Interrogation of:- Polish Lorry driver, born 19. Jul. 12.
Left Cracow 28 Mar. 43.
Information as at March, 1943, unless otherwise stated.

[...]

ATROCITIES.

38. On three occasions in about Aug. 42. informant had to take coal to the crematorium in the village of PUSTELNIK about 6klm. from DEBICA which is about 145klm. from CRACOW on the road to LEMBERG.

39. Polish workmen working in the "fertilizer" stores told him that from 450-500 Jews and Poles (mainly Jews) are cremated every day. The Jews are said to come in the main from a distance.

40. The victims are gassed in a special chamber. Suffocation takes about 15 minutes. The bodies are them removed by Ukrainians and Jews to the crematorium and the ashes after cremation filled into sacks and described as "fertilizer".

41. Informant has on his three journeys taken 7 tons, 9 tons and 16 tons back to CRACOW and delivered to a store at LWOWSKA no.9 from where the "fertilizer" us [sic] rationed out to the farmers.

42. It is also possible to buy this "fertilizer" in the Black market at Szl. 40-50. - per sack.

43. The crematorium is run by the S.S. and S.A. and of course the workmen are prisoners and not allowed to leave.
- UK NA: WO 208/5170
Sender Jaari: And in another statement by you, made at another place, you said you visited Treblinka in 1942. Which year is correct?
Rudolf Hoess: 1941 is correct. If I said 1942, it was incorrect.

Balmoral95
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1307
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Balmoral95 » Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:19 am

BRoI wrote:There's apparently "railroad shipping documents":

The Soviet commission that investigated war crimes at Auschwitz determined that bones from corpses burned in the crematoria were sold, after being crushed, to the "Strem" firm in Strzemieszyce (near Dabrowa Gornicza), for use in the manufacture of fertilizer. At least 100 tons of crushed human bones were shipped from Auschwitz to the "Strem" firm in 1943 and 1944.[44]

The German management of "Strem" was to make regular deliveries of crushed bones to the Rendziny chemical factory in Rudniki (near Czestochowa), which manufactured fertilizer. The workers there found burned metal buttons, clips from suspenders, belt buckles, zippers, hair pins and other objects among the crushed bone. The heaps of bone powder left behind when the German management fled from Rudniki contained such items, as well as numerous human teeth and fragments of jaws.[45] A significant portion of the bones and ashes shipped to Rudniki probably came from the corpses of Auschwitz victims. This seems to be corroborated by the account of a former prisoner: "Once ... we took the ashes of burned corpses from the crematorium to the train station. We loaded them on freight cars. I heard someone say they would be used as fertilizer."[46]

[...]

44. Communique of the Soviet Extraordinary State Commission for the Investigation of War Crimes by the German-Fascist Aggressors, May 8, 1945, APMAB, Hoess Trial, vol. 8, p. 6; vol. 11, p. 55; findings of the Soviet forensics expert General Dymitri Ivanovich Kudriavtsev, APMAB, SS Staff Trial, stenographic record, vol. 7, pp. 180-181; findings by General Kudriavtsev, APMAB, Materials/22; statement by the Soviet prosecutor L.N. Smirnov, Prozess gegen die Hauptkriegsverbrecher, vol. 7 pp. 644-645.

45. Soviet documentation of the supply of crushed bones by the "Strem" firm to the Rendziny factory in Rudniki (testimony by factory employees, findings from the examination of bone ash found there, and railroad shipping documents), APMAB, IZ-1/Soviet Commission/4 catalogue no. 149228; see also APMAB, SS Staff Trial, stenographic record, VII (VI), pp. 18-181. One worker employed in the processing of bone ash into fertilizer at the Rendziny factory in Rudniki was told by a railroad employee that the bone ash was shipped from Auschwitz, and other workers regarded this theory as credible.

46. Account by former prisoner Wladyslaw Bujewicz, APMAB, Collection of Testimonies, vol. 94, p. 5. See also forensic expert General Kudriavtsev's opinion on the account by Oswiecim rail-road station employee Jan Mrowiec, APMAB, SS Staff Trial, stenographic record, vol. 7, p. 181.

- Auschwitz 1940-1945, v.2, p.412-4


So WTF do you want? Court docos citing witnesses or primary German docos showing the economic value of ash as fertilizer to the WVHA and private ag firms?


Oh, and take the shite Majdanek post off YouTube.... it'll help with lessening your rep as a disingenuous hypocrite and facile. lying twot.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 344
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: "they never discuss Auschwitz. Probably because it is so obviously a hoax."

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sun Jan 21, 2018 12:23 pm

I have seen the Soviet docs. In fact I probably have some of them.


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jeffk 1970 and 3 guests