The Truth is Out There!
We'll see about that, what they SAW, and what they KNOW...Roberto wrote:Are we going back to kindergarten, Scotty? While few people may be able to distinguish a diesel engine from a gasoline engine when they see it, just about everyone knows what an engine looks like.Scott Smith wrote:Then how do you know it was an engine and not a rhinocerous? What did it look like? Details, please, from the battery of "eyewitnesses."Roberto wrote:Yeah, no one was gassed because we don’t know everything about what the gassing engine looked like. Does it get more imbecile than this?Scott wrote:No Details/No Holocaust! Well, maybe...
Okay, I'll comment on Wiernik and Rosenberg, soon.Roberto wrote:Which means that when several people - from the ranks of perpetrators, survivors and outside observers - describe the device as the engine of a huge motor vehicle, there is every reason to assume that it actually was such an engine.
Just two examples for the silly little Reverend:
From the depostion of Ya'akov Wiernik at the Eichmann trialQ. You could not see the inside of the building of the gas chambers?
A. When the doors were open, I did see them.
Q. When they removed the dead bodies, could you look inside the gas chambers?
A. Yes. The doors were open — they were open almost completely, and when they were opened, the dead bodies fell out, since they had been lying there crowded together. Into a room of 1.90 metres, they forced many inside.
Q. Can you describe the inner structure?
A. It was a room. The floor was somewhat sloping. When the people inside were suffocated, they used to wash the floor with a hosepipe or a bucket of water. When they removed the bodies, they had been suffocated.
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.
From the deposition of Eliahu Rosenberg at the same trial.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 quotes:
http://www.ukar.org/eichma02.shtml
I just want to know what they saw or how they came to know this.Roberto wrote:Lots of details on the relevant issues, actually. But you have to forgive non-technical witnesses if, concerned as they understandably were with many other things, they failed to correctly describe the type of engine used for gassing – assuming that they were wrong at all, that is.Scott wrote:But why no details?
On the contrary, I think these DETAILS are essential to FACT. That is my point of interest, the crux of my skepticism.Roberto wrote:When negotiating contract drafts, we make a distinction between "deal breakers", other fairly essential issues and clauses that are "nice to have". A similar distinction can be made in regard to the evidence to the mass killings at Treblinka and the other Aktion Reinhard(t) extermination camps: the details you would like to see are "nice to have," but if we don't have them we can do without them because they were and are not necessary to establish the essential facts.Scott wrote:It would be nice to have a technical description from a mechanic, technician, or engineer, but at this point, we don't even know what they purport to have seen. Can they describe ANYTHING about this "ENGINE" or not?
Eichmann says that he was driven to a place two hours outside Lublin (Belzec?), where the SS officer Wirth was constructing homicidal gas chambers. It was intended to use a russian submarine engine to kill the people. He also states that there were "Vergasungslager" in Belzec and Treblinka.In einem Schreiben Ganzenmüllers an Wolff vom 28. 7. 1942 heißt es:
"Unter Bezugnahme auf unser Ferngespräch vom 16. Juli, teile ich Ihnen folgende Meldung meiner Generaldirektion der Ostbahnen (Gedob /Schreibung auf Seite gegenüber verdeutlicht/) in Krakau zu Ihrer gefälligen Unterrichtung mit:
Seit dem 22. 7. fährt täglich ein Zug, mit je 5000 Juden von Warschau über Malkimia nach Treblinka, außerdem wöchentlich ein Zug mit 5.000 Juden von Przemysl nach Belzek. Gedob steht in ständiger Fühlung mit dem Sicherheitsdienst in Krakau. Dieser ist damit einverstanden, daß die Transporte von Warschau über Lublin anch Sobibor /Schreibung auf Seite gegenüber verdeutlicht/ (bei Lublin) solange ruhen, wie die Umbauarbeiten auf dieser Strecke, die Transporte unmöglich machen (ungefähr Oktober 1942).
Die Züge wurden mit dem Befehlshaber der Sicherheitspolizei im Generalgouvernement vereinbart. SS- und Polizeiführer des Distrikts Lublin, SS-Brigadeführer Globocnigg, ist verständigt."
Darauf antwortete Wolff am 3. August 1942,
an Ganzenmüller:
„Für Ihr Schreiben vom 28. Juli 1942 danke ich Ihnen – auch im Namen des Reichsführers – herzlich. Mit besonderer Freude habe ich von Ihrer Mitteilung Kenntnis genommen, daß nun schon seit 14 Tagen täglich ein Zug mit je 5000 Angehörigen des auserwählten Volkes nach Treblinka führt und wir doch auf diese Weise in die Lage versetzt sind, diese Bevölkerungsbewegung in einem beschleunigtem(sic) Tempo durchzuführen. Ich habe von mir aus mit den beteiligten Stellen Fühlung aufgenommen, so daß eine reibunslose Durchführung der gesamten Maßnahmen gewährleistet erscheint. Ich danke Ihnen nochmals für die Bemühungen in dieser Angelegenheit und darf Sie gleichzeitig bitten, diesen Dingen auch weiterhin Ihre Beachtung zu schenken.“ /am Rand Ziffer 47/
In Treblinka und Belzek hatte Globocnigg auf Befehl Himmlers und Krügers, Vergasungslager errichtet. Solche und ähnliche Dokumente waren freilich in den ersten Zeiten der Nachkriegsprozesse nicht immer gleich zur Hand. Daher konnte man sich in Nürnberg getrost auf mich ausreden. Heute ist solches nicht mehr möglich. Diese beiden Dokumente sind in Himmlers eigenem Kommadostab aufgefunden worden. Denn das Schreiben Ganzenmüllers ist das Originalschreiben, während die
Wolff´sche Antwort darauf ein von diesem signierter Durchschlag des Schreibens an Ganzenmüller ist. –
Alles Grundsätzliche wurde höeren Ortes ausgearbeitet; und tauchten selbst bei untergeordneteren Arbeiten einmal Schwierigkeiten auf, sofort wurden diese von den Befehlsgebern selbst unmittelbar untereinander, und persönlich behoben.
Nur nach 1945, da schob man solches fleißig auf die seinerzeitigen Befehlsempfänger, da hatten die ehemaligen Chefs mit solchen Fragen selbstverständlich gar nichts zu tun, und sie wußten überhaupt von solchen Dingen nicht das Geringste. „Nachher sollte es sich um einen Schimmel und nicht um einen Rappen gehandelt haben.“
[...]
Am nächsten Tage fuhr ich mit einem Adjutanten Globocniggs zu der Stelle, über die ich berichten sollte.
Globocnigg war um jene Zeit SS Brigadeführer und Generalmajor der Polizei. Seine Dienststellung war die eines SS- u. Polizeiführers des Distriktes Lublin im Generalgouvernement. Er unterstand dem Höheren SS- u. Polizeiführer im Generalgouvernement und Staatssekretär für das Sicherheitswesen, in der Regierung des Generalgouverneuer in Krakau, SS Gruppenführer und General der Polizei, Krüger. Er und damit seine vier SS- u. Polizeiführer, waren Himmler unmittelbar untergeordnet. So viel also zum Personellen.
Nach etwa zwei Stunden Fahrt, es mögen auch nur anderthalb Stunden gewesen sein, kamen wir zu einer Waldlichtung, an der zur rechten Straßenseite ein Bauernhäuschen stand.
Dort hielt der Wagen.
[...]
Besagter Hauptmann Wirth also, führte uns auf einen kleinen Waldweg zur linken Seite der Straße und da standen unter Laubbäumen zwei kleinere Bauernhäuser. Ich kann nich nicht mehr mit Sicherheit erinnern, ob dort im Augenblick unseres Besuches gearbeitet wurde, aber Wirth erklärte uns seinen Auftrag.
Demzufolge hatte er sämtliche Fenster und Türen hermetisch zu verschließen. In den Räumen würden nach Arbeitsbeendigung Juden kommen, welche durch die auspuffgase eines russischen U-Bott-Motors, die in diese Räume geleitet würden, getötet werden.
Das war alles, was er zu sagen hatte.
Q Didn't you visit any of the three existing extermination camps?
A Yes.
Q Which ones?
A Treblinka ...
Q What did you see there?
A At that time the action in connection with the Warsaw Ghetto was in progress, and I watched the procedure.
Q How was it done there?
A They had chambers for about 200 people. Into these
chambers the fumes from an exhaust machine came in. These motors had been taken from captured enemy equipment such as tanks, trucks and had been installed next to the gas chambers. They were run by gas, and those victims were supposed to be suffocated by the fumes.
Q How many chambers were there, and how many people were killed?
A I do not know the exact figure, but there may have been about ten chambers. It was built next to a ramp and the train drove right up to it. The people were unloaded right into the chambers, and this procedure was necessary because the motors did not always work right.
Q Weren't the people first registered or interrogated?
A No.
Q They were put directly into the chambers from the trains?
A Yes.
Q And what happened to their clothing?
A They had to undress before they were put into the chambers.
Q And their valuables?
A That was all sorted. I saw a number of shacks there in which there were piles of clothing, shoes, valuables, etc., all sorted separately and neatly stacked. They were later packed.
Q What happened to these things?
A I do not know.
Q Who did the sorting?
A Inmates.
Q Who guarded the trains in which the Jews were to be gassed alive?
A The train that I saw In Treblinka arrived guarded by members of the Security Police; also the trains that came into Auschwitz from Poland were guarded by the Security Police.
Q Did the train loads consist of women, men and children all together?
A All together.
Q We are now talking about the train in Treblinka?
A Yes, the one in Treblinka.
Q Were there babies, real small children and very old people also?
A All kinds, if they were evacuated from Warsaw.
Q You only saw one train in Treblinka during your visit there?
A Yes, only one.
Q How many people were in that train?
A One train generally handled 2,000 people.
Q When you said generally, do you mean that the trains arriving in Auschwitz also usually had 2,000 people?
A Yes, 2,000 on an average. Some trains held 2400; others, 1,500 and 1,800 but the average was 2,000.
Q Was this the first time that you observed exterminations?
A Yes.
Q Now I understand from your statement that the people — men, women and children had to strip themselves completely naked. Am I right?
A Yes.
Q And the women carried their babies with them into the chambers?
A Yes.
Q And they know what was going to happen to them?
A Yes, I assume so.
Q Did they knew what was going to happen to them?
A Yes, they did.
Q And what was your reaction?
A I did not consider this problem, or the means, or the manner in which it was conducted because in my opinion they knew it was going to happen to them.
Q But you found it lawful and right that they were to be exterminated. It was only the manner you objected to?
A Yes, according to my discussions with Himmler it was the way you just stated.
Q Did anyone try to escape?
A No, I didn't see that.
Q How long did you remain in Treblinka?
A About three or four hours.
Q Did you discuss the matter with the Camp Commandant In Treblinka?
A Yes.
Q Who was he?
A I don't remember his name.
Q Just one moment. How did you get into the camp? What kind of a pass or permit did you have?
A I was introduced by Eichmann. They had been advised of my arrival by Eichmann.
Q Was Eichmann with you?
A No.
Q Did you see Eichmann in Berlin before you left?
A Eichmann had been in Auschwitz in the meantime and at that time I told him that I had to see this camp and that he should advise them of my coming. Otherwise, I would not be able to get into the camp.
Q Did Eichmann have the power to let anyone visit the camp?
A No I don't believe so.
Q How could he get you the orders to get in?
A I assume that he had already received instructions from the Reichsfuehrer via Gruppenfuehrer Mueller.
Got it now, Scott? That's how reasonable people see the issue. The details of the murder weapon matter to criminal justice only to the extent that they provide clues about the identity of the murderer. In this case, it was immaterial to the findings of fact about the features and extent of the crime and about the identity and guilt of those involved in it how much or how little could be established about the specifics of the gassing engine. It was sufficient to know that it was an engine. It would even have been sufficient to know that it was some device which produced suffocating fumes. Further details are just "nice to have". Mere window dressing.Scott,
This is a bit pointless. It's like arguing over the color of a knife used to kill someone, when you have a confession by the murderer, several witness to the crime, and the physical evidence points to the use of a knife.
While knowing the color of the knife might be interesting, it has no bearing on WHETHER the person was murdered or not.
That is key. Just because we don't know every detail of something, doesn't mean something didn't happen. If we knew every detail, there'd be nothing left for future historians.
It's argument likes this that make you fall into the Deniers camp. The exact details as to what engine was used will never be known. Most of the witnesses are dead, nearly 60 years have passed, and it was a minor detail to begin with.
Xanthro
... the Minister of Science and Keeper of the Faith:So there are qualifications for posting on this thread, and the one who judges them to be "spam" is...?
“Hoaxbuster” Friedrich Paul Berg on the Codoh discussion forum.Keep the Faith fellow revisionists. The Nazis and the SS were the good guys--but the anti-Nazis and the anti-revisionists dare not admit it for fear of losing their fabulous, ill gotten gains from the war.
Source of quote:I don't think I'm out of line in asking for one little detail about how this huge forging operation was carried out. Not when Mr. Berg makes demands on his opponents like:
Surely, the hatemongers can tell us something about those monstrously amazing Diesels-of-Death. Surely, from their "mountains" of "eyewitness testimony" they can tell us whether the Diesels were outside in the open, or inside the vehicles (tank or truck or whatever), or inside a room. Surely, they can tell us whether they were V-12 or inline-sixes or whatever -- whether they were connected to something like a huge fan or bonecrusher or something. These Diesels were, supposedly, the greatest mass murder devices in the entire history of the world -- and we don't even have a picture.
If Mr. Berg feels it acceptable to ask me how many cylinders a Nazi engine had, I don't think it's out of line for me to ask him (and Greg Raven, and Bradley Smith, and Ernst Zündel, and whoever else wants to try answering):
Give me one piece of documentation, or one testimony, that serves as evidence for this alleged massive hoax, this insane conspiracy theory.
Just one.
Haven't you been paying attention?Tarpon27 wrote:Hey, someone should post on how lethal diesel engines are or aren't.
That would be novel.
Irrelevant crap from Holo-sites. Roberto's post prior to yours was mostly irrelevant spam.And no "spam"? What is that?
Me, since I started the thread and make the qualifications. Just as someone started a thread recently where "no Revisionism" was allowed. I didn't post on it, though I didn't find it interesting either.So there are qualifications for posting on this thread, and the one who judges them to be "spam" is...?
The subject is the murder-weapon. I know that is tough for all of you to understand but we are assuming the premise of murders for rhetorical convenience; therefore the fact or nonfact of the murders is irrelevant.Frankly, I'd like to see the Devil explain some of the "details" on Treblinka, too, such as trains, the Stroop Report, where all them Jews went to.
But I doubt I will.
A false-belief does not require any conspiracy-theory, nor does it whether interest groups find that situation advantageous or not. The insane conspiracy-theory must be that of the anti-Deniers.Roberto wrote:"Give me one piece of documentation, or one testimony, that serves as evidence for this alleged massive hoax, this insane conspiracy theory." [Jamie McCarthy]
Hans, you haven't given a citation but that's okay; it is not obscure.Hans wrote:According to Rudolf Höß on 1 April 1946 in Nuremberg:
Q How was it done there?
A They had chambers for about 200 people. Into these
chambers the fumes from an exhaust machine came in. These motors had been taken from captured enemy equipment such as tanks, trucks and had been installed next to the gas chambers. They were run by gas, and those victims were supposed to be suffocated by the fumes.
Scott wrote:
Although off-topic and irrelevant to my thesis, which concerns the murder-weapon...
...is not a thesis.Scott wrote:
Please present any evidence relating to the MURDER-WEAPON at TREBLINKA!
This is very interesting. I assume that the above comes from the account that Eichmann wrote AFTER his trial, while awaiting the appeal, and which was released by the Government of the Jewish State during the Irving versus Lippmann court action. It shows some differences from what Eichmann told Sassen in 1957, or what he said during his pre-trial interrogations, eg in those statments he did not specifically name Wirth (perhaps indicating that he only heard the name during his trial?).Besagter Hauptmann Wirth also, führte uns auf einen kleinen Waldweg zur linken Seite der Straße und da standen unter Laubbäumen zwei kleinere Bauernhäuser. Ich kann nich nicht mehr mit Sicherheit erinnern, ob dort im Augenblick unseres Besuches gearbeitet wurde, aber Wirth erklärte uns seinen Auftrag.
Demzufolge hatte er sämtliche Fenster und Türen hermetisch zu verschließen. In den Räumen würden nach Arbeitsbeendigung Juden kommen, welche durch die auspuffgase eines russischen U-Bott-Motors, die in diese Räume geleitet würden, getötet werden.
Das war alles, was er zu sagen hatte.
You haven't been paying attention, have you...Tarpon27 wrote:What "thesis" are you referring to?Scott wrote:
Although off-topic and irrelevant to my thesis, which concerns the murder-weapon...
You have not stated a thesis.
This...
...is not a thesis.Scott wrote:
Please present any evidence relating to the MURDER-WEAPON at TREBLINKA!
Scott wrote:That nobody was gassed with diesel exhaust because of the technical absurdity of the idea--not even by Nazi Germany--and that very little evidence has been developed about gassings there at all. We have Moral Certainty and Mystery instead of a proper foundation of knowledge regarding what really happened. And I don't know what that is.Xanthro wrote:First, state your thesis. I don't think you actually have defensible one
Wed May 08, 2002 1:02 am Post subject: SIN-THESIS...
