Eichmann in Jerusalem

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
michael mills
Member
Posts: 8803
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by michael mills » 06 Aug 2003 15:41

Hoess lying served no Utilitarian value and convergence of other testimonies and documents generally support his version of events.


Perhaps Demonio and Chalutzim could come up with their own credible explanation for some of the glaring anomalies in Hoeß's claims.

Here is one for starters. Hoeß claims that Eichmann came to Auschwitz soon after Himmler gave the extermination order in June 1941 (which implies in July or at the latest August of that year), and told him that the methodology of gassing with vehicle exhaust that had been used in the East for some time would not be suitable for Auschwitz.

But the gas-vans were first introduced into service on the Russian Front in December 1941, ie several months after Eichmann is supposed to have come to Auschwitz and told Hoeß about them.

Here is another one. According to Hoeß, at the same visit by Eichmann, the two of them selected a peasant house in the village of Brzezinka as the location for the future gas-chamber (even though the gas had supposedly not yet been selected). He then describes experiments with Zyklon-B in the cellar of a building in Auschwitz main camp, and the subsequent conversion of Crematorium I into a gas-chamber.

If the peasant house had already been chosen as the site for the gas-chamber, in July or August 1941, why were the experiments with Zyklon-B (held either in September or December - accounts vary) not held in that building? Why was Crematorium I converted into a gas-chamber, rather than installing the gas-chamber in the peasant house immediately?

demonio
Member
Posts: 908
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 03:54
Location: The Matrix

Post by demonio » 06 Aug 2003 15:50

Does Demonio have any documentary evidence for his claim that Auschwitz was under the jurisdiction of the RSHA?


Yes. the testimony of the man that ran the camp.

The YMCA is less signifant because it seems to me that they were administering for the RSHA. Eg Whose jurisdiction did the belongings of gassed persons come under ?
Last edited by demonio on 06 Aug 2003 16:06, edited 1 time in total.

demonio
Member
Posts: 908
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 03:54
Location: The Matrix

Post by demonio » 06 Aug 2003 15:51

David Thompson wrote:demonio -- Please avoid personalizing the argument with coarse similes.


The smile has been removed

Best Regards

Respectfully Demonio

User avatar
chalutzim
Member
Posts: 803
Joined: 09 Nov 2002 20:00
Location: Südamerika - Brazil

Post by chalutzim » 06 Aug 2003 15:56

Lucius Felix Silla wrote:(...) Hoess "confessions" and "statements" were and are unreliables, precisely because extorted him by his British captors and after by Polish authorities.


Signore Silla, since this thread is about him, what about
Eichmann's 1,200-page manuscript penned in 1961, while he was in jail awaiting and during his trial for crimes against humanity.
?

from, Denying History, by Shermer and Grobman, p. 259.

They also "were and are unreliable" as Hoess' memories?
Last edited by chalutzim on 06 Aug 2003 16:00, edited 1 time in total.

demonio
Member
Posts: 908
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 03:54
Location: The Matrix

Post by demonio » 06 Aug 2003 15:58

Hoess lying served no Utilitarian value and convergence of other testimonies and documents generally support his version of events

Perhaps Demonio and Chalutzim could come up with their own credible explanation for some of the glaring anomalies in Hoeß's claims


Is this supposed to imply that your claims are somehow credible ?


Here is one for starters. Hoeß claims that Eichmann came to Auschwitz soon after Himmler gave the extermination order in June 1941 (which implies in July or at the latest August of that year), and told him that the methodology of gassing with vehicle exhaust that had been used in the East for some time would not be suitable for Auschwitz.

But the gas-vans were first introduced into service on the Russian Front in December 1941, ie several months after Eichmann is supposed to have come to Auschwitz and told Hoeß about them
.

They were "touring" poland before that cleaning out hospitals, mental homes and the like prior to the deployment to the Russian front. Another fact you have chosen to overlook

Here is another one. According to Hoeß, at the same visit by Eichmann, the two of them selected a peasant house in the village of Brzezinka as the location for the future gas-chamber (even though the gas had supposedly not yet been selected). He then describes experiments with Zyklon-B in the cellar of a building in Auschwitz main camp, and the subsequent conversion of Crematorium I into a gas-chamber.

If the peasant house had already been chosen as the site for the gas-chamber, in July or August 1941, why were the experiments with Zyklon-B (held either in September or December - accounts vary) not held in that building? Why was Crematorium I converted into a gas-chamber, rather than installing the gas-chamber in the peasant house immediately


At that stage they were open to carbon monoxide, sulphuric acid or whatever else would poison people to death. Big deal if they had not settled on Zyklon at that point . That proves nothing

User avatar
Lucius Felix Silla
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 01 Aug 2003 17:46
Location: North Italy

Post by Lucius Felix Silla » 06 Aug 2003 16:15

Demonio write:

"At that stage they were open to carbon monoxide, sulphuric acid or whatever else would poison people to death. Big deal if they had not settled on cyclon at that point . That proves nothing"

This is statement absurd and - frankly - is first time i read this new theory on Bunker I. Everyone starting from J.C. Pressac to Van Pelt and finish with Auschwitz Museum stressed that Bunker I and II as others gas chambers of Birkenau were equipped or transformed to use Zyklon B.

Mr. Michael Mills have showed too much proofs about the absurdities of Hoess memoirs. I think that the point have been adequately proved by Mr. Michael Mills.

Best Regards
LFS

User avatar
Lucius Felix Silla
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 01 Aug 2003 17:46
Location: North Italy

Post by Lucius Felix Silla » 06 Aug 2003 16:24

chalutzim wrote:
Lucius Felix Silla wrote:(...) Hoess "confessions" and "statements" were and are unreliables, precisely because extorted him by his British captors and after by Polish authorities.


Signore Silla, since this thread is about him, what about
Eichmann's 1,200-page manuscript penned in 1961, while he was in jail awaiting and during his trial for crimes against humanity.
?

from, Denying History, by Shermer and Grobman, p. 259.

They also "were and are unreliable" as Hoess' memories?


I see that You don't have answer to my questions....
Well, the memoirs written by Eichmann at Jerusalem are, if i'm not wrong, in possession of the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum. I don't have yet seen published these memoirs. You have? How is possible speak about something which was not yet published?
Or You have read these memoirs?
An answer is appreciate.

LFS
Best Regards

demonio
Member
Posts: 908
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 03:54
Location: The Matrix

Post by demonio » 06 Aug 2003 16:25

Lucius Felix Silla wrote:Demonio write:

"At that stage they were open to carbon monoxide, sulphuric acid or whatever else would poison people to death. Big deal if they had not settled on cyclon at that point . That proves nothing"

This is statement absurd and - frankly - is first time i read this new theory on Bunker I. Everyone starting from J.C. Pressac to Van Pelt and finish with Auschwitz Museum stressed that Bunker I and II as others gas chambers of Birkenau were equipped or transformed to use Zyklon B.

Mr. Michael Mills have showed too much proofs about the absurdities of Hoess memoirs. I think that the point have been adequately proved by Mr. Michael Mills.

Best Regards
LFS


The Hoess memoirs are far from absurd, because he discusses things in a frank manner and his number estimates for victims are plausible. For the third time now. There was no utilitarian value for him to lie and or fudge figures. Hoess was an honest man

User avatar
Lucius Felix Silla
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 01 Aug 2003 17:46
Location: North Italy

Post by Lucius Felix Silla » 06 Aug 2003 17:55

Hoess sincere?

Here the history of his arrest, as seen by himself:

"I was arrested on 11 March 1946 (at 11 pm).

My phial of poison had been broken two days before.

When I was aroused from sleep, I thought at first I was being attacked by robbers, for many robberies were taking place at that time. That was how they managed to arrest me. I was maltreated by the Field Security Police.

I was taken to Heide where I was put in those very barracks from which I had been released by the Bntish eight months earlier.

At my first interrogation, evidence was obtained by beating me. I do not know what is in the record, although I signed it. Alcohol and the whip were too much for me. The whip was my own, which by chance had got into my wife’s luggage. It had hardly ever touched my horse, far less the prisoners. Nevertheless, one of my interrogators was convinced that I had perpetually used it for flogging the prisoners.

After some days I was taken to Minden-on-the-Weser, the main interrogation centre in the British Zone. There I received further rough treatment at the hands of the English public prosecutor, a major.

The conditions in the prison accorded with this behaviour.

After three weeks, to my surprise, I was shaved and had my hair cut and I was allowed to wash. My handcuffs had not previously been removed since my arrest.

On the next day I was taken by lorry to Nuremberg, together with a prisoner of war who had been brought over from London as a witness in Fritzsche's defence. My imprisonment by the Intemational Military Tribunal was a rest-cure compared to what I had been through before. I was accommodated in the same building as the principal accused, and was able to see them daily as they were taken to the court. Almost every day we were visited by representatives for all the Allied nations. I was always pointed out as an especially interesting animal.

I was in Nuremberg because Kaltenbrunner's counsel had demanded me as a witness for his defence. I have never been able to grasp, and it is still not clear to me, how I of all people could have helped to exonerate Kaltenbrunner. Although the conditions in prison were, in every respect, good - I read whenever I had the time, and there was a well stocked library available - the interrogations were extremely unpleasant, not so much physically, but far more because of their strong psychological effect. I cannot really blame the interrogators - they were all Jews.

Psychologically I was almost cut in pieces. They wanted to know all about everything, and this was also done by Jews. They left me in no doubt whatever as to the fate that was in store for me.

On 25 May, my wedding anniversary as it happened, I was driven with von Burgsdorff and Bühler to the aerodrome and there handed over to Polish officers. We flew in an American plane via Berlin to Warsaw. Although we were treated very politely during our joumey, I feared the worst when I remembered my experiences in the British Zone and the tales I had heard about the way people were being treated in the East. (Commandant in Auschwitz, English translation, Weidenfeld and Nicolson,. 1959, p. 173-175.)

Here the history narrated in "Legions of Death" by Rupert Butler published in 1983,Hamlyn Paperbacks.

On 11 March 1946, a Captain Cross, Bernard Clarke and four other intelligence specialists in British uniforms, entered the home of Miss. Höss and her children.

The six men, we are told, were all "practised in the more sophisticated techniques of sustained and merciless investigation" (p. 235). Clarke began to shout:

"If you don't tell us [where your husband is] we'll turn you over to the Russians and they'll put you before a firing-squad. Your son will go to Siberia."

Frau Höss broke down and revealed, says Clarke, the location of the farm where her husband was in hiding, as well as his assumed name: Franz Lang. And Bernard Clarke added:

"Suitable intimidation of the son and daughter produced precisely identical information."

The Jewish sergeant and the five other specialists in third degree interrogation then left to seek out Höss, whom they surprised in the middle of the night, sleeping in an alcove of the room used to slaughter cattle on the farm.

<<Höss screamed in terror at the mere sight of British uniforms.

Clarke yelled "What is your name?"

With each answer of "Franz Lang," Clarke's hand crashed into the face of his prisoner. The fourth time that happened, Höss broke and admitted who he was.

The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of the Jewish sergeants in the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an order signed by Höss.

The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjamas ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.

Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse."

A blanket was thrown over Höss and he was dragged to Clarke's car, where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his throat. Then Höss tried to sleep.

Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered in German: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine."

For the first time Höss trotted out his oft-repeated justification: "I took my orders from Himmler. I am a soldier in the same way as you are a soldier and we had to obey orders."

The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow was swirling still, but the blanket was torn from Höss and he was made to walk completely nude through the prison yard to his cell.>> (p. 237)

So it is that Bernard reveals "It took three days to get a coherent statement out of [Höss]" (ibid.).


Best regards
LFS

demonio
Member
Posts: 908
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 03:54
Location: The Matrix

Post by demonio » 06 Aug 2003 23:58

Lucius Felix Silla wrote:Hoess sincere?

Here the history of his arrest, as seen by himself:

"I was arrested on 11 March 1946 (at 11 pm).

My phial of poison had been broken two days before.

When I was aroused from sleep, I thought at first I was being attacked by robbers, for many robberies were taking place at that time. That was how they managed to arrest me. I was maltreated by the Field Security Police.

I was taken to Heide where I was put in those very barracks from which I had been released by the Bntish eight months earlier.

At my first interrogation, evidence was obtained by beating me. I do not know what is in the record, although I signed it. Alcohol and the whip were too much for me. The whip was my own, which by chance had got into my wife’s luggage. It had hardly ever touched my horse, far less the prisoners. Nevertheless, one of my interrogators was convinced that I had perpetually used it for flogging the prisoners.

After some days I was taken to Minden-on-the-Weser, the main interrogation centre in the British Zone. There I received further rough treatment at the hands of the English public prosecutor, a major.

The conditions in the prison accorded with this behaviour.

After three weeks, to my surprise, I was shaved and had my hair cut and I was allowed to wash. My handcuffs had not previously been removed since my arrest.

On the next day I was taken by lorry to Nuremberg, together with a prisoner of war who had been brought over from London as a witness in Fritzsche's defence. My imprisonment by the Intemational Military Tribunal was a rest-cure compared to what I had been through before. I was accommodated in the same building as the principal accused, and was able to see them daily as they were taken to the court. Almost every day we were visited by representatives for all the Allied nations. I was always pointed out as an especially interesting animal.

I was in Nuremberg because Kaltenbrunner's counsel had demanded me as a witness for his defence. I have never been able to grasp, and it is still not clear to me, how I of all people could have helped to exonerate Kaltenbrunner. Although the conditions in prison were, in every respect, good - I read whenever I had the time, and there was a well stocked library available - the interrogations were extremely unpleasant, not so much physically, but far more because of their strong psychological effect. I cannot really blame the interrogators - they were all Jews.

Psychologically I was almost cut in pieces. They wanted to know all about everything, and this was also done by Jews. They left me in no doubt whatever as to the fate that was in store for me.

On 25 May, my wedding anniversary as it happened, I was driven with von Burgsdorff and Bühler to the aerodrome and there handed over to Polish officers. We flew in an American plane via Berlin to Warsaw. Although we were treated very politely during our joumey, I feared the worst when I remembered my experiences in the British Zone and the tales I had heard about the way people were being treated in the East. (Commandant in Auschwitz, English translation, Weidenfeld and Nicolson,. 1959, p. 173-175.)

Here the history narrated in "Legions of Death" by Rupert Butler published in 1983,Hamlyn Paperbacks.

On 11 March 1946, a Captain Cross, Bernard Clarke and four other intelligence specialists in British uniforms, entered the home of Miss. Höss and her children.

The six men, we are told, were all "practised in the more sophisticated techniques of sustained and merciless investigation" (p. 235). Clarke began to shout:

"If you don't tell us [where your husband is] we'll turn you over to the Russians and they'll put you before a firing-squad. Your son will go to Siberia."

Frau Höss broke down and revealed, says Clarke, the location of the farm where her husband was in hiding, as well as his assumed name: Franz Lang. And Bernard Clarke added:

"Suitable intimidation of the son and daughter produced precisely identical information."

The Jewish sergeant and the five other specialists in third degree interrogation then left to seek out Höss, whom they surprised in the middle of the night, sleeping in an alcove of the room used to slaughter cattle on the farm.

<<Höss screamed in terror at the mere sight of British uniforms.

Clarke yelled "What is your name?"

With each answer of "Franz Lang," Clarke's hand crashed into the face of his prisoner. The fourth time that happened, Höss broke and admitted who he was.

The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of the Jewish sergeants in the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an order signed by Höss.

The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjamas ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.

Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse."

A blanket was thrown over Höss and he was dragged to Clarke's car, where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his throat. Then Höss tried to sleep.

Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered in German: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine."

For the first time Höss trotted out his oft-repeated justification: "I took my orders from Himmler. I am a soldier in the same way as you are a soldier and we had to obey orders."

The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow was swirling still, but the blanket was torn from Höss and he was made to walk completely nude through the prison yard to his cell.>> (p. 237)

So it is that Bernard reveals "It took three days to get a coherent statement out of [Höss]" (ibid.).


Best regards
LFS


The memoirs and what he signed for the British are two different things. A statement made under duress can be challenged.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8803
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by michael mills » 07 Aug 2003 04:50

Demonio wrote:

Yes. the testimony of the man that ran the camp.

The YMCA is less signifant because it seems to me that they were administering for the RSHA. Eg Whose jurisdiction did the belongings of gassed persons come under ?


I said documentary evidence, eg written orders from the RSHA addressed to the Auschwitz camp administration, telling them what to do.

And yes, I fully agree that the YMCA played no role whatever in running Auschwitz. Nor did the CVJM, the German equivalent of the YMCA.

What about the YWCA? Perhaps the young Christian women could do what the young Christian men could not.

Not a fan of the "Village People" are you, Demonio?

Dan
Financial supporter
Posts: 8429
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:06
Location: California

Post by Dan » 07 Aug 2003 05:08

Not a fan of the "Village People" are you, Demonio?


This is a fair reply and funny, just in case any of the poster or lurkers have no sense of humor. A 16 year old on a moral soap box must take the punches if he enters the ring.

demonio
Member
Posts: 908
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 03:54
Location: The Matrix

Post by demonio » 07 Aug 2003 07:21

Dan wrote:
Not a fan of the "Village People" are you, Demonio?


This is a fair reply and funny, just in case any of the poster or lurkers have no sense of humor. A 16 year old on a moral soap box must take the punches if he enters the ring.



Im actually 24.Why do you speak of Village people. How do you know the people in my Village ?

xcalibur
Member
Posts: 1457
Joined: 20 Apr 2003 15:12
Location: Pennsylvania

Post by xcalibur » 07 Aug 2003 07:40

Whilst wanting to believe what Hoess has to say ( even in certain circumstances rather than his testimony as a whole) it does become apparent that he is nothing more than a pathetic, self-serving liar.

Even more disturbing however are the amateurish attempts of his interrogators... Kinderspiele at best... They allowed this drunk, psychotic piece of human garbage to run them in circles....

Hoess' "testimony" and subsequent statements have to be treated very carefully by any serious student of the events that occured at Auschwitz.

demonio
Member
Posts: 908
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 03:54
Location: The Matrix

Post by demonio » 07 Aug 2003 08:58

xcalibur wrote:Whilst wanting to believe what Hoess has to say ( even in certain circumstances rather than his testimony as a whole) it does become apparent that he is nothing more than a pathetic, self-serving liar.

Even more disturbing however are the amateurish attempts of his interrogators... Kinderspiele at best... They allowed this drunk, psychotic piece of human garbage to run them in circles....

Hoess' "testimony" and subsequent statements have to be treated very carefully by any serious student of the events that occured at Auschwitz.


But what agenda is he supposed to be serving. He knew he would hang any way

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”