Treblinka Perpetrators

[Eddy Marz]

Hello Little Grey Rabbit;
Sorry. I didn’t mean to shock your historian sensibility; it certainly wasn’t my intention. That being said, I believe that interpretation is in no way heretical and consider historians who have a point of view far more interesting than soulless clinical sentences studded with dates and sources. Of course, and it goes without saying, they are of primordial importance as references, but once the references and sourced testimonies on such or such subject or character have been digested, I feel perfectly entitled and justified in emitting an opinion as to what I feel or perceive in a historical human being (and not just from figures). I guess you consider that may be too ‘sentimental’… The historian’s Bête Noire. But then, on what authority could someone like Christopher Browning name the members of the 101st Polizei battalion ‘ordinary men’? Were they really? If one bases a reading of Browning’s book using Lonnie Athen’s theories on criminal behavior, then Browning’s theories fall to pieces. Yet Browning’s book is fascinating, very insightful, and very true on other aspects. So?

I believe that Wirth was proud of his method for 3 reasons:

1. He virtually “invented” the system during T4

2. While applying as candidate to Berlin’s SIPO/SD Academy (June 1940) he was noted for his idea of camouflaging the gas chambers as shower rooms, passed the exam with flying colors, and was promoted Kriminalkommissar 4 months later.

3. Once in Poland, after lengthy gassing experiments conducted by himself, Dr. Kallmeyer, and Lorenz Hackenhold, Wirth opted for a system recreating T4 conditions (brick and mortar gas chambers – as opposed to EK gas-vans), discarding ready made C02 cylinders, and choosing gasoline to feed various motors; gasoline being easy to come by, cheap enough, depending on no exterior factors and therefore creating no suspicion.

Conclusion? Wirth was appreciated for his “creativity”, promoted, and initiated a cheap, effective, and discreet method immediately adopted by the KdF for all AR camps. Sure he was proud of his method.

You ask if Wirth had any opinion concerning Zyklon B… I don’t think he had any concerning the product itself, but he certainly did concerning using it. In his well-known report, Gerstein clearly states:

« Hauptmann Wirth asked me not to propose changes in Berlin re his facilities, and to let it remain as it is, being well established and well-tried. I supervised the burial of the prussic acid because it allegedly had decomposed »

How’s that for sources? But I guess you don’t trust Gerstein’s report. Unfortunately that is your problem – not mine. Interpretation again… The fact that Wirth simply didn’t want to change his method appears as evidence since they didn’t even experiment with the Zyklon which Gerstein had brought all the way from Kolin, and which Rolf Günther of IVB4 had entrusted him to do two months earlier. Wirth obviously had the last word, or else he would have just submitted to orders from above.

Changing the system to Zyklon B would certainly have entailed more than mere “out-gassing” time. Zyklon B is not C02 – and is a highly toxic product. The chambers’ insulation would have had to be completely re-thought, men trained (see about accidental poisoning of SS men in Auschwitz – c/o Pressac), and of course expense.

Nowhere did I say that Gerstein was aware “he was just bringing Zyklon B for experimental purposes”.

[Hecht]

he supported that was not partisans fire but some kind of ambush.

Meaning what ? SS men ? Franz Stangl had also told Gitta Sereny that his comrades, discussing Wirth's death, had come to the conclusion that he had been killed by his own men - which, as we now know, is untrue.

Hello Eddy,

Unfortunatly Lerch's statement is not that specific about this.
He just said that he was targeted by bullets while arrived on place shortly after and that was not partisan's.
But reading his very words, yes, you would be lead to think that there was some kind of SS involvment in Wirth's death.

I don't know if this is true or false, the only comment I can make is that that Lerch was an SS high officier with an important position in the HSSPF Triest, so, I tend to think that his words would be realiable, since I wouldn't expect from an high rank like him no bullshit about an important case, for which, moreover, he was charged by the KdF to investigate about.
So, I think that his report to the KdF about Wirth's death and wereabouts contained also a description of his troubles at killing spot.

Carnier also stated, I think based on Suchomel report, that R men in Triest were very, very happy for the deaths of Reichleitner and Wirth, and had quite a few drinks to celebrate them (the Deaths, I mean).

By the way, as far as I know, there still no undebatable true about Wirth's death, am I wrong?
Also Stefano di Giusto, to my eyes the author of the best and more realiable and informed book about the german activities in the Adriatisches Kuestenland, supported that Wirth's was very likely killed by some sort of not casual "friend fire" (not that friendly, after all )

[Eddy Marz]

By the way, as far as I know, there still no undebatable true about Wirth's death, am I wrong?
Also Stefano di Giusto, to my eyes the author of the best and more realiable and informed book about the german activities in the Adriatisches Kuestenland, supported that Wirth's was very likely killed by some sort of not casual "friend fire" (not that friendly, after all )

Hello Hecht;
After all, I can agree with you, everything is possible. And Stefano di Giusto may well be right in repeating a constant rumor regarding Wirth's death - no smoke without fire as they say. Yet we all know that rumors can be unfounded as well... Other researchers have pointed to a Partisan operation. Will we ever know ?

[Hecht]

By the way, as far as I know, there still no undebatable true about Wirth's death, am I wrong?
Also Stefano di Giusto, to my eyes the author of the best and more realiable and informed book about the german activities in the Adriatisches Kuestenland, supported that Wirth's was very likely killed by some sort of not casual "friend fire" (not that friendly, after all )

Hello Hecht;
After all, I can agree with you, everything is possible. And Stefano di Giusto may well be right in repeating a constant rumor regarding Wirth's death - no smoke without fire as they say. Yet we all know that rumors can be unfounded as well... Other researchers have pointed to a Partisan operation. Will we ever know ?

Agreed my friend.
We will never know.
Of course the fact that Stagl and Lerch supported the very same thing make me think twice about this.
The only thing I'm certain of is that Wirth wasn't really what you would call a "nice fella", so, if was actually killed by his own men, I wouldn't be surprised

Permit me one question: is there any Holo denier that have dealt with Suchomel "confession"?
I mean, looks to me that Suchomel seemed very sharp, clear and realiable while telling these "things" in the Shoah movie, so, I'm pretty curious to know how did deniers deal with this.

Have a nice weekend

[Eddy Marz]

Permit me one question: is there any Holo denier that have dealt with Suchomel "confession"?
I mean, looks to me that Suchomel seemed very sharp, clear and realiable while telling these "things" in the Shoah movie, so, I'm pretty curious to know how did deniers deal with this.

I can't think of anyone specifically, although I've read a good many articles on negationist websites concerning Suchomel's interview by Lanzmann. The general discourse is that 'having been assured that his identity wouldn't be revealed (Suchomel was filmed without his knowing), Suchomel just went into wild imaginative descriptions which he cunningly mixed with real verifiable details'. A pretty lame explanation, and unworthy of consideration.

[Hecht]

Permit me one question: is there any Holo denier that have dealt with Suchomel "confession"?
I mean, looks to me that Suchomel seemed very sharp, clear and realiable while telling these "things" in the Shoah movie, so, I'm pretty curious to know how did deniers deal with this.

I can't think of anyone specifically, although I've read a good many articles on negationist websites concerning Suchomel's interview by Lanzmann. The general discourse is that 'having been assured that his identity wouldn't be revealed (Suchomel was filmed without his knowing), Suchomel just went into wild imaginative descriptions which he cunningly mixed with real verifiable details'. A pretty lame explanation, and unworthy of consideration.

I agree, quite pathetic.
Was that their best explanation?!
I'm curious to know what Mattogno has to say regarding this.
Personally I think that an old man, even if forced to tell the false at Nurnberg as somebody supported, after serving time and 40 years from the facts, would actually tend to tell the real truth about, then that he was innocent if so, even since he had few years to live yet and nothing to lose: I would also say that I would feel unconfortable to tell the truth about such kind of facts in front of a camera (many vets in fact does), so I would tend to lie in that case, and, on the opposite, I would tell the truth in private to a friend, or to someone which is interested into know my real history (in this case Lanzmann), but not for sure in front of any camera or recorder.

[little grey rabbit]

Permit me one question: is there any Holo denier that have dealt with Suchomel "confession"?
I mean, looks to me that Suchomel seemed very sharp, clear and realiable while telling these "things" in the Shoah movie, so, I'm pretty curious to know how did deniers deal with this.

I can't think of anyone specifically, although I've read a good many articles on negationist websites concerning Suchomel's interview by Lanzmann. The general discourse is that 'having been assured that his identity wouldn't be revealed (Suchomel was filmed without his knowing), Suchomel just went into wild imaginative descriptions which he cunningly mixed with real verifiable details'. A pretty lame explanation, and unworthy of consideration.

That's curious, because I would have thought even a cursory glance would tell you that deniers repeat Lanzmann's statements that he paid the Germans in order to talk

German "witnesses" in the film "Shoah" were bought at a high price

I have already shown how Claude Lanzmann, in his film Shoah, sought to make us believe in Nazi gas chambers at Auschwitz and Treblinka. He had, notably, used alleged Polish or German witnesses whose accounts were in reality vague, confused, contradictory and rich in material impossibilities.

In an interview in 1985 he already said on the subject of the "German witnesses": "Money made up the minds of the hesitant ones" (report by Annette Lévy-Willard and Laurent Joffrin in Libération, 25 April 1985, p. 22). Yesterday he did it again, declaring: "And then, I paid. No light sum. I paid them all, the Germans" (Virginie Malingre, "Claude Lanzmann explains Shoah to pupils before its distribution in the lycées", Le Monde, 16 September 2004, p. 12).

Negationist blog http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com/200 ... -were.html

However, he only paid them to say on camera what they had already said in the defence box. Indeed, having read some the pre-trial interrogations, of those I have seen all of them gave a full and complete confession immediately on arrest. There was a remarkable consistency between what they said on day 1 of their arrest and what the final judgement of them was.

German efficiency, I expect. The Germans have such an innate respect for authority that the very idea of dissembling or minimizing to investigators is unthinkable, such a refreshing change from dealing with Anglo-Saxons murder suspects, who generally lie their heads off.

[Eddy Marz]

That's curious, because I would have thought even a cursory glance would tell you

Would you now ?

[carman]

it has been a great discussion so far guys ,,very informative, Eddy did Franz Suchomel consider himself a bit of an expert on Treblinka? thats the impression I got from reading Into that darkness,by Gitta Sereny,,so many more questions I hope to ask ,,having alittle trouble staying logged in ,,very new to typing and such . Thanks again to all

[Eddy Marz]

I wouldn't be able to say if he considered himself an expert, but he certainly knew the workings of Treblinka practically inside out, and also witnessed Wirth's behavior and organization. Although implicated in Aktion Reinhard, Suchomel wasn't a murderer like Franz or Hackenhold and such. He had worked in the photographic services at Hadamar during T4 before being sent to Treblinka (and then Sobibor in October or November 43) where his duty was to supervise unloading of arriving trains, women's undressing hut prior to the 'schlauch', and, later on, assignment to the Geldjuden. There is no mention of him anywhere in the Totenlager This lack of participation in direct murder may also have helped him to forward information more readily.

[trespasser07]

Eddy what is your view on the fate of Hackenhold? Dod you believe he survived the war? Also Kuttner as he was never brought to trial but was one of the pillers of Treblinka.

[Eddy Marz]

Eddy what is your view on the fate of Hackenhold? Dod you believe he survived the war?

Yes, I believe Hackenhold survived in hiding. Michael Tregenza wrote an interesting article on the german police's search for him :
Tregenza, Michael. 'The Disappearance of SS-Hauptscharfuhrer Lorenz Hackenholt ; A Report on the-1959-63 West German Police Search for Lorenz Hackenholt, the Gas Chamber Expert of the Aktion Reinhard Extermination Camps'
E-article : http://www.mazal.org/

[trespasser07]

Anyone any info on Kuttner? Why did he not stand trial?

[Hecht]

Anyone any info on Kuttner? Why did he not stand trial?

Arrested but died before the trial.

[trespasser07]

Thanks Hecht i'm guessing that Kuttner wouldn have recieved a life sentence verdict.