Nazi gas chambers

michael mills · Post by **michael mills** » 05 Mar 2004 01:16

The 1.5 metres off the ground does make sense, Michael is right, its primary function is to make loading easier, but it is the loading of corpses into a cart or truck directly from the gas chambers

That would certainly be the case if carts or trucks were used to transports the bodies of the gassed victims to a crematorium or mass-graves.

But the survivor accounts that I have read, dealing with Sobibor and Treblinka, all seem to give the impression that the bodies were dragged out of the gas-chamber and along the ground by hand to a nearby mass-grave. As I pointed out, the 1.5-metre- high loading platform would be a hindrance to that method of removing the bodies.

One explanation could be that the original aim was to load the bodies onto carts or trucks, which would explain the loading platform and the height above ground of the whole structure, but that there was a change in plan, with removal by dragging along the ground being substituted (perhaps due to shortage of vehicles?).

Does anyone have any information on whether trucks or other vehicles were used at any time at Belzec or other camps for transporting the bodies of the victims away from the gas-chambers?

giles120 · Post by **giles120** » 26 Mar 2004 13:55

A tractor was used(according to a number of eye witness testimonies) at Majdanek to transport the newly murdered victims from Barrack 41(the gas chambers) to the crematoria. The dead were loaded into wagons which were towed by the tractor.

The crematoria was/is located in another part of the camp to the gas chambers, and up a steep slope. The tractor served another purpose as well; to drown out the cries of the dying victims in the gas chambers.

Thanks.

MAX_theHitMan · Post by **MAX_theHitMan** » 29 Apr 2004 15:12

Many thanks for having contributed to this post Michael Mills
Giles 120
Dan
xcalibur

and specially for David Thompson for taking his time out to scan those pictures, plans and valuable information on this subgect matter.

We must never forget. And future generations must never forget these horrible atrocities.

MAX-theHitMan

Lucius Felix Silla · Post by **Lucius Felix Silla** » 25 May 2004 13:45

What seems clear is that don't exist any documentary proof of the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau.

Best Regards

LFS

Wasa · Post by **Wasa** » 25 May 2004 13:49

Note that it is not allowed to deny the Holocaust on this forum..

Lucius Felix Silla · Post by **Lucius Felix Silla** » 25 May 2004 14:03

Dear Mr. Wasa,

I don't have denied nothing.
I have only posted my opinion about the lack of documentary proofs for homicidal chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau.
If You have any proof, we can open a discussion about this evidence.

Best Regards

LFS

Wasa · Post by **Wasa** » 25 May 2004 14:27

Dear Mr. Silla,

I suggest that you study the following internetsite...as a start..

http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/

Lucius Felix Silla · Post by **Lucius Felix Silla** » 25 May 2004 14:54

Dear Mr. Wasa,

I don't understand Your reply.
I have asked for documentary proofs (blue prints, photographies, letters et cetera).
You suggests to see the transcipts of the Irving's trial.
I have read the full transcripts of the trial many years ago, but i don't have found anyone documentary evidence about the existence of homicidal gas chambers.
When You have any proof, You can show me (and to all members of Forum) this evidence and we can discuss together this evidence or lack of this.

Best Regards

LFS

P.S. Whatever one can think about Mr. David Irving, what is clear from an analysis of the his trial and his works is that he don't have a deep knowledge of the matter in discussion here.

Karl · Post by **Karl** » 25 May 2004 15:07

Lucius Felix Silla wrote:P.S. Whatever one can think about Mr. David Irving, what is clear from an analysis of the his trial and his works is that he don't have a deep knowledge of the matter in discussion here.

He once said something to the effect that he was too good for studying holocaust…

tom! · Post by **tom!** » 25 May 2004 15:30

Hi.

In Germany a scientist made an appraisal for a court. In his so called "Rudolf-Gutachten" he mentioned that there couldn´t be found any scientific indications for the use of "Zyklon B" at the gaschambers of Auschwitz and Birkenau.

This caused a controverse discussions between revisionists an non-revisionists

This doesn´t mean that there was no holocaust.
I think it cold be of interest for you.

A german version of the "Rudolf-Gutachten" can be found
here.

Yours

tom

Lucius Felix Silla · Post by **Lucius Felix Silla** » 25 May 2004 16:06

Dear Mr. Tom!,

Thank You for Your suggestion.
I have read the "Rudolf Gutachten" and also contrary opinions from non-revisionistic point of view. It's a very difficult matter and i don't have the necessary technical knownledge to judge.
Back to our topic: anyone can show me one documentary proof about the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau?

Best Regards

LFS

Wasa · Post by **Wasa** » 25 May 2004 16:14

Lucius Felix Silla wrote:Dear Mr. Tom!,

Thank You for Your suggestion.
I have read the "Rudolf Gutachten" and also contrary opinions from non-revisionistic point of view. It's a very difficult matter and i don't have the necessary technical knownledge to judge.
Back to our topic: anyone can show me one documentary proof about the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau?

Best Regards

LFS

Dear Mr Silla,

If you don´t have the necessary technical knowledge maybe it would an overkill with documents about them?..Just my two kopeks...

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 25 May 2004 18:13

Lucius Felix Silla -- You asked:

anyone can show me one documentary proof about the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau? (my emphasis -- DT)

This question is essentially the same as one asked by Robert Faurisson in 1979, which resulted in a 564 page book by Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York: 1989.

It is now twenty-five years since the question was asked and fifteen years since it was answered. Why -- and to who -- is this question now important?

As our readers are aware, evidence comes in many forms. There are eyewitness accounts, tangible evidence such as dead people, piles of clothing, eyeglasses, hordes of dental gold, buildings, equipment and tools, documents, the testimony of expert witnesses who have sifted through both documents and testimony in order to give an informed opinion, and reasonable inferences which can be drawn from such evidence.

If the question were "can anyone show me proof about the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau?", it would be worth discussing. However, for purposes of establishing whether or not there were homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau, restricting the question to documentary evidence -- "one documentary proof about the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau" -- is a narrow and self-consciously unproductive approach.

How many murders could be successfully prosecuted using only documentary evidence? Not many. That's why the method isn't used, and has never been used, by the criminal justice system of any country. Why undertake to prove an historical proposition without looking at, or using, all forms of available evidence? Why focus the question so narrowly as to exclude the other evidence?

Lucius Felix Silla · Post by **Lucius Felix Silla** » 25 May 2004 18:50

Dear Mr. David Thompson,

You cite the work of Mr. Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York: 1989. This work is long 564 pages, full of photos, drawnings, letters et cetera: in one word of DOCUMENTS.

My question is very simple: can anyone show me one documentary proof of the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or Birnkenau?

If this proof don't exist, i must conclude:

1) That the book of Mr. Pressac is a historiographical curiousity: one work which have for purpose the rebuttal of the work of Mr. Faurisson from the point of view of the method and arguments of the work of Mr. Faurisson...is a complete failure-
2) That the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau is proved ONLY by eyewitness accounts or through postwar confessions.
Not by "dead people, piles of clothing, eyeglasses, hordes of dental gold, buildings, equipment and tools," - as You have written - because those aren't proofs of a crime.
Nor by "the testimony of expert witnesses who have sifted through both documents and testimony in order to give an informed opinion" because this is only an opinion.
3) This forum must concentrate his topics only on eyewitness accounts and postwar confessions, because all other material is without any real importance.

Is my opinion that is very important for all members of the forum to known if exist documentary proofs about the construction, activity, technical datas of the gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau.

Best Regards

LFS

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 25 May 2004 22:53

Lucius Felix Silla -- You asked for a documentary proof of the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or Birnkenau. When I referred you to Jean-Claude Pressac's book, Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York: 1989, you again asked:

My question is very simple: can anyone show me one documentary proof of the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or Birnkenau?

You are the one who is asking for something here, but when told where you can find it, your response is to repeat the question. This is a good indication that the discussion is not going to go anywhere, and that you may have an agenda which goes beyond the question. Also, nothing in your post suggests that you even looked at Pressac's book before responding, and needless to say, you didn't answer any of the questions I posed to you, either.

For convenience, those unanswered questions were:

(1) Why -- and to who -- is this [your] question now important?

(2) How many murders could be successfully prosecuted using only documentary evidence?

(3) Why undertake to prove an historical proposition without looking at, or using, all forms of available evidence?

(4) Why focus the question so narrowly as to exclude the other evidence?

You and I have had this sort of discussion here before, on another thread, namely, "Son of Majdanek revisited" at:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?p=255583

Lucius Felix Silla -- You asked chalutzim
You write that at Majdanek was in function a gas chamber.
Proof and evidence for this statement?
In addition to the proof chalutzim offered, I gave references to three West German trials involving charges of fatal gassings of inmates at KL Majadanek.

You responded:
But, very hardly, one can think that the verdict of Düsseldorf process (see Your reference) is a proof. The problem with this very interesting material is that we known only the judgement, but not the arguments and proofs or the transcripts of the trial.
You asked for proof of a functioning gas chamber at Majdanek. I showed you that two West German courts (one at Duesseldorf and one at Bielefeld) have convicted persons of the execution of prisoners by gassing at Majdanek. Now you want the "arguments and proofs or the transcripts of the trial."

Well, I'm content with the court judgments. They establish the fact of lethal gassings at Majdanek. Unless someone can show that there's something definitely wrong with the judicial findings of fact, I consider the matter as factually proven. Why would anyone want to re-prove to you what has already been established for the rest of the world?

If you need more proof for your personal purposes, check it out for yourself. You're the one who is unconvinced, and you are several thousand miles closer to the German court archives than I am.

I will repeat the same advice I gave you on that occasion:

If you need more proof for your personal purposes, check it out for yourself.

You also said:

If this proof don't exist, i must conclude:

1) That the book of Mr. Pressac is a historiographical curiousity: one work which have for purpose the rebuttal of the work of Mr. Faurisson from the point of view of the method and arguments of the work of Mr. Faurisson...is a complete failure-
2) That the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz I or in Birkenau is proved ONLY by eyewitness accounts or through postwar confessions.
Not by "dead people, piles of clothing, eyeglasses, hordes of dental gold, buildings, equipment and tools," - as You have written - because those aren't proofs of a crime.
Nor by "the testimony of expert witnesses who have sifted through both documents and testimony in order to give an informed opinion" because this is only an opinion.
3) This forum must concentrate his topics only on eyewitness accounts and postwar confessions, because all other material is without any real importance.

My responses to your declaration are "So what?" and "Who cares?"

I'd been inclined to give you a little more time and information, were it not for our previous Majdanek exchange and your failure to answer any of my questions in this thread. From your previous posts you look like a guy who's asking for help for the sole purpose of being dissatisfied with what he gets.

This, however, is only my opinion. Let those answer you who will.