Well, neither have I for the moment. My kids are at their grandmother's place with their mother, and my girlfriend went to see her parents. But your have a point regarding the imbecility of discussing about whether gassing engines were diesel engines or not, which I have often pointed out. Try to explain that to the Reverend.Wehr2 wrote:What if the T-34 engines were running on Russian Vodka?
I think you guys should spend your Easter holidays with your families instead of arguing about diesel engines. I know that I'm a complete hypocrite but I really have no family to spend it with.
Fun with DIESEL GAS-VANS at Krasnodar and Kharkov...
My question has been since the beginning of the other topic; is what difference does it make whether or not it's a Gasoline engine or a Diesel engine? My last study in school was on Ethanol and Gasoline. Quite simply, in this case the engine itself has nothing to do with the emissions but rather the fuel itself. Ethanol simply burns cleaner.
"What if" a different or abnormal fuel was used in the Diesel engine?
Forgive me if I'm completely off topic...
"What if" a different or abnormal fuel was used in the Diesel engine?
Forgive me if I'm completely off topic...
Diesel, gasoline or...Lambrusco (italian wine)
Well, no intrusion meant (I'm quite a fish out of water when it comes to engines), but let me thank you for giving me a chance to revise the old historical debate (on the old forum) as I probably missed some contributions there.
I must thank you Scott, for your explanations and charts helped me grab something more of what you and Medor have been discussing. I made just a little step forward in understanding a little better the various functions connected with an engine, its load and its discharge.
I must thank you Medor for your objections and answers to Scott's hypothesis, as they concisely pointed out two main aspects:
- either Scott's statement was unproved and needed more evidence to be accepted
- and/or even if finally substantiated by some incontrovertible evidence would not endanger or diminish the value of the main subject, that is the utlization of gas vans in the killings
I'm thanking you both, but honestly, Scott, I guess your sharing the conclusion that even if another type of gas was used, that wouldn't infirm, to say nothing of invalidating, the fact that those killings took place, would give you a boost in fairness and, no offense meant, cast away the shadow of a prejudicial attitude on your part.
A friend of mine who is a lawyer with some 40 years experience and who's at times critical of my own approach to the Holocaust, convened that in this case, the eventual discrepancy about the kind of engine used is ridicule if seen as something else than just a corollary element having per se no other importance than detailing an action whose finalization and conclusion was proved by perpetrators' documents and a number of reliable witnesses.
In any case, thanks a lot Medor for your clarifications. They helped a lot to make the whole picture clearer while giving your counterpart a fair chance to come to a reasonable conclusion.
Angelo
I must thank you Scott, for your explanations and charts helped me grab something more of what you and Medor have been discussing. I made just a little step forward in understanding a little better the various functions connected with an engine, its load and its discharge.
I must thank you Medor for your objections and answers to Scott's hypothesis, as they concisely pointed out two main aspects:
- either Scott's statement was unproved and needed more evidence to be accepted
- and/or even if finally substantiated by some incontrovertible evidence would not endanger or diminish the value of the main subject, that is the utlization of gas vans in the killings
I'm thanking you both, but honestly, Scott, I guess your sharing the conclusion that even if another type of gas was used, that wouldn't infirm, to say nothing of invalidating, the fact that those killings took place, would give you a boost in fairness and, no offense meant, cast away the shadow of a prejudicial attitude on your part.
A friend of mine who is a lawyer with some 40 years experience and who's at times critical of my own approach to the Holocaust, convened that in this case, the eventual discrepancy about the kind of engine used is ridicule if seen as something else than just a corollary element having per se no other importance than detailing an action whose finalization and conclusion was proved by perpetrators' documents and a number of reliable witnesses.
In any case, thanks a lot Medor for your clarifications. They helped a lot to make the whole picture clearer while giving your counterpart a fair chance to come to a reasonable conclusion.
Angelo
-
Scott Smith
- Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
- Location: Arizona
- Contact:
Type of Engine not type of fuel...
A spark-ignition engine, also known as a gasoline, petrol, Benzin, or "Otto" engine works differently than a compression-ignition engine, also known as an oil engine or simply a diesel engine, regardless of the fuel type.Wehr2 wrote:My question has been since the beginning of the other topic; is what difference does it make whether or not it's a Gasoline engine or a Diesel engine? My last study in school was on Ethanol and Gasoline. Quite simply, in this case the engine itself has nothing to do with the emissions but rather the fuel itself. Ethanol simply burns cleaner.
"What if" a different or abnormal fuel was used in the Diesel engine?
Fuel-type would make a difference with regard to emissions, but what is of concern here is ENGINE-type. A compression-ignition engine ALWAYS operates with excess air and therefore minimal carbon monoxide. Therefore it could not have been used to generate carbon monoxide to kill people without absurd considerations.
Not even in Nazi Germany.
-
Scott Smith
- Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
- Location: Arizona
- Contact:
Re: Diesel, gasoline or...Lambrusco (italian wine)
I think the evidence that the killings took place is thin. Basically, I think the Soviets made the story up and the Allies at Nuremberg ran with it.Angelo wrote:I'm thanking you both, but honestly, Scott, I guess your sharing the conclusion that even if another type of gas was used, that wouldn't infirm, to say nothing of invalidating, the fact that those killings took place, would give you a boost in fairness and, no offense meant, cast away the shadow of a prejudicial attitude on your part.
Perhaps, but if a murder was claimed to have occured with a Death Ray, or some other unusual weapon, it behooves us as historians and those interested in what really happened to learn more. If it was not exactly as claimed by atrocity propagandists, then we need to ask further skeptical questions. Where there are details there is proof.A friend of mine who is a lawyer with some 40 years experience and who's at times critical of my own approach to the Holocaust, convened that in this case, the eventual discrepancy about the kind of engine used is ridicule if seen as something else than just a corollary element having per se no other importance than detailing an action whose finalization and conclusion was proved by perpetrators' documents and a number of reliable witnesses.
These trucks had to have been real vehicles and not magic murder machines. There simply had to have been a murder-weapon if there was a murder. But it could not have been by diesel engines, and we know that this was claimed in many accounts and court jurisdictions. The Soviet court also stated that the cause of death was carbon monoxide and even performed autopsies.
This should cast doubt on such atrocity stories, unless we really don't care about the facts and simply want another morality tale.
Best Regards,
Scott
<<A spark-ignition engine, also known as a gasoline, petrol, Benzin, or "Otto" engine works differently than a compression-ignition engine, also known as an oil engine or simply a diesel engine, regardless of the fuel type.>>
Sure.
<<Fuel-type would make a difference with regard to emissions, but what is of concern here is ENGINE-type.>>
Why, and I thought it’s the emissions, or more precisely the composition of the exhaust in regard to carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and oxygen, that determines the toxicity thereof. Putting in some obscure stuff called “Ropa” instead of standard-compliant present-day diesel fuel might thus make some difference.
<<A compression-ignition engine ALWAYS operates with excess air and therefore minimal carbon monoxide. Therefore it could not have been used to generate carbon monoxide to kill people without absurd considerations.>>
Such as cutting off the excess air by restricting the air intake and/or greatly increasing the fuel supply. Seems to be no big deal, however much the Reverend kicks and screams.
<<I think the evidence that the killings took place is thin.>>
Make it “I would like to think”. That’s more honest.
<<Basically, I think the Soviets made the story up and the Allies at Nuremberg ran with it.>>
As above. Smith’s wishful thinking doesn’t change the fact that a considerable number of defendants and witnesses provided detailed and coincident descriptions of the gas van killings before West German courts in the 1960s and that there is very telling documentary evidence that Smith would like to believe was “forged”, although there is no reason to doubt its authenticity.
<<Perhaps, but if a murder was claimed to have occured with a Death Ray, or some other unusual weapon, it behooves us as historians and those interested in what really happened to learn more.>>
I wonder where outside the “Revisionist” dream world historians are supposed to make the examination of murder weapons their task. And we are not talking about a “Death Ray” here. We are talking about engines from huge motor vehicles, a very plausible and logical killing method. The only possible inaccuracy relates to the type of the engine used, but as there is only one possible alternative to a diesel engine – a gasoline engine – that doesn’t matter a thing.
<<If it was not exactly as claimed by atrocity propagandists, then we need to ask further skeptical questions.>>
What evidence does Smith have that the description of the gas van engines as diesel engines in Soviet trials, assuming that it is absurd at all (the Reverend is far from having demonstrated this) was the work of “atrocity propagandists” and not just the product of an error of observation by witnesses or a mistaken assessment of eyewitness testimonials? The quotes he has provided don’t read like the Soviet court cared much whether it was a diesel engine, a gasoline engine or anything else. And assuming that they went wrong in regard to this irrelevant minor detail – the type of the engine – where else would they have been wrong as well? Considering the documentary evidence to the gas van killings and the coincident and detailed depositions of former gas van drivers and other witnesses before West German courts, I don’t see any mistake other than the possible minor mistake in regard to the type of engine, which Smith hasn’t even yet demonstrated to have been a mistake.
<<Where there are details there is proof.>>
Exactly, Reverend. And there are lots of details in Becker’s letter to Rauff of 26 May 1942, in Just’s letter to Rauff of 5 June 1942 and in other documentary evidence, as well as in the depositions of former members of the Einsatzgruppen and of former members of the Sonderkommando Lange at Chelmno before West German courts in the 1960s.
<<These trucks had to have been real vehicles and not magic murder machines.>>
There’s no indication that they were anything other than real vehicles. Their type, the company that converted them for the special purpose and the conversion mechanism are known in great detail from the documentary and eyewitness evidence assessed by historians and by West German courts in the 1960s.
<<There simply had to have been a murder-weapon if there was a murder.>>
Murder there was, and there was a murder weapon. The fact that we don’t know every last detail about it does not mean that there wasn’t one, except in the mind of a True Believer like Reverend Smith.
<<But it could not have been by diesel engines>>
If so, which Smith is far from having demonstrated, it could only have been gasoline engines. Big deal.
<<and we know that this was claimed in many accounts and court jurisdictions.>>
None that Smith has shown us so far, except for the Soviet courts at the Krasnodar/Kharkov trials. Anyway, even if their conclusion in regard to the type of engine was wrong, their other conclusions coincide with the documentary evidence, defendants’ depositions and eyewitness testimonials assessed by West German courts in the 1960’s. So their essential findings of fact were accurate enough.
<<The Soviet court also stated that the cause of death was carbon monoxide and even performed autopsies.>>
They were probably right in that, as suggested by the last paragraph of Becker’s letter to Rauff dated 26 May 1942. The only detail in regard to which they may have been wrong is the type of the engine.
<<This should cast doubt on such atrocity stories>>
The findings of a court of criminal justice, even a Soviet one, are not exactly “atrocity stories”.
<<, unless we really don't care about the facts and simply want another morality tale.>>
No, Reverend. Unless the findings of fact are confirmed by the assessment of documentary and eyewitness evidence performed by historians and the independent criminal justice courts of the Federal Republic of Germany, as is the case. The only one I see here not caring about the facts is Reverend Smith, who defends himself with claws and teeth against all evidence that is not compatible with the “morality tale” he piously believes in.
Sure.
<<Fuel-type would make a difference with regard to emissions, but what is of concern here is ENGINE-type.>>
Why, and I thought it’s the emissions, or more precisely the composition of the exhaust in regard to carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and oxygen, that determines the toxicity thereof. Putting in some obscure stuff called “Ropa” instead of standard-compliant present-day diesel fuel might thus make some difference.
<<A compression-ignition engine ALWAYS operates with excess air and therefore minimal carbon monoxide. Therefore it could not have been used to generate carbon monoxide to kill people without absurd considerations.>>
Such as cutting off the excess air by restricting the air intake and/or greatly increasing the fuel supply. Seems to be no big deal, however much the Reverend kicks and screams.
<<I think the evidence that the killings took place is thin.>>
Make it “I would like to think”. That’s more honest.
<<Basically, I think the Soviets made the story up and the Allies at Nuremberg ran with it.>>
As above. Smith’s wishful thinking doesn’t change the fact that a considerable number of defendants and witnesses provided detailed and coincident descriptions of the gas van killings before West German courts in the 1960s and that there is very telling documentary evidence that Smith would like to believe was “forged”, although there is no reason to doubt its authenticity.
<<Perhaps, but if a murder was claimed to have occured with a Death Ray, or some other unusual weapon, it behooves us as historians and those interested in what really happened to learn more.>>
I wonder where outside the “Revisionist” dream world historians are supposed to make the examination of murder weapons their task. And we are not talking about a “Death Ray” here. We are talking about engines from huge motor vehicles, a very plausible and logical killing method. The only possible inaccuracy relates to the type of the engine used, but as there is only one possible alternative to a diesel engine – a gasoline engine – that doesn’t matter a thing.
<<If it was not exactly as claimed by atrocity propagandists, then we need to ask further skeptical questions.>>
What evidence does Smith have that the description of the gas van engines as diesel engines in Soviet trials, assuming that it is absurd at all (the Reverend is far from having demonstrated this) was the work of “atrocity propagandists” and not just the product of an error of observation by witnesses or a mistaken assessment of eyewitness testimonials? The quotes he has provided don’t read like the Soviet court cared much whether it was a diesel engine, a gasoline engine or anything else. And assuming that they went wrong in regard to this irrelevant minor detail – the type of the engine – where else would they have been wrong as well? Considering the documentary evidence to the gas van killings and the coincident and detailed depositions of former gas van drivers and other witnesses before West German courts, I don’t see any mistake other than the possible minor mistake in regard to the type of engine, which Smith hasn’t even yet demonstrated to have been a mistake.
<<Where there are details there is proof.>>
Exactly, Reverend. And there are lots of details in Becker’s letter to Rauff of 26 May 1942, in Just’s letter to Rauff of 5 June 1942 and in other documentary evidence, as well as in the depositions of former members of the Einsatzgruppen and of former members of the Sonderkommando Lange at Chelmno before West German courts in the 1960s.
<<These trucks had to have been real vehicles and not magic murder machines.>>
There’s no indication that they were anything other than real vehicles. Their type, the company that converted them for the special purpose and the conversion mechanism are known in great detail from the documentary and eyewitness evidence assessed by historians and by West German courts in the 1960s.
<<There simply had to have been a murder-weapon if there was a murder.>>
Murder there was, and there was a murder weapon. The fact that we don’t know every last detail about it does not mean that there wasn’t one, except in the mind of a True Believer like Reverend Smith.
<<But it could not have been by diesel engines>>
If so, which Smith is far from having demonstrated, it could only have been gasoline engines. Big deal.
<<and we know that this was claimed in many accounts and court jurisdictions.>>
None that Smith has shown us so far, except for the Soviet courts at the Krasnodar/Kharkov trials. Anyway, even if their conclusion in regard to the type of engine was wrong, their other conclusions coincide with the documentary evidence, defendants’ depositions and eyewitness testimonials assessed by West German courts in the 1960’s. So their essential findings of fact were accurate enough.
<<The Soviet court also stated that the cause of death was carbon monoxide and even performed autopsies.>>
They were probably right in that, as suggested by the last paragraph of Becker’s letter to Rauff dated 26 May 1942. The only detail in regard to which they may have been wrong is the type of the engine.
<<This should cast doubt on such atrocity stories>>
The findings of a court of criminal justice, even a Soviet one, are not exactly “atrocity stories”.
<<, unless we really don't care about the facts and simply want another morality tale.>>
No, Reverend. Unless the findings of fact are confirmed by the assessment of documentary and eyewitness evidence performed by historians and the independent criminal justice courts of the Federal Republic of Germany, as is the case. The only one I see here not caring about the facts is Reverend Smith, who defends himself with claws and teeth against all evidence that is not compatible with the “morality tale” he piously believes in.
-
Scott Smith
- Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
- Location: Arizona
- Contact:
ASK MEDO, HE KNOWS!
Careful, you are showing your ignorance.Roberto wrote:++A spark-ignition engine, also known as a gasoline, petrol, Benzin, or "Otto" engine works differently than a compression-ignition engine, also known as an oil engine or simply a diesel engine, regardless of the fuel type.++
<<Sure.>>
Unless Ropa is Sarin nerve gas the logic makes no sense at all. We have to kill quickly; we are not concerned about the rainforest here.++Fuel-type would make a difference with regard to emissions, but what is of concern here is ENGINE-type.++
<<Why, and I thought it’s the emissions, or more precisely the composition of the exhaust in regard to carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and oxygen, that determines the toxicity thereof. Putting in some obscure stuff called “Ropa” instead of standard-compliant present-day diesel fuel might thus make some difference.>>
You still don't understand how compression-ignition engines work, do you? There is no restricting the air-intake to increase the fuel-air ratio appreciably, and especially with a large motor. The only way you can do it is with a full-load on the motor and then open the fuel supply. And even if you only want high carbon dioxide and less oxygen you still have to LOAD the motor. The only way around the load is to inject CO2 into the air-intake in a controlled fashion. Absurd.++A compression-ignition engine ALWAYS operates with excess air and therefore minimal carbon monoxide. Therefore it could not have been used to generate carbon monoxide to kill people without absurd considerations.++
<<Such as cutting off the excess air by restricting the air intake and/or greatly increasing the fuel supply. Seems to be no big deal, however much the Reverend kicks and screams.>>
Cuckoo! Cuckoo!
When poor Smith is running out of arguments, he likes to invoke his “technical knowledge” and call his opponent “ignorant”.--A spark-ignition engine, also known as a gasoline, petrol, Benzin, or "Otto" engine works differently than a compression-ignition engine, also known as an oil engine or simply a diesel engine, regardless of the fuel type.--
++Sure.++
<<Careful, you are showing your ignorance.>>
I’ve heard that empty slander too often to take it seriously.
Come on, Reverend, does rudimentary fuel containing more toxins produce no more toxic exhaust than standard-compliant, properly refined fuel? Couldn't it tip the balance between sub-lethal exhaust and lethal exhaust under certain conditions? Think about it.--Fuel-type would make a difference with regard to emissions, but what is of concern here is ENGINE-type.++
++Why, and I thought it’s the emissions, or more precisely the composition of the exhaust in regard to carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and oxygen, that determines the toxicity thereof. Putting in some obscure stuff called “Ropa” instead of standard-compliant present-day diesel fuel might thus make some difference.++
<<Unless Ropa is Sarin nerve gas the logic makes no sense at all. We have to kill quickly; we are not concerned about the rainforest here.>>
I presume it normally operates with excess air and therefore minimum carbon monoxide, according to what the Reverend told us.--A compression-ignition engine ALWAYS operates with excess air and therefore minimal carbon monoxide. Therefore it could not have been used to generate carbon monoxide to kill people without absurd considerations.--
++Such as cutting off the excess air by restricting the air intake and/or greatly increasing the fuel supply. Seems to be no big deal, however much the Reverend kicks and screams.++
<<You still don't understand how compression-ignition engines work, do you?>>
Why not, Reverend? The less air gets into the engine, the less there is to burn the fuel, the higher the fuel-air ratio will become. Quite simple, really.There is no restricting the air-intake to increase the fuel-air ratio appreciably, and especially with a large motor.
Injection of CO2 might be necessary if you want the engine to work properly for a longer period of time with a restricted air intake, but not if the engine is to operate under such conditions for no more than 30 to 45 minutes at a time and efficiency for legitimate purposes such as power production is not a concern. The Reverend keeps repeating his “load” nonsense without having properly explained why load is a must and why the same effect cannot be achieved by restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply of the engine.The only way you can do it is with a full-load on the motor and then open the fuel supply. And even if you only want high carbon dioxide and less oxygen you still have to LOAD the motor. The only way around the load is to inject CO2 into the air-intake in a controlled fashion. Absurd.
And in order to cover up his woeful inability to explain why a load would be a must – instead of just repeating over and over again that it would be – he takes recourse to arrogantly invoking his superior technical knowledge. Has no one ever told the Reverend that in a debate like this any expert knowledge is only as good as the ability to convey it to a thinking layman like myself? A reply that goes like “I’m a technician, I know, you don’t, so shut up” is not likely to convince. It sounds like a quack’s last refuge when his pseudo-scientific nonsense is challenged by those he tried to take for a ride. Especially when coming from someone like the Reverend.Cuckoo! Cuckoo!
-
Scott Smith
- Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
- Location: Arizona
- Contact:
ALSO SPRACH MEDOJURGEN...
Any evidence? No, it still wouldn't "work properly." It would be boiling out the black smoke since you would have to open up the fuel just to keep it running. But it would allow the CO to shoot up without loading the motor much.Roberto wrote:Injection of CO2 might be necessary if you want the engine to work properly for a longer period of time with a restricted air intake, but not if the engine is to operate under such conditions for no more than 30 to 45 minutes at a time and efficiency for legitimate purposes such as power production is not a concern.
The MedoMan knows it's nonsense but he doesn't know what it is! Really, if you don't understand it by now I doubt you ever will.The Reverend keeps repeating his “load” nonsense without having properly explained why load is a must and why the same effect cannot be achieved by restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply of the engine.
Look at my chart again, and then reflect upon why the engine CO is rising... Because it can't get enough oxygen to burn the excess fuel but still plenty of air to compress for ignition. And that means LOAD--unless you have some air that has little or no oxygen in it, which could be accomplished by injecting CO2 instead. As Johnny Carson would say, "Wild, Wild, Stuff."
But understanding does not matter for those who need no facts that do not support the Big-H canon; moral-certainties are enough. And some myths really do take on a life of their own, don't they...
++Injection of CO2 might be necessary if you want the engine to work properly for a longer period of time with a restricted air intake, but not if the engine is to operate under such conditions for no more than 30 to 45 minutes at a time and efficiency for legitimate purposes such as power production is not a concern.++
<<Any evidence?>>
It’s up to the Reverend to show us that only by injecting CO2 you would obtain fuel-air ratios on the “rich” side without a load. I don’t see why this should be so. The issue seems to be that without CO2 injection the engine will get damaged after running with a restricted air intake for some time. The question is: how long would it take for the engine to get damaged? If longer than 30 to 45 minutes, no sweat.
<<No, it still wouldn't "work properly.">>
So what?
<<It would be boiling out the black smoke since you would have to open up the fuel just to keep it running.>>
If so, what the heck? Any evidence, by the way? Or are we supposed to take the great technician’s word for it?
<<But it would allow the CO to shoot up without loading the motor much.>>
As would restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply. Anyway, I’m glad to see that the Reverend is moving away a bit from his original “only under load” position. Let’s see what comes next.
++The Reverend keeps repeating his “load” nonsense without having properly explained why load is a must and why the same effect cannot be achieved by restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply of the engine.++
<<The MedoMan knows it's nonsense but he doesn't know what it is! Really, if you don't understand it by now I doubt you ever will.>>
The Reverend is again playing big fat technician. I have done nothing else than to read the reports of Holtz & Elliot and Pattle & Stretch, where it is stated that the composition of a diesel engine’s exhaust is chiefly a function of the fuel-air ratio, and that this ratio depends on how much air there is to completely burn the fuel. Ergo an increase of the fuel supply, as in Holtz & Elliot’s experiments B-70, B-72 and B-69, or a restriction of the air intake, as in Pattle & Stretch’s experiment D1, will bring up the fuel-air ratio, it also being possible to combine both methods. Smith has never been able to explain what is wrong with these assumptions, regarding which I am by no means alone:
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... senet.9806
http://www.holocaust-history.org/~jamie/buchanan/
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/b/ ... /berg.0794
<<Look at my chart again, and then reflect upon why the engine CO is rising... Because it can't get enough oxygen to burn the excess fuel but still plenty of air to compress for ignition.>>
Exactly.
<<And that means LOAD--unless you have some air that has little or no oxygen in it, which could be accomplished by injecting CO2 instead.>>
Or unless you restrict the air intake, or significantly increase the fuel supply, or do both.
<<As Johnny Carson would say, "Wild, Wild, Stuff.">>
I don’t see why. Let me guess: Because Reverend Smith would like it to be that way, perhaps?
<<But understanding does not matter for those who need no facts that do not support the Big-H canon; moral-certainties are enough. And some myths really do take on a life of their own, don't they...>>
Blah, blah, blah. As Smith well knows, I couldn’t care less whether the gassing engine was a diesel engine or a gasoline engine burning diesel fuel or gasoline. The latter alternative is the best that Smith can hope to demonstrate, and he should be very careful with accusing anyone of harboring “moral certainties”, especially as long as he persists in his irrelevant discussion about the sex of the angels while avoiding to address the relevant questions asked i.a. in my post # 1358 (1/25/02 10:36:23 pm) on the thread
Eyewitness Testimony
http://pub3.ezboard.com/fskalmanforumfr ... =1&stop=20
of the old forum, lest his woeful inability to respond to these questions make clear to whoever hasn't realized it so far that the True Believer adhering to “moral certainties” is no one other than himself.
<<Any evidence?>>
It’s up to the Reverend to show us that only by injecting CO2 you would obtain fuel-air ratios on the “rich” side without a load. I don’t see why this should be so. The issue seems to be that without CO2 injection the engine will get damaged after running with a restricted air intake for some time. The question is: how long would it take for the engine to get damaged? If longer than 30 to 45 minutes, no sweat.
<<No, it still wouldn't "work properly.">>
So what?
<<It would be boiling out the black smoke since you would have to open up the fuel just to keep it running.>>
If so, what the heck? Any evidence, by the way? Or are we supposed to take the great technician’s word for it?
<<But it would allow the CO to shoot up without loading the motor much.>>
As would restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply. Anyway, I’m glad to see that the Reverend is moving away a bit from his original “only under load” position. Let’s see what comes next.
++The Reverend keeps repeating his “load” nonsense without having properly explained why load is a must and why the same effect cannot be achieved by restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply of the engine.++
<<The MedoMan knows it's nonsense but he doesn't know what it is! Really, if you don't understand it by now I doubt you ever will.>>
The Reverend is again playing big fat technician. I have done nothing else than to read the reports of Holtz & Elliot and Pattle & Stretch, where it is stated that the composition of a diesel engine’s exhaust is chiefly a function of the fuel-air ratio, and that this ratio depends on how much air there is to completely burn the fuel. Ergo an increase of the fuel supply, as in Holtz & Elliot’s experiments B-70, B-72 and B-69, or a restriction of the air intake, as in Pattle & Stretch’s experiment D1, will bring up the fuel-air ratio, it also being possible to combine both methods. Smith has never been able to explain what is wrong with these assumptions, regarding which I am by no means alone:
Michael Mills in a Usenet article featured underThe data at the COHQ site imply that the exhaust of a poorly tuned diesel engine could produce a CO concentration in the air high enough to be reliably lethal. If so, it is possible that poorly tuned diesel engines were used at Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka for homicidal purposes. If that is the case, it should be reflected in testimony, ie there should be accounts of experiments with the tuning to find the setting that would produce a sufficiently high level of CO in the exhaust. Perhaps this is a topic for further research. Alternatively, it is possible that gasoline engines were used, but that would mean that a number of witnesses, such as Gerstein, were mistaken.
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... senet.9806
Jamie McCarthy, Pat Buchanan and the HolocaustLet's look first at his claim about diesel engines. Many things are wrong with the diesel argument, and this will be the topic of a future webpage at this site. Here is the quickest way to debunk the claim: if the operator of the diesel engine races it up to high RPM and then restricts the air intake, the engine can be made to run arbitrarily rich, producing extremely low levels of oxygen.
The victims at the Reinhard camps were suffocated to death, not killed with carbon monoxide, because, although an intentionally-mistuned diesel produces enough carbon monoxide to kill you, the lack of oxygen will kill you first.
A properly-tuned diesel engine running at idle cannot kill: this is true. But unlike the locomotive engineer in Buchanan's example, who was concerned with saving the lives of trapped people, the Nazis had no qualms about opening the engine's throttle and restricting the air intake.
http://www.holocaust-history.org/~jamie/buchanan/
From a Usenet discussion transcribed underArticle 14309 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.delphi.com!usenet From: [email protected] Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Diesel A, B, C's and Scott Mullins Date: Mon, 25 Jul 94 23:24:56 -0500 Organization: Delphi ([email protected] email, 800-695-4005 voice) Lines: 24 Message-ID: References: <2vt3du$[email protected]> NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com X-To: Friedrich Berg
Friedrich Berg writes: >engine, Diesel engine and even the automobile. I can't really believe >that Mullins can be that stupid--but, then again, perhaps he is?
I dont believe any useful purpose is served by calling people names. Why cannot you keep this discussion at a professional level? If you are an engineer that should not be too difficult. I also happen to be a mechanical engineer with probably more years experience that many of you have. I see nothing technically wrong in accepting that a diesel engine exhausting into a closed room provided with an exhauster would fill the room with a lethal gas. The percentage of CO is not only a function of load but also of the air/fuel ratio. It is quite possible to run a diesel engine "rich" at part-load as well as at full-load. It won't be efficient but it would produce higher percentages of CO. Apart from all of this people forced into a closed chamber filled with exhaust gases would not only die from CO but would also be asphyxiated. And finally, the argument about gas producers being a better source of CO is technically correct but not practical because gas producers are basically custom-built and certainly not as readily available during the war at a camp near the war zones than diesel engines.
Let's try to cut out the emotions and keep this at a dispassionate technical level.
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/b/ ... /berg.0794
<<Look at my chart again, and then reflect upon why the engine CO is rising... Because it can't get enough oxygen to burn the excess fuel but still plenty of air to compress for ignition.>>
Exactly.
<<And that means LOAD--unless you have some air that has little or no oxygen in it, which could be accomplished by injecting CO2 instead.>>
Or unless you restrict the air intake, or significantly increase the fuel supply, or do both.
<<As Johnny Carson would say, "Wild, Wild, Stuff.">>
I don’t see why. Let me guess: Because Reverend Smith would like it to be that way, perhaps?
<<But understanding does not matter for those who need no facts that do not support the Big-H canon; moral-certainties are enough. And some myths really do take on a life of their own, don't they...>>
Blah, blah, blah. As Smith well knows, I couldn’t care less whether the gassing engine was a diesel engine or a gasoline engine burning diesel fuel or gasoline. The latter alternative is the best that Smith can hope to demonstrate, and he should be very careful with accusing anyone of harboring “moral certainties”, especially as long as he persists in his irrelevant discussion about the sex of the angels while avoiding to address the relevant questions asked i.a. in my post # 1358 (1/25/02 10:36:23 pm) on the thread
Eyewitness Testimony
http://pub3.ezboard.com/fskalmanforumfr ... =1&stop=20
of the old forum, lest his woeful inability to respond to these questions make clear to whoever hasn't realized it so far that the True Believer adhering to “moral certainties” is no one other than himself.
-
Scott Smith
- Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
- Location: Arizona
- Contact:
BODYGUARD OF LIES...
No, it’s your theory that the load is irrelevant and that you can make a murder-machine simply by blocking the air-intake. Even with the Pattle & Stretch experiment using the small engine they only got 0.22% CO maximum, and the killing results were marginal.medorjurgen wrote:<<Injection of CO2 might be necessary if you want the engine to work properly for a longer period of time with a restricted air intake, but not if the engine is to operate under such conditions for no more than 30 to 45 minutes at a time and efficiency for legitimate purposes such as power production is not a concern.>>
++Any evidence? ++
<<It’s up to the Reverend to show us that only by injecting CO2 you would obtain fuel-air ratios on the “rich” side without a load. I don’t see why this should be so.>>
No, damage to the motor from mechanical overloading, and damage to the motor from excessive black smoke from lack of oxygen, are separate issues that normally go together when an engine is lugging. I don’t have any data on how long the motor will last if punished like this, but 30-45 minutes is a very long time under these conditions and that is at least once every day.The issue seems to be that without CO2 injection the engine will get damaged after running with a restricted air intake for some time. The question is: how long would it take for the engine to get damaged? If longer than 30 to 45 minutes, no sweat.
My point was that the motor would not RUN because by blocking the air-intake you restrict the amount of air that can be compressed, which otherwise gets hot and ignites the fuel. Blocking the air-intake on a large motor will cause it to misfire before it starves of oxygen; in other words, oxygen-starvation is not what is causing the misfires, but lack of gas to compress to provide ignition. You can increase the compressed gas with CO2 injection and thereby also decrease the oxygen; however, to the extent that oxygen deprivation causes black smoke, as in an overloaded and straining (and consequently high fuel-air ratio) engine, it will shorten the life of the motor.
It has to pump gas, doesn’t it, and it can’t do that if it isn’t running. Remember, even the small engine of Pattle & Stretch could not have the CO raised any further and still run.++No, it still wouldn't "work properly."++
<<So what? >>
That would be wise since nobody from the Holo-sites knows what they are talking about.++It would be boiling out the black smoke since you would have to open up the fuel just to keep it running.++
<<If so, what the heck? Any evidence, by the way? Or are we supposed to take the great technician’s word for it? >>
But if you have access to a diesel truck or tractor with a standard transmission, give it a try. Go up a hill in high gear starting fairly slow, just about bucking, and when the engine starts to lug real good, floor the accelerator to maintain your speed without stalling. Maximum smoke if you do it right! If you can measure the CO in the exhaust that would be even better. (An automatic transmission won’t work because you cannot lug the motor.)
I made this point a year ago when I studied the big yellowed volumes written by Holtz, Elliott, Davis, Marshall and Hurn, et al, on-exhaust-gas- recirculation in mines. I sent you some of it but you showed no interest other than calling me a liar when it took so long.++But [CO2 injection] would allow the CO to shoot up without loading the motor much.++
<<As would restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply. Anyway, I’m glad to see that the Reverend is moving away a bit from his original “only under load” position. Let’s see what comes next.>>
Nevertheless, you are still incorrect that restricting the air-intake would do the job without a load; only with a small engine and that was marginal.
I think I have explained it many times. My latest effort is on the other thread:The Reverend keeps repeating his “load” nonsense without having properly explained why load is a must and why the same effect cannot be achieved by restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply of the engine.
http://quantum.phpwebhosting.com/~marcu ... &start=100
Well, yes, in a chemical sense, that is true about the fuel-air ratio. Stoichiometry is the ideal fuel-air ratio, where all fuel is completely burned and there is no excess oxygen. But we have a diesel engine here, not a garden-variety oil burner—which, btw, would make an excellent CO generator with a rich mixture.++The MedoMan knows [the LOAD is] nonsense but he doesn't know what it is! Really, if you don't understand it by now I doubt you ever will.++
<<The Reverend is again playing big fat technician. I have done nothing else than to read the reports of Holtz & Elliot and Pattle & Stretch, where it is stated that the composition of a diesel engine’s exhaust is chiefly a function of the fuel-air ratio, and that this ratio depends on how much air there is to completely burn the fuel.>>
But a diesel engine ALWAYS works with excess air UNLESS there is a heavy load to work against, and then you can make the fuel-air ratio overly rich, usually in the futile attempt to overload the motor (as in taking a hill in the wrong gear).
Perhaps the Believer can show us some high fuel-air ratios where there was no load—other than the small motor of Pattle & Stretch, which had an unconventional load put on it.
We have to take the unique physics of diesel engines into additional account because we have different goals, to deliberately make carbon monoxide, not prevent it. Holtz and Elliott managed to limit the load merely with a fuel stop so that the engine couldn’t be gunned, thereby limiting its load like a truck going up a hill with a block underneath the accelerator pedal, which would then just grind to a halt and quit. That quick-and-dirty solution was easier than regulating the load, though not foolproof either if, for example, the engine starts lugging, without actually quitting, at a lower than normal rpm, as might happen during an electrical brownout.
“Methods,”Ergo an increase of the fuel supply, as in Holtz & Elliot’s experiments B-70, B-72 and B-69, or a restriction of the air intake, as in Pattle & Stretch’s experiment D1, will bring up the fuel-air ratio, it also being possible to combine both methods.
: that’s just Nizkor talking! They need some way to justify the idea that the motor(s) were supposedly just sitting there cranking out gas and didn’t approach the problem from the eyes of an engineer, let alone adopt a critical standpoint that perhaps some of these fine Jews and Communists could have simply been lying about those nasty Nazis, their intractable enemies.Here’s an interesting article about Treblinka historiography:
Jean-François Steiner's Bodyguard of Lies, by Orest Slepokura.
Sorry, but there is no such data at COHQ, despite Nizkor’s claim, which Mr. Mills apparently inferred. The COHQ people are quite understandably cautious against citizens thinking that diesel engine exhaust is “safe,” and hence the “poorly tuned diesel” misnomer. Under the right circumstances, yes, a diesel engine can kill. But Dr. Penney’s book is useless in this regard.Roberto wrote:Smith has never been able to explain what is wrong with these assumptions, regarding which I am by no means alone:
“The data at the COHQ site imply that the exhaust of a poorly tuned diesel engine could produce a CO concentration in the air high enough to be reliably lethal. If so, it is possible that poorly tuned diesel engines were used at Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka for homicidal purposes. If that is the case, it should be reflected in testimony, ie there should be accounts of experiments with the tuning to find the setting that would produce a sufficiently high level of CO in the exhaust. Perhaps this is a topic for further research. Alternatively, it is possible that gasoline engines were used, but that would mean that a number of witnesses, such as Gerstein, were mistaken.”
Michael Mills in a Usenet article featured under
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... senet.9806
No, McCarthy is all wet and has no evidence to support this. Here science is being shoehorned to follow Survivor claims, not leading the way to debunk those claims. McCarthy/Nizkor don’t care how diesel engines work; they only want fodder for their Gospel of Genocide.Jamie McCarthy:
“Let's look first at his claim about diesel engines. Many things are wrong with the diesel argument, and this will be the topic of a future webpage at this site. Here is the quickest way to debunk the claim: if the operator of the diesel engine races it up to high RPM and then restricts the air intake, the engine can be made to run arbitrarily rich, producing extremely low levels of oxygen.”
Gee, that’s funny, Höß and everybody says it was carbon monoxide. Nobody had this CO2 or “mistuning” theory until after Berg pointed out that carbon monoxide from a diesel engine was bogus. Then it was, “damage control, boys—man the pumps!”McCarthy:
“The victims at the Reinhard camps were suffocated to death, not killed with carbon monoxide, because, although an intentionally-mistuned diesel produces enough carbon monoxide to kill you, the lack of oxygen will kill you first.”
McCarthy/Nizkor have absolutely no evidence about the victims of the Reinhardt camps being killed by suffocation instead of CO except for Dr. Pfannenstiel’s observation that he saw some blue bodies (and the Good Doktor never admitted to seeing a gassing or a gaschamber, btw).
For one thing, an engine running at 1400 rpm, as in our test data, is not at “idle.” It is revved somewhat substantially. The difference between Test B-13 and the others to B-12 is the LOAD, and setting the throttle to meet that load. Only when the engine cannot be loaded any more does a rising fuel supply also correlate to rising CO, as my graph amply shows in the tests to the right of B-12.McCarthy:
“A properly-tuned diesel engine running at idle cannot kill: this is true. But unlike the locomotive engineer in Buchanan's example, who was concerned with saving the lives of trapped people, the Nazis had no qualms about opening the engine's throttle and restricting the air intake.
Pat Buchanan and the Holocaust, by Jamie McCarthy.
Here is Berg’s article about the famous Pat Buchanan controversy at the height of the Demjanjuk affair:
Pat Buchanan and the Diesel Exhaust Controversy, by Friedrich Paul Berg.
Best Regards,
Scott
It’s my reasoning, and not only mine. The “it couldn’t have worked this way” – contention is Smith’s baby, and it’s to him and only to him that it matters. So let us see what he’s got to show for it.medorjurgen wrote:
<<Injection of CO2 might be necessary if you want the engine to work properly for a longer period of time with a restricted air intake, but not if the engine is to operate under such conditions for no more than 30 to 45 minutes at a time and efficiency for legitimate purposes such as power production is not a concern.>>
++Any evidence? ++
<<It’s up to the Reverend to show us that only by injecting CO2 you would obtain fuel-air ratios on the “rich” side without a load. I don’t see why this should be so.>>
No, it’s your theory that the load is irrelevant and that you can make a murder-machine simply by blocking the air-intake.
Sure, because 0.22 % CO is not a lethal concentration. But comparison with the experiences of Holtz & Elliot and Elliot & Davis indicates that with a 70 bhp engine the CO concentration would be lethal. Even more so with a 150 bhp engine, not to mention a 500 bhp engine.Even with the Pattle & Stretch experiment using the small engine they only got 0.22% CO maximum, and the killing results were marginal.
No data, just the Reverend’s assumptions. Considering the Reverend’s reliability in matters of Faith, that’s far too thin.Quote:
The issue seems to be that without CO2 injection the engine will get damaged after running with a restricted air intake for some time. The question is: how long would it take for the engine to get damaged? If longer than 30 to 45 minutes, no sweat.
No, damage to the motor from mechanical overloading, and damage to the motor from excessive black smoke from lack of oxygen, are separate issues that normally go together when an engine is lugging. I don’t have any data on how long the motor will last if punished like this, but 30-45 minutes is a very long time under these conditions and that is at least once every day.
Maybe so, but how long would that take to happen with Pattle & Stretch’s method? And how long if the air intake were only partially restricted and the fuel supply increased to obtain a “rich” fuel-air ratio?My point was that the motor would not RUN because by blocking the air-intake you restrict the amount of air that can be compressed, which otherwise gets hot and ignites the fuel. Blocking the air-intake on a large motor will cause it to misfire before it starves of oxygen; in other words, oxygen-starvation is not what is causing the misfires, but lack of gas to compress to provide ignition.
Making the engine run efficiently for legitimate purposes such as power production would be the least of the killers’ concerns. So would be an eventual shortening of the engine life, given that they had a vast pool of salvaged Soviet tank engines not required for military purposes at their disposal.You can increase the compressed gas with CO2 injection and thereby also decrease the oxygen; however, to the extent that oxygen deprivation causes black smoke, as in an overloaded and straining (and consequently high fuel-air ratio) engine, it will shorten the life of the motor.
The issue is that a bigger engine would most probably produce exhaust with a much higher amount of CO under the conditions in which Pattle & Stretch ran their engine in the “D” experiments. How long did it take for their engine to stop running under these conditions?It has to pump gas, doesn’t it, and it can’t do that if it isn’t running. Remember, even the small engine of Pattle & Stretch could not have the CO raised any further and still run.
They seem to know at least as much as the Reverend, despite his hollow mumbling. The difference being that the Reverend is also a Keeper of the Faith who will try to sell you the idea that light bulbs carry electricity inside if it serves his stance and he thinks he can get away with it.Quote:
++It would be boiling out the black smoke since you would have to open up the fuel just to keep it running.++
<<If so, what the heck? Any evidence, by the way? Or are we supposed to take the great technician’s word for it? >>
That would be wise since nobody from the Holo-sites knows what they are talking about.
As I often told the Reverend, I couldn’t care less about whether the gassing engine was a diesel engine or a gasoline engine. The “it couldn’t have been a diesel” – contention is his baby. So let him do the demonstration that the exhaust of a huge engine couldn’t be made reliably lethal without “lugging”.But if you have access to a diesel truck or tractor with a standard transmission, give it a try. Go up a hill in high gear starting fairly slow, just about bucking, and when the engine starts to lug real good, floor the accelerator to maintain your speed without stalling. Maximum smoke if you do it right! If you can measure the CO in the exhaust that would be even better. (An automatic transmission won’t work because you cannot lug the motor.)
Quote:
++But [CO2 injection] would allow the CO to shoot up without loading the motor much.++
<<As would restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply. Anyway, I’m glad to see that the Reverend is moving away a bit from his original “only under load” position. Let’s see what comes next.>>
I made this point a year ago when I studied the big yellowed volumes written by Holtz, Elliott, Davis, Marshall and Hurn, et al, on-exhaust-gas- recirculation in mines. I sent you some of it but you showed no interest other than calling me a liar when it took so long.[/quote]
The poor Reverend sounds like he’s about to burst out crying. Needless to say, his version of events is somewhat less than honest. And his regurgitating past grievances says a lot about the kind of fellow he is.
That’s what the Reverend would like to make believe, without being able to demonstrate it.Nevertheless, you are still incorrect that restricting the air-intake would do the job without a load; only with a small engine and that was marginal.
Effort already taken apart, see the other thread.Quote:
The Reverend keeps repeating his “load” nonsense without having properly explained why load is a must and why the same effect cannot be achieved by restricting the air intake and/or increasing the fuel supply of the engine.
I think I have explained it many times. My latest effort is on the other thread:
http://quantum.phpwebhosting.com/~marcu ... &start=100
Same old soap. The load is not a must for making the fuel-air ratio “rich”, as often explained.Quote:
++The MedoMan knows [the LOAD is] nonsense but he doesn't know what it is! Really, if you don't understand it by now I doubt you ever will.++
<<The Reverend is again playing big fat technician. I have done nothing else than to read the reports of Holtz & Elliot and Pattle & Stretch, where it is stated that the composition of a diesel engine’s exhaust is chiefly a function of the fuel-air ratio, and that this ratio depends on how much air there is to completely burn the fuel.>>
Well, yes, in a chemical sense, that is true about the fuel-air ratio. Stoichiometry is the ideal fuel-air ratio, where all fuel is completely burned and there is no excess oxygen. But we have a diesel engine here, not a garden-variety oil burner—which, btw, would make an excellent CO generator with a rich mixture.
But a diesel engine ALWAYS works with excess air UNLESS there is a heavy load to work against, and then you can make the fuel-air ratio overly rich, usually in the futile attempt to overload the motor (as in taking a hill in the wrong gear).
I would rather have the Believer explain what would have happened if Holtz & Elliot has run experiment B-13 with 29.63 lbs/hr of fuel, 6.5 times the amount they actually used. The “it could not have worked” baloney is his baby, after all, not mine.Perhaps the Believer can show us some high fuel-air ratios where there was no load—other than the small motor of Pattle & Stretch, which had an unconventional load put on it.
Interesting, but where does that get us?We have to take the unique physics of diesel engines into additional account because we have different goals, to deliberately make carbon monoxide, not prevent it. Holtz and Elliott managed to limit the load merely with a fuel stop so that the engine couldn’t be gunned, thereby limiting its load like a truck going up a hill with a block underneath the accelerator pedal, which would then just grind to a halt and quit. That quick-and-dirty solution was easier than regulating the load, though not foolproof either if, for example, the engine starts lugging, without actually quitting, at a lower than normal rpm, as might happen during an electrical brownout.
No, Reverend, that’s my own reasoning. And not only mine.Quote:
Ergo an increase of the fuel supply, as in Holtz & Elliot’s experiments B-70, B-72 and B-69, or a restriction of the air intake, as in Pattle & Stretch’s experiment D1, will bring up the fuel-air ratio, it also being possible to combine both methods.
“Methods,” that’s just Nizkor talking!
Blah, blah, blah. A rather pointless lie that would have been, making a gasoline engine into a diesel engine or making people killed in some other way into people killed by gassing. Cut out the crap, Reverend, and try to think logically, like I do.They need some way to justify the idea that the motor(s) were supposedly just sitting there cranking out gas and didn’t approach the problem from the eyes of an engineer, let alone adopt a critical standpoint that perhaps some of these fine Jews and Communists could have simply been lying about those nasty Nazis, their intractable enemies.
Another “Revisionist” sack full of cattle manure, I presume. Inveterate liars accusing others of lying. Strictly for the birds.Here’s an interesting article about Treblinka historiography:
Jean-François Steiner's Bodyguard of Lies, by Orest Slepokura.
Trying to teach people to read, Reverend? The above quote obviously contains Michael Mills’ very own reasoning based on what he found on the COHQ site.Roberto wrote:
Smith has never been able to explain what is wrong with these assumptions, regarding which I am by no means alone:
“The data at the COHQ site imply that the exhaust of a poorly tuned diesel engine could produce a CO concentration in the air high enough to be reliably lethal. If so, it is possible that poorly tuned diesel engines were used at Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka for homicidal purposes. If that is the case, it should be reflected in testimony, ie there should be accounts of experiments with the tuning to find the setting that would produce a sufficiently high level of CO in the exhaust. Perhaps this is a topic for further research. Alternatively, it is possible that gasoline engines were used, but that would mean that a number of witnesses, such as Gerstein, were mistaken.”
Michael Mills in a Usenet article featured under
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/ftp ... senet.9806
Sorry, but there is no such data at COHQ, despite Nizkor’s claim, which Mr. Mills apparently inferred.
What Smith would like to believe, as usual. Can he show us what exactly is written in this respect on the COHQ site?The COHQ people are quite understandably cautious against citizens thinking that diesel engine exhaust is “safe,” and hence the “poorly tuned diesel” misnomer.
And those circumstances are not too hard to bring about, whether Smith likes it or not.Under the right circumstances, yes, a diesel engine can kill.
For all of Smith’s hollow slander, the fact is that McCarthy is just following the same logical train of thought that I have. It is up to Smith to demonstrate what is wrong with his reasoning, which makes all the sense in the world.Quote:
Jamie McCarthy:
“Let's look first at his claim about diesel engines. Many things are wrong with the diesel argument, and this will be the topic of a future webpage at this site. Here is the quickest way to debunk the claim: if the operator of the diesel engine races it up to high RPM and then restricts the air intake, the engine can be made to run arbitrarily rich, producing extremely low levels of oxygen.”
No, McCarthy is all wet and has no evidence to support this. Here science is being shoehorned to follow Survivor claims, not leading the way to debunk those claims. McCarthy/Nizkor don’t care how diesel engines work; they only want fodder for their Gospel of Genocide.
Did Höß see the victims? No, he didn’t. The only more detailed descriptions of the dead bodies we have were provided by Dr. Pfannenstiel and Karl Alfred Schluch, who witnessed the gassings at Belzec. Both descriptions suggest that what may have been intended to be death by carbon monoxide poisoning was actually death by suffocation – probably due to the speed at which the exhaust of a large engine filled the gas chambers, a phenomenon similar to the one described by Becker in regard to the gas vans in his letter to Rauff of 26 May 1942.Quote:
McCarthy:
“The victims at the Reinhard camps were suffocated to death, not killed with carbon monoxide, because, although an intentionally-mistuned diesel produces enough carbon monoxide to kill you, the lack of oxygen will kill you first.”
Gee, that’s funny, Höß and everybody says it was carbon monoxide.
The fact is that no one gave a damn about the type of engine used for gassing at Treblinka (why should anyone have cared about this irrelevant minor detail?) until Berg and Buchanan came up with their bullshit. Some people then thought it necessary to provide some clarifications for the benefit of gullible souls who might be taken in by that propaganda crap.Nobody had this CO2 or “mistuning” theory until after Berg pointed out that carbon monoxide from a diesel engine was bogus. Then it was, “damage control, boys—man the pumps!”
The observations of Pfannenstiel and Schluch are more than enough evidence to assume that the cause of death was actually suffocation:McCarthy/Nizkor have absolutely no evidence about the victims of the Reinhardt camps being killed by suffocation instead of CO except for Dr. Pfannenstiel’s observation that he saw some blue bodies (and the Good Doktor never admitted to seeing a gassing or a gaschamber, btw).
5.4.2.3 Alfred Schluch had worked at the euthanasia institutes of Grafeneck and Hadamar prior to his assignment to Belzec in February or March 1942. He described the routine killing procedure of the Belzec camp as follows:
After unloading, the ambulant Jews proceeded to the assembly place. At the unloading the Jews were told that they were going to be resettled and before that had to be bathed and disinfected. The speech was given by Wirth and also by his translator, a Jewish capo. Next the Jews were then led to the undressing barracks. In one of the barracks the men and in the other the Jewish women and children had to undress.
After undressing the male Jews and the women with children were led separately through the tube. ...My position in the tube was quite near the undressing barracks. Wirth had installed me there, because in his opinion I could have a pacifying effect on the Jews. I had to direct the Jews along the path to the gas chamber after they left the undressing barracks. I believe that I made the way to the gas chambers easier for the Jews, because they must have been convinced from my words or gestures that they were actually to be bathed. After the Jews had entered the gas chambers, the doors were tightly closed by Hackenholt himself or by the Ukrainians assigned to him. Then Hackenholt started the motor that was used for the gassing. After about 5 to 7 minutes--and I only estimate the length of time--the peephole into the gas chamber was looked through to establish whether everyone was dead. Only then were the outer doors opened and the gas chambers aired out. ...After the gas chambers were aired out, a Jewish work commando under the direction of a capo arrived and took the corpses out of the chambers. I was also occasionally assigned to supervise at this place. Thus I can exactly describe the procedures, because I saw and experienced everything myself.
The Jews had been very tightly packed into the gas chambers. For this reason the corpses did not lie on the ground, but all leaned in a jumble this way and that, the one backwards, the other forwards, one prone to the side, the other kneeling, each according to the space around. The corpses were at least partially besmirched with excrement and urine, others in part with saliva. The lips and nose tips of some of the corpses had turned blue. With some the eyes were closed, with others the eyes had rolled.
The corpses were pulled out of the chambers and immediately examined by one of the dentists. The dentist removed rings from the fingers and pulled out gold teeth. The valuables recovered in this way were tossed into a box that had been provided. After this procedure the corpses were thrown into the large graves nearby.
From Prof. Browning’s expert opinion submitted at the Irving-Lipstadt trial.
Source of quote:
http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/e ... .asp#5.4.2
Emphasis is mine.
Next morning, a shipment of Jews - men, women, and some children - arrived...They were ordered to strip completely and to hand over their possessions. They were informed that they were to be incorporated into a working process and must be deloused to prevent epidemics. They would also have to inhale something. After the women's hair had been cut off, the whole shipment of people was taken to a building containing six rooms. On that occasion, to my knowledge, only four [of these] were used. After these people had been shut up in the rooms, the exhaust gas from an engine was piped in. Gerstein stated that it took about eighteen minutes before quiet was restored inside. While the Jews were being taken in, the rooms were lit up with electric light and everything passed off peacefully. But when the lights were turned off, loud cries burst out inside, which then gradually died away. As soon as everything was quiet again, the doors in the outside walls were opened, the corpses were brought out, and, after being searched for gold teeth, they were stacked in a trench. Here, too, the work was done by Jews. No doctor was present. I noticed nothing special about the corpses, except that some of them showed a bluish puffiness about the face. But this is not surprising since they had died of asphyxiation.
From the deposition of Wilhelm Pfannenstiel before the Darmstadt Court, June 6, 1950.
Source of quote:
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/p/ ... fannen.001
Emphasis is mine.
The above quoted depositions are clear enough, aren’t they? The one of Pfannenstiel, incidentally, also shows Smith’s contention that “the Good Doktor never admitted to seeing a gassing or a gaschamber” to be just another of the Reverend’s transparent lies.
Cut out the obfuscating nonsense, Reverend. The question is what would have happened if B-13, where the engine had no load on it at all, had been run not with 4.56lbs/hr but with 29.63lbs/hr of fuel, with or without simultaneously restricting the air intake. Smith is again invited to demonstrate that it would not have been possible to make the fuel-air ratio sufficiently “rich” in this manner. The diesel irrelevancy is his baby, after all.Quote:
McCarthy:
“A properly-tuned diesel engine running at idle cannot kill: this is true. But unlike the locomotive engineer in Buchanan's example, who was concerned with saving the lives of trapped people, the Nazis had no qualms about opening the engine's throttle and restricting the air intake.
Pat Buchanan and the Holocaust, by Jamie McCarthy.
For one thing, an engine running at 1400 rpm, as in our test data, is not at “idle.” It is revved somewhat substantially. The difference between Test B-13 and the others to B-12 is the LOAD, and setting the throttle to meet that load. Only when the engine cannot be loaded any more does a rising fuel supply also correlate to rising CO, as my graph amply shows in the tests to the right of B-12.
Let me guess what’s in there: The “Hoaxbuster” praising Buchanan for his valiant stand against those evil Jews and exhorting his followers toHere is Berg’s article about the famous Pat Buchanan controversy at the height of the Demjanjuk affair
(“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.
http://www.codoh.org/dcforum/DCForumID9/143.html#10 ).
Am I right?
From a Usenet discussion transcribed underArticle 14309 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.delphi.com!usenet From: [email protected] Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Diesel A, B, C's and Scott Mullins Date: Mon, 25 Jul 94 23:24:56 -0500 Organization: Delphi ([email protected] email, 800-695-4005 voice) Lines: 24 Message-ID: References: <2vt3du$[email protected]> NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com X-To: Friedrich Berg
Friedrich Berg writes: >engine, Diesel engine and even the automobile. I can't really believe >that Mullins can be that stupid--but, then again, perhaps he is?
I dont believe any useful purpose is served by calling people names. Why cannot you keep this discussion at a professional level? If you are an engineer that should not be too difficult. I also happen to be a mechanical engineer with probably more years experience that many of you have. I see nothing technically wrong in accepting that a diesel engine exhausting into a closed room provided with an exhauster would fill the room with a lethal gas. The percentage of CO is not only a function of load but also of the air/fuel ratio. It is quite possible to run a diesel engine "rich" at part-load as well as at full-load. It won't be efficient but it would produce higher percentages of CO. Apart from all of this people forced into a closed chamber filled with exhaust gases would not only die from CO but would also be asphyxiated. And finally, the argument about gas producers being a better source of CO is technically correct but not practical because gas producers are basically custom-built and certainly not as readily available during the war at a camp near the war zones than diesel engines.
Let's try to cut out the emotions and keep this at a dispassionate technical level.
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/b/ ... /berg.0794
-
Scott Smith
- Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
- Location: Arizona
- Contact:
SOVIET MEDICO-LEGAL REPORT: CARBON MONOXIDE...
THE PEOPLE’S VERDICT
a full report of the proceedings at the KRASNODAR and KHARKOV
GERMAN ATROCITY TRIALS:
Hutchinson, London; NY:1944
a full report of the proceedings at the KRASNODAR and KHARKOV
GERMAN ATROCITY TRIALS:
Hutchinson, London; NY:1944
Morning Session, 17 December, 1943
“Findings of the Commission of Medico-legal Experts
“The Medico-legal experts examined in Kharkov and neighbouring localities the scenes of the crimes of the German fascist invaders—the places where they carried out the extermination of the Soviet citizens. These included the burned-out block of the army hospital, where they shot and burned war prisoners—severely wounded personnel of the Red Army; the place of the mass shooting of the healthy and sick, of small children, juveniles, young people, old men and women in the forest park of Sokolniki, near the village of Podvorki, in the Dobritsky gully, and in the therapeutic colony of Strelechye. At these sites the medico-legal experts examined the grave-pits and exhumed bodies of Soviet citizens shot, poisoned, burned or otherwise brutally exterminated.
“The medico-legal experts examined the places where the German fascist invaders burnt bodies to destroy evidence of their crimes—the poisoning with carbon monoxide. This is the site of the conflagration on the territory of the barracks of the Kharkov tractor plant. Examination of territories on which bodies were burnt or buried, examination of the grave-pits and positions of bodies in them and comparison of material thus obtained with data of the Court proceedings, provide grounds for considering that the number of bodies of murdered Soviet citizens in Kharkov and its environs reaches several tens of thousands, whereas the figure of 33,000 exterminated Soviet citizens given by accused and some witnesses is only approximate and undoubtedly too low.
“In the 13 grave-pits opened in Kharkov and its immediate vicinity were found a huge number of corpses. In most graves they lay in extreme disorder, fantastically intertwined, forming tangles of human bodies defying description. The corpses lay in such a manner that they can be said to have been dumped or heaped but not buried in common graves. In two pits in the Sokolniki forest park bodies were found lying in straight rows, face downward, arms bent at the elbow and hands pressed to faces or necks. All the bodies had bullet wounds through the heads. Such a position of the bodies was not accidental. It proves that the victims were forced to lie down face downward and were shot in that position. In the grave pits where the bodies lay and in places where the bodies had been burnt the medico-legal experts found articles of everyday use and personal effects, such as bags, sacks, knives, pots, mugs, spectacles, fasteners of women’s handbags, etc. The fact revealed by the investigation—namely, that before being murdered Soviet citizens were stripped of their footwear—is fully confirmed by the medico-legal examinations: during exhumation the experts in most cases discovered naked or half-naked bodies.
“In order to ascertain which Soviet citizens were exterminated and in what manner, the experts exhumed and examine 1,047 bodies in Kharkov and its environs. These included the bodies of 19 children and adolescents, 429 women and 599 men. The dead ranged in age from two to 70 years. The fact that the bodies of children, adolescents, women and old men as well as invalids were discovered in grave-pits with civilian clothes and articles of domestic use and personal effects on the bodies or near them, proves that the German fascist authorities exterminated Soviet citizens regardless of sex or age. On the other hand, the fact that the bodies of young and middle-age men were found clothes of military cut worn in the Red Army, also articles of military equipment (pots, mugs, belts, etc.) is evidence of Soviet war prisoners.
“The extermination of Soviet people (civilians and war prisoners) was effected by means of poisoning with carbon monoxide, shooting, burning, and killing with blunt, hard and heavy instruments. All this has been established absolutely and irrefutably, by the material of the preliminary investigation., the Court proceedings, and proved by the medico-legal experts with scientific objectivity.
“The depositions of the accused and the witnesses state that in various parts of the temporarily occupied territory of the U.S.S.R. the German fascist invaders used specially equipped large vans in the bodies of which Soviet citizens were murdered by exhaust gases containing carbon monoxide. The medico-legal experts proved this beyond doubt for the first time when examining bodies exhumed in the town of Krasnodar and in its vicinity. At the same time the presence of carbon monoxide was irrefutably established by a combination of physiological, chemical and spectroscopic tests of the blood in the tissues and organs of the corpses. The same method of poisoning with carbon monoxide as was used in Krasnodar has been proved by medico-legal examination of some of the bodies exhumed in Kharkov.
“The lorry which came to be known as the ‘gas van’ or ‘murder van,’ designed to exterminate people inside its air-tight body by means of exhaust gases, must be regarded as a mechanical method for the simultaneous poisoning of large groups of people.
“Investigation and medico-legal examinations has established that in addition to poisoning with carbon monoxide, the Germans applied on a large scale, in Kharkov and its environs, mass shooting from automatic firearms, firing as a rule into the back of the head, the back of the neck and the spine.
“Examination of bodies has also proved that there were cases of killing by means of the smashing of the skull and destruction of the cerebral cortex by blows by blows from blunt, hard and heavy implements.
“It should be noted that in Kharkov gravely wounded Soviet war prisoners were exterminated in an especially painful manner by means of burning in combination with shooting. This has been proved by the data of the preliminary investigation, the Court proceedings, and also by medical examination of parts of corpses found on the site of the burnt-down block of the army hospital when, in particular, soot was discovered in the respiratory tract of a charred body, which indicates that the victim was subjected to the action of smoke and fire when still alive.
“The German fascist invaders tried to cover up the evidence of their crimes, in the first place of poisoning with carbon monoxide, by burning the bodies of poisoned persons. However, the material of the investigation and discovery of portions of skeletons of bodies which were burnt on the territory of the barracks of the Kharkov tractor plant, prove the fact of the burning of bodies.
“On the basis of all the combined data of their proceedings—the medico-legal experts have established the presence of:
“(a) A vast number of burial sites in the city of Kharkov and its immediate environs.
“(b) A huge number of bodies in the grave-pits.
“(c) Varying times of burial in various graves.
“(d) Varying degrees of preservation of the bodies in the same graves.
“(e) Distinction of bodies in regard to sex and age.
“(f) Uniformity of methods of extermination of human beings.
“We regard the above as proofs of systematic, methodically organized, mass extermination of Soviet civilians and war prisoners.
“Chief medico-legal expert of the People’s Commissariat for Health Protection of the U.S.S.R., Director of the State Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Medicine under the People’s Commissariat for Health Protection of the U.S.S.R. Prozorovsky.
“Professor of Forensic Medicine at the Second Moscow Medical Institute, Doctor of Medical Science Smolyaninov.
“Snr. Staff Scientist of the tanatological department of the State Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Medicine of the Commissariat of Health of the U.S.S.R, Dr. Semenovsky.
“Chief medico-legal expert of the 69th Army, major of Medical Service Gorodnichenko.
“Pathologist-anatomist Major of Medical Service Yakusha.
“After the translation of the finding of the medico-legal experts in to the German language, the President, Justiciary Major-General Miasnikov, declared the Court proceedings concluded.”
(Op Cit, pp. 110-111. Emphasis added.)
Thanks for the insight into the Kharkov massacres as examined by a Soviet investigation commission (though the empases are somewhat misleading: it becomes apparent from reading the document as a whole that the Soviet commission found only a part of the established number of victims to have been killed by carbon monoxide in gas vans).
A few documents and testimonials from the German side, though not necessarily related to Kharkov, will serve to round up the picture:
http://www.ns-archiv.de/einsatzgruppen/ ... auff.shtml
See also the thread
Inside the RSHA
http://thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/viewt ... 9d6db03d04
of this forum.
From a report by the Wehrmacht commander for the Eastern territories (Wehrmachtsbefehlshaber Ostland) dated 19.11.1941:
The following quotes are from the book book Tote Zonen. Die deutsche Wehrmacht an der Ostfront, by German historian Hannes Heer, Hamburg 1999.
Page 101: From the diary of corporal Werner Bergholz
http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/einsatz.html
From OPERATIONAL SITUATION REPORT USSR No. 173:
http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/osr173.html
From OPERATIONAL SITUATION REPORT USSR No. 143:
http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/osr143.html
From OPERATIONAL SITUATION REPORT USSR No. 128
http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/osr128.html
Last but not least, an excerpt from Rosenberg’s official complaint to Keitel of 28 February 1942 about such policies and their results:
Source of quote:
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/pow2.htm
The writings of British historian Richard Overy, Russia’s War, Penguin Books 1998, also give an idea of what German occupation policies in the occupied territories of the Soviet Union were about:
Pages 125/126
Pages 133/134
A few documents and testimonials from the German side, though not necessarily related to Kharkov, will serve to round up the picture:
The above was translated from the transcription of the original text underFeldpostnummer 32 704
Kiev, 16 May 1942
B. Nr. 40/42 -
Secret Reich Matter
To
SS-Obersturmbannführer Rauff
in Berlin
Prinz-Albrecht-Str. 8
The overhauling of the vans of Groups D and C is concluded. While the vans of the first series can also be used when the weather is not all too bad, the vans of the second series (Saurer) are completely immobilized in rainy weather. This because if it has been raining for only half an hour the van cannot be operated because it simply slips away. It can only be used in good weather. The question now arises if the van can only be used at the place of execution standing. The van must first be brought to that place, which is possible only in good weather. The place of execution, however, is located at least 10-15 km away from the traffic routes and is already difficult to access due to its location; in bad weather it is inaccessible altogether. If those to be executed are led or driven to this place, they notice immediately what is going on and become restless, which should be avoided. The only remaining possibility is to load them in at the place of assembly and then to drive them out.
I ordered the vans of group D to be camouflaged as house trailers by putting one set of window shutters on each side of the small van and two on each side of the large vans, such as one often sees on farm houses in the country. The vans became so well known that not only the authorities but also the civilian population called the van "death van", as soon as one of these vehicles appeared. It is my opinion the van cannot be kept secret for any length of time, not even camouflaged.
The Saurer van that I transferred from Simferopol to Taganrog had a brake damage on the way. At the S.K. [Spezialkommando = special unit] in Mariupol it was verified that the flange [Manchete] of the combined oil and compressed air brake was broken in several places. Through persuasion and bribe at the H. K. P. it was possible to have turned a form after which two flanges were forged. When I came to Stalino and Gorlovka a few days later, the drivers of the vans complained about the same damage. After consulting the commanders of these special units I went again to Mariupol in order to have further flanges for these vans manufactured. It was agreed to forge two flanges for each of these vans, while 6 flanges remained as a reserve in Mariupol for the Group, and 6 flanges were sent to SS-Untersturmführer Ernst for the vans of Group C to Kiev. For the groups B and A the flanges could be obtained from Berlin, because the transport from Mariupol to the north is still too cumbersome and would last too long. Smaller damages on the vans are repaired by technicians of the special units or groups or in a workshop.
Due to the uneven terrain and the hard to describe road conditions the sealing and rivet places loosen after some time. I was asked if in such cases the vans can be sent to Berlin for repair. Such a transfer would be much too expensive and cost too much fuel. To save this expense I gave the instruction to rivet smaller leaking parts on site and, if this was no longer possible, to immediately inform Berlin by radio that van Pol. No. …. had broken down.
Besides that, I ordered that during application of gas all the men were to be kept as far away from the vans as possible, so they should not suffer damage to their health by the gas which eventually would escape. I should like to take this opportunity to bring the following to your attention: several commands have had the unloading after the application of gas done by their own men. I brought to the attention of the special units concerned the immense psychological injuries and damages involved to their health that this work can have for those men, even if not immediately, at least later on. The men complained to me about headaches, which appeared after each unloading. Nevertheless they don't want to change the orders, because they are afraid prisoners called for that work could use an opportune moment to flee. To protect the men from these damages, I request orders to be issued accordingly.
The application of the gas is not undertaken correctly. In order to come to an end as fast as possible, the driver presses the accelerator to the fullest extent. By doing that the persons to be executed suffer death from suffocation and not death by dozing off as was planned. My directions have now proved that by correct adjustment of the levers death comes faster and the prisoners fall asleep peacefully. Distorted faces and excretions, such as could be seen before, are no longer noticed.
In the course of this day I will travel on to Group B, where further news may reach me.
Dr. Becker
SS-Untersturmführer
http://www.ns-archiv.de/einsatzgruppen/ ... auff.shtml
See also the thread
Inside the RSHA
http://thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/viewt ... 9d6db03d04
of this forum.
From a report by the Wehrmacht commander for the Eastern territories (Wehrmachtsbefehlshaber Ostland) dated 19.11.1941:
The above was translated from: Ernst Klee/Willi Dreßen, “Gott mit uns”: Der deutsche Vernichtungskrieg im Osten 1939-1945, 1989 S. Fischer Verlag GmbH, Frankfurt am Main, page 55Total number of prisoners: 10 940, of whom 10 431 were shot.
Booty made: 13 tents
11 (light) machine guns
21 automatic rifles
28 infantry rifles
8 machine pistols
19 pistols and revolvers
2 signal pistols
Ammunition, hand grenades, explosive powder, radios, tools, food, other equipment
On a cleaning operation in the area of Sluzk-Kleck the Reserve Police Battalion 11 shot
5 900 Jews.
The following quotes are from the book book Tote Zonen. Die deutsche Wehrmacht an der Ostfront, by German historian Hannes Heer, Hamburg 1999.
Page 101: From the diary of corporal Werner Bergholz
My translation:Krieg mit Rußland. 31.6.1941. Als wir am 29. Juni nach Rowno kamen, wurden alle Geschäfte geplündert, jeder schleppte mit, was ihm unter die Finger kam. (...) 1.7. Heute schlachteten wir ein Schwein. Wir konnten auch ein Faß Bier auftreiben. Was kann man sich besseres wünschen? (...) 2.7. Nachts wurden zwei unserer Wachen erschossen. Hundert Menschen wurden dafür an die Wand gestellt. Es dürften alles Juden gewesen sein.”
From the diary of Major Reich:War with Russia. 31.6.1941. When we came to Rovno on 29 June, all shops were plundered, everyone took along whatever he could lay his hands on. (...) 1.7. Today we slaughtered a pig. We also found a barrel of beer. What more can you ask for ? (...) 2.7. At night two of our guards were shot. A hundred people were stood against the wall [= executed] for this. They were probably all Jews.
My translation:2.7.1941 Juden erschossen. 3.7. Wir brechen auf. 22 russische Soldaten, einige verwundet, werden im Hof eines Bauern erschossen. Fruchtbares Tal, Windmühlen. (...) 9.7. Kommissar von einer MG-Abteilung erledigt. (...) 12.7. Hübsche, ordentliche Dörfer. Ein Streifschuß von hinten auf meinem Stahlhelm. Dafür sterben drei Dorfbewohner. 13.7. Ein deutscher Luftwaffensoldat getötet, 50 Juden erschossen.
Page 311: From the diary of another German soldier2.7.1941 Jews were shot. 3.7. We are getting on move. 22 Russian soldiers, some of them wounded, are shot in a peasant’s yard. Fertile valley, windmills. (...) 9.7. A commissar was liquidated by a machine gun detachment. (...) 12.7. Pretty, orderly villages. A touching shot from behind on my steel helmet. Three villagers die for this. 13.7. A German air force soldier killed, 50 Jews shot.
My translation:25.7. Verwundeten Russen im Chauseegraben den Gnadenschuß gegeben, Gefangene werden nicht gemacht. 2.8. Partisanen haben die Eisenbahnlinie zerstört; alle Einwohner des Dorfes wurden an die Wand gestellt, ihr Schicksal ist gewiß.
Page 114: From the diary of the guard of a prisoner of war camp, Feldersatz-Bataillon XVII/6:25.7. Gave wounded Russians the grace shot in the ditch by the street, prisoners are not made. 2.8. Partisans destroyed the railway line; all inhabitants of the village are stood against the wall; their fate is certain.
My translation:11.12.1941 Tag und Nacht Wache schieben. Am Morgen, gegen 9 Uhr, marschierte eine Kompanie vorbei mit unserem Oberleutnant. Dieser (...) hatte befohlen, drei Russen aus dem Lager zu erschießen. 12 Männer wurden für das Erschießungskommando ausgesucht.
(...)
19.12.1941 Um 1 Uhr nachmittags wurden vier weitere Russen erschossen. Ich sollte an der Erschießung teilnehmen, aber da ich andere Russen zu bewachen hatte, konnte ich nicht weg. Alle Gefangenen mußten zuschauen, wie vier von uns vier von ihnen erschossen. (...) Weil zwei Gefangene während der Exekution zu fliehen versuchten, verwirkten weitere vier ihr Leben auf der Stelle.
21.12.41 Russe bei Fluchtversuch erschossen.
29.12.41 Um 12 Uhr erlitt ein weiterer Russe dieTodesstrafe.
11.1.42 Morgens hängten wir fünf Männer und erschossen zwei Frauen. Es gab guten Eintopf. 120 Russen wurden in Begleitung von vier Soldaten und zwei Polizisten nach Borisowka losgeschickt.
14.1.42 Besuchte morgens den Gottesdienst. Steckte 50 Pfennig in den Opferstock.
21.1.42 Um 8 Uhr erschossen wir acht Männer und eine Frau.
23.1.42 Abends erhielt ich Post von zu Hause - von meiner Frau und den Angehörigen. Der Brief enthielt die ersten Zeilen, die mein Sohn geschrieben hatte.
(...)
25.1.42 15 Russen am Nachmittag erschossen. (...)
27.1.42 Morgens fünf erschossen (...)
2.2.42 Sechs erschossen. Eine Gans gebraten. Sehr lecker.
3.2.42 Wir erschossen zwei Frauen und zwei Männer (...)
6.2.42 Einen Mann erschossen. Eintopf gekocht (...)
7.2.42 Auf Wache wie üblich. Während meines Dienstes wurde ein Mann erhängt im Keller gefunden. Später am Tag hängten sie einen anderen auf, direkt neben ihm. (...)
Other illustrative German documents are the Operational Situation Reports USSR, translations of some of which are transcribed under the link11.12.1941 On guard duty day and night. In the morning, around 9 hours, a company marched past us with our first lieutenant. He (...) had ordered to shoot three Russians from the camp. 12 men were chosen for the firing squad.
(...)
19.12.1942 A 1 hour in the afternoon another four Russians were shot. I was to take part in the shooting, but as I had other Russians to watch, I couldn’t get away. All prisoners had to watch four of us shooting four of them. (...) As two prisoners tried to flee during the execution, another four immediately forfeited their lives.
21.12.41 A Russian was shot while trying to escape.
29.12.41 At 12 hours another Russian suffered the death penalty.
11.1.42 In the morning we hanged two men and shot five women. We had a good stew. 120 Russians were sent to Borisovka accompanied by four soldiers and two policemen.
14.1.42 In the morning I attended mass. I gave 50 pfennigs to charity.
21.1.42 At 8 hours we shot eight men and one woman.
23.1.42 In the evening I got mail from home – from my wife and the relatives. The letter contained the first lines that my son had written.
(...)
25.1.42 Shot 15 Russians in the afternoon. (...)
27.1.43 Shot five in the morning. (...)
2.2.43 Shot six. Roasted a goose. Very delicious.
3.2.42 We shot two women and two men (...)
6.2.42 Shot one man. Cooked stew. (...)
7.2.43 On guard as usual. While I was on duty they found one man hanged in the cellar. Later in the day they hanged another, right next to him. (...)
http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/einsatz.html
From OPERATIONAL SITUATION REPORT USSR No. 173:
Source of quote:Einsatzgruppe C
Location: Kiev
During the period January 14 to February 12, 1942, 861 people were shot by order of the Summary Court by Sonderkommando 4b. Of this number, 649 were political officials, 52 saboteurs and partisans, and 139 Jews.
The number of Summary Court shootings carried out by Einsatzkommando 5 during the period January 12 to January 24, 1942 totalled 104 political officials, 75 saboteurs and looters, and about 8,000 Jews. In the past weeks, Einsatzkommando 6 shot 173 political officials, 56 saboteurs and looters, and 149 Jews.
In Dniepropetrovsk particular importance has recently been attached to combatting the numerous habitual criminals. On February 14, 1942, it was possible, in collaboration with the Ukrainian militia, to arrest 25 capital offenders, some of whom were escaped prisoners. Among those arrested were two of the main perpetrators of a mass murder, and a document forger who was particularly skilled in the art of making German and Ukrainian official seals.
During the period January 10 to February 6, 1942, in Dniepropetrovsk, 17 habitual criminals, 103 Communist officials, 16 partisans, and about 350 Jews were shot by order of the Summary Court.
In addition, 400 inmates of the Igrin mental hospital and 320 inmates of the Vasilkova mental hospital were disposed of.
http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/osr173.html
From OPERATIONAL SITUATION REPORT USSR No. 143:
Source of quote:Einsatzgruppe C
Location: Kiev
..........
Security police measures of the Einsatzkommandos
On November 9, 1941, the number of people executed by SK 4a amounted to 97,243.
On November 7, 1941, a Teilkommando of Sk 4a shot 385 Jews after summary proceedings in Gornostaipol. The Jews had mostly been rounded up from the surrounding villages. On their way back to Kiev, the same Kommando on the same day shot 120 Jews in Dymer and 30 Jews and partisans in Oster. In cooperation with the German Army, this action was carried out without incident.
From October 31, 1941 to November 5, 1941, the SK shot a total of 740 people after summary proceedings, among them:
3 political officials
1 saboteur
137 Jews
599 mentally ill persons
This action was carried out without difficulties due to the advance preparations. The farm freed after the greater part of the inmates of the Poltava lunatic asylum had been shot is primarily used by the local field hospitals. Underwear, clothing, and household articles have also been placed at the disposal of the field hospitals. The remaining 200 inmates of the asylum, who are incurable, have been sent to work in the agricultural plant.
A Teilkommando of SK 4b has started to purge the prison camp in Losovaya.
The total number of persons shot after summary proceedings by Einsatzkommando 5 on November 10, 1941, amounted to 2,514.
Between November 2 and November 18, 1941, EK5 shot
15 political officials
21 saboteurs and looters
10,650 Jews
and 424 hostages.
The hostages were shot by agreement with the Military Commander of Kiev in retaliation for increased incidents of arson and sabotage. In a proclamation to the population of Kiev, the City Commander publicized the shooting of the hostages. He also stressed that for every new case of arson and sabotage, a large number of people would be shot. Furthermore, he stressed that it was the duty of all the inhabitants to report immediately to the German police any suspicious thing they observe.
Since November 6 and 7, 1941, an action against the Jews that had been prepared for some time was carried out in Rovno, where about 15,000 Jews were shot. According to the orders of Higher SS and Police Chiefs, the organization of this action was in the hands of the German Order Police. Aussenkommando Rovno of Einsatzkommando 5 participated substantially in carrying out this Aktion.
From October 26, 1941 to November 11, 1941, EK 6, after summary proceedings, shot:
26 political officials
10 saboteurs and looters
43 Jews;
in the period November 3 to 9, 1941:
20 political officials
3 saboteurs
113 Jews;
and from November 10 to 16, 1941:
4 political officials
10 saboteurs and looters
and 47 Jews.
The total number of people whom EK 6 executed between November 17 and 23, 1941, amounts to 105, including
24 political officials
20 saboteurs and looters
61 Jews.
http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/osr143.html
From OPERATIONAL SITUATION REPORT USSR No. 128
Source of quote:Einsatzgruppe C
Location: Kiev
...............
Execution activities
As to purely execution matters, approximately 80,000 person have been liquidated by now by the Kommandos of the Einsatzgruppe.
Among these are approximately 8,000 person convicted after investigation of anti-German or Bolshevist activities.
The remainder was liquidated in retaliatory actions.
Several retaliatory measures were carried out as large-scale actions. The largest of these actions took place immediately after the occupation of Kiev. It was carried out exclusively against Jews and their entire families.
The difficulties resulting from such a large-scale action, in particular concerning the round-up, were overcome in Kiev by requesting the Jewish population to assemble, using wall posters. Although at first only the participation of 5-6000 Jews had been expected, more than 30,000 Jews arrived who, until the moment of their execution, still believed in their resettlement, thanks to extremely clever organization [propaganda].
Even though approximately 75,000 Jews have been liquidated in this manner, it is evident at this time that this cannot be the best solution of the Jewish problem. Although we succeeded, particularly in smaller towns and villages, in bringing about a complete liquidation of the Jewish problem, nevertheless, again and again it has been observed in the larger cities that after such an action, all Jews have indeed been eradicated. But, when after a certain period of time a Kommando returns, the number of Jews still found in the city always surpasses considerably the number of executed Jews.
Besides, the Kommandos have also carried out military actions in numerous cases. On request of the Army, separate platoons of the Kommandos have repeatedly combed the woods searching for partisans, and have accomplished successful work there.
Besides, prisoners-of-war marching along the highways were systematically overtaken [by the Kommandos of the EG]. All those elements were liquidated who did not possess identification papers and who were suspected, once set free, of [possibly] committing acts of sabotage against the German Army, the German authorities, or the population. In numerous cases, systematic searches for parachutists were carried out, with the result that approximately 20 parachutists were captured, among them a Russian who, at his interrogation supplied extremely important information to the Army.
Finally, it should be mentioned that prisoners-of-war were taken over from the prisoner assembly points and the prisoner-of-war transit camps, although at times, considerable disagreements with the camp commander occurred.
http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/osr128.html
Last but not least, an excerpt from Rosenberg’s official complaint to Keitel of 28 February 1942 about such policies and their results:
It is understood, of course, that there are difficulties encountered in the feeding of such a large number of prisoners of war. Anyhow, with a certain amount of understanding for goals aimed at by German politics, dying and deterioration could have been avoided in the extent described. For instance, according to information on hand, the native population within the Soviet Union are absolutely willing to put food at the disposal of the prisoners of war. Several understanding camp commanders have successfully chosen this course. However in the majority of the cases, the camp commanders have forbidden the civilian population to put food at the disposal of the prisoners, and they have rather let them starve to death. Even on the march to the camps, the civilian population was not allowed to give the prisoners of war food. In many cases, when prisoners of war could no longer keep up on the march because of hunger and exhaustion, they were shot before the eyes of the horrified civilian population, and the corpses were left. In numerous camps, no shelter for the prisoners of war was provided at all. They lay under the open sky during rain or snow. Even tools were not made available to dig holes or caves. A systematic delousing of the prisoners of war in the camps and of the camps themselves has apparently been missed. Utterances such as these have been heard: "The more of these prisoners die, the better it is for us."
Source of quote:
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/pow2.htm
The writings of British historian Richard Overy, Russia’s War, Penguin Books 1998, also give an idea of what German occupation policies in the occupied territories of the Soviet Union were about:
Pages 125/126
Page 132In August 1941 the commander of Einsatzgruppe B, Artur Nebe, called up experts from the Criminal Technical Institute to help him solve a problem. A short while before, Heinrich Himmler had visited the Belorussian capital of Minsk to witness the execution of a hundred ‘saboteurs’. It was the first time he had seen men killed, shot a dozen at a time face down in an open pit. He asked Nebe to test other methods that were less brutalizing to those who carried out the executions. The experts drove to Russia in trucks filled with explosives and gassing equipment. The morning after their arrival they drove out to a wood outside Minsk, where they packed two wooden bunkers with 250 kilograms of explosive and twenty mental patients from a Soviet asylum. The first attempt to blow them up failed, and the wounded and frightened victims were packed into the bunkers with a further 100 grams of explosive. This time they were blown to smithereens, and Jewish prisoners were forced to scour the area picking up the human remains. The group then tried a different method at an asylum in Mogilev. Here they herded mental patients into a bricked-up laboratory, into which they inserted a pipe connected to a car exhaust. Fumes from the car took too long to kill the victims, and the car was swapped for a truck, which could generate a larger volume of fumes. The victims died in eight minutes. Gas killing became the preferred option. Altogether an estimated 10,000 died in asylums across German-occupied territory: men, women and children.
These murderous experiments were part of a programme of ethnic cleansing and ‘counterinsurgency’ in the East that led to the deaths of millions of Jews, Soviet prisoners of war, captured Communists, partisans and ordinary people caught in the crossfire of ideological and racial war – a harvest of dead unparalleled in the history of modern war.
[…]
[…]
The conquest of the Eastern territories was a gigantic colonial war, not a war to emancipate the peoples of Eurasia. Hitler saw the German future in the East in terms of colonial exploitation. A German governing class would rule the region, supported by a network of garrison cities – rather like the fortified towns of the Roman empire – around which would cluster settlements of German farmers and traders. Plans were drawn up for a web of high-speed motorways to link the regional centres with Berlin and a wide-gauge double-checked railway, around which would sweep the new imperial élite through land tilled by modern helots, millions of Slavs laboring for the master race. Any of the new colonial peoples surplus to the requirements of the empire were to be transported to Slavlands beyond the Urals or left to die.”
[…]
Pages 133/134
The exact number of Ukrainians who died at the hands of the German occupiers will probably never be known. Death was meted out arbitrarily. Peasants who, when questioned by German officials, admitted to being able to read and write were liable to be shot as ‘intellectuals’. Farmers who withheld food stocks or refused to work in the fields for the Germans were hanged as an example to the rest. In the district of Rivne the German farm administrators introduced flogging for everything from slack work to the failure of peasants to remove their caps in the presence of the Germans; they imposed curfews; the carrying of a knife was punishable by death. Thousands of peasants were hanged or shot for suspected partisan activity. Throughout the Ukraine 250 villages and their populations were deliberately obliterated to encourage good behavior in the rest.
Thousands more died of starvation. The seizure of food supplies to feed the vast German army and its hundreds of thousands of horses left the cities of the conquered regions desperately short of food. In the Ukraine it was decided to eliminate ‘superfluous eaters’, primarily Jews and the populations of the cities. In Kiev the meagre food ration was cut sharply (200 grams of bread per week), roadblocks were set up to prevent food from entering the city and the collective-farm markets supplying the city were suspended. As the supply of food reached famine levels, the peoples of the East were denied effective medical care. In Kharkov around 80,000 died of starvation, in Kiev almost certainly more.”
[…]