Nazi gas chambers

[Lucius Felix Silla]

3) Gasdichtetür or Gastür or gasdichte Tür(en).

Pressac’s criminal traces nr. 3, 6, 7, 11, 13, 14, 15, are a series of commands for gastight doors/gas-proof door (and other accessories concerning these items) delivered and fitted in LK1 of Krematorium II and Krematorium III. I have grouped here these criminal traces because don’t seems necessary an explication (at least, for the moment) of these indirect proofs taken one by one.

I will preserve our readers from an annoying technical examination of these gastight doors (at least if not necessary) and from a deep analysis of these documents.

In this sedes materiae, I want accept entirely the explications provided by Pressac about the various commands and distribution of the doors (where they seems logical, obviously) and only suggests some observations which entirely dismiss the thesis of our researcher.

The presence of gastight doors in Krematoria don’t constitutes in itself a proof of the existence of one homicidal gas chamber here.
Much reasons - not criminals, obviously - can be adduced for the presence of these equipment in the underground mortuaries of Krematoria II and III.
Firstly, in a general fashion, a gas-tight door may be found anywhere in a building where high-temperature ovens are in operation and gas are produced by the combustion of ovens such a carbon monoxide (CO) or carbon dioxide (CO2) with risk of fire, explosion and leakage. Is a general, if not compulsory, practice provided special doors to basements with central heating installations. And this specially in wartime, where succession of explosions and penetration of gas generated from bombing were a serious danger.
According to Pressac, in one command for gasdichte Türen for Krema IV, “telle commande des portes étanches" (this command of gastight doors) wasn’t “manifestement pas d'usage criminal” (evidently don't have any criminal employ) but with any probability served only to isolate the crematory room from the mortuary (leichenhalle) (cfr. Les "Krématorien" IV et V de Birkenau et leurs chambres à gaz. Construction et fonctionnement", Jean-Claude Pressac, pp.119-120 in « la revue du Centre de documentation juive contemporaine de Paris, » n•107, juillet-septembre1982, published in october 1982).

Can be dismissed, perhaps, the absurd thesis advanced by David Irving during his trial about a presumed (but unfounded) use of Krematoria of Birkenau as shelters against air attacks or antigas shelters, as shown by numerous elements. Only the Krematorium I at Auschwitz I-Stammlager was transformed in Lufschutzbunker für SS Revier mit Operationsraum (air-raid shelter for personnel of SS hospital with chirurgic room) in 1944. This claim by Irving, abslolutely unfounded in my opinion, has been one of the most important evidence against the british historian in Mr. Justice Gray judgement.

Secondarily, must be noted that, as shown elsewhere in this same thread, the historical context of these commands pertains a catastrophic sanitary situation in Birkenau.
So is absolutely normal, if not entirely necessary, provides these installations with special doors: the infected corpses piled in the Leichenkeller 1 of Krema II and Krema III must be isolated from the others rooms of the building as elementary medical precaution (bacteria diffusion). And in the evenience of one future fumigation of this room is obvious that the Germans have provided the mortuary or morgue with gastight doors.

One german document, already shown, seems very important: on date 25 february 1943 the SS-Standortarzt of Auschwitz, Dr. Wirths, in a letter to the Head of Amt D III of the SS-WVHA, intended to carry out a general disinfestation:
»Wie bereits berichtet, ist, nachdem in den Monaten November und Dezember die Fleckfieberepidemie im K.L. Auschwitz praktisch erloschen war, durch die aus dem Osten eingetroffenen Transporte erneut ein Anstieg der Fleckfiebererkrankungen sowohl bei den Häftlingen des K.L. Auschwitz, als auch bei den Truppenangehörigen erfolgt. Trotz der sofort erfolgten Bekämpfungsmassnahmen liess sich bis heute ein restloses Erlöschen der Fleckfiebererkrankungen nicht erreichen. Mit Ausnahme der wenigen lebenswichtigen Kommandos (Ernährungsbetriebe, landwirtschaftliche Arbeiter in der Viehversorgung und Büropersonal) wäre der gesamte Arbeitseinsatz in den grossen Lagern des K.L. Auschwitz, nämlich Stammlager, MKL und FKL-Birkenau und KGL, Bauabschnitt 2, für die Dauer von 3 Wochen zu sperren. In dieser Zeit wird zweimalige gründliche Entlausung und Entwesung dieser Lager durchgeführt so dass nach Beendigung der 3-wöchigen Quarantänezeit von einer Verlausung des Lagers nicht mehr gesprochen werden kann und die Gefahr neuerlicher Fleckfiebererkrankungen beseitigt ist.«
As already reported, after that typhus epidemic was practically under control, a new rise in typhus cases occurred in November and December [1942] among the inmate population as well as among the troops because of the arrival of new prisoners from the East. In spite of immediate measures against the disease, a complete stop has not been achieved. With the exception of the important requirements such as food and fodder production, farm workers in animal care and necessary office personnel, all working troops in the largest areas of K.L. Auschwitz, namely Stammlager; MKL and FKL-Birkenau, and KGL; Bauabschnitt 2; should all be closed for three weeks. During this time, a major delousing and disinfection will be conducted twice so that after the three-week quarantine, one cannot refer anymore to a lice infestation of the camp and the danger of yellow fever should be erased.

The command for the gastight door of Krematorium III was dated 6 march 1943 and, according to Pressac, the Krematorium II have been already provided with the same equipment.
If the medical section of Birkenau intended, starting from 25 th February 1943, and during the next three weeks conduces a major delousing and disinfection of the camp (from which no one single buildings were excluded: specially where infected corpses were conserved, obviously) is evident that this command is intended to this scope: chronologically and also logically there’s a simple (absolutely without criminal intent) explication.

But there’s more.
Assuming that the Leichenkeller 1, as I have showed in my back post, was designated vergasungskeller (NB I have emended my back post Addenda to Vergasungskeller with more informations) and destined as fumigation chamber, is obvious that there was absolutely necessary use gastight doors.

Conscious of the consistence of objections provided by revisionists, Pressac write that: “Although the revisionists, pulling out all the stops, first claimed that morgues had to have such doors to contain the smell and infectious germs, then, in response to toxicological analyses carried out on the upper ventilation hole covers that showed the presence of cyanides, explained that this was no cause for concern, because these «typical morgues» with gas-tight doors were disinfected using Zyclon-B (an INSECTICIDE!), the fact remains that drawing 932 showing the Krematorium II basement formally shows that the underground rooms were designated «Leichenkeller/corpse cellars» [or morgues], access to which was through DOUBLE DOORS, 190/190, not a single door 100/192. The morgues were converted into gas chambers, and there are documents to prove it, but this modification should be perfectly acceptable to the revisionists, since their version of «disinfected [with Zyclon-B! This hiron] morgues» still remains valid. It simply remains for them to integrate in their «explanation» the presence of «14 Brausen/14 [DUMMY] showers» in the «disinfected morgue» of Krematorium III.” (Pressac pp.433ss) (NB.As for the presence of 14 Brausen, the “definitive proof”[sic!] for Pressac of the existence of one homicidal gas chamber in Krematorium II, in a next post we see that this fantasy is deprived of any basis. I’m sorry: job problems, no much time in these days!).
And before (p.28): “Since the homicidal and delousing gas chambers using Zyclon-B had been installed and equipped according to the same principle, they had identical gas-tight doors fabricated in the same workshops [at Auschwitz]. Confusion (…) was inevitable since at this time it was not known how to distinguish between the two types of gas chamber.”
So, how is a homicidal gas chamber to be distinguished from a disinfection gas chamber?
He devised a pitiful technical explanation. “ The only difference is in the gas-tight doors: there is a hemispherical grid protecting the peephole on the interior of the doors of homicidal gas chambers” It is this grid which makes the difference between the door of a homicidal gas chamber and the door of a disinfection gas chamber: this grid protects the peephole, thanks to this ingenious equipment the victims could not break the glass through which the SS were watching them. Here, as everywhere, this thesis is based upon exclusively eyewitnesses’ accounts: the logic is always the same. Because the witness say this, this is true, so any other logic must be dismiss.
The confusion of Pressac on this point is absolute.
At pages 49 and 50 he show photographs (where also a disinfection gas chamber is provided with this grid) but, Pressac assures, commenting two photos of the presumed homicidal gas chambers, only the doors of homicidal gas chambers have this element on interior of the doors. But he’s not so sure, why write “makes it reasonable to conclude a homicidal use.” At page 232, commenting the same two photos he states that indisputably that this door is “a gas thight door from a homicidal gas chamber (as can be seen by the heavy hemispherical grill protecting the inspection peephole on the inside)” .
At pag. 425 he discovers a photograph of a wooden door and comments: “An almost intact gas-tight door found in the ruins of the western part of Krematorium V. (…) This door has no peephole [emphasis in the original] even though it was used for homicidal gassings.” This comment, alone, destroy his entire logic (if there’s one).
The impression is that Pressac, according to his will, decides, hic et hinde, to class as homicidal gas chamber this or this other chamber, this or this other door: none document is produced about this famous grid to prove the reality of his thesis, the only evidence is based upon the dubious assertions of (ex?)communist Auschwitz Museum researchers, so one can simply observe that none of the documents (the criminal traces) produced by Pressac say something of these grids.

But also assuming that here Pressac is founded, there’s a more reasonable and technical explication for the presence of this grid on the interior of the doors: the grill simply protect either the extremity of a device to measure the temperature of one disinfection gas chamber (or more simply the temperature of the mortuary) or a instrument (which can be a cyilinder for density or other instruments according to gas employed: we must remember that the “Zyklon B” wasn’t the only one gas employed at Auschwitz-Birkeanu, but also “Ventox “Cartox”, ox”, “Areginal” “N” were employed for fumigation’ clothing) for chemical testing.

So, also in this case, Pressac’s thesis appears to be unfounded.

Best Regards.

LFS

[simsalabim]

Mr Mills wrote:

As for the "Drahtnetzeinschiebevorrichtung", it does indicate an insertion device; the verb "einschieben" implies an object being pushed or slid into a space. But the verb certainly does not describe the action of pouring something down a chute or pipe, which is "einwerfen". The shape of the device is not clear, ie there is no reason to beleive that it was a vertical column. And again there is no explicit connection with Zyklon-B.

An alternative explantion is given on:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschw ... inventory/

from which I quote:

"Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung" is a large compound word. Words like this are quite common in the German language. Its meaning is put together from the words which form it:

der Draht - wire
das Netz - grid, net
einschieben - insert
die Vorrichtung - device, mechanism

This is best translated as "wire-mesh insertion device" or "wire-mesh introduction device."

"Holzblenden" means "wooden covers."



Why is this significant? The room labeled as a morgue, the Leichenkeller, was actually the homicidal gassing chamber in this Krematorium building. We know from numerous sources - aerial photographs, examination of the ruins of the building as they stand today, and the testimony both of the Jewish witnesses and of the perpetrators - that there were holes in the roof, four in number, where the poison Zyklon-B was inserted.

This wartime document confirms key aspects of the testimonies. The Zyklon granules were poured into the holes, falling into the wire columns which held them and allowed them to give off their poison gas freely. The wooden covers were placed over those holes to keep the gas contained (though the SS men on the roof surely wore gas masks for safety) and to shut out the screams of those below.

The wire mesh existed primarily to make cleanup faster and safer. If the small pellets had simply fallen onto the floor, they might continue to give off dangerous gas even after everyone had died. But since they were poured into a wire "core" which could be lifted out of the gas chamber and onto the roof after the killing operation was complete, they would pose no danger to anyone inside. Removal of corpses could begin much sooner, thus making the entire killing process more efficient.

[michael mills]

Simsalabim wrote:

An alternative explantion is given on:

If Simsalabim had read my posts more carefully, he would have seen that I gave precisely that link, so that readers could see the actual inventory for themselves.

The trouble with the alternative explanation is that it makes too many assumptions.

In the first place, the inventory shows that the items were located in Leichenkeller II, not in Leichenkeller I, which is normally assumed to have been the homicidal gas-chamber.

In the second place, there is nothing in the inventory that tells us what the "wire-mesh insertion device" was, what its shape was, how it was installed etc.

In the third place, "Holzblende" does NOT mean "wooden cover"; it means "wooden shutter", and suggests a covering on a window. The word "Blende" is related to "blind", and means something that shuts out the light. For example, a shutter in a camera is called "Blende". It certainly does not suggest some sort of barrier to prevent gas escaping. As I wrote, the "holzblende" is not stated to be "gasdicht".

Finally, we cannot assume a connection between the four wire-mesh devices and four wooden shutters listed as located in Leichenkeller II and the four chimney-like structures observable on the roof of Leichenkeller I. The only common element is the quantity, which may be coincidental.

The only honest thing we can say about the two items listed in the inventory of Crematorium II is that their function and purpose is not explained.

[Lucius Felix Silla]

Dear Mr. Michael Mills,

I agree entirely with Your brilliant actual post and superlative analysis in back messages of the Pressac's criminal traces nr. 8 and 9.

And as for the presumed "aerial photographs, examination of the ruins of the building as they stand today" which confirms, according to Jamie McCarthy and Mark Van Alstine, that were holes in the roof of Krematorium II of Birkenau , four in number, where the poison Zyklon-B was inserted i can only say that this affirmation is simple fantasy.

I don't go back on this topic in next days, unless new arguments will be posted, because what have been said is sufficient to dismiss Pressacian claim.

Best Regards

LFS

[Sergey Romanov]

> At pag. 425 he discovers a photograph of a wooden door and comments: ?An almost intact gas-tight door found in the ruins of the western part of Krematorium V. (?) This door has no peephole [emphasis in the original] even though it was used for homicidal gassings.? This comment, alone, destroy his entire logic (if there?s one).

It's hard to see how. Elaborate, please.

[Sergey Romanov]

> And as for the presumed "aerial photographs, examination of the ruins of the building as they stand today" which confirms, according to Jamie McCarthy and Mark Van Alstine, that were holes in the roof of Krematorium II of Birkenau , four in number, where the poison Zyklon-B was inserted i can only say that this affirmation is simple fantasy.

And what would be the evidence for your assertion? For the moment we see only your fantasy.

[Sergey Romanov]

In the first place, the inventory shows that the items were located in Leichenkeller II, not in Leichenkeller I, which is normally assumed to have been the homicidal gas-chamber.

This was explained by Pressac. Your counter-argument was not persuasive.

In the second place, there is nothing in the inventory that tells us what the "wire-mesh insertion device" was, what its shape was, how it was installed etc.

So? What _is_ known about those devices from their _names_ alone is sufficient to identify them with the devices described by witnesses. And you have no alternative explanation.

In the third place, "Holzblende" does NOT mean "wooden cover"; it means "wooden shutter", and suggests a covering on a window.

Nitpicking.

As I wrote, the "holzblende" is not stated to be "gasdicht".

1) Did they need to be gasdicht?
2) So what? It does not mean that they were not gas-tight.

Finally, we cannot assume a connection between the four wire-mesh devices and four wooden shutters listed as located in Leichenkeller II and the four chimney-like structures observable on the roof of Leichenkeller I. The only common element is the quantity, which may be coincidental.

Surely we can. That we can do it only on the basis of the number is a straw-man.

The only honest thing we can say about the two items listed in the inventory of Crematorium II is that their function and purpose is not explained.

No, the only honest thing to say is that they were explained very neatly by other pieces of evidence. The conventional explanation is supported by all the evidence. And there is even no "unconventional" one, as it turns out. That is, these wire-mesh devices cannot be explained outside the homicidal gas chambers theory.

[Lucius Felix Silla]

Dear Mr. Sergey Romanov,


According to Pressac, all gas-tight doors fitted in gas chambers of Auschwitz (delousing or homicidal) have a peephole "since the homicidal and delousing gas chambers using Zyclon-B had been installed and equipped according to the same principle, they had identical gas-tight doors fabricated in the same workshops [at Auschwitz]. (...) “ The only difference is in the gas-tight doors: there is a hemispherical grid protecting the peephole on the interior of the doors of homicidal gas chambers"
But one of the gas-tight door showed by Pressac, don't have peephole, also if was employed in one homicidal gas chamber.
So the Pressac's criteria to distinguish the two functions are unfounded.
His entire logic (if there's no - i repeat) is based on his own judgement: this is a homicidal, this not.

Best Regards

LFS

[simsalabim]

Simsalabim wrote:

An alternative explantion is given on:

If Simsalabim had read my posts more carefully, he would have seen that I gave precisely that link, so that readers could see the actual inventory for themselves.

The trouble with the alternative explanation is that it makes too many assumptions.

In the first place, the inventory shows that the items were located in Leichenkeller II, not in Leichenkeller I, which is normally assumed to have been the homicidal gas-chamber.

In the second place, there is nothing in the inventory that tells us what the "wire-mesh insertion device" was, what its shape was, how it was installed etc.

In the third place, "Holzblende" does NOT mean "wooden cover"; it means "wooden shutter", and suggests a covering on a window. The word "Blende" is related to "blind", and means something that shuts out the light. For example, a shutter in a camera is called "Blende". It certainly does not suggest some sort of barrier to prevent gas escaping. As I wrote, the "holzblende" is not stated to be "gasdicht".

Finally, we cannot assume a connection between the four wire-mesh devices and four wooden shutters listed as located in Leichenkeller II and the four chimney-like structures observable on the roof of Leichenkeller I. The only common element is the quantity, which may be coincidental.

The only honest thing we can say about the two items listed in the inventory of Crematorium II is that their function and purpose is not explained.

Mr Mills,

Your previous post linked specifically to the document. It was my intention to refer to the explanation given there.

Your point is well taken off course and has been discussed earlier on Rodoh at:

http://p067.ezboard.com/frodohforumfrm1 ... =340.topic

[Lucius Felix Silla]

Dear Mr. Sergey Romanov,

Finally, we cannot assume a connection between the four wire-mesh devices and four wooden shutters listed as located in Leichenkeller II and the four chimney-like structures observable on the roof of Leichenkeller I. The only common element is the quantity, which may be coincidental.

You replied:
Surely we can. That we can do it only on the basis of the number is a straw-man.

Where exactly are observable these presumed four chimney-like structures on the roof of Leichenkeller I of Krematorium II?

Best Regards

LFS

[Sergey Romanov]

Dear Mr. Sergey Romanov,

According to Pressac, all gas-tight doors fitted in gas chambers of Auschwitz (delousing or homicidal) have a peephole "since the homicidal and delousing gas chambers using Zyclon-B had been installed and equipped according to the same principle, they had identical gas-tight doors fabricated in the same workshops [at Auschwitz]. (...) ? The only difference is in the gas-tight doors: there is a hemispherical grid protecting the peephole on the interior of the doors of homicidal gas chambers"
But one of the gas-tight door showed by Pressac, don't have peephole, also if was employed in one homicidal gas chamber.
So the Pressac's criteria to distinguish the two functions are unfounded.
His entire logic (if there's no - i repeat) is based on his own judgement: this is a homicidal, this not.

Best Regards

LFS

What this proves is only that not all gas chambers had peep-holes. If Pressac ever said that, he was wrong (assuming that there was a HGC door without a peep-hole). This does not prove that existence of the gas-tight door with the peep-hole AND grid on the inside is not evidence for the homicidal gas chamber.

[Sergey Romanov]

Dear Mr. Sergey Romanov,

Finally, we cannot assume a connection between the four wire-mesh devices and four wooden shutters listed as located in Leichenkeller II and the four chimney-like structures observable on the roof of Leichenkeller I. The only common element is the quantity, which may be coincidental.

You replied:
Surely we can. That we can do it only on the basis of the number is a straw-man.

Where exactly are observable these presumed four chimney-like structures on the roof of Leichenkeller I of Krematorium II?

Best Regards

LFS

Chimney-like structures are observable on at least one German photo. They are not observable now, but the holes are. I refer you to this article:

http://www3.oup.co.uk/holgen/hdb/Volume ... m.abs.html

[Lucius Felix Silla]

Dear Sergey Romanov,

You can say exactly at what page and the date of the german photo?

Best Regards

LFS

[Sergey Romanov]

The photo is a well-known one (look here, for example: http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschw ... ro-columns ). It is analyzed at length in the above mentioned article.

[Lucius Felix Silla]

Dear Mr. Sergey Romanov,

I have behind my eyes this article. I read...but i don't see. You can say more clearly what photo i must see as a "proof" of the existence of these like-chimneys on the roof of the LK1, KII? And this - highly speculative and conjectural (the words most used were "can" could" "probably") - essay would be a proof of the existence of gas chambers?

Best Regards

LFS