Gassing Vans Revisited

[Roberto]

American citizens have no business being hauled before political courts in foreign lands for jaywalking on government forms.

Again the "political courts", with nothing to show for this imbecile contention. Yawn ...

All courts are ultimately political to varying degrees. Some more than others.

Meaningless platitudes is all Smith can offer, as usual.

Meaningless, perhaps, but very true.

Keep digging, Smith, until the hole is deep enough for your bullshit to fit in.

Certainly not Communist courts.

Why, was Israel ever a Communist country? As to Poland and Ukraine, they ceased to be more then ten years ago, IIRC.

In the 1980s during the Demjanjuk controversy, when he was fighting extradition, Poland and Ukraine were very much Communist countries.

Maybe so, but that doesn’t necessarily mean a trial conducted there would have been a “show-trial”. Besides, the issue under discussion was the possible extradition to those countries in 2003, not in the 1980s.

I think it is extremely naïve to suggest that Demjanjuk would not have been executed if he had been sent as a Nazi War Criminal without U.S. citizenship to a Communist country.

I’d say it is extremely idiotic to maintain that poor Johnny would have been executed without evidence showing that this would necessarily have been so. He would not have been the first and only Nazi War Criminal to get away with a prison term in a Communist country. And then, I’m told that even some states of the wonderful U.S.A. apply the death penalty for murder. Why Smith keeps riding around on the “Communist country” stuff is beyond my understanding, anyway. Poland and Ukraine ceased to be Communist more than ten years ago.

And with respect to Nazi Warcrimes or maybe Palestinian issues Israel's courts are very much political.

How does Smith know that? Because gurus Fred, Brad and Greg told him so?

More naïvete. Sorry.

As I suspected, Smith again has nothing to show for his contention. It’s just another of his articles of faith.

And so was the administrative kangaroo affair spearheaded by the OSI that got Demjanjuk deported.

Where Smith sees kangaroos there are usually none. So let’s have a demonstration of just how "kangaroo" the administrative affair "spearheaded by the OSI" was.

Everybody admits this, Walter and David and even Chuck I believe.

Given Smith’s tendency for misrepresenting other posters’ statements, I’d have to see the statements of Walter Kaschner, David Thompson and Charles Bunch verbatim before accepting Smith’s assertions.

It is not really at issue. It would be charitable to describe the OSI agenda as political instead of criminal.

Whatever puts your confused mind at ease, Smith.

The point is that Demjanjuk was a U.S. citizen and deserved a real U.S. trial, kangaroo or otherwise.

As I suspected, US courts can be "kangaroo" as well, in Smith’s mind – a label they are certain to receive from Smith when one of his Nazi heroes is in the dock.

Demjanjuk was a Nazi? I am shocked, truly shocked.

Poor Smith is trying to play the wise guy. He knows as well as I do what I mean by his “Nazi heroes”: everyone who did his perceived duty, however repugnant, for his and Smith’s beloved Führer during the Nazi era.

I for my part would prefer standing trial in a continental European country like Germany, where (unlike under Anglo-Saxon law) the prosecution is obliged to look for evidence not only against but also in favor of the defendant.

The same seems to apply in Israel, according to what Charles told us.
The fact that the indictment against Demjanjuk was not extended to his activities at Sobibor which became apparent during the trial, as would have been possible under German procedural law, suggests that Israeli procedural law is even more defendant-friendly than procedural law in Germany.

Perhaps but certain political issues like the Holocaust might distort the criminal process one way or another in either country depending on what axes to grind certain officials might have.

They might, but this doesn’t mean that they do. All depends on the effectiveness of mechanisms applied to assure fairness and objectivity.

Even in the U.S. it would be a circus.

Or so poor Smith would like to believe.

But it would be our circus.

As under US law the prosecution must look only for evidence against the defendant, leaving the presentation of favorable evidence to the defense alone, and as new evidence is not admitted before the court of appeal, according to Charles, I’m not so sure if this would be to the defendant’s advantage.

And eight years in an Israeli prison for having been in the SS is a bit harsh as I see it since they could not prove any warcrimes.

It's called preventive detention, to which a murder suspect is subject under any legislation I know of while he’s on trial (or are murder suspects allowed to run free in the US while their guilt or innocence is being established?).

Yes, it's called bail and it often means the difference between conviction and acquittal because the defendant doesn't have that "deer in the headlights" look of a prisoner when he faces the dock. Sometimes bail is set ludicrously high, as is the case with most sex-crime acusations and most people don't have those kinds of assets. Of course, bail is harder to get with murder than with shoplifting and especially depends on past criminal history. O.J. Simpson couldn't get bail, despite his millionaire lawyers, because he tried to bolt in the famous low-speed chase with the white Bronco.

We’re talking about a murder suspect here, and I consider it improbable that, even in the U.S., a murder suspect can be released against however high a bail. But I’m prepared to be convinced otherwise if shown legal provisions allowing for this or judicial decisions where such release has been conceded.

Murder suspects are routinely allowed out on bail in the U.S. if they are not habitual criminals and do not present a risk of flight. The bail might be set rather high, however. Perhaps Walter, David "Commissar" C. or Chuck could back me up on this.

I’ll wait for that backup. Smith shoots the bull all day long.

There is no doubt the Demjanjuk would have been free on bond if he had been tried for mass-murder in the USA.

Now that’s a statement of faith. Faith moves mountains, doesn’t it, Smith?

Instead of all that blah-blah-blah, how about some evidence that poor Demjanjuk had a harder time while imprisoned in Israel than he would have had in a jail somewhere in the U.S.?

Other than he would have been free on bond in the U.S., I think he did have an easier time in an Israeli prison than in a U.S. jail would have been. For one thing he was a celebrity in Israel, worth his weight in gold. And the carnival publicity tended to work in favor of the defense the longer he was held.

The one statement in Smith’s post approaching reasonability.

As far as the diesel exhaust topic, well, that is the absurd case that was made against Demjanjuk in Israel. I calls 'em as I sees 'em.

The case made was one of mass murder. An eventual inaccuracy in the description of the murder weapon doesn't make it absurd, under the circumstances.

Even with mass-murder you still need a murder weapon.

Yeah, and you have one, whether or not you know all the details about it and even if, assuming Smith’s dieseling is not just another sack full of cattle manure, your notion in regard to certain details is inaccurate.

I stand ready to hear your evidence for gasoline gassings at Treblinka or Sobibor.

Any good reason why such evidence would be required for the purposes of criminal justice and/or historiography, considering that, as a I explained, even complete uncertainty about the nature and mechanism of the murder weapon would make no difference to the essential findings of fact?

As it is, the issue is rather simple. The killing mechanism was exhaust from an engine. If it couldn’t have been diesel exhaust, it can only have been gasoline exhaust, full stop. Smith has not only failed to convincingly demonstrate the implausibility of diesel exhaust and – far more important – the possibility and relevance of establishing this detail, he has not even been able to demonstrate that there is a convergence of eyewitness accounts on the description of gassing engines as diesel engines. Which is not surprising, given that such convergence doesn’t exist, as I already demonstrated on two other threads,

So-Called JOKERS...
http://www.thirdreichforum.com/viewtopi ... a11758a2e2

and another I don’t remember right now:

[…]
Some time ago I had a look at some of the eyewitness and documentary evidence to find out where what Smith’s guru Berg calls the “myth within a myth” comes from.

The results were the following:

1. Gas vans used by the Einsatzgruppen in the occupied territories of the Soviet Union

Dr. Widmann: No mention of type of engine (Kogon/Langbein/Rückerl et al, Nationalsozialistische Massentötungen durch Giftgas, pages 81 and following)

Rauff: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 82)

Pradel: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 82)

Wentritt: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 83)

Leidig: Doesn’t mention type of engine. (Kogon et al, as above, pages 83 and following)

Just (letter to Rauff of 5 June 1942): No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 84 and following)

Gniewuch: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 87, 90, 91)

Trühe: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 87)

Mendel Vulfovich: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 88 )

Adolf Rübe: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 89)

Zalman Levinbuck: Gasoline engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 91)

Unter den Lastwagen gibt es riesige mit hermetisch verschließbaren Türen … Diese luftdicht geschlossenen Wagen werden ‘dushegubky’ genannt, was auf russisch ‘Seelentöter’ heißt. Sie bringen bereits tote Menschen heran, die man nicht mehr erschießen muß. Die Menschen werden unterwegs vergiftet durch Gase und Abgasdämpfe, die durch das Verbrennen von Benzin im Motor entstanden sind. Denn diese Abgase werden durch ein spezielles Rohr ins Wageninnere geleitet, anstatt, wie normalerweise, frei an die Luft zu entweichen; und so werden die Menschen durch das Kohlenmonoxyd getötet.

My translation:

Among the trucks there were giant one with doors that closed hermetically.... These hermetically closed vans are called ‘dushegubky’, which in Russian means ‘soul killer’. They already bring along dead people who don’t have to be shot anymore. The people are poisoned during the drive by gases and exhaust fumes that are created by the combustion of gasoline in the motor.[my emphasis] This because the exhaust is led through a special valve into the inside of the van instead of freely vanishing into the air as it normally would, and thus the people are killed by the carbon monoxide.

Chugunov: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 91)

Boris Dobin: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 91 and following)

Lauer: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 93)

Bauer: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 93)

Willi Friedrich: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 94 and following)

Wilhelm Findeisen: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 95)

Robert Mohr: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 96)

Ljudmila Nazarevskaya: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 97)

Kotov: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 101 and following)

Paul Zapp: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 104 and following)

Johannes Schlupper: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 105 and following)

Eugenia Ostrovec: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 106 and following)

2. Gas vans used in Yugoslavia and Eastern Poland

Dr. Harald Turner (letter to Wolff of 11 April 1942): No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 107 and following)

Hedwig Schönfein: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 108)

Benno Goldbrand: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, page 109)

3. Gas vans used at Chelmno

Walter Burmeister: Gasoline engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 115, 123 and following, 125 and following, 129 and following)

[…]Die Wagen waren mittelschwere Renault-Lastwagen mit Ottomotor. Sie ließen sich schlecht fahren, weil sie nicht einen so großen Wendekreis hatten. Der zeitweise hinzugekommene dritte Wagen war wohl ein schwerer. Die Wagen hatten Kastenaufbau mit einer großen Zweiflügeltür an der Rückseite, ähnlich wie Möbelwagen.[…]

My translation:

[...]The vans were medium size Renault trucks with Otto engines.[my emphasis] They were hard to drive because they didn’t have so big a turning circle. The temporarily added third van must have been a heavy one. The vans had a box-like buildup with a big two-wing door at the back side, similar to furniture vans.[...]

Johann H. and Johann P. before the Vienna County Court: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 116 and following)

Kurt Möbius: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 122 and following)

Wilfried Heukelbach: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 124 and following)

Gustav Laabs: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 126 and following)

Walter Piller: Gasoline engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 138 and following)

[...]Während der Fahrt wurde durch den Kraftfahrer Laabs ein Ventil geöffnet, durch welches Gas einströmte, welches die Insassen in 2-3 Minuten tötete. Hierbei handelte es sich um Gase, die durch den Benzinmotor erzeugt wurden.[...]

.

My translation:

[...]During the drive the driver Laabs opened a valve, through which gas streamed in, which killed those inside within 2-3 minutes. These were gases that had been created by the gasoline motor.[my emphasis][...]

.

4. Gas chambers of Belzec extermination camp

Karl Alfred Schluch: No mention of type of engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 167 and following)

Gerstein: diesel engine (Kogon et al, as above, pages 171 and following)

Pfannenstiel: No mention of type of engine. Speaks of a 100 BHP motor that was run with diesel fuel (“Er wurde mit Dieselkraftstoff betrieben”)

Reder: gasoline engine

[…]Gerstein, citing Globocnik, claimed the camps used diesel motors, but witnesses who actually serviced the engines in Belzec and Sobibor (Reder and Fuchs) spoke of gasoline engines.[…]

Source of quote:

http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/e ... .asp#5.4.5

5. Gas chambers of Sobibor extermination camp

Fuchs: gasoline engine. See Kogon et al, as above, pages 158 and following and Browning, as above. Translation of Fuchs’ deposition:

Testimony of SS Scharfuhrer Erich Fuchs, in the Sobibor-Bolender trial, Dusseldorf: (Quoted in "BELZEC, SOBIBOR, TREBLINKA - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps", Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 31-32). .....We unloaded the motor. It was a heavy Russian benzine engine, at least 200 horsepower.[my emphasis] We installed the engine on a concrete foundation and set up the connection between the exhaust and the tube. I then tested the motor. It did not work. I was able to repair the ignition and the valves, and the motor finally started running. The chemist, who I knew from Belzec, entered the gas chamber with measuring instruments to test the concentration of the gas. Following this, as gassing experiment was carried out. If my memory serves me right, about thirty to forty women were gassed in one gas chamber. The Jewish women were forced to undress in an open place close to the gas chamber, and were driven into the gas chamber by the above mentioned SS members and the Ukrainian auxiliaries. when the women were shut up in the gas chamber I and Bolender set the motor in motion. The motor functioned first in neutral. Both of us stood by the motor and switched from "Neutral" (Freiauspuff) to "Cell" (Zelle), so that the gas was conveyed to the chamber. At the suggestion of the chemist, I fixed the motor on a definite speed so that it was unnecessary henceforth to press on the gas. About ten minutes later the thirty to forty women were dead.

Source of quote:

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... /fuchs.t01

This inconvenient witness provided the most detailed description of a gassing engine available, and he expressly mentioned a gasoline engine.

So he must have been lying, “Revisionist” faith says. All the way to a four year prison sentence for assistance to murder. Proof that he lied, in the “real world” of “Revisionists”: he didn’t describe the device with the level of detail that the true believers would like to believe a “true technician” would have, or something like that.

6. Gas chambers of Treblinka extermination camp

Central Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, based on the testimonials of Jankiel Wiernik, Henryk Poswolski, Abe Kon, Aron Czechowicz, Oskar Strawczynski, Samuel Reisman, Aleksander Kudlik, Hejnoch Brener, Starislaw Kon, Eugeniusz Turowski, Henryk Reichman, Szyja Warszawsski, and Leon Finkelsztejn: No mention of the type of engine.

The aspect of the chambers in which victims were gasssed, according to statements by the witnesses Wiernik, Rajchman and Czechowicz, was as follows: Both buildings had many corridors, within the larger building the entrances to the chambers being on both sides of the corridor, but in the smaller one on one side only. The entrances were small and had tightly closing doors. In the outer wall’s of the chambers were large trap doors which could be raised in order to permit the removal of the corpses. The chambers had tiled floors, sloping towards the outer side. In the ceiling were openings connected by pipes with engines situated in adjoining buildings, which produced the CO gas with which the victims were suffocated.

Source of quote:

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gcpoltreb1.htm

Ya’akov Wiernik at the Eichmann trial: No mention of type of engine.

[…]Q. Where did the gas enter?

A. That is in the sketch. Here was the gas engine, the engine which forced the gas in. And there were pipes with valves. They would open the valve into the chamber where the people were. There was an engine of a Soviet tank standing there, and in this way the gas was introduced. Here were the doors where people entered from one side, and, on the other, this was the large door which opened along almost the entire wall. And, after forty to forty-five minutes had passed, they would stop, they would open the door, and the dead bodies would fall out. And here was a spare engine next to the three. Numbers 1, 2, 3 and 26 were the engines that generated the electricity, and there, too, there was a motor.

Q. I understand from this that the gas was produced on the spot, or was it brought in ready-made from outside?

A. The gas was produced on the spot.[…]

Source of quote:

http://www.ukar.org/eichma02.shtml

Eliahu Rosenberg at the Eichmann trial: No mention of type of engine. Speaks of “Ropa, which was a kind of oil, a crude oil” as having been the fuel they put into the gassing engine. Possible conclusions see my last post on this thread.

[…]Q. Where did the gas come from?

A. The gas came from an engine.

Q. They did not bring it from outside — it was produced on the spot?

A. It was Ropa — Ropa gas.

Q. Was it manufactured by an engine, from the exhaust of a diesel engine?

A. Yes. It was gas from an engine. They put in Ropa, which was a kind of oil, a crude oil, and the fumes entered the gas chambers. The people who were the last to enter the gas chambers, the very last, received stabs in the bodies from the bayonets, since the last persons already saw what was going on inside and did not want to enter. Four hundred people were put into one small gas chamber. And when they forced them in, they, on their part, pressed inwards and in this way reached the full capacity, so that only with difficulty could the outer door of the chamber be shut.[…]

Source of quote:

http://www.ukar.org/eichma02.shtml

Otto Horn before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, 26 February 1980: No mention of type of engine. See transcription of interrogation protocol under

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hor ... n-004.html

Adolf Eichmann: No mention of type of engine.

[…]Höfle told the police captain to explain the installation to me. And then he started in. He had a, well, let's say, a vulgar, uncultivated voice. Maybe he drank. He spoke some dialect from the southwestern corner of Germany, and he told me how he had made everything airtight. It seems they were going to hook up a Russian submarine engine and pipe the exhaust into the houses and the Jews inside would be poisoned.[…]

Source of quote:

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/e/eic ... n-004.html

Rudolf Höß: No mention of type of engine.

[…]The camp commandant at Treblinka told me that he had liquidated 80,000 in the course of half a year. He was principally concerned with liquidating all the Jews from the Warsaw ghetto. He used monoxide gas and I did not think that his methods were very efficient.[…]

Source of quote:

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/camps/aktion ... linka.html

Pavel Vladimirovich Leleko before the Fourth Department of the "SMERSH" Directorate of Counterintelligence of the Second Belorussian Front: diesel engine.

[…]The road from the undressing rooms, fenced on both sides by barbed wire intertwined with branches led to the gas chamber building where people were exterminated with gas obtained from running diesel engines.[…]

Source of quote:

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... leleko.001

Nikolai Petrovich Malagon, interrogated in Zaporozh'ye, March 18, 1978: diesel engine

[…]Pipes carrying exhaust gas from running diesel motors were installed in the gas chambers and the people inside perished.[…]

Source of quote:

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... alagon.001

7. The impression conveyed by the above collection of depositions is the following:

a) Most witnesses to gassings with engine exhaust don’t mention the type of engine at all.

b) Those who do mention it casually, without making a big deal out of it.

c) Regarding the gas vans, the only depositions mentioning the type of engine expressly speak of gasoline engines.

d) Regarding Sobibor, the only deposition that addresses the type of engine expressly mentions a gasoline engine.

e) Regarding Belzec, the only deposition expressly mentioning a diesel engine is that of Gerstein, and outsider who, according to Browning, didn’t see the engine himself. Another outside observer, Pfannenstiel, speaks of an engine running on diesel fuel, which doesn’t necessarily mean that the engine itself was a diesel engine, see below. Of the depositions of camp insiders, one (Schluch) doesn’t mention the type of engine at all and the other (Reder) speaks of a gasoline engine.

f) Of the depositions regarding Treblinka, only two mention the type of engine, and these speak of a diesel engine. Both come from former Ukrainian camp guards not involved in the operation of the gassing engine, and neither is detailed enough to establish whether the witnesses based their descriptions on features they observed themselves or on what they heard from others, making it impossible to assess the accuracy of their statements ("critical" as "Revisionists" are regarding the details of the inconvenient deposition of Fuchs, they wouldn't think of even mentioning the lack of detail of the depositions of Leleko and Malagon, for obvious reasons). The depositions of the witnesses who testified before the Central Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland seem to have left the type of engine unmentioned or to have been inconclusive in this respect, or then the Commission didn’t consider this detail worth mentioning. Eichmann and Höß do not mention the type of engine, and they obviously didn’t see the engine but described it after what they heard from others. The depositions of Wiernik and Rosenberg at the Eichmann trial and the deposition of Horn before the Ohio District Court, on the other hand, are based on what the witnesses saw themselves and constitute the most detailed descriptions of the gassing device among those collected. Neither of these two descriptions clearly points towards one or the other type of engine, however. Rosenberg’s statement that the engine ran with “Ropa”, a Polish term for rock oil or diesel oil, makes it possible that what he considered to have been the gassing engine was a diesel engine. It is equally possible, however, that the engine was a gasoline engine run on diesel fuel for gassing purposes, or that Rosenberg confounded the gassing engine, which was a gasoline engine running on gasoline, with one of a number of diesel engines used to generate electricity for the camp.

g) At any rate, there is no such thing as a convergence of eyewitness testimonials on the use of diesel engines, nor did any of the witnesses seem to have given any significance to the detail what type of engine was used. Thus the diesel engine “myth within a myth” that Berg makes such a fuss about seems to be little other than a windmill he built himself in order to have something to furiously race against. One of the many such paper dragons the valiant “Revisionist” dragon slayers like to impress their gullible followers with.

So far all you have is the testimony of Sgt. Fuchs, which is rather incomplete,

Yeah, sure. See above.

Apart from the irrelevance of Smith’s criteria as to what is or not “complete”, what does he base this conclusion on, by the way?

Has he been to the archives of the respective court and looked up the protocol of Fuchs’ deposition?

And if Fuchs’ rather detailed deposition is “incomplete”, what about much more vague depositions that Smith and his gurus derive the supposed “myth within a myth” from?

as has been discussed extensively on these two threads (below).

Discussed without opposition among true believers. That means a lot, of course.

I know you can't post there, unfortunately,

Are you still posting there, Smith? If so, shame on you. I would have expected you to have more self-esteem.

but you can post here. Perhaps a new thread, however.

Feel free to open one, Smith. I certainly won’t, because, as you know, I have little time and inclination for discussions about the sex of the angels.

CLICK! attempted switch from alleged diesel 'gassings' to gasoline

Poor jerks. Contrary to what their confused minds tell them, no historian or criminal justice authority gives a damn about what would be an understandable and irrelevant inaccuracy of observation by non-technical witnesses, at worst.

CLICK! Answer to Jonathan Swift on Diesels...

Wasn’t that the thread where Smith, ever the gentleman, responded to a post deleted by the moderator, the poster being unable to respond to Smith’s rubbish because he had also been banned ?

If I were you, Smith, I’d keep my mouth shut about this accomplishment.

To our readers interested in the issue of “Revisionist” free speech, I recommend reading the following threads on this forum:

about Rudolf Höß
http://www.thirdreichforum.com/viewtopi ... 8656236f01

"If it can’t happen as alleged, it didn’t happen"
http://www.thirdreichforum.com/viewtopi ... 8656236f01

Mass Graves
http://www.thirdreichforum.com/viewtopi ... 8656236f01
(featuring Scott Smith vs. Jonathan Swift)

So-Called JOKERS...
http://www.thirdreichforum.com/viewtopi ... a11758a2e2
(Smith vs. Swift, continuation)

For the record
http://www.thirdreichforum.com/viewtopi ... 8656236f01

Very honestly, my dear friend, I don’t know why you keep doing this to yourself. You are knowledgeable and talented enough to contribute to this forum with interesting information and arguments. Instead of doing so, however, you keep running the same "Revisionist" baloney over and over again, no matter how silly it is, thereby giving the impression that – as a former fellow poster once put it – you so desperately want to believe certain things that you turn your brain off.

I feel truly sorry for you, Smith.

And I don’t think I’m the only one.

[Scott Smith]

Certainly not Communist courts.

Why, was Israel ever a Communist country? As to Poland and Ukraine, they ceased to be more then ten years ago, IIRC.

Yeah but we are talking about over ten years ago, aren't we. Demjanjuk isn't going to be extradited anywhere now because the OSI's dirty game was exposed.

In the 1980s during the Demjanjuk controversy, when he was fighting extradition, Poland and Ukraine were very much Communist countries.

Maybe so, but that doesn’t necessarily mean a trial conducted there would have been a “show-trial”. Besides, the issue under discussion was the possible extradition to those countries in 2003, not in the 1980s.

It may not have been a show but it would still have been a farce.

I think it is extremely naïve to suggest that Demjanjuk would not have been executed if he had been sent as a Nazi War Criminal without U.S. citizenship to a Communist country.

I’d say it is extremely idiotic to maintain that poor Johnny would have been executed without evidence showing that this would necessarily have been so. He would not have been the first and only Nazi War Criminal to get away with a prison term in a Communist country. And then, I’m told that even some states of the wonderful U.S.A. apply the death penalty for murder. Why Smith keeps riding around on the “Communist country” stuff is beyond my understanding, anyway. Poland and Ukraine ceased to be Communist more than ten years ago.

Well, Walus was able to prove that he had been an agricultural worker and not even in the SS. But if Demjanjuk had been deported to a Communist country like Federenko, who can believe that he would not have been executed as a Nazi Warcriminal? What about that?

The case made was one of mass murder. An eventual inaccuracy in the description of the murder weapon doesn't make it absurd, under the circumstances.

Even with mass-murder you still need a murder weapon.

Yeah, and you have one, whether or not you know all the details about it and even if, assuming Smith’s dieseling is not just another sack full of cattle manure, your notion in regard to certain details is inaccurate.

I stand ready to hear your evidence for gasoline gassings at Treblinka or Sobibor.

Any good reason why such evidence would be required for the purposes of criminal justice and/or historiography, considering that, as a I explained, even complete uncertainty about the nature and mechanism of the murder weapon would make no difference to the essential findings of fact?

Well, it would be the first murder case where an exotic weapon was not established. Of course it might not be important if one brings apriori beliefs to the investigation.

As it is, the issue is rather simple. The killing mechanism was exhaust from an engine. If it couldn’t have been diesel exhaust, it can only have been gasoline exhaust, full stop.

Or it could have been a knife or a gun. Or a rocket engine or a death-ray. Or a homicidal Zeppelin. Oh the humanity...

Smith has not only failed to convincingly demonstrate the implausibility of diesel exhaust

I'm afraid I have, oh ye of short memory. At least if the death toll is hundreds of thousands and the time of gassing to death was less than five hours. Xanthro found one example of an octogenarian who may have perished after only an hour inhaling diesel fumes--but I have not been able to confirm that report from a primary source. And that is ONE case!

and – far more important – the possibility and relevance of establishing this detail, he has not even been able to demonstrate that there is a convergence of eyewitness accounts on the description of gassing engines as diesel engines. Which is not surprising, given that such convergence doesn’t exist, as I already demonstrated on two other threads,

Well, you ignored the 1943 Krasnodar and Kharkov trials in the Soviet Union, where both the murder-vans were identified as Saurer AND as diesels.

Then there is Gerstein. How does Browning know that Gerstein never saw the engine? Why would a mining engineer particularly think an engine was a diesel?

And Pfannenstiel said diesel fuel (but no other identifying details, which is suddenly important to Roberto, where the details of gasoline engines don't matter).

And Eichmann, who describes an engine from a Russian submarine. It must be a diesel unless there is an example of a gasoline-driven submarine. One German version with a Walthermotor used chemical steam for propulsion. But maybe he meant an electric motor! How diabolical. All submarines have one of those, except nuclear and Walther types. Remember that this is Holocaust science.

And Lelenko, diesel engine, with the SMERSH quote you provided from Nizkor.

And Malagon, also from the Soviet Union, as provide by you and Nizkor.

And then we have Rozenberg and diesel (Ropa) oil. This certainly means a diesel engine unless (as you said) he confused a diesel electrical-generator for the gasoline engine or other gassing apparatus that generated the homicidal carbon monoxide.

And lastly, the Rauff memo mentions Saurer vans again, i.e., diesels.

But with this particular inquiry I think we should just confine ourselves to the Reinhardt camps and not every piece of hearsay where somebody mistook a German van for a death-chamber on wheels.

5. Gas chambers of Sobibor extermination camp

Fuchs: gasoline engine. See Kogon et al, as above, pages 158 and following and Browning, as above. Translation of Fuchs’ deposition:

Testimony of SS Scharfuhrer Erich Fuchs, in the Sobibor-Bolender trial, Dusseldorf: (Quoted in "BELZEC, SOBIBOR, TREBLINKA - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps", Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 31-32). .....We unloaded the motor. It was a heavy Russian benzine engine, at least 200 horsepower.[my emphasis] We installed the engine on a concrete foundation and set up the connection between the exhaust and the tube. I then tested the motor. It did not work. I was able to repair the ignition and the valves, and the motor finally started running. The chemist, who I knew from Belzec, entered the gas chamber with measuring instruments to test the concentration of the gas. Following this, as gassing experiment was carried out. If my memory serves me right, about thirty to forty women were gassed in one gas chamber. The Jewish women were forced to undress in an open place close to the gas chamber, and were driven into the gas chamber by the above mentioned SS members and the Ukrainian auxiliaries. when the women were shut up in the gas chamber I and Bolender set the motor in motion. The motor functioned first in neutral. Both of us stood by the motor and switched from "Neutral" (Freiauspuff) to "Cell" (Zelle), so that the gas was conveyed to the chamber. At the suggestion of the chemist, I fixed the motor on a definite speed so that it was unnecessary henceforth to press on the gas. About ten minutes later the thirty to forty women were dead.

Source of quote:

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... /fuchs.t01

This inconvenient witness provided the most detailed description of a gassing engine available, and he expressly mentioned a gasoline engine.

Yes, as I said, FUCHS is the only one to provide any significant details on the engine type in order to establish it as gasoline, as was discussed in the mentioned Air-Photo threads.

CLICK! attempted switch from alleged diesel 'gassings' to gasoline

CLICK! Answer to Jonathan Swift on Diesels...

So he must have been lying, “Revisionist” faith says. All the way to a four year prison sentence for assistance to murder. Proof that he lied, in the “real world” of “Revisionists”: he didn’t describe the device with the level of detail that the true believers would like to believe a “true technician” would have, or something like that.

The devil is in the details, isn't it, Roberto.

6. Gas chambers of Treblinka extermination camp

Central Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, based on the testimonials of Jankiel Wiernik, Henryk Poswolski, Abe Kon, Aron Czechowicz, Oskar Strawczynski, Samuel Reisman, Aleksander Kudlik, Hejnoch Brener, Starislaw Kon, Eugeniusz Turowski, Henryk Reichman, Szyja Warszawsski, and Leon Finkelsztejn: No mention of the type of engine.

A curious omission. Steam and town-gas were also claimed, as was chlorine gas and electricity at one time or another.

The aspect of the chambers in which victims were gasssed, according to statements by the witnesses Wiernik, Rajchman and Czechowicz, was as follows: Both buildings had many corridors, within the larger building the entrances to the chambers being on both sides of the corridor, but in the smaller one on one side only. The entrances were small and had tightly closing doors. In the outer wall’s of the chambers were large trap doors which could be raised in order to permit the removal of the corpses. The chambers had tiled floors, sloping towards the outer side. In the ceiling were openings connected by pipes with engines situated in adjoining buildings, which produced the CO gas with which the victims were suffocated.

Source of quote:

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gcpoltreb1.htm

Well, DETAILS don't matter, do they?


Let's try a little experiment, shall we...

The aspect of the saucers in which victims were gassified, according to statements by the witnesses Wiernik, Rajchman and Czechowicz, was as follows: Both spaceships had many corridors, within the larger saucer the entrances to the Death Ray being on both sides of the corridor, but in the smaller one on one side only. The entrances were small and had tightly closing doors. In the outer walls of the saucers were large trap doors which could be raised in order to permit the removal of the Soylent Green. The saucers had silvery floors, sloping towards the outer side. In the ceiling were openings connected by plasma pipes with reactors situated in adjoining cavities, which produced the plasma with which the victims were vaporized.

a) Most witnesses to gassings with engine exhaust don’t mention the type of engine at all.

And no investigators thought to ask. Curious.

b) Those who do mention it casually, without making a big deal out of it.

No realizing the technical significance, obviously. This is called "implausible embellishment."

c) Regarding the gas vans, the only depositions mentioning the type of engine expressly speak of gasoline engines.

If one discounts the Rauff memo and the Krasnodar/Kharkov trials. But again, perhaps we should limit ourselves to the Reinhardt camps.

d) Regarding Sobibor, the only deposition that addresses the type of engine expressly mentions a gasoline engine.

As I've already stated myself, Fuchs gives us sufficient detail to establish the type of engine, but not all the verisimilitude for the story.

e) Regarding Belzec, the only deposition expressly mentioning a diesel engine is that of Gerstein, and outsider who, according to Browning, didn’t see the engine himself. Another outside observer, Pfannenstiel, speaks of an engine running on diesel fuel, which doesn’t necessarily mean that the engine itself was a diesel engine, see below. Of the depositions of camp insiders, one (Schluch) doesn’t mention the type of engine at all and the other (Reder) speaks of a gasoline engine.

How would Browning know what Gerstein did or didn't see? The only critical analysis of Gerstein was provided by Roques, who had his Ph.D. stripped by fiat for smashing a graven image and breaking the French Thoughtcrimes laws.

So far all you have is the testimony of Sgt. Fuchs, which is rather incomplete,

Yeah, sure. See above.

Apart from the irrelevance of Smith’s criteria as to what is or not “complete”, what does he base this conclusion on, by the way?

Did you even read the discussion and the points made by me, Sailor, and others?

Has he been to the archives of the respective court and looked up the protocol of Fuchs’ deposition?

Are laymen allowed access--or credentialed Holocaustorians and establishment jurists only. Stäglich, a Bundestablishment judge who is not a Believer, could not access the postwar West German trial records for Auschwitz.

And if Fuchs’ rather detailed deposition is “incomplete”, what about much more vague depositions that Smith and his gurus derive the supposed “myth within a myth” from?

You are missing the point that I said that people weren't gassed in the hundreds of thousands with diesel exhaust. I have made no claim about gasoline engines from a technical perspective. What the sacred liturgy says about how people died may or may not have any bearing with how/if people died. I am not Hannover. Just because the Jews might have gotten their story wrong doesn't mean that they never suffered and died at the hands of the Nazis during the war. But the truth is important for historiography.

as has been discussed extensively on these two threads (below).

Discussed without opposition among true believers. That means a lot, of course.

Mr. Swift was offered the chance to discuss the matter on this board. Obviously he had no interest in doing so, as he only cabbaged your material anyway.

I know you can't post there, unfortunately,

Are you still posting there, Smith? If so, shame on you. I would have expected you to have more self-esteem.

Er, no. And besides, why the churlish attitude considering that I have bent over backwards trying to get them to allow the opposition to post in all fairness to you and others? If it wasn't that I do not want to get dragged into the big lawsuit or cause anyone else the same trouble I would not have backed-off.

but you can post here. Perhaps a new thread, however.

Feel free to open one, Smith. I certainly won’t, because, as you know, I have little time and inclination for discussions about the sex of the angels.

Certainly this would be an important ontological question. Like I said, if you have mass-murder then you have to have a mass-murder weapon. Excuse me for asking inconvenient questions of Believers.

Poor jerks. Contrary to what their confused minds tell them, no historian or criminal justice authority gives a damn about what would be an understandable and irrelevant inaccuracy of observation by non-technical witnesses, at worst.

And why not? Perhaps because it is not a matter of epistemological truth but what van Pelt calls Moral Certainty, i.e., a matter of Faith, instead... The Holocaust as all-things-Holy.

Very honestly, my dear friend, I don’t know why you keep doing this to yourself. You are knowledgeable and talented enough to contribute to this forum with interesting information and arguments.

How do you know?

Instead of doing so, however, you keep running the same "Revisionist" baloney over and over again, no matter how silly it is, thereby giving the impression that – as a former fellow poster once put it – you so desperately want to believe certain things that you turn your brain off.

I feel truly sorry for you, Smith.

And I don’t think I’m the only one.

Oh now don't worry none. I've got a sweet chicken hatchling named Cortagravatas, called "Corty" for short. He sits on my shoulder when I sit on my ammunition crate and surf the Internet. He just chirps in my ear and pecks away at my collar. Sometimes he soils my clothing a bit but I will always keep him. Cockadoodledoo.
8)

[witness]

. Sometimes he soils my clothing a bit but I will always keep him.

A bit...? You wish..
Your "ammunition" is all soaked through..

[Roberto]

Certainly not Communist courts.

Why, was Israel ever a Communist country? As to Poland and Ukraine, they ceased to be more then ten years ago, IIRC.

Yeah but we are talking about over ten years ago, aren't we.

No, we are not. It was Smith who tried to change the subject when he saw he was getting nowhere regarding present-day Poland and Ukraine.

Demjanjuk isn't going to be extradited anywhere now because the OSI's dirty game was exposed.

"The OSI’s dirty game" – an integral part of what makes poor Smith tick, isn’t it?

In the 1980s during the Demjanjuk controversy, when he was fighting extradition, Poland and Ukraine were very much Communist countries.

Maybe so, but that doesn’t necessarily mean a trial conducted there would have been a “show-trial”. Besides, the issue under discussion was the possible extradition to those countries in 2003, not in the 1980s.

It may not have been a show but it would still have been a farce.

As Smith has nothing to show for this nonsensical contention, he would do himself a favor by keeping it to himself.

I think it is extremely naïve to suggest that Demjanjuk would not have been executed if he had been sent as a Nazi War Criminal without U.S. citizenship to a Communist country.

I’d say it is extremely idiotic to maintain that poor Johnny would have been executed without evidence showing that this would necessarily have been so. He would not have been the first and only Nazi War Criminal to get away with a prison term in a Communist country. And then, I’m told that even some states of the wonderful U.S.A. apply the death penalty for murder. Why Smith keeps riding around on the “Communist country” stuff is beyond my understanding, anyway. Poland and Ukraine ceased to be Communist more than ten years ago.

Well, Walus was able to prove that he had been an agricultural worker and not even in the SS. But if Demjanjuk had been deported to a Communist country like Federenko, who can believe that he would not have been executed as a Nazi Warcriminal?

"Who can believe" - crap is no substitute for evidence. Even during World War II German war criminals often got away with prison terms in the Soviet Union. The number of death sentences was actually rather low, about 1,000 according to German historian Andreas Hilbiger. What about that?

Even with mass-murder you still need a murder weapon.

Yeah, and you have one, whether or not you know all the details about it and even if, assuming Smith’s dieseling is not just another sack full of cattle manure, your notion in regard to certain details is inaccurate.

I stand ready to hear your evidence for gasoline gassings at Treblinka or Sobibor.

Any good reason why such evidence would be required for the purposes of criminal justice and/or historiography, considering that, as a I explained, even complete uncertainty about the nature and mechanism of the murder weapon would make no difference to the essential findings of fact?

Well, it would be the first murder case where an exotic weapon was not established.

Hardly so, and I don’t see the "exoticism". As even Smith should have understood by now, the details of murder weapons are a footnote to historiography, and to criminal justice they matter only insofar as they provide hints about the identity of the criminal. Was that the case here, Smith? Was it necessary to establish the exact mechanism of the murder weapon in order to prove the deeds and guilt of the defendants at the West German Treblinka trials beyond a reasonable doubt?

Of course it might not be important if one brings apriori beliefs to the investigation.

An investigation focuses on what matters to the investigation. What relevance – if any - the murder weapon’s details have in this respect, in this particular case, I have often asked Smith to explain, without ever getting anything other than his imbecile "Revisionist" platitudes as a response.

As it is, the issue is rather simple. The killing mechanism was exhaust from an engine. If it couldn’t have been diesel exhaust, it can only have been gasoline exhaust, full stop.

Or it could have been a knife or a gun. Or a rocket engine or a death-ray. Or a homicidal Zeppelin. Oh the humanity...

No, my dear boy. The number of alternatives is rather reduced. And even if it were not, what would that matter?

Smith has not only failed to convincingly demonstrate the implausibility of diesel exhaust

I'm afraid I have, oh ye of short memory.

I wonder who else is.

At least if the death toll is hundreds of thousands and the time of gassing to death was less than five hours. Xanthro found one example of an octogenarian who may have perished after only an hour inhaling diesel fumes--but I have not been able to confirm that report from a primary source. And that is ONE case!

Cut out the crap, Smith. You know what I’m referring to – the possibility of enhancing the exhaust’s toxicity by restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply. Which Smith hasn’t been able too rule out, as he also wasn’t able to rule out his peer Richard Miller’s thesis of death by "CO2 narcosis", remember?

and – far more important – the possibility and relevance of establishing this detail, he has not even been able to demonstrate that there is a convergence of eyewitness accounts on the description of gassing engines as diesel engines. Which is not surprising, given that such convergence doesn’t exist, as I already demonstrated on two other threads,

Well, you ignored the 1943 Krasnodar and Kharkov trials in the Soviet Union, where both the murder-vans were identified as Saurer AND as diesels.

I was talking about evidence, not about a court's conclusions. Smith still has to show us on what basis the Soviet courts concluded on diesel engines. Was it the depositions of eyewitnesses – few if any of whom I would expect to be knowledgeable enough to tell one type of engine from the other -, or did they just conclude that the vans had been of Saurer manufacture and that all Saurer vans were diesels, although this need not have been so?

Then there is Gerstein. How does Browning know that Gerstein never saw the engine?

Ask him. Or better, show us a passage from Gerstein’s depositions suggesting that, like Reder (who spoke of a gasoline engine) he saw the engine himself.

Why would a mining engineer particularly think an engine was a diesel?

You may wonder about that when you have shown us that he saw the engine. And then, I thought Gerstein was a fantasy-prone fellow whose statements have to be carefully checked for corroboration by other, more reliable witnesses.

And Pfannenstiel said diesel fuel (but no other identifying details, which is suddenly important to Roberto, where the details of gasoline engines don't matter).

What’s that supposed to mean, Smith? Shooting the bull to gloss over the fact that Pfannenstiel’s deposition doesn’t necessarily support your diesel dream, because the running of an engine with diesel fuel – according to our fellow poster Ovidius aka White Trash – doesn’t necessarily mean that the engine was a diesel engine?

And Eichmann, who describes an engine from a Russian submarine.

On what basis, Smith? Did he see it himself, or did he speak from hearsay? Read his deposition. It’s amazing what relevance hearsay, otherwise contemptuously cast aside, has when it seems convenient to "Revisionist" arguments.

It must be a diesel unless there is an example of a gasoline-driven submarine. One German version with a Walthermotor used chemical steam for propulsion. But maybe he meant an electric motor! How diabolical. All submarines have one of those, except nuclear and Walther types. Remember that this is Holocaust science.

Who are you trying to impress with irrelevant technical details and imbecile "Revisionist" slogans, Smith? You’re not among fellow true believers on Air Photo, remember.

And Lelenko, diesel engine, with the SMERSH quote you provided from Nizkor.

And Malagon, also from the Soviet Union, as provide by you and Nizkor.

None of them gives any details whatsoever, both just say "diesel". It’s interesting how little this bothers the true believers, who at the same time make a big bloody fuss about Fuchs’ description of the Sobibor engine as a gasoline engine not having been detailed enough, isn’t it?

And then we have Rozenberg and diesel (Ropa) oil. This certainly means a diesel engine unless (as you said) he confused a diesel electrical-generator for the gasoline engine or other gassing apparatus that generated the homicidal carbon monoxide.

It may be a diesel engine, or a gasoline engine running on diesel, or a gasoline engine running on gasoline that Rosenberg confounded with a diesel electrical-generator. The best Smith can derive from Rosenberg’s deposition is an understandable error of observation.

And lastly, the Rauff memo mentions Saurer vans again, i.e., diesels.

Please help my memory with a quote, Smith. And explain why it would have been out of the question that these particular Saurer vans were custom-built issues with a gasoline engine, more suitable for the cold Russian weather, as Ovidius suggested.

But with this particular inquiry I think we should just confine ourselves to the Reinhardt camps and not every piece of hearsay where somebody mistook a German van for a death-chamber on wheels.

After the big deal Smith made above about an obvious piece of hearsay (Eichmann’s description of the Treblinka gassing engine, see above), the above remark is particularly amusing.

5. Gas chambers of Sobibor extermination camp

Fuchs: gasoline engine. See Kogon et al, as above, pages 158 and following and Browning, as above. Translation of Fuchs’ deposition:

Testimony of SS Scharfuhrer Erich Fuchs, in the Sobibor-Bolender trial, Dusseldorf: (Quoted in "BELZEC, SOBIBOR, TREBLINKA - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps", Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 31-32). .....We unloaded the motor. It was a heavy Russian benzine engine, at least 200 horsepower.[my emphasis] We installed the engine on a concrete foundation and set up the connection between the exhaust and the tube. I then tested the motor. It did not work. I was able to repair the ignition and the valves, and the motor finally started running. The chemist, who I knew from Belzec, entered the gas chamber with measuring instruments to test the concentration of the gas. Following this, as gassing experiment was carried out. If my memory serves me right, about thirty to forty women were gassed in one gas chamber. The Jewish women were forced to undress in an open place close to the gas chamber, and were driven into the gas chamber by the above mentioned SS members and the Ukrainian auxiliaries. when the women were shut up in the gas chamber I and Bolender set the motor in motion. The motor functioned first in neutral. Both of us stood by the motor and switched from "Neutral" (Freiauspuff) to "Cell" (Zelle), so that the gas was conveyed to the chamber. At the suggestion of the chemist, I fixed the motor on a definite speed so that it was unnecessary henceforth to press on the gas. About ten minutes later the thirty to forty women were dead.

Source of quote:

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... /fuchs.t01

This inconvenient witness provided the most detailed description of a gassing engine available, and he expressly mentioned a gasoline engine.

Yes, as I said, FUCHS is the only one to provide any significant details on the engine type in order to establish it as gasoline, as was discussed in the mentioned Air-Photo threads.

Yep, the only witness who provides "significant details" speaks of a gasoline engine. Too bad for the true believers who would like to make a fuss about diesels, isn’t it?

CLICK! attempted switch from alleged diesel 'gassings' to gasoline

CLICK! Answer to Jonathan Swift on Diesels...

As I said, I wouldn’t brag about having discussed with fellow true believers on that sewer barred to opposition, if I were you. Just a piece of well-meaning advice.

So he must have been lying, “Revisionist” faith says. All the way to a four year prison sentence for assistance to murder. Proof that he lied, in the “real world” of “Revisionists”: he didn’t describe the device with the level of detail that the true believers would like to believe a “true technician” would have, or something like that.

The devil is in the details, isn't it, Roberto.

In some details, namely those addressed in my frequently asked but never answered questions to you. Not in how many screws and bolts the gassing engine had.

6. Gas chambers of Treblinka extermination camp

Central Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, based on the testimonials of Jankiel Wiernik, Henryk Poswolski, Abe Kon, Aron Czechowicz, Oskar Strawczynski, Samuel Reisman, Aleksander Kudlik, Hejnoch Brener, Starislaw Kon, Eugeniusz Turowski, Henryk Reichman, Szyja Warszawsski, and Leon Finkelsztejn: No mention of the type of engine.

A curious omission.

What’s so curious about it, Smith? Are the witnesses supposed to have been so terribly interested in the details of the killing device, assuming they even got close to it and were technically knowledgeable enough to identify the type of the engine?

Steam and town-gas were also claimed, as was chlorine gas and electricity at one time or another.

The uncertainty related to outside observation from far away leads to speculations that may be far fetched. How this affects the accuracy of coincident descriptions by insider witnesses is beyond me.

The aspect of the chambers in which victims were gasssed, according to statements by the witnesses Wiernik, Rajchman and Czechowicz, was as follows: Both buildings had many corridors, within the larger building the entrances to the chambers being on both sides of the corridor, but in the smaller one on one side only. The entrances were small and had tightly closing doors. In the outer wall’s of the chambers were large trap doors which could be raised in order to permit the removal of the corpses. The chambers had tiled floors, sloping towards the outer side. In the ceiling were openings connected by pipes with engines situated in adjoining buildings, which produced the CO gas with which the victims were suffocated.

Source of quote:

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gcpoltreb1.htm

Well, DETAILS don't matter, do they?

Still waiting for Smith’s explanation as to how establishing the exact technical construction and functioning of the murder weapon would have affected the essential findings of fact, be it from the perspective of historiography or that of criminal justice.

Let's try a little experiment, shall we...

The aspect of the saucers in which victims were gassified, according to statements by the witnesses Wiernik, Rajchman and Czechowicz, was as follows: Both spaceships had many corridors, within the larger saucer the entrances to the Death Ray being on both sides of the corridor, but in the smaller one on one side only. The entrances were small and had tightly closing doors. In the outer walls of the saucers were large trap doors which could be raised in order to permit the removal of the Soylent Green. The saucers had silvery floors, sloping towards the outer side. In the ceiling were openings connected by plasma pipes with reactors situated in adjoining cavities, which produced the plasma with which the victims were vaporized.

Why, Smith, I would never have expected you to sink so deep as to quote Air Photo baloney on this forum.

As you mentioned experiments, however, I would prefer another: stuffing Smith and a number of other true believers into a garage and then introducing the fumes of a huge engine. Any volunteers?

a) Most witnesses to gassings with engine exhaust don’t mention the type of engine at all.

And no investigators thought to ask. Curious.

Still waiting for Smith to give me a good reason why investigators should have asked.

b) Those who do mention it casually, without making a big deal out of it.

No realizing the technical significance, obviously. This is called "implausible embellishment."

No, it’s called ignorance of technical matters and a proper notion of the relevance of details. Which true believer like Smith don’t seem to have.

c) Regarding the gas vans, the only depositions mentioning the type of engine expressly speak of gasoline engines.

If one discounts the Rauff memo

Quote, please (see above)

and the Krasnodar/Kharkov trials.

The evidence on which the Soviet courts based their findings, please (see above).

But again, perhaps we should limit ourselves to the Reinhardt camps.

Of course. Too much inconvenient evidence regarding the gas vans to leave room for your diesel baloney there, ain’t that so, Smith?

d) Regarding Sobibor, the only deposition that addresses the type of engine expressly mentions a gasoline engine.

As I've already stated myself, Fuchs gives us sufficient detail to establish the type of engine, but not all the verisimilitude for the story.

Just like I said …

So he must have been lying, “Revisionist” faith says. All the way to a four year prison sentence for assistance to murder. Proof that he lied, in the “real world” of “Revisionists”: he didn’t describe the device with the level of detail that the true believers would like to believe a “true technician” would have, or something like that.

e) Regarding Belzec, the only deposition expressly mentioning a diesel engine is that of Gerstein, and outsider who, according to Browning, didn’t see the engine himself. Another outside observer, Pfannenstiel, speaks of an engine running on diesel fuel, which doesn’t necessarily mean that the engine itself was a diesel engine, see below. Of the depositions of camp insiders, one (Schluch) doesn’t mention the type of engine at all and the other (Reder) speaks of a gasoline engine.

How would Browning know what Gerstein did or didn't see?

Ask Browning, or better, let’s have a demonstration that Gerstein did see. Haven’t we been there before?

The only critical analysis of Gerstein was provided by Roques, who had his Ph.D. stripped by fiat for smashing a graven image and breaking the French Thoughtcrimes laws.

I don’t have to tell you where you can stick poor Roques and the "Thoughtcrimes laws", do I ?

If you maintain that Gerstein wasn’t describing the engine from hearsay, show us a passage from his statements that demonstrates this.

So far all you have is the testimony of Sgt. Fuchs, which is rather incomplete,

Yeah, sure. See above.

Apart from the irrelevance of Smith’s criteria as to what is or not “complete”, what does he base this conclusion on, by the way?

Did you even read the discussion and the points made by me, Sailor, and others?

No, and I don’t think I missed anything. But if you think you can convince me otherwise, go ahead.

Has he been to the archives of the respective court and looked up the protocol of Fuchs’ deposition?

Are laymen allowed access--or credentialed Holocaustorians and establishment jurists only.

Smith should ask this question to Dr. Dick W. de Mildt of the University of Amsterdam, who on his Justiz und NS-Verbrechen site:

http://www1.jur.uva.nl/junsv/Strafakten.htm

recommends looking up the court archives to anyone interested in further details about West German trials.

Anyway, how does Smith know that access requires credentials? Did one of his gurus tell him?

Stäglich, a Bundestablishment judge who is not a Believer, could not access the postwar West German trial records for Auschwitz.

Yes indeed, as I presumed. I wouldn’t take Stäglich’s word for it, if I were you, for the fellow is an accomplished liar like all “Revisionists”. Just a piece of well-meaning advice.

And if Fuchs’ rather detailed deposition is “incomplete”, what about much more vague depositions that Smith and his gurus derive the supposed “myth within a myth” from?

You are missing the point that I said that people weren't gassed in the hundreds of thousands with diesel exhaust.

Is that a point, Smith? I'd call it a most irrelevant imbecility. Assuming it is even accurate, that is.

I have made no claim about gasoline engines from a technical perspective.

Congratulations, my dear friend.

What the sacred liturgy says about how people died may or may not have any bearing with how/if people died.

What "sacred liturgy" are you talking about, Smith? "Revisionist" articles of faith, perhaps?

If you’re shooting the bull about the historical record, here's another reminder that you still haven’t explained in what way an eventual inaccuracy in the description of the way people died would affect the proven fact that they died, in their hundreds of thousands.

I am not Hannover.

No, but I see you’re trying real hard.

Just because the Jews might have gotten their story wrong doesn't mean that they never suffered and died at the hands of the Nazis during the war.

Exactly, my dear Smith. Just because the description of a murder weapon by one or the other witness may have been understandably inaccurate doesn’t mean that the murder of millions of people at the Nazi extermination camps is not a fact proven by ample evidence.

I'm glad to see a flicker of reason in Smith’s mind, and I hope it doesn’t go out too soon.

But the truth is important for historiography.

Yeah, it’s very important to historiography how many cylinders the gassing engine had, and whether it ran on diesel fuel or gasoline, right?

as has been discussed extensively on these two threads (below).

Discussed without opposition among true believers. That means a lot, of course.

Mr. Swift was offered the chance to discuss the matter on this board. Obviously he had no interest in doing so, as he only cabbaged your material anyway.

Anything wrong with my material, Smith?

Except for the fact that true believers are understandably scared of it, that is.

I know you can't post there, unfortunately,

Are you still posting there, Smith? If so, shame on you. I would have expected you to have more self-esteem.

Er, no. And besides, why the churlish attitude considering that I have bent over backwards trying to get them to allow the opposition to post in all fairness to you and others?

And now you’re bending backwards trying to explain why you will continue posting there although your noble efforts failed and you ended up being censored yourself, aren’t you, buddy?

If it wasn't that I do not want to get dragged into the big lawsuit or cause anyone else the same trouble I would not have backed-off.

Now the poet is speaking in ciphers. Care to translate?

but you can post here. Perhaps a new thread, however.

Feel free to open one, Smith. I certainly won’t, because, as you know, I have little time and inclination for discussions about the sex of the angels.

Certainly this would be an important ontological question. Like I said, if you have mass-murder then you have to have a mass-murder weapon. Excuse me for asking inconvenient questions of Believers.

Cut out the crap, Smith. It should be obvious to anyone with brains around here that the Believer is none other than yourself, and that the inconvenient questions are not your questions about irrelevant minor details, but my questions related to documentary, eyewitness and physical evidence to large-scale mass murder that you have never been able to answer.

If you want to give it another try, I have no problem repeating those questions once again. Shall I?

Poor jerks. Contrary to what their confused minds tell them, no historian or criminal justice authority gives a damn about what would be an understandable and irrelevant inaccuracy of observation by non-technical witnesses, at worst.

And why not? Perhaps because it is not a matter of epistemological truth but what van Pelt calls Moral Certainty, i.e., a matter of Faith, instead... The Holocaust as all-things-Holy.

Thanks a lot, Smith, for illustrating to just what extent you are one of those poor jerks. The pot calling the kettle black. The fanatical follower of a quasi-religious faith accusing his opponents of what are in fact his own fallacies, as propagandists have always done. Poor Smith.

Very honestly, my dear friend, I don’t know why you keep doing this to yourself. You are knowledgeable and talented enough to contribute to this forum with interesting information and arguments.

How do you know?

Well, your posts are not exactly worthless – except when it comes to your articles of faith.

Instead of doing so, however, you keep running the same "Revisionist" baloney over and over again, no matter how silly it is, thereby giving the impression that – as a former fellow poster once put it – you so desperately want to believe certain things that you turn your brain off.

I feel truly sorry for you, Smith.

And I don’t think I’m the only one.

Oh now don't worry none. I've got a sweet chicken hatchling named Cortagravatas, called "Corty" for short. He sits on my shoulder when I sit on my ammunition crate and surf the Internet. He just chirps in my ear and pecks away at my collar. Sometimes he soils my clothing a bit but I will always keep him. Cockadoodledoo.
8)

That's my Smith - smiling through broken teeth, as usual.

And incidentally showing that my good intentions were wasted on him and he deserves nothing better than being kicked all over the place on every possible occasion, as I’ve done over the last two and a half years.

Well, so be it.

[Scott Smith]

At least if the death toll is hundreds of thousands and the time of gassing to death was less than five hours. Xanthro found one example of an octogenarian who may have perished after only an hour inhaling diesel fumes--but I have not been able to confirm that report from a primary source. And that is ONE case!

Cut out the crap, Smith. You know what I’m referring to – the possibility of enhancing the exhaust’s toxicity by restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply. Which Smith hasn’t been able too rule out, as he also wasn’t able to rule out his peer Richard Miller’s thesis of death by "CO2 narcosis", remember?

No, look at the graphic again. To get the CO2 to rise the diesel engine has to have a heavy load put on it. That is hard to do with an engine that is better than 500 horsepower.

Btw, Germar Rudolf is publishing the Holtz & Elliott and Pattle & Stretch and other technical papers on his website so that anyone can read them theirselves. I don't know the link at the moment.

[Hans]

And Eichmann, who describes an engine from a Russian submarine.

I guess you are using the word "describe" deliberately to allege that Eichmann actually saw the engine. But as I understand Eichmann, this piece of information was supposedly passed on to him by Wirths.

Yes, as I said, FUCHS is the only one to provide any significant details on the engine type in order to establish it as gasoline,

Can you prove this? (I mean, now and here and without linking to non-working "discussion"-Forums where any other opinion is censored anyway)

The only critical analysis of Gerstein was provided by Roques, who had his Ph.D. stripped by fiat for smashing a graven image and breaking the French Thoughtcrimes laws.

Well, Gerstein was critically analysed at West-German trials against Zyklon-B producers.

[Tarpon27]

The Development of the Gas-van in the Murdering of the Jews

by Mathias Beer
Translation of:
Mathias Beer, "Die Entwicklung der Gaswagen beim Mord an den Juden," Vierteljahreshefte fuer Zeitgeschichte, 37 (3), pp. 403-417.

The gas-van is a special product of the Third Reich, it is a van with a gas-tight cabin/container-box/superstructure mounted on its chassis/understructure used to kill people by the motor-exhausts led into that cabin. The designation was coined only later: "Gaswagen [Gas-van] - that was the common word only afterwards/later". [footnote 1].

In the contemporaneous documents the designation doesn't arise. There the words Sonder-Wagen [footnote 2], Sonderfahrzeug [footnote 3], Spezialwagen [footnote 4] and S-Wagen [footnote 5] [Special van, special vehicle] are used. In a letter dating from April 11th 1942 with hindsight to camouflage the word Entlausungswagen [delousing-van] is used [footnote 6].

There are in all fourteen documents related to that complex, allowing to assess which types of vans were transformed/rebuilt into gas-vans and providing technical data on the container/cabin/superstructure. The documents give informations about the producers/vendors of the vans, about technical improvements due to practical experience, about the operation and the operating locations of different vans, moreover the responsible official services and individuals in charge of the employment of gas-vans are named. Hence a rather detailed picture emerges which is, however, not exhaustive/complete as documents are available only for the timespan/period starting in 1942 when gas-vans were already in use for the killings of human beings [footnote 7].

Based only on the written records not much can be said about the period when the gas-vans were under development. So the route of decisions leading to the construction and the operation/usage of these vans remains unclear/obscure. This state of things may be amended by the results of the multitude of trials held since 1945.

In the Federal Republic mainly since 1958 the installation of the Central Agency [Zentrale Stelle der Landesjustizverwaltungen =ZSL] for the prosecution of national-socialist crimes in Ludwigsburg and the investigations started by that agency have enlarged our knowledge about the crimes of the NS-regime[8]. However, the historian cannot adopt results of trials without probing them, as jurisdiction and historiographic science are directed by different purposes [footnote 9].

With the historian, witness-testimonies are of formost importance as they assist in closing gaps left by documents. But due to their pecularities witness-testimonies may be used as equals to documents and appraised by the historic research with valid results only if certain principles are obeyed [footnote 10].

The basic principle requires that the link between testimony and critically validated documents shouldn't be abandoned whenever possible, that is, the most probable fact must be linked to the certified fact [footnote 11].

There will remain questions which can't be answered satisfactorily by this method. There are witness testimonies reporting that during the cleansing/purging of mentally insane in the hospitals in Poland 1939/40 a hermetic sealed trailer with the label "Kaisers-Kaffee-Geschaeft" [about: Kaiser's coffee shop], with a tractive unit/tractor/towing vehicle in front was used.

In the trailer, insane persons were killed allegedly by the introduction of pure carbon-monoxide (CO) from (steel) cylinders [footnote 12]. The origin/source of these vehicles cannot be traced back as documents are lacking. However, there are hints that there is a link between "Kaisers-Kaffee"-vans and the gas-vans. Therefore we first investigate the few testimonies related to "Kaisers-Kaffee"-vans and then the development of the gas-vans.

In a letter dated 1st september 1939, Hitler entitles/orders his personal/assisting medecin Dr.Karl Brandt and the Reichsleiter Philipp Bouhler of the Fuehrer's chancellery to carry out the Euthanasie -program [footnote 13]. The Kriminaltechnisches Institut [KTI] in the Reichssicherheitshauptamt [RSHA] was ordered to test/explore appropriate killing procedures/agencies, and reported that the best method to kill would be the use of CO [footnote 14].

Following first experimental gassings in the prison of Brandenburg/havel in January 1940 - in a hermetic sealed room mentally insane had been killed with pure CO -, the method was used in all other "Euthanasie" set-ups/centers. The necessary CO was acquired by the Fuehrer's chancellery under cover-up/camouflage indirectly via the KTI, this being based on an agreement between the head of the Euthanasie -agency, Brack, and Widmann, head of the Referat V D2 (Chemistry and Biology) [footnote 16].

On order by Nebe, head of Amt V [department] (counter- criminality) in the RSHA, SS-Sturmfuehrer Becker got the (steel) cylinders at the IG Farben [factory] in Ludwigshafen and delivered them to the different installations [footnote 17]. SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Heess, head of the KTI, was knowledgeable/knew about the close relation/collaboration beteen the Fuehrer's chancellery and the KTI [footnote 18].

The "Kaisers-Kaffe"-van operated through the same principle as the gas-chambers of the "Euthanasie"- installations. CO was guided into a trailer through hoses from a cylinder which was fixed to the tractor. This was, hence, a gas-chamber on wheels [footnote 19]. Witnesses report that since september 1939 the Sonderkommando Lange [Special commnad/task force] killed mentally insane people in such vans in pommeranian, eastern-prussian and polish hospitals [footnote 20].

The name of that command is derived from the name of its head, SS-Sturmfuehrer and Kriminalrat Herbert Lange. The letter from the Higher SS- and Police leader Koppen to the SS-Gruppenfuehrer Sporrenberg elucidates the operationing/work of that command in Soldau:

"The special command being under my command for particular tasks was sent to Soldau during the time from 21.5 to 8.6.1940 in accord with the RSHA and has evacuated 1588 insane persons from the transition-camp during that time" [footnote 21].

A vehicle of that kind was brought with Lange either from the RSHA [the testimonies by Gustav Sorge, footnote 22; and evidence on the important role of the Gruppe II D technical matters in the RSHA in the later development of the gas-van, footnote 23; back this assumption], or he organized its production in collaboration with the RSHA [footnote 24].

Alfred Trenker, deputy head of the Stapo bureau (state police) in Posen testified that Lange had told him in summer 1940, he, Lange, had to travel to Berlin and the RSHA several times because of "conferences/meetings about the suitable type of gassing-vans" [footnote 25].

These testimonies let suppose that the operationing of the "Kaisers-Kaffee"-vans was optimized for the purpose of the Sonderkommando Lange, which had probably the taks to practically test these vehicles. Apparently, they didn;t operate adequately (Lange mentioned something to that extent against Trenker [footnote 26]) and the Sonderkommando Lange was disbanded/ got leave soon after their task in Soldau. Starting from that time, there aren't found any reports about the operations/usage of that kind of vehicles.

The exchange of letters/correspondence about the still due payments in connection with the Sonderkommando Lange, which lasted till february 1941, shows that as well Himmler knew about the whole affair. In a letter by Koppe to Karl Wolff, head of the personal staff of the Reichsfuehrer SS, dated 22. February 1941, it is mentioned, "that you by order of the Reichsfuehrer SS would decide about the payments of the transportation costs" [footnote 27].

From the date of the first usage, we may infer that "Kaisers-Kaffee"-vans were prepared beginning in the end of 1939 till midyear 1940 with assistance of the Fuehrer's chancellery and the RSHA.

On 15 and 16th August 1941 Himmler was in Baranowitschi [English spelling?] and Minsk [footnote 28] And inspected an action of [liquidation/execution] by shooting in the area of Einsatzgruppe B [footnote 29].

The attending Higher SS- and Police-Leader in Center Russia ["Russland Mitte"] von dem Bach-Zelewski reported later, Himmler was moved/shaken apparently by this action [footnote 30].

After that, Himmler had visited a hospital/sanatorium for mentally insane people and afterwards ordered the Leader of Einsatzgruppe B, Nebe, to search/investigate means, fit to shorten the suffering of the people as far as possible [footnote 31], as he had concluded from the experience with the execution by shooting "that shooting wasn't yet the most human way" [footnote 32].

He [i.e. Nebe] should send "a report" about those investigations. Himmler addressed Nebe, as the KTI, subordinated to the 'Amt V', had excelled in the investigation/development of killing procedures during the "Euthanasia" program, so that their experiences could be employed now. Nebe was simultaneously head of that 'Amt V' [department] in the RSHA. Relying on this position, in beginning September he ordered Widmann to come to Minsk with explosives and two metal-hoses/tubes [footnote 33].

Widmann had had discussed this order with his immediate boss/superior Heess. This elucidates that apart of the stress for the execution squads/commands, a further reason was given for the following experiments:

"It was discussed with Heess also about the usage of [poisonous] gas in the killing of mentally insane persons, especially about the impossibility to transport the CO-cylinders in Russia" [footnote 34].

The CO-cylinders would have been necessary, if one was intending to use "Kaisers-Kaffe"-vans or gas-chambers as they were used in the "Euthanasia" program.

When the blasting/explosion of a bunker in Minsk, into which mentally insane persons had been brought, didn't show the intended result/success, an experiment with the metal hoses, which Widmann had carried with him, was undertaken in the sanatorium for mentally insanes/asylum of Mogilew, which Himmler had visited also [footnote 35]. About this, Widmann testified on 11th January 1960:

"Nebe has ordered to close the windows with brick-work and to leave two openings for the gas-pipes on that afternoon ... When we arrived, first one of the hoses, which had been with me in the car, was fixed/connected. The connection was made to a passenger vehicle. In the openings of the wall, there were pieces of pipes/tubes were situated, where/onto which one could easily affix the hoses ... After five minutes, Nebe came out and said, there wasn't any effect yet.

Also after eight minutes, he couldn't observe any effect and asked, what had to be done now. Nebe and I convinced ourselves, that the car was too weak. Hence, Nebe ordered/caused/made the second hose to be fixed to the van [to transport troops] of the Ordnungspolizei . Then it took only a few minutes, Till the people lost consciousness. One left [the motors of] both cars running for about another ten minutes [footnote 36].

The incident just described is also reported in the deposition by the Russian doctor N.N.Akimova of 18th November 1946, who gives as date of the experiment the 186h September [footnote 37]. Hence/therefor, Widmann and his aides must have been in Minsk and Mogilev from 13th to 21st September [footnote 38]. The relation between these experiments and Himmler's visit and order is revealed/given/elucidated in another deposition by Widmann: "Nebe wanted to discuss the matter with me, as he said, that he had to report it to Himmler" [footnote 39].

Nebe must have learned by these two experiments, that only the idea to kill with exhaust gases, which most probably was his own, was feasible [footnote 40].

But the Einsatzgruppen, for the usage of which the new more "humane" killing method was searched/investigated, couldn't use/handle a gas-chamber with fixed location, in which people were killed by exhaust-gases. They had to be mobile, to fulfill their task [footnote 41]. Based on these considerations and the past experience, a plan/project emerged the KTI to build gas-vans. Nebe and Heess proposed this to their commander Heydrich, head of the security police and the SD [footnote 42].

Widmann testified about this:

"I was informed by Heess shortly about the result of his report in the Prinz-Albrecht -street [Heydrich's head-quarter]. He told me, that vans would be built/constructed, into which exhaust- gases would be led/introduced, instead of the recent application of CO-cylinders" [footnote 43].

It becomes apparent, that "Kaisers Kaffe"-vans, which were known in the KTI, had been the model for the gas-vans - mobile, gas-tightly sealed, close boxes. However, because of the technical difficulties, the pure CO couldn't simply be replaced by exhaust-gases. A new construction was necessary which unified traction unit, trailer and the source of the poisonous gas.

Heydrich's immediate superior/boss was Himmler since the decree of 27th September 1939. Therewith the circle is closed.

Heydrich had supposedly heard about the experiments in advance, and was therefore in the "secret", otherwise it couldn't be understood, why Nebe and Heess contacted/approached him. Heydrich was also in a position to lend the necessary technical support to the KTI. He approached SS-Obersturmfuehrer Rauff, head of group/department II D3 (technical matters), with its subgroup/sub-department being led by SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Pradel. He [Pradel] testified in his trial that Rauff had told him: "This is an order by Heydrich which has to be carried out" [footnote 44].

In this sense, we may also understand Rauff's deposition on 28th June 1972 in Santiago de Chile:"I think, it is impossible that Pradel undertook the development of the gas- vans on his own. He must have had an order either by me or someone with a higher position" [footnote 45].

Wentritt, head of the repairing-shop/park in Referat II D3a testified concerning this:

"Still in 1941, I was summoned to the head of the group/department, Major Pradel. He declared/told me, that the execution squads in action suffered often from nervous break-down (respectively were close to it), so that a more humane killing method should be used. We needed therefore - as Pradel stated closed/sealed vans/motor vehicles" [footnote 46].

Pradel ordered Wentritt to test/investigate whether it was possible to lead motor-exhausts in the closed/sealed superstructure of a van. When Wentritt answered this in the affirmative, Pradel communicated the positive/affirmative answer to Rauff and got back with the order to contact Heess. Heess detailed, how such a van had to be constructed and how it should operate.

On Rauff's order, Pradel and Wentritt visited the Gaubschat -factory/company in Berlin-Neukoelln, which was specialized in the production of sealed/closed box- superstructures [footnote 47] where they pretended, that they needed the vans to transport the dead victims/corpses of a spotted fever epidemic.

They made an agreement that the RSHA should deliver the chassis to the factory "which had to put a box- superstructure on top of them" [footnote 48].

The order was given directly by Rauff, probably in a letter/in-written form [footnote 49]. But Pradel's attempt to purchase chassis was a failure, so that an intervention by Rauff was necessary. He testified on 19th October 1945: "In so far as I can recall I only supplied 5 or 6 chassis" [footnote 50].

When the chassis had been delivered to the Gaubschatt company, Wentritt informed himself several times about the on-going construction work and fetched the first van himself. He provided this van with the following alterations in the workshop of Referat II D 3a, as the matter was classified as "geheime Reichssache" [highest level of secrecy]:

"At the exhaust-pipe an exhaust-hose was fixed which was led from the exterior to the bottom of the van. In this van we drilled a hole with diameter of about 58-60 mm, the diameter of the exhaust-pipe. Into the interior of the van, above the hole, we welded a metal pipe (exhaust pipe), which was connected or could be connected to the exhaust-hose. Upon starting the motor, the exhaust went into the exhaust-pipe and from there into the exhaust-pipe in the interior of the van, where the [exhaust-]gas was spread" [footnote 51].

On Pradel's order, Wentritt brought this van, so prepared, to the KTI, where gaseous samples were taken in the box- superstructure. The chemist Leiding, collaborator in the KTI, testified:

"I once entered that van with a gas-mask. I had the order/task to take air-samples. Those air- samples were hence analyzed in the laboratory."

Why these analyses were necessary may be understood from Widmann's deposition on 12th January 1960:

"The objective of that analysis was, by the way, to find out how long it took to reach a CO- concentration of 1% in the van. At this CO- contents, deep unconsciousness and then death occur in a short time (3rd stage of CO poisoning). One intended to prevent the first and second stage of CO-poisoning. The first stage is numbness and nausea, the second stage is marked by states of agitation/irritation" [footnote 53].

Short time late, an experimental gassing took place in the concentration camp Sachsenhausen ( the KTI had there a workshop/atelier). At the gassing, Heess, the two chemists Leiding and Hoffmann, and beyond some SS-officers attended. Widmann wasn't present [footnote 54].

Following Krausnick/Wilhelm, he was in Kiew on about X[?]th November [footnote 55]. The experimental gassing in Sachsenhausen must have taken place on that date. Regarding the events in Sachsenhausen, Leiding testified:

"I understood only later the intended purpose of the van, in which I had taken an air sample. One day, I was summoned to travel to Sachsenhausen ... and there was a van, which was equal or like that, which I had seen in the yard of the Reichskriminalpolizeiamt. The number of men, which entered into the van, may have been around/about 30... The corpses had, as we chemists found out/observed the typical pink outlook of men, who had died of a CO-poisoning" [footnote 56].

Heess reported the success of the experimental gassing not only to Pradel [footnote 57], but he wrote a report together with Widmann, which was supposedly delivered to Heydrich [footnote 57]. Hence the prototype of the gas-vans was developed/ready and tested. The remaining vans, ordered at the Gaubschat factory, were as well altered into gas-vans now [footnote 59].

The course of events described here is corroborated by the analogous proceedings/activities in 1942. Since April there were plans/schemes in Reerat II D 3a, how to improve the gas-vans, how to expand/augment the killing capacity and how to facilitate their operationing/handling [footnote 60]. The proceeding was analogous to the development of the prototype. The matter was debated first internally, then Rauff gave an order for a van with the planned alterations to the Gaubschat factory. This one should be tested practically and only after that a decision should be taken on the vans to be altered further [footnote 61].

When starting with the date of the experimental gassing at Sachsenhausen and considering the time necessary to rebuild the vans to be about 8-14 days [footnote 62] and the time to bring the vans to the locations of operations [footnote 63], we may conclude, that the first gas-vans could be used only in the end of November of beginning December 1941.

The first usage of a gas-van may be traced down in the operation area of Einsatzgruppe C [footnote 64] with the Sonderkommando 4a in Poltawa. Eye-witnesses report that a gas-van was used there in November 1941 in the killings of the Jews [footnote 65]. The van is described as follows:

"The gas-van was used in the same place [i.e. there were also shootings]. Each time about 30 people were carried in them. As far I know, the passengers were killed by exhaust-gases led into it" [footnote 66].

The usage of gas-vans by the already known Sonderkommando Lange is testified for the 8th December in Chelmno [footnote 67].

Hence, not only in the experimental phase, but as well in the operationing, experienced staff was employed. In Chelmno, two smaller vans were operationing first. Gustav Laabs, the driver of one of the vans, testified:

"Later I found out, that the vans were American 3- tons-trucks. ... The interior of their box- container was, as I later saw 4m in length to 2m in width. ... In the gas-van, I drove, ... about 50 people were gassed" [footnote 68].

Still before Christmas 1941 two smaller gas-vans were brought from Berlin to Riga [footnote 69]. These were the smaller "Daimond"-vans, which were named/mentioned in a letter by SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Truehe to Rauff on 15th July 1942 [footnote 70].

In the operation area of Einsatzgruppe D [footnote 71] the presence of a gas-van, which could carry about 50 persons, is testified/assured by testimony for the end of 1941.

This date may be certified by the deposition of SS- Untersturmfuehrer Becker. He was transferred to the RSHA in December 1941 after a conference/consultation between Himmler and Brack [footnote 73].

Hence, Himmler observed/had in mind/supervised the operations of the gas-vans further. In the RSHA, Ruff ordered him (Becker) to travel to the East to investigate/observe the operationing of the gas-vans. Becker testified about this:

"He (Rauff) said, that gas-vans were already in place or sent to the different Einsatzgruppen" [footnote 47].

This must have taken place shortly before 14th December, as Becker couldn't begin his travel, intended for that day, because of an accident; so his travel was postponed until in beginning 1942 [footnote 73]. The projected date of Becker's inspection travel may have been meaningful only if the gas- vans had been sent to the Einsatzgruppen shortly before it.

So it is assured/certain that gas-vans were used beginning with the end of November or beginning December 1941 [footnote 76].

The Higher SS- and Police-Leader Jeckeln testified in 1945:

"In December 1941, when I reported orally the completion of Himmler's order to execute by shooting the Jews of the Ghetto in Riga to him, Himmler told me that shooting was too complicated an action. In the shootings, one needed troops who were able to shoot, and that it had a bad influence on the men. So, said Himmler further, it would be best to destroy/liquidate/kill the people with gas-vans, which upon his order had been built in Germany" [footnote 77].

The six gas-vans, described so far, (one with Einsatzgruppe C, two in Chelmno, two in Riga, one with Einsatzgruppe D- ), which were operating until end of 1941, Had two features in common, the exterior appearance and the number of people they could carry [footnote 78].

The vans were smaller, 3-tons-trucks, with a superstructure of about 4m in length, in which 30-50 persons could be carried [footnote 79].

The same description fits on the vans, in which air-samples were taken in the yard of the KTI, and which were later tested in Sachsenhausen. Leiding and Hoffmann testify unanimously, that the vans were 3-tons transporters in which thirty men were killed [footnote 80].

According to Rauff and Wentritt, firstly five or six chassis had been purchased and delivered to the Gaubschat factory [footnote 81]. Hence, in 1941, first six vans with 3-tons weight have been prepared/built and were operating starting in November or December. These are the vans of the "first series" [footnote 82] with at least two different types of chassis, "Daimond" [footnote 83] and "Opel-Blitz" [footnote 84].

That one used vans with different types is related to the difficulties with the purchase of the chassis in the beginning [footnote 85]. The sources and testimonies report as well that larger vans, type "Saurer" were rebuilt/altered into gas-vans [footnote 86]. These were trucks with 8 tons with a box- superstructure with 5.8m length and 1.7m height, which could carry up to one hundred people [footnote 87]. In a note in the files of Referat II D3a on 23th June 1942 is remarked: "According to transaction/proceeding II D3a - 1737/41, an order on 30 special superstructures for chassis delivered was given to Gaubschat company. 20 vehicles are already finished and have been delivered" [footnote 88].

Conforming with the high number of vans ordered, the order must have been given late in 1941 [footnote 89]. That the whole order was related only to Saurer-vans is certified by a note on 27th April 1942, which relates to the transaction-number 1737 [footnote 90]. The sketches/blueprints enjoined show that "proposals for a fast discharge equipment@ were only provided for the Saurer vans.

As construction plans for such an equipment were provided only for this type of van - they should be added/built into the vans already in operation subsequently - we may conclude, that the whole order for thirty chassis consisted of Saurer-vans. This consideration is corroborated by a letter from Becker to Rauff on 16th May 1942:

"While the vans of the first series can be used in not too bad weather, the vans of the second series (Saurer) are completely immobile in rainy weather" [footnote 92].

It becomes apparent, that Becker distinguishes between two series of vans; moreover, the description "Saurer" for the vans of the second series is only meaningful, if all vans in this series were of them same type. Hence, the Referat II D 3a issued an order and delivered the Saurer-chassis to equip them with the superstructures/boxes/containers in the end 1941 and in April 1942 already 20 of them had been delivered [footnote 93].

The sources and witnesses say that gas-vans of the Saurer- type were operating only in January 1942 [footnote 94], i.e. later than the smaller vans.

Considering the necessary time for the construction works [footnote 95], the order 1737 cannot be issued before December 1941. Becker's distinction relates therefore not only to the size of the vans, but as well to the date of their construction and of their operationing. This means that for starting six smaller vans had been built and were used, but already since December 1941, one only built larger vans of the Saurer- type, firstly, as one intended to provide each Sonderkommando of the different Einsatzgruppen with at least one van, and secondly to expand and extend the gassing- capacity.

That the latter aim was foremost is shown by the note of 27th April 1942, which discusses several possibilities ("tip- up equipment for the box-superstructure", "facility to tip- up the bottom-grate", "facility to move in and out the bottom-grate") to achieve a quicker discharge of the 'cargo' (=gassed people) [footnote 97]. Even when it turned out that the large vans couldn't be used in the open ground in all weather it wasn't thought of using smaller vans as in the beginning, only the box-superstructure should be slightly shortened [footnote 98].

Referat II D 3a was not only responsible for technical matters but as well for the operationing/handling of the vans/transportation park of the security police and consequently for the gas-vans.

This is elucidated not only by the official tasks of the Referat, but as well by the work of SS-Untersturmfuehrer Becker [footnote 99]. On Rauff's order he travelled to the Einsatzgruppen to supervise the operationing/handling of the gas-vans and to mend occurring faults/difficulties [footnote 100].

According to his own statements, he was thus travelling from mid January to September 1942 [footnote 101]. During this time, he was in perpetual connection with Rauff, and reported continuously about his supervising/observations and his actions/work [footnote 102]. His reports provided basis of "technical alterations/improvements" which should be applied in the construction of vehicles which were still to be built [footnote 103].

Becker's intervening wouldn't have been necessary if the group Rauff had been responsible only for the production/construction/preparation of the vans. Becker's task shows that the group II D3 was as well responsible for the operationing/maintenance/handling of the vans. This is as well certified by the sources.

On 15th June 1942, the Commanding Leader of the Security Police and of the SD in Ostland [administrative district in occupied SU, comprising parts of Lithuania, Poland, Byelorussia - around Vilna, Baranowicze, Minks, Sluzk] addressed a request to Rauff for an additional van of Saurer-type [footnote 104].

In the same place, he ordered "another 20 exhaust-hoses to be send along, as the existing were already untight". From Becker's report we may infer that the failure of a van had to be reported by wireless telegraph to the Amt II D and that the vans had to be sent to Berlin in the case of more involved repairs [footnote 105]. The note in the file on 5th June 1942 reports that a gas-van was exploded in Chelmno. This incident caused Rauff to order new experiments on gas-samples by the KTI.

In the same place, the "services affected by this [got] special instructions" and smaller alterations to the vans were undertaken to prevent [the building-up] of high pressures in the box-superstructures [footnote 106].

SS-Gruppenfuehrer Harald Turner, head of the administration staff with the military commander in Serbia, had requested and got a gas-van in April 1942 for the killing of the Jews of Belgrad [footnote 107].

On 9th June this Saurer-van was sent back to Belin after completed "special task" [footnote 108]. After due repair, it was sent to Riga conforming to the request on 15th June [footnote 109].

Often the gas-vans have been seen on intermediate stops on their way to the East, e.g. in Breslau or Krakau [footnote 110].

The Leader of Einsatzgruppe D, Ohlendorf, testified that the gas-vans didn't belong to the transportation- park/rolling stock of the Einsatzgruppe, but were commissioned/leased to them from Berlin [footnote 111].

With the gas-vans, the drivers, who had got a training to the handling of the vans [footnote 112] were sent along. Gas-vans drivers testified that on order of the operative leader of group II D 3a they had fetched/got the vans in Berlin and brought them to their operation location/area [footnote 113].

This means, that Amt II D 3a was not only responsible for the construction of the gas-vans, but it directed/orchestrated centrally from/in the RSHA the operations of the gas-vans [footnote 114], providing the vans, drivers, and exchange parts/equipment; it controlled/supervised and coordinated the operationing of the vehicles.

For finishing, a conclusion of the results:

In the period of four months, on order by Himmler, a new killing method, the gas-van, was developed in the following sequence of actions/events:

- 15./16.8.1941 Himmler's order

- 16./18.9. Experiments in Minsk and Mogilev

- Early October, order given to Amt II D 3a

- 3.11. experimental gassing in Sachsenhausen

- Late November and in December first usage of the vans

In this the RSHA cooperated closely with the following services:

- the KTI; here emerged the idea to build gas-vans; and it was responsible for the "chemistry part" of the experiments

- Referat II D 3a ; it prepared two series of vans, six smaller ones (Daimond and Opel-Blitz) and the thirty Saurer- vans; it directed and supervised the operationing of the vans, centrally from Berlin

In the development of the gas-vans, the experience gathered during the "Euthanasia", which was stopped officially in 1941 was purposively applied/used in technical matters ("Kaisers Kaffee"-vans) as well as with the staff employed (KTI, Becker, Lange). Unlike the case of "Kaisers Kaffee"- vans, a participation of Fuehrer's chancellery cannot be stated/found here. This staff worked during that time on the development of another method which was used in the destruction centers since 1942.

"Technical developments" were a precondition for the perpetration of the premeditated/intended crimes. The step- wise perfectioning of the killing-methods were the development of the gas-van was only one step in the sequel of national-socialist killing methods, result in the killing of ever more people, mainly Jews.

Footnotes ---------

1. Deposition by Gustav Laabs driver of a gas-van in Chelmno, dated 29.11.1960, Staatsanwaltschaft (StA) [Attorney bureau] Bonn, Aktenzeichen (Az) [Filen-number] 8 Js 52/60.

[ZSL, Az.203 AR-Z 69/59, Bl.912]. The designation/word is used as well in the literature and by witnesses.

Raul Hilberg, in the book The destruction of the European Jews (Chicago 1961), p.219, uses "gas-van", apparently a translation of the German word.

SS-Obersturmfuehrer Walter Rauff, Gruppenleiter [department-leader] of Dienststelle [department of services] II D (Technical matters) in the RSHA [ Reichssicherheitshauptamt:

Main security bureau in the Reich] speaks in his affidavit dated 19.10.1945 about "death vans", International Military Tribunal, Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg (IMT) Vol.30, Doc.2384-PS. In the description given in document IMT 501-PS the word Vergasungswagen [gassing-van] is used.

2. Letter by Rauff to the KTI [Kriminaltechnisches Institut] dated 26.3.1942. Copy in ZSL, Folder: Verschiedenes Nr.227.

3. Entry/note in file dated 27.4.1942, Copy in ZSL, USA Dok. Film I, Bl.19-25; Letter by Firma Gaubschat [Company/manufacturer] to the Referat [sub-department] IID 3a of the RSHA dated 14.5.1942, ZSL, USA Dok. Film I, Bl.28.

4. Entry/note in file dated 5.6.1942, Copy ZSL, USA Dok. Film I, Bl.9-14; facsimile in: Nationalsozialistische Massentoetung durch Giftgas. Eine Dokumentation, hrsg. von A.Rueckerl/E.Kogon/H.Langbein u.a., Frankfurt a. M.1983, pp.333-337. [This should be also available in the English Translation now] Letter by SS- Obersturmfuehrer Schaefer to Rauff dated 9.6.1942, IMT-Doc. 501-PS.

5. Letter by SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Truehe to Rauff dated 15.6.1942, IMT-Doc. 501-PS. The "S" is probably an abbreviation to spezial or sonder [special]. These adverbs were originally used with respect to the container-superstructure, which was specially manufactured. Cf. entry/note in file dated 23.6.1942, Copy ZSL, USA Dok. Film II, B1.14-16, where the word Spezialaufbauten [special superstructure] is used. The relation to the camouflage word Sonderbehandlung [special treatment], i.e. killing is apparent, IMT-Doc. 501-PS.

6. Letter by SS-Gruppenfuehrer Harald Turner to SS- Obergruppenfuehrer Karl Wolff, head of the personal staff of the Reichsfuehrer SS (RFSS) [Leader of the SS, H.Himmler], dated 11.4.1942, StA Muenchen II, Az.10a Js 39/60, bill of indictment/accusation [ZSL, Az. Sammelakte 137, Bl.164-167].

7. The earliest document is dated 26.3.1942, Cf. footnote 2. In the entry dated 5.6.1942 it is noted that since december 1941 97.000 human beings were "processed", i.e. killed with tree vans, Cf. footnote 4.

8. See as well: A.Rueckerl (ed.): NS-Vernichtungslager im Spiegel deutscher Strafprozesse. Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, Chelmno. Muenchen 1977; same author: NS-Prozess nach 25 Jahren Strafverfolgung. Moeglichkeiten, Grenzen, Ergebnisse, Karlsruhe 1971. Nationalsozialistische Massentoetung Frankfurt a.M. 1983. Here I'd like to thank the ZSL for the support and the helps, especially Mr Chief-attorney A.Rueckerl, Mr Chief-attorney A. Streim, Mr attorney W.Dressen, Inspector S.Fritschle and last but not least Mrs H.Doms from the documentation.

9. I.Arndt/W.Scheffler: Organisierter Massenmord an den Juden in nationalsozialistischen Vernichtungslagern. Ein Beitrag zur Richtigstellung apologetischer Literatur, in: VfZ 24 (1976), S.115 Anm.20.

10. See for an excellent example, A.Streim, Die Behandlung der Kriegsgefangenen im Fall Barabarossa, Heidelberg 1981, S.74 ff. In the following, the different quality of documents and witness testimonies is remarked here, by notifying each quotation from a depostition.

11. This allows for instance to check the credibility/consistency of witnesses. If there exist consistency between document and testimony, it is reasonable to assume that the witness's deposition is reliable/trustworthy as well with respect to facts/ cases which aren't covered by documents.

12. Deposition by H.H.Renfranz, dated 10.10.1962, StA Hannover, Az. 2 Js 614/62 [ZSL, Az. V 203 AR-???1101/1960, Bl.2]. See also Nationalsozialistische Massentoetung, p. ^62 ff; E.Klee, "Euthanasie" im NS-Staat. Die "Vernichtung lebenswerten Lebens", Frankfurt a.M. 1983, S.106 ff and S.190 ff.

13. IMT, Vol. 26, S.169.

14. Deposition by A.Widmann, Head of Abt. V D 2 (Chemistry and Biology) in the KTI, dated 11.1.1960; StA Duesseldorf, Az. 8 Js7212/59 [ZSL, Az.202 AR-Z 152/59, Bl.51 f.]; deposition by A.Becker, 20.6.1961, StA Stuttgart, Az. 13 Js 328/60 [ZSL, Az.439 AR-Z 18a/60, Bl.1001 ff.] See also Nationalsozialistische Massentoetung, S.46; Klee, "Euthanasie", S.84 f.

15. same sources as footnote 13.

16. Deposition by A.Widmann, 27.1.1959, StA Duesseldorf, Az.8 Js 7212/59 [ZSL, Az. 439 AR-Z 18a/??, Bl.36 f.]; Klee, "Euthanasie", S.84 f.

17. Deposition by A.Becker, 28.1.1960, StA Hannover, Az. 2 Js 299/60 [ZSL, Az.415 AR-Z 220/59, Bl.36 ff].

18. Deposition by Walter Schade, datd 12.2.1959, StA Hannover, Az. 2 Js 299/60 [ZSL, Az.415, AR-Z 220/59, Bl.110 ff].

19. Cf. footnote 12.

20. Cf. footnote 12.

21. Copy ZSL, USA Dok.Bd.II, Bl.6; see also Klee, "Euthanasie", p.191.

22. He testified on 7.3.1962, that before 1941 another "Gaswagen" was tested in Sachsenhausen and produced there; StA Hannover, Az. 2 Js 299/1960 [ZSL, Az. 415 AR-Z 220/59, Bl.277 ff; see also Rueckerl, NS-Vernichtungslager, p. 268, see footnote 55.

23. Cf. text p.409 ff].

24. Deposition by A.Trenkers, dated 17.5. 1962, StA Hannover, Az. 2 Js 299/60 [ZSL, Az. 415 AR-Z 220/59, Bl.635].

25. Deposition dated 16.5.1961, StA Bonn, Az.8 Js 52/60 [ZSL, Az. 203 AR-Z 69/59, Bl.678 ff].

26. Cf. footnote 24.

27. Copy of the correspondence in: ZSL, USA Dok.Bd.I, Bl.90 and 98; Bd.II, Bl.801-807. See as well Klee, "Euthanasie", pp.190-193. Characteristically, on the letter there is a note by Wolff, that he phone with Brack, one of the responsibles in the "Euthanasie"- program, about the affair.

28. Diensttagebuch [Diary kept on duties during service/official diary] Bach-Zelewski, Bundesarchiv, Sign.R20/45b, Copy ZSL, Findmittelschrank Nr.35. Accordingly, Himmler was in Baranowitschi on 30-7-1941 and in Baranowitschi and Minsk on 15/16th August 1941.

On 15th August, Bach attended/was drawn [to the visit], so Himmler's observation of the shootings is most likely to be dated on that day. Cf. deposition by the Russian [lady-]doctor N.N.Akimova, who reports about a visit spent by Himmler to a sanatorium in August 1941; see A.Ebbinghaus/G.Preissler: Die Ermordung psychisch kranker Menschen in der Sowjetunion. Dokumentation, in: Aussonderung und Tod. Die klinische Hinrichtung der Unbrauchbaren, Berlin 1985, p.188.

29. About Einsatzgruppe B : H.Krausnick/H.-H.Wilhelm, Die Truppe des Weltanschaungskrieges. Die Einsatzgruppen der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD 1938-1942, Stuttgart 1982, p.179ff.

30. Deposition by Back-Zelewski in: Aufbau (New York), 23.8.46, p.2. Cf. similar deposition by Karl Wolff, Himmler's adjutant, who attended there too, StA Muenchen, Az.10a Js 39/60, Anklageschrift [bill of indictment/accusation] [ZSL, Az.Sammelakte 137, Bl.140ff] with further testimonies about the incidence.

31. Ibid. Cf. N.N.Akimova's deposition, see footnote 28.

32. Deposition by Back-Zelewski, footnote 30. Cf. deposition by the chemist H.Hoffmann, 7-1-59, StA Duesseldorf, 8 Js 7212/59 [ZSL, Az.439 AR-Z 18a/60,Bl.28].

33. Deposition by A.Widmann as of 11-1-1960, see footnote 14, Bl.45ff; A.Bauer, driver with the KTI, deposition as of 17-3-1960, H.Schmidt, collaborator with the KTI, StA Bremen, Az.6Js 3/60 [ZSL, Az.202 AR-Z152/59, Bl.135; 201].

34. Deposition by A.Widmann as of 11-1-1960, see footnote 14, Bl.46.

35. Cf. footnote 28.

36. Same as footnote 14, Bl.50f. Gerald Reitlinger, Die Endloesung. Hitlers Versuch der Ausrottung der Juden Europas 1939-1945, Berlin 1951, mentions on page 1944, that in 1949 negatives were found in Nebe's home, which show this incident/procedure. According to E.J.Else, superintendent of transport services of the K-Staffel [squad] in the 1st company, Police-Battaillon 3, the van, recognizable on these pictures, belonged to his transport park. Deposition on 13- 12-1962, StA Frankfurt a.M., Az 4 Js 1928/60 [ZSL, Az.202 AR- Z 152/1959, Bl.1127] Thus, he was member of Einsatzkommando 8, which participated in the experiment.

37. Ebbinghaus/Preissler, Ermordung, p.189. The plausibility of this date is given by the following relations: Bach-Zelewski couldn't attend at the final conference/meeting because of a Russian air-attack/raid, which happened on 17-9-1941 according to Bach-Zelewski's diary. Cf. too Widmann's deposition on 11-1-1960, see footnote 14.

38. This date may be exactly determined because the witnesses name the days of the week on which they stayed in Minsk and Mogilew. When relating these statements with the exact fixture in time, 18-9, one gets the period for the stay.

39. Deposition by A.Widmann on 11-1-1960, see footnote 14; further testimonies in the same vein: Karl Schulz, Nebe's adjutant, deposition on 9-3-1959, StA Stuttgart, Az.13 Js 328/60 [ZSL, Az.439 AR-Z 18a/1960, Bl.48]; deposition by B.Wehners on 26- 1-1960, StA Bremen, Az.6 Js 3/6 [ZSL, Az.202 AR-Z 152/1959, Bl.57ff].

40. Deposition by A.Widmann on 27-1-1959, see footnote 16, Bl.33f; deposition by H.Engelmann, Nebe's adjutant, on 9-1-1951, ibid, Bl.617; deposition by B.Wehner on 26-1-1960, see footnote 37.

41. Krausnick/Wilhelm, Truppe, pp.150ff.

42. Deposition by A.Widmann on 27-1-1959 and on 12- 1-1960, see footnote 16. These two depositions differ in that different dates are given for the events described. In the first deposition, he gives as date: shortly after the beginning campaign in Russia, in the second: "shortly before the campaign/onslaught/invasion in Russia". This second statement is probably wrong/incorrect, as the psychic stress of the execution squads and the great distances in Russia as hindrance for the transport of CO-cylinders are mentioned. These arguments/reasons may play a role only after the begin of the campaign in Russia. Further observations/considerations to follow will corroborate this claim.

43. ibid.

44. Decision by Landgericht [Provincial/regional court] Hannover on Pradel and Wentritt, Az. 2 Js 299/60 [ZSL Az.415 Ar-Z 220/1959,Bl.419f].

45. StA Hamburg, Az. 147 Js 31/67 [ZSL, Az.II 415 AR-Z 1310/63-E32, Bl.545].

46. Deposition on 2-2-1961, StA Hannover, Az. 2 Js 299/60 [ZSL, Az.415 Ar-Z 220/59, Bl.260b]. Compare the following statements with the court-decision on Pradel, Bl.418 ff.

47. Deposition by M.Bauer, technician of the Gaubschat factory, on 21-3-1961, StA Hannover, 2 Js 299/60 [ZSL Az.202 AR-Z 152/59, Bl.275f].

48. Deposition by H.Wentritt on 2-2-1961, see footnote 46, Bl.260d ff.

49. Cf. following statements p.412.

50. IMT-Doc. 2348-PS. The credibility of this testimony is corroborated by that of H.Wentritt, see footnote 46, Bl.260 e, who mentions as well a number of five or six vehicles.

51. Deposition by H.Wentritt on 2-2-1961, see footnote 46, Bl. 260b ff.

52. Deposition on 6-2-1959, StA Stuttgart, Az.13 Js 328/60 [ZSL, Az.439 AR-Z 18a/1960, Bl.39]. This analysis is testified also by Widmann, see footnote 14.

53. Deposition by Widmann on 12-1-1960, ibid.; see also IMT- Doc.501-PS dated 16.5.42.

54. This is testified unanimously by Leiding, Hoffmann and Widmann.

55. See, Krausnick/Wilhelm, pp.544f. The testimonies fix the time for the experiment to early November 1941.

56. Deposition on 6-2-1959, see footnote 52, Bl.40. Hoffmann describes the event similarly; deposition on 27-1-1959, StA Hannover, Az.2 Js 299/60 [ZSL, Az.415 AR-Z 220/59, Bl.95ff].

57. See, court-decision on Pradel, Bl.427.

58. Deposition by E.Freiwald, employee at the KTI, on 3-9- 1959 and W.Schade on 12-2-1959, StA Hannover, Az.2 Js 299/60 [ZSL, Az. 415 AR-Z 220/59, Bl.68f and 181].

59. See footnote 44.

60. File entry dated 27.4.1942 and 5.6.1942, see footnote 3.

61. File entry dated 23.6.1942, see footnote 5.

62. Letter by Rauff to the KTI dated 26-3-1942, see footnote 2.

63. Cf. the following statements/arguments p.413.

64. See footnote 41, pp.186 ff.

65. Deposition by a member of this command, Lauer, StA Darmstadt, Az. Ks 1/67 [ZSL 205 AR-Z 269/60, Bl.2390ff]. P.Blobel, leader of Einsatzkommando 4a, testified on 6-5- 1947 in Nuremberg, that a gas-van was used already in September or October 1941. This statement cannot be correct. Howeber, his description of the smaller vehicles is conclusive. Nuremberg Document NO-3824.

66. ibid.

67. L.Bednarz, Extermination Camp at Chelmno, in: German Crimes in Poland 1/1946, p.110. Regarding Sonderkommando Lange Cf. Rueckerl, NS-Vernichtungslager, pp.243ff .

68. See footnote 1.

69. Deposition by the driver K.Gebel on 23-10-1962, StA Hannover, Az. 2 Js 299/60 [ZSL, Az.415 AR-Z 20/59, Bl.634f].

70. IMT-Doc 501-PS.

71. See footnote 41, pp.195 ff.

72. Court-decision on Drexel and Kehrer, StA Muenchen I, Az.119c Ks 6 a-b/70, Bl.33-35 [ZSL, Az.Sammelakte 32].

73. Deposition by Becker on 26-40-1960, StA Giessen, Az.3 Js 11/60 [ZSL, Az.2 AR-Z 311/59, Bl.194].

74. ibid., Bl.195; Becker's statements are ascertained by Ohlendorf, Einsatzgruppen -case Per. ??02 VI, Interrogation Nr.167.

75. Consequently, all dates given before this date and relating to the usage of gas-vans cannot be correct. Cf. footnote 65 too.

78. Deposition by Jeckeln on 21-12-1945, see footnote 41, p.548.

79. See the arguments on p.414.

79. That the number of people carried in the van may be viewed as a sure mark of the vans is ascertained by the notes in the files on 5.6.1942, see footnote 4.

80. See footnotes 54 and 56.

81. See footnote 50.

82. This formulation/words were used by Becker in his report on 16.5.1942, IMT-Doc. 501-PS.

83. Deposition by H.Wentritt on 2. 2. 1960, see footnote 44, Bl.260h; letter on 15.6.1942, IMT-Doc 501-PS.

84. Deposition by H.Hoffmanns on 27.1.1959, StA Duesseldorf, Az. 8 Js 7212/59 [ZSL, Az.439 AR-Z 18a/1960, Bl.28]; deposition by A.Becker on 26-3-1960, see footnote 71, Bl.195. As the first series consisted not only of chassis of one type, Becker couldn't give a more precise designation in his report on 16.5.1942, as he did with the vans of the second series.

85. See above p.410.

86. Letter to Gaubschat company on 30.4.1942, Copy ZSL, USA Dok. Film I Nr.26f.; Letter from Becker to Rauff on 16.5.1942, IMT-Doc. 501-PS; Letter from Schaefer to Rauff on 9.6.1952, see footnote 4; Truehe to Rauff on 15.6.1942, see footnote 5.

87. Note in the files on 27.4.1942, see footnote 3. This number of people can be calculated from the measures given there.

88. See footnote 5.

89. See footnote 44 (Bl.429).

90. See footnote 3.

91. Note in the files on 5.6.1942, see footnote 4.

92. Cf. footnote 86.

93. This may be concluded from a letter from Gaubschat company to Rauff on 14.5.1942, see footnote 3.

94. Cf. the letters on 9. and 15.6.1942 and Becker's report on 16.5.1942, IMT-Doc. 501-PS. Regarding the witness- testimonies see NS-Massentoetung, pp.87ff.

95. See footnote 62.

96. Deposition by A.Becker on 28-1-1960, see footnote 17, Bl.44.

97. See footnote 3.

98. Note in the files on 5.6.1942, see footnote 4.

99. See above p.413.

100. Deposition by Becker on 26-3-1960, see footnote 73.

101. ibid. Bl.197f.

102. ibid.; Cf. his report on 16.5.1942 too.

103. Note in the files on 5.6.1942, see footnote 4.

104. See footnote 5; deposition by H.Munk on 3.2.1959, StA Karlsruhe, Az. Js 2138/58 [ZSL, Az.415 AR-Z 220/59, Bl.499ff].

105. 16.5.1942, see footnote 82.

106. Note in the files 5.6.1942, see footnote 4. Deposition by A.Widmann on 11.1.1960, see footnote 14.

107. See footnote 6.

108. IMT-Doc 501-PS.

109. ibid.

110. Deposition by M.Draheim on 29.8.1961, StA Hannover, Az. 2 Js 299/60 [ZSL, Az. 415 AR-Z 220/1959, Bl.294f] deposition by W.Schmidt, ibid, Bl.260zf.

111. IMT, Vol.4, deposition on 3.1.1946, p.357.

112. Deposition by Becker on 28-4-1960, see footnote 96, Bl.43.

113. Cf. depositions by the drivers G.Laabs and K.Gebel, see footnotes 1 and 69.

114. Deposition by A.Truehe on 16-10-1959, ZSL, Az 2 AR-Z 311/59, Bl.43ff.

115. Cf. draft version of a letter from the official/administrative servant at the ministry for the occupied territories to the Reichskommisar for the Ostland on 25.10.1942, Doc. No-365; deposition by SS- and Police-Leader Warthegau W.Koppe on 2-2- 1960, StA Bonn, Az.18 Js 52/60 [ZSL, Az.220/59, Bl.138f].

116. Note in the files on 5.6.1942, see footnote 4. There we read: "Since December 1941 e.g., 97.000 have been processed with 3 vans employed, without any failure of the vehicles."
[/quote]

http://weber.ucsd.edu/~lzamosc/chelm10.htm

For other info on Chelmno and the gas vans, and I don't recall seeing this posted before:

http://weber.ucsd.edu/~lzamosc/gmoreinf.html


Regards,

Mark

[David Thompson]

Thaks, Tarpon27, for posting that very interesting and informative article!

[Tarpon27]

From the URL above, this series of letters is interesting, including the mechanic's comments on the engine, exhaust system, the use of "petrol", the fumes developed while work was being done on the "cooler", which I assume is the radiator.

Enquires on the Killing of the Gombin Jews


Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 15:40:00 CDT
Subject: Gas vans, Chelmno
To: Multiple recipients of list HOLOCAUS

From: Leon Zamosc

I am trying to find a photograph or any other graphic illustration
of the gas vans used at Chelmno and other places. Has anyone seen
anything in books or elsewhere? I am also interested in pictures of
the Chelmno camp. Will welcome any reference.
Leon Zamosc
University of California, San Diego
[email protected]

-------------

Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 11:28:00 CDT
Subject: Re: Gas vans in Chelmno
To: Multiple recipients of list HOLOCAUS

From: Jerzy Halbersztadt < HALBERUW@PLEARN >

Dr. Leon Zamosc was
interested few weeks ago in finding a graphic illustration of the
gas vans used at Chelmno.

I made some survey (with an assistance of Marek Jannasz)
and here are the results:

The case of Chelmno death camp was investigated by the
Main Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in
Poland (it was the commission's name at the beginning of it's
existence) starting from May 1945. The commission received the
information that in the town KOLO (ca. 12 km from Chelmno) in
the former factory of Ostrowski there was a van which, according
to the witnesses, was used in the death center at Chelmno. The
van was found, photographed and researched.

The photos taken then are available in the Main
Commission's Archives in Warsaw (signatures 47398, 47396,
47397, 47399; the best one is 47398). The captions of these
photographs are till today: "a car for killing people by the exhaust
fumes at Chelmno". One of these photos was reproduced in the
Fleming's book "Hitler and the Final Solution" with the
information that it is a photograph of a "gaswagon" used in
Chelmno.

Despite of their captions, the photographs do not show the
gas van used in the Chelmno death camp. It is clear from the
testimonies of Polish witnesses kept in the same archives of the
Main Commission (collection "Ob", file 271 and others).
Witnesses to whom the van photographed in Kolo was shown did
not confirm that it was one of those used in Chelmno for killing
people. Some of them only said that it was similar to those
described in their testimonies, but not the same. The most
common answer was: "I didn't see this one".

The inspection of the van in Ostrowski factory, done on 13
November 1945 by the judge J.Bronowski, did not confirm the
existence of any elements of system of gassing of the van's closed
platform. The witnesses called this van "a pantechnicon van" (a
van to transport furniture). It was produced by "Magirus-Werke"
with a diesel type engine of "Deutz". The plate on the engine
stated: "Humboldt-Deutz A.G. "Magirus-Werke" Ulm (Donau)
Baujahr 1939 Lieferdat739 Abn-Stempel. Fahrgestell Nr. 9282/38
Nutzlast kg 2700 Fahgestell-Baumuster 023. Eingewicht 4980 kg.
Motor Baumuster FoM 513 zul. Gesamt gew. 7900 Leistung P.S.
105 cm3 7412. Zulaessige Achsendruecke vorn kg 2400 hinten
5500." The thickness of the car's wooden body was 7 cm, of the
door - 8 cm. The walls, door, ceiling and floor were covered from
the inside with the 2mm sheet iron. The car was painted in grey-
lead color. Under this paint the inscription was seen on the door
of the cab: "Otto Koehn Spedition Ruf 516 Zeulen.....da i.TH".

I cite all these details to make possible the further comments
to the story of this van. It is my feeling that there are some
unclear points in this story. Nobody explained for what purpose
this van was used? Its door was tightened with an impregnated
canvas. What for? Some witnesses had seen this car in the area of
the forest of Chelmno starting from the spring of 1942. It is
possible that it belonged to the SS-Sonderkommando Kulmhof,
too. I came across a version that this van was used for a
disinfection of victims' clothes but there are no grounds for it.

In 1945 the prosecutors came to the conclusion that this van
was not a gas van of Chelmno. The van was left incomplete and
not serviceable in Ostrowski's factory at least till 1950. The last
known documents (a correspondence between the Association of
Combatants "ZBoWiD" in Kolo and the Main Commission) of
April 1950 inform that there was an idea to move this van to the
museum in Auschwitz or Majdanek (till 1990 there was no
museum in the Chelmno forest; first monument was erected there
in 1964). Those plans were not accomplished and the van was
scrapped, probably.

Thus, there is no reliable graphic illustration of the gas vans
used in Chelmno. However, the testimonies of witnesses contain
many important data on these vehicles. In 1945 and later Polish
authorities examined some Poles who stayed in the area of
Chelmno after the removal of the vast majority of the Polish
population to the GG in 1939-1940. The witnesses were able to
identify gas vans very well. They declared that there were three or
four gas vans, one of them was a bit bigger. All of them were
black. The cars' bodies were boxes made of boards. The length of
a biggest vehicle was 5.5-6 m. It was ca. 2.5 m high and 2.5 m
wide. Each vehicle was guarded all the time (even during the
repair in the local factories) by two watchmen, who did not give
anybody the access to the van and, especially, to the chassis and
the closed box (platform).

However, at least three witnesses were able to see the
vehicles from the short distance. Mr. Jozef Piaskowski (b. 1908)
was employed in the Reichsstrassenbauamt in Kolo (former
*Ostrowski factory). In the winter 1941/42 he was ordered to
repair the damaged cooler in the biggest of Chelmno vans.
Piaskowski was an experienced driver. He declared later that he
has never seen the motor of this type. "The motor was a bit odd".
"It was enormous". The most interesting in his report is the
description of the exhaust system. He has noticed that the exhaust
pipe was divided into three parts. First and third were done of
metal as in normal cars. But, the central part was done of the
elastic, "hydraulic" pipe which could joint both standard tubes or
could be screwed to the holen the van's floor. After the repair
of the cooler, when the motor was tested, so much exhaust fumes
were produced that the air in the garage (size 30 m x 12 m) started
immediately to be blue. The German bosses ordered to open all
windows and doors. The workers who spent a very short time in
the polluted air have got headache. The witness heard later their
comments that the motor of this car uses 75 liters of petrol per 100
km, so twice more than normal motors do. Piaskowski stated that
he had seen two military type gas-masks in the driver's cab.
Piaskowski's colleague, Mr. Bronislaw Mankowski (b. 1882)
confirmed his story and added that he had seen the van when the
middle part of the exhaust tube was joint to the hole in the car's
floor. Mankowski declared that he looked inside the box when
the watchmen left their posts for a while. He had seen a hole
covered with a perforated sheet iron in the middle of the wooden
floor.

Another witness Mr. Bronislaw Falborski (b. 1910) was
employed in the "Kraft" company in Kolo where the vehicles of
the SS-Sonderkommando Kulmhof were repaired starting from
1942. In summer 1942 he received the order to repair one of the
gas vans. His description of the exhaust pipe is in general the
same as done by witnesses cited above. The only (but important)
difference is the description of the connection of elastic pipe with
the hole in the car's floor. According to Falborski (who made
even a picture) they were joint by two fasteners tightened by four
screws. It seems that this connection was permanent, quite
difficult to change and only optionally substituted by the standard
connection of both metal parts of the exhaust pipe as in normal
cars. Falborski's report seems reliable as his task was to make
this connection air-tight by the change of the packing between
two fasteners.

The cases of the repair of gas vans in the local workshops of
Kolo seem to be rare and exceptional. Probably it happened only
in necessity when it was impossible to use military- or SS-motor
services.

The Chelmno death center stopped to operate many months
before the liberation of this site. The gas vans were very easy to
move from the area of Chelmno-Kolo and to change into standard
vans with very little signs of their previous function. It is very
difficult to think that SS murders (who tried to destroy all
evidences of genocide, like crematoria, camps, corpses, etc.) could
simply forget a gas van near to Chelmno or elsewhere.

Jerzy Halbersztadt
University of Warsaw
and US Holocaust Museum, Washington, DC.
e-mail: [email protected]

-------------

From: Leon Zamosc
Subject: Chelmno
To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 95 13:27:48 PDT

Dear Jerzy,

I have learned much from the detailed report on the Chelmno vans
that you posted today. Two other scholars had already warned me
that there were problems with the picture in Fleming's book, and
your report shows that the matter is still far from clear.

I am doing some research about our relatives who perished
in Poland. In the case of my father's family, I know that they
were rounded up with all the other Jews of the town of Gabin
(Gostynin district) and taken to Chelmno on May 12, 1942. I
assumed that they had been killed in the gas vans (that is why I
made the enquiry about the vans). But recently I have found a
book that tells a different story. The book is DZIEJE GABINA DO
ROKU 1945, by Janusz SZCZEPANSKI (Warszawa : Panstwowe Wydawn.
Naukowe, c1984, Prace Mazowieckiego Osrodka Badan Naukowych /
Mazowiecki Osrodek Badan Naukowych ; nr. 42. ISBN: 8301039175). I
myself do not speak Polish, but a friend gave me a rough
translation of the paragraphs relevant to the end of the Jews
(pages 281-282). Based on testimony of a local German who seems
to have supervised the transport, SZCZEPANSKI describes the
killing of the Jews as a shooting execution, in which the victims
were first forced to dig their own graves, and then were
machine-gunned by the Germans.

I have talked to old people from Gabin living here in the US and
they do not know exactly how the Jews of Gombin died. So this is
something that must be clarified. I myself have doubts on the
veracity of SZCZEPANSKI's story, since there is no mention of
mass-killing by shooting at Chelmno in any of the materials I
have seen until now (GULCZYNSKI's book, KRAKOWSKI's chapter in
NAZI MASS MURDER, the Chelmno chapter in the Polish Commission
report GERMAN CRIMES IN POLAND, another Polish Commision report
from 1946 that I read in a book in Hebrew by ZEEV KIBEL, a
pamphlet in English from the Chelmno Museum, and references to
Chelmno in many other books on the Shoah).

So I am writing to you in order to ask if, in the course of your
research, you have seen any specific reference to the Jews of
Gabin. If nothing conclusive is known about the exact manner of
their death, did you ever come across any evidence or mention of
any cases of mass executions by shooting at Chelmno? I hope you
will find time to answer this query, which is very important for
us. Thanks a lot for your help.

Leon Zamosc
Professor of Sociology
University of California, San Diego
9500 Gilman Drive
La Jolla, CA 92093

-------------

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 95 01:59:29 CET
From: Jerzy Halbersztadt
Subject: Jews of Gabin
To: Leon Zamosc

Dear Leon Zamosc:

I tried to find some references to the Jews of Gabin, but there are
very few facts in the historical literature on this topic.
Apart from the books you mentioned, there are two articles which
could be interesting for you. However neither of them gives the
direct answer to your questions.

The first one is: D.Dabrowska, Zaglada Zydow w Kraju Warty
(Extermination of Jews in "Wartegau"), "Biuletyn Zydowskiego
Instytutu Historycznego", 1955, no.13 and 14, p. 145 - 172.
In Dabrowska's article there is a table. According to the data
in this table before the war there were 2313 Jews in Gabin, in
January 1940 there were 2100 and in 1942 - 2150 (including those
who came to Gabin during the war). April 1942 all Jews form Gabin
were taken to Chelmno. Please note that these numbers are not in
contradiction with the testimony in Janusz Szczepanski's book
(There was no exact number of Jews killed by shooting given in
this book).

The second one is: J.Wrobel, Getta w powiatach gostyninskim i
kutnowskim (Ghettos in Gostynin district and Kutno district).
This is an unpublished paper given during the conference in 45
anniversary of the extermination of Jews in "Kraj Warty", held
in Zdunska Wola, October 23, 1987. One fragment of this article
is directly connected with the question of extermination of Gabin
Jews. Here is the translation of this fragment:
"Ghetto in Gabin was liquidated in April 1942. First, 300 men
were taken and closed in the building of the fire-station. They
were beaten there and two men were shot by a German guard.
Finally all men, women and children were taken to the Chelmno
death camp."

I will send you xerocopies of these two articles by snail mail.

It was really a great pleasure for me to do something for a
founding member of the Holocaust Museum. I hope I could be
helpful also in the future.

With best regards, Jerzy Halbersztadt

http://weber.ucsd.edu/~lzamosc/chelm00.htm

[Witch-King of Angmar]

What’s that supposed to mean, Smith? Shooting the bull to gloss over the fact that Pfannenstiel’s deposition doesn’t necessarily support your diesel dream, because the running of an engine with diesel fuel – according to our fellow poster Ovidius aka White Trash – doesn’t necessarily mean that the engine was a diesel engine?

Off topic:

I strongly protest against the assumption that I'm Ovidius - just as strongly as "Commissar D The Evil" aka David C. Clarke had protested against the assumption that he was Tovarich

~The White Trash

[Scott Smith]

And Eichmann, who describes an engine from a Russian submarine.

I guess you are using the word "describe" deliberately to allege that Eichmann actually saw the engine. But as I understand Eichmann, this piece of information was supposedly passed on to him by Wirths.

Then I guess his testimony is hearsay, i.e., worthless, huh.

Yes, as I said, FUCHS is the only one to provide any significant details on the engine type in order to establish it as gasoline,

Can you prove this? (I mean, now and here and without linking to non-working "discussion"-Forums where any other opinion is censored anyway)

The operative question is can the accusers prove it. Doesn't look like it.

The only critical analysis of Gerstein was provided by Roques, who had his Ph.D. stripped by fiat for smashing a graven image and breaking the French Thoughtcrimes laws.

Well, Gerstein was critically analysed at West-German trials against Zyklon-B producers.

How so?

[Scott Smith]

From the URL above, this series of letters is interesting, including the mechanic's comments on the engine, exhaust system, the use of "petrol", the fumes developed while work was being done on the "cooler", which I assume is the radiator.

Here's a link to the furniture van in question. It is a Magirus-Deutz diesel.

http://www.zchor.org/GASVAN.HTM

The rest of the story sounds like poppycock. For one thing thick smoke doesn't make the exhaust more toxic unless we are talking about lung disease or cancer. Carbon monoxide does make the fumes more toxic, which diesel exhaust has almost none. CO is odorless and colorless. And you wouldn't need to seal the chamber. In fact you wouldn't because the chamber would have to vent somehow if you pipe exhaust into it.

As far as the petrol, well how many times have you heard people refer to filling up with diesel fuel as "getting gas," or in this case tanking up "with petrol." Of course it's still diesel fuel. But if a mechanic like Fuchs says so that means something. Saurer (always) and Diamond (usually) are diesels as well.

And the bit about the gas masks is obvious bullshit. It takes a special gas mask to block carbon monoxide and you are not going to need one unless you are in the gaschamber along with the victims.

Here's a picture of a Einheits diesel model. Note that the Germans are wearing military gas masks. They are not doing that because it's a smelly old diesel. This would be an A-wagen or Allradantreib (all-wheel drive). A Standard-drive vehicle would be an S-Wagen. There were also plenty of Special vehicles, Sonderkraftfahrzeug, or Sdkfz. That is insignificant as well. A Tiger I tank was an Sdkfz 181.

CLICK for Enlargement!

In addition, there were indeed hundreds of thousands of German vehicles called Gaswagen or Holzgaswagen. They used wood or some other cheap combustible like coal or peat to generate carbon monoxide for propulsion fuel on account of the shortages of gasoline and diesel fuel. The idea of using cylinders is absurd with a gasoline engine, which generates plenty of carbon monoxide as waste. And considering that all civilian or nontactical vehicles were mandated during the war as being Holzgas the idea is even more bizarre because the fuel itself is carbon monoxide and even more toxic than the exhaust.

As far as security and logistical concerns shipping steel cylinders containing combustible gas, four miles from Auschwitz was a synthetic oil facility called Monowitz that use forced-labor; there was plenty of industrial carbon monoxide available there, yet the Nazi engineers like Kammler chose insecticide, or rather the non-engineer, Höß chose Zyklon-B and chiselled holes in the roof.

It doesn't quite wash. Especially if you are talking about millions the technical DETAILS become very important. It's not Colonel Mustard in the Conservatory with the Candlestick.

A Holzgas-fueled motorcycle. This ain't rocket science, folks.

[Roberto]

At least if the death toll is hundreds of thousands and the time of gassing to death was less than five hours. Xanthro found one example of an octogenarian who may have perished after only an hour inhaling diesel fumes--but I have not been able to confirm that report from a primary source. And that is ONE case!

Cut out the crap, Smith. You know what I’m referring to – the possibility of enhancing the exhaust’s toxicity by restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply. Which Smith hasn’t been able too rule out, as he also wasn’t able to rule out his peer Richard Miller’s thesis of death by "CO2 narcosis", remember?

No, look at the graphic again. To get the CO2 to rise the diesel engine has to have a heavy load put on it. That is hard to do with an engine that is better than 500 horsepower.

Not that it matters, but let’s allow our audience to benefit from the knowledge of Smith’s peer Richard Miller. First of all, here’s a graphic representation of the data from the Holtz & Elliot experiments, more illustrative than Smith’s conveniently incomplete graph based thereon:

Experiment #; Power (load hp); Rpm; Fuel; volume gas; Fuel-Air ratio; CO2%; O2%; CO%; NOx (ppm); H2%:

B13; 00.0hp; 1400rpm; 04.56lbs/hr; 4500cf/hr; 0.013 (77:1); 02.7%; 17.14%; 0.041% (410ppm); 167ppm; 0.0%
B14; 08.8hp; 1410rpm; 06.89lbs/hr; 4460cf/hr; 0.020 (50:1); 04.2%; 15.13%; 0.028% (280ppm); 267ppm; 0.0%
B15; 17.5hp; 1400rpm; 09.56lbs/hr; 4180cf/hr; 0.029 (35:1); 06.2%; 12.20%; 0.024% (240ppm); 378ppm; 0.0%
B16; 24.6hp; 1410rpm; 12.45lbs/hr; 4050cf/hr; 0.039 (26:1); 08.4%; 09.26%; 0.027% (270ppm); 448ppm; 0.0%
B12; 37.8hp; 1400rpm; 18.12lbs/hr; 3950cf/hr; 0.056 (18:1); 12.4%; 03.44%; 0.058% (580ppm); 364ppm; 0.0%
B70; 40.2hp; 1400rpm; 21.29lbs/hr; 3700cf/hr; 0.070 (14:1); 13.8%; 00.80%; 0.700% (07kppm); 346ppm; 0.1%
B72; 41.0hp; 1400rpm; 24.41lbs/hr; 3650cf/hr; 0.084 (12:1); 12.1%; 00.30%; 3.500% (35kppm); 277ppm; 1.3%
B69; 40.6hp; 1400rpm; 29.63lbs/hr; 4050cf/hr; 0.094 (11:1); 10.2%; 00.30%; 6.000% (60kppm); 186ppm; 0.4%
In a discussion on the extinct Codoh forum,

Ambient air carries 21% O2, and any significant increase in CO2 results in a corresponding decrease in available O2. (Which can easily be seen on the chart.}This is a much different mechanism than CO poisoning, which can occur at very low levels due to its highly efficient displacement of O2 in the blood.
Unlike CO2, if you had CO levels high enough to significantly reduce ambient O2 levels, probably a single breath would kill you.
When the CO2 hits about 7% to 10% of your ambient air, you DO die. Even if the rest is O2. It is known as CO2 narcosis, and it shuts you down.[my emphasis]
5% CO2 is equivalent to about 40 Torr, which is your normal blood level. If you breath the 7-10% CO2, you go up to 80 Torr, enough to black you out unless you hyperventilate. If you double your minute volume (through rapid breathing) you can get down to 60 Torr, but you will feel ill. At 10% CO2 there's no way to keep below about 90 Torr, and (unless you're a chronic COPD patient who's used to high CO2's and you have a high bicarb rate and other compensatory mechanisms) you black out.
You then quit hyperventilating. Then quit breathing entirely.
Ultimately, hypoxia is the cause of death in either case, but death by CO poisoning wouldn't be called suffocation whereas death by CO2 (ie, lack of O2) would.
An increase in CO2 in the air would tend to increase the driving force for the CO2 to go into the blood. This causes a condition known as Acidosis (Your body PH becomes more acidic.) Metabolically, your body defends your pH by having the kidneys make more buffer (bicarbonate) over the course of a few days. The problem with CO2 in the air is that your body depends on the difference in CO2 pressure in the blood and CO2 pressure in the air, to get RID of it.
Ultimately, blood pH would drop again, once the buffer was overcome. The CO2 builds up in your blood and acts as a direct anesthetic. Eventually, you lose consciousness and respiratory drive, then you die.
A person in a 10 ft. X 10 ft. sealed room will increase the CO2 level by about 1% over a period of 24 hours, if he rests.
If he is active, this time can decrease to 8 hours.
Now if 200 scared, screaming people are placed in a sealed room (gas chamber) it would take a matter of minutes to elevate CO2 levels to the point where they would die. This, without any diesel, or Zyklon, or steam, or whatever.
The people, by simply hyperventilating would effectively kill themselves.[my emphasis][...]

Assuming Miller’s arithmetic is correct, let’s apply it to the gas chambers of Treblinka. Miller tells us that one person in a room 10 ft x 10 ft (roughly 3 x 3 meters or 9 square meters) will increase the CO2 level by about 1 % over a period of 24 hours if resting and over a period of a little as 8 hours if active. The people crammed into the Treblinka gas chambers were in the latter rather than in the former situation, so the latter value seems more appropriate than the former.

The Treblinka gas chambers newly constructed after the initial phase of extermination, according to the findings of the Düsseldorf County Court at the first Treblinka trial that ended in 1965, were at most 4 meters long by 8 wide and could take in 250 people each - a concentration of roughly 8 people per square meter. Now if, according to our above assumption, a concentration of 0.11 people (one-ninth) active people per square meter would increase the CO2 content by 1 % within 8 hours, a concentration of people more than 70 times higher can be expected to have achieved the same effect in one-seventieth of the time, i.e. the CO2 concentration would increase by 1 % every seven minutes. At this rate, a fatal concentration of 7 % would be reached after 7 * 7 = 49 minutes.

Now comes the gas. Let’s assume that it would take twenty minutes to fill the chamber and contain only 2.74 % CO2, as in experiment B-13 above. Thus from minute 21 onward the effect of the CO2 in the exhaust would add to the “natural” CO2 increase, leaving the people breathing air with 5,8 % CO2 in minute 21 and 7.12 % in minute thirty. After this, as mentioned by Miller, they would black out, quite hyperventilating, then quit breathing entirely.

The calculated time of death in the above scenario is compatible with the time it took the people to die in the Treblinka gas chambers according to some eyewitness testimonials - 30 to 45 minutes. No load or enhancement of exhaust toxicity by restriction of air intake and/or increase of fuel supply required.

The only thing the exhaust did, according to this theory, was to speed up the dying process. Which was important to the killers, however. With up to 15,000 people to dispatch within 24 hours, according to their depositions before West German courts, every minute counted.

[Roberto]

And Eichmann, who describes an engine from a Russian submarine.

I guess you are using the word "describe" deliberately to allege that Eichmann actually saw the engine. But as I understand Eichmann, this piece of information was supposedly passed on to him by Wirths.

Then I guess his testimony is hearsay, i.e., worthless, huh.

Which takes us back to a previous post on this thread:

And Eichmann, who describes an engine from a Russian submarine.

On what basis, Smith? Did he see it himself, or did he speak from hearsay? Read his deposition. It’s amazing what relevance hearsay, otherwise contemptuously cast aside, has when it seems convenient to "Revisionist" arguments.

As I said, hearsay can be valuable or worthless to “Revisionist” howler like Smith, depending on whether or not it can be used to support their rubbish.

Yes, as I said, FUCHS is the only one to provide any significant details on the engine type in order to establish it as gasoline,

Can you prove this? (I mean, now and here and without linking to non-working "discussion"-Forums where any other opinion is censored anyway)

The operative question is can the accusers prove it. Doesn't look like it.

Whoever understood what rubbish Smith is trying to convey in the above statement, raise your hands.

[Roberto]

From the URL above, this series of letters is interesting, including the mechanic's comments on the engine, exhaust system, the use of "petrol", the fumes developed while work was being done on the "cooler", which I assume is the radiator.

Here's a link to the furniture van in question. It is a Magirus-Deutz diesel.

http://www.zchor.org/GASVAN.HTM

Why does Smith insist on a diesel van when the witnesses mentioned in the articles quoted by Mark seem to agree that the Magirus-Deutz diesel shown in Fleming’s book was not one of the Chelmno gas vans ?

The rest of the story sounds like poppycock.

Any inconvenient evidence that doesn’t fit into his believer bubble is “poppycock” to Smith. The sole criterion being the inconvenience of such evidence.

For one thing thick smoke doesn't make the exhaust more toxic unless we are talking about lung disease or cancer.

And who of the witnesses exactly said that thick smoke did make the exhaust more toxic? What I read is that the engine was found to produce an abnormally high amount of exhaust. Nothing else.

Carbon monoxide does make the fumes more toxic, which diesel exhaust has almost none.

Depends, my dear Smith. But what makes you think we’re talking about diesel engines here?

CO is odorless and colorless.

But it does come along with other substances in the exhaust that are not colorless or odorless, doesn’t it?

And you wouldn't need to seal the chamber. In fact you wouldn't because the chamber would have to vent somehow if you pipe exhaust into it.

Bingo, Smith. That’s exactly what they did in the gas vans, install flaps to let out the fumes pumped in and avoid the buildup of excessive pressure. See e.g. Just’s letter to Rauff of 5 June 1942:

[…]In order to facilitate the rapid distribution of CO, as well as to avoid a buildup of pressure, two slots, ten by one centimeters, will be bored at the top of the rear wall. The excess pressure would be controlled by an easily adjustable hinged metal valve on the outside of the vents.[…]

Source of quote:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/194206 ... zialwagen/

As far as the petrol, well how many times have you heard people refer to filling up with diesel fuel as "getting gas," or in this case tanking up "with petrol." Of course it's still diesel fuel.

I have never heard diesel fuel referred to as “petrol” or “gas”, either in Germany or in Portugal. In Colombia such confusion would be even more difficult, for there diesel is called “aceite combustible para motores”, i.e. “combustion oil for motors”. I don’t know how it is in Arizona, and as we’re talking about events involving Germany and Poland, I hardly think that matters. Besides, Smith likes to hear whatever helps his stance, for he desperately wants it to be diesel in order to have something to make a fuss about. Unfortunately for him, the food for his diesel baloney is especially meager when it comes to the gas vans.

But if a mechanic like Fuchs says so that means something.

And if the witness is not a mechanic and speaks of “petrol” or “gas”, the burden of proof that he or she meant not gasoline but diesel is still on the howler.

Saurer (always) and Diamond (usually) are diesels as well.

Says Smith, which doesn’t exclude the possibility of custom-built models with gasoline engines, or of the vans put together by Gaubschat having been special constructions which only happened to have a Saurer or Diamond chassis. But then, where is anything said about Saurer or Diamond vans in the quote provided by Mark? It’s about Chelmno, if I understood correctly. The only deposition related to that camp which mentions the type of the vehicles clearly speaks of Renault trucks with gasoline engines.

From the deposition of Chelmo gas van driver Walter Burmeister at the trial before the Bonn County Court against the members of Sonderkommando Lange (StA Bonn AZ: 8 Js 52/60 (AZ. ZSL 203 AR-Z 69/59, Volume I, pages 138-141, quoted in Kogon Langbein/Rückerl et al, as above, page 114):

[…]Die Wagen waren mittelschwere Renault-Lastwagen mit Ottomotor. Sie ließen sich schlecht fahren, weil sie nicht einen so großen Wendekreis hatten. Der zeitweise hinzugekommene dritte Wagen war wohl ein schwerer. Die Wagen hatten Kastenaufbau mit einer großen Zweiflügeltür an der Rückseite, ähnlich wie Möbelwagen.[…]

My translation:

[...]The vans were medium size Renault trucks with Otto engines. They were hard to drive because they didn’t have so big a turning circle. The temporarily added third van must have been a heavy one. The vans had a box-like buildup with a big two-wing door at the back side, similar to furniture vans.[...]

And the bit about the gas masks is obvious bullshit.

Careful with that term, Smith. Most of the bullshit I read on this forum is from you.

It takes a special gas mask to block carbon monoxide and you are not going to need one unless you are in the gaschamber along with the victims.

What passage exactly is Smith referring to, and where is it stated therein that someone used a gas mask to “block carbon monoxide”?

Here's a picture of a Einheits diesel model. Note that the Germans are wearing military gas masks. They are not doing that because it's a smelly old diesel. This would be an A-wagen or Allradantreib (all-wheel drive). A Standard-drive vehicle would be an S-Wagen. There were also plenty of Special vehicles, Sonderkraftfahrzeug, or Sdkfz. That is insignificant as well. A Tiger I tank was an Sdkfz 181.

CLICK for Enlargement!

Interesting, but what is that supposed to tell us?

In addition, there were indeed hundreds of thousands of German vehicles called Gaswagen or Holzgaswagen.

Assuming there were, so what? The homicidal gas vans were never referred in correspondence among those involved in their use as “gas vans”, by the way, but as “special vans”, “delousing vans” or similar, their homicidal use becoming apparent only from the context in which they were referred to in the respective document

They used wood or some other cheap combustible like coal or peat to generate carbon monoxide for propulsion fuel on account of the shortages of gasoline and diesel fuel. The idea of using cylinders is absurd with a gasoline engine, which generates plenty of carbon monoxide as waste. And considering that all civilian or nontactical vehicles were mandated during the war as being Holzgas the idea is even more bizarre because the fuel itself is carbon monoxide and even more toxic than the exhaust.

As far as security and logistical concerns shipping steel cylinders containing combustible gas, four miles from Auschwitz was a synthetic oil facility called Monowitz that use forced-labor; there was plenty of industrial carbon monoxide available there, yet the Nazi engineers like Kammler chose insecticide, or rather the non-engineer, Höß chose Zyklon-B and chiselled holes in the roof.

It doesn't quite wash. Especially if you are talking about millions the technical DETAILS become very important. It's not Colonel Mustard in the Conservatory with the Candlestick.

A Holzgas-fueled motorcycle. This ain't rocket science, folks.

To sum it up, the true believer is again trying to tell us that there were easier ways of gassing people, as if that would in any way affect the fact that gassing was done not in those supposedly easier or “smarter” ways, but as becomes apparent from coincident and conclusive documentary and eyewitness evidence.
We might as well argue that no murdering government has used firearms to bump off its victims ever since the Cambodian Khmer Rouge discovered that it was enough to pull a plastic bag over a victims’ head an pulling it tight, thus saving a lot of ammunition especially as the same plastic bag could be reused a number of times.

Irrelevant to the point of imbecility as this kind of argument is, it is also hard to imagine a more practical and economic solution for gassing than pouring an extra can of your lethal standard insecticide through holes in the roof into a cellar full of tightly packed, fast-breathing victims, however hard the true believers try to come up with more “practical” alternatives, as if the existence of such would say anything against the use of the method borne out by the evidence. In regard to the Holzgas vans mentioned by Smith, his guru Berg inadvertently damaged his not exactly pertinent argument by pointing out two inconveniences that this supposedly far superior killing method, unlike engine exhaust, would have had for the users: a toxicity so great that the users themselves might have been at risk, and the danger of explosion.

As an alternative which they were required, by law, to know was
extremely deadly, the Germans had producer gas generators--18%
to 35% CO--on hundreds of thousands of trucks. Those generators
were extremely dangerous--everyone had to know that because gas
leaks were not only toxic but also highly explosive! When the
engines were shutoff, the generators would keep on generating
until the internal fire could be extinguished. [my emphasis] Can anyone
really believe the Germans would have used Diesel exhaust as a
source of CO, when they had 18% to 35% CO? These were
essentially the same people who built the first jet and
rocket-propelled fighter airplanes, the first ballistic
missiles, who also invented the gasoline engine, Diesel engine
and even the automobile. I can't really believe that Mullins
can be that stupid--but, then again, perhaps he is? (Berg,
Diesel A,B,C's)

Source of quote:

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/b/ ... -available

Can anyone really believe that the SS would have risked gassing themselves or blowing themselves to oblivion while doing their dirty work, when they could avoid such risks by using engine exhaust? These were essentially people who, however indifferent they were to the lives of their victims, had some concern about their own safety. I can’t really believe that Berg can be that stupid - but, then again, perhaps he is?