Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Post Reply
michael mills
Member
Posts: 9000
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#181

Post by michael mills » 24 Feb 2018, 00:55

Clauberg was searching for new sterilization methods, whether chemical or physical.
That's what he told Himmler. Something that Himmler wanted to hear.

Rascher told Himmler that he had discovered a way of making German women have multiple births. Something Himmler wanted to hear.

Rascher told Himmler that he had tried this method on his own wife, and she had produced twins. He showed Himmler the twins. Himmler was overjoyed, and rewarded Rascher.

Later Himmler found out that the two twins had actually been adopted. He was so angry at being deceived that he had Rascher executed.

I have read a theory that Clauberg's personal aim in carrying out his experiments was to discover a substitute "Kontrastmittel", ie a material that shows up on an x-ray, and is used for x-raying soft tissue that, unlike bones, normally does not show up on an x-ray. According to this theory, the reason why he was seeking a substitute contrast substance was that the material normally used was in short supply due to the wartime conditions. Once he had found a usable substitute, he intended to patent it and make a lot of money after the war.

The procedures he carried out on female prisoners at Auschwitz, ie injecting a substance into the uterus of his subject and then taking an x-ray, certainly were consistent with that theory. The procedures may well have resulted in damage to the uterus of his test subjects which left some or all of them infertile, but the bottom line is that those procedures were not an efficient method of sterilising a large number of women in a short time, which was the ostensible purpose of the experiments, what Himmler was told it was all about.

In other words, Clauberg may have been doing a Rascher on Himmler.

User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1987
Joined: 28 Dec 2003, 02:52
Location: World
Contact:

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#182

Post by Sergey Romanov » 24 Feb 2018, 11:24

> If this would be correct I wonder why pathologies in the whole world use/-d Formalin (formaledyhde) for preservation/fixation of biological tissue and body parts of humans and animals and keep it usable for many years.

Your formulation suggests that you imply some sort of a contradiction, yet you never point out what the contradiction is supposed to be. Both facts are correct and don't contradict each other.

I don't see the relevance of your second comment to the issue at hand, so I'm not commenting on it, except to point out that Shelley explicitly wrote: "It was dark in Block 10" and that Czech's entry for Oct. 2, 1944 [sic] does contain the said information.


Yuli
Member
Posts: 117
Joined: 30 Nov 2016, 12:26
Location: Israel

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#183

Post by Yuli » 25 Feb 2018, 10:50

History1:
If this would be correct I wonder why pathologies in the whole world use/-d Formalin (formaledyhde) for preservation/fixation of biological tissue and body parts of humans and animals and keep it usable for many years.
Formaline-fixated tissue is dead tissue. It can be preserved for many years and used for anatomical dissections, as are corpses in medical schools or morgues.

User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1987
Joined: 28 Dec 2003, 02:52
Location: World
Contact:

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#184

Post by Sergey Romanov » 25 Feb 2018, 12:20

> That's what he told Himmler. Something that Himmler wanted to hear.

Sure, and he did it too.

> I have read a theory that Clauberg's personal aim in carrying out his experiments was to discover a substitute "Kontrastmittel", ie a material that shows up on an x-ray,

That was one of his tasks, quite separate from his sterilization attempts (but which could done at the same time, so why not use the opportunity).

Your claim was that his search for the contrast "pigment" somehow contradicts his sterilization experiments is obviously illogical nonsense.

User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1987
Joined: 28 Dec 2003, 02:52
Location: World
Contact:

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#185

Post by Sergey Romanov » 25 Feb 2018, 12:22

Yuli wrote:History1:
If this would be correct I wonder why pathologies in the whole world use/-d Formalin (formaledyhde) for preservation/fixation of biological tissue and body parts of humans and animals and keep it usable for many years.
Formaline-fixated tissue is dead tissue. It can be preserved for many years and used for anatomical dissections, as are corpses in medical schools or morgues.
Apparently Roman hasn't heard that formalin is a danger to fertility.

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/repro/ ... ehyde.html

David Green
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 06 Jan 2018, 20:35
Location: London

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#186

Post by David Green » 25 Feb 2018, 14:10

Skyderick wrote:
history1 wrote:
David Green wrote:There is no record of Kitty Hart on the Auschwitz State Museum's online database.[...]
Not uncommon. I have many Holocaust survivor testimonies from books published by them and they don´t appear in the database, yet.
What is more questionable is how one can not know the DOB of his/her father @7:25: " I THINK he was born in 1888."
I wonder if she really was born as "Kitty Felix"? Or maybe the Polish variant "Feliks" fits better? Especially since her father was "Karol" and not "Karl".
And why does the German wikipedia mention as her birth name "Leokadia Dobrzynska"?
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Hart-Moxon#Jugend
Hart's father was indeed Karol Feliks. His cousin testified in 1957 that he was born around 1885 (she used Karl in Hebrew and Karol in Polish), his parents being Wilhelm and Regina Feliks, and that his wife Lola survived. Hart did the same in 1995, providing his date of birth as 27.1.1888. Hart's grandparents are buried in Bielsko. Her grandmother died in 1931 and her grandfather the following year. Their surname is spelled as Feliks and Felix interchangeably, and was not uncommon.
As far as not knowing the year of birth - it isn't strange at all. My grandparents knew their parents' birthdays, but not which year they were born.
Skyderick, would you please supply us with links to your sources? It would be much appreciated.

David Green
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 06 Jan 2018, 20:35
Location: London

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#187

Post by David Green » 25 Feb 2018, 15:03

This post will briefly cover Kitty's changing story regarding two sisters she allegedly first met in Bitterfeld and how they interacted in Auschwitz. In her 1961 book Kitty tells us she never saw the younger sister, Janka, after she had been taken away to become a messenger. Janka's older sister who had become a block leader remembered Kitty and always threw her bread. Kitty described this as being a great privilege.

By the early eighties when Return to Auschwitz was published Janka's older sister had gained a name - Cesia. Kitty now changes her story and demonises Janka by telling us she stood happily alongside the SS at the entrance to the women's camp. Cesia too is demonised as being self-serving and treacherous. A monster who threatened to beat the poor downtrodden Kitty, despite everything Kitty's mother had done for Janka in the past.
Mother and I had practically lost touch with most of our original friends from Bitterfeld. They were swallowed in the crowd of the one thousand in our block. Janka, the youngest of our group, somehow caused a sensation among the privi-leged class. Never before has such a small child been allowed into the camp. All children had been taken the "other way". Although Janka was twelve, she was so small that she could easily pass for an eight-year-old. Almost the day after our arrival she was taken away, to be given one of the best occu-pations. She was made a Läuferin, a messenger. There were about four to six of them, and they were the lines of com-munication between the SS authorities and the "high-ranking" prisoners. They were continuously walking about with messages, and when not sent out stood by the main gate. They were well dressed and usually lived in the élite blocks, which had only a few hundred occupants in each, with sufficient blankets on the bunks. They were not short of food for they had access to almost anything, anywhere. Mother had looked after Janka well during our stay in Bitterfeld and I hoped that perhaps she might help mother in return. But she probably lost us in the crowd, and I never saw her again. Through her, her sister became a Blockälteste. Occasionally I managed to catch a glimpse of her, and if she saw me she would always throw some bread out to me - a great privilege.
I Am Alive, Kitty Hart, Abelard-Schuman (1961), pp.59-60
I knew someone else who became a messenger girl very early on. It was little Janka. Children were not usually admitted into the camp, but this twelve-year-old, like the rest of us, was somewhat special, having a record as a politival criminal. Jewish or not, we had somehow been 'processed' in a different way by meticulous organizers. With-in ten days or so of our arrival Janka was picked out and, as she began to make a fuss about being taken away, her sister was taken along as well. At first the rest of our original group of thirteen were unable to guess what had happened to them, and already knew better than to ask.
Then we saw them again. Janka had been smartly dressed, she had been allowed to grow her hair again, and looked very pretty and well pleased with herself: they had made here a messenger girl. There she was standing happily at the gate beside an S.S. man as the work parties went out.

Janka had managed to get her sister Cesia a job as a block senior. Although Cesia could not have been no more than sixteen, she soon became adept at beating up her fellow prisoners. One day, worried about my mother's health and the inadequate rations she was getting, I approached Cesia as an old friend.
'Do you think you could help us?'
She backed away as if from some contagious disease. 'Don't you dare come near me,' she shouted.
'Cesia, surely you remember -'
'One step nearer, and I'll beat you up.'
I couldn't believe she had sold out so soon. 'Have you forgotten my mother? After all she did for you and Janka?' She hesitated, then threw me a hunk of bread. 'Now be off with you. And don't ever dare speak to me again'.
As a counter to such self-seeking treachery little 'families' formed within a block[...]
Return To Auschwitz, Kitty Hart, Atheneum (second printing 1985), p.69



Image
Image
I Am Alive, Kitty Hart, Abelard-Schuman (1961), pp.59-60


Image
Return To Auschwitz, Kitty Hart, Atheneum (second printing 1985), p.69

User avatar
Skyderick
Member
Posts: 165
Joined: 11 Apr 2014, 13:59

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#188

Post by Skyderick » 26 Feb 2018, 11:22

David Green wrote:Skyderick, would you please supply us with links to your sources? It would be much appreciated.
Of course. Here's the testimony submitted by Karl's cousin Jadwiga Veinberg in 1957:
Image
She also submitted testimonies for Kitty's brother Robert, and Karl's sister Stefania.

Hart's testimony from 1995:
Image

David Green
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 06 Jan 2018, 20:35
Location: London

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#189

Post by David Green » 27 Feb 2018, 15:21

Thank you for the scans, Skyderick.

Below is what is described as Kitty's last school report in Kitty - Return To Auschwitz. Her surname is different - Felixówna, and her year of birth is wrong (timestamp 3:53). This was first noted by history1.

Was Peter Morely the director attempting to flesh out his documentary with this deception or is there more to this than meets the eye? As far as I am aware Kitty Hart has never publicly acknowledged this anomaly.

Image

User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1987
Joined: 28 Dec 2003, 02:52
Location: World
Contact:

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#190

Post by Sergey Romanov » 27 Feb 2018, 20:18

Your readiness to entertain deception hypotheses instead of checking whether you're missing some cultural context is an alarming sign.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_name

"In the past, when the masculine form ended in a consonant, the feminine surname could have been derived by adding the suffix, -owa, for married women, indicating ownership and the suffix -ówna for maiden surname, indicating fatherhood"

David Green
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 06 Jan 2018, 20:35
Location: London

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#191

Post by David Green » 27 Feb 2018, 21:29

Sergey Romanov wrote:Your readiness to entertain deception hypotheses instead of checking whether you're missing some cultural context is an alarming sign.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_name

"In the past, when the masculine form ended in a consonant, the feminine surname could have been derived by adding the suffix, -owa, for married women, indicating ownership and the suffix -ówna for maiden surname, indicating fatherhood"
Thank you for supplying this very important information, Mr. Romanov. It would appear I am indeed guilty of cultural ignorance but would hardly call that alarming.

User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1987
Joined: 28 Dec 2003, 02:52
Location: World
Contact:

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#192

Post by Sergey Romanov » 27 Feb 2018, 21:57

I didn't call your cultural ignorance alarming...

User avatar
Skyderick
Member
Posts: 165
Joined: 11 Apr 2014, 13:59

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#193

Post by Skyderick » 27 Feb 2018, 23:54

I second that, David. You've raised a solid argument about plagiarism in I Am Alive, but there is no evidence that calls Hart's identity into question.

[email protected]
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 18 Sep 2020, 05:09
Location: Austra;lia

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#194

Post by [email protected] » 18 Sep 2020, 05:16

history 1 asks:
why does the German wikipedia mention as her birth name "Leokadia Dobrzynska"?
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Hart-Moxon#Jugend

I am fairly certain from listening to a youtube item of Kitty speaking, that she was given a baptismal certificate for another person by a Polish priest - I think that is the same as the name you mention as her birth name. If I remember correctly, Leokadia was a real person, born about one year after Kitty, who had died.

[email protected]
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 18 Sep 2020, 05:09
Location: Austra;lia

Re: Is Kitty Hart-Moxon a plagiarist?

#195

Post by [email protected] » 18 Sep 2020, 05:29

Landau (w obozie Żywulska ), Sonia (Krystyna)

I don't know how Kitty's first book was written. Was she helped by an editor who was using the book by Landau to jog her memory?

Post Reply

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”