John Wear writes on another posting:

My response: I will make comments for the Defense as needed.

Great. Just to go over the situation…this will be a mock *civil* trial, not a mock *criminal* trial.

I’m not a lawyer, but based on general knowledge and my *one* experience sitting on the jury of a civil trial, the biggest difference between the two is that a civil trial has a burden of proof of “a preponderance of evidence”. That is, if the juror(s) think that it is more likely than not (i.e. greater than a 50% chance) that one side is right, they should vote for that side. In contrast, a criminal trial requires proof “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

The most famous example of the difference is the O.J. Simpson criminal trial for murder of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, and the O.J. Simpson civil trial for “wrongful deaths” of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. Simpson was found “not guilty” in the criminal trial (because the jurors apparently agreed there wasn’t proof “beyond a reasonable doubt”) but was found liable for wrongful deaths in the civil trial, and forced to pay damages to the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman.

From the original posting, here is the Complaint:

OK, here is my *preliminary* complaint, as the Plaintiff’s lawyer. The defendants (Nazis), between 1942 and January 1945, engaged in at least 40,000 instances of:

1) Kidnapping (from Yugoslavia and Greece);
2) Wrongful transport of my clients out of their countries;
3) Wrongful imprisonment in Auschwitz;
4) Wrongful death;
5) Wrongful death specifically through use of Zyklon B in a homicidal gas chamber.

Note: I separated the complaint so the jury can decide whether there was any wrongful death at all, and specifically whether it was wrongful death by Zyklon B in a homicidal gas chamber.

My clients include (but are not limited to): Shlomo Venezia, a Sephardic Jew who was taken from Greece to Auschwitz with his two sisters and mother; the family of Reuven and Gershon Fogel and their mother, who were taken to Auschwitz in 1944; the family of Gerty Ackerman and her sister Wally and their mother, who were also taken from Hungary to Auschwitz in 1944; and 40,000 Jewish children who were taken from Hungary to Auschwitz from May to July 1944.

OK, here is my *preliminary* complaint, as the Plaintiff’s lawyer. The defendants, between 1942 and January 1945, engaged in at least 40,000 instances of:

1) Kidnapping (from Yugoslavia and Greece);
2) Wrongful transport of my clients out of their countries;
3) Wrongful imprisonment in Auschwitz;
4) Wrongful death;
5) Wrongful death specifically through use of Zyklon B in a homicidal gas chamber.

Note: I separated the complaint so the jury can decide whether there was any wrongful death at all, and specifically whether it was wrongful death by Zyklon B in a homicidal gas chamber.

My clients include (but are not limited to): Shlomo Venezia, a Sephardic Jew who was taken from Greece to Auschwitz with his two sisters and mother; the family of Reuven and Gershon Fogel and their mother, who were taken to Auschwitz in 1944; the family of Gerty Ackerman and her sister Wally and their mother, who were also ; and 40,000 Jewish children who were taken from Hungary to Auschwitz from May to July 1944.

I’d like to have discussion constituting a “mock trial” for Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz. However, my comments on this post do not seem to be showing up.

Holocaust revisionists state that: 1) there were no homicidal gas chambers in any of the German concentration camps; 2) Germany did not have a program of genocide against the Jews; and 3) the standard estimate of 6 million Jews who died during World War II is a ridiculous exaggeration.

These are the issues I would like to focus on in this mock trial. I and most other Holocaust revisionists do not dispute the first three charges in your complaint.

In regard to your first three charges, the Allies committed these crimes and much more against Germans after the war. These Allied crimes vastly exceed the crimes Germany committed against Jews and other people during the war. Let’s examine what the Allies did to the Germans after World War II.

German deaths after the war can be divided into three groups of people. The first group is the German POWs in both Europe and the Soviet Union. The second group is the German expellees, and the third group is the Germans already residing in Germany. While no one will ever know how many Germans died from 1945 to 1950, it is certain that the deaths far exceed most traditional estimates. The great majority of these deaths were caused by the lethal policies imposed by the Allies on Germany after the war.

As documented in Chapter 5 of my book “Germany’s War”, a conservative estimate of German deaths in the Allied prisoner-of war (POW) camps is 1.5 million. This includes over 517,000 POW deaths in the Soviet Union, 100,000 POW deaths in Yugoslavia, Poland and other countries, with the remaining POW deaths in U.S. and French camps. The Germans who died in these Allied POW camps suffered miserably from exposure, disease, and slow starvation. This well-documented Allied atrocity is still denied by most historians today.

As discussed in Chapter 6 of my book “Germany’s War”, probably a minimum of 2.1 million German expellees died in what was supposed to be an “orderly and humane” transfer. The estimate of 2.1 million German expellee deaths is acknowledged to be valid by most traditional historians. Notable authorities have estimated a much higher number of German expellee deaths.

For example, Konrad Adenauer, the first Chancellor of West Germany, estimated that 6 million German expellees died. Adenauer stated:

“According to American figures a total of 13.3 million Germans were expelled from the Eastern parts of Germany, from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and so on. 7.3 million [German expellees] arrived in the Eastern zone and the three Western zones, most of these in the latter. Six million Germans have vanished from the earth. They are dead, gone. Most of the 7.3 million who stayed alive are women, children, and old people.” (Source: Adenauer, Konrad, Memoirs, 1945-1953, translated by Beate Ruhm von Oppen, Chicago: Henry Regnery Co., 1966, p. 148).

An estimated 5.7 million Germans already residing in Germany also died from the starvation policies implemented by the Allies. James Bacque details how this 5.7 million death total is calculated:

“The population of all occupied Germany in October 1946 was 65,000,000, according to the census prepared under the ACC. The returning prisoners who were added to the population in the period October 1946-September 1950 numbered 2,600,000 (rounded), according to records in the archives of the four principal Allies. Births according to the official German statistical agency, Statistisches Bundesamt, added another 4,176,430 newcomers to Germany. The expellees arriving totaled 6,000,000. Thus the total population in 1950 before losses would have been 77,776,430, according to the Allies themselves. Deaths officially recorded in the period 1946-50 were 3,235,539, according to the UN Yearbook and the German government. Emigration was about 600,000, according to the German government. Thus the population found should have been 73,940,891. But the census of 1950 done by the German government under Allied supervision found only 68,230,796. There was a shortage of 5,710,095 people, according to the official Allied figures (rounded to 5,700,000).” (Source: Bacque, James, Crimes and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950, 2nd edition, Vancouver, British Columbia: Talonbooks, 2007, pp. 115-116).

Bacque’s calculations have been confirmed by Dr. Anthony B. Miller, who is a world-famous epidemiologist and Head of the Department of Preventive Medicine and Biostatistics at the University of Toronto. Miller read the whole work, including the documents, and checked the statistics, which he says “confirms the validity of [Bacque’s] calculations…” Miller states: “These deaths appear to have resulted, directly or indirectly, from the semi-starvation food rations that were all that were available to the majority of the German population during this time period.” (Source: Ibid., pp. xvii-xviii).

The sum of 1.5 million German POWs, 2.1 million German expellees, and 5.7 million German residents equals the minimum estimate of 9.3 million Germans who died needlessly after the war. This is far more Germans than died during the Second World War. Millions of these Germans slowly starved to death while the Allies withheld available food. The majority of these postwar dead Germans were women, children and very old men. Their deaths have never been honestly reported by the Allies, the German government, or most historians.

The German dead do not tell the entire story of the tragedy that was inflicted on Germany after World War II. Millions of German women who had been repeatedly raped had to bear the physical and psychological scars for the rest of their lives. Millions of German expellees who lost all of their real estate and most of their personal property were never compensated by the Allies. Instead, they had to live in abject poverty in Germany after the expulsion from their homes. Millions of other Germans had their property stolen or destroyed by Allied soldiers. The Allied postwar treatment of Germany is surely one of the most brutal, criminal, and unreported tragedies in world history.

So, I want to focus in this mock trial on what Holocaust revisionists actually contest: 1) that there were no homicidal gas chambers in any of the German concentration camps; 2) Germany did not have a program of genocide against the Jews; and 3) the standard estimate of 6 million Jews who died during World War II is a ridiculous exaggeration.

Mr Wear, I am with you on your areas of concern.

And I want it to be a criminal trial, nothing less!

Why? Because in a civil trial the Preponderance of the Evidence can be quite nebulous.

I gather from Mr Bahner’s postings that for him Preponderance of Evidence is the number of people he can line up on his side to shout “Germans baaad”, they killed my third cousin thrice removed in…

Before I enter into any dialogue with him I want him to answer the three main concerns I posted in the other forum.

As a matter of fact, I want him to answer all the points you raised in your article about the Zundel trials in Toronto.

I’m certain that without this path we would only have another thread with 2300 posts, but no answers, as happened on the much earlier thread in Mr Unz’s American Pravda section.

How can there be Holocaust debate when you go to jail in more and more countries when you say the “wrong” things?
The debate is over. Gods chosen psychos have won. And don’t you dare to ask for God’s proof.

Europa the last battle 10 part doc i thought really sumed it up from me along with audio speeches from george lincoln rockwell from the 60’s and an article from andrea carter from jewworldorder.org describing the jews hatred for whites and y they use the so called holocaust narritive to basically have an excuse kill whites and kill white nations so the power jews can enslave the rest and have their own utopia..

Dear ladies and gentlemen!

For your interest – information on past debates concerning this topic (what I found).

1) Weber – Shermer (report)

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n1p22_Weber.html

2) Dalton – Cockerill

https://codoh.com/media/files/images/cockerill_holo_debate_-_full_text-compressed.pdf

Bonus 1: A page from well-known blog that includes discussions (indistinct) with Dr. Dalton.

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/p/holocaust-deniers.html

Bonus 2: An audio debate concerning revisionism between Friedrich P. Berg and Roberto Muehlenkamp (I didn’t listen- I’m not very good at listening to spoken English)

https://codoh.com/library/document/online-radio-debates-on-revisionism/en/

P.S. I see no a priori reason not to trust people, so Dr. Dalton will remain a doctor in this post, even though it is a pseudonym.

Good luck to the debaters – let truth prevail

I know we’re not on speaking (writing) terms any longer, but we are all anxiously waiting for your opening statement. In all seriousness. Do you need a continuance already?

I promise to shut up once proceedings begin.

Do we know who was responsible for sorting through clothing/material after de-lousing and if there were any established protocols for that process?

I can’t find anything on it.

The holocaust debate? It is a fact that’s never existed. The debate should be why and who wants us to believe it.

You really are a self-hating Jew, Ron. So sad…

How do you know the defendants engaged in those things? You’ve now remembered it 70 years later but were saying nothing 5, 10, 20 years afterwards?

You sickening troll, meandodo. You lot, the ones who intrinsically hate all others, enlessly accuse others of hate, hate speech etc. So typical! Ron Unz is doing a magnificent job because… because he hates himself? What a laugh! Oddities? Wow!

@Ron Unz

Perhaps you could include a link to the CODOH – Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust website.

It is pretty much the reference for Holocaust revisionism and even historical revisionism in general, these days.

They have a big library with many articles, videos and other documents.

It is also worth mentioning their blog Inconvenient History and the Castle Hill Publishers website which sells probably every Holocaust revisionist book worth reading.

I have personal matters (selling my parents’ house and settling their estate, getting a mountain of their photographs digitized, and other things) that simply have to start taking higher priority in my life. So I’ll probably be commenting less in the coming days/weeks. However, I’ve already given a *preliminary* list of the evidence that I plan to present at the trial. (It’s preliminary, because I haven’t seen yet what evidence the Defense plans to present…also, I’m still reading material that I may want to use to add to my evidence list.)

The only person who has agreed to be a juror (“littlereddot”) hasn’t shown up here yet, but that’s fine. Hopefully, he’ll come eventually. He did express concern that the trial might last too long, which I think is an absolutely legitimate concern.

One way to avoid the trial being too long is to *know* in advance what evidence both the Plaintiff and the Defendant plan to present. That’s why I think it’s so important that the Plaintiff’s side gets a *preliminary* list of what evidence the Defendant’s side plans to present. Then we can agree to limit whatever evidence is presented to an amount the Jury accepts. Or, another possibility is to simply release “littlereddot” from the jury, and have the “trial” without a jury…just leave each reader to decide what side won.

Here was the *preliminary* list of evidence I presented a few days ago:

1) Ruldolf Hoess
a) Confession of Hoess, May 14, 1946
b) Section of Hoess memoirs where he recaculates death toll at Auschwitz to 1.13 million.
c) Statements from Hoess’s memoirs that make it clear he wasn’t suffering from torture either in May 1946 or while he was writing his memoirs.
d) Further statements from Hoess memoirs that show he personally witnessed many instances of operation of the gas chambers

2) Testimony from Nazi doctor Fritz Klein at his trial (at which he was convicted)

3) Excerpts from book, “Auschwitz: A Doctor’s Eyewitness Account”, by Jewish prisoner/doctor, Dr. Miklos Nyiszli

4) Conviction of Auschwitz SS guard Oskar Groening for 300,000 counts of accessory to murder
a) News reports of the conviction
b) Interview in which he describes knowing about the gassings, but only accidentally personally witnessing one gassing.

5) Conviction of SS guard Reinhold Hanning for 170,000 counts of accessory to murder

6) Layout of the gas chambers at Auschwitz and explanation for the procedures used
a) Plot plans of the Auschwitz I, Birkenau, and Morowicz
b) Plot plans of Crematoria II, III, IV, and V
c) Language from

7) Description of the preparations at Auschwitz for “Aktion Hoess,” the Hungarian Jewish extermination
a) Reports to Berlin on the number of Hungarian Jews put on trains over time (totaling 437,000)
b) Construction of the “burn pits” with channels for collecting human grease
c) Description of the procedures from the book of Sonderkommando Filip Muller, “Eyewitness Auschwitz”

8) Explanation for why Hungarian Jewish children and old people must have been murdered and their bodies burned
a) Explanation of the concept of Occam’s Razor
b) Reports to Berlin of number of Hungarian Jews transported (437,000 by July 15)
c) Accounts of multiple people, including Shlomo Venezia, Irene Fogel of how they last saw family members on the train platform (and that their family members couldn’t work)
d) Explanation of the desperate plight of the Nazis at the time
e) Explanation why it would be illogical to deport children and old people from Hungary to Auschwitz, and then deport them again to other places within the Reich.
f) Explanation how there is no evidence of an increase in population in Auschwitz that could account for the importation of 437,000 people in less than 2 months without most of them being murdered and cremated

You write: “Perhaps you could include a link to the CODOH – Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust website.”

My response: On the right side of this screen you will see a section titled Selected Alternative Media.

This section has a line titled Inconvenient History. If you click on this line, near the top right of the screen you will see CODOH. You can click on CODOH to be taken to the CODOH website.

You write: “Or, another possibility is to simply release “littlereddot” from the jury, and have the “trial” without a jury…just leave each reader to decide what side won.”

My response: Let’s not have a jury and let each reader decide which side won.

You start with Ruldolf Hoess as your first witness. So, I will begin with him, and establish why his testimony is not credible.

The British after the war attempted unsuccessfully for many months to find Höss. Frustrated by their inability to locate Höss, the British decided to intimidate his wife and their five children. On March 7, 1945, Jewish British Cpt. Howard Harvey Alexander arrested Höss’s wife Hedwig and interrogated her in a prison cell, but she refused to reveal her husband’s hiding place. Alexander then interrogated Höss’s children, all minors (3 to 16 years old), who had been left behind alone on their farm. Not getting the answers he wanted, Alexander jailed them as well. Hedwig, however, still would not talk. (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, Commandant of Auschwitz: Rudolf Höss, His Torture and His Forced Confessions, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, p. 18).

Since their tactics of imprisonment and intimidation had failed, the British soldiers decided to use a new approach. A noisy old steam train was driven past the rear of the prison. Alexander burst into Hedwig’s cell and informed her that this train was about to take her son to Siberia, and that she would never see him again. Waiting a few moments to let his message sink in, Alexander told Hedwig that she could prevent her son’s deportation if she told him where her husband was living and under what alias. Alexander left Hedwig sitting on her cot with a piece of paper and a pencil. When Alexander returned 10 minutes later, Hedwig had written a note with Höss’s location and his alias. (Source: Ibid., pp. 18-19).

In 1983, the anti-National Socialist book “Legions of Death” by Rupert Butler documented that Sgt. Bernard Clarke and other British officers tortured Rudolf Höss into making his confession. The torture of Höss was exceptionally brutal. Neither Bernard Clarke nor Rupert Butler finds anything wrong or immoral in the torture of Höss. Neither of them seems to understand the importance of their revelations. Bernard Clarke and Rupert Butler prove that Höss’s confession was obtained by torture. (Source: Faurisson, Robert, “How the British Obtained the Confessions of Rudolf Höss,” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 7, No. 4, Winter 1986-87, pp. 392-399).

Moritz von Schirmeister, a former associate of Joseph Goebbels, confirmed that Höss’s confession was obtained by torture. At Nuremberg, von Schirmeister sat in the backseat of a car together with Höss, with whom he could speak freely during transit. He remembered Höss’s following statement:

“On the things he is accused of, he told me: ‘Certainly, I signed a statement that I killed two and a half million Jews. But I could just as well have said that it was five million Jews. There are certain methods by which any confession can be obtained, whether it is true or not.’” (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, Commandant of Auschwitz: Rudolf Höss, His Torture and His Forced Confessions, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, p. 16).

British Pvt. Ken Jones also confirmed that the British used sleep deprivation to break Höss. Jones stated:

“We sat in the cell with him, night and day, armed with axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to help break down his resistance. When Höss was taken out for exercise, he was made to wear only jeans and a thin cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Höss finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities.” (Source: Ibid., pp. 16-17).

The International Military Tribunal (IMT) began on November 20, 1945, four months before Höss’s arrest. Whitney Harris, a young American prosecutor at the IMT, was desperate to find a high-ranking German willing to confirm what had taken place in the concentration camps. At Harris’s request, the manacled Höss was transported 300 miles south to Nuremberg. (Source: Harding, Thomas, Hanns and Rudolf: The True Story of the German Jew Who Tracked Down and Caught the Kommandant of Auschwitz, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2013, pp. 248-251).

On April 1, 1946, Höss was taken to a small office to be interviewed by Harris. The three weeks in British captivity had taken their toll on Höss. Höss’s eyes were bloodshot, his cheeks were unshaven and gaunt, and his frame appeared to be fragile. Expecting to meet a larger man, someone who exuded power and brutality, Harris instead observed that Höss was a shrunken man. (Source: Ibid., p. 252).

While Höss waited in his cell to be called as a witness, he was visited by psychologist Dr. Gustave Gilbert, a New Yorker born to Jewish-Austrian immigrants. Gilbert wrote about Höss:

“In all of the discussions Höss is quite matter-of-fact and apathetic, shows some belated interest in the enormity of his crime, but gives the impression that it never would have occurred to him if somebody hadn’t asked him. There is too much apathy to leave any suggestion of remorse and even the prospect of hanging does not unduly distress him. One gets the general impression of a man who is intellectually normal but with the schizoid apathy, insensitivity and lack of empathy that could hardly be more extreme in a frank psychotic.” (Source: Gilbert, Gustave M., Nuremberg Diary, New York: Farrar, Straus and Company, 1947, p. 260).

Dr. Gilbert later wrote after Höss’s testimony at the IMT: “He gave his testimony in the same matter-of-fact, apathetic manner as he had related it to me in his cell.” (Source: Ibid., p. 264). In my opinion, Höss’s “schizoid apathy” and “apathetic manner” were caused by his brutal torture by British soldiers. Höss was not usually described as apathetic before he was tortured.

Maj. Leon Goldensohn, a U.S. Army psychiatrist, also remarked that “Höss looked blank and apathetic.” (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, Commandant of Auschwitz: Rudolf Höss, His Torture and His Forced Confessions, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, pp. 119, 329).

On April 15, 1946, Höss appeared in court at the IMT. Ernst Kaltenbrunner’s defense lawyer, Dr. Kurt Kauffmann, asked Höss a series of questions designed to prove that Kaltenbrunner had never visited Auschwitz. Höss affirmed that Kaltenbrunner had never visited Auschwitz, and that Kaltenbrunner didn’t ordered the execution of Jews at this camp. (Source: Harding, Thomas, Hanns and Rudolf: The True Story of the German Jew Who Tracked Down and Caught the Kommandant of Auschwitz, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2013, p. 257).

U.S. prosecutor Col. John Amen next started reading from an affidavit Höss had signed in front of Whitney Harris on April 5, 1946. Höss’s testimony at the IMT was probably the most important and striking evidence presented there of a German extermination program. Höss in his testimony said that more than two and a half million people were exterminated in the Auschwitz gas chambers, and that another 500,000 inmates had died there of other causes. (Source: Taylor, Telford, The Anatomy of the Nuremberg Trials: A Personal Memoir, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1992, p. 363). No defender of the Holocaust story today accepts these inflated figures, and other key portions of Höss’s testimony at the IMT are widely acknowledged to be untrue.

No legitimate court would ever allow testimony from someone who has been brutally tortured to be entered into evidence. Not only should Rudolf Höss’s testimony not be allowed into evidence, it could also be grounds for declaring a mistrial of the IMT.

While Höss was appearing as a witness at the IMT, the Polish government sent word that they intended to try Höss for crimes committed in their country. Höss was eventually transported to a tiny basement cell in a prison on the outskirts of Krakow. Dr. Jan Sehn, the leading investigator in the Polish war crimes trials, asked Höss to write about Auschwitz’s operations and many other war-related matters. Sehn eventually persuaded Höss to write his memoirs. (Source: Harding, Thomas, Hanns and Rudolf: The True Story of the German Jew Who Tracked Down and Caught the Kommandant of Auschwitz, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2013, pp. 262-267).

Höss’s trial began March 11, 1947, before the Supreme National Tribunal of Poland in Warsaw. Dr. Tadeusz Cyprian, the lead prosecutor, presented statements from a large number of camp inmates to prove Höss’s guilt. By contrast, neither Höss nor his attorneys introduced any witnesses, relying entirely on the witnesses put forward by the prosecution. As he had done at Nuremberg, Höss remained stoic, answering all questions in a brief, precise manner, without emotions. Similar to Dr. Gustave Gilbert and Dr. Leon Goldensohn at Nuremberg, both Dr. Shen and Dr. Cyprian described Höss as being apathetic. (Source: Primomo, John W., Architect of Death at Auschwitz: A Biography of Rudolf Höss, Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., 2020, pp. 166-167, 187).

Höss’s trial ended on March 29, 1947. As expected, on April 2, 1947, Höss was found guilty and sentenced to death by hanging. Höss was hanged on April 16, 1947, in front of the old crematorium at the Auschwitz main camp. (Source: Ibid., pp. 167, 196).

So, we have established the following facts:

1. Rudolf Höss’s family members had all been imprisoned and intimidated by British soldiers prior to Höss’s capture.
2. Höss was subject to brutal torture by British soldiers.
3. Höss was also subject to sleep deprivation by British soldiers.
4. Dr. Gustave Gilbert and Dr. Leon Goldensohn both described Höss as being blank and apathetic at the IMT.
5. Dr. Jan Sehn and Dr. Tadeusz Cyprian both described Höss as being apathetic at the Polish trial.
6. Neither Höss nor his attorneys introduced any witnesses at the Polish trial, relying entirely on the witnesses put forward by the prosecution.
7. Key portions of Höss’s testimony at the IMT are widely acknowledged to be untrue. Höss was merely repeating the Allied propaganda at the time.

Since Höss’s confessions and testimony had been obtained by torture, sleep deprivation, and fear for his family’s safety, they never should have been allowed into evidence at the IMT and later Polish trial. Höss’s testimony also calls into question the legitimacy of both the IMT and later Polish trial.

How do you know the defendants engaged in those things? You’ve now remembered it 70 years later but were saying nothing 5, 10, 20 years afterwards?

No, you’ve got it 180 degrees backward. It’s the revisionists who are claiming, 70+ years later, that what the people who witnessed and participated in the crimes said occurred, did not really occur.

For example, here is digitized version of a Guardian newspaper article dated October 2, 1945, reporting on the testimony of Dr. Charles Bendel:

https://www.theguardian.com/century/1940-1949/Story/0,,127738,00.html

From that article:

The prosecution put forward an unexpected witness in Charles Bendel, a Rumanian doctor resident in Paris for many years, who was arrested there in 1943 for not wearing the yellow star and was sent to Auschwitz. Here he worked at a crematorium as doctor to the special Kommando of prisoners required to dispose of bodies from the gas chamber and who were kept under lock and key lest details of what went on became known in the rest of the camp.

At eleven o’clock in the morning, witness went on, the chief of the political bureau would arrive on his motor-cycle to say that a new batch of prisoners had arrived. There would be between 800 and 1,000 of them, some on foot and others, usually too ill to walk, in tip-up trucks, from which, to the amusement of the drivers, they were spilled out without warning. They were taken into the courtyard or, in winter, to a large hall of the crematorium and required to undress under the pretext that they were to take a bath followed by hot coffee.

And:

At Berkenau, a sector of the main camp, there were, stated witness, four crematoriums, each equipped with two gas chambers. But their capacity became insufficient and an additional system was devised by digging large trenches, some 12 yards by six, in which the bodies were burned, and to expedite matters channels were cut at the bottom of the trenches to drain away the human fat.

It was part of his Kommando’s work to prepare these pits each day by laying huge wood fires saturated with petrol, and by this system it was possible to dispose of one thousand bodies an hour as against one thousand a day in a crematorium.

At eleven o’clock in the morning, witness went on, the chief of the political bureau would arrive on his motor-cycle to say that a new batch of prisoners had arrived. There would be between 800 and 1,000 of them, some on foot and others, usually too ill to walk, in tip-up trucks, from which, to the amusement of the drivers, they were spilled out without warning. They were taken into the courtyard or, in winter, to a large hall of the crematorium and required to undress under the pretext that they were to take a bath followed by hot coffee.

Then came a wait for the gas to arrive, said the witness. Raising his voice, he exclaimed that for a doctor the greatest insult was to have the cylinders delivered in a Red Cross ambulance in which, on occasion, he had seen the prisoner Klein.

Then the doors of the two-roofed gas chambers would be opened and the victims, who by this time realised that they were going to their death, herded in with blows from whips and sticks. Finally the guards would succeed in locking the doors. “You would hear cries and shouts as the people within began to fight against each other and to beat at the walls. This goes on for two minutes-then complete silence, nothing more.”

About twenty minutes later, said Dr. Bendel, the main task of the special Kommando began. With the opening of the doors the bodies, tightly jammed inside, would fall out. Often it was almost impossible to separate one from another and one had the impression that they had fought terribly against death. Anyone who had seen a gas chamber filled to a height of four feet with corpses would never forget it. before they were dragged by their wrists to the ghats, barbers and dentists would shear off the hair and go over the teeth.

And here is a photograph of a mimeographed affidavit of Dr. Bendel:

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/holocaust/gas-chambers-crematoria-birkenau/

From that affidavit:

There were two gas chambers, underground, roughly 10 meters long, 5 meters wide, and 1 1/2 meters high, each one. These two chambers supplied corpses to crematorium 1 and 2.

For crematoriums 3 and 4 there were two other gas chambers measuring each one 6 meters long and 3 meters wide and 1 1/2 meters high.

In the case of gas chambers for crematoriums 1 and 2 the gas was poured in through the roof. In the case of the gas for crematoriums 3 and 4 the gas was put in through small windows in the wall.

At BIRKENAW the gas used for killing people was prussic acid, also called ZYKLON B.

It is the people of 2023, who deny that hundreds of thousands of people were murdered at Auschwitz with Zyklon B, and then their bodies cremated, who are just like the people of today who claim that the Apollo 11 moon landing was faked.

As a man living in a community where many former Axis soldiers lived, I was given two sides of the WW Two-story. I had always been skeptical of the genocide propaganda, especially the legends generated by the so-called Holocaust survivors. But, it wasn’t until the two Zundel trials in the 80s that I became convinced that British and Soviet psychological warfare had become the historical narrative. The Holocaust narrative was designed to be a reparations scam, and, a cudgel to continue beating the Germans, and basically all of Christian Europe. One only needs to read the preposterous Nuremberg testimonies to understand the weakness of the holocaust story. This phantasmagorical nonsense has now become a religion with penalties for us, the nonbelievers.

You write: “Or, another possibility is to simply release “littlereddot” from the jury, and have the “trial” without a jury…just leave each reader to decide what side won.”

My response: Let’s not have a jury and let each reader decide which side won.

You start with Ruldolf Hoess as your first witness. So, I will begin with him, and establish why his testimony is not credible.

John, you’re presenting your evidence before either of us had even made an opening statement! 🙂 (And I hadn’t even presented my evidence regarding Rudolf Höss, so your response was to evidence that the Plaintiff hasn’t even presented yet.)

In fact, you haven’t even said what evidence *you’ll* be presenting. In Comment #16, I provided a *preliminary* list of the evidence I planned to present. (And I forgot to include Dr. Charles Bendel’s court testimony and affidavit in my evidence list…because I only recently found the 1945 newspaper article.) Do you plan to do anything more than just respond to my evidence?

For example, is there anything from the Zundel trial that you think is strong evidence for your case? In particular, “littlereddot” said the testimony by the cremation guy (I’m too lazy to look up his name) at the Zundel trial seemed persuasive. Do you plan to present anything from Fred Leuchter or the German chemist guy (again, too lazy to look up his name). Is there anything from Carlo Mattogno specific to Auschwitz that seems persuasive to you?

It’s fine if you don’t have time or energy to present a list of evidence you plan to present. You could do the whole mock trial just responding to evidence I present. But it would be very unfortunate if, at the end of the mock trial, you wrote something like, “We never even touched on “X”, “Y,” or “Z,” which prove there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz.”

So again, look at my *preliminary* list of evidence (note: I’m going to add reports on the testimony and a copy of the affidavit of Dr. Charles Bendel to my list of evidence). Based on the preliminary list, is there something you plan to present, like sampling for Prussian Blue or cyanide? Or perhaps something about cremation capacity from the Zundel trial? Or anything else from the Zundel trial? Or anything from your website specific to Auschwitz, and why you think homicidal gas chambers did not exist there?

The standard order of events in a trial where there’s no jury might be:

1) Both sides share with each other the evidence they plan to present (does not have to be detailed, just a general list, like I prepared for you).

2) Both sides make an opening statement.

3) Both sides present their evidence (including discussion of what their evidence means) and the other side responds.

One huge problem I think will be that this whole thing will be far too long. That’s why I want to know what evidence you’ll present. We can agree that I’ll cut out some things, if it looks like the trial will be too long…i.e. too many words.

You have provided nothing but a list of suppositions and allegations, none of which you can back up with authenticated forensic evidence or other scientific proof.

You have been unwilling or unable (more than likely) to critique Mr Wear’s article on the Zundel trials in Toronto which, in my not so humble opinion, would be the best place to start your mock trial.

You as an engineer should know that when fundamental scientific and engineering principles have to be swept aside in order to make any testimony believable, the whole house-of-cards testimony is false.

Yet you persist in promoting such false testimony.

I say start with the scientific and engineering principles that must be met for any alleged holocost actions to have occurred. All the rest will fall into place or by the wayside.

You write: “John, you’re presenting your evidence before either of us had even made an opening statement! 🙂 (And I hadn’t even presented my evidence regarding Rudolf Höss, so your response was to evidence that the Plaintiff hasn’t even presented yet.) In fact, you haven’t even said what evidence *you’ll* be presenting.”

My response: The following is the evidence I will be presenting:

1. Chapter Eight of my book “Germany’s War”, which is available on this website at https://www.unz.com/book/john_wear__germanys-war/.

2. All of my articles on Inconvenient History dealing with the so-called Holocaust. You can read these articles at https://inconvenienthistory.com/columnists/2873.

3. All of my articles on my website dealing with the so-called Holocaust. You can read these articles at http://www.wearswar.com/.

There is considerable overlap on these three sites, so it is not quite as much reading material as it might first appear.

My opening statement is as follows:

The Holocaust story is a fraud. Dr. Arthur Robert Butz has aptly stated: “The ‘Holocaust’ is such a gigantic fraud that it is a cornucopia of absurdities.”

So, now you have my opening statement and where I will get my information from. I will now proceed to respond to your evidence in comment #16. If you need more time for family matters or to do more research, please let me know and we can reconvene at a later date at your convenience.

You have been unwilling or unable (more than likely) to critique Mr Wear’s article on the Zundel trials in Toronto which, in my not so humble opinion, would be the best place to start your mock trial.

Is this John Wear’s “article on the Zundel trials” to which you’re referring?

http://www.wearswar.com/2023/06/25/why-was-the-1985-ernst-zundel-trial-a-disaster-for-the-holocaust-narrative/

If so, *this trial* is only about what happened at Auschwitz, not what happened elsewhere.

And much of the wording in that article is about witnesses at the Zundel trial. For example, John Wear wrote:

Another prosecution witness at this trial was Dennis Urstein, who claimed he saw bodies hauled out of the gas chamber at Auschwitz…

Well, Dennis Urstein’s testimony isn’t in my preliminary list of evidence. The people mentioned in my preliminary list of evidence are:

1) Rudolf Höss,
2) Nazi doctor Fritz Klein,
3) Jewish prisoner Dr. Miklos Nyiszli, who wrote the book: “Auschwitz, A Doctor’s Eyewitness Account”
4) Auschwitz SS guard Oskar Groening, convicted of 300,000 counts of accessory to murder,
…and some others.

NOTE: I will be withdrawing any mention or presentation of evidence regarding Reinhold Hanning, and will substitute evidence regarding Dr. Charles Bendel.

For Dr. Bendel, I’ll basically be writing, “See my pre-trial comments to a spectator in Comment #19”. Then John can provide any rebuttal to that…WHEN THE EVIDENCE IS PRESENTED. 🙂

No offense to anyone, but I probably shouldn’t have even made that comment…I should have saved it for the trial. I don’t want to be discussing things before I’ve even seen a list of evidence that the Defense plans to present. And before both sides even present their opening statements. 🙂

Hi John,

You write,

My response: The following is the evidence I will be presenting:

1. Chapter Eight of my book “Germany’s War”, which is available on this website at https://www.unz.com/book/john_wear__germanys-war/.

2. All of my articles on Inconvenient History dealing with the so-called Holocaust. You can read these articles at https://inconvenienthistory.com/columnists/2873.

3. All of my articles on my website dealing with the so-called Holocaust. You can read these articles at http://www.wearswar.com/.

But *this trial* is about these five Complaints (see my comment #1):

The defendants (Nazis), between 1942 and January 1945, engaged in at least 40,000 instances of:

1) Kidnapping (from Yugoslavia and Greece);
2) Wrongful transport of my clients out of their countries;
3) Wrongful imprisonment in Auschwitz;
4) Wrongful death;
5) Wrongful death specifically through use of Zyklon B in a homicidal gas chamber.

You’ve already conceded your clients are liable for the first three items in the Complaint. (Although, please feel free to withdraw that concession before the trial begins, if you wish.)

So this trial is only about Item #4 and #5, with respect to Hungarian Jews and Sephardic Jews of Greece, deported to Auschwitz-Birkenau from 1942 to 1945.

My opening statement is as follows:

The Holocaust story is a fraud. Dr. Arthur Robert Butz has aptly stated: “The ‘Holocaust’ is such a gigantic fraud that it is a cornucopia of absurdities.”

Again, this trial isn’t about the entire Holocaust. It’s only about what happened at Auschwitz-Birkenau to Hungarian Jews and Sephardic Jews of Greece from 1942 to 1945. (Note that what happened to Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz didn’t start until May of 1944.)

I don’t want to make your opening statement for you, but maybe you’d want to make something along the lines of, “There were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau, so obviously no Hungarian Jews or Greek Jews were murdered there by use of homicidal gas chambers.”…???

In comment #16, you refer to “Testimony from Nazi doctor Fritz Klein at his trial (at which he was convicted).”

My response: The Belsen trial was conducted by the British in the autumn of 1945. This trial was concluded in November, just as the International Military Tribunal (IMT) was beginning. Fritz Klein did not receive a fair hearing at this trial.

We know that many of the defendants at the Belsen trial were tortured, sometimes to the point of begging to be put to death. (Source: Belgion, Montgomery, Victors’ Justice, Hillsdale, Ill.: Henry Regnery, 1949, pp. 80-81).

British journalist Alan Moorehead, for example, described the treatment of camp personnel at Bergen-Belsen after the British takeover of the camp:

“As we approached the cells of the SS guards, the [British] sergeant’s language became ferocious…. The sergeant unbolted the first door and…strode into the cell, jabbing a metal spike in front of him. “Get up” he shouted. “Get up. Get up, you dirty bastards.” There were half a dozen men lying or half lying on the floor. One or two were able to pull themselves erect at once. The man nearest me, his shirt and face splattered with blood, made two attempts before he got on to his knees and then gradually on to his feet. He stood with his arms stretched out in front of him, trembling violently.

‘Come on. Get up’ the sergeant shouted [in the next cell]. The man was lying in his blood on the floor, a massive figure with a heavy head and bedraggled beard… ‘Why don’t you kill me?’ he whispered. ‘Why don’t you kill me? I can’t stand it anymore.’ The same phrases dribbled out of his lips over and over again. ‘He’s been saying that all morning, the dirty bastard,’ the sergeant said.” (Source: Moorehead, Alan, “Belsen” in Cyril Connolly (ed.), The Golden Horizon, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1953, p. 105f).

I do not know of any crimes that Fritz Klein committed at Bergen-Belsen.

Dr. Russell Barton, an English physician who later became an American psychiatrist, entered Bergen-Belsen with British forces as a young medical student on May 2, 1945. Dr. Barton’s first impression of the camp was one of horror; some inmates were dead and piled up outside the huts, others were in various stages of dying, disease and dehydration. Barton examined the camp’s well-equipped kitchens and found record books listing the food that had been cooked and distributed going back to 1942. Dr. Barton determined from his examination of the camp records that there had been no deliberate policy of starvation at Bergen-Belsen.

Dr. Barton made inquiries with inmates, including Jewish doctors, who told him that Bergen-Belsen had not been too bad until the autumn of 1944. Then, as the Russian armies were advancing, the inmates said they had been given the choice of remaining in the camps about to be overrun by the Soviets or being repatriated back to Germany. Many chose to return to Germany. As a result, from the autumn of 1944 to early 1945, some 53,000 people were moved into Bergen-Belsen, which had room for only 3,000 inmates. The overcrowding was extreme and the staff at the camp resented it. Josef Kramer, the commandant of Bergen-Belsen, and Dr. Fritz Klein, the medical doctor at the camp, didn’t know what to do with the huge influx of inmates. Dr. Barton concluded that the horrific conditions at Bergen-Belsen were attributable to overcrowding and the collapse of the German economy at the end of the war rather than to an intentional program of extermination. (Source: Kulaszka, Barbara, (ed.), Did Six Million Really Die: Report of Evidence in the Canadian “False News” Trial of Ernst Zündel, Toronto: Samisdat Publishers Ltd., 1992, pp. 175-176).

As far as any crimes Dr. Klein might have committed at Auschwitz-Birkenau, I also do not know of any. This is something we can discuss at a later date.

You write: “I don’t want to make your opening statement for you, but maybe you’d want to make something along the lines of, “There were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau, so obviously no Hungarian Jews or Greek Jews were murdered there by use of homicidal gas chambers.”…???”

My response: That is close enough for me. My opening statement is:

“There were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau, so obviously no Hungarian Jews or anyone else were murdered there by use of homicidal gas chambers.”

My response: That is close enough for me. My opening statement is:

“There were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau, so obviously no Hungarian Jews or anyone else were murdered there by use of homicidal gas chambers.”

Thinking about it more, it would be a good idea for you to summarize the evidence you’re going to present, like the chemical evidence regarding Prussian Blue, or the gas chamber doors, or why all evidence I’m presenting by doctors will be lies, or whatever.

Mark Bahner,

You write: “Thinking about it more, it would be a good idea for you to summarize the evidence you’re going to present, like the chemical evidence regarding Prussian Blue, or the gas chamber doors, or why all evidence I’m presenting by doctors will be lies, or whatever.”

My response: The evidence I have against there being homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau are contained in my two articles at https://inconvenienthistory.com/9/4/5160 and https://inconvenienthistory.com/12/1/7200.

@ Mark Bahner ( + @ anyone here & elsewhere)

Browsing thru the 1700 comments of Roy Unz WW II article I read you asked somewhere who wired the 911 towers / I can´t find it any more / but since you are an adherent to holocaustianity you will never answer 911 whodunnit ( although you know…)

I posted a comment yesterday but it did not get thru the Unz Review filter / I did not save it somewhere else / it was closing time in the cybershop where I did my online job yesterday…

@ Roy Unz : a pity / why the holocaust joke of WWII is intertwined with the Twin Towers 911 joke / both are ultra sick j. jokes of the satanic j. bankers cabal – who financed all sides of WW II

Now as we all know they are about to launch the CBDC coupled with the vaccination passport by the WHO / funny enough / it got anounced the day after I flew back to Spain – no “vaxx & test” needed- by the WHO lackey on the payroll of crypto j. Bill Gates of Hell.

The RotSchild money moneymonopolists who run the BIS in Basel / the Central Bank of all Central Banks in the world / Basel is in French Bale ( pronounced Baal)…

Most people here or elsewhere will not have entered that deeply into their occult Baal territory as I have – I can assure you / it is not an enviable job & dont try this at home / I am one of the few ( so not the only one ) & am still breathing ( not excatly to their amusement).

check out: https://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2022/06/14/dollar-to-die-may-19-2023/ the gj comment 14 June 2022

” A project we did in New York / ten years ago / because New York is a good place to do shows” says Florian Reithner in the very beginning of this vid….He is a j. from Austria & one of the Urhebers of the Gelatin B. group who wired the Twin Towers for destruction / if we don’t mention the beast by its name / we can forget the feast….”

Btw I am in favor of the “no planes hypothesis” / did you ever see a blue beam holographic show…

https://911justicehalifax.wordpress.com/israeli-art-of-deception-students-at-wtc/

But the Whodunnit is most important / the jaws naturlich with umlaut ( no typo) / but in a country like the USA which has since 1978 the National Education Day dedicated to that insane chabad lubavitch rebbe Schneerson that answer will never be televised (like they whodid911 did on 911)…..

CIA O

@ Roy Unz I hope you will at least let your readers / posters see this vid / in answer to holocaustianity addict Mark Bahner who asked for it in the 1700 comments WW II article

tps://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2022/06/14/dollar-to-die-may-19-2023/

the gj comment of 14 juni 2022

” A project we did in New York / ten years ago / because New York is a good place to do shows” says Florian Reithner in the very beginning of this vid….He is a j. from Austria & one of the Urhebers of the Gelatin B. group who wired the Twin Towers for destruction / if we don’t mention the beast by its name / we can forget the feast….”

4045 Gaschambers – 6 million- & 911 are two sick kabbala jokes / in a country like the USA with its National Education Day dedicated to chabad rebbe Schneerson – since 1978 / absolutely insane – you can´t hope that the Deagle´s pro/gnosis will not become factual….

CIA O

https://911justicehalifax.wordpress.com/israeli-art-of-deception-students-at-wtc/

You write: “Excerpts from book, “Auschwitz: A Doctor’s Eyewitness Account”, by Jewish prisoner/doctor, Dr. Miklos Nyiszli.”

My response: Carol Mattogno has written an entire book about Dr. Miklos Nyiszli. This book is titled “An Auschwitz Doctor’s Eyewitness Account: The Bestselling Tall Tales of Dr. Mengele’s Assistant Analyzed.”

The Jewish Hungarian physician Miklos Nyiszli published a book of memoirs shortly after World War II about his experiences at Auschwitz. These memoirs have been used by mainstream historians as the primary source of Mengele’s alleged crimes at Auschwitz. Nyiszli’s memoirs, however, contain numerous errors and weaknesses that call into question the veracity of his claims. (Source: Mattogno, Carlo and Nyiszli, Miklos, An Auschwitz Doctor’s Eyewitness Account: The Bestselling Tall Tales of Dr. Mengele’s Assistant Analyzed, Uckfield: Castle Hill Publishers, 2020, pp. 9-16).

Dr. Nyiszli said that he wrote innumerable autopsy reports and signed them with his tattoo number. These reports were signed by his superior, Dr. Mengele, and then shipped to a medical center in Berlin-Dahlem. Nyiszli also wrote that he sent countless autopsy specimens to Berlin-Dahlem, and that he received replies about them with detailed scientific commentary or instructions. Based on descriptions in his book, Nyiszli performed at least 170 autopsies while at Auschwitz. Despite these autopsy reports allegedly written and signed by Nyiszli, and the “countless” packages of autopsy specimens sent to a medical institute in Berlin-Dahlem, there is not a single piece of paper in the documentary record bearing Nyiszli’s signature. (Source: Ibid., pp. 9, 12-13, 19).

Nyiszli also alleged in his book that, starting in August 1944, he was the doctor of the Sonderkommando for the Birkenau crematoria. The Romanian Jewish physician Charles Sigismund Bendel made the same claim at the Belsen trial in late 1945. Despite the fact that these two doctors spent at least four months together in the same place, they were totally ignorant of each other. They also produced totally contradictory testimony in regard to their experiences at the Birkenau crematoria. (Source: Ibid., pp. 13, 304-308).

Nyiszli made numerous false claims in his memoirs about the alleged homicidal gas chambers and crematoria at Birkenau. For example, Nyiszli wrote regarding a crematorium at Birkenau that “what is really impressive is the column of fire 8-10 meters high which gushes from its mouth between the lightning rods at its four corners.” (Source: Ibid., p. 22).

As documented by many researchers, it is technically impossible for flames to gush from crematoria.

Nyiszli wrote about the aftermath of gassings at Birkenau:

“The bodies do not lie all over the length and breadth of the room but rather in a single, story-high heap. The explanation for this is that the fallen gas granules first permeate the air layer above the concrete floor with their deadly vapors and only gradually saturate the higher layers of air in the room. This forces the unfortunate victims to trample each other, to climb over one another. In the higher layers the gas thus reaches them later. What a terrible struggle for life must take place there, and yet the time won is only one or two minutes in all!” (Source: Ibid., p. 41).

Nyiszli totally invented these gassings results. Since hydrocyanic vapors are slightly lighter than air, the diffusion of gas in the gas chambers would not rise from the floor to the ceiling. The gassing victims would have no need to climb over one another to escape the poison gas. (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, “Dr. Mengele’s ‘Medical Experiments’ on Twins in the Birkenau Gypsy Camp,” Inconvenient History, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2013).

Nyiszli also incorrectly wrote that the crematoria were located two kilometers from the Birkenau Camp. In reality, the crematoria were located inside the camp. (Source: Ibid).

The unreliability of Nyiszli’s testimony is shown by the fact that he was not used as a witness at the I.G. Farben trial at Nuremberg. Charles D. Provan wrote: “Although Dr. Nyiszli was summoned to Nuremberg to testify in the I.G. Farben trial, he was not called to the stand, presumably because he was only at Monowitz for about two weeks, and could provide little in the way of useful evidence. At some point in the trial, he was allowed to return home to Romania.” (Source: Provan, Charles D., “New Light on Dr. Miklos Nyiszli and His Auschwitz Book,” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 20, No. 1, Jan./Feb. 2001, p. 29).

Carlo Mattogno writes in regard to Nyiszli: “It is impossible to ascribe good faith to this ‘eyewitness,’ who was and remains a mere impostor. In consequence, the essential eyewitness testimony of Dr. Mengele’s alleged crimes at Auschwitz crumbles inexorably, and the rest of the legend along with it.” (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, “Dr. Mengele’s ‘Medical Experiments’ on Twins in the Birkenau Gypsy Camp,” Inconvenient History, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2013).

Mattogno concludes:

“Dr. Mengele’s alleged crimes are not proven by any document. No document shows that Mengele ever killed even one single child, or that one single child was ever killed on his orders. The essential and sole witness, the one upon whose testimony the whole accusation was based, was an extraordinarily creative imposter. Dr. Mengele’s closest collaborators, including the presumed essential witness, and at least 543 of his “victims” were allowed to live: but how, then, are we to believe seriously in the fairy tale of the “Angel of Death” of Auschwitz?” (Source: Ibid).

Post WWII Zionism is heavily dependent upon two charades – a) the holocaust story – Jewish victimhood in general, and b) the flag events of 9/11 which proved turned US military and economic power over to Israel in a single afternoon. The Jews lie. It is what they do. If their lies are exposed – they will be destroyed and they know it. This is why any threats to the maintenance of their lies are met with ruthless murders. Modern Ashkenazi Judaism is totally devoid of any moral anchor. It is purely Satanic materialism that not only eschews all manner of spirituality, it must destroy and or eat it to survive. This repeated Jewish effort throughput history is the foundation of all pogroms. If they fail this time – most all of global humanity will respond. Hence – the continuous effort they are making for total control of the US and the entire western world. If people awaken before they are finished with their work – they will be annihilated and they know it.

You write: “4) Conviction of Auschwitz SS guard Oskar Groening for 300,000 counts of accessory to murder
a) News reports of the conviction
b) Interview in which he describes knowing about the gassings, but only accidentally personally witnessing one gassing.”

My response: I do not regard Oskar Gröning as a credible witness to homicidal gassings at Auschwitz-Birkenau. I will review why it has been dangerous for Germans after World War II to contest the official Holocaust narrative.

Thies Christophersen was a witness who said that the alleged genocide of Jews during the war never happened. Christophersen supervised about 300 workers, many of them Jewish, at Auschwitz from January to December 1944. On a number of occasions during this period he visited Birkenau where allegedly hundreds of thousands of Jews were being gassed to death. In a memoir first published in Germany in 1973, “The Auschwitz Lie”, Christophersen wrote that during the time he was at Auschwitz he did not notice the slightest evidence of mass gassings. In March 1988, at the Ernst Zündel trial in Toronto, he also successfully answered numerous pointed questions by the prosecuting attorney about his experiences at Auschwitz.

After “The Auschwitz Lie” was published, Christophersen received thousands of letters and calls. He wrote in regard to these letters and calls:

“Many of those who contacted me can confirm my statements, but are afraid to do so publicly. Some of those are SS men who were brutally mistreated and even tortured in Allied captivity. I also immediately contacted those who claimed to know more about mass gassings. My experiences were precisely the same as those of French professor Paul Rassinier. I have not found any eyewitnesses. Instead, people would tell me that they knew someone who knew someone else, who talked about it. In most cases the alleged eyewitnesses had died. Other supposed eyewitnesses would quickly begin to stammer and stutter when I asked a few precise questions. Even Simon Wiesenthal had to finally admit before a Frankfurt district court that he was actually never in Auschwitz. All of the reports I have heard about are contradictory. Everyone seemed to tell a different story about the gas chambers. They couldn’t even agree about where they were supposed to have been located. This is also true of the so-called scholarly literature, which is full of contradictions.…” (Source: Christophersen, Thies, “Reflections on Auschwitz and West German Justice,” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 6, No. 1, Spring 1985, p. 118).

Another eyewitness who did not see any evidence of genocide of the Jews is Dr. Wilhelm Stäglich. Dr. Stäglich, a German judge, visited Auschwitz several times during the Second World War as a German orderly officer of an Anti-aircraft Detachment. Dr. Stäglich published the following account of his visits to Auschwitz:

” On none of these visits did I see gassing installations, crematoria, instruments of torture, or similar horrors. The camp gave one the impression of being well-kept and very well-organized…The camp reminded me of the German Labor Front camp in which I served out my six-month stretch in the Labor Service, except that Auschwitz was, of course, considerably larger…None of the inmates behaved as though they were in fear of mistreatment, let alone death.

On the later point, one encounter with inmates especially sticks in my memory. As some comrades and I were standing near the camp one evening, we caught sight of a big gang of inmates returning to camp from work in the industrial plants. They were escorted by a relatively small contingent of SS-men—mostly older people—and seemed to be thoroughly undisciplined. They talked loudly among themselves, laughing all the while. Two or three inmates dropped out of line when they spotted us, opened their flies, and made water. Although this gesture could have been interpreted as a sign of contempt for German men in uniform, the SS guards ignored it completely. Later, whenever I heard that mortal terror prevailed in the concentration camps, I had to recall this incident. That is hardly the way people who are in constant fear of death behave.” (Source: Stäglich, Wilhelm, Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, Institute for Historical Review, 1990, p. 293).

The historical blackout forces have sought to intimidate German eyewitnesses from writing about their observations in the German concentration camps. When Thies Christophersen published “The Auschwitz Lie” in 1973, he was charged with “popular incitement,” “contempt against the state,” and defamation of the Jews. Christophersen spent a year in prison even though the charge of popular incitement was eventually dropped. All Christophersen had done was to write about his experiences while he was working in Auschwitz in 1944. (Source: Christophersen, Thies, “Reflections on Auschwitz and West German Justice,” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 6, No. 1, Spring 1985, p. 117).

German Judge Wilhelm Stäglich’s public challenge to the official version of life at Auschwitz brought forth severe reprisals from the German government. Stäglich was induced to resign his job as a judge in Hamburg, his health having been affected by a harassment campaign against him. German authorities also attempted to deprive Stäglich of his pension, eventually settling on a 20% reduction in his pension over a five-year period. Finally, in a crowning absurdity, Stäglich was deprived of the doctoral degree he had earned at the University of Göttingen in 1951. (Source: Stäglich, Wilhelm, Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, Institute for Historical Review, 1990, pp. vii-viii, 292).

Prematurely retired, Stäglich worked for several years on an extensive study of the evidence supposedly substantiating systematic murder by gassing at Auschwitz. The book resulting from his study, “Der Auschwitz Mythos”, disputes the various “proofs” offered for the Auschwitz myth and is a damning analysis of the postwar trials staged by the Allies. The publication of “Der Auschwitz Mythos” in West Germany in 1979 caused the defenders of the Holocaust story to censor Stäglich’s book. Nevertheless, all but seven of the 10,000 copies of the first edition of “Der Auschwitz Mythos” had been sold by the time the book was ordered seized by the German government.

Wilhelm Stäglich wrote in 1984 concerning the intellectual subservience and guilt inculcated in most Germans since the end of World War II:

“We Germans, in spite of the repeated assurances to the contrary of our puppet politicians, are politically and intellectually no longer a sovereign nation since our defeat in the Second World War. Our political subservience, which is apparent in the fact of the breaking up of the Reich and the incorporation of the individual pieces into the extant power blocks of the East and of the West, has had as its consequence a corresponding intellectual subservience. Escape from this intellectual subservience is prevented primarily by the guilt complex inculcated in most Germans through the “reeducation” instituted in 1945. This guilt complex is based primarily on the Holocaust Legend. Therefore for we Germans the struggle against what I have called the “Auschwitz Myth” is so frightfully important.” (Source: Stäglich, Wilhelm, “Der Auschwitz Mythos: A Book and its Fate in the German Federal Republic,” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, Spring 1984, p. 65).

Germany passed laws soon after the publication of Stäglich’s book making it a felony to dispute any aspect of the Holocaust story. Similar laws were eventually passed in the following countries: Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Czech Republic, France, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Spain, Switzerland, and the European Union. (Source: Thorn, Victor, The Holocaust Hoax Exposed: Debunking the 20th Century’s Biggest Lie, Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review, 2012, p. 2 of Foreword).

Defenders of the Holocaust story have also taken extreme measures to prosecute perpetrators of the alleged crimes. John Demjanjuk, for example, was found not guilty by the Israeli Supreme Court in 1993 of being Ivan the Terrible at Treblinka. Demjanjuk returned to his home in Cleveland, Ohio and looked forward to a peaceful retirement after spending years on death row in Israel. Unfortunately, in 2001, Demjanjuk was charged again on the grounds that he had instead allegedly been a guard named Ivan Demjanjuk at the Sobibór camp in Poland.

On May 11, 2009, Demjanjuk was deported from Cleveland to be tried in Germany. On May 12, 2011, Demjanjuk was convicted by a German criminal court as an accessory to the murder of 27,900 people at Sobibór and sentenced to five years in prison. No evidence was presented at Demjanjuk’s trial linking him to specific crimes. Instead, Demjanjuk was convicted under a new line of German legal thinking that a person who served at an alleged death camp can be charged as an accessory to murder because the camp’s sole function was to kill people. No proof of participation in a specific crime is required. Demjanjuk died in Germany before his appeal could be heard by a German Appellate Court. (Source: The Dallas Morning News, May 7, 2013, p. 9A).

This new line of German legal thinking is breathtaking in its unfairness. It incorrectly assumes that some German concentration camps were used for the purpose of exterminating people when, in fact, none of them was. Moreover, this proposed German law finds a person guilty merely for being at a certain camp. People can be found guilty of a crime even when no evidence is presented that they committed a crime. The Simon Wiesenthal Center has been looking to help prosecute and convict other elderly German guards under this line of German legal thinking. (Source: Ibid.).

The Holocaust story is being used to increasingly restrict free speech. Moshe Kantor, President of the European Jewish Congress, spoke at the International Holocaust Remembrance Day at the European Parliament ceremony in Brussels on January 27, 2014. Kantor rejected free speech arguments over what he called the worldwide spread of anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is “not an opinion—it’s a crime,” he said. Kantor apparently wants to criminalize any speech, symbols, or gestures that Jews consider to be anti-Semitic. (Source: The Dallas Morning News, Jan. 28, 2014, p. 2A).

So, with this historical perspective, I do not find Oskar Gröning’s testimony to be credible. Gröning could not state the truth that there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. This defense is a felony in modern-day Germany. Gröning’s only possible defense was to accept that there was a mass extermination program at Auschwitz-Birkenau, but claim that as a lowly bookkeeper he had nothing to do with it.

Item 1 should have read:

1) Kidnapping (from Hungary and Greece)

John Wear is winning.

You write: “4) Conviction of Auschwitz SS guard Oskar Groening for 300,000 counts of accessory to murder

John, please wait to respond until I actually *present the evidence*. You’re writing very long comments containing responses that have no real relevance to the evidence I plan to present. And I haven’t even finished my opening statement yet.

Btw I am in favor of the “no planes hypothesis” / did you ever see a blue beam holographic show…

Evidently you haven’t seen this video (especially watch the 30 secs or so beginning at 2:00):

You write: “NOTE: I will be withdrawing any mention or presentation of evidence regarding Reinhold Hanning, and will substitute evidence regarding Dr. Charles Bendel.”

My response: Pursuant to your comment #37, I will now keep my responses brief.

Dr. Charles Bendel served as a kind of professional witness. He testified for the prosecution during the Belsen trial, during which he was interrogated by Col. Backhouse at the hearing on October 1, 1945. Bendel then participated in the Tesch trial, during which he was interrogated by Major Draper on March 2, 1946. Bendel also appeared as a witness for the prosecution during the I.G. Farben trial on March 18, 1948. (Source: Mattogno, Carlo and Nyiszli, Miklos, An Auschwitz Doctor’s Eyewitness Account: The Bestselling Tall Tales of Dr. Mengele’s Assistant Analyzed, Uckfield: Castle Hill Publishers, 2020, pp. 304-305).

When we later present evidence, I plan to show some inconsistencies and incongruities in Dr. Charles Bendel’s testimony.

Not only does “the court” (lol) require opening statements, it also requires full disclosure. What evidence do the parties intend to present, what witnesses do they intend to call, etc.

Does Council for the prosecution have any idea what so ever of the “courts” (lol) rules of procedure? Does anyone?

Where’s/who’s the judge? How can the jury be sure that the rules are being properly applied, and the law properly stated, sans a legally/lawfully qualified judge?

Stuff-o-nonsense!

As far as I’m concerned, the jury (me) is already out and the verdict already in: There was no “holocaust”, as such,(programme to exterminate all European Jews, 6,000,000 exterminated Jews).

The “holocaust”, as such, is nothing more than a political construct, in keeping with the political manifestos, the Torah, the Talmud(s) and the Kabalah, which has, like the others, taken on a religious mantle, henseforth “holicaustianity” with the demonstrable aim of granting Jews political and social/societal predominance throughout Western societies, and granting “Israel” carte blanche to steal , plunder, murder, maim and genocide the ancient land and people of Palestine, whilst harassing and threatening it’s regional neighbours.

And if I were a silly-Bahner-sausage, I’d insist that a “trial” proceed, with the above paragraph as charges for the holocaustians to defend against!

I’m somewhat flabbergasted that anyone actually agreed to put revisionism on “trial” here given the monumental lack of evidence for the “holocaust”! Surely, SURELY, the boot should be on the other foot?!

Forgive me if I’m mistaken about what’s going on here. I missed the last 300 or so comments in the previous thread due to technical difficulties (aka being busy). I think I’ve got the general idea though.

I hope this finds everyone well, happy and full of the joys of summer. 😁

Best regards,
Kali

What is to love about jews?

Pursuant to your request in comment #37 to keep my comments short, I will combine your items #6, 7, and 8 in your comment #16 into this short response.

I plan to prove that there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. I also plan to prove that the crematoria capacity at Auschwitz-Birkenau was not sufficient to cremate the Hungarian Jews in the short time period claimed by “Holocaust” historians. Finally, Allied aerial photographs taken at the height of the alleged extermination of the Hungarian Jews at Birkenau show an uneventful camp devoid of any evidence of a mass extermination program.

Given these facts, I plan to show that there was no program of mass extermination of the Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

For some reason I read your reply to Mark Bannerman and was puzzled to find this

Nyiszli totally invented these gassings results. Since hydrocyanic vapors are slightly lighter than air, the diffusion of gas in the gas chambers would not rise from the floor to the ceiling. The gassing victims would have no need to climb over one another to escape the poison gas. (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, “Dr. Mengele’s ‘Medical Experiments’ on Twins in the Birkenau Gypsy Camp,” Inconvenient History, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2013).

What am I t infer from the fact that you have asserterted something which, on the face of it, is clearly wrong? With some hesitation I offer you the chance to show that you understand the problem as well as explain it.

“All rise!”

1. The court accepts the “defendants” (why??) submition and hereby disqualifies the witness Hoss/Hoess as unreliable.

2. The court requests the plaintiff clarify how the bodies of dead Jews “fell out” of chambers with inward opening doors. (Ref: comment 19/Guardian 1945 article.)

3. The court requests that the plaintiff refrain from playing the role of the judge. “This isn’t a game, My Bahner!” 🧐

4. The court thanks counsel HdC for clarifying the matter and insists that the plaintiff demonstrate that the alleged crime was even possible. “What physical forensic evidence do you intent to offer, Mr Bahner?” 🤔

5. The court thanks lead counsel for the “defence” (why??) John Wear for his evidence. “You make a very strong case that there is no case to answer, Mr Wear. Most intriguing.”

5.a. The court expects the prosecution to make it’s case in a timely manner, lest the courts time be wasted. “Mr Bahner, you have brought this case before the court. I suggest you, if you are unable to present your case personally, appoint another counsel to do so. You are already sailing very close to a charge of malicious prosecution, wasting the courts time and contempt of court, sir. Proceed with caution, Mr Bahner. This is not a game!” 🤨

6. The court is dismayed that the prosecution has altered it’s list of witnesses without so much as a ‘by your leave’ to the court. The court rules that witnesses will not be substituted without consent and without good reason. “This is Not a Game, Mr Bahner! And this is not Nuremberg, sir! You may not substitute witnesses on a whim. Either present your case or withdraw it, sir! The court will not be triffled with!” 🥸

7. The court, once again, is perplexed by prosecution counsels insistence on determining the courts procedural rules, and rules of evidence.”Mr Bahner, I again remind you that this is not a game! This game… errr… I mean trial is in regards to the alleged “holocaust”, sir, a central plank of which is what happened at Auschwitz. You may not rule that Auschwitz is somehow ‘out of bounds’ sir, as without it your entire allegation of mass extermination of Jews in homicidal gas Chambers falls on its head. In fact you may not rule anything at all, Mr Bahner, as that is the perogative if the court! Any more of this sort of thing, Mr Bahner, and your case will be dismissed and you, sir, will be held in contempt and possibly sentenced to a severe trolling!” 😠

8. The court thanks the witness Dr Barton for his testimony. A most credible witness.

9. “Mr Bahner! I suggest you present your own case for the prosecution, and allow defense to shred… I mean defend, of course, such evidence as you can muster. In the meantime, please refrain from playing all sides in this gam… errr trial. I, the jury…judge, will rule what evidence and procedures will carry forward. Thank you” 🙃

10. The court is relieved to note that at least one side is very well prepared for this trial. “Thank you, Mr Wear.” 😇

11. The court agrees with counsel for the deffence that Oskar Groning’s testimony is not credible.

12. The court finds the tardiness and lack of preparedness of prosecution counsel to be obstructive to justice. “This is not a game, Mr Bahner! You are not at Nuremberg now sir! Please present your case or kindly admit that you have none.” 😵‍💫

All rise!
Judge Kali. 😁

So, who want’s to fill me, and other readers in on who is being charged with what in this trial.

Presumably Mark Bahner is charging “the Germans” with the mass murder of “the Jews”?

But has that trial not already taken place, and “the Germans” found guilty?

So should this not, after all, be an appeal against wrongful conviction? And even a counter-claim in tort law, given the massive harms done to the German people as a result of the unspeakable miscarriage of justice and misrepresentation of history and their place in it?

Best regards,
Kali

The fact that Howss’s confession should have been held inadmissible because of torture doesn’t get you very far. His evidence in the Kaltenbrunner trial was not similarly disqualified The issue there for present purposes is different, namely that he made up figures and, apparently, was not called out on them though he may have been hoping later to use their patent absurdity to his advantage. By the time of the Polish trial he had apparently reconciled himself to his fate and been persuaded to write accurate memoirs. So why shouldn’t his memoirs be accepted as a true confession?

BTW I note here – and probably elsewhere – the fact that there is quite enough evidence in human history to conclude that there is nothing particularly surprising about Nazi genocide or gas chambers as part of it. How about Abu Ghreib, the murders by Americans that got Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange into trouble and Rwanda and Srebrenizca as more recent proofs?

You write: “What am I to infer from the fact that you have asserted something which, on the face of it, is clearly wrong? With some hesitation I offer you the chance to show that you understand the problem as well as explain it.”

My response: Since hydrocyanic vapors are slightly lighter than air, these vapors would already be toward the top of the alleged homicidal gas chamber. Therefore, the gassing victims would have no need to climb over one another to escape the poison gas.

I will quote from Carlo Mattogno’s article at https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/5/4/3223 to give a more complete explanation:

“The gassing technique described by Nyiszli is completely invented, based on the erroneous supposition that Zyklon B (the alleged homicidal agent) was chlorine (rather than hydrocyanic acid). Since chlorine is heavier than air, Nyiszli imagined that, in an area in which it was released in large quantities, the chlorine would spread from the floor to the ceiling, as if the area were being filled with water. As a result, he claims that the bodies, in the “gas chamber”, “were piled up in a mass up to the ceiling”, because “the gas first fills the lowers strata of air and then moves slowly upwards”. The victims therefore climbed on each others’ shoulders to get closer to the ceiling and escape the gas so as to survive for a short time longer. But hydrocyanic acid vapors are slightly lighter than air, therefore the diffusion of the gas as described by Nyiszli is physically impossible.”

“This absurdity was later appropriated lock, stock and barrel by the plagiarist Filip Müller, another self-described “eyewitness” who shamelessly plagiarized Nyiszli’s work.”

You say “totally fraudulent” Possibly. But you neglect to spell out reasons for regarding it as worse than “probably erroneous”. Can you please give us more?

BTW You will not be surprised that I repeat here what I said to John Wear but preferably considered by you

BTW I note here – and probably elsewhere – the fact that there is quite enough evidence in human history to conclude that there is nothing particularly surprising about Nazi genocide or gas chambers as part of it. How about Abu Ghreib, the murders by Americans that got Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange into trouble and Rwanda and Srebrenizca as more recent proofs?

David Irving in his book, Nuremberg: The Last Battle, talks about the origin of the six million in 1945. Robert Jackson, who would be the lead American prosecutor at the International Military Tribunal (IMT)at Nuremberg, met with a few Jewish organizations before he left for Europe. They wanted a hand in running the trial and wished to prosecute Nazi philosopher Alfred Rosenberg. Robert Jackson asked about the Jewish losses during the war and was told six million. This included everyone from the English Channel to Stalingrad. Jackson wrote in his diary that night,

“I was particularly interested in knowing the source and reliability of his estimate as I know no authentic data on it.”

Jackson was obviously surprised by such a number so it could not have been in wide circulation at that time. These Jewish organizations asked for the right to have an amicus curiae in Jackson’s courtroom to ‘represent the six million slaughtered.’

It seems like there was a great deal of lobbying effort to get this number into the official record of the Nuremberg trials. Robert Jackson in his opening speech at the IMT in Nuremberg said,

“Five million seven hundred thousand Jews are missing from the countries in which they formerly lived, and over 4,500,000 cannot be accounted for by the normal death rate nor by immigration; nor are they included among displaced persons. History does not record a crime ever perpetrated against so many victims or one ever carried out with such calculated cruelty.”

It appears that the lobbying effort paid off.

I’d be very curious if anyone can find any American mainstream media discussion of the Holocaust between roughly 1946 and 1960. If people actually believed in its reality during the first 15 years after WWII, such silence would seem rather peculiar.

(I hope the thread is still open): Some time ago (maybe about two years ago) Haaretz published an article that has to do with this theme (I think someone here posted the link to the article). The article (if I still remember relevant details) said that a historian had (finally) discovered who came up with this number 6 million. According to him it was a man who had been in a camp, had left Germany and made a long trip to Palestine. In the beginning of 1944 (in January) there was a meeting in Palestine where he proposed this number which became the official number. It should reflect the reality of 1943, when he must have started his trip from Germany to Palestine.

But we are not informed about how he established this number, what kind of information he had. Nothing. The question of the source of his information should be an important question because it seems to be a fact that Jews generally didn’t have any idea about what was happening. A recent article in The Guardian tells the story of a man who was in Ausschwitz and according to the article it seems that (many) people outside camps had no idea what was going on and even inside the camp the whole thing seemed to be unknown for people. Once I saw on TV an interview with a man who was presented as a survivor from a camp and he said that he only learned about the Holocaust after the war. But the number 6 million was probably put into circulation already during the war, although it may have taken time afterwards until it became widely know. From the article in The Guardian:

Plenty of testimonies from the time suggest Jews not only had no inkling of the fate that awaited them when they arrived in Auschwitz, but also that they chose to repress the knowledge once they had acquired it.

Perl says that he didn’t know people were being gassed, their bodies being turned into smoke and ash, even when he was inside Auschwitz…..

Kali,

Plaintiff had me removed from court, but I would speculate he knows less than I do about the particular details of the Nuremberg proceedings, if that’s possible.

I previously knew enough to know it was a tribunal of retribution based more on Talmudic Migo than actual truth or justice.

Any attempt by anyone, anywhere, to throw off the yoke of Jewish influence and treachery in gentile society is returned with a vendetta, so encompassing as to include the innocent among their own people, that defies belief; they will have their pound of flesh, one way or another.

They whine about being relegated to “ghettos”, but conveniently neglect to mention this practice is preferred and supported by Rabbis, to prevent assimilation; there is a word for this practice that escapes me at the moment, but it’s true nonetheless. Their communities/history are filled with these sorts of contradictions; no opportunity to muddy the waters goes unexploited.

A study of history, going back as far as possible, reveals the same observations and accusations against their habits and deeds, made by nearly every society unfortunate enough to “let them in.” A reasonable person will ask, “is everyone, everywhere, always wrong?”

On a comedic note, Ron White, a great Texan comedian has a 30 second bit about this phenomena; google “Ron White-maybe it’s me.” Maybe he can join the jury panel.

Opening Statement for the Plaintiffs: Friends and Families of Hungarian Jewish and Greek Jewish Children Under 12 and Elderly Adults “Not Fit for Work” vs. Nazis Operating Auschwitz-Birkenau Camp

I’m representing the Plaintiffs in this mock civil trial. My clients are the Hungarian Jewish and Greek Sephardic Jewish children under 12 years old and elderly adults (i.e. those “not fit to work”). The details of the complaint are:

The defendants (Nazis), between 1942 and January 1945, engaged in at least 40,000 instances of:

1) Kidnapping (from Yugoslavia and Greece);
2) Wrongful transport of my clients out of their countries;
3) Wrongful imprisonment in Auschwitz;
4) Wrongful death;
5) Wrongful death specifically through use of Zyklon B in a homicidal gas chamber.

The Defense has already agreed that the Nazis kidnapped the Plaintiffs, wrongly transported them out of their countries, and wrongfully imprisoned them in Auschwitz (also called Auschwitz-Birkenau). Therefore, the only disputed claims are #4 (wrongful death) and #5 (wrongful death specifically through use of Zyklon B in homidal gas chambers).

The burden of proof in a civil trial is “a preponderance of evidence.” The preponderance of evidence standard comes into play when the plaintiff satisfies the burden of proof by offering evidence that demonstrates their claims have a greater than 50% chance to be true. In other words, if a claim can be demonstrated to be more likely to be true than not true, the burden of proof is met.

https://valientemott.com/legal-terminology/preponderance-of-evidence/

This case is very simple. As the Plaintiffs’ counsel, I will present overwhelming evidence that the Nazis at Auschwitz-Birkenau operated homicidal gas chambers that resulted in far, far more than 40,000 wrongful deaths. (In fact, the number of wrongful deaths at Auschwitz-Birkenau is likely one million or more).

My evidence will include:

1) Sworn affidavits and sworn testimony of the Nazis themselves;
2) Excerpts from the memoirs of Rudolf Höss, a Commandant of Auschwitz when the very first homicides with Zyklon B were performed, and the man who led “Aktion Höss,” which resulted in approximately 400,000 Hungarian Jews being murdered in gas chambers in Birkenau in 1944;
3) Writings of men (Sonderkommandos) who performed significant portions of the operations of homicidal gas chambers, including removing bodies and moving them to the crematorium ovens or to large “burn pits” (when the crematoriums could not handle the large number of bodies being produced by the gas chambers);
4) The location of the homicidal gas chambers and the “burn pits”, as well as constuction information showing that they were intended to be used as homicidal gas chambers;
5) Details of the preparations for and execution of “Aktion Höss” in which the vast majority of the 437,000 Hungarian Jews arriving from May-July 1944 were killed in homicidal gas chambers, and their bodies cremated in crematoria and “burn pits.”
6) An explanation, using simple arithmetic and logic, to show why the majority of the 437,000 Hungarian Jews arriving at Auschwitz-Birkenau from May to July 1944 absolutely must have been murdered, and their bodies cremated.

Again, this is a very simple case. The Plaintiffs will simply point to a tiny fraction of the absolutely overwhelming evidence that the Nazis murdered approximately 1 million people using homicidal gas chambers employing Zyklon B from 1942 to 1945. This overwhelming evidence is why not one single legitimate historical organization doubts that homicidal gas chambers existed to carry out mass exterminations at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Plaintiff had me removed from court,…

Bullshit. I invited you to be a juror. You declined.

You write: “The fact that Hoess’s confession should have been held inadmissible because of torture doesn’t get you very far. His evidence in the Kaltenbrunner trial was not similarly disqualified.”

My response: Ernst Kaltenbrunner was tried and convicted at the IMT. No evidence was presented at the IMT that Rudolf Höss had been tortured. Therefore, Höss was regarded as a credible witness by the judges at the IMT.

Höss’s testimony at the IMT was also regarded by the world press as being credible, and was reported by the press around the world. A New York Times article described it as the “crushing climax to the case.” The Times in Britain said of Höss’s signed testimony: “Its dreadful implications must surpass any document ever penned.” (Source: Harding, Thomas, Hanns and Rudolf: The True Story of the German Jew Who Tracked Down and Caught the Kommandant of Auschwitz, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2013, pp. 259-260).

Höss was regarded as the star prosecution witness at the IMT, and his testimony has become the framework for the official Holocaust story. (Source: Butz, Arthur R., The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry, Newport Beach, Cal: Institute for Historical Review, ninth printing, 1992, p. 101).

You write: “BTW I note here – and probably elsewhere – the fact that there is quite enough evidence in human history to conclude that there is nothing particularly surprising about Nazi genocide or gas chambers as part of it.”

My response: I know of no other instances where homicidal gas chambers using Zyklon B were used to carry out mass executions of humans. If you know of any other instances, please let me know.

This thread was for debate between plaintiffs and defendants, but as usual, we are wandering off topic/premise, myself included. This is from a Jewish Holocaust site:

“ The ethical implication of any theological position about the Holocaust is: What will be its effect on the survivors of the Holocaust, indeed on the whole Jewish people still in mourning? The pietist theology says to the Jewish people that our sisters and brothers, mothers and fathers, wives and husbands, daughters and sons all died because of their own sins or for the sin of being part of the Jewish people who had been so taken in by Zionism. The religio-nationalist theology says to the Jewish people that six million Jews had to die in order that there be a Jewish state in the land of Israel. It is hard to tell which answer is more morally offensive to Jews — don’t they both basically torture the Jewish people?”

The six million number has implications regarding prophesy; you can find references to this number before WW2 if you look into Jewish theology/history. The destruction of Edom is necessary, as well.

It contains a chapter on Dachau, including discussion of the numerous inmates killed in the Dachau gas chamber, possibly making it the first mainstream text presenting a Holocaust narrative, and obviously a very prominent work given the endorsement by our Vice President.

Yet ironically enough, these days no one claims that Dachau was a death camp or that anyone died in a Dachau gas chamber.

No, the Dachau prisoners simply died in a gas chamber *near* Dachau:

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/shocking-level-brutality-and-degradation-dachau-wartime

Nazi authorities subjected prisoners deemed perennially too weak for labor, chronically ill, or disabled to Aktion 14f13, initiated in July 1941. This depraved operation linked the concentration camps to the ongoing clandestine program of killing individuals with mental and physical disabilities, codenamed Operation T-4 and ordered by Hitler in the fall of 1939. Over 2,500 inmates from Dachau were shipped to the killing center at Hartheim Castle, near Linz in Upper Austria. There T-4 medical personnel put them to death them with carbon monoxide gas in the Castle’s gas chamber. They were among the 6,000 concentration camp prisoners murdered at Hartheim as part of Aktion 14f13.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartheim_killing_centre

The Hartheim killing centre (German: NS-Tötungsanstalt Hartheim, sometimes translated as “Hartheim killing facility” or “Hartheim euthanasia centre”) was a killing facility involved in the Nazi programme known as Aktion T4, in which German citizens deemed mentally or physically unfit were systematically murdered with poison gas. Often, these patients were transferred from other killing facilities such as the Am Spiegelgrund clinic in Vienna. This was initially a programme of “involuntary euthanasia” permitted under the law ostensibly to enable the lawful and painless killing of incurably ill patients; these murders continued even after the law was rescinded in 1942. Other victims included Jews, Communists and those considered undesirable by the state. Concentration camp inmates who were unfit for work, or otherwise deemed troublesome, were also executed here.

What the actual, Wiz!?

Not once, but twice you cite Abu Ghreib and Rwanda to support the ludicrous notion that NS Germany used homicidal gas Chambers to murder millions upon millions of Jews.

“Mr Bahner, if your witnesses are not going to take this gam…errr, show-trial seriously, I hardly see the point!” 🤨

Regards,
Kali.

Therefore all those Goys who subscribe for the Jewish version of the holocaust are self-hating Goys. At least we have clarified that already.

Plaintiff had me removed from court, but I would speculate he knows less than I do

He’s a very naughty plaintiff(!) and I agree that he certainly knows less than you do, Miss/Mrs/Mr Tiptoe. I have a feeling he may we’ll be pilpulling our strings! 🥸

More seriously, have you ever read a book called The Controversy of Zion, by Douglass Reed? If not, I highly recommend it!

Reed was a foreign correspondent for The Times (London) based in Berlin in 1933. Recognizing as he did, the demonization of Hitler and Germany before the war (because his own columns were not being published, or were being edited before publication), and the hand that the “international Jew” was taking in shaping national affairs and public opinion, before, during and after the war, he determined to get to the root of the problem.

He began research for his book in 1953 and had a finished manuscript by 56. That manuscript sat on top of his wardrobe until after his death, where it was discovered by friends and neighbours; friends who had never realized their friend was the Douglass Reed, author of so many famous books long forgotten (consigned to the dustbin of history).

They managed to find a publisher in South Africa willing to publish the book in 1976.

Now it stands as a historic account of the Jews journey to Zion/Israel/Occupied Palestine, and Jewish influence and intrigue within Western societies, particularly during the first half of the 20th century. It’s a very interesting read, well written, in which the qualities of the author (a real English gentleman of honour) shine through.

It’s actually available on this website in html format, but if you were to download a copy from archive.org then the very touching preface, written by Mr Reed’s friend, is included.

Fond regards,
Kali.

Based on our previous exchanges, I would be disqualified from your jury.

Empaneling me would be a basis for a mistrial.

So the first high-profile Holocaust book published claimed there were gas chambers at Dachau, which there weren’t, but you say it wasn’t really so inaccurate because people now claim there were gas chambers at a location 160 miles away. I’m not sure that 160 miles qualifies as “near.”

My point is that 2500 prisoners at Dachau were indeed murdered in gas chambers. Do you really think it mattered to the prisoners at Dachau whether they were murdered in a gas chamber actually at Dachau, or at a gas chamber in Austria?

As far as the distance, how about, “The 2500 Dachau prisoners were murdered in the nearest convenient* gas chamber”?

P.S. *That would of course be “convenient” for the Nazi murderers, not their civilian victims.

Flailing.

I have read about Hungarian Jews who survived Auschwitz and they said that they never heard about gas chambers during this time in the camp. One such case came in The Guardian and the other in Der Spiegel (different from the ones that I mention above). I know their names. How was possible that they never heard about the gas chambers? What did Germans do in order that nobody knew about the gas chambers? If there was a meeting of Zionist leaders in Palestine in 1944 (January) where they agreed that the number of dead was 6 millions, why did they fail to make this public and to pass the information to the Americans so that the Americans could do something to stop that and to use it in their war propaganda? Why didn’t they care spreading the information among the European Jewish community? Given that the most different people survived, including children that had been born in the camps (with their mother and sisters), what were the criteria they had in the camps to send someone to the gas chambers? Who made the selection? I would just like to have some answers in order to understand better what happened.

Those “accurate” memoirs that Hoess signed were written in English, a language Hoess did not read or write.

Anyone defending the Jewish narrative of “THE HOLOCAUST” is either a Jew or the Jew’s USEFUL IDIOT.
It is very obvious that “THE HOLOCAUST” was built on a HUGE LIE and has become a DOGMA NOT TO BE CHALLENGED.

The Jews have made sure that anyone challenging that Dogma will have to pay dearly for it.
Sheer intimidation to shut everyone else up.

The Truth doesn’t fear investigation, it is therefore obvious that by not allowing an investigation into the Holocaust they are lying and don’t want the Truth to come out.

The Jews can only maintain their Holocaust Lie because they have deep pockets, own the media,
control governments, education, etc.
See the long list of Holocaust films: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Holocaust_films

‘Schindler’s List’, Jewish Steven Spielberg “masterpiece” was based on Australian Tom Keneally’s book ‘Schindler’s Ark’ which won the Booker Prize for FICTION in 1982.

The question posed by Thomas Keneally’s win was whether Schindler’s Ark was a proper work of fiction or an imaginative piece of non-fiction. FICTION said the judges, resoundingly.
The Australian novelist had already written 16 novels before he started on Schindler’s Ark – later renamed Schindler’s List.

Keneally had not intended to write the book, but in 1980 went into a shop in Beverly Hills to buy a briefcase. The proprietor, Poldek Pfefferberg, was a “Holocaust survivor” and one of the Jews saved by the German industrialist Oskar Schindler.
On discovering that Keneally was a novelist, Pfefferberg persuaded him to write the book. Steven Spielberg’s film adaptation went on to win seven Oscars.

Of course, Wikipedia, edited by the LYING Jews:
“He is best known for his non-fiction novel Schindler’s Ark, the story of Oskar Schindler’s rescue of Jews during the Holocaust, which won the Booker Prize in 1982.”

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” – Arthur Schopenhauer

In reality, the deaths in the Jewish Holocaust were a few million compared to the previous crimes of European Christians during the wars of conquest and African slavery in which millions upon millions of human beings were killed or enslaved over the course of several centuries.
Even in the Sunday festivities of the Inquisition, which also lasted several centuries, many more millions of people must have been burned alive than the Jewish victims sacrificed in just five years by the civilized German Nazis.

What hard, authenticated forensic evidence can you supply to substantiate your allegations?

In any murder trial the state must prove:
a) that someone was murdered; this takes a lot more than some paid stooges proclaiming: “I saw it with my own eyes”!
b) what the murder weapon was
c) prove the murder weapon exits and was available
d) that the alleged murderer had the opportunity to commit the alleged crime

In my not so humble opinion this can only begin to be proved by making authenticated forensic evidence available. Over 2300 posts in Mr Unz’s American Pravda about the holocost failed to furnish same.

There was no Jewish holocost by the Germans!
If you disagree please supply authenticated forensic evidence to support your allegation.

The rules and procedures for criminal, civil and military trials/tribunals vary, and Mark is weaving in and amongst all three, simultaneously.

Even in this “imaginary” setting, he will not prevail due to improper process. Nor will he prevail upon preponderance of evidence, which is why he hammers away on matters/numbers impossible to quantify.

Where did all those people, all unidentified and undocumented, go? My speculation about the Great Flying Yarmulke, whisking them away, is most likely. In my opinion.

generally, female members of the Jewish sonderkommando did the clothing sort-throughs in this or that camp.

“inquisition …millions burned alive”. Actually,

at least as re actual Jews, the total number auto-da-fe’d

in the course of 300 years….was about 500.

see Henry Kamen, The Spanish Inquisition, A Historical Revision

this works out to about 1.67 Jews per year.

1)The defendants (Nazis), between 1942 and January 1945, engaged in at least 40,000 instances of:

Kidnapping (from Yugoslavia and Greece);
2) Wrongful transport of my clients out of their countries;
3) Wrongful imprisonment in Auschwitz;
4) Wrongful death;
5) Wrongful death specifically through use of Zyklon B in a homicidal gas chamber.

The court orders the plaintiff to particularise the above stated charges. To whit:

Firstly, specify to whom exactly the word “Nazi’s” is being applied in this case;if you mean the National Socialist Government or Military Command, or the enlisted men serving under them, or the very people of Germany as a collective whole, or some specific, identifiable individuals, then do let the court and the jury know.

Please always keep at the forefront of your mind, Mr Bahner, throughout these proceedings, that this is not a game! Rules of evidence and rules of procedure apply, and standards of conduct and presentation must be adhered to.

Further:
1. What code of which jurisdiction are you claiming has been contravened, Mr Bahner? . Or state that definition of “Kidnapped” that you wish the court, the jury, to determin the merit of your charges upon.
2. Again, Mr Bahner, what do you mean exactly, by “unlawfully transported. Which laws, under which codes in which jurisdiction were contravened, and how did the defendant(s)(?) fall within said jurisdiction.
3. “Wrongful under which code… Etc!

5) Exactly where do you alleged such “gas Chambers” existed. Do you mean at Auschwitz or somewhere else?

“Please try to tighten your game, Mr Bahner. This is not a game, sir, and such sloppy play… I mean work, is simply not good enough!” 😶

…
The Defense has already agreed that the Nazis kidnapped the Plaintiffs, wrongly transported them out of their countries, and wrongfully imprisoned them in Auschwitz

But the court has not, Mr Bahner! 😠
The court will here the evidence to support those allegations which you charge against the defendant(s)(?).

The court instructs “the defence”, to, as it were, mount a defence. – It was wartime, ladies and gentlemen. Many things were afoot that may not be apparent to us today. Defend your clients without reserve or concession of a single thing. That is your job!

Justice must be served, and seen to be served.

Therefore, the only disputed claims are #4 (wrongful death) and #5 (wrongful death specifically through use of Zyklon B in homidal (such) gas chambers).

“I think we’ve just demonstrated that that is NOT the case, Mr Bahner, don’t you?” 💅

All rise!
Kali

Probably one reason for the book’s confusion is that after the end of the war, the American OSS apparently constructed a fake gas chamber at Dachau, which the American government claimed was real. But eventually, the Holocaust narrative was straightened out, and the Dachau gas chamber declared to be an American fake.

Let’s say for the sake of debate you’re correct, and the Dachau gas chamber was “an American fake.” That would simply be the difference between real historical investigation and the Holocaust “revisionist” crap you pedal.

Do you think you will ever acknowledge the hilarious historical ignorance, innumeracy, irrationality, and utter insanity of the “revisionist” crap you…and Nick Kollerstrom, Carlo Mattogno, Fred Leuchter, John Wear…and all your other “revisionist” friends…pedal?

For example, there is this comment of yours, #799 in “Why Everything You Know About WWII is Wrong”:

https://www.unz.com/runz/why-everything-you-know-about-world-war-ii-is-wrong/?showcomments#comments

Well, as just one example I think Nick Kollerstrom’s analysis is quite persuasive. So the Jewish death-toll at Auschwitz was probably 95% lower than the traditional figure*, nearly all those deaths were due to disease, and Jewish lives were saved rather than taken by Zyklon-B.

*NOTE: You described the “traditional figure” of the Jewish death-toll at Auschwitz as 4,000,000…so “95% lower” would be 200,000 Jewish dead at Auschwitz. And of course you further stated that nearly all those deaths were due to disease, and Jewish lives were saved rather than taken by Zyklon-B.

Do you think you will ever concede:

Nick Kollerstram’s analysis of approximately 200,000 Jewish dead at Auschwitz, and that none of them were killed by Zyklon B, is utterly ridiculous. In fact, homicidal gas chambers using Zyklon B killed over 500,000 Jews at Auschwitz.”

?

Do you think you’ll ever concede that? Is there any amount of evidence that would cause you to make that concession?

P.S. Ron, as you can tell, I’m a pretty blunt guy. 😉 But in addition to criticizing where appropriate, I’m a strong believer in giving credit where credit is due. As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve had my comments censored, and have even been kicked off, both global warming worrier sites *and* global warming skeptic sites(!), in both cases for too strongly criticizing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for their lies. In contrast your site has not only allowed every word I’ve typed to be posted as is, you even set up this “Auschwitz mock civil trial” posting thread specifically at my request. So I salute you for that! 🙂

P.P.S. But I digress… 😉 I absolute *must* get back to working on the first piece of evidence I will be presenting in this mock trial…the words of Rudolf Höss himself.

My point is that 2500 prisoners at Dachau were indeed murdered in gas chambers…

…somewhere on Planet Earth…”

Dude, serio?

If you don’t even know where the alleged murder weapon was how can you possibly know it was in fact, the murder weapon – supposing it ever really existed in the first place?!

Stop being silly!

Silence in court!
Kali.

The court recognizes Ron Unz as an expert witness.

For the benefit of the jury, Mr Unz has just pointed out that the plaintiff’s side have, on at least this occasion, besides the dozens of others, “revised” their narrative in light of cold, hard reality.

Thank you, expert witness Unz.
Kali.

Let’s say for the sake of debate you’re correct, and the Dachau gas chamber was “an American fake.” That would simply be the difference between real historical investigation and the Holocaust “revisionist” crap you pedal.

Is this an actual, real life example of cognative dissonance I see here?

Holy moly, I never knew it could be this extreme! I’m actually stunned.

Good night all,
Kali

Mr. Unz, have you considered, in your evil banality, that if you persist in making the holocaust into a hilarious slapstick joke, six million innocent Jews will be unable to sleaze into Ivy schools with bullshit stories about their holocaust grandmas?

You will personally shoah the lifetime earnings of flouncing pearl-clutching sperg Mark Bahner, the Ann Frank of Jew favoritism, cowering in his Kaplan course frantically trying to make up for all the time he spent jerking off to Lolis. Weh! Weh! We said, never again – Who knew it would happen again? Once again, nobody gives a shit about fake-ass waah-baby genocide whoppers, and you got to measure up and learn shit and compete!

Shanda! One who acts for years on end in such conditions must pay the full penalty.

The Defense has already agreed that the Nazis kidnapped the Plaintiffs, wrongly transported them out of their countries, and wrongfully imprisoned them in Auschwitz

But the court has not, Mr Bahner! 😠

If the Defense concedes, then the Court concedes. There is no judge in this mock civil trial.

Do you wish to join John Wear in the Defense? If so, please do so, and persuade him to remove his concession of the first three items of the complaint:

1) Kidnapping (from Hungary and Greece);
2) Wrongful transport of my clients out of their countries;
3) Wrongful imprisonment in Auschwitz;

But you better do it fast. And you need to very quickly disclose what possible evidence you plan to use to contest the first three items of the complaint.

So I certainly find it very “intriguing” that the earliest Holocaust narrative presented in a high-profile mainstream book seems to have been totally fraudulent.

It’s what you would expect if the Holocaust narrative was just starting to be constructed. There’s only one version of the truth, but there are infinite false narratives that can be made up.

Do you think the intention at any of the camps was to work the Jewish inmates to death? That would have been a much more natural way of getting rid of them. Or is the modern narrative so bogus that even the notion that the Germans expected large numbers of Jewish inmates to die is false?

I recall that recently I read that during the Wannsee conference it was discussed that in the German sphere of influence there were about 4.5 million Jews.

After the war 4.2 million Jews filed for reparations payment.

Draw your own conclusion.

During the last year of the war food, fuel, medication, etc. were in short supply, and transports were severely impacted by the day and night bombing by the allies.

If the camps were the last to be supplied with requirements… Tough.

At least we can be sure Iraqi soldiers really did smash incubators and kill Kuwaiti babies.

https://www.winterwatch.net/2021/11/conspiracy-fact-teenage-kuwaiti-girl-lied-to-congress-about-iraqi-atrocities-to-manipulate-public-support-for-a-gulf-war/

I’d be very curious if anyone can find any American mainstream media discussion of the Holocaust between roughly 1946 and 1960.

When I was indoctrinated my teacher told me Hilberg’s book

published in 1961 was the one that broke the spell of denial. That ain’t verbatim but it was very very close to that wording.**

**Not spell of time but more like a hypnotic spell.

Do you think the intention at any of the camps was to work the Jewish inmates to death? That would have been a much more natural way of getting rid of them. Or is the modern narrative so bogus that even the notion that the Germans expected large numbers of Jewish inmates to die is false?

No, the intention at Auschwitz-Birkenau with the approximately 437,000 Hungarian Jews who arrived from May to July 1945 was to select 10-30 percent for work, and to murder all who were not “fit for work,” such as children under 12 and the elderly men and women.

Let’s say for the sake of debate you’re correct, and the Dachau gas chamber was “an American fake.” That would simply be the difference between real historical investigation and the Holocaust “revisionist” crap you pedal.

Is this an actual, real life example of cognative dissonance I see here?

No, you obviously don’t know what “cognative(sic) dissonance” even means.

Here’s the definition:

Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort a person feels when their behavior does not align with their values or beliefs.

I was merely accepting, for the sake of debate, something I do not think is true, simply to see if Ron Unz thinks there might *ever* be enough evidence to convince him to make this statement:

Nick Kollerstram’s analysis of approximately 200,000 Jewish dead at Auschwitz, and that none of them were killed by Zyklon B, is utterly ridiculous. In fact, homicidal gas chambers using Zyklon B killed over 500,000 Jews at Auschwitz.

You are not permitted to speak directly to the jurors or observers. I know, I hereby break said rule, but someone has to do it.

Please make your arguments to the defense, and get on with it. The rest of us can chat amongst ourselves.

@ Mark Bahner,
Anyone defending the Jewish narrative of “THE HOLOCAUST” is either a Jew or the Jew’s USEFUL IDIOT.
It is very obvious that “THE HOLOCAUST”, built on a HUGE LIE has become a DOGMA NOT TO BE CHALLENGED.

The Jews made sure that anyone challenging that Dogma will have to pay dearly for it.
Sheer intimidation to shut everyone else up. The Jews excel at that! Their chutzpah is beyond belief.
No more criticism of Jews, Israel and Zionism allowed in the US.

The Truth doesn’t fear investigation, it is therefore obvious that by not allowing any investigation into the Holocaust they are lying about it and don’t want the Truth to come out.
The Jews, pathological LIARS, can only maintain their Holocaust narrative because they have very deep pockets, own the media, control governments, education, etc.

I grew up in Holland and History was always my favourite subject at Primary and High School in the 1950s and 1960s. I read so much about WWII, the Dutch occupation by the Germans and later when we had TV watched all the documentaries about it and went to Auschwitz in 2013 to see it for myself.

NEVER EVER was the word ‘HOLOCAUST’ mentioned during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s in Holland.

Here an article from 27 January 2019 from the Dutch NOS, the equivalent of the British BBC:

HOLOCAUST, THE WORD FOR THE INDESCRIBABLE IS 40 YEARS OLD
https://nos.nl/artikel/2269356-holocaust-het-woord-voor-het-onbeschrijflijke-is-40-jaar-oud

Below some opening paragraphs of that article in English. Click on the above link and do a Google translation to read the whole article.

“In 1977 ‘Holocaust’ was still a concept for the Nieuw Israëlietisch Weekblad (New Israelite Weekly) that had to be explained. “Holocaust means great destruction or devastation, the word is derived from the Greek ‘holocaiston’.”

“The word was only used six times in the Dutch press that year, twice because of the science fiction film Holocaust 2000, with Kirk Douglas.

“Two years later, the term appeared almost 1500 times in the media. Explanation was no longer necessary. The term was definitively established by the American TV series ‘Holocaust’, which was also broadcast in the Netherlands 40 years ago. The series was a watershed in how World War II was talked about.

“”Until then it was mainly a story of the battle,” says historian Chris van der Heijden, who researched how people came to terms with the war. “It was about the military, the resistance, collaboration, the Hunger Winter, things like that. Moreover, the emphasis was on the perpetrators and the Allies, not on the Jewish victims.””

See the long list of Holocaust films: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Holocaust_films

When will Jewish Hollywood make movies about the Jewish Bolshevik 1917 Revolution in which they, according to Solzhenitsyn, murdered 66 million Russians? Or the Holodomor with millions starved to death by the Jewish Bolsheviks? NEVER.

‘Schindler’s List’, Jewish Steven Spielberg’s “masterpiece” was based on Australian Tom Keneally’s book ‘Schindler’s Ark’ which won the Booker Prize for FICTION in 1982.

The question posed by Thomas Keneally’s win was whether Schindler’s Ark was a proper work of fiction or an imaginative piece of non-fiction. FICTION said the judges, resoundingly.
The Australian novelist had already written 16 novels before he started on Schindler’s Ark – later renamed Schindler’s List.

Keneally had not intended to write the book, but in 1980 went into a shop in Beverly Hills to buy a briefcase. The proprietor, Poldek Pfefferberg, was a “Holocaust survivor” and one of the Jews saved by the German industrialist Oskar Schindler.
On discovering that Keneally was a novelist, Pfefferberg persuaded him to write the book. Steven Spielberg’s film adaptation went on to win seven Oscars.

Of course, Wikipedia, edited by the LYING Jews:
“He is best known for his non-fiction novel Schindler’s Ark, the story of Oskar Schindler’s rescue of Jews during the Holocaust, which won the Booker Prize in 1982.”

Anne Frank, her parents and sister Margot were taken from Amsterdam to Westerbork concentration camp in the north-east of Holland.
Then transported to Auschwitz where her mother died and Otto Frank was taken to hospital with typhus. Anne and Margot were then transported to Bergen-Belsen where both died of typhus in February 1945. Her diary is a total fraud.

Anne Frank Diary Fraud Finally Admitted – April 3, 2019
https://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=186146

“Finally, the long-time fraud of Anne Frank’s diary was publicly admitted by the Anne Frank Foundation. Anne Frank’s diary was co-authored by her father and thus the credibility of the diary ultimately comes to an end.

Holocaust means burnt offering. The Holocausted people were NOT the Jews but the German people in the deliberate fire bombings of 61 cities like Hamburg, Lubeck, Dresden and so on.
https://www.reformationsa.org/index.php/history/174-the-bombing-of-cities-in-world-war-ii

From an Israeli website:
Stalin’s Jews – We mustn’t forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish
https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html

Within a short period of time, Cheka became the largest and cruelest state security organization. Its organizational structure was changed every few years, as were its names: From Cheka to GPU, later to NKVD, and later to KGB.

We cannot know with certainty the number of deaths Cheka was responsible for in its various manifestations, but the number is surely at least 20 million, including victims of the forced collectivization, the hunger, large purges, expulsions, banishments, executions, and mass death at Gulags.

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” – Arthur Schopenhauer

During the last year of the war food, fuel, medication, etc. were in short supply, and transports were severely impacted by the day and night bombing by the allies.

If the camps were the last to be supplied with requirements… Tough.

Yes, what the Allies did was odious. Deliberately provoke Germany into attacking Poland so there was an excuse to declare war on Germany, then wage war against the reasonable, peace-loving Germans in the most atrocious way possible. The whole thing was embarrassing.

I was merely trying to get Ron and others to stop thinking of the events of the Holocaust as very unlikely as a starting point based on their knowledge of what human beings are capable of. Have you a problem with that?

I can, as usual, think of ternative explanations for surprising facts and suppositions. Since Auschwicz-B had been destroyed and was, anyway, in Soviet controlled territory the undoubted desire of Soviet moles, like their masters, to have the Americans hate the Germans was rationally served by creating fake gas chambers where Americans would see them.

‘When I was indoctrinated my teacher told me Hilberg’s book published in 1961 was the one that broke the spell of denial. That ain’t verbatim but it was very very close to that wording.**’

There was no 'spell of denial.' Ron Unz's attempts to argue from ignorance notwithstanding, the essential reality of the Holocaust was an established fact from 1945 on. My impression is that Hilberg merely quantified and defined exactly what was fact and what was embroidery.

What is your explanation for the sending of Jewish women and children and elderly people unfit for work to the camps in Poland from France, Belgium, Holland, Hungary and Italy?

May it please the Court,

Mr. Bahner has polluted our trial proceedings with ridiculous hearsay. We can conclude from this that the prosecution could not find any credible evidence for their claim that the Defendants systematically murdered huge numbers of Jews.

The reality is that the Defendants (and the Axis as a whole) were the good guys in World War II and would never do such a thing. The Defendants’ goal was to save lives by quarantining potential Bolsheviks from the rest of society. Perhaps Mr. Bahner would have preferred for the Bolsheviks to have swept across Europe and murdered and enslaved the people of that continent. We are confident that the jury does not share his preference.

After the war 4.2 million Jews filed for reparations payment.

I presume you are not including grandchildren still being encouraged by shyster lawyers to claim. So…..

Proof please.How and when did they claim? From whom were the reparations sought? Details and links please.

Dear Mr Bahner,

Please stop being silly!

Has my performance so far in this thread not persuaded you of the utter farce your bizarre mock trial is before it’s even properly underway?

For my part, I will comment as I see fit, and play whatever part(s) I choose to play, whenever and however I choose to play them.

Unless persuaded otherwise by either John or anyone else I have respect for in this forum

Thank you,
Kali

Dear Mark,

From Psychiatry Today:

Cognitive dissonance is a state of mental discomfort experienced when two or more modes of thought contradict each other.1 It refers to the perception of contradictory information, including actions, feelings, ideas, beliefs, values, and things in the environment.3 People tend to seek consistency in their attitudes and perceptions, so this conflict causes unpleasant feelings of unease or discomfort.2 Examples of cognitive dissonance include doing something that goes against one of one’s values or learning a new piece of information that disagrees with a long-standing belief or opinion.

You said:

Let’s say for the sake of debate you’re correct, and the Dachau gas chamber was “an American fake.” That would simply be the difference between real historical investigation and the Holocaust “revisionist” crap you pedal.

So tell us, Mr Bahner, how do FAKE gas Chambers built after the war SUPPORT “real historic investigation”, and deny “holocaust revisionist crap”???

I’m all ears,
Kali

Your last par is so silly that it casts doubt on your supposedly serious wish to debate the possible truth of the received versions of the Holocaust.

Otherwise I note your unproven assertion that Hoess’s exaggerated testimony was significant to the decision in Kaltenbrunner’s case but still say “so what” given that, for the purpose oflearning the truth, it is the revised version in his memoirs that you should be giving weight to.

At best you failed to consider the implications of your partial cut and paste. You only need to suppose that there was the gas slightly lighter than air near the floor of te gas chamber either because it was blown in downwards or the containers took it to te floor and it rose from there. As it is you don’t give an explanation for the gas getting into the gas chamber at all. After all if you are merely supposing a lighter than air poison gas was poured into the chamber it would not have reached the prisoners.

You write: “Otherwise I note your unproven assertion that Hoess’s exaggerated testimony was significant to the decision in Kaltenbrunner’s case but still say “so what” given that, for the purpose oflearning the truth, it is the revised version in his memoirs that you should be giving weight to.”

My response: Rudolf Höss’s testimony at the IMT was by far the most important evidence presented by the prosecution to prove a German program of mass extermination of Jews at Auschwitz-Birkenau. It was very damaging to Ernst Kaltenbrunner’s case.

As to your other comments, I will wait until Mark Bahner makes his initial presentation in our mock trial to make a response.

You ask HdC about the Holocaust reparations program: “Proof please. How and when did they claim? From whom were the reparations sought? Details and links please.”

My response: I wrote an article about the German postwar reparations program for “Holocaust” survivors. If you have an interest, you can read my article at http://www.wearswar.com/2022/12/15/holocaust-reparations/.

Wizard of Oz says:

“What is your explanation for the sending of Jewish women and children and elderly people unfit for work to the camps in Poland from France, Belgium, Holland, Hungary and Italy?”

The same reason the American government interned the Japanese-Americans.

By the end of the war in 1945, 125,000 people, half of them children, had spent time in what even Roosevelt admitted were concentration camps.

For the Japanese Americans who were forced into internment, the relocation process was a nightmare of dislocation and uncertainty. Once an exclusion order was issued, Japanese Americans were given one week in which to register with the authorities, gather whatever possessions they could carry, and report to an assembly center nearby.

The evacuees were required to liquidate their assets in few days, and so homeowners were required to sell their houses, and business owners their farms, stores, and restaurants, hurriedly and at steep discounts, often for pennies on the dollar.

The assembly centers were usually converted racetracks and fairgrounds, where thousands of people slept in stables, livestock stalls, or the open air while they waited to be transported to their assigned internment camps.

This large-scale imprisonment of U.S. citizens solely on the basis of their ancestry was met with almost universal approval by the non-Japanese-American population, and was accepted largely without question.
https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/immigration/japanese/behind-the-wire/

Jewish Female Assassins

Jewish historian Dr. Judy Batalion, in her book The Light of Days, states that Jewish women who resisted the Third Reich were far more numerous than she had ever imagined. She writes:[4]

“At first, I imagined that the several dozen resistance operatives mentioned in Freuen comprised the total amount. But as soon as I touched on the topic, extraordinary tales of female fighters crawled out from every corner: archives, catalogues, strangers who emailed me their family stories.

“I found dozens of women’s memoirs published by small presses, and hundreds of testimonies in Polish, Russian, Hebrew, Yiddish, German, French, Dutch, Danish, Greek, Italian, and English, from the 1940s to today.”

Many Jewish women used stealth and disguises to murder Germans. For example, 24-year-old Niuta Teitelbaum, from the Communist group Spartacus, wore her flaxen hair in braids, appearing like a young 16-year-old—an innocent disguise that hid her role as an assassin.

She walked into the office of a high-ranking Gestapo officer, and shot him in cold blood at his desk. Teitelbaum pulled the trigger on yet another German officer while he was in bed in his own home.

In another operation, she killed two Gestapo agents and wounded a third who was taken to a hospital. Disguising herself as a doctor, Teitelbaum entered the wounded Gestapo agent’s room, and murdered both him and his guard.[5]

https://codoh.com/library/document/why-hitler-put-jews-camps-and-ghettos/en/

Plaintiff’s Evidence Item #1: The Words of Rudolf Höss (Timeline)

Before presenting this evidence, this is a timeline, as best I am aware.

May 1940 to November 1943, then May 8, 1944 to January 18, 1945.
Rudolf Höss was the Auschwitz Commandant from May 1940 to November 1943, and again from 8 May 1944 to 18 January 1945, when Auschwitz-Birkenau was liberated by the Soviets. (Note: May 8, 1944 was when Höss arrived for “Aktion Höss.” “Aktion Höss” consisted of the transportation to Auschwitz-Birkenau of approximately 437,000 Hungarian Jews from May 15, 1944 to July 13, 1944.)

Here is a timeline from his capture by the British on March 2, 1946, to his execution by hanging at Auschwitz, Poland, on April 16, 1947.

March 2, 1946: British Field Security Police arrest Rudolf Höss in a farm outhouse near Flensburg, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany. He is disguised as a German sailor and gives the name Franz Lang.

April 14, 1946: Höss is transferred to Nuremberg, Germany, to testify at the International Military Tribunal (IMT) war crimes trials. He is a defense witness for Ernst Kaltenbrunner.

April 15, 1946: Höss testifies at the IMT for two days. He admits to being the commandant of Auschwitz concentration camp and to overseeing the murder of millions of Jews and other prisoners.

May 14, 1946: He provides a personal handwritten confession, which is signed by a witness. The document is available in the British National Archives, and on the Internet.

May 16, 1946: Höss is transferred to the British Military Interrogation Center (MIC) at Bad Mondorf, Luxembourg. He is interrogated by British and American intelligence officers for several months.

May 25, 1946: Transferred to the Polish Ministry of Public Security prison in Warsaw, Poland. He is held there while awaiting trial.

January 1947: Höss begins writing his autobiography. He completes it in March 1947.

March 11-29, 1947: Höss is tried by a Polish military tribunal in Warsaw. He is found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity and sentenced to death by hanging.

April 16, 1947: Höss is hanged in the courtyard next to the former crematorium of Auschwitz I concentration camp. He is the first person to be executed for war crimes in Poland.

Hmmm, nary a word of Hoess’ torture by the Brits; how typical.

With torture you would swear your mother were a child molester.

Mr Wear, thanks for that reference to your article.

It was truly enlightening, throwing light on otherwise nebulous happenings.

A long time ago I came to the conclusion that practically all German actions were in response to enemy actions, and never did Germans initiate an action just because they could.

Your article reinforces my understanding tremendously. Again, thanks. HdC

Plaintiff’s Evidence Item #1: The Words of Rudolf Höss – Part A

I’ll now present text from the autobiography of Ruldolf Höss, found in the book, “The Commandant of Auschwitz.” The autobiography was written by Höss in Poland, from January 1947 to March 1947, as he awaited trial in Poland for war crimes. His words will be in italic, and will not be in block quotes to allow more words per line. My comments on the autobiography will be minimal, and will be in regular font. The page numbers in the book precede the excerpt. This is “Part A”. Parts “B” and “C” will follow, and I’d appreciate it if there will be no response until all Parts A through C are posted.

Rudolf Höss describes the initial orders he received from Reichsführer SS (Himmler) to begin exterminating all Jews, except those who were “capable of work”:

(p132) When the Reichsführer SS modified his original Extermination Order of 1941, by which all Jews without exception were to be destroyed, and ordered instead that those capable of work were to be separated from the rest and employed in the armaments industry, Auschwitz became a Jewish camp. It was a collecting place for Jews, exceeding in scale anything previously known.

(p132) Whereas the Jews who had been imprisoned in former years were able to count on being released one day and were thus far less affected psychologically by the hardships of captivity, the Jews in Auschwitz no longer had such hope. They knew, without exception, that they were condemned to death, that they would live so long as they could work.

(p144) By the will of the Reichsführer SS, Auschwitz became the greatest human extermination centre of all time.

(p144) In the summer of 1941 he (Himmler) himself gave me the order to prepare installations at Auschwitz where mass exterminations could take place, and to personally carry out these exterminations, I did not have the slightest idea of their scale and consequences. It was certainly an extraordinary and monstrous order. Nevertheless, the reasons behind the extermination program seemed to me right. I did not reflect on it at the time: I had been given an order, and I had to carry it out. Whether this mass extermination of the Jews was necessary or not was not something on which I could allow myself to form an opinion, for I lacked the necessary breadth of view.

(p145) Since my arrest it has been said to me repeatedly that I could have disobeyed this order, and that I might even have assassinated Himmler. I do not believe that of all the thousands of SS officers there could have been found a single one capable of such a thought.

Höss describes the origins of using Zyklon B in gas chambers to murder large groups of people. The first Soviet POWs were executed by Zyklon B in approximately September 1941 (https://www.auschwitz.org/en/museum/news/first-transport-of-soviet-pows-reached-auschwitz-64-years-ago,429.html )

(p146) The political officials of the Red Army thus identified were brought to Auschwitz for liquidation. The first, smaller transports of them were executed by firing squads.

(p146) While I was away on duty, my deputy, Fritsch, the commander of the protective custody camp, first tried gas for these killings. It was a preparation of Prussic acid, called Zyklon B, which was used in the camp as an insecticide and of which there was always a stock on hand. On my return, Fritsch reported to me, and the gas was used again for the next transport.

Höss describes the first gassing in a gas chamber, which was originally the mortuary in the main camp of Auschwitz I. The original mortuary was modified with holes in the roof and floor, and Zyklon B introduced through the holes in the roof. I’m not including the full text, to limit the length of the excerpts.

(p147) …The doors were then sealed and the gas shaken down through the holes in the roof. … When the powder was thrown in, there were cries of “Gas”, and a great bellowing, and the trapped prisoners hurled themselves against both the doors. But the doors held. They were opened several hours later, so that the place might be aired. It was then I saw, for the first time, gassed bodies in the mass.

(p147) The killing of these Russian prisoners of war did not cause me much concern at the time. The order had been given, and I had to carry it out. I must even admit that this gassing set my mind at rest, for the mass extermination of Jews was to start soon and at that time neither Eichmann nor I was certain how these mass killings were to be carried out. It would be by gas, but we did not know which gas or how it was to be used. Now we had the gas, and we had established a procedure. I always shuddered at the prospect of carrying out exterminations by shooting, when I thought of the vast numbers concerned, and of the women and children.

Plaintiff’s Evidence Item #1: The Words of Rudolf Höss – Part B

The following excerpts deal not with Greek or Hungarian Jews, but with “gypsies.” I’m including these excerpts to show that the autobiography of Höss contains many examples of mass murder described in a perfectly matter-of-fact way.

(p126) In July 1942 the Reichsführer SS visited the camp. I took him all over the gypsy camp. He made a most thorough inspection of everything, noting the overcrowded barrack-huts, the unhygienic conditions, the crammed hospital building…

(p126) He saw it all, in detail, as it really was–and he ordered me to destroy them. Those capable of work were first to be separated from the others, as with the Jews.

(p126) I pointed out to him that the personnel of the gypsy camp was not precisely what he had envisaged being sent to Auschwitz. He thereupon ordered that the Reich Criminal Police Officer should carry out a sorting as quickly as possible. This in fact took two years. The gypsies capable of work were transferred to another camp. About 4,000 gypsies were left by August, 1944, and these had to go to the gas chambers. Up to that moment, they were unaware of what was in store for them. They first realised what was happening when they made their way, barrack-hut-by barrack-hut towards Crematorium I.

I think this is a description specifically of the procedures for dealing with Hungarian Jews from May through July 1944, although the autobiography does not make this clear. (The autobiography is not in strict chronological order.) The reason I think this is specifically related to the Hungarian Jews is that it describes the “burn pits”, which were constructed specifically to handle the large number of corpses generated by the execution of the vast majority of the approximately 437,000 Hungarian Jews.

(p152) Then the bodies had to be taken from the gas-chambers, and after the gold teeth had been extracted, and the hair cut off, they had to be dragged into the pits or to the crematoria. Then the fires in the pits had to be stoked, and the surplus fat drained off, and the mountain of burning corpses constantly turned over so that the draught might fan the flames.

Plaintiff’s Evidence Item #1: The Words of Rudolf Höss – Part C

In his autobiography, Höss attempts to make an accurate assessment of the true number of people murdered at Auschwitz-Birkenau:

(p195) During previous interrogations I have put the number of Jews who arrived in Auschwitz for extermination at two and a half millions. This figure was supplied by Eichmann who gave it to my superior officer Gruppenführer Blücks, when he as ordered to make a report to the Reichsfürher SS shortly before Berlin was surrounded. Eichmann, and his permanent deputy Günther, were the only ones who possessed the necessary information on which to calculate the total number destroyed. In accordance with orders given by the Reichsfürher SS, after every large action all evidence in Auschwitz on which a calculation of the number of victims might be based was burnt.

(p195) As head of department DI I personally destroyed every bit of evidence which could be found in my office. The heads of other offices did the same.

(p195) I can only remember the figure involved in the larger actions , which were reported to me by Eichmann or his deputies.

(p196)
From Upper Silesia and Polish territory under German rule.. 250,000
Germany and Therisienstadt…………………………………………………. 100,000
Holland……………………………………………………………………………….. 95,000
Belgium………………………………………………………………………………. 20,000
France…………………………………………………………………………………. 110,000
Greece………………………………………………………………………………….. 65,000
Hungary……………………………………………………………………………… 400,000
Slovakia……………………………………………………………………………….. 90,000

Plaintiff’s Counsel note: The total of these numbers is 1,130,000.

(p196) I can no longer remember the figures for the smaller actions, but they were insignificant in comparison with the numbers given above.

Höss again, in a matter-of-fact way describing how all the stolen possessions of the murdered people were handled:

(p196) When the Jewish transports unloaded on arrival, their luggage was left on the platform until all Jews had been taken to the extermination buildings or into the camp. … The clothing of those who had been gassed in bunkers I and II or in crematoria I to IV was also brought to the sorting office.

I was merely trying to get Ron and others to stop thinking of the events of the Holocaust as very unlikely as a starting point based on their knowledge of what human beings are capable of. Have you a problem with that?

Point taken, Wiz.

K.

Mark Bahner says:

“May 16, 1946: Höss is transferred to the British Military Interrogation Center (MIC) at Bad Mondorf, Luxembourg. He is interrogated by British and American intelligence officers for several months.”

INTERROGATED, Mark Bahner? You know very well that Höss was TORTURED. You know very well that anyone tortured would confess to anything.

There is ample scientific research showing that any statement made or information provided under torture is inherently unreliable.

It was established as a fact at the Nuremberg Trials that 4 Million people were killed at Auschwitz.
The primary source from which the 4 Million number derived was the confession of Rudolf Höss.

To commemorate the number, Polish government installed plaques in front of the Auschwitz Memorial to remind the visitors that 4 Million people were killed there.
After the fall of communism in Europe, this number was officially revised and reduced to a million and a half. However according to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum website, the total number of people killed at Auschwitz was no more than 1.1 Million.

Bernard Clarke was the Jewish British Sergeant who captured Rudolf Höss and expressed pride in having tortured him.
Höss was almost beaten to death when captured by the British soldiers. A medical officer saved his life: ‘Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse.’

Höss was severely beaten. Bernard Clarke:
“It took three days to get a coherent statement out of him. But once he started talking, there was no holding him.”

Documented Torture of German POWs Before the Nuremberg Trials

Baron Paget of Northampton wrote in his book titled “Manstein: His Campaign and His Trial” (published by Collins in 1951) on page 109:

[The US Simpson Inquiry Commission] reported among other things that of the 139 cases they had investigated, 137 had had their testicles permanently destroyed by kicks received from the American War Crimes Investigating Team.

Pennsylvania judge Edward L. Van Roden – member of the commission investigating the accusations by Colonel Everett who reported that Germans did not receive fair trial, wrote in his book titled “American Atrocities in Germany“:

Our investigators would put a black hood over the accused’s head and then punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him, and beat him with rubber hose. Many of the German defendants had teeth knocked out. Some had their jaws broken. All but two of the Germans, in the 139 cases we investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair.

No doubt that Jewish Sergeant Bernard Clarke would have kicked Rudolf Höss in the testicles too.

https://rudolfhoess.wordpress.com/
How the British Obtained the Confessions of Rudolf Höss
https://www.ihr.org/jhr/v07/v07p389_Faurisson.html

Mark Bahner:

“May 14, 1946: He provides a personal handwritten confession, which is signed by a witness. The document is available in the British National Archives, and on the Internet.”

Rudolf Höss Affidavit

On March 14, 1946 two days after his capture, at 2:30 in the morning, Rudolf Höss signed an 8 page typed text document written in German. The document lacked any form of formatting, headings or printed administrative references and was littered with hand written corrections. The document was also signed by two witnesses – British sergeants and a captain of the 92nd Field Security Section, who certified that the prisoner made his statement voluntarily.

The captain dated his signature March 14, but one of the witnessing officers dated it March 15. The document does not bear any indication of place where it was signed. Remember the dates – March 14 or 15.

Then on April 5, 1946 Rudolf Höss signed a 20 pages long affidavit written in English – language he did not speak. He signed the affidavit under oath, even though it was written in the language of his captors, not his own.

In order to hide that Rudolf Höss had signed an affidavit in language he did not speak, the original text was recast and presented as “translation” into English from German. However during the hasty attempt to hide the deception, mistakes were made so the handwritten addition to paragraph 10 was mistakenly added to the end of paragraph 9, rendering the paragraph incomprehensible.
It was the forgery that was used before the Nuremberg tribunal.

In my lengthy comment #18 on this discussion thread, I established the following facts:

1. Rudolf Höss’s family members had all been imprisoned and intimidated by British soldiers prior to Höss’s capture.
2. Höss was subject to brutal torture by British soldiers.
3. Höss was also subject to sleep deprivation by British soldiers.
4. Dr. Gustave Gilbert and Dr. Leon Goldensohn both described Höss as being blank and apathetic at the IMT.
5. Dr. Jan Sehn and Dr. Tadeusz Cyprian both described Höss as being apathetic at the Polish trial.
6. Neither Höss nor his attorneys introduced any witnesses at the Polish trial, relying entirely on the witnesses put forward by the prosecution.
7. Key portions of Höss’s testimony at the IMT are widely acknowledged to be untrue. Höss was merely repeating the Allied propaganda at the time.

Since Höss’s confessions and testimony had been obtained by torture, sleep deprivation, and fear for his family’s safety, they never should have been allowed into evidence at the IMT and later Polish trial.

I thought that this would be enough for you to realize that Höss’s testimony was not credible and never should have been used at both the IMT and later Polish trial. However, since you are using Höss’s testimony as proof that there was a mass extermination program at Auschwitz-Birkenau, I will continue with this discussion.

The Allies were definitely eager to find Höss. After threatening to have Höss’s son sent to Siberia, Höss’s wife broke down and gave British soldiers a note with Höss’s location and his alias.

A group of about 25 men were sent the night of March 11, 1946 to arrest Höss. Many of them were German Jews such as British Cpt. Howard Harvey Alexander. Some had kept their original names, such as Kuditsch and Wiener; others had taken on British-sounding names, like Roberts, Cresswell and Shiffers. There were also English-born soldiers from Jewish families, such as Bernard Clarke and Karl Abrahams. Virtually all of these men were enraged and eager to take out their revenge on Höss. (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, Commandant of Auschwitz: Rudolf Höss, His Torture and His Forced Confessions, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, p. 19).

After Rudolf Höss was arrested by the British, he was tortured for days until he was finally ready to sign the “confession” presented to him. This is revealed in his memoirs, which Höss wrote in a Polish prison:

“On March 11, 1946, at 11 p.m., I was arrested.…I was treated terribly by the (British) Field Security Police.…During the first interrogation they beat me to obtain evidence. I do not know what is in the transcript, or what I said, even though I signed it, because they gave me liquor and beat me with a whip. It was too much even for me to bear.…Minden on the Weser River…There they treated me even more roughly, especially the first British prosecutor, who was a major.… I cannot really blame the interrogators [at the IMT] – they were all Jews. I was for all intents and purposes psychologically dissected.…They also left me with no doubt whatsoever what was going to happen to me.” (Source: Rudolf Germar, Lectures on the Holocaust: Controversial Issues Cross-Examined, 4th edition, Bargoed UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2023, p. 401. This book is available on the web at
https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/15-loth.pdf).

Höss’s torture has been confirmed by his torturers:

“Höss screamed in terror at the mere sight of British uniforms. Clarke yelled ‘What is your name?’ With each answer of ‘Franz Lang,’ Clarke’s hand crashed into the face of his prisoner. The fourth time that happened, Höss broke and admitted who he was. The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of the Jewish sergeants in the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an order signed by Höss.

The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pajamas ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless. Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: ‘Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse.’ A blanket was thrown over Höss and he was dragged to Clarke’s car, where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his throat. Then Höss tried to sleep. Clarke thrust his service stick under the man’s eyelids and ordered in German: “‘Keep your pig eyes open, you swine.”

For the first time Höss trotted out his oft-repeated justification: “I took my orders from Himmler. I am a soldier in the same way as you are a soldier and we had to obey orders.” The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow was swirling still, but the blanket was torn from Höss and he was made to walk completely nude through the prison yard to his cell.” (Source: Ibid., pp. 401-402).

Carlo Mattogno provides a good explanation why Höss repeatedly lied about Auschwitz:

“To sum up, from his first interrogation, which he had signed without even knowing the contents, the British interrogators imposed upon Höss by way of torture the Auschwitz narrative outlined during the Belsen Trial, and Höss subsequently stuck to this version due to the well-founded fear of retaliation against his family, who remained hostages of the British occupational authorities. His broken psyche made him uniquely subservient to his inquisitors, who induced him to make ever increasing “confessions” along with the growing amount of holocaust “information” they fed him, but at the same time this prevented him from keeping control over the enormous mountain of lies he was piling up—much of which he probably did not even remember—because of the enormous amounts of contradictions they contain, as well as the many absurdities which are the most telling hallmarks of his lies.” (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, Commandant of Auschwitz: Rudolf Höss, His Torture and His Forced Confessions, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, p. 329).

Since you find Höss to be a credible witness to the mass extermination of Jews at Auschwitz-Birkenau, I will continue in later comments as to the credibility of his autobiography and confessions.

Since there are no witnesses at this trial, and I don’t have much time, I don’t think it’s necessary to go through the usual process of: 1) Plaintiff presents Plaintiff’s witness #1, 2) Defense cross-examines, 3) Plaintiff re-directs, and possibly so on and so on.

Instead, I’m just going to present my evidence in the order I originally gave. This is Evidence Item #2.

Plaintiff’s Evidence Item #2: Testimony from Nazi doctor Fritz Klein at his trial (at which he was convicted)

Nazi doctor Fritz Klein said *in his defense* at his trial:

When I arrived at Auschwitz the SS officer in charge was Kommandant Hoess; he was succeeded by Kommandant Liebehenschel, and then in June 1944 Kommandant Baer took over. There were several doctors in that camp, the chief one being Dr. Wirtz, others whose names I can remember are Dr. Fischer, Dr. Kitt, Dr. Lucas, Dr. Mengele, Dr. Thilo, Dr. Rohde and Dr. König. When transports arrived at Auschwitz it was the doctor’s job to pick out those who were unfit or unable to work. These included children, old people and the sick. I have seen the gas chambers and crematoria at Auschwitz, and I knew that those I selected were to go to the gas chamber. But I only acted on orders given me by Dr. Wirtz. I cannot say from whom Dr. Wirtz received his orders and I have never seen any orders in writing relating to the gassing of prisoners. All orders given to me were given verbally. All the doctors whom I have previously mentioned have taken part in these selections and although S. S. guards were on parade they took no active part in choosing those who were unfit to work.

I never protested against people being sent to the gas chamber although I never agreed. One cannot protest when in the Army. It was not a pleasure to take part in these parades, as I knew the persons selected would go to the gas chamber. Persons who became pregnant whilst in the camp and therefore unfit for work were also selected on later parades. I have heard that Himmler had visited Auschwitz camp, although I have never actually seen him. It was certainly known to the higher-ups that these methods were being used at Auschwitz Camp.

http://www.bergenbelsen.co.uk/pages/trialtranscript/Trial_Day_017.html#Day017_Klein

This is a man testifying *in his defense* at a trial for which, if convicted, he will almost certainly be put to death. But does he say, “There were no gas chambers at Auschwitz!”? Absolutely not.

He freely admits that the “children, old people and the sick” that he selected would be put to death in gas chambers. He even throws in the fact that, “Persons who became pregnant whilst in the camp and therefore unfit for work were also selected on later parades.” (!!!) Meaning that women who became pregnant would be murdered, because they were “unfit for work.”

Keep in mind that this present action we are engaged in is a mock civil trial. Therefore, the Plaintiffs only need to demonstrate that it is “more likely than not” that the Nazis murdered large numbers of people in gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Even if a member of the Jury somehow thought that Rudolf Höss was somehow completely insane when he wrote his autobiography, and completely fabricated everything in it, what are the odds that Fritz Klein was also insane? That is, is there any counter-evidence that can outweigh the writings of Nazi Auschwitz Commandant Rudolf Höss and a sworn statement by Nazi doctor Fritz Klein?

The Plaintiff’s counsel will be presenting much more evidence…although I can’t say on what schedule.

> Niuta Teitelbaum, from the Communist group Spartacus,

Where did this nonsense come from? Teitelbaum acted as a courier for the Gwardia Ludowa or People’s Guard. It was a front organized by the Polish Communist Party, but there’s no indication of them ever having used the name “Spartacus” for anything.

You write from Höss’s autobiography: “Rudolf Höss describes the initial orders he received from Reichsführer SS (Himmler) to begin exterminating all Jews…”

My response: Han in his comment #113, and my comments #18 and #114 on this discussion thread, should be enough to convince you that Höss is not a credible witness to the so-called Holocaust.

However, since you are probably not convinced, I think that we should examine whether Höss actually received orders from Himmler to exterminate the Jews at Auschwitz-Birkenau. In my opinion, Höss never received such orders from Himmler.

Originally the Holocaust story assumed that Germany had a plan or program for exterminating the Jews. In the 1961 edition of his book “The Destruction of European Jews”, Raul Hilberg wrote that in 1941 Hitler issued two orders for the extermination of the Jews. However, even though the Allies captured most of Germany’s government and concentration camp records intact, no order or plan has ever been found to exterminate European Jewry.

In the revised 1985 edition of Hilberg’s book, all references to such extermination orders from Hitler were removed. Exterminationist historian Christopher Browning, in a review of the revised edition of “The Destruction of European Jews”, wrote: “In the new edition, all references in the text to a Hitler decision or Hitler order for the ‘Final Solution’ have been systematically excised. Buried at the bottom of a single footnote stands the solitary reference: ‘Chronology and circumstances point to a Hitler decision before the summer ended.’ In the new edition, decisions were not made and orders were not given.” (Source: The Revised Hilberg, Simon Wiesenthal Annual, Vol. 3, 1986, p. 294).

When asked in 1983 how the extermination of European Jewry took place without an order, Raul Hilberg replied:

“What began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures. They were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus–mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy.” (Source: De Wan, George, “The Holocaust in Perspective,” Newsday: Long Island, NY, Feb. 23, 1983, Part II, p. 3).

On January 16, 1985, under cross-examination at the first Ernst Zündel trial in Toronto, Raul Hilberg confirmed that he said these words. Thus, Hilberg stated that the genocide of European Jewry was not carried out by a plan or order, but rather by an incredible mind reading among far-flung German bureaucrats.

Other historians have acknowledged that no document of a plan by Germany to exterminate European Jewry has ever been found. In his well-known book on the Holocaust, French-Jewish historian Leon Poliakov stated that “…the campaign to exterminate the Jews, as regards its conception as well as many other essential aspects, remains shrouded in darkness.” Poliakov added that no documents of a plan for exterminating the Jews have ever been found because “perhaps none ever existed.” (Source: Poliakov, Leon, Harvest of Hate, New York: Holocaust Library, 1979, p. 108).

British historian Ian Kershaw stated that when the Soviet archives were opened in the early 1990s: “Predictably, a written order by Hitler for the ‘Final Solution’ was not found. The presumption that a single, explicit written order had ever been given had long been dismissed by most historians.” (Source: Kershaw, Ian, Hitler, the Germans, and the Final Solution, New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2008, p. 96).

Many defenders of the Holocaust story claim that the Wannsee conference held on January 20, 1942, was the start of a program to systematically exterminate Europe’s Jews. The documentary evidence of this meeting shows that no extermination program existed; instead, the German policy was to evacuate the Jews to the East. Israeli Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer has declared, “The public still repeats, time after time, the silly story that at Wannsee the extermination of the Jews was arrived at.” (Source: Canadian Jewish News, Toronto, Jan. 30, 1992, p. 8).

Likewise, Israeli Holocaust historian Leni Yahil has stated regarding the Wannsee conference, “[I]t is often assumed that the decision to launch the Final Solution was taken on this occasion, but this is not so.…” (Source: Yahil, Leni, The Holocaust: The Fate of European Jewry, 1932-1945, Oxford University Press, 1990, p. 312).

So, it is not credible that Höss received orders from Himmler to exterminate the Jews at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Himmler did not have the authority to make such orders. Such orders would have had to come from Adolf Hitler, and no such orders from Hitler have ever been found to exist.

You ask Han: “Where did this nonsense come from? Teitelbaum acted as a courier for the Gwardia Ludowa or People’s Guard. It was a front organized by the Polish Communist Party, but there’s no indication of them ever having used the name “Spartacus” for anything.”

My response: Han got it from page 219 of the book by Judy Batalion titled “The Light of Days: The Untold Story of Women Resistance Fighters in Hitler’s Ghettos”, New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 2020.

Zofia Posmysz, in 1959, wrote a radio play called The Passenger from Cabin 45, which drew on her experience as an inmate in Auschwitz-Birkenau. It was made into a Polish film entitled The Passenger. Posmysz also adapted her play into a novel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zofia_Posmysz
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_(Posmysz_novel)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_(1963_film)
The novel has been translated into several languages, including German, but not into English, which is puzzling since the movie is well considered, despite being unfinished and the missing parts having been rather peculiarly filled with narration and stills.

The part which is offered as a quote from Judy Batalion gives no indication of the name “Spartacus” ever having been used by the People’s Guard.

I’m sorry for the question, but it seems to me, or are you making a logical error when write?

The reason I think this is specifically related to the Hungarian Jews is that it describes the “burn pits”, which were constructed specifically to handle the large number of corpses generated by the execution of the vast majority of the approximately 437,000 Hungarian Jews.

As far as I understand, the purpose of the trial (among other things) is to prove such executions…? Or am I missing something? I’m not attacking you now, I just want to clarify.

And Mark, don’t pay much attention to those self-proclaimed jury members who have already decided everything for themselves without hearing your evidence.

P.S Perhaps the format of the Dalton-Cockerill debate was not so bad)

Honestly, I don’t know

Germar Rudolf on pages 453-455 of his book “Lectures on the Holocaust: Controversial Issues Cross-Examined”, 4th edition, Bargoed UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2023 lists some weaknesses of Höss’s testimonies:

1) Höss mentioned three million victims alleged to have been murdered under his command, that is, through the end of 1943. This is obviously an accommodation of the false Soviet total number of victims of four million. In order to make this number appear realistic, he also exaggerated the numbers of Jews living in various European countries.

2) Höss mentions Belzec, Treblinka, and Wolzec as additional “extermination camps,” although there was no camp named Wolzec. He stated that these three camps were already in operation by June of 1941, but Belzec began operating in March of 1942 and Treblinka in July 1942.

3) Höss claims to have received orders to begin murdering Jews in June of 1941, at which time he states that gassings began at Auschwitz. Established historiography, however, dates the hypothetical “final solution” orders in the fall of 1941, with the alleged gassings beginning early in 1942. Höss also parrots the fairy tale of collecting human fat and pouring it on the flames.

4) Höss even stated that members of the prisoner’s cremation detail were immune to poison gas and had no need for gas masks. Höss wrote:

“The door [of the gas chamber] was opened a half an hour after the gas was thrown in and the ventilation system was turned on. Work was immediately started to remove the corpses….they could be seen shifting the corpses with one hand while they chewed on something they were holding in the other.”

5) During an interrogation on April 2, 1946, Höss expressively confirmed his claim that no gas masks were required during hard labor in the gas chambers. Höss was asked if it was dangerous work for inmates to go into gas chambers and work among the bodies and among the gas fumes. Höss replied: No. They had some gas masks, but they did not need them, as nothing ever happened.

6) Höss also mentions technically inappropriate, even absurd methods of disposing of the corpses: “At first we poured waste oil over the bodies. Later on we used methanol…He [Blobel] also tried using dynamite to blow up the corpses, but he had very little success with this method.”

Germar Rudolf concludes: “If you are interested in a thorough documentation of Höss’s capture and torture by the British as well as an in-depth analysis of 53 impossible and untrue statements made by Höss, I recommend you read the monograph on this by the indefatigable Carlo Mattogno.”

I agree with Rudolf’s conclusion. In his well-researched book “Commandant of Auschwitz”, Carlo Mattogno documents that almost all of Höss’s statements about the so-called Holocaust are wrong, contradictory and absurd. Mattogno writes that Höss’s chronology of events is also fictitious, as are the events (such as gassings) he wove into them. (Mattogno, Carlo, Commandant of Auschwitz: Rudolf Höss, His Torture and His Forced Confessions, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, p. 325).

Thus, Rudolf Höss’s testimony and autobiography are not credible. Höss’s confessions and testimony were obtained by torture, sleep deprivation, and fear for his family’s safety. They never should have been allowed into evidence at the IMT and later Polish trial, and should not be used today as a credible source of information regarding the so-called Holocaust.

I’m sorry for the question, but it seems to me, or are you making a logical error when you write?

The reason I think this is specifically related to the Hungarian Jews is that it describes the “burn pits”, which were constructed specifically to handle the large number of corpses generated by the execution of the vast majority of the approximately 437,000 Hungarian Jews.

Never apologize for a question! 🙂 Especially a question asked politely and respectfully. 🙂

This is a mock trial. There is no judge. And there are no witnesses. I have no legal background, beyond watching TV shows and movies about courtrooms. 🙂

But I think if I made such a statement in a real civil trial, the Defense would jump up and say, “Objection! Arguing facts not in evidence!” And the judge would sustain that objection. 🙂 So as Plaintiff’s counsel ,I would be forced to rephrase my statement to something like:

The reason I think this is specifically related to the Hungarian Jews, is that it describes the “burn pits”, which the Plaintiffs intend to provide evidence were constructed specifically for “Aktion Höss,” which was related to the approximately 437,000 Hungarian Jews who arrived from May-July 1944.

And Mark, don’t pay much attention to those self-proclaimed jury members who have already decided everything for themselves without hearing your evidence.

I’m speaking off the record here. (Actually I wouldn’t be allowed to talk to a potential juror, especially “off the record!”)

I’ve done all of this for three reasons:

1) To see for myself if Ron Unz’s original claim was true, that only about 200,000 people died at Auschwitz-Birkenau, and almost all were from disease, and none from homicidal gas chambers. I’ve established for myself that claim is clearly false;

2) To try to convince others to see the truth as I see it (that many hundreds of thousands of people were murdered in homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau); and

3) To leave a record of what I’ve found regarding what happened at Auschwitz-Birkenau, regardless of whether anyone’s mind is changed. I think I absolutely owe it to the people who I think were murdered, and their friends and family, to leave a record.

P.S Perhaps the format of the Dalton-Cockerill debate was not so bad.

Yes, a debate is not a bad format. I think the advantage to a “mock civil trial” is that it (theoretically!) forces both the Plaintiff and the Defendant to share the evidence they plan to present, so both sides can prepare their arguments in a way that will address the other side’s arguments. And a mock *civil* trial forces the person serving as a juror to think in terms of, “Which side is the most likely to be correct?”

Unfortunately, with this mock trial, I simply don’t have the time to get into a back and forth with John Wear, as would be normal in a mock trial. So I’m just going to run through all my evidence at one shot. And after I’ve presented the evidence I originally intended to present, I’ll come back to John’s responses to address them.

IMPORTANT NOTE TO JOHN WEAR: See paragraph above. I do intend to come back to address all of your responses after I’ve finished presenting all the evidence I told you I was going to present. Hopefully, I will be able to present the evidence regarding Item #3 and #4 tonight.

You write in comment #115: “Nazi doctor Fritz Klein said *in his defense* at his trial: When I arrived at Auschwitz the SS officer in charge was Kommandant Hoess; he was succeeded by Kommandant Liebehenschel, and then in June 1944 Kommandant Baer took over.”

My response: This is a correct statement. Both Rudolph Höss and Arthur Liebehenschel were commandants at Auschwitz-Birkenau, and both of these men were executed after their trials conducted in Poland. But what happened to Richard Baer?

Richard Baer, the last commandant of Auschwitz, did not live to see the beginning of his trial in Frankfurt, Germany. He was arrested in December of 1960 in the vicinity of Hamburg. Baer during his pretrial questioning adamantly refused to confirm the existence of homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz during World War II.

Baer died in June 1963 under mysterious circumstances while being held in pretrial custody. An autopsy performed on Baer at the Frankfurt-am-Main University School of Medicine stated that the ingestion of an odorless, non-corrosive poison could not be ruled out as the cause of his death. There was no further probe into the cause of Baer’s death, and Chief Public Prosecutor Fritz Bauer ordered his body cremated. Conveniently, the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt, Germany began almost immediately after Baer’s death. The statements Baer made during his pretrial interrogations were not read into the trial record. With Baer’s death the prosecutors at the Auschwitz trial were able to attain their primary objective—to reinforce the gas chamber myth and establish it as an unassailable historical fact. (Source: Stäglich, Wilhelm, Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence, Institute for Historical Review, 1990, pp. 238-239).

It has been widely known ever since the illegal abduction of Adolf Eichmann in Argentina that the Israeli Mossad has immense capabilities. Given the fact that Chief Public Prosecutor Bauer was a Zionist Jew, which should have precluded him from heading the pretrial investigation, it is quite possible that the forces of international Jewry were able to murder Baer while he was in jail. If anyone knew the truth about the gas chamber allegation, it was Baer, the last commandant of Auschwitz. Baer’s untimely death prevented him from giving testimony that would have contradicted the official Holocaust narrative. Baer’s death was certainly a relief for the promoters of the Auschwitz trial. (Source: Ibid.).

So, in my opinion, Richard Baer was murdered before the Auschwitz trial started. The promoters of the Holocaust story could not have the last commandant of Auschwitz testifying that there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. This would ruin their purpose for conducting the trial.

Dr. Fritz Klein also could not testify at the Belsen trial that there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. If he had, he would have certainly been hanged. Instead, Dr. Klein chose the strategy of accepting the reality of a gas chamber, but denying any personal responsibility for the gassings. This was his only realistic strategy to avoid being hanged.

Dr. Klein’s strategy was adopted by other defendants at the Allies’ postwar trials. For example, Ernst Kaltenbrunner’s defense at the IMT rested on two main points. First, he was head of the RSHA, which was charged with security, and not the head of the WVHA, which administered the concentration camps. His only involvement with the internal operation of the camps was his order of March 1945, which gave permission for the Red Cross to establish itself in the camps. Second, Kaltenbrunner said it was Heydrich who had organized the details of the Jewish policy, whatever that policy was. Thus, according to Kaltenbrunner, there was no respect in which he could be held responsible for the extermination of the Jews. (Source: Butz, Arthur R., The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry, Newport Beach, Cal.: Institute for Historical Review, 1993, pp. 180-181).

Kaltenbrunner’s defense strategy was his only realistic chance for acquittal on the extermination charge. If he had testified that no extermination program had existed, any leniency shown by the court in the judgment would have been tantamount to the court’s conceding the possible untruth of the extermination claim. This was a political impossibility. By claiming that Kaltenbrunner had no responsibility for the extermination program, and even opposed it, the defense was making it politically possible for the court to be lenient in its sentencing of Kaltenbrunner. (Source: Ibid., pp. 181-182).

The genocide of European Jewry has been given legitimacy by the numerous trials conducted by the Allies after the Second World War. However, the Nuremberg and other Allied trials were organized not to dispense impartial justice, but for political purposes. This has been commented on by numerous people, including many high-level American judges appalled by these judicial proceedings.

Thanks. I thought it might be interesting to compare the protocol for the clothes sorting to the non-protocol of the body sorting.

Regarding comment #124: This is a mock trial. There is no judge. And there are no witnesses. I have no legal background, beyond watching TV shows and movies about courtrooms. 🙂

You have no idea how hard it was to restrain myself from blasting away on this movie reference given my previous commenting history with Mark, but you are correct, this is serious subject matter, and all kidding aside, I think Mark is well intentioned. Let’s see what happens.

Unlike in the real world, and in actual courts of law in some places, most of us in the peanut gallery would be whisked away to jail for our comments; defense counsel as well. But, what can I say? Peanuts gonna peanut. While we still can.

Patrick McNally says:

“Where did this nonsense come from? Teitelbaum acted as a courier for the Gwardia Ludowa or People’s Guard. It was a front organized by the Polish Communist Party, but there’s no indication of them ever having used the name “Spartacus” for anything.”

LOL, Patrick McNally, Shlomo, Moshe or whatever your name is!

So good to see you, The Master of Spin, again. What took you so long to contribute your 2 cents worth to this thread?

The beginnings of Communist rule in Poland

https://dokumen.pub/the-beginnings-of-communist-rule-in-poland.html

“A small number of pro-Soviet leftist underground organizations with names like ‘SPARTACUS’, ‘Union of Peasants and Workers’ the ‘Revolutionary Councils of Workers and Peasants’ and ‘Association of Friends of the USSR’ continued to exist in Poland after 1938 and were even able to function in the initial period of German occupation, but their influence remained minimal.

“Their support had largely evaporated as a result of Polish bitterness at the Soviet occupation of much of eastern Poland in September 1939 and they were almost wiped out by German repression after the outbreak of the Nazi-Soviet war in June 1941.”

The Gwardia Ludowa Explained

https://everything.explained.today/Gwardia_Ludowa/

Gwardia Ludowa (People’s Guard) or GL was a communist underground armed organization created by the communist Polish Workers’ Party in German occupied Poland, with sponsorship from the Soviet Union.

Formed in early 1942, within a short time Gwardia Ludowa became the largest clandestine fighting force on Polish soil which refused to join the structures of the Polish Underground State loyal to the London-based government-in-exile. On January 1, 1944 GL was incorporated into the communist Armia Ludowa.[1]

Gwardia Ludowa was created on 6 January 1942 with military aid from the Red Army. The availability of firearms led to GL swiftly reaching a strength of 3,000 fighters.[2] Gwardia Ludowa was connected to the NKVD intelligence services of the Soviet Union with NKVD colonels commanding some AL military actions.[3]

It was tasked with fighting against Germany by means of partisan warfare, sabotage, and reprisal actions.
The full-size partisan detachments were formed in May 1942 although foray groups were organized earlier. They operated near Piotrków and Radom. By the end of the year the organisation was divided onto seven administrative districts including Warsaw, Lublin, Radom-Kielce, Kraków, Łódź, Silesia and Lwów.

Book talk: ‘The Light of Days: The Untold Story of Women Resistance Fighters in Hitler’s Ghettos’

https://www.jewishchronicle.org/2022/03/02/book-talk-the-light-of-days-the-untold-story-of-women-resistance-fighters-in-hitlers-ghettos/

“A young Polish girl, wearing a peasant skirt with her hair in braids and a handkerchief covering her head, showed up unexpectedly one day at the Gestapo headquarters in Warsaw. She told the guards she needed to speak with an official inside about a personal matter.

“They showed her to the office. She went in and shot him in the head, and then just walked out and meekly waved goodbye to the guards and walked off,” said author Judy Batalion.

“That was Nuita Teitelbaum, who on the outside was just a young history student at Warsaw University when World War II began and a member of the underground Communist Youth movement.

“On the inside, however, she was a self-appointed executioner, dubbed “Little Wanda with the Braids” by the Nazis as she made a habit out of sneaking up on German soldiers and killing them.

“Teitelbaum is just one of the many brave Jewish women featured in “The Light of Days” by Batalion, who will be in Milwaukee at Congregation Shalom on Sunday, March 6 to discuss her work made up of remarkable stories about Jewish women resistance fighters in Hitler’s Ghettos. The program is in partnership with the Nathan and Esther Pelz Holocaust Education Resource Center, a program of Milwaukee Jewish Federation, and Congregation Shalom.”

You write: “IMPORTANT NOTE TO JOHN WEAR: See paragraph above. I do intend to come back to address all of your responses after I’ve finished presenting all the evidence I told you I was going to present. Hopefully, I will be able to present the evidence regarding Item #3 and #4 tonight.”

My response: That is fine by me. Take your time. You are also welcome to have someone else such as a history professor or other scholar join you in these discussions.

And Mark, don’t pay much attention to those self-proclaimed jury members who have already decided everything for themselves without hearing your evidence.

Hi Kb_2,

Just to clarify, and speaking for myself, having already seen Mark’s evidence repeated over the course of several hundred comments in the WWII thread, and having read reams of evidence that challenges and beats Mark’s “charges”, and having been an active participant in several long threads on this very topic, it surely surprises no-one paying attention that I’ve already seen through Holocaustians dogma. (I could go to prison for writing this comment where I live. Isn’t that interesting?)

Additionally, I find this absurdity of a “mock” trial, sans any clearly defined parameters – for example, are there any time-limits set, or will this BS nonsense continue indefinitely? How will the verdict be decided, and by whom? According to what criteria (cognisant of the “prosecutions” self-determined “civil” trial, and the shitty, lowest common denominator rules HIS jurisdiction wishes to slither around in.

Are there actually any lawyers here??! I mean, IF we are going to stage mock trials, we would do well to do it right!

Since when did The Unz Review comment section become a no-holds-barred Clown Show? << That's a rhetorical question, because the answer is: Since commenter "Mark Bahner" started throwing his emotional effluence liberally about the WWII thread, telling us how it is that he "virtually knows in his heart that it's true", and generally lowering the quality of the conversation, and preventing it from going anywhere – No wonder school ma'am Yeager stopped participating. Who can blame her in the light of such relentless , l.c.d. pilpul?

I am a regular commenter, and even more regular reader, here on unz. I comment as I feel inclined. – God love him, even dear Ron Unz can't stop me from doing that! lol

As far as I understand, the purpose of the trial (among other things) is to prove such executions…? Or am I missing something? I’m not attacking you now, I just want to clarify.

The purpose of this GAME is to flaunt the “special, unique suffering” of a conniving cultural enemy, and keep it front and center of any discussion of the ever-expanding Jewish Question (JQ), so that we gentiles (they call us Goy) are stiffled and prevented from moving the conversation toward discussion of solutions.

This is not a game.

This is not a court. (I shouldn’t even have to say that!)

This is a mockery.

I love this place,
Kali

But of course we are blessed by the indomitable grace of John Wear, as he opens up the archive for all to see.

My Teacher says there’s always a cost:
You just lost Hoess as a witness, Mr Bahner!

The court is instructed to disregard all testimony obtained by torture as unreliable and probably false.

All rise!
Kali

Never apologize for a question! 🙂

Why would you presume that you are addressing a child or an imbecile, Mr Bahner? – Are you, by any chance a primary school teacher?

Especially a question asked politely and respectfully. 🙂

I’ll be the judge if that.

Kali.

I have no legal background, beyond watching TV shows and movies about courtrooms

So, none at all, then!

Watching telly of any sort does not constitute, in any way, shape or form, a “legal background”. The word “beyond” in the above quotation, is redundant, and the rest of the sentence pure drivel.

So, given that you are singularly unqualified to represent your “virtually certain truth” …. I mean ‘side’, wtf do you think you are doing?

You want to do this, Mr Bahner, do it properly, – If it’s done properly then no doubt one if the columnists/bloggers, will provide a platform for the “hearings”. (Kev, Steve Sailer, even Mr Giraldi.?)

So far you’re doing nothing but waste everyone’s time.
Thank goodness for John.

Kali.

How fruitful is it to debate willful, paid liars?

wsb/5ds

> “A small number of pro-Soviet leftist underground organizations with names like ‘SPARTACUS’, ‘Union of Peasants and Workers’ the ‘Revolutionary Councils of Workers and Peasants’ and ‘Association of Friends of the USSR’ continued to exist in Poland after 1938

OK, that much is easily believable. You list 4 different underground organizations, and one of them is using the name “Spartacus.”

> Gwardia Ludowa (People’s Guard) or GL was a communist underground armed organization created by the communist Polish Workers’ Party in German occupied Poland, with sponsorship from the Soviet Union.

No mention of the name “Spartacus” in anything there. From your own references it just sounds like this was a careless use of a name which was not applicable to the People’s Guard.

From Douglas Reed:

The West has come to this dilemma through the pressure of two millstones, Communism and Zionism, the nation-destroying world-revolution and the new, nation-creating, ruling-class. The one has incited the mob; the other has gained mastery over rulers. Are the organizers of both the same?
……..

The one movement, Zionism, aimed at reassembling a dispersed nation in a territory promised to it by the Jewish god; the second movement, Communism, aimed at the destruction of separate nationhood as such.
………..

In 1791 the great German historian Johann Gottfried von Herder, looking back on the hundred years behind him, wrote:

“The ruder nations of Europe are willing slaves of Jewish usury … The Jewish people is and remains in Europe an Asiatic people alien to our part of the world, bound to that old law which it received in a distant climate, and which according to its own confession it cannot do away with … It is indissolubly bound to an alien law that is hostile to all alien peoples.”
…………….

And,
An Illuminist emissary was struck by lightning on a journey to Silesia in 1785. Papers found on him caused the houses of two Illuminist leaders to be searched. Correspondence between “Spartacus” (Adam Weishaupt) and the “Areopagites” (his closest associates in the order), and other papers then found revealed the full plan for world-revolution with which we of the 20th Century have become familiar through its results and under the name of “Communism.”
……………….

“Proof”of nothing here, but an interesting pattern well worth looking into when one asks, How is this possible? with regard to the Jewish question.

Plaintiff’s Evidence Item #3-A: Excerpts from book, “Auschwitz: A Doctor’s Eyewitness Account”, by Jewish prisoner/doctor, Dr. Miklos Nyiszli

Dr. Miklos Nyiszli was a pathologist from Oradea-Nagyvarad, Hungary. He was taken to Auschwitz with his wife and daughter in April 1944. His KZ (Nazi camp) number was A 8450.

(p6 – Introduction) Separated from his wife and daughter upon arrival, Dr. Nyiszli was shortly chosen by the infamous Dr. Mengele to take charge of all the pathological work in the camp. As such, Nyiszli became a member of the Sonderkommando, the specially qualified and privileged group of prisoners who worked exclusively inside the crematoriums. This Sonderkommando…was made up of 860 male prisoners chosen for their various professional abilities as well as their physical strength and sturdy constitution.

The Declaration at the front of the book says, “Done at Oradea-Nagyvarad, March 1946.” Plaintiff’s counsel note: This is important, particularly if that was when the manuscript was actually completed; the manuscript pre-dates, or is approximately coincident with, the capture of Rudolf Hoss.

(p30) …This was the famous “Gypsy Camp”. … Because they were Catholics, they were allowed the privilege of remaining in family groups.

(p30) There were about 4,500 of them in all. They did no work, but were assigned the job of policing the neighboring Jewish camp and barracks, where they did their job with unimaginable cruelty.

(p30) The Gypsy Camp offered one curiosity: the experimental barracks. The director of the Research Laboratory was Dr. Epstein, professor at the University of Prague, a pediatrician of world renown, a KZ prisoner since 1940. His assistant was Dr. Bendel, at the University of Paris Medical School.

(p33) Mengele was indefatigable in the exercise of his functions. He spent long hours in his laboratories, then hurried to the unloading platform, where the daily arrival of four or five trainloads of Hungarian deportees kept him busy half the day.

(p38) For the crematoriums ran on a twenty-four hour schedule, as I learned from a fellow prisoner, who also informed me that the crematorium personnel were known at the Sonderkommando, which means merely, kommandos assigned to special work.

(p38) Later I learned that Auschwitz KZ had, at certain periods, held more than 100,000 people inside its barbed wire fences(1). (1) Hoess, the camp commander, testified at Nuremberg that hte camp held 140,000 prisoners when filled to capacity.

(p41) Besides my laboratory and anatomical work, I was also responsible for the medical care for the crematorium’s SS personnel–about 120 men–as well as the Sonderkommando–about 860 prisoners.

(p46) The present Sonderkommando was the twelfth to bear that name. I learned the history of the previous Sonderkommando, when it “reigned,” who its heroes were, and I was reminded of a fact I already knew: that the Sonderkommando’s life was a few months at most.

(p47) Fifteen ventilators were going simultaneously, one beside each oven. The incineration room was about 500 feet long: it was bright, whitewashed room with a concrete floor and barred windows. Each of the ovens was housed in a red brick structure.

(p49) Above the benches, numbered coat hangers. Numerous signs in several languages drew everyone’s attention to the necessity of tying his clothes and shoes together. Especially not to forget the number of his coat hanger, in ordere to avoid all useless confusion on return from the bath.

(p49) There were 3000 people in the room, men, women, and children. Some of the soldiers arrived and announced that everyone must be undressed in 10 minutes. The aged, grandmothers and grandfathers; the children; the wives and husbands were all stuck dumb with surprise. Modest women and girls looked at each other questioningly. Perhaps they had not understood the German words.

(p50) Making his way through the crowd, the SS opened the swing-doors at the end of the room. The crowd flowed into another, equally well-lighted room. The second room was the same size as the first, but neither benches nor pegs were to be seen. In the center of the rooms, at 30-yard intervals, columns rose up from the concrete floors to the ceiling. They were not supported columns, but square sheet-iron pipes, the sides of which contained numerous perforations, like a wire lattice.
…
(p51) The Deputy Health Officer held four green sheet-iron canisters. He advanced across the green, where every 30 yards, short concrete pipes jutted up from the ground. Having donned his gas mask, he lifted the lid of the of the pipe, which was also made of concrete. He opened one of the cans and poured the contents–a mauve granulated material–into the opening. The granulated substance fell in a lump to the bottom. The gas escaped through the perforations, and within a few seconds filled the room in which deportees were stacked. Within five minutes everyone was dead.

(p51) For every convoy it was the same. Red Cross cars brought the gas from the outside. There never was a stock of it in the crematorium.

(p51) Twenty minutes later the electric ventilators were set going in order to evacuate the gas. The doors opened, the trucks arrived, and a Sonderkommando squad loaded the clothing and shoes separately.

(p51) The ventilators, patented “Exhator” system, quickly evacuated gas from the room, but in the crannies between the dead and the cracks of doors small pockets remained. Even two hours latoer it caused a suffocating cough. For that reason the Sonderkommando group which first moved into the room was equipped with gas masks.

(p52) The bodies were not lying here and there throughout the room, but piled in a mass to the ceiling. The reason for this was that the gas first inundated the lower layers of air and rose but slowly towards the ceiling.
…
(P52) I noticed the bodies of the women, the children, and the aged were at the bottom of the pile, the strongest at the top.

(p52) The Sonderkommando squad, outfitted with large rubber boots, lined up around the hill of bodies and flooded it with powerful jets of water. This is necessary because the final act of those who die by drowning or by gas is involuntary defecation. Each body was befouled, and had to be washed.

(p52) When the last gold tooth was removed, the bodies went to the incineration Kommando. They were laid by threes in a kind of pushcart made of metal. The heavy doors of the oven opened automatically; the pushcart moved into a furnace heated to incandescence.

(p55) Nothing but pile of ashes remained in the crematory ovens. Trucks took the ashes to the Vistula, a mile away, and dumped them into the raging waters of the river.

(p131) Annihilation time had come for the 4,500 inhabitants of the Gypsy Camp. The measures taken were the same as those of the Czech Camp. All the barracks were quarantined. SS guards, leading their police dogs, invaded the Gypsy quarters and chased the inhabitants outside, where they were made to line up. Rations of bread and salami were distributed. … No one thought of he crematoriums, for then why would rations of food been distributed?

(p131)… Throughout the night the chimneys of number one and two crematoriums sent flames roaring skyward, so that the entire camp was lighted with a sinister glow.

(p132) Next day the Gypsy Camp, once so noisy, lay silent and deserted.

Plantiff’s Evidence Item #3B – Excerpts from the Vrba-Wexler Report

This is a Holocaust Memorial Day Trust Fund web page explaining who Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler were, and what the 40-page Vrba-Wexler report that was created after they were interviewed separately:

https://www.hmd.org.uk/resource/rudolf-vrba/

Rudolf Vrba escaped from Auschwitz-Birkenau so he could warn Hungarian Jews about their imminent extermination.

It was particularly urgent because I knew that all was prepared for the murder of one million Jews from Hungary. And because it was close to Slovakia, I thought it would be possible to give the warning.

In his role clearing the arrivals ramp, and in a later desk job, Vrba took mental note of the transports arriving, their origin, and estimated the numbers killed.

In early 1944 he learnt that the Nazis were preparing for arrival of Hungary’s entire Jewish population of around one million people, who were to be exterminated. Vrba had considered attempting escape from Auschwitz before, but now saw that it was now urgent. He felt the members of the organised resistance movement in Auschwitz were focused on their own survival, and not on provoking resistance from the people who arrived to be gassed.

Vrba worked with his friend Alfréd Wetzler to analyse previous unsuccessful escape attempts, and plan a successful one.

The Vrba–Wetzler Report was an important piece of evidence at the Nuremberg war crimes trials in 1946. Vrba sent evidence to the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem in 1961, and was a witness at a trial of Holocaust denier Ernst Zündel in Toronto in 1985. He died in 2006. Throughout his life Rudolf Vrba was somebody who refused to stand by. In the most extreme and appalling situation he risked his life to try to prevent the killing of hundreds of thousands of people. It can be argued that through their contribution to telling the world about Auschwitz the heroism of Vrba and Wetzler saved the lives of tens of thousands of Budapest’s Jews.

Some excerpts from the Vrba-Wexler Report, from the following Adobe Acrobat file. Vrba kept records with the Auschwitz I.D. numbers in front, and noted how many people were not registered, because they were immediatedly gassed. He also often noted the fate of those who were registered.

https://www.fdrlibrary.org/vrba-wetzler-report

http://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/_resources/images/hol/hol00522.pdf

From approximately the beginning of June, 1942:

At the same time the so-called “selections” were introduced. Twice weekly, Mondays and Thursdays, the camp doctor indicated the number of prisoners who were to be gassed and then burned. These “selectees” were loaded into trucks and brought to the Birch Forest. Those still alive upon arrival wer gassed in a big barack erected near a trench use for burning the bodies. The weekly “draft” in dead from “Block 7” was about 2,000, of whom 1,200 died of natural “death” and about 800 through “selection.” For those who had not been selected a death certificate was issued…whereas for “selectees” a special register was kept with the indication “S.B.” (“Sonderhandelt” – special treatment).

48,000 – 64,800 15,000 naturalized French, Belgian, and Dutch Jews. This figure certainly respresents less than 10% of the total convoy. This was between July 1st and September 15, 1942. Large family convoys arrived from various European countries and were at once directed to the Birch wood. The special squad (“Sonderkommando”) employed for gassing and burning worked in day and night shifts. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were gassed during this period.

85,000 – 92,000 6,000 Jews from GRODNO, BIALOSTOK and CRACOW as well as 1,000 Aryan Poles. The majority of the Jewish convoys were directly gassed and daily about 4,000 Jews were driven into the gas chambers.

During mid-January 1943 3 convoys of 2,000 persons each from THERESIENSTADT arrived. The bore the designations “CU” “CR” and “R”. (The meaning of these markings were unknown to us). These markings were also stamped on their luggage. Out of these 6,000 persons only 600 men and 300 women were admitted to camp. The remainer were gassed.

At the end of February 1943 a new modern crematorium and gassing plant was inaugurated at BIRKENAU. The gassing and burning of bodies in the Birch forest was discontinued, the whole job being taken over by the four specially built crematoria. The large ditch was filled in, the ground levelled and the ashes use as before for fertilizer at the fam labour camp of HERMENSE, so that to-day it is almost impossible to find traces of the dreadful mass murder which took place here.

At present there are four crematoria in operation at BIRKENAU, two large ones, I and II, and two smaller ones, III and IV. Those of type I and II consist of 3 parts, i.e.: a) the furnace room; b) the large hall; and c) the gas chamber.

They are crowded into the gas chamber (c) in such numbers that there is of course only standing room. To compress this crowd into the narrow space shots are often fired to induce those already at the far and to huddle still closer to together. When everybody is inside the heavy doors are closed. Then there is a short pause, presumably to allow the room temperature to rise to a certain level, after which the SS men with gas masks climb on the roof, open the traps and shake down a preparation in powder form out of tin cans labeled “CYKLON” “For use against vermin” which are manufactured by a Hamburg concern. After 3 minutes everyone in he chamber is dead. No one is known to have survived this order, although it was not uncommon to discover signs of life after the primative measures employed in the Birch wood. The chamber is then opened, aired and the “special squad” carts the bodies on flat trucks to the furnace rooms where the burning takes place. Crematoria III and IV work on nearly the same principle, but their
capacity is only half as large. Thus the total cremating and gassing capacity at Birkenau is approximately 6,000 daily.

109,000 – 119,000 At the beginning of March 1943, 45,000 Jews arrived from Saloniki. 10,000 of them camp to the camp including a small percentage of women; some 30,000 however went straight to the cremating establishment. Of the 10,000 nearly all died a short time later from a contagious illness resembling malaria.

In my lengthy comment #32, I said that Carlo Mattogno has written an entire book about Dr. Miklos Nyiszli. This book is titled “An Auschwitz Doctor’s Eyewitness Account: The Bestselling Tall Tales of Dr. Mengele’s Assistant Analyzed.”

I thought that my comment #32 would be enough to convince you that Dr. Miklos Nyiszli was not a credible witness to the so-called Holocaust. However, since you have made a new comment #136 about Nyiszli’s book, I will give you some additional information from pages 466-467 of Germar Rudolf’s book “Lectures on the Holocaust.” This book is available on the web at https://www.unz.com/announcement/the-holocaust-debate/.

Germar Rudolf lists some reasons why Miklos Nyiszli is not a credible witness:

1) Even German mainstream historian Prof. Dr. Maser said that Nyiszli’s book contains excessive lies. According to Nyiszli’s account, each of the four crematories at Auschwitz had a capacity of 5,000 corpses per day. To these must be added the 6,000 who he says were shot and burned in trenches every day at the “birch wood.”

2) According to Nyiszli, Auschwitz had a murder rate of around 26,000 people per day, which comes to 780,000 per month or around 936,000 per year. It came to a total of around 20 million after the Birkenau crematories went into operation – in addition to the two million already shot at “Birkenwald.”

3) Nyiszli, who worked in the autopsy room of a Birkenau crematorium, gave the length of the “gas chambers” as 150 meters. The actual length of the basement morgue was a fifth of that: 30 meters.

4) Jean-Claude Pressac attempted to salvage Nyiszli’s credibility by suggesting that Nyiszli did in fact tell the truth, but for some inscrutable reason exaggerated everything fourfold, which isn’t true either, because his victim number, to give just one example, is inflated by a factor of twenty, if we take the figure currently bandied about by the Auschwitz Museum of about one million.

5) Another key false claim of Nyiszli’s testimonies is his statement that the members of the so-called Sonderkommando – the inmate allegedly in charge of pulling the corpses out of the gas chambers and burning them in furnaces or on pyres – were killed by the Germans every four months, and replaced with new inmates, in order to leave no witnesses of the crime behind.

If that were so, the world wouldn’t be awash in Holocaust survivors claiming to have been a member of such a Sonderkommando.

Mark, I encourage you to read my comment #32 on this discussion thread again for more information about Miklos Nyiszli. He is not a credible source of information on the homicidal gassings that allegedly occurred at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

If you feel inclined, I also encourage you to read Carlo Mattogno’s book “An Auschwitz Doctor’s Eyewitness Account” for more information. Mattogno concludes about Miklos Nyiszli: “It is impossible to ascribe good faith to this ‘eyewitness,’ who was and remains a mere impostor.” (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, “Dr. Mengele’s ‘Medical Experiments’ on Twins in the Birkenau Gypsy Camp,” Inconvenient History, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2013).

Douglas Reed was totally unreliable in his later years. He recites nonsense from Robert Wilton uncritically, as just one of many flaws.

OSKAR GROENING

https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-nazi-trial/bookkeeper-of-auschwitz-admits-moral-guilt-at-holocaust-trial-idINKBN0NC17V20150421

Oskar Groening, in what could be one of Germany’s last big Holocaust trials, is accused of being an accessory to the murder of 300,000 people although in his role as a clerk he did not kill anyone himself.

“In moral terms, my actions make me guilty,” Groening said on the first day of his trial in the northern town of Lueneburg.

Groening was 21, and by his own admission an enthusiastic Nazi, when he was sent to work at Auschwitz in 1942. His case is unusual because unlike many of the other SS men and women who worked in concentration camps, he has spoken openly in interviews about his time at the camp in occupied Poland.

Groening’s job was to collect the belongings of deportees after they arrived at the camp by train and had been put through a selection process that resulted in many being sent directly to the gas chambers.

The charges against Groening relate to the period between May and July 1944 when 137 trains carrying roughly 425,000 Jews from Hungary arrived in Auschwitz. At least 300,000 of them were sent straight to the gas chambers, the indictment says.

He also told of an incident in late 1942 when he witnessed Jews being herded into a converted farm house near the camp. An officer shut the door, put on a gas mask, opened a can and poured its contents down a hatch.

“The screams became louder and more desperate but after a short time they became quieter again,” Groening said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42698558

A former guard at the Auschwitz death camp has submitted a request for mercy to avoid jail in Germany.

In 2015 Oskar Groening, 96, was given a four-year prison sentence for being accessory to murder of 300,000 Jews in the camp in Nazi-occupied Poland.

REINHOLD HANNING

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/29/auschwitz-guard-reinhold-hanning-holocaust-trial

In his statement, Hanning insisted he was initially unaware of what kind of place he had been transferred to, but admitted he soon realised that the camp was used for mass killings.

“People were being shot, gassed and burned. I could see corpses being moving around and off the site, yes, one was aware of that. I noticed the smell of burning. I knew that corpses were being burned,” he said.

“Of course I found out that trains arrived in Auschwitz crammed full of people. We were aware that the majority of people who arrived in the trains were killed.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-40122610

A former SS guard at Auschwitz who was found guilty of helping to commit mass murder has died before he could serve a prison sentence.

Reinhold Hanning, who was 95, was convicted last June but had appealed the judgement.

He was sentenced to serve five years for facilitating the killing of at least 170,000 people.

Hi Kali.

As far as I understand, the difference between the previous threads and this thread is to present the arguments in a more systematic way.

In previous thread, I noticed that the dispute was reduced to the exchange of the same questions and answers (see the summary that I wrote). The idea of “court” in the form in which it was embodied seems rather eccentric to me. The format of the Dalton-Cockerill debate is much better) However, I would rather listen to what both sides have to say.

You may not take this as a court , but I think you should not interfere with people who want to hear both sides.

In fact, many controversial theories – scientific or conspiracy theories – have a lot of small details that are unknown to outsiders. And often very important things are connected with these details.

I know this very well, because I am a physicist by training, and I have seen dozens of books and articles devoted to attempts to refute the special theory of relativity. Some of them were rhetorically persuasive and did a pretty good job of disproving individual claims from specific textbooks. But even the best examples of them fell under the criterion of “not even wrong.” Why? Because they were written by amateurs (often engineers) who didn’t know the finer details. And sometimes they just didn’t know what they were criticizing at all. Somewhere in the textbooks there were simplifications, somewhere there were incorrect statements. In fact, exact knowledge is not always contained in a textbook – there are many details that can be learned from monographs, articles, etc. In general, knowledge is distributed among many people. And the special theory of relativity – as it has been tested by thousands of people in theoretical physics – still stands, although many people believe otherwise after reading some seemingly convincing papers. If you haven’t spent many years getting to know a theory in details, you’re still an amateur.

I hope that in this court a lot of details will come up that I do not know about). And I hope you don’t get sent to jail for your comment.

Since I am a dilettante on the Holocaust issue (according to my criteria – although over the years I have read a number of books and articles) – it is interesting for me to observe the debates. It seemed to me that Dalton had lost the debate I was pointing out.

P.S Regarding special relativity – https://www.kritik-relativitaetstheorie.de/Anhaenge/Kapitel2-englisch.pdf – Of course, there are some true statements there (criticism of conventional wisdom) – If anything, I have no desire to debate on this topic)

Do you have a law degree, “Kali”? Do you have a license to practice law? If so, what type of law do you specialize in?

Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler are famous eyewitnesses to the so-called Holocaust.

Rudolf Vrba was considered one of the most important witnesses in support of the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz. Vrba was interned in Auschwitz, but succeeded in escaping – like hundreds of other inmates. Vrba’s and Wetzler’s report on the alleged mass exterminations in Auschwitz was published in November 1944 by the War Refugee Board, a U.S. propaganda institution founded by the Jewish U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau.

This was the first report on Auschwitz officially sanctioned by the U.S. government. Vrba’s testimony was perhaps one of the most influential in this respect. Twenty years later, Vrba published a book titled “I Cannot Forgive” describing the same things published in the War Refugee Report. Furthermore, Vrba had provided important eyewitness testimony at the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt in 1964.

Everything was going great for Vrba until he decided to appear as a witness for the prosecution in the 1985 Ernst Zündel trial. The prosecution felt that Vrba could produce reliable and authentic testimony at the trial in support of the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz.

However, Vrba confessed during his testimony at Zündel’s trial that his book “I Cannot Forgive” was “an artistic picture…not a document for the court.” Vrba also testified that he had never actually witnessed anybody being gassed at Auschwitz, but had merely heard rumors. Furthermore, Vrba admitted that his written and pictorial descriptions of the Auschwitz crematory were mere guessing, based on “what I heard it might look like.” Vrba proved to be an unreliable witness who could only cite hearsay evidence of the so-called Holocaust. (Source: Hoffman II, Michael A., The Great Holocaust Trial, 3rd edition, Dresden, NY: Wiswell Ruffin House, 1995, pp. 56-59).

The prosecution was not able to provide any credible witnesses at the 1985 Ernst Zündel trial. The failure of Jewish eyewitnesses to provide credible testimony at the 1985 Ernst Zündel trial caused Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz to write that the trial was “a total victory for Holocaust deniers and a total disaster for Holocaust survivors and the Jewish people.” (Source: Kahn, Robert A., Holocaust Denial and the Law: A Comparative Study, New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004, p. 119).

Germar Rudolf gives more information indicating that Rudolf Vrba is not a credible witness.

In his book “Pietà”, Swedish Professor Georg Klein told of a conversation he had with Rudolf Vrba in 1987. Klein was a Hungarian Jew who had experienced the persecution of the Jews during the war, but he had no knowledge of mass extermination. In 1987, Klein talked to Vrba about the nine-hour film Shoah, produced by Claude Lanzmann a few years before. The topic of Vrba’s experiences at Auschwitz naturally came up, since Klein was a Holocaust survivor, too. Klein asked Vrba whether his colleagues knew about his experience during the war. Vrba answered that he never mentioned anything to them, for he thought they wouldn’t understand. But later, with a sardonic smile, he mentioned that one of his colleagues had gotten really excited upon unexpectedly seeing Vrba in Lanzmann’s film.

The colleague, of course, wanted to know whether “the horrible things that Vrba describes in the film were really true. ‘I do not know,’ Vrba answered. ‘I was only an actor reciting my lines.’ ‘How strange,’ the colleague remarked. ‘I didn’t know that you were an actor. Why did they say that the film was made without any actors?’ I was speechless.” (Source: Rudolf, Germar, Lectures on the Holocaust: Controversial Issues Cross-Examined, 4th edition, Bargoed, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2023, p. 388).

Germar Rudolf discusses some errors in the 1944 War Refugee Report co-authored by Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler:

1) Vrba’s testimony alleges that 1,765,000 Jews were gassed in the period April 1942 to April 1944. However, at the time of this writing, official historiography assumes a figure of “only” half a million for that period. Furthermore Vrba assures us that 50,000 Lithuanian Jews were gassed at Auschwitz, of which official historiography has no knowledge whatsoever.

2) Vrba also alleges that the number of French Jews gassed at Auschwitz amounted to 150,000. Official historiography assumes that around 75,000 were deported, some being regularly registered while the rest were allegedly gassed.

3) The map of Auschwitz included in their report is false, as are the sketches of Crematories II & III, in a particularly crude manner:

– Instead of the 9 furnaces each with 4 openings alleged by Vrba, there were actually 5 furnaces with 3 openings each.
– Instead of the pair of rails that he alleges led from the gas chamber to the furnace room, the basement morgue (alleged gas chamber) was actually a level lower than the furnace room, and they were connected by an elevator.

4) Vrba says that 2,000 people at a time were gassed in the alleged gas chambers. However, the morgue had an area of 210 square meters; 9.5 persons could never be packed into an area of one square meter, without strict military discipline and willing cooperation.

5) The allegation that Zyklon B was a “dustlike substance” is also false; Zyklon B was gypsum granules infused with hydrogen cyanide.

6) The alleged duration of execution, three minutes, agrees with most other testimony, but is technically absolutely impossible. For execution periods of a few minutes, the amount of poison necessary would be so absurdly large that it cannot be seriously considered, in particular with Zyklon B, which releases its gas only slowly.

7) The allegation that Crematories IV and V were “of very similar construction” as Crematories II and III is false. They were of entirely different construction.

8) The allegation that 8,000 Jews from Krakow were gassed in the presence of prominent guests from Berlin at the dedication of the first Birkenau crematorium early in 1943 is not confirmed by a single source.

9) In his book “I Cannot Forgive”, Vrba lavishly describes Heinrich Himmler’s alleged presence at the gassing of 3,000 Jews (packed 13 per square meter this time) in the alleged “gas chamber” of the recently opened Crematorium II in January of 1943. In truth, the crematorium was not completed until March of that year, and it is undisputed that Himmler’s last visit to Auschwitz was in July 1942. (Source: Ibid., pp. 459-461).

I could go on and on. I do not give Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler any credibility as being witnesses to the gassings at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

As unreliable as Dario Gabbai? As unreliable as “6 million” killed by the Nazis? As unreliable as confessions obtained under torture and threats to family members?

Mr. Gabbai claims a chamber was emptied of thousands of bodies, 30 minutes after exposure to lethal gas, hauled with the hook end of a cane, placed on stretchers, 4 persons high, sent up in an elevator, cremated, 4 persons at once, to ash, in a 24 hour period. He never mentioned Dr. Bendel or Dr. Nyiszli in the story I heard from his own mouth.

Regarding 6 million, another unreliable author/journalist/historian says:

“Heddesheimer cogently documents the slew of previous attempts by Jews to disseminate deceitful and untrue atrocity propaganda before, during and after World War I. The First Holocaust features an amazing collection of press clippings and propaganda articles dating back to the late 19th century that make claims of the suffering and imminent extermination of European Jewry. Among such articles we find that Jews have, dozens of times before WWII, invoked the cabalisitc “6,000,000″ number as the amount of Jews on the verge of death and destruction during various periods of turmoil and conflict in Europe and Russia.”

Everyone, everywhere is unreliable, throughout history, it seems, unless you are a Rabbi praising the destruction of Edom, a Jewish victim of unwarranted persecution or Barbara Spectre, of “Europe is not for Europeans” fame, who said “Jews will be resented for their role in the necessary transformation, that must take place….” Mr. McNally, do you have any idea why the transformation must take place?

I’ll also add, I’ve been cross referencing Mr. Reed’s historiography for quite some time; no deception or poor scholarship found thus far.

Just a note to keep proper court records…

The material on OSKAR GROENING should have been labeled:

Plaintiff’s Exhibit #4: Words and Criminal Trial Verdict for OSKAR GROENING

And the material on Reinhold Hanning should have been labeled:

Plaintiff’s Exhibit #5: Words and Criminal Trial Verdict for REINHOLD HANNING

Douglas Reed was totally unreliable in his later years.

Who told you to say that?? Some one who doesn’t want anyone reading Douglass Reed, that’s for sure.

The Controversy of Zion is a gift to us from 7 decades ago: The perspective of an honest, articulate and capable English gentleman who asked the Jewish Question.

Viva Palestine!
Kali

an enthusiastic Nazi,

The term “Nazi” is a purjorative, used to conjour a pre-ordained image of evil.

The court, for that reason, requires all parties to use the more correct term, National Socialist, instead. – Propaganda words have no place in this court.

Kali

John, do you have any link to a *transcript* of the 1985 Zündel trial?

My lengthy comment #34 on this discussion thread gives a detailed response why I do not regard Oskar Gröning as a credible witness to the alleged homicidal gassings at Auschwitz-Birkenau. I do not feel the need to add anything to this comment.

You may not take this as a court , but I think you should not interfere with people who want to hear both sides.

In what way am I “interfering” with anyone’s ability or desire to read both sides?

I’m actually encouraging people to actually read both sides, Kb_2 by making the thread more interesting and by highlighting specific points of contention.

It is my sincere hope that people do read the thread(s) in question. – As I have been repeating, this is not a game!

Which is why I am of the opinion that the thing needs to be done properly. Which is why I ask if there are any lawyers present.

It is also my sincere hope and intention to expose an obvious troll for what he is.

Best regards,
Kali

Maybe you need this:

https://archive.org/details/1985ZndelTrialTranscript/mode/2up

John usually uses paper sources, so I took the liberty of doing some googling.

You ask: “John, do you have any link to a *transcript* of the 1985 Zündel trial?”

My response: The transcript can be purchased at CODOH in the book Rudolf, Germar (ed.), The First Zündel Trial: The Court Transcript of the Canadian “False News” Trial of Ernst Zündel, 1985, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2020.

As far as an online transcript, I don’t know. Maybe someone else on this discussion thread can find one for you.

4) Vrba says that 2,000 people at a time were gassed in the alleged gas chambers. However, the morgue had an area of 210 square meters; 9.5 persons could never be packed into an area of one square meter, without strict military discipline and willing cooperation.

This statement has (nearly) zero value. Japanese trains fit 6 people per square meter without strict military discipline and special cooperation. It’s just that some people put pressure on others.

If we take into account that in the conditions of war a) people were most likely emaciated b) there were many children among them – this number easily increases to 10. And yes, if the Germans were herding people into the gas chamber, they could well use force.

And I’m not talking about a theoretical upper bound (which could really be hard to reach)…

No lawyer, with any sense (oxymoron?), would own to it, as 1. He/she would be subjected to all sorts of abuse; 2. She/he would forfeit the pleasure of speculating and slinging accusations, willy nilly, as the abuse would again follow, i.e., what an idiot you are, I feel sorry for your clients! Have you ever won a case in your lifetime?

It’s best to work subversively, like you know who.

Plaintiff’s Exhibit 6 – Plot Plans for Auschwitz Camps, Plan Views of Crematoriums II and III, Notes on Purpose of Crematoriums II and III

a) These are the plot plans of Auschwitz I, Birkenau (Auschwitz II) and Morowicz (Auschwitz III).

One important note is that when the four crematoria at Birkenau were constructed, they were referred to during WW2 as “Crematorium I, II, III, and IV”, rather than “Crematorium II, III, IV, and V”, as it is on the Birkenau (Auschwitz II) plot plan below.

Another important note is that the Cremation Pyre (Item 6) that’s nearest the Soviet Prisoner Mass Grave is has also been called “burn pit” or “pit”. There were a total of 9 of them constructed at that location, before and during “Aktion Hoss,” dealing with the Hungarian Jews arriving at Auschwitz from May to July 1944.

A final note is that Items 14 and 15 described as “Provisional Gas Chamber 1” and “Provisional Gas Chamber 2” are often known as “Bunker 1” and “Bunker 2.”

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/map/auschwitz-i-camp-1944

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/map/auschwitz-ii-birkenau-camp-summer-1944

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/map/auschwitz-iii-monowitz-camp-1944

b) This webpage contains a plan views of Krematorium I (as it was called in WW2)

https://www.yadvashem.org/yv/en/exhibitions/through-the-lens/auschwitz-blueprints.asp

There are many drawings on the page, but the plan view of Krematorium I (as it was called in WW2) is next to this text on the webpage:

Shortly after construction had begun at Birkenau, the decision was made to change its designation, and turn it into an extermination camp. The first experiments with gas were carried out in the main camp in the fall of 1941, and in the light of their success, the SS decided to build four permanent installations in Birkenau, for the specific purpose of gassing people to death. The construction began in 1942, directed by the Topf and Sons company, supervised by the SS. As a stopgap measure until the installations were completed, the Germans converted existing buildings to erect two makeshift gas chambers next to the camp.

The four extermination installations started operating in 1943. They each included an undressing room and a gas chamber, both underground, and a crematorium for incinerating the bodies of the murdered. These facilities made the murder of the Jews a far more efficient process.

c) Notes on the design of new crematoria in Birkenau

The book “Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp,” edited by Yisrael Gutman and Michael Berenbaum has these footnotes on page 179, from “7. Gas Chambers and Crematoria,” by Franciszek Piper. (Note that crematoria II and III would have been referred to as “I” and “II” in WW2.)

42. When annotations to the preliminary project were drafted, i.e., by late October 1941, the conception of the purpose and outfitting of the crematorium had lost its relevance. The Bauleitung’s letter of commission, dated October 22, 1941, which was sent to the furnace builder, Topf and Sons, indications that not one but two underground mortuaries were planned for construction near the crematorium. See ASAM Bauleitung, BW 30/34, card 116.

43. In a Bauleitung letter of March 6, 1943, mortuary 2 was referred to as “undressing room” (Auskleideraum). In another letter, one of the underground mortuaries was designated as “gas cellar” (Vergasungskeller); ASAM, Trial of Hoss, vol. 11, card 9; microfilm 1060, card 100. Hoss, p. 215, confirms that the underground spaces at crematoria II and III served as undressing rooms and gas chambers and were outfitted with an automatic ventilation system.

, vol. 11, card 9; microfilm 1060, card 100. Hoss, p. 215, confirms that the underground spaces at crematoria II and III served as undressing rooms and gas chambers and were outfitted with an automatic ventilation system.

Snowflakes!

No wonder they lost the war. 😉

Plaintiff’s counsel doesn’t change the words in the articles entered into evidence. That would be unethical. 🙂

You write: “If we take into account that in the conditions of war a) people were most likely emaciated b) there were many children among them – this number easily increases to 10. And yes, if the Germans were herding people into the gas chamber, they could well use force. And I’m not talking about a theoretical upper bound (which could really be hard to reach)…”

My response: This is not a major issue in establishing that Rudolf Vrba is not a credible witness. However, I doubt if 2,000 people could be gassed at one time in alleged homicidal gas chambers at Birkenau.

Experience shows that people do not pack themselves tightly to the very edge of an enclosed area – unless, of course, they are quite willing to do so, like when they enter a bus and need to fill it tightly, so that other passengers can still get in.

In the case of an alleged homicidal gas chamber, people would have to enter through just one door in a long, stretched-out room and fill it tightly to the last place, starting at the room’s opposite end. After undressing, the naked people would walk over into the alleged gas chamber. Since that room is much smaller, the victims must press themselves even more tightly together.

The first people entering the room would have to proceed to the very end of this 100 ft long room in a disciplined manner and line up against the wall. The next lot would then form the line directly in front, and so on, until the entire chamber is full. Even if choreographed perfectly, this would still take a considerable amount of time. The room would eventually be filled with 120 rows of 14 people each, which equals 1,680 people. This would be extremely difficult to achieve without the willing and disciplined cooperation of all.

So, I doubt if 2,000 people could be gassed at one time in an alleged homicidal gas chamber. However, this is not a big issue, since Vrba made so many false statements that he is not a credible witness to the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Birkenau.

Ron, I was wondering, in relation to the following thread authored by Steve Sailer, why do you allow him to censor commentary? :

https://www.unz.com/isteve/could-the-u-s-have-stopped-the-holocaust-no-because-it-was-mostly-over-by-the-end-of-1942/#comment-6051905

I have half a dozen or so comments posted there and all are still in ‘moderation’ (most of them have been in limbo for between 1 and 2 days).
Have a look at those comments of mine Ron and you’ll see that I’m not heckling the author, disrupting the thread etc, but posting hard truths about the Holohoax that Steve Sailer and his small hat controllers don’t want to hear.

I posted several comments in another Steve Sailer thread a week or so ago and, even though all of those comments are no longer in moderation and are now available for all to see, most of them were only out of moderation after several days had elapsed.
One comment in particular was in moderation for over FIVE (5) days before finally being released from purgatory.

Ron, I get it that you allow individual authors autonomy over moderation policy or whether or not to ban individuals outright from participating.
But a warning should be posted for Steve Sailer articles that reads:

‘Only commentary from yes-men and women are permitted in Steve Sailer threads.
Dissent will not be tolerated and such comments will be purged (especially those comments that don’t flatter our Talmudic overlords)’.

Anyone who cares to peruse the comments section of the article in the link I posted above, will notice that it’s swarming with Mark Bahner’s synagogue brethren, all peddling the Holohoax fable.(There is one especially toxic fellow who uses the handle ‘Jack D’, and the B.S he’s been writing is beyond the pale).

Mark ‘Mordechai’ Bahner-stein, if you’re reading this, it would be best if you went there to mingle with other rabid Zionists like yourself.
You’ll feel right at home.

Plaintiff’s Evidence Item 7A: Description of Hungarian Jewish transports

1) Accounts of Hungarian Jews transported to Auschwitz from May 15 to July 9, 1945
Per “Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp”:

From page 466:

Of approximately 438,000 Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz from May 15 to July 9, 1944, about 10 percent were determined to be fit for labor. Some were retained to work in Auschwitz itself; the remainder were dispersed to 396 camps in the Nazi empire. The largest groups wer concentrated in the notorius camps of Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, Gross-Rosen, Gunskirchen, Mauthausen, Neuengamme, Ravensbruck, and Sachenhausen…

The number of Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz continued to decline following the periodic selections and transfers. By the time the camp was liberated in January 1945, only a few thousand were left. Most of them were transferred on death marches to other camps in the central and western parts of the fast-crumbling Third Reich. Few who were evacuated survived until the liberation in April and May 1945.

2) Accounts of May 23, 1944: Single-day total of 12,674 Hungarian Jews from four towns:

https://www.facebook.com/auschwitzmemorial/photos/19442014-70th-anniversary-of-deportation-and-extermination-of-jews-from-hungary-/10152040524421097/

1944/2014 | 70th anniversary of deportation and extermination of Jews from Hungary in Auschwitz

On May 23 1944 four trains with Jews deported from Hungary to Auschwitz crossed the border in Košice, with: 3023 Jews from Vişeu de Sus (Felsővisó), 3272 from Nyiregyháza, 3269 from Mukačevo (Munkács) and 3110 from Oradea (Nagyvárad) – all together 12,674 people.

On 23 May 1944 after the selection of transports from Hungary 5 women were registered in the camp. Most probably a group of young, healthy people were kept in the camp as the so-called deposit (without registering them in the camp – some were soon transported to other concentration camps, some – killed in the gas chambers). Remaining people were murdered in the gas chambers.

Jews deported from Hungary a few moments before being murdered in gas chambers. They are waiting in a small forest next to gas chambers and crematoria IV and V

The girl standing second from the right is Gerty Ackerman of Munkács. Sitting next to her is her sister Wally. Behind the girls, in the white headscarf, is the sister’ mother, Rozi-Rebecca née Mermelstein. The two boys to the left are probably Reuven and Gershon Fogel. Lia Fogel, née Mermelstein is sitting next to the in the dark headscarf. The picture was taken by SS photographers in May 1944 during deportation of Jews from Hungary to Auschwitz.

3) Accounts for Munkács alone:

https://www.yadvashem.org/yv/en/exhibitions/communities/munkacs/liquidation.asp

The first deportation train left Munkács on 11 May. The deportation route and number of cars was predetermined: 3,000 people were to be evacuated on each train. The loading of the trains, carried out at a distance from the civilian stations, were overseen by a gendarme or German army officer, and the Jews were allowed to take with them just a few belongings.

On the nine transports that left the Munkács brick factories, 28,587 Jews from the town and its surroundings were sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau. According to data of the Hungarian train service in Kassa, the transports from Munkács passed through Kassa on 14, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 May, carrying Jews from the area.

The remainder of the Jews of Munkács was sent in three transports that passed through Kassa on 21, 23 and 24 May, to the same destination – Auschwitz-Birkenau. The Jews were forced onto the deportation wagons under a hail of physical and mental abuse. They were pushed into the cattle cars, 70-80 people in each enclosed car, with one bucket of water for a three-day journey and one bucket to use as a toilet, with no fresh air or space to lie down. Some died along the way. Some committed suicide. Others lost their minds.

Plaintiff’s Evidence Item 7B: Construction of the “burn pits” with channels for collecting human fat

From Filip Müller’s “Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers”. He describes preparations for dealing with the Hungarian Jews in “Aktion Höss”:

(p124) Towards the end of April, there were increasing rumors of the imminent extermination of the Jews of Hungary.

(p125) At the beginning of May 1944, Camp Lagerkommandant Hoss arrived, followed a few days later by Hauptscharfuhrer Moll. We knew Moll only too well, for it was he who supervised the burning of corpses which, in the summer of 1942, had risen to the earth’s surface from their mass graves, and who afterwards, had liquidated to the last man the Sonderkommando workers employed there.

(p126) Soon after his arrival Moss odered the excavation of five pits behind crematorium 5, not too far from the three gas chambers. An increasing number of preisoners was also emplyed on the site near bunker 5 to dig more pits there. Here as well as at the crmaatorium yards wattle screens had been put up to prevent the curious from looking in at the death factories from the outside. The meadow behind the yard of crematorium 5, where thousands of spring flowers were in bloom, now turned into a strange building site where some 150 prisoners were set to work.

(p130) It was decided we should concentrate all our efforts on two pits only. A few days later we made it: the twoe pits were 40-50 meters long, about 8 meters wide and 2 meters deep.
Together with his assistant, Eckhardt, he climbed down into the pit and marked out a 25 centimeter by 30 centimeter wide strip, running lengthways dow the middle from end to end. By digging a channel which sloped slightly to either side from the center point, it would be possible to catch the fat exuding from the corpses as they were burning in the pit, in two collecting pans at the end of the channel.

The whole concept seemed quite inconceivable: a drain channel to catch human fat which in turn was to be used as fuel in order to obliterate as fast as possible all traces of these murderous deeds.

(p132) The two new pits had considerably increased the capacity of the four crematoria at Birkenau. It was just a matter of adding the finishing touches. There was a constant stream of trucks delivering materials of all kinds, asuch as old railway sleepers, conifer branches, waste wood, beams, rags, large quantities of wood alcohol, barrels of waste lubricating oil, rammers, course- and fin-meshed iron seives, cement, wood planks, boards and barrels of chlorinated lime. Whereever the fuel was stacked in the open it was roofed over.

(p132) It was the middle of May 1944 when the first transports of Hungarian Jews arrived at Birkenau. By now the Sonderkommando had been increased to 450 men, a number soon to be almost doubled.

(p133) Three more cremation pits were dug in the back yard of crematorium 5, making up the five Moll had ordered. In addition, the farmhouse which had served as a place of extermination in 1942, was put in running order. It’s four rooms served as gas chambers while an additional four cremation pits were dug outside. The changing rooms were located in three wooden barracks, and the whole complex was knowln as bunker 5.

(p133) There were now nine of these large pits in addition to the crematorium ovens, making it possible to burn an almost unlimited number of corpses.

Patrick McNally says:
“No mention of the name “Spartacus” in anything there. From your own references it just sounds like this was a careless use of a name which was not applicable to the People’s Guard.”

LOL, Patrick McNally, Shlomo, Moshe or whatever your name is!
You are playing your stupid games again, now on this thread.
I just knew that you would be saying things like that. You are sooooooo predictable.

Are you dyslexic or just a TROLL? I suspect the latter.

An internet TROLL is someone who makes intentionally inflammatory, rude, or upsetting statements online to elicit strong emotional responses in people or to steer the conversation off-topic. They can come in many forms. Most trolls do this for their own amusement, but other forms of trolling are done to push a specific agenda.

It is clear what your AGENDA is: Defending the JEWISH WORLD WAR II narrative: THE BIG LIE.
It is therefore obvious that you are either a JEW or a JEW’S USEFUL IDIOT. Take your pick.

Here we go again, though, it is getting boring and a complete waste of time, which, as a TROLL, must be your intention:

https://thecanadian.news/the-jewish-women-who-challenged-the-nazis/

“It is not surprising that with such a record she (Niuta Teitelbaum) was one of the most wanted assassins by the Gestapo, who called her “little Wanda with piglets”. She called herself “laksman”. She was prosecuted, tortured and executed. She belonged to the Communist group SPARTACUS.”

https://dokumen.pub/the-beginnings-of-communist-rule-in-poland.html
The beginnings of communist rule in Poland

The creation in January 1942 of the Polish Workers’ Party (PPR) had been the work of the Comintern and the policy and personnel of the new party was closely supervised by the general secretary of the Comintern Executive, Georgi Dimitrov.

The Communist Party of Poland (KPP) had been dissolved by Stalin in mid 1938 on the grounds that ‘agents of Polish fascism managed to gain positions of leadership’. (1) Most of its principal figures perished in Soviet prisons or labour camps. A small number of pro-Soviet leftist underground organizations with names like ‘SPARTCUS’,… continued to exist in Poland after 1938…

As a result Stalin, while not yet prepared to break with the Polish Government-in-exile, became increasingly willing to build up a Polish communist group in order to strengthen his hand in negotiating with the London Poles and the western allies. An ‘initiative group’ was formed from the trainees at the Comintern school to re-establish a Polish Communist Party.

On Dimitrov’s instructions, it was decided not to establish a central committee from among communists in Poland but instead to parachute into that country a three-man leadership team selected from among the Poles in Moscow and headed by Marceli Nowotko.

This was duly done, and … a meeting was held in Warsaw on 5 January 1942 at which the PPR was formally established.
By June 19 42 it was claiming a membership of approximately 4,000 Party menbers with 3,000 partisans organized in the People’s Guard (Gwardia Ludowa – GL).

Patrick McNally says:
“No mention of the name “Spartacus” in anything there. From your own references it just sounds like this was a careless use of a name which was not applicable to the People’s Guard.”

LOL!
Obvious that PRO-SOVIET SPARTACUS was part the People’s Guard (Gwardia Ludowa – GL) and that Niuta Teitelbaum was a member of SPARTCUS.

Patrick McNally, why are people like you pushing the Jewish World War II narrative and Hitler’s “murderous behavior” onto the world when in reality he is but a boy scout when compared to Stalin’s brutal rule in the Soviet Union and occupied parts of Europe?

“We cannot state that all Jews were Bolsheviks. But: Without Jews there would never have been Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.” – Alexander Solzhenitsyn

From an Israeli website:
Stalin’s Jews – We mustn’t forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish
https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html

“We cannot know with certainty the number of deaths Cheka was responsible for in its various manifestations, but the number is surely at least 20 million, including victims of the forced collectivization, the hunger, large purges, expulsions, banishments, executions, and mass death at Gulags.”

1923: Adolf Hitler Predicts ‘Semitic Empire’ From Vladivostok To The Rhine If ‘Jewish Marxism’ Prevails

Hitler was only partially right.
Marxism prevailed and the whole world has become a ‘Semitic Empire’: PAX JUDAICA.
The world is now experiencing Weimar Republic Mark 2, with all its corruption, sexual degeneracy, transgenderism, etc.

Jewish BlackRock and Vanguard are now ruling the world together with the UN, EU, WEF, etc., all founded by the Jews. Everything Hitler fought against came to pass.

But Hitler was right: “My spirit will rise from the grave.”

Let me break the good news to you, Patrick McNally, this will thrill you:

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/german-interest-in-adolf-hitler-on-the-rise/

German Interest in Adolf Hitler on the Rise
According to a recent Telegraph article, sociologists have attributed the rise in interest in Adolf Hitler to a younger generation of German citizens.
German interest in Adolf Hitler is on the rise, according to a recent Telgraph article and a study conducted by the German Media Control group.
According to the study:

• 242 television programs focusing explicitly on Adolf Hitler have aired in the last four months of 2013.
• 500 films, documentaries and other series focusing on Nazi-era Germany have also been aired.
• 2,000 books on Hitler were published in Germany just last year. Some of these titles included: Hitler’s Wonder Weapons, Hitler and the Holy Lance, and Hitler’s Blitzkrieg.
• Germany’s public “ZDF Info” channel was found to have screened 109 documentaries on Hitler last year alone.

According to the Telegraph article, sociologists have attributed the rise in interest in Adolf Hitler to a new generation of German citizens who have no first-hand experience or knowledge of World War II, and so are less ashamed about their country’s history than previous generations.

Of course, that Telegraph article is no longer available. It wasn’t KOSHER.

But I am sure you would LOVE to read Gerard Menuhin’s book ‘TELL THE TRUTH AND SHAME THE DEVIL’.

Gerard Menuhin in his book ‘Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil’ makes a case for Adolf Hitler
being the only statesman in the modern era who could have liberated the enslaved people of planet Earth from the clutches of organized world Zionism. (I couldn’t agree with him more!)

Gerard Menuhin, son of the great violinist Yehudi Menuhin, is descended from a long line of rabbis.

The free pdf version of that book can be downloaded here in English or German: https://telltruthshamedevil.blogspot.com/2016/03/ebook-tell-truth-shame-devil.html

Everyone, Germans in particular, should read his book published in 2015. It is of monumental importance for the people of the world today.

Gerard Menuhin:
Recognize the True Enemy and Join to Fight Him.
If you don’t recognize the one true enemy and join forces to fight him and his stooges, you and your children are doomed to slavery!

(Well, once they bring in the Digital ID, CBDC, 15-minute cities, etc., there will be no more FREEDOM at all, only SLAVERY, PAX JUDAICA for the Goyim. So, Menuhin is spot-on.)

Gerard could no longer bear the lies being perpetrated against Germany and risked all to unmask what he called the “biggest lie in history” and the mightiest fraudulent criminal enterprise in mankind’s history—the Holocaust industry.

He writes:
“The Holocaust is the biggest lie in history. Germany has no blame for the Second World War.”

Again, Gerard Menuhin is spot-on!

“Nazi” is a political epithet invented by Jewish journalist and member of the Social Democratic Party Konrad Heiden, during the 1920s, as a means of denigrating the NSDAP and National Socialism.

The term is an imitation of the nickname given to Marxists of the SDP at the time, Sozi. It was then popularized abroad by various Judaics and other subversives, including Heiden himself, who fled the country after the NSDAP were elected to government.

The term was regarded as a derogatory epithet by National Socialists and was used almost exclusively by Marxist agitators.

Typically, the use of Nazi Germany and Nazi regime was popularized by Jewish emigres from Germany after 1933, especially in English-speaking countries. From them, it spread into other languages.

From: Tell The Truth And Shame The Devil – Gerard Menuhin, p 9 & 10

Nazi was also a derogatory term for a backward peasant, being a shortened version of Ignatius, a common name in Bavaria, the area from which the Nazis emerged.

You write: “Plaintiff’s Exhibit #5: Words and Criminal Trial Verdict for REINHOLD HANNING.”

My response: The case of Reinhold Hanning is very similar to the case of Oskar Gröning. I ask you to refer back to my lengthy comment #34 on this discussion thread for a detailed response why I do not regard either Oskar Gröning or Reinhold Hanning as credible witnesses to the alleged homicidal gassings at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

If either Oskar Gröning or Reinhold Hanning had testified that there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau, they would be committing a felony in modern-day Germany. They would both be convicted of Holocaust denial. Their only possible defense was to accept that there was a mass extermination program at Auschwitz-Birkenau, but claim they were low-level soldiers who had nothing to do with the extermination program and could do nothing to stop it.

It is also illegal in modern-day Germany for an attorney to defend their client in court against charges of Holocaust denial. For example, when Sylvia Stolz presented evidence in court in an attempt to defend her client Ernst Zündel, she was committing a felony. Stolz was later convicted of Holocaust denial and had to spend several years in jail. She was also banned from practicing law for five years.

So, with a corrupted legal system in modern-day Germany, Oskar Gröning and Reinhold Hanning could not legally dispute the so-called Holocaust. Their only option was to state that there was a German extermination program, but claim they had nothing to do with it and could do nothing to stop it.

As for the procedure for entering there in rows, this is just nonsense. People of different ages and heights take up different amounts of space, and in order to optimally fill the space, they should not stand as if they were rectangles.

Putting 2000 people in 210 square meters is physically possible – and this is far from the theoretical limit (see my calculations in the previous thread). The reasoning given by Rudolf – he asks how to stuff 1000 (!) people into a room – that it would be unpleasant for them to touch each other and so on is nonsense.

L: So how did they get these 1,000 naked people to pack themselves tightly together,
touching other completely naked strangers?
R:I don’t know, but it would have required the drill and discipline that you can instill
only in soldiers after weeks of exercising, provided they are dressed

I answer – easily. If there are infants and just children among them, then it is even easier. And 2000 will also fit there. We are talking about people who were deported – and according to the mainstream, were going to be killed. A few men with weapons would be enough to stuff as many people as needed into the chamber.

There are probably reasons to doubt Vrba’s words – the discrepancies with the generally accepted version look intriguing. But the statement about 2,000 people is not one of them.

I see where you’re coming from, Tiptoe, but without some formal structure (of the legal”/lawful kind) this “trial” is a waste of time. It’s just another internet discussion pretending to be something grand.

It strikes me that the “prosecution” is also playing the role of the judge, and attempting to instruct the “defence” on how to present it’s case.

I have more courtroom experience than him and a lot of other people here, yet even I am unqualified to direct these “proceedings” – which are already underway without any proper frame-work to guide them.

So lawyers, judges, legal advisers, clerks, solicitors or anyone qualified or experienced to guide a trial of this nature could only help.

Otherwise I will be forced to keep on taking the piss. 🥸

Best regards,
Kali.

Hearsay is not evidence. It’s just narrative.

That’s for the court to decide, Mr Bahner…

Oh, but wait! This isn’t a court, nor even a very loose approximation of one, is it?

This is a silly game you invented to make yourself feel important and to elevate narrative to the status of evidence.

Just about everything you’ve presented so far has already been dealt with in the other thread, yet here you persist. It doesn’t matter to you that your case is as weak as water, just as long as the arguing continues, and endless, circular debate achieved.

John and others have trounced your arguments already. Yet you seem determined to drag your silly game out for as long as possible. Because that is your primary objective here! And you know it.

Kali

Patrick McNally says:
“Douglas Reed was totally unreliable in his later years. He recites nonsense from Robert Wilton uncritically, as just one of many flaws.”

LOL! ROTF! Of course, you would say that. That is so typical Patrick McNally!

The one totally unreliable on this thread and others is definitely YOU, Patrick McNally, Shlomo, Moshe or whatever your name is.

You constantly recite nonsense because you are defending the indefensible: The Jewish narrative of World War II and The Holocau$t: Both Big Jewish Lies.
It is therefore obvious that you are either a JEW or a JEW’S USEFUL IDIOT, but certainly a TROLL. Take your pick.

As Gerard Menuhin, a Jew himself, wrote in his book ‘Tell The Truth And Shame The Devil’:

“The Holocaust is the biggest lie in history. Germany has no blame for the Second World War.”

The free pdf version of that book can be downloaded here in English or German: https://telltruthshamedevil.blogspot.com/2016/03/ebook-tell-truth-shame-devil.html

Anyone not fitting your narrative, like Douglas Reed or Joseph Kennedy were/are “totally unreliable” and to be slandered by you.

Let me refresh your memory re what you said about Joseph Kennedy:

2023-07-04 https://www.unz.com/article/an-appeal-to-readers-stop-the-obsession-with-jews/?showcomments#comment-6041378

#1510
Patrick McNally says:

“What the Forrestal diaries carry are the impressions of a conversation which James Forrestal had with Jospeh Kennedy on December 27, 1945. Forrestal is careful enough to phrase it as:
“Chamberlain, he says, stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war.”

The “he” referenced here is Jospeh Kennedy. It’s all Jospeh’s Kennedy’s story. There’s no evidence that Chamberlain ever said anything quite like this.

Patrick McNally says:
“There’s no evidence that Chamberlain ever said anything quite like this.”

OH, REALLY?… NO EVIDENCE?… Are you, AGAIN, (wilfully?) ignorant or just lying?

NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN (UK Prime Minister) told JOSEPH KENNEDY (Family Patriarch):

“Chamberlain (speaking off the record to Kennedy while playing golf) stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war”. – The Forrestal Diaries ed. Millis, Cassell 1952 p129

There you have it, Patrick McNally, or whatever your name is, Shlomo, Moshe:
THE EVIDENCE.
CHAMBERLAIN STATED THAT AMERICA AND THE WORLD JEWS HAD FORCED ENGLAND INTO THE WAR. – FORRESTAL DIARIES ED. MILLIS, CASSELL 1952, P 129

Of course, you would say that “KENNEDY WAS LYING”.

#1471 Patrick McNally says:
“The British, ruled by the Jews since the days of Cromwell in the 1650s
These are you fantasies.”

#1472 Patrick McNally says:
“Communist Jews ran the Weimar Republic. Utterly absurd.”

James Forrestal was murdered on May 22, 1949. He was the leading government critic of American support for the creation of the state of Israel.

Using primarily information provided in the Navy’s official investigation of the death of America’s first Secretary of Defense, which had been kept secret for 55 years, The Assassination of James Forrestal thoroughly demolishes the widely believed view that Forrestal’s fall from a 16th-floor window of the Bethesda Naval Hospital on May 22, 1949, was an act of suicide.

The official report, in fact, did not conclude that Forrestal committed suicide. It concluded only that the fall caused his death and that no one in the U.S. Navy was responsible for it. A major reason why the suicide thesis is still widely believed is that the news of the release of the official report, which the author obtained through the Freedom of Information Act in 2004, has been effectively suppressed.

Building upon what he has long made available on his web site, and in the manner of his 2018 book, The Martyrdom of Thomas Merton: An Investigation, co-authored with Hugh Turley, David Martin breaks through the wall of silence and misinformation. This meticulous examination of the violent death of the leading government critic of American support for the creation of the state of Israel is vital to an understanding of U.S. and world history since the mid-20th century.

You begin your comment #160 by writing: “Accounts of Hungarian Jews transported to Auschwitz from May 15 to July 9, 1945 Per “Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp”:”

My response: I think you meant to say the year 1944 instead of the year 1945.

You quote from page 466 of this book: “Of approximately 438,000 Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz from May 15 to July 9, 1944, about 10 percent were determined to be fit for labor. Some were retained to work in Auschwitz itself; the remainder were dispersed to 396 camps in the Nazi empire. The largest groups wer concentrated in the notorius camps of Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, Gross-Rosen, Gunskirchen, Mauthausen, Neuengamme, Ravensbruck, and Sachenhausen…”

My response: The estimate of only 10% of Hungarian Jews fit for labor might be on the low side. However, the statement that the remainder of the Hungarian Jews were dispersed to 396 German camps is probably accurate. As I have stated, Auschwitz-Birkenau was a transit camp. Many Hungarian Jews were sent to other German camps after first arriving in Auschwitz-Birkenau.

The Hungarian Jews were not subject to a program of mass extermination at Auschwitz-Birkenau. No homicidal gas chambers existed at Auschwitz-Birkenau to carry out such a massive extermination process. The crematoria capacity at Auschwitz-Birkenau was also not sufficient to cremate the alleged dead Hungarian Jews in the time period claimed by Holocaust historians. Finally, Allied aerial photographs taken at the height of the alleged extermination of the Hungarian Jews at Birkenau show an uneventful camp devoid of any evidence of a mass extermination program.

You write: “Accounts for Munkács alone..The remainder of the Jews of Munkács was sent in three transports that passed through Kassa on 21, 23 and 24 May, to the same destination – Auschwitz-Birkenau. The Jews were forced onto the deportation wagons under a hail of physical and mental abuse. They were pushed into the cattle cars, 70-80 people in each enclosed car, with one bucket of water for a three-day journey and one bucket to use as a toilet, with no fresh air or space to lie down. Some died along the way. Some committed suicide. Others lost their minds.”

My response: The conditions in which Hungarian Jews were sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau were typically not ideal. There would have been some overcrowding on the trains, some shortages of food and water and the like. However, I don’t think too many Hungarian Jews died or committed suicide while being transported to Auschwitz-Birkenau. I certainly don’t think that the transports of Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz-Birkenau was part of an overall German plan to exterminate the Jews.

John, if you’re not too busy, you might care to look at this response to a comment of mine in another UR thread authored by Steve Sailer:

https://www.unz.com/isteve/could-the-u-s-have-stopped-the-holocaust-no-because-it-was-mostly-over-by-the-end-of-1942/#comment-6052089

That thread is focused on the Holohoax, and the author has a habit of putting comments he doesn’t like (ie: comments that don’t agree with the official Zio narrative of ‘6 million killed in gas chambers’) into extended moderation periods*.
(*My comments in that thread and previous threads of his, have been subjected to moderation periods of anything from 2 to 5 days on several occasions – with 24 hours being typical).

NOTE: Steve Sailer’s commentariat is choc-a-block full of rabid Zionists peddling nonsense, so don’t expect to encounter anything (for the most part) other than individuals with a Talmudic axe to grind.

You write: “From Filip Müller’s “Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers”. He describes preparations for dealing with the Hungarian Jews in “Aktion Höss”:”

My response: I don’t regard Filip Müller as a credible witness. You quote his last statement: “(p133) There were now nine of these large pits in addition to the crematorium ovens, making it possible to burn an almost unlimited number of corpses.”

If this is true, why doesn’t the smoke from these burning pits show up on Allied aerial photos taken during this time period?

The photographic evidence indicates that Germany did not have an extermination program against the Hungarian Jews. The U.S. government released wartime aerial photographs in 1979 of the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp taken on several random days in 1944 during the height of the alleged extermination period. Many of these photographs were taken at mid-morning on typical workdays. None of these photos shows huge pits or piles of bodies, smoking crematory chimneys, masses of Jews awaiting death outside of the alleged gas chambers, or mountains of coke used to fuel the crematoria. All of these would have been visible if Auschwitz-Birkenau had been the extermination center it is said to have been.

The following is from pages 467-472 of Germar Rudolf’s book “Lectures on the Holocaust” demonstrating some of the reasons why Filip Müller is not a credible witness:

1) Müller is literally “living proof” that the members of the so-called Sonderkommando were not themselves murdered every few months, as is often claimed. Müller claims to have been a member of this Sonderkommando from the summer of 1943 until the bitter end.

2) Müller made the following statement during the Auschwitz trial at Frankfurt:

“The chief of the crematory, Moll, once grabbed a child away from its mother. I saw that at Crematorium IV. There were two big pits nearby where they were burning corpses. He threw the child into the boiling fat that had collected in the trenches around the pit… There were these two pits near Crematorium IV. They were about 40 meters long and six to eight meters wide, with a depth of about two and a half meters. The fat from the corpses would collect at the edge. We had to pour this fat over the corpses.”

Müller’s statement here is obviously total nonsense. There would be no need to pour fat over the corpses.

3) On p. 110 of his book, Müller even claims that Slovaks were singing the Czechoslovak national anthem and the Jewish Hatikvah in the gas chamber, which today is Israel’s national anthem.

In my opinion, it is not realistic to think that a large crowd of people will celebrate their own execution by singing national anthems.

4) Müller, who was weary of life, writes on page 113 of his book that he decides he wants to die in the gas chamber with naked young women:

“Suddenly a few girls, naked and in the full bloom of youth, came up to me. They stood in front of me without a word, gazing at me deep in thought and shaking their heads uncomprehendingly. At last one of them plucked up courage and spoke to me: ‘We understand that you have chosen to die with us of your own free will, and we have come to tell you that we think your decision pointless: for it helps no one.’ She went on: ‘We must die, but you still have a chance to save your life. You have to return to the camp and tell everybody about our last hours,’…. Before I could make an answer to her spirited speech, the girls took hold of me and dragged me protesting to the door of the gas chamber. There they gave me a last push which made me land bang in the middle of the group of SS men.”

The question should be asked: If it was so easy to shove Müller out of the gas chamber, why couldn’t the young girls shove their own way out of the gas chamber?

5) In a different scene, Müller reports on page 12 of his book the following about his first day of work in Crematorium I of the Main Camp:

“The damp stench of dead bodies and a cloud of stifling, biting smoke surged out towards us. Through the fumes I saw the vague outlines of huge furnaces.…As the glow of the flames broke through the smoke and fumes, I noticed two large openings: they were cast-iron incinerators. Prisoners were busy pushing a truck heaped with corpses up to them.…We were met by the appalling sight of the dead bodies of men and women lying higgledy-piggledy among suit-cases and rucksacks.… Before me lay the corpse of a woman. With trembling hands and shaking all over I began to remove her stockings…the biting smoke, the humming of fans and the flickering of flames.”

The furnaces of Crematorium I were made of firebrick, not of cast iron. Furthermore, Müller’s allegation that the victims were gassed fully clothed along with their luggage contradicts all logic and all other testimonies, as well as official versions of history.

To top it all off, Müller claims on page 13 of his book to have eaten “triangles of cheese and a poppy seed cake,” which he claims to have found in the pocket of one of the victims in the gas chamber. This is obviously impossible while wearing a gas mask. But if he had removed the mask, that would have been his last meal.

6) On pages 46ff of his book, Müller wrote the following:

“From time to time SS doctors visited the crematorium, above all Hauptsturmführer Kitt and Obersturmführer Weber. During their visits it was just like working in a slaughterhouse. Like cattle dealers they felt the thighs and calves of men and women who were still alive and selected what they called the best pieces before the victims were executed. After their execution the chosen bodies were laid on a table. The doctors proceeded to cut pieces of still warm flesh from thighs and calves and threw them into waiting receptacles. The muscles of those who had been shot were still working and contracting, making the bucket jump about.”

Somehow, I don’t think that working and contracting muscles would make the bucket jump about. Müller is making an obviously fictional statement here.

7) On page 117 of his book, Müller writes that “Many [of the corpses] had turned blue.”

However, persons who have died from Zyklon-B poisoning turn a bright cherry red color. Müller had never seen a corpse that had died from Zyklon-B poisoning.

I could go on and on. There is no reason to give Filip Müller any credibility as a witness to the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

“We cannot state that all Jews were Bolsheviks. But: Without Jews there would never have been Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.” – Alexander Solzhenitsyn

That is almost certainly a misquote. Since I am not a specialist on Solzhenitsyn, I will merely quote someone who is reputedly more knowledgeable than me — Spencer J. Quinn of Counter-Currents. In reply to a commenter, he wrote:

I’m skeptical of that quote. I hunted around and always found it without a source. It doesn’t sound like something Solzhenitsyn would say and it is certainly not in 200yrs. Further the number is too high. AS *never* wrote that 66m were murdered in that time frame in anything I have read of his, and he never attributed all the Soviet atrocities to Jews as in the quote.

The closest I could find was this quote from the Jewish writer I.M. Beckerman (same person as Biekerman, whom I mention in part 1 of this series). AS quotes him at length, but this quote comes from Slezkine’s Jewish Century page 183, so we know it’s legit:

“it goes without saying that not all Jews are Bolsheviks and not all Bolsheviks are Jews, but what is equally obvious is that disproportionate and immeasurably fervent Jewish participation in the torment of half-dead Russia by the Bolsheviks.”

https://counter-currents.com/2021/03/two-hundred-years-together-4/#comment-1723095

Is this 210 sq meter chamber the same as the one described as a shower facility with shower heads and floor drains? The same shower room retrofitted to become a gas chamber? If so, it would quickly become obvious to 2,000 people they were not being piled in for a shower. When you consider the number of SS guards posted, as stated by camp inmates, I find it unlikely that those 2,000 people (sometimes 3,000, according to some Kapos) would not put up some sort of protest or resistance, rather than just fully cooperating as is usually described.

I am also wondering if you are aware of the orchestra, theater (plays & movies), library, cafe, camp currency, soccer field and soccer games, in which the SS officers participated, day care facility for children, etc.? Why would these amenities be available in death/labor camps. These amenities are described and verified by former inmates.

If I may give you a recommendation in considering the veracity of the official story, please view the interviews of former inmates. There were thousands conducted by The Shoah Foundation, and a great many interviewees seemed unaware of the gassing, burning, shooting for mass extermination. There are a few who push the official story, and that is where the official story begins to unravel; start with the interview of Dario Gabbai, a link is posted on the former thread. His lies are so obvious, I can’t believe they released the footage. I’ll refrain from naming the issues I discovered, so you can determine, on your own accord, if he is a former inmate or an actor.

Plaintiff’s Evidence Item 7C: Filip Muller’s Description of Destruction of Hungarian Jews and Photographic Evidence of Burn Pits in Use

Filip Muller’s book, “Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers” describes the destruction of the Hungarian Jews.

(p135) Since last night three transports had disappeared into the gas chambers of crematorium 5. As soon as every last body had been flung on the heap behind the crematorium, the next batch of victims was led into the changing room to undress, the clothes left by their predecessors having been whisked away first. All this took time, hence the waiting period in the grove for those who arrived later.

(p135) Moll returned once more to the grove and explained to the waiting crowd that it really would not be long before they were given a drink. Several people were so desperately thirsty that they crouched on the ground licking the dew-wet grass. When the long-promised drink failed to materialize, people began to grow restless, distressed above all by the piteous cries and entreaties of their children who were begging their mothers for just a few drops of water.

(p135) …This pre-programmed suffering was deliberately aimed at paralyzing the ability to resist in order to allow the giant machinery of murder to run smoothly and at full speed. Not a minute must be lost, otherwise the plan to liquidate several hundred thousand Jews within a few weeks might not succeed.

(p136) During the day shift there were, on average, 140 prisoners working in and around crematoria 4 and 5. Some twenty-five bearers were employed in clearing the gas chamber and removing corpses to the pits. Ten dental mechanics and barbers had to wrench out the gold teeth, search the bodies for valuables, and cut off the women’s hair. It was the job of another twenty-five bearers to stack the corpses in three layers on top of the fuel in the pits. About fifteen stokers had to place the fuel in the pit and light and maintain the fire by constantly stoking in between the corpses and pouring oil, wood alcohol and liquid human fat over them. There were approximately thirty-five men in the ash team. Some had to dig the ashes from the pits and remove them to the ash depot. The others were pulverizing the ashes. A smaller group of prisoners loaded clothing, shoes and other of the victims’ belongings on trucks, to be taken to “Canada”…

(p137) In order to prepare the third pit for cremation old railway sleepers, wooden beams, planks, and sawdust were arranged in layers and covered with a layer of dry fir branches. Then the bearers laid about 400 corpses face upwards in four long rows on top of the fuel. The next layer again consisted of fuel covered, as before, with fir branches. The followed another layer of corpses. The sequence was repeated once more until, in the end, there were over 1200 dead bodies in three layers. Meanwhile the stokers had soaked pieces of material and rags in oil and wood alcohol and stuffed them in between the fuel in many places. Then they thrust long burning torches deep into the pit. These torches consisted of iron poles with handles on one end, while round the other were oil soaked rags.

Plaintiff’s photographic evidence: There were surreptitious photos taken by a Sonderkommando of a “burn pit” in operation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderkommando_photographs

You write: “John, if you’re not too busy, you might care to look at this response to a comment of mine in another UR thread authored by Steve Sailer:”

My response: I just finished writing a brief response to Steve Sailer on that discussion thread. It currently shows as comment #600 waiting moderation.

FYI, I thought Steve Sailer was unnecessarily rude to you in his comment #566 on that discussion thread when he said your comments are not very good.

Plaintiff’s Item 8: Evaluating What Happened to the 438,000 Hungarian Jews?

We know that approximately 438,000 Hungarian Jews arrived at Auschwitz-Birkenau from May 15 to July 13, 1944. Of those, about 10 percent were able to work. Therefore, there were approximately 400,000 Hungarian Jews who arrived in that period who were not able to work. But we know that, at most, one percent of those 438,000 were in Auschwitz-Birkenau at liberation in January 1945…only 6-8 months later. And we know that the approximately 65,000 Auschwitz prisoners who were forced to go to other camps (on “death marches”) shortly before Auschwitz was liberated were all workers, not children and the elderly.

In order to evaluate what happened to the 400,000 Hungarian Jews who arrived from May to July 1944, and were not capable of working, it’s useful to assess the matter logically, without preconceptions. Possible explanations for what happened to the approximately 400,000 Hungarian Jews not able to work include (put in blockquotes to emphasize these three choices):

1) They were all murdered in gas chambers, their bodies burned, and the ashes scattered into the nearby Vistula river, spread on the ground, or buried.

2) Most or all of them were housed in Auschwitz-Birkenau (and the rest transported to other places).

3) Most of them were sent to other places (and the rest were housed in Auschwitz-Birkenau).

Explanation #1 (all murdered in gas chambers) is by far the most logical:

a) We know that many “burn pits” were constructed prior to arrival of the Hungarian Jews.

b) We know that Rudolf Hoss states in his autobiography that the policy after roughly 1942 was to send Jews who could not work to the gas chambers.

c) We know that in his autobiography, Hoss estimates that 400,000 Hungarian Jews were killed, and he was the leader of “Aktion Hoss,” which dealt with the Hungarian Jews. Therefore, he is the person who would be most likely to know that they were murdered.

d) We know that Oskar Groning, an SS officer, acknowledged knowing about and even seeing gas chambers at Auschwitz. And we know that he was convicted of 300,000 counts of accessory to murder specifically related to the Hungarian Jews.

e) Other SS personnel who acknowledge that gas chambers were used extensively in Auschwitz include:
1) Nazi doctor Fritz Klein, who was convicted of war crimes for selecting elderly, women, and children for what he knew would be death in gas chambers.
2) Reinhold Hanning, who was convicted of 170,000 counts of accessory to murder, and said he knew gas chambers must have existed in Auschwitz, because he saw many people going into crematoria and not coming out, and because he saw bodies being transported and could smell bodies being burned.

f) We have Filip Muller’s book, “Eyewitness Auschwitz: Three Years in the Gas Chambers”, which describes not only how and why the “burn pits” were created to cremate the murdered Hangarian Jews, but also describes the operation of the burn pits on the Hungarian Jewish bodies. And we have photographic evidence of bodies about to be thrown into burn pits.

g) We have photographic evidence of Hungarian Jews right outside the crematoria, just hours before they were murdered there, and their bodies reduced to ash.

h) We have the 40-page Vrba-Wetzler report, that was produced in 1944, even before the liberation of Auschwitz. In fact, Vrba and Wetzler escaped from Auschwitz, risking their lives, specifically to *prevent* the extermination of Hungarian Jews.

i) We have the book of Dr. Miklos-Nyiszli, prisoner number A 8450, himself a Hungarian Jew from the town of Oredea-Nagyvarad, who witnessed the results of gas chamber operation and worked as the doctor for the Sonderkommando who worked at the gas chambers and crematoria. His town of Oredea-Nagaryvarad was essentially.

j) Etcetera.

Explanation 2 (most or all of them housed at Auschwitz-Birkenau) is not logical:

a) There was not any room at Auschwitz-Birkenau even for 100,000 non-working people, let alone up to 400,000. We also have no records of non-working Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz-Birkenau from July 1944 to liberation in January 1945.

b) It would be foolish for Germany, which was losing a war, to transport Hungarian Jews to Poland, and house people who could not work at Auschwitz-Birkenau. It would make more sense to have simply left them in Hungary, rather than to transport them away from family and friends in Hungary, and then take care of them in Poland.

c) We know there were virtually no children at Auschwitz-Birkenau when it was liberated in January 1945 (approximately 500 children under 15…which would correlate to approximately 350 children under 12). A reasonable estimate of the number of children under 12 among the 437,000 Hungarian Jews would be 20-30 percent.

d) We have no records of the ~400,000 of them existing after WWII. None of them checked back with friends in Hungary, attempted to reclaim their stolen property

Explanation 3 (most or all of them transported away from Auschwitz-Birkenau) is not logical:

a) This explanation is even more illogical than Explanation #2. Why in the world would the German government, losing a war and desperate for fuel, and not even able/willing to feed existing prisoners, transport non-working prisoners to another place? Why would Germans transport them from Hungary to Auschwitz, and then from Auschwitz to some other place, if they were not able to work? In fact, the *working* Hungarian Jews who did get transported, got transported to places like Buchenwald, Dachau, Bergen-Belsen, and other places *inside Germany*. Why in the world would the Germans transport non-working Jews *into* Germany at the end of the war, when they spent the entire war transporting them *out* of Germany (or killing them in Germany)?

Brás Cubas says:

“That is almost certainly a misquote.”

“We cannot state that all Jews were Bolsheviks. But: Without Jews there would never have been Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.” – Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Well, when you do an internet search you’ll find it all over the place. Of course, it could well be a misquote, but the figure of 66 million murdered in Russia comes close to the findings of R. J. Rummel, an American Professor Emeritus of Political Science.

His shocking conclusion is that, CONSERVATIVELY calculated, 61,911,000 people were systematically killed by the Communist regime from 1917 to 1987.

“Lethal Politics: Soviet Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1917” by R. J. Rummel

While there are estimates of the number of people killed by Soviet authorities during particular episodes or campaigns, until now, no one has tried to calculate the complete human toll of Soviet genocides and mass murders since the revolution of 1917.

Here, R. J. Rummel lists and analyzes hundreds of published estimates, presenting them in the historical context in which they occurred. His shocking conclusion is that, conservatively calculated, 61,911,000 people were systematically killed by the Communist regime from 1917 to 1987.

Rummel divides the published estimates on which he bases his conclusions into eight historical periods, such as the Civil War, collectivization, and World War II. The estimates are further divided into agents of death, such as terrorism, deportations, and famine. Using statistical principles developed from more than 25 years of quantitative research on nations, he analyzes the estimates.

In the collectivization period, for example, about 11,440,000 people were murdered. During World War II, while the Soviet Union had lost almost 20,000,000 in the war, the Party was killing even more of its citizens and foreigners-probably an additional 13,053,000. For each period, he defines, counts, and totals the sources of death.

He shows that Soviet forced labor camps were the major engine of death, probably killing 39,464,000 prisoners overall.

To give meaning and depth to these figures, Rummel compares them to the death toll from ‘major wars, world disasters, global genocide, deaths from cancer and other diseases, and the like. In these and other ways, Rummel goes well beyond the bare bones of statistical analysis and tries to provide understanding of this incredible toll of human lives.

Why were these people killed? What was the political and social context? How can we understand it? These and other questions are addressed in a compelling historical narrative.

This definitive book will be of interest to Soviet experts, those interested in the study of genocide and violence, peace researchers, and students of comparative politics and society.

Written without jargon, its statistics are confined to appendixes, and the general reader can profitably read the book without losing the essence of the findings, which are selectively repeated in the narrative.

Mark,

Regarding said autobiography of Mr. Hoss, this was written in two months, during imprisonment, by hand, type, and in what language? Who supplied the material, paper, pens, journals, documents, etc., he would need for this endeavor? Was a translation necessary?

I have not read it, so I can’t speak to the contents, but don’t you find the autobiography suspect given his circumstances?

I’ve finished with Plaintiff’s original list of evidence, though I retain the right to present further evidence in rebuttal to Defense claims.

I will now start with what in a real civil trial would be “re-direct” in response to the Defense’s “cross-examination” questions. I will go down the list in the order I presented Plaintiff’s evidence and analysis.

1) Excerpts from the autobiography of Rudolf Höss. Background timeline in comment #106, and then excerpts from his autobiography, as found in the book, “Commander of Auschwitz” in comments #109, #110, #111.

2) Testimony of Nazi doctor Fritz Klein, comment #115.

3) Excerpts from the book by Dr. Miklos Nyiszli, comment #136.

Etc.

Therefore, my next comment will start with excerpts from the autobiography of Rudolf Höss, and the response of the Defense (John Wear) to the evidence I presented.

According to the New York Times’ book reviewer STEPHEN F. COHEN:
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/98/03/01/home/solz-gulag.html?ref=truth11.com

“The Gulag Archipelago” is a non-fictional account from and about the other great holocaust of our century–the imprisonment, brutalization and very often murder of tens of millions of innocent Soviet citizens by their own Government, mostly during Stalin’s rule from 1929 to 1953.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has called “The Gulag Archipelago” his “main” work, setting it above the major novels that won him the reputation of Russia’s pre-eminent living writer and the 1970 Nobel Prize.

In it (The Gulag Archipelago) he implores the Soviet leadership to disavow this “rubbishy ideology.” It has killed, he argues 66 million and bred cynicism and hypocrisy among the living…

A misquote?…

“We cannot state that all Jews were Bolsheviks. But: Without Jews there would never have been Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.” – Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Re-direct on Plaintiff’s Evidence Item #1 – The words of Rudolf Hoss

I presented excerpts from Rudolf Höss’s autobiography as found in the book “Commandant of Auschwitz” in my comments #109, #110, and #111. John Wear responded (what would be the trial equivalent of a cross-examination) in comments #114, #117, and #123. (Please forgive me if there were others, or if some of the comment numbers aren’t correct.)

John, unfortunately, your responses really didn’t address the *evidence* that I presented in the excerpts from the autobiography in comments #109, #110, and #111. Therefore, I’m going to bring up each excerpt individually, and ask you to characterize the words as “True,” “Mostly True,” “Mostly False,” or “False.” Important note: I do *not* want you to give an explanation for your characterization. Just the characterization, for the time being.

(p132) When the Reichsführer SS (Plaintiff’s counsel note for jurors: that would be Heinrich Himmler) modified his original Extermination Order of 1941, by which all Jews without exception were to be destroyed, and ordered instead that those capable of work were to be separated from the rest and employed in the armaments industry, Auschwitz became a Jewish camp. It was a collecting place for Jews, exceeding in scale anything previously known.

True? Mostly true? Mostly false? False?

(p132) Whereas the Jews who had been imprisoned in former years were able to count on being released one day and were thus far less affected psychologically by the hardships of captivity, the Jews in Auschwitz no longer had such hope. They knew, without exception, that they were condemned to death, that they would live so long as they could work.

True? Mostly true? Mostly false? False?

(p144) By the will of the Reichsführer SS, Auschwitz became the greatest human extermination centre of all time.

True? Mostly true? Mostly false? False?

(p144) In the summer of 1941 he (Himmler) himself gave me the order to prepare installations at Auschwitz where mass exterminations could take place, and to personally carry out these exterminations, I did not have the slightest idea of their scale and consequences. It was certainly an extraordinary and monstrous order. Nevertheless, the reasons behind the extermination program seemed to me right. I did not reflect on it at the time: I had been given an order, and I had to carry it out. Whether this mass extermination of the Jews was necessary or not was not something on which I could allow myself to form an opinion, for I lacked the necessary breadth of view.

True? Mostly true? Mostly false? False?

(p146) While I was away on duty, my deputy, Fritsch, the commander of the protective custody camp, first tried gas for these killings. It was a preparation of Prussic acid, called Zyklon B, which was used in the camp as an insecticide and of which there was always a stock on hand. On my return, Fritsch reported to me, and the gas was used again for the next transport.

True? Mostly true? Mostly false? False?

Again, just for now, I’d like just the characterization of those statements in Höss’s autobiography as “True,” “Mostly true,” “Mostly false,” or “False.”

Thanks for that John.

As for your comment, prepare yourself for an extended period of moderation. I have another comment (currently showing as # 587, posted at 2.23pm GMT), that is likely to be in limbo for quite some time I suspect, because I included a link to your Chapter 8 in Germany’s War.

The fact is, Steve Sailer doesn’t like too many truths to be revealed in his threads.

Again, just for now, I’d like just the characterization of those statements in Höss’s autobiography as “True,” “Mostly true,” “Mostly false,” or “False.”

Mark ‘Mordechai’ Bahner, it’s fair to say that pretty much everything you’ve claimed about the Holohoax is ENTIRELY FALSE.

“Truth Vigilante” you ignorant twit, can’t you even read? If you can’t read, why don’t you get some adult to read for you?

The words I presented were words of Rudolf Höss.

Are you saying each of those five excerpts from the autobiography of Rudolf Höss are false?

You write: “Plaintiff’s photographic evidence: There were surreptitious photos taken by a Sonderkommando of a “burn pit” in operation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderkommando_photographs

My response: Holocaust revisionists are fully aware of these pictures. In fact, Carlo Mattogno has written a book titled “Auschwitz: Open-Air Incinerations” which has one of these pictures on its front cover.

This book can be purchased at https://castlehill.shop/product/auschwitz-open-air-incinerations/. An online version of this book is also available at https://ia802205.us.archive.org/2/items/HHCompleteSet/17-Auschwitz_Open%20Air%20Incinerations.pdf.

Dr. Arthur Butz also has one of these pictures on page 74 of the ninth U.S. printing of his book “The Hoax of the Twentieth Century.”

Carlo Mattogno reaches the following summary conclusions on pages 77-79 of his book “Auschwitz: Open-Air Incinerations”:

“1. Orthodox historiography knows nothing specific about the incineration trenches and is not in a position to say anything about their number, their location, their dimensions, or their capacity.

2. The testimonies of the former detainees contradict each other regarding the number, location, dimensions, and capacity of the incineration trenches.

3. The testimonies of the former detainees are radically refuted by the air photos of Birkenau.

4. If the story of mass exterminations at Birkenau were true, it would have been necessary and even indispensable for the SS, during the deportation of the Hungarian Jews to Birkenau, to carry out the projects for installations of mass cremation envisioned in early 1943, as is demonstrated by the corresponding fabrications of Jan Sehn and Franciszek Piper.

5. An outdoor cremation activity does emerge from the documents for the summer of 1944, but its order of magnitude is far lower than, and absolutely incompatible with, the enormous figures brandished by orthodox historiography.

6. The ground-level photographs do show an outdoor cremation activity in the north yard of Crematorium V, but its dimensions are extremely small and absolutely incompatible with the immense order of magnitude argued by orthodox historiography.

7. The reports of the motor pool of the Central Construction Office for the period March 15 through June 15, 1944, show a perfectly normal activity of the vehicles. For the month of May 15 through June 15 there is a maximum of 2,315 trips with a total load of 11,253 tons of materials. (In September of 1943 there were 3,237 trips!) However – assuming the hypothesis of a mass extermination – 8,111 trips for a total load of 39,200 tons would have been necessary merely for the transportation of the firewood and coke and for the removal of the ash. In the same way, the report in question should show at least 14,426 trips instead of 6,315, with a load of at least 69,853 tons instead of 30,653 tons for the three-month period covered.

8. If the story of a mass extermination at Birkenau were true, the air photos would show:
– incineration trenches with a minimum surface area of 5,900 square meters in the area both around “Bunker 2” and around Crematorium V,
– piles of earth excavated from the trenches with a total volume of at least 6,500 cubic meters,
– a supply of at least 1,570 tons of wood for the cremation of May 31, corresponding to a pile of wood 50 m long, 35 m wide and 2 m high, i.e. a total surface area larger than Crematoria IV and V put together,
– dozens of trucks for the transportation of the wood and the removal of the ash,
– a camp railway with flatcars for the transportation of the corpses from the gas chambers to the incineration trenches,
– a concrete platform 60 by 15 meters (or 900 m²) i.e. a surface area larger than Crematorium V in the yard of this very crematorium,
– a fence made of branches running south and west of Crematorium V, some 150 m long,
– smoking chimneys at the crematoria.

Although the air photos show an area of some 50 m² near Crematorium V from which smoke emanates, these photos show:
– no trace of trenches or smoke around “Bunker 2,”
– no trace of any excavated earth,
– no trace of any piles of wood for the cremation,
– no trace of any trucks,
– no trace of a camp railway,
– no trace of a concrete platform 60 by 15 meters,
– no trace of a hedge made of branches allegedly some 150 meters long
to the south and west of Crematorium V;
– at most one single smoke column rising from the chimney of Crematorium III (air photo of August 20, 1944).

All the documentary and photographic evidence examined in this study converges on a single and irrefutable conclusion:

The story of the gassing and the cremation of the Hungarian Jews at Birkenau has no foundation in history. It is a simple propaganda story invented and structured on the basis of the elements provided by the real but insignificant and sporadic cremation of registered detainees in the yard of Crematorium V.”

Good work.
Also of note: Hoss’s confession was written in English, which he did not speak.

Thanks for the two replies, which contain interesting information; the first point is that this Spencer J. Quinn is not as knowledgeable about Solzhenitsyn as he purports to be. It takes about two seconds of googling to find out that Solzhenitsyn really said, or quoted someone to that effect, that 66 million were killed from 1918 to 1959. But Solzhenitsyn was almost certainly wrong according to most experts.
‘The Dead of the Gulag: An Experiment in Statistical Investigation’
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2986039
As for the rest of that quote, you haven’t provided any evidence, and I think, as before, that it’s probably false.

What we are saying is that Hoess was tortured beyond endurance and would have written anything his torturers required in order to stop the torture.

Any impartial or fair court would consider such “testimony” worthless.

You write in comment #177: “In order to evaluate what happened to the 400,000 Hungarian Jews who arrived from May to July 1944, and were not capable of working, it’s useful to assess the matter logically, without preconceptions.”

My response: I agree with this statement. So, let us do this now.

Carlo Mattogno, in his book “Auschwitz: Open-Air Incinerations”, writes on pages 57-58: “According to the most recent results of revisionist historiography, the number of Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz amounted to a total of about 398,400, of whom 106,700 were immediately registered or admitted into the transit camp of Birkenau without registration and then transferred to other camps; hence the percentage of those allegedly gassed would be about 73%.”

Mattogno then writes on page 59 that, assuming that 73% of all deportees were indeed gassed, the number of persons allegedly gassed would therefore be approximately 134,300 by May 31, 1944.

Mattogno writes on pages 59-60:

“The maximum theoretical capacity of the Birkenau crematoria, taking into account a possible presence of children among those cremated, would have been 1,104 corpses per day. Hence, between May 17 and 31, over 15 days, the crematoria would have been able to handle (15 × 1,104 =) roughly 16,600 corpses at the most. This, however, was impossible in practice, because….all the Birkenau crematoria were undergoing repairs, their capacity was therefore in the best of cases seriously impaired.

But let us leave that aside for the moment. Out of the 134,400 allegedly gassed persons, 16,600 could then have been incinerated in the crematoria. That would leave about 117,700 for the incineration trenches, i.e., within those 15 days roughly (117,700 ÷ 15 =) 7,850 corpses per day on average for outdoor cremation…

For the cremation of an average of 7,850 bodies per day, assuming a surface area of 0.75 square meters per corpse, one would have needed a total area of roughly (7,850 × 0.75 =) 5,900 m² (7 times the floor area of Crematorium IV or V) corresponding to
– 11 trenches as described by H. Mandelbaum (35 m × 15 m)
– 13 trenches as described by Cz. Mordowicz and A. Rosin (30 m × 15 m)
– 14 trenches as described by F. Müller (50 m × 8 m)
– 19 trenches as described by D. Paisikovic (30 m × 10 m) and by M.
Nyiszli (50 m × 6 m)
– 39 trenches as described by Sz. Dragon (25 m × 6 m)
– 82 trenches as described by S. Bendel (12 m × 6 m)
– 118 trenches as described by J. Rosenblum (10 m × 5 m)
– 147 trenches as described by S. Jankowski (20 m × 2 m).”

However, as previously discussed, the U.S. government released wartime aerial photographs in 1979 of the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp taken on several random days in 1944 during the height of the alleged extermination period. Many of these photographs were taken at mid-morning on typical workdays. None of these photos shows huge pits, trenches or piles of bodies, smoking crematory chimneys, masses of Jews awaiting death outside of the alleged gas chambers, or mountains of coke used to fuel the crematoria. All of these would have been visible if Auschwitz-Birkenau had been the extermination center it is said to have been.

In his book “Auschwitz: The End of a Legend”, Carlo Mattogno writes regarding the Allied aerial photographs taken at Birkenau on May 31, 1944:

“It is pointed out also that the aerial photographs taken by the Allied military on 31 May 1944, at the crucial time of presumed extermination, on the day of the arrival at Birkenau of about 15,000 deportees, and after 14 days of intense arrivals (184,000 deportees, averaging 13,000 per day) and with an extermination toll (according to Pressac’s hypothesis) of at least 110,000 homicidally gassed, which would have had to average 7,800 per day, every single day for 14 consecutive days; after all of that, the photographs do not show the slightest evidence of this alleged enormous extermination: No trace of smoke, no trace of pits, crematory or otherwise, burning or not, no sign of dirt extracted from pits, no trace of wood set aside for use in pits, no sign of vehicles or any other type of activity in the crucial zones of the courtyard of Crematory V nor in the earth of Bunker 2, nor in Crematories II and III. These photographs constitute irrefutable proof that the story of extermination of the Hungarian Jews is historically unfounded.” (Source: Mattogno, Carlo, Auschwitz: The End of a Legend, Newport Beach, CA: The Institute for Historical Review, 1994, p. 32).

John C. Ball writes that the Hungarian Jews arriving at Auschwitz-Birkenau from May 28 through May 31, 1944 are said to have been killed on the spot and cremated. Since the crematories at Auschwitz-Birkenau could have cremated only a small fraction of these bodies, by necessity most of them would have been cremated on gargantuan pyres outdoors. Therefore, if the orthodox story was true, the area would have been blanketed in smoke. However, the Allied air photo of Birkenau on May 31, 1944 shows a peaceful and uneventful camp devoid of any smoke emanating from the crematoria or open pits. (Source: Ball, John C., Air-Photo Evidence, in Rudolf, Germar (ed.), Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of Truth and Memory, Uckfield, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, 2019, pp. 275-277).

Ball concludes:

“The air photos of Auschwitz-Birkenau known to date from the period of December 1943 to February 1945 show no signs of fuel depots, massive smoke from chimneys or open fires, burning pits or pyres. The photos were altered: fake Zyklon-B input shafts and groups of inmates were retouched onto the photo negatives. One must assume that any actual mass-murder activities would not have escaped the notice of the air-photo interpreters, which would have resulted in the bombing of the camp – but this did not happen….To this day there is no air-photo evidence to support the alleged mass murder of the Jews at any location in Europe occupied by the Germans during World War II.” (Source: Ibid., p. 277).

So, in conclusion, we can state that your Explanation #1 in your comment #177 is not correct.

No homicidal gas chambers existed at Auschwitz-Birkenau to carry out such a massive extermination process. The crematoria capacity at Auschwitz-Birkenau was also not sufficient to cremate the alleged dead Hungarian Jews in the time period claimed by Holocaust historians. Finally, Allied aerial photographs taken at the height of the alleged extermination of the Hungarian Jews at Birkenau show an uneventful camp devoid of any evidence of a mass extermination program.

In my next comment, we will explore what actually did happen to the Hungarian Jews.

In your comment #177, you give three possible explanations of what happened to the Hungarian Jews. Your Explanation #3 is: “Most of them were sent to other places (and the rest were housed in Auschwitz-Birkenau).” I think this is the best explanation of what happened to the Hungarian Jews.

You write about Explanation #3: “This explanation is even more illogical than Explanation #2. Why in the world would the German government, losing a war and desperate for fuel, and not even able/willing to feed existing prisoners, transport non-working prisoners to another place?”

My response: We know that many Jews were transited through Auschwitz-Birkenau to other places.

For example, Viktor Frankl’s book “Man’s Search for Meaning” has been ranked by the Library of Congress as one of the 20th century’s 10 most influential books in the United States. Frankl described his experiences at Auschwitz in this book as if he had spent many months there. In reality, Frankl was in Auschwitz only for a few days in October 1944 while in transit from Theresienstadt to a sub-camp of Dachau. Frankl has admitted this to the American evangelist Robert Schuller: “I was in Auschwitz only three or four days…I was sent to a barrack and we were all transported to a camp in Bavaria.” (Source: Frankl, Viktor, “Dr. Robert Schuller Interviews Viktor Frankl: How to Find Meaning In Life,” Possibilities: The Magazine of Hope, March/April 1991, p. 10).

Frankl’s short time in Auschwitz is substantiated by the prisoner log from the sub-camp of Dachau, Kaufering III, which listed Frankl’s arrival on October 25, 1944, six days after his departure from Theresienstadt. (Source: Pytell, Timothy, “Extreme Experience, Psychological Insight, and Holocaust Perception; Reflections of Bettelheim and Frankl,” Psychoanalytic Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 4, Oct. 2007, p. 646). Thus, Frankl’s descriptions of his long stay at Auschwitz in “Man’s Search For Meaning” are false and inaccurate.

It would have been a shorter distance to send Viktor Frankl from Theresienstadt to Dachau. However, Auschwitz-Birkenau was a major transportation hub. Large numbers of Jews were sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau first before being sent to other camps.

The fate of Anne Frank, who is known around the world for her famous diary, is typical of many Jews who died in German camps during the war. Anne, her mother, her sister and her father were first deported from the Netherlands to Auschwitz in September 1944. Anne’s father contracted typhus at Auschwitz and was sent to the camp hospital to recover. He was one of thousands of Jews who remained at Auschwitz when the Germans abandoned the camp in January 1945. He survived the war and died in Switzerland in 1980.

In the face of the advancing Soviet army, Anne Frank and her sister were evacuated to Bergen-Belsen, where she died of typhus in March 1945. While Anne Frank’s fate was tragic, her story is not consistent with a German plan of extermination against the Jews. Along with thousands of others at Bergen-Belsen, Anne died from a typhus epidemic and not from a German plan to commit genocide against European Jewry.

It would have been easier for the Germans to first send the Frank family to Bergen-Belsen rather than to Auschwitz-Birkenau. However, since Auschwitz-Birkenau was a major transportation hub and work camp, large numbers of Jews such as the Frank family were sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau first before being sent to other camps.

In your comment #160, you quote form page 466 of the book “Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp”:

“Of approximately 438,000 Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz from May 15 to July 9, 1944, about 10 percent were determined to be fit for labor. Some were retained to work in Auschwitz itself; the remainder were dispersed to 396 camps in the Nazi empire. The largest groups were concentrated in the notorious camps of Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, Gross-Rosen, Gunskirchen, Mauthausen, Neuengamme, Ravensbruck, and Sachenhausen…”

So, the book “Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp” states that Hungarian Jews “were dispersed to 396 camps in the Nazi empire.” This is a very large number of camps where the Hungarian Jews were sent to. It supports your Explanation #3 that Hungarian Jews were sent from Auschwitz-Birkenau to other camps.

In your comment #182, you ask my opinion about five excerpts from Rudolf Höss’s autobiography. I regard all five excerpts as being False.

So, the book “Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp” states that Hungarian Jews “were dispersed to 396 camps in the Nazi empire.” This is a very large number of camps where the Hungarian Jews were sent to. It supports your Explanation #3 that Hungarian Jews were sent from Auschwitz-Birkenau to other camps.

No, John, it doesn’t support the proposition that Hungarian Jews not able to work were sent from Auschwitz-Birkenau to other camps.

Also of note: Hoss’s confession was written in English, which he did not speak.

Rudolf Höss’s final confession before being turned over to Polish authorities was on May 14, 1946. It was in German, not English:

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/artifact/hoess-affidavit

I have not read it, so I can’t speak to the contents, but don’t you find the autobiography suspect given his circumstances?

Why haven’t you read it?

It’s available, used, on Amazon, for a little less than $11, including shipping and handling. Can’t you afford that?

Do you not live in the U.S., or some other country with similar book shopping capability?

Why would you continue to comment without bothering to learn anything about the subject you’re commenting on?

P.S. Oh, I forgot to answer your question. My editing time is running out, so I’ll answer it in a later comment.

Brás Cubas says:

“But Solzhenitsyn was almost certainly wrong according to most experts.
‘The Dead of the Gulag: An Experiment in Statistical Investigation’
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2986039
As for the rest of that quote, you haven’t provided any evidence, and I think, as before, that it’s probably false.”

Thanks for bringing it up, Brás Cubas, really appreciated.

Solzhenitsyn in ‘Gulag Archipelago’ mentioned the 66 million figure, but he was very careful about it:

“We, of course, cannot vouch for his figure,…”

“According to the estimates of émigré Professor of Statistics Kurganov, this “comparatively easy”
internal repression cost us, from the beginning of the October Revolution up to 1959, a total of…
sixty-six million—66,000,000—lives.

“We, of course, cannot vouch for his figure, but we have none
other that is official. And just as soon as the official figure is issued the specialists can make the
necessary critical comparisons.” – Solzhenitsyn, Gulag Archipelago, page 146

https://www.d-pdf.com/book/pdf-download-the-gulag-archipelago-191856

Kurganov’s estimate of 66 million deaths is not based on archival research, but rather his projection of what the Soviet population should have been in 1959 based on a constant rate of increase from 1917: the difference between that figure and what the Soviet population actually was he attributed to deaths from the Soviet regime.
He then revised his figure upwards to 110 million, which Solzhenitsyn first used in an interview in 1976.

Another Russian emigre demographer, Sergei Maksudov (born Alexander Babyonyshev), called Kurganov’s estimate “pseudoscience”.

I have not read it, so I can’t speak to the contents, but don’t you find the autobiography suspect given his circumstances?

As far as I’m aware, these are the circumstances. It was written from January to March 1947, while he was in prison in Poland. His trial was March 11-29, so I’m not sure whether or not he’d finished his autobiography before the trial.

He wrote in his autobiography:

On 30 July (1946) I was taken to Cracow with seven other Germans. … During the first few weeks we were treated quite well, but then suddenly the attitude of the prisoner-officials changed completely and overnight. From their behavior and their conversation, the meaning of which was clear to me though I could not understand what they said, I gathered they wanted to “finish me off.”
I was only given the smallest piece of bread, and less than a spoonful of thin soup. I was no longer given a second helping, although almost every day there was food left over which was divided among prisoners of adjacent cells.

If the public prosecutor’s office had not intervened, it would have been the end of me, not only physical but first of all from a psychological point of view…

I must admit that I had never expected such decent and considerate treatment as I received in Polish custody, after the Prosecutor intervened.

Therefore, I don’t think he was being tortured while he wrote his autobiography. He further stated, towards the end of the autobiography:

I am no writer and I have never been particularly skilled with the pen. … I have written down what came to my mind, often not in sequence, but nothing is invented. I have described myself as I was and as I am.

So, to answer your question, excepting for the possibility that the Polish authorities somehow cut out or mistranslated major parts, I think the autobiography is very compelling as a statement of what things he did and why he did them. And also how he viewed other people.

And he absolutely knew he was going to die. He wrote about several instances where he could have been killed in battle, or by taking poison (the vial broke). Then he wrote:

On every occasion fate has intervened to save my life, so that at last I might be put to death in this shameful manner.

How greatly I envy comrades who died a soldier’s death.

So I consider this to be essentially an 114 page book that he wrote knowing he was on his “death bed.” Death bed writings like his, that admit certain things, explain others, and deny still others, seem very persuasive to me. Plus, many of the things in his autobiography can be corroborated either with physical evidence or the words of others…both perpetrators and victims.

You really should get the book and read it, if you want to know about Höss and Auschwitz-Birkenau. Reading it should at least relieve you of any ignorant/foolish/divorced-from-reality idea that people didn’t die in homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau.

The events referred to as the holocaust carry an emotional significance for Sailer, perhaps even spiritual. You can provide him with a mountain of evidence as high as a pile of Jewish shoes, but you’ll have more luck convincing an evangelist that Jesus never existed.

John, unfortunately, your responses really didn’t address the *evidence* that I presented in the excerpts from the autobiography

Surely it’s wise to establish the authenticity of the “auto”biography first, Mr Bahner?!

“Evidence” from a document obtained/written under duress is not evidence of anything but the helpless, hopeless and broken state of the man from whom such documents – “confessions” and “auto”biography – were wrung.

But you already know this, don’t you Mr Bahner, as it has been clearly established here and in the previous discussion of this same topic!

The court recognises Mr Mark Bahner as an obvious troll, impervious to counter-argument, who’s aim is to limit the scope of this conversation to an endless round of debunking the same claims over and over again. Mr Bahner is not to be taken seriously.

Bons Dias paras tudos! The sun is shining, the gardens are booming the animals are fed and happy, and the coffee is good. 😎

Best regards,
Kali.

Why haven’t you read it?

Of the revisionist literature that John Wear has cited throughout this and the previous thread, how many have you read, and which ones???

My comment was regarding the circumstances under which his confession/autobiography was written. I did read the confession, written in English, dated March 16,1946, with an illegible countersignature. Do you know the identity of this witness? Is it your claim that Hoss WAS NOT tortured, nor was his family threatened? Do you believe torture or threats invalidate testimony? Do you believe statements under duress, in general, are valid? Do you believe the Nuremberg trials were properly conducted?

You seem to be arguing that any statement, made by anyone in support of your position, is true, just because it MUST be true. You argue by supposition alone; by multiple suppositions, all at once, so, it’s difficult to counter such an enormously broad range of circumstantial evidence.

Read this:
Already in 1987, 1 published a book devoted to Hoss’s various post-war
statements (Mattogno 1987). It listed 60 objections characterized by internal
contradictions and insurmountable contradictions to the orthodox Holocaust
narrative of that time, thus showing that “the former commander of Auschwitz
lied on all essential points of his ‘eye-witness testimony,’ which must there¬
fore be rejected as a gross fraud.” The tortures inflicted by the British on Hoss
at the time, which in 1987 had already been documented, were therefore not
mentioned a priori in order to invalidate Hoss’s declarations, but a posteriori
in order to explain the contradictions and absurdities found in his statements.
………………………………………………

I have yet to see you engage in any sort of redirect upon Mr. Wear’s defense of your allegations submitted for this mock trial; it is proceeding in the same manner as the initial thread. You say “this is what happened”; Mr. Wear says “this is why it did not/could not happen”; you say………nothing.

Do you want to argue or assert the testimony of Hoss was valid? Is it your argument no torture was inflicted upon said witness? Do you know which aspect of his testimony was in conflict with known facts? If we can pin you down on a specific aspect of your “evidence”, perhaps some progress can be made. Defend your assertions, Mark. Counter the specific answers submitted by Mr. Wear.

I will study on the various aspects of Hoss’s confessions, in totality, if that’s what you want, although I am quite sure Mr. Wear knows all of it by memory alone. Mr. Wear has submitted the confessions were obtained under duress, therefore inadmissible. Why don’t you counter his defense?

See #202

The only person who has agreed to be a juror (“littlereddot”) hasn’t shown up here yet,

Apologies. I have been traveling. But I am back now 🙂

I’m sorry, Mark, see #201

OK, you think all five excerpts from Rudolf Höss’s autobiography were false. How about these excerpts? Again, no need to explain your reasoning just yet.

(p126) In July 1942 the Reichsführer SS visited the camp. I took him all over the gypsy camp. He made a most thorough inspection of everything, noting the overcrowded barrack-huts, the unhygienic conditions, the crammed hospital building…

(p126) He saw it all, in detail, as it really was–and he ordered me to destroy them. Those capable of work were first to be separated from the others, as with the Jews.

(p126) I pointed out to him that the personnel of the gypsy camp was not precisely what he had envisaged being sent to Auschwitz. He thereupon ordered that the Reich Criminal Police Officer should carry out a sorting as quickly as possible. This in fact took two years. The gypsies capable of work were transferred to another camp. About 4,000 gypsies were left by August, 1944, and these had to go to the gas chambers. Up to that moment, they were unaware of what was in store for them. They first realised what was happening when they made their way, barrack-hut-by barrack-hut towards Crematorium I.

True? Mostly true? Mostly false? False?

(p152) Then the bodies had to be taken from the gas-chambers, and after the gold teeth had been extracted, and the hair cut off, they had to be dragged into the pits or to the crematoria. Then the fires in the pits had to be stoked, and the surplus fat drained off, and the mountain of burning corpses constantly turned over so that the draught might fan the flames.

True? Mostly true? Mostly false? False?

(p195) I can only remember the figure involved in the larger actions , which were reported to me by Eichmann or his deputies.

(p196)
From Upper Silesia and Polish territory under German rule.. 250,000
Germany and Therisienstadt……………..…..………………. 100,000
Holland………………………………………..………………….. 95,000
Belgium……………………………………………..……………. 20,000
France……………………………………………..……………. 110,000
Greece…………………………………………………………….. 65,000
Hungary…………………………………………….…………… 400,000
Slovakia………………………………………………………….. 90,000

Plaintiff’s Counsel note: The total of these numbers is 1,130,000.

True? Mostly true? Mostly false? False?

NOTE: On this question, if you think the answer is “False”, please give the number that you think is true…or give a range in which you think the correct number lies. Thanks!

(p196) When the Jewish transports unloaded on arrival, their luggage was left on the platform until all Jews had been taken to the extermination buildings or into the camp. … The clothing of those who had been gassed in bunkers I and II or in crematoria I to IV was also brought to the sorting office.

True? Mostly true? Mostly false? False? (No need for any further explanation.)

Again, thanks.

Curious minds want to know:

Why would the Nazis waste clothing, tattooing ink and effort,
de-lousing chem if death happening soon? And high heat/fire
very good for controlling lice, etc.

Plaintiff’s “Re-direct” on Item 2: The Court Testimony of Dr. Fritz Klein, a German Doctor at Auschwitz

In my comment #115, I presented the words of Fritz Klein in his defense at his trial, for which he was convicted of war crimes. I’d like the Defense (John Wear) to label these specific excerpts as “True, Mostly True, Mostly False, or False”. I realize John Wear responded to my original comment #115 in his comment #125, but I’d like to get all the Defense’s responses to the evidence I presented in a simple and similar format.

When transports arrived at Auschwitz it was the doctor’s job to pick out those who were unfit or unable to work. These included children, old people and the sick. I have seen the gas chambers and crematoria at Auschwitz, and I knew that those I selected were to go to the gas chamber. But I only acted on orders given me by Dr. Wirtz. I cannot say from whom Dr. Wirtz received his orders and I have never seen any orders in writing relating to the gassing of prisoners. All orders given to me were given verbally.

True, Mostly True, Mostly False, or False?

I never protested against people being sent to the gas chamber although I never agreed. One cannot protest when in the Army. It was not a pleasure to take part in these parades, as I knew the persons selected would go to the gas chamber. Persons who became pregnant whilst in the camp and therefore unfit for work were also selected on later parades. I have heard that Himmler had visited Auschwitz camp, although I have never actually seen him. It was certainly known to the higher-ups that these methods were being used at Auschwitz Camp.

True, Mostly True, Mostly False, or False?

Is a confession under duress admissible in court?

Constitutionally and backed by case law, coerced confessions are considered inadmissible in court—even if the confession was true. Coerced confessions violate your right not to be compelled to testify against yourself, and coercive tactics are a denial of due process under the law.
………………………….

Military tribunals may be somewhat different, but the basic premise of confession by means of torture or threats is universally considered unreliable or invalid. Rabbinical/Talmudic laws, against gentiles, fly in the face of “western” ethics and due process.

> As unreliable as Dario Gabbai?

Separate issue. There’s no reason to place any special trust in one person just because you may have suspicions about the story from a different person.

> Heddesheimer cogently documents the slew of previous attempts by Jews to disseminate deceitful and untrue atrocity propaganda before

While some of those stories from the early 20th century are interesting to review, one should not overstate things the way that your quote is doing. The bulk of the stories which Heddesheimer cites do not actually have much to do with atrocities as such but are rather assertions made about different types of economic poverty, famine and war-related disasters. For example, Heddesheimer cites a story which he attributes to the New York Times of June 11, 1900, which allegedly quotes Rabbi Wise as saying:

“There are 6,000,000 living, suffering arguments in favor of Zionism.”

It’s clear that the article is simply talking about economic poverty among east European Jews, but makes no greater atrocity claim. As far as how that number 6 million would have been arrived, the Czarist census of 1897 produced a count of 5.2 million Jews. So, Rabbi Wise appears to be adding on an extra 800,000 out of consideration to neighboring countries adjoint to Russia (the map before 1914 was very different from that after 1918).

> Everyone, everywhere is unreliable, throughout history

Hardly, but some critical assessment of sources is always necessary. Robert Wilton was originally a paid British propagandist who turned his loyalties over to Kolchak and freely spun fabricated stories. To the extent that Douglas Reed showed a willingness to treat Wilton as a substantive source, he is at best showing pure gullibility. Just as an example of Wilton’s falsehoods, he speaks in Last Days of the Romanovs about:

“Lenin did not rule; the Soviet system was governed by other people, the fellow-passengers who came with him under German auspices. … the real power was elsewhere. We are concerned with great, if maleficent, personages … A goodly portion of the hundred Jews who came out of Germany with Lenin, and the hundreds who came from Chicago, deserve to be included in this gallery, for they undoubtedly hold Russia under their sway.”
— Wilton, Last Days, pp. 26-7.

As far as Wilton’s story about “the hundred Jews who came out of Germany with Lenin” goes:

“At 3:20 P.M. on March 27/April 9, thirty-two Russian emigres left Zurich for the German frontier… it is known that among them were nineteen Bolsheviks, including Lenin, Krupskaia, Zinoviev with his wife and child, Inessa Armand, and Radek, as well as six members of the Bund and three followers of Trotsky. Having crossed the border at Gottmadingen, they transferred to a German train…”
— Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution, pp. 391-2, Vintage Books, 1991.

32 people, not 100, and not all of them Bolsheviks. The Bundists, of course, were not Lenin’s allies and their party would later be banned. Moreover, none of these 32 passengers were “German Jews.” They were all political exiles from Czarist Russia.

More than that, Wilton is spreading absurd rubbish when he claims that Lenin was somehow controlled by people around him. In the Soviet state apparatus, Lenin’s particular skill was always pivotal in maintaining a sense of orientation. After his death the political shake-ups led to Stalin’s rule precisely because none of the traditional party-members had ever planned for managing things without Lenin. The notion that there was some hidden group of secret controllers managing things behind the scenes over Lenin’s head is really absurd. There’s simply no point in pretending to ramble on about historical topics if one is not willing to scrutinize claims of the type which Wilton promoted.

, vol. 11, card 9; microfilm 1060, card 100. Hoss, p. 215, confirms that the underground spaces at crematoria II and III served as undressing rooms and gas chambers and were outfitted with an automatic ventilation system.

Do you have a link showing these letters?

Good grief.

“Tiptoethrutulips,” you never answered my questions about why you never read the Höss autobiography.

Why haven’t you? Don’t you think it’s simple good research practice to read the account(s) of the people who actually were at Auschwitz-Birkenau during WWII, before you read the comments of someone (Defense counsel please correct this if I’m wrong regarding any of these eight items regarding Carlo Mattogno):

1) Who wasn’t even born until after WWII;
2) Has no degree in History, let alone an advanced degree in History;
3) In fact, to my knowledge, Carlo Mattogno has no college degree at all;
4) Has never written a single peer-reviewed journal article on Auschwitz;
5) In fact, to my knowledge, Carlo Mattogno has never written a single peer-reviewed journal article on any aspect of WWII;
6) First published on WWII subjects in 1985, when he was approximately 34 years old, and which consisted of two books published by the Italian neo-fascist publisher Sentinella d’Italia;
7) Has never in his life been accepted as an expert witness in any court of law on any aspect of WWII, let alone Auschwitz-Birkenau;
8) Whose contention that there were never any homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau is as ignorant, foolish, irrational, and basically insane as people who claim the Apollo 11 moon landing was faked.

I’ll address your other comments/question in #201 later.

NOTE: I should not be addressing them at all, since you’re not a member of the Defense team, and you clearly aren’t capable or can’t be bothered to research even the simplest things…like who the witness was for the Rudolf Höss. But you have raised some issues and raised some questions similar to those John Wear has raised, so I will address your comments later.

Apologies. I have been traveling. But I am back now 🙂

Hi,

We decided to simply present our cases, and let each person be a juror. So you were dismissed, with our thanks.

🙂

Mark

P.S. You’re very late into the trial. I’ve presented my roughly eight items of evidence. John Wear has responded to most of them (what would essentially be the “cross-examination” in a real civil trial). I’m now in the “re-direct” phase on the first two pieces of evidence…though I’ve been distracted by comments from those *outside* the trial. (Which I really should learn never to respond to…)

Let’s just take an example.

—–
This was Robert Wilton… The French edition of his book included the official Bolshevik lists… These records show that the Central Committee of the Bolshevik party, which wielded the supreme power, contained 3 Russians (including Lenin) and 9 Jews.
—–
— Douglas Reed, The Controversy of Zion, p. 274.

Bogus. If you actually are interested in bona fide official lists of the top party membership, you can find a lot of that here:

http://holocaust.skeptik.net/misc/party.htm

Just to take the data from a point, on March 8, 1918, the Central Committee’s (TsK) membership was:

—–
TsK: Members: Artem F. A., Bukharin N. I. (Russian), Vladimirskij M. F. (Russian), Dzerzhinskij F. E. (Pole), Zinovjev G. E. (Jewish), Krestinskij N. N. (Ukrainian), Lashevich M. M., Lenin V. I. (Russian), Sverdlov Ja. M. (Jewish), Smilga I. T., Sokol’nikov G. Ja. (Jewish), Stalin I. V. (Georgian), Stasova E. D. (Russian), Trotskij L. D. (Jewish), Shmidt V. V. (German)
—–

More like 4 Jews out of 15 members, rather than the 9 out of 12 which Wilton invented. Yes, Wilton’s lists are simply inventions. He was not an investigative news reporter. He was a propagandist. Reed simply treats Wilton’s rubbish uncritically because it appeals ideologically to him.

In your comment #160, you quote form page 466 of the book “Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp”:

“Of approximately 438,000 Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz from May 15 to July 9, 1944, about 10 percent were determined to be fit for labor. Some were retained to work in Auschwitz itself; the remainder were dispersed to 396 camps in the Nazi empire. The largest groups were concentrated in the notorious camps of Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, Gross-Rosen, Gunskirchen, Mauthausen, Neuengamme, Ravensbruck, and Sachenhausen…”

I wrote in my comment #191: So, the book “Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp” states that Hungarian Jews “were dispersed to 396 camps in the Nazi empire.” This is a very large number of camps where the Hungarian Jews were sent to. It supports your Explanation #3 that Hungarian Jews were sent from Auschwitz-Birkenau to other camps.”

You responded in comment #193: “No, John, it doesn’t support the proposition that Hungarian Jews not able to work were sent from Auschwitz-Birkenau to other camps.”

I decided to go to the SMU Library this morning to check out this book to see exactly what it says on page 466 of “Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp.”

In your favor, this book says on page 466 “the remainder were dispersed to 386 camps in the Nazi empire.” You apparently made a typo when you said 396 camps in the Nazi empire.

However, you left out the sentence “Like Auschwitz, several of those camps had subcamps.” This is definitely a true statement.

For example, Dachau had major sub-camps that include Kaufering I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, and XI. In the case of Viktor Frankl, he was transferred to Kaufering III from Auschwitz-Birkenau in October of 1944.

Mauthausen also had numerous sub-camps that include the large sub-camps of Gusen and Ebensee. Gross-Rosen also had numerous sub-camps. Per Wikipedia, “at its peak activity in 1944, the Gross-Rosen complex had up to 100 subcamps located in eastern Germany and in German-occupied Czechoslovakia and Poland.”

So, there were many more camps where Hungarian Jews could have been sent after arriving in Auschwitz-Birkenau than the 386 mentioned on page 466 of “Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp.” This book does support your Explanation #3 that most Hungarian Jews were sent from Auschwitz-Birkenau to other German camps.

Forever trying to build a house of cards on a sea of testimony. Pathetic.

Show us the plans. Show us the gas chambers. Show us the remains.

Instead you say “oh, the plans were above top secret, and the gas chambers were disguised as shower rooms and or destroyed, and the remains were not only cremated but ground up with mortars and pestles to ensure that NOT ONE TRACE OF EVIDENCE was left behind”?

And then to argue “we’ll obviously the Nazis wanted to genocide the Jews, haven’t you read Mein Kampf”?

If the Nazi will to genocide was so obvious, why did they take such pains to leave behind NO EVIDENCE of the Holocaust? They were losing the war, they were going to lose, supposedly everybody knew what they were guilty of, yet they sat there like a bunch of squaws, grinding up the bone fragments of untermenschen as the Allies closed in? And then they got busted for the crime anyway? What an insult to human intelligence.

Do you rate Hoess’ original testimony at Nuremberg as true, mostly true, you wish it were true, or totally fucking false?

Your comments #205 and #207 are again, similar to your questions about Rudolf Höss, asking me to answer True, Mostly True, Mostly False, or False? I am going to pass on answering these questions. I consider this to be a game that I have no desire to participate in.

My argument was about the manner in which the confessions were obtained, NOT the veracity of his statements.

It is not necessary to go over statements, with a fine toothed comb, if the confession was obtained by coercion. Said confession is NOT admissible.

It is/was not my intention to interfere with this trial, but saying “You’re wrong” or “I don’t agree” is not a rebuttal. It’s not an appropriate argument; it’s spinning wheels and getting nowhere.

Do you deny torture/coercion/threats made against Hoss? If you do, offer your theory against the many, credible sources that claim otherwise; if you admit to maltreatment/coercion, explain why his testimony, under duress, is valid and acceptable. If we agree that his testimony given under coercion is acceptable, we can then argue about what he revealed and whether or not it was accurate.

So I consider this to be essentially an 114 page book that he wrote knowing he was on his “death bed.” Death bed writings like his, that admit certain things, explain others, and deny still others, seem very persuasive to me.

With any other person, I would agree with your sentiments.

But with Hoss, it is not so simple. I think we can only be reasonably sure of his candour if he didn’t have the futures of a wife and young children to protect.

—————————

Having followed all the evidence presented so far, and pending your reply to my comment #204, I would say my observations are:

Testimonies of the Hoss, Klein, Nyiszli, and especially Muller do not seem credible when viewed against the counter arguments given by John Wear

Testimonies by the two prison guards seem ok at first, and counter argument given by John about modern day “anti holocaust denial laws” are not very strong. However I note that he also makes the argument that, as relatively simple minded minions, the two guards could easily have been leaned on by the War Crimes Tribunal Prosecutors in order to “spill the beans” on their bosses. This is a well known tactic used by police around the world. And I entirely expect that it was used then.

The building and site plans provided show no indication of them being ORIGINALLY INTENDED for use as gas chambers. They do show every sign of being used as normal crematoria, complete with underground corpse holding/mortuary facilities….listed as gas chambers and undressing rooms in Holocaust websites.

However your post #164, item 43 may show that the these underground mortuaries were indeed retrofitted at a later date and turned into gas chambers.

If you have references to these, they would be useful to make up our minds about them.

Thanks

Why would the Nazis waste clothing, tattooing ink and effort, de-lousing chem if death happening soon?

They didn’t waste clothing. Typically, about 25 percent of people off the trains (though this varied tremendously, from close to zero percent to maybe 40 percent) were deemed fit to work. It was those who people who were deemed fit to work who were given the delousing, tattoos, and prison clothing.

The majority of Jews–consisting of young children and their mothers, elderly people, and men and women judged not fit to work on a couple seconds of evaluation–were sent directly to the the crematoria.

At the crematoria, they were forced to strip, then forced into gas chambers, then brought out and people with long hair had their hair sheared off, and everyone having gold teeth had those pulled out, and then they were either cremated in the crematoria or in “burn pits” with many bodies.

Thank you!

K.

True, Mostly True, Mostly False, or False?

Wtf is this, a telemarketing survey or a COURT OF LAW? (Please don’t answer that. lol!)

I move that counsel be slapped about the head with a wet fish until he comes to his senses and starts to behave himself.

The court rules that Mr Bahner closely read everything that His Grace, Mr Wear, has so far laid before the court, forthwith!

And I hope you’re not wearing a hat!
Kali.

The historical record shows that Reed is just a gullible repeater of propaganda from liars like Robert Wilton. I might just continue from where I left off on page 274 of The Controversy of Zion:

“The next body in importance, the Central Committee of the Executive Commission (or secret police) comprised 42 Jews and 19 Russians, Letts, Georgians and others.”

Here Reed seems to just be jumbling up Wilton’s own propaganda, even worse than Wilton himself gave it. Since this page

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:The_Jewish_role_in_the_early_Soviet_Regime

contains the transcript which Reed claims to be drawing upon, we can compare both Reed to Wilton, and each of them to reality. The closest thing in Wilton’s book (pp. 187-9 of the IHR edition, if you have that) to what Reed seems to be rambling about is when Wilton provides what he claims is a list taken from the Central Executive Committee (a somewhat different title and entity than what Reed asserts). Wilton gives the bogus claim of:

—–
out of 61 members, five were Russians, six were Latvians, one was a German, two were Armenians, one was a Czech, one was an Imeretian, two were Georgians, one was a Karaim, one was a Ukrainian, and 41 were Jews.
—–

In reality:

“The All-Russian Central Executive Committee … included 62 Bolsheviks (out of 101 members). Among them were 23 Jews, 20 Russians, 5 Ukrainians, 5 Poles, 4 ‘Balts,’ 3 Georgians, and 2 Armenians.”
— Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century, p. 175, Princeton University Press, 2004.

“At 3:20 P.M. on March 27/April 9, thirty-two Russian emigres left Zurich for the German frontier… it is known that among them were nineteen Bolsheviks, including Lenin, Krupskaia, Zinoviev with his wife and child, Inessa Armand, and Radek, as well as six members of the Bund and three followers of Trotsky. Having crossed the border at Gottmadingen, they transferred to a German train…”

And who else was “among them” Patrick McNally? Your list seems to infer that there were more than those listed also on the train.

100 German Jews (who don’t necessarily have to be Bolsheviks to appreciate the power the Bolsheviks gave them). How can you be sure that these were not on the train?

Kali.

My comment was regarding the circumstances under which his confession/autobiography was written.

It’s not logical to write that sentence. His confession of May 14, 1946 and his autobiography were not under the same circumstances. In his confession of May 14, 1946, he was in Allied custody, about a month after he’d testified for the Defense at Nuremberg.

His autobiography was written over the course of several months, when he was in Polish custody.

See my comment #106 for his timeline. And see my comment #197 why I think what he wrote in his autobiography is very credible.

Do you know the identity of this witness?

You’re talking about the witness for the May 14, 1946 confession?! Just read the text right next to the written confession!:

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/artifact/hoess-affidavit

Hoess affidavit

Affidavit signed by Rudolf Hoess attesting to the gassing of Jews while he was the commandant of the Auschwitz killing center. The German text reads: “I declare herewith under oath that in the years 1941 to 1943 during my tenure in office as commandant of Auschwitz Concentration Camp 2 million Jews were put to death by gassing and a 1/2 million by other means. Rudolf Hoess. May 14, 1946.” The confession is also signed by Josef Maier of the US Chief of Counsel’s office. A photoreproduction of the original document is on display on the third floor of the Permanent Exhibition at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.

Is it your claim that Hoss WAS NOT tortured, nor was his family threatened?

No, I specifically did NOT include anything but excerpts from his autobiography as Plaintiff’s evidence in this trial. I did that specifically because, to my knowledge, he was NOT being tortured or his family threatened during the period of months in which he wrote his autobiography in Polish custody. Again, see my comment #197 where I explain in detail why I consider his autobiography very credible.

Do you believe torture or threats invalidate testimony? Do you believe statements under duress, in general, are valid?

Yes, I absolutely agree that torture or threats invalidate testimony. And I absolutely agree that statements made under duress, in general, are not valid. That’s why the only evidence I presented in this mock trial were the words in his autobiography.

Now, you could say, “But when he was writing his autobiography he was under ‘duress’!” Well, duh. He knew he was going to be tried for war crimes, found guilty, and sentenced to death. But he was only under that “duress” because he freely admitted that he was in charge of an operation that murdered over 1,000,000 innocent civilians.

When Ted Bundy knew without doubt that he going to be executed for mass murder, he started telling the prosecutors about all the other murders that they didn’t even know he did. And he made those confessions so that they’d put off executing him until he confessed to every single murder. (The families of the people he murdered that prosecutors didn’t know about obviously wanted to get some “closure” on what happened to their missing loved ones.) Now, those were absolutely confessions under “duress”…but it was just the “duress” of his impending execution for crimes he absolutely committed.

Already in 1987, 1 published a book devoted to Hoss’s various post-war statements (Mattogno 1987). It listed 60 objections characterized by internal contradictions and insurmountable contradictions to the orthodox Holocaust narrative of that time, thus showing that “the former commander of Auschwitz lied on all essential points of his ‘eye-witness testimony,’ which must therefore be rejected as a gross fraud.”

Carlo Mattogno was not responding to any evidence presented by the Plaintiffs in this mock trial.

If he wishes to do so, let him come.

Right now, I have simply presented a list of excerpts from Hoss’s autobiography. So far, John Wear has labeled the first five excerpts as “false.” I asked about some more excerpts, and I assume he’ll respond to those.

We first need to establish if there is anything I presented in the autobiography excerpts that John Wear views as “true.”

Defend your assertions, Mark.

Regarding Rudolf Hoss’s autobiography, I made no “assertions.” I merely presented Rudolf Höss’s assertions.

P.S. Obviously, I’ve been varying in my spelling of Höss. “Hoss” is easiest for me. (I have to copy/paste to do “Höss”.)

I am wholly unfamiliar with Wilton, so I will refrain from commenting on his activities, however you are now asserting that the actions/statements of one man, Wilton, nullifies the opinions/conclusions of another, Reed, in the precise manner in which you conclude Gabbai’s obvious falsehoods, thereby do NOT nullify my conclusions about the official Holocaust narrative. Is this analysis correct? Is this somewhat of an example of the “pilpuling” I keep seeing bantered about?

Your method of arguing, by hyper-focusing on details, will not work against me, as I do not believe many such details, such as “did Hitler know about the flight to Scotland?” are relevant to the bigger picture and the initial proclamations about 6 million Jews, yet again, perishing in death and labor camps, by specific intent of mass murder. Therefore, I do not entertain such arguments. Generally.

I will say, rather than reading entirely on what others reveal/conclude about Hitler/Germany, I rely, partially, on first hand accounts, and Hitler’s very own words, which I painstakingly translated, from speeches made by him, and I never heard the sort of malice and maniacal comments about annihilating Jews from the earth, as are often attributed to him; he wanted Jews out of banking, academia, publishing, and positions of influence in Europe. Did innocent, assimilated Jews suffer for this agenda? Yes. Do I believe Zionist Jews cared NOT for the fate of their assimilated brethren? Yes. Does the Talmud or Rabbinical laws prohibit assimilation and punish accordingly for so doing? Yes? No?

I do not profess to know or to have heard every statement made by Hitler regarding Jewish machinations in Germany/Europe, but I know enough about his statements, and I know enough about WHAT MANY JEWS, IN POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY, SAY PUBLICLY about Gentiles and their societies, to know where the truth lies.

That Canadian News link which you gave is the first thing which seems to make some kind of claim about Niuta Teitelbaum and Spartacus. Unfortunately, it seems rather confused and in need of editing:

https://thecanadian.news/the-jewish-women-who-challenged-the-nazis/

—–
She was prosecuted, tortured and executed. He [sic] belonged to the communist group Spartacus. She was 25 years old and she is one of the forgotten Polish Jewish women that the art historian and comedian Judy Battalion, granddaughter of a Holocaust survivor, saves in the essay ‘Daughters of the Resistance’ (Six Barral).
—–

But that’s probably just a sloppy typo.

also anon #132. I forget these things.

Maybe better to have shaved heads before soaked, caked, covered with cyanide.
Were heads (arm pits?, arms, pubes?, backs?) tonsured to prevent burning hair smell?
Eastern Yid very hairy.

Apparently last century Yid were in less than excellent condition. So many unqualified
for any work: sweeping floors, serving water, cleaning toilets, etc. Gates and Kissinger,
and Soros, would have approved the weeding out.

Is it known how many old time Yid (men, doubt women into such) had gold teeth?

Weren’t Nazis pedos and rapists? Why not make use of instead of rushed discarding?

> You constantly recite nonsense because you are defending the indefensible:

I haven’t touched on that at all here. Personally, I think it’s extremely doubtful that 46 cremation muffles at Birkenau (which had already been in use for more than a year) would be able to consume somewhere on the order of 400k bodies of different sizes without there being clear records of the masonry in the crematoria disintegrating apart. But that’s different from Robert Wilton’s hoaxes. What I’ve always had to note is that there is an abnormal tendency for people who claim to just be reviewing the records of alleged deaths in German camps during the Second World War t0 quickly become enraptured with repeating all sorts of Right-wing junk from as far back as 1917. It would be like someone who starts out as a critic of the Bush/neocon war in Iraq and suddenly out of nowhere begins reciting propaganda put out by Saddam Hussein as far back as 1968. What results is total junk.

Rummel just blindly repeats older propaganda. Nothing in the actual population statistics of the Soviet Union, when set against the already known death rates which had existed in Czarist Russia up to 1913, supports the lunacy which Rummel and Solzhenitsyn have spouted. Solzhenitsyn himself tells us of his own remembered experiences:

—–
Twenty-five years later we could think: Well, yes, we understood the sort of arrests that were being made at the time, and the fact that they were torturing people in prisons, and the slime they were trying to drag us into. But it isn’t true! After all, the Black Marias were going through the streets at night, and we were the same young people who were parading with banners during the day. How could we know anything about those arrests and why should we think about them? All the provincial leaders had been removed, but as far as we were concerned it didn’t matter. Two or three professors had been arrested, but after all they hadn’t been our dancing partners, and it might even be easier to pass our exams as a result. Twenty-year olds, we marched in the ranks of those born the year the Revolution took place, and because we were the same age as the Revolution, the brightest of futures lay ahead.
—–
— Solzhenitsyn, Gulag Archipelago, pp. 160-1.

If anything remotely like the ridiculous 66 million hoax had been going on, then Solzhenitsyn would not be recalling that “the brightest of futures lay ahead.”

Was he or was he not, in custody, when statements/confessions/memoirs were given/written?

You say, yes.

Were the aforementioned statements given under torture, abuse, threats or malfeasance, of any sort?

If so, how can his statements be considered truthful? Would this evidence then be admissible in a proper forum/court? Or, do you claim no malfeasance?

Yes, our exchange is complicating this “debate”, but you can’t make numerous assertions, in a barrage, much of which is opinion and/or of the nature of unknowns (undocumented people can’t be named or counted, as they are undocumented; we can estimate, but arguments of this nature have no definitive answer).

I suspect your focus on Hungarian Jews is more about the nature of the “unknowable”; the latter part of the war was marked by less precise documentation due to destruction of railways, supply lines, military personnel, and all manner of things spinning out of control. I did hear one former camp inmate remark that rules/regulations were relaxed due to the impending loss by Germany; he may have been the very same inmate who reported on the library, cafe and soccer games played amongst SS personnel and British POW’s and camp inmates. But, I digress……

Cohen himself is repeating in 1974 what were grossly exaggerated figures promoted in the West during the Cold War:

“whose prisoner population grew from small numbers after the revolution of 1917 to 12 to 15 million (about half “politicals”) at any one time by the 1940’s.”

BS. To take a specific year, in 1946 there were 245,146 in prisons, 600,987 in camps, and 509, 696 in colonies. For data on other years, see Michael Haynes & Rumy Husan, A Century of State Murder? Death and Policy in Twentieth-Century Russia, pp. 214-5. The range of “12 to 15 million” which Cohen repeats there is a just a Cold War fantasy.

I’m sorry, yet again, Mark. I did not quite finish:

Yes, our exchange is complicating this “debate”, but you can’t make numerous assertions, in a barrage, much of which is opinion and/or of the nature of unknowns (undocumented people can’t be named or counted, as they are undocumented; we can estimate, but arguments of this nature have no definitive answer), AND PROCEED AS IF FACTS AND PROPER EVIDENCE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AND AGREED UPON. SO DOING, IS JUST MORE OF WHAT WAS ALREADY DONE IN THE PREVIOUS THREAD.

If the Nazi will to genocide was so obvious, why did they take such pains to leave behind NO EVIDENCE of the Holocaust?

Because they knew what they were doing–murdering over a million innocent civilians at Auschwitz, for example–was a war crime, and that they’d be executed for it.

Just read Rudolf Hoss’s frickin’ autobiography. He says so right in his autobiography. I have excerpts from his autobiography in my comments #109, #110, and #111.

(p195) During previous interrogations I have put the number of Jews who arrived in Auschwitz for extermination at two and a half millions. This figure was supplied by Eichmann who gave it to my superior officer Gruppenführer Blücks, when he as ordered to make a report to the Reichsfürher SS shortly before Berlin was surrounded. Eichmann, and his permanent deputy Günther, were the only ones who possessed the necessary information on which to calculate the total number destroyed. In accordance with orders given by the Reichsfürher SS, after every large action all evidence in Auschwitz on which a calculation of the number of victims might be based was burnt.

(p195) As head of department DI I personally destroyed every bit of evidence which could be found in my office. The heads of other offices did the same.

Were the aforementioned statements given under torture, abuse, threats or malfeasance, of any sort?

See my comments in #224…and #197.

The only evidence I introduced in this mock trial was from from his autobiography, and I do NOT think that autobiography was written, “…under torture, abuse, threats or malfeasance, of any sort.”

I simply don’t know how to make it any clearer than that.

As Han said and John Wear confirmed, that information was extracted from Judy Batalion’s book. Han provided the relevant excerpt twice, though in his first related comment the quotation marks are missing and in his second related comment he omitted precisely the word ‘Spartacus’, probably accidentally. But that excerpt is visible on the Google Books page for Batalion’s book. Spartacus was a Polish youth organization (I presume Teitelbaum joined it as a student, and only later joined Gwardia Ludowa, though that’s only an educated guess).
Another reference to that organization is in the book “If the Walls Could Speak: Inside a Women’s Prison in Communist Poland”, by Anna Müller. From an extract available on the web, one can read another reference to Spartacus, this time in connection to a different woman:

Hedda Bartoszek (1919–2000) joined the Association of Independent Socialist Youth Spartacus (Związek Niezależnej Młodzieży Socjalistycznej Spartakus) before the war and during the war was involved in the Communist-led underground People’s Guard (Gwardia Ludowa [GL]) in Warsaw.

https://academic.oup.com/book/6599/chapter-abstract/150583042

Fair enough, Mark.

But, “what you think” does not fly in court, if your opponent presents evidence that your thinking is wrong, and/or certainly whether or not, in this case, you assert, or refuse to acknowledge, if evidence obtained by malfeasance should be admissible, in general.

You say the autobiography/confessions are truth (accepted evidence); Mr. Wear objects and says it was obtained under duress, therefore inadmissible, and he provides evidence/sources for his argument; You say, Mr. Wear is wrong!…….…………….That’s it. So, now what? Since you provide nothing, but opinion, to counter Mr. Wear’s claim, he wins; you lose on this issue, and your evidence is tossed out.

I am pointing out the flaws in your strategy, and I’ll just leave it at that.

If anything remotely like the ridiculous 66 million hoax had been going on

how different: Yid 6 mill out of maybe 9 mill vs 66 mill out of 140 mill, give or take.

Can you unveil another hoax or several hoaxes?
Clue, all involve Yid.

Every deed leaves residue.

So, first prove with authenticated forensic evidence that murder was committed:

Start with the easiest, the alleged burning pits with their grease collecting channels. Or do you assert that those remains were also dug up and ground to dust using mortar and pestle?

In any murder trial the state must first prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a murder has been committed. Were the prosecution to dance around this issue the defence would have a field day and the prosecution team would get fired and lose their license.

> thirty-two Russian emigres left Zurich for the German frontier… it is known that among them were nineteen Bolsheviks

32 Russian exiles who all got some kind of trip back to Russia because the German government had an interest in helping the return of anyone who had expressed discontent with the war. Ludendorff wasn’t giving a trip to any German Jews, that’s Wilton’s fantasy. Ludendorff simply wanted to send back to Russia former exiles who had stated their opposition to the war. The people traveling in there weren’t all aligned with Lenin. 19 of them were. But Ludendorff would have had no way of knowing that Lenin would one day be a significant historical figure. Ludendorff just wanted to encourage discontent with the war among the Russian population.

> nullifies the opinions/conclusions of another, Reed

Reed repeats from Wilton many factually incorrect assertions, showing that he is not very careful about examining a source. While someone might be forgiven for presuming in 1920 that Wilton was just a reporter doing an honest job, by the time Reed was citing Wilton only someone who was very heavily ideologically predisposed to Wilton would trust anything he ever said.

> the initial proclamations about 6 million Jews, yet again, perishing in death and labor camps, by specific intent of mass murder.

I don’t see any reason to believe in the 6 million figure. Depending on how chooses to read data from a later time, the number of abnormal Jewish fatalities in World War II could hypothetically have been on the order of 2.25 million. Of course, if people are going to recycle something like Solzhenitsyn’s 66 million hoax then it is kind of pointless to worry about 2.25 or 6 million or whatever. There have obviously been loads of exaggerations and fabrications throughout the whole of the last century, whether against the Soviet Union or the Third Reich or whoever. But fundamentally Hitler was defeated because his aim of conquering living space in eastern Europe made it impossible for very many Slavs to support him for too long.

You write:
There are 6,000,000 living, suffering arguments in favor of Zionism.”

It’s clear that the article is simply talking about economic poverty among east European Jews, but makes no greater atrocity claim. As far as how that number 6 million would have been arrived, the Czarist census of 1897 produced a count of 5.2 million Jews. So, Rabbi Wise appears to be adding on an extra 800,000 out of consideration to neighboring countries adjoint to Russia (the map before 1914 was very different from that after 1918).
…………………………………………..

It’s not clear to me why the 6 million figure, pops up repeatedly, whether estimating up or down, naming those perished or in eminent danger of perishing, with regard to the Jewish people, wherever they reside, amongst people, always hostile, for no apparent reason, to Jewish society. This number is asserted out of convenience, then? Is that what you are saying?
…………………………………………………
You write:
*Everyone, everywhere is unreliable, throughout history

The above* is my statement, taken completely out of context. You chose to offer a response to six words, which on their own and out of context, mean nothing or anything.

In my opinion, Henry Ford, was a reliable source of information and a great contributor to the success and prosperity of his employees and this nation; I find his opinions more credible than the ideas and notions of ancient, desert dwelling, vengeful, first-born-killers from yore, whose tenets run roughshod over “everyone everywhere.”

The only evidence I introduced in this mock trial was from from his autobiography, and I do NOT think that autobiography was written, “…under torture, abuse, threats or malfeasance, of any sort.”

I simply don’t know how to make it any clearer than that.

But, “what you think” does not fly in court, if your opponent presents evidence that your thinking is wrong,…

The Defense has produced ABSOLUTELY NO SUCH EVIDENCE. The Defense presented only the words of Hoss, and observers of Hoss, in the period from March 2, 1946 when he was captured and tortured by the British, up to the time he testified in Nuremberg, April 15-16, 1946.

My timeline estimates his autobiography to be written from January 1947 to March 1947 (see postscript…it was actually completely in February 1947). That’s *more* than six months *after* any Defense evidence presented. (Note: It may be that Hoss’s autobiography was started as early as October 1946…but in any case that would still be exactly six months after he testified at Nuremberg.) (Or five months after his handwritten and witnessed confession on May 14, 1946…which itself was one month after his Nuremberg testimony.)

In fact, the *only* evidence presented regarding Rudolf Hoss’s state of mind when he wrote his autobiography was presented by the Plaintiffs. I presented an entire comment of Hoss’s state of mind when he wrote his autobiography, in comment #197.

He wrote in his autobiography:

On 30 July (1946) I was taken to Cracow with seven other Germans. … During the first few weeks we were treated quite well, but then suddenly the attitude of the prisoner-officials changed completely and overnight. From their behavior and their conversation, the meaning of which was clear to me though I could not understand what they said, I gathered they wanted to “finish me off.”

I was only given the smallest piece of bread, and less than a spoonful of thin soup. I was no longer given a second helping, although almost every day there was food left over which was divided among prisoners of adjacent cells.

If the public prosecutor’s office had not intervened, it would have been the end of me, not only physical but first of all from a psychological point of view…

I must admit that I had never expected such decent and considerate treatment as I received in Polish custody, after the Prosecutor intervened.

From my comment #197: Therefore, I don’t think he was being tortured while he wrote his autobiography. He further stated, towards the end of the autobiography:

I am no writer and I have never been particularly skilled with the pen. … I have written down what came to my mind, often not in sequence, but nothing is invented. I have described myself as I was and as I am.

From comment #197:

So, to answer your question, excepting for the possibility that the Polish authorities somehow cut out or mistranslated major parts, I think the autobiography is very compelling as a statement of what things he did and why he did them. And also how he viewed other people.

And he absolutely knew he was going to die. He wrote about several instances where he could have been killed in battle, or by taking poison (the vial broke). Then he wrote:

On every occasion fate has intervened to save my life, so that at last I might be put to death in this shameful manner.

How greatly I envy comrades who died a soldier’s death.

Again, my comment in #197:

So I consider this to be essentially an 114 page book that he wrote knowing he was on his “death bed.” Death bed writings like his, that admit certain things, explain others, and deny still others, seem very persuasive to me. Plus, many of the things in his autobiography can be corroborated either with physical evidence or the words of others…both perpetrators and victims.

The Defense seems to be making the claim that because Hoss was tortured from his capture in March 1946 until his transfer to Nuremberg to testify for the Defense on April 14, 1946, that *nothing* Hoss writes of says subsequently can be true.

I hope any reasonable juror can see how that’s nonsense. Many, many military men have been tortured over history. Consider John McCain, for example. He was tortured so badly they broke multiple bones. He signed a confession to war crimes. But he didn’t for the rest of his life maintain he’d committed war crimes.

And he certainly didn’t write a *114 page book* documenting *fake* war crimes, over a period of *months.* It’s absolutely absurd to maintain that someone who knows with virtual certainty that he’s going to be executed would write a *114 page* autobiography over the course of months, and fill it with lie after lie.

P.S. Oh, I should have looked at the final words on page 181 of “The Commandant of Auschwitz”:

These writings consist of 114 pages. I have written them voluntarily and without compulsion.

Cracow, February 1947 Rudolf Hoess

So the actual finish date was February 1947, not March 1947 as I’ve previously written.

Well, I’m not the one who’s attempting to argue the alleged 6 million. However, it may be pointed out that it certainly is easier to argue for that than for something like the silly 66 million. The problem in trying to make sense of how many Jews perished in World War II is that everyone agrees that huge numbers of them were deported at one time or another, often far to the east. Subsequently, the apparent attempts to count a postwar population seemed to show a steep drop. But the issue which is raised is that quite possibly many Jews still alive might have gone crypto-Jew after the war, leading to a severe undercount. That is possible, but impossible to directly prove.

But no one has ever found any real evidence in the demographics of the USSR to support something like the 66 million story. The closest thing to an argument for that has been to claim that population growth rates in the early 20th century, if not interrupted by war and such, would have led to a much higher population. Yet those population growth rates of early 20th century Czarist Russia involved death rates on the order of 30.9 per thousand, with birth rates in the 45+ range. Obviously, this was all unstable and would not have persisted if any kind of modernization had been achieved. Drops in birth rates are one of the first things to follow a successful industrialization. The challenge for industrial countries is maintaining a sensible birth rate without having it drop too low.

Dear Tiptoe,

Yes, our exchange is complicating this “debate”,

I disagree. – Your exchange is bringing much-needed focus to this discussion.

I only hope the “plaintiff” manages to hear you. Lets see how long he continues to obfuscate (a Patrick McNally specialty) and bullshit to avoid engaging with the counter arguments being put forward.

In the meantime, if this were a real civil trial, I’d have already put forward a counter-claim against the “Holocaustian True Believers” cult, on behalf of the Third Reich, National Socialism (even though I’m not a NS myself) and the victims of the German Holocaust. – I’m nowhere near sensible enough to play by court rules in this setting though. LoL

Thank you for your input in these threads, Tiptoe. Personally, I really appreciate your focus and clarity, not to mention your authenticity.

Kind regards,
Kali.

One possible reason for the number 6 being invoked could be the bit of mythology discussed by Rabbi Benjamin Blech in his book The Secrets of Hebrew Words:

—–
The Hebrew word for “ye shall return,” … seems to be spelled incorrectly. Grammatically it requires another … (vav)… Why is it lacking the letter … (vav), which stands for 6? … We did return, lacking 6–an all-important 6 million of our people who perished during the Holocaust.
—–

That would be sort of like the way that anyone familiar with Dostoyevsky’s novel The Possessed will realize that the hoax of “100 million victims of Communism” was inspired by his passages where Pyotr Verkhovensky (modeled on Sergei Nechayev) speaks of “adopting the radical measure of chopping off a hundred million heads.” But one should resist the temptation to use such parallels as an all-purpose argument.

Mark,

Death bed confessions are often true, when the confessor is lying in bed, at home, or in a hospital, etc. Is the “death bed” theory your defense of your evidence? Did Hoss have family members, children or friends to protect? Modern historians have been assaulted and IMPRISONED for offering counter evidence and opinions of the official story. What do you say to that? Although, your opinions, whatever they may be, on David Irving’s or Ernst Zundel’s trials and tribulations have no bearing, whatsoever, on the Hoss evidence, which is why this method of whataboutism is not effective in court, unless it’s in a closing statement. Maybe.

I will say, in my opinion, whoever assaulted and hounded, into near oblivion, the likes of Irving and Zundel, in modern times, would certainly have no qualms about brutality wrought upon an actual “Nazi.” He was under total control of his captors. He knew a defense was an exercise in futility. The actions of the allies, yet another issue, would have convinced him no fair or objective hearing/trial would be possible. I am speculating, about what he knew in this regard, but there is actual evidence of malfeasance by both the US and England, towards Germany/Germans, to support my theory.

John McCain is a poor example on your part, and now we are spiraling off again; there are other POW’s who claim, he was injured, but he sang like a canary, to earn preferential treatment. I also watched him storm out of a hearing, in a hissy fit, over statements from a woman, pleading on behalf of her missing brother, and other Vietnam soldiers, to open an investigation into those still missing in Vietnam. You need to reassess your method of choosing heroes/examples of appropriate/ethical/relative behavior.

I will, hereby, bow out and watch your case implode from the sidelines.

> Henry Ford, was a reliable source of information

Ford was a con artist who promoted misquotations and fabrications. One that still gets repeated no and then is an article from The American Hebrew & Jewish Messenger by Svetozar Tonjoroff, September 10, 1920. Tonjoroff was claiming that Jews had provided the world with The Golden Rule and that this had metaphysically brought down the Czarist government in the February Revolution. He then went to present the Bolsheviks as an unfortunate disruption which he believed was being thrust aside as the true spirit which had brought the Czar down asserted itself. Ford propagated a series of misquotations from Tonjoroff’s silly article which made it sound as if Tonjoroff had claimed that Jews were behind Bolshevism. While Tonjoroff’s piece was silly in a lot of respects, the misquotes which are often made from it by people who repeat Ford’s talking points are way off.

So, first prove with authenticated forensic evidence that murder was committed:

I’ve provided photos of people just hours before they were murdered, right next to the gas chambers where they were murdered in May 1944. Approximately 400,000 Hungarian Jews were murdered in gas chambers and their bodies incinerated, by Rudolf Hoss’s own sworn statements and testimony. And Ronald Groning was convicted in Germany of 300,000 counts of accessory to murder regarding the Hungarian Jews. In fact Ronald Groning was deeply disturbed by people *denying* that “atrocities” (including deaths in gas chambers) occurred at Auschwitz. Speaking out against Holocaust denial was in fact one of his last acts in his long life.

It is up to the *Defense* to provide some evidence the Hungarian Jews who could not work *left* Auschwitz-Birkenau, after they came in, and got off the train in Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Each train was stuffed with 3000 people. Even so, if 300,000 people came to Auschwitz-Birkenau, and left, there would have to be *100* trains with 3000 people each to get 300,000 people unable to work out of Auschwitz-Birkenau.

I challenge the Defense to provide even *one* example of a Hungarian Jewish child under 12 or an adult over 65 who arrived in the May to July 1944 period that survived to liberation of Auschwitz in January 1945. That should be extremely easy to do, since there were probably approximately 100,000 children under 12 who arrived, and probably at least 10,000 adults over 65 who arrived.

If they all really weren’t murdered, it should be easy to prove some of them survived the less than 8 months from when they arrived to the liberation of Auschwitz in January 1945. There should be some accounts of them contacting friends or family after WW2, or writing books or giving interviews, or simply showing up as a name in a census somewhere.

It is far, far easier to hide human ashes than it is to hide a live human being. I know this to a point of absolute certainty, since I have the ashes of both my mother and father (who died last year) in urns in my living room.

In any murder trial the state must first prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a murder has been committed.

This is not a mock murder (i.e. criminal) trial. In a murder trial the burden on the Prosecution is proof “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This is a mock wrongful death civil trial, where the burden on the Plaintiffs is merely a “preponderance of evidence”.

Ford was a con artist? According to whom? Was he known for unethical business practices? Was he known for treating his employees unfairly? Was he known for destroying his community?

On that note, about fair business practices and enhancing communities, you and anyone else interested in this subject matter, should toggle on over to The Occidental Observer site and read an interesting analysis of the book by Jewish author, Stephen Bloom, and his book “Postville.”

Yes, I know, Mr. McNally, Mr. Bloom is unreliable. As is, Samuel Roth, of “Jews Must Live.” Is there anyone, anywhere, whose criticism of Orthodox/Zionist organized Jewry is reliable? You never answered my question about Barbara Spectre. I find her quite reliable.

Also, in regard to Jews taking advantage of their host society, why do I need a kosher certification for my laundry detergent? Pardon my language, but I don’t give a rat’s ass about what is or is not kosher. The fees extracted from businesses for this ridiculous certification, which hardly anyone knows about in gentile society anyway, is astronomical. And, I resent it. And, I can’t avoid products with the circled U, because they are nearly everywhere on everything. Why should average Americans participate in this nonsense? Are we unreasonable for this objection over subsidizing kosher products? Is it unreasonable to wonder that hardly anyone knows or cares about it? What are the collected fees used for? I would speculate, they contribute to aid/rescue for third world migration into America and Europe. I have seen and heard the rescue trucks/vans with the Star of David and the testimony of caring Jewish doctors and bleeding hearts over the plight of certain people from the Middle East and Africa. Why don’t they send those poor souls to Israel? And, I am unreliable/evil to speculate thusly.

Now, we’re off topic and no longer discussing the Holocaust. Accident or design?

I heard/read about the goings on at the Iowa plant years ago, before I was aware of Mr. Bloom’s book. It’s all complete and utter grift; everywhere, from everyone, for always?

I will say a few words in defense of Mattogno:

1) He researched documents in the archives
2) historian Ernst Nolte called him a serious historian
3) He is probably intellectually honest in his hypercriticism – as Jurgen Graf wrote

For me, who translated Mattogno’s book from Italian to German, the conclusion that a gassing was “probably” perpetrated in the Alsatian camp at Natzweiler was very surprising. In August of 1943, 86 Jews were sent to the Natzweiler camp from Auschwitz and were subsequently murdered. The documents do not permit any doubt in this regard. The criminal deed was initiated by an SS professor who wanted to prepare a collection of Jewish skeletons. Without providing us with any clear documentary evidence, Mattogno believes that the murders were probably carried out by means of phosgene gas. By allowing such a hypothesis, the Italian researcher risks being rebuked by other revisionist historians. The fact that he accepts this risk proves that he does spread neither black nor white propaganda but is trying to do serious science

This does not answer your points (of which 4 and 5 are quite serious), but indicates that Mattogno may be more serious than some people think he is. Nevertheless some who read Mattogno’s books do not agree with him (for example, HC bloggers who believe that there are many exaggerations and errors in his work).

In fact, it is not clear how good a historian Carlo Mattogno is. Even if he is wrong in his hypercritical approach, his writings may contain valuable ideas and good points. But unfortunately, one can hardly expect an objective assessment of his work because of the ban on revisionism by law (as well as the general attitude to his main idea). We do not know how historians would have assessed his books if there were no restrictions on freedom of speech. This – from my point of view – makes Nolte’s opinion more valuable than if there were no legislative barriers. Nolte, as far as I know, did not go far from the mainstream (although he was accused of trivializing the Holocaust).

Item 8 is a value judgment without evidence (at least within this trial). By the way, your opponents are waiting for you to prove the murders in the gas chambers.

The events referred to as the holocaust carry an emotional significance for Sailer, perhaps even spiritual.

The Holocaust went fully mainstream when Steve was a young man. He must believe in it out of nostalgia.

Plaintiff’s Exhibit #4: Additional Words from Oskar Gröning (aka, Groening)

Plaintiffs are adding additional evidence of which they were just made aware. Oskar Gröning, the SS Guard known as the “Accountant of Auschwitz,” actually spoke out on the “atrocities” that occurred at Auschwitz specifically to refute Holocaust denial.

From a BBC article, “The fight against Holocaust denial,” by Raffi Berg, dated 14 April, 2005.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4436275.stm

The fear that deniers could gain the upper hand led an SS camp guard, Oskar Groening, to break a lifetime of silence earlier this year in a BBC documentary, Auschwitz: The Nazis and the Final Solution.

“I saw the gas chambers. I saw the crematoria. I saw the open fires. I was on the ramp when the selections [for the gas chambers] took place,” said Mr Groening, now in his 80s.

“I would like you to believe these atrocities happened – because I was there.”

From the BBC documentary “Auschwitz: The Nazis and the Final Solution”, Episode 6, dated February 14, 2005, starting at minute 43:40. (Plaintiff’s Counsel note: The mention of “here” refers to Auschwitz-Birkenau.)

https://www.bbcselect.com/watch/auschwitz-nazis-the-final-solution/

BBC Narrator:

There are even those who deny the reality of what took place here. And it was to confront them that Oskar Groening finally broke his silence about his own personal history.

Oskar Groening:

I see it as my task now at my age, to face up to these things I experienced and to oppose the Holocaust Deniers who claim that Auschwitz never happened. And that’s why I’m here today. I want to tell those Deniers I have seen the crematoria. I have seen the burning pits. And I want you to believe that atrocities happened. I was there.

So we have a Defendant in this mock civil trial (where the burden of proof is a “preponderance of evidence” standing up and essentially saying, “My Defense Counsel is not telling the truth. I want you to believe that atrocities happened at Auschwitz-Birkenau. I was there.”

The Holocaust went fully mainstream when Steve was a young man. He must believe in it out of nostalgia.

Or perhaps, unlike people who deny the Holocaust, Steve Sailor can actually think rationally.

You write: “I challenge the Defense to provide even *one* example of a Hungarian Jewish child under 12 or an adult over 65 who arrived in the May to July 1944 period that survived to liberation of Auschwitz in January 1945.”

My response: I recommend you read Carlos Mattogno’s book “An Auschwitz Doctor’s Eyewitness Account: The Bestselling Tall Tales of Dr. Mengele’s Assistant Analyzed”, Uckfield: Castle Hill Publishers, 2020, pp. 391-407.

You will find numerous Hungarian children on pages 391-407 of this book who were under age 12 and survived Auschwitz-Birkenau. I am sure kb_2 will be able to find us an online free pdf link to this book.

You write to Mark Bahner: “By the way, your opponents are waiting for you to prove the murders in the gas chambers.”

My response: We certainly are. Mark Bahner is still flouting Rudolf Höss as a credible witness to the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. My comments #18, 114, 117, and 123 on this discussion thread all discuss why Rudolf Höss is not a credible witness. Han also made an excellent comment #113 about Höss. However, Mark Bahner still thinks Höss is a credible witness to the gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Mark Bahner’s evidence for the existence of homicidal gas chambers so far is based on witnesses such as Rudolf Höss, Fritz Klein, Oskar Gröning, Reinhold Hanning, Miklos Nyiszli, Filip Müller, Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler. I have made lengthy comments on this discussion thread why I think all of these witnesses are not credible.

My comment #29 lists two articles I wrote discussing why there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. I would like to see Mark Bahner respond to these two articles. Did I make any mistakes in these two articles? Does he disagree with my conclusions? As HdC has said, we would like to see some real tangible scientific and engineering evidence why Mark believes there were homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

By the way, your opponents are waiting for you to prove the murders in the gas chambers.

Good grief! I’ll save the summary of the overwhelming amount of evidence I’ve presented for my Summation.

Instead, I’ll ask you just one question. I presented this evidence:

1) Accounts of Hungarian Jews transported to Auschwitz from May 15 to July 9, 1945
Per “Anatomy of Auschwitz Death Camp”:

From page 466:

Of approximately 438,000 Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz from May 15 to July 9, 1944, about 10 percent were determined to be fit for labor. Some were retained to work in Auschwitz itself; the remainder were dispersed to 396 camps in the Nazi empire. The largest groups wer concentrated in the notorius camps of Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, Gross-Rosen, Gunskirchen, Mauthausen, Neuengamme, Ravensbruck, and Sachenhausen…

The number of Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz continued to decline following the periodic selections and transfers. By the time the camp was liberated in January 1945, only a few thousand were left. Most of them were transferred on death marches to other camps in the central and western parts of the fast-crumbling Third Reich. Few who were evacuated survived until the liberation in April and May 1945.

So 438,000 arrived, and 10 percent were able to work. That means approximately 400,000 were not able to work. Rudolf Hoess himself wrote that all 400,000 were murdered (by Zyklon B gas in gas chambers, and then their bodies cremated in either crematoriums or burn pits).

If you do not believe Rudolf Hoess, and you think those 400,000 were not murdered, what do you think happened to those 400,000 Hungarian Jews not able to work? Particularly, I’m thinking of the approximately 100,000 children under 12…

No worries. I never wanted to be a juror. I just did not decline because I already intended to read both arguments before I formed an opinion anyway, so it would make no difference to me.

I’ve presented my roughly eight items of evidence. John Wear has responded to most of them (what would essentially be the “cross-examination” in a real civil trial). I’m now in the “re-direct” phase on the first two pieces of evidence

Yes, I have read the arguments. My initial observations are in #218

Because they knew what they were doing–murdering over a million innocent civilians at Auschwitz, for example–was a war crime, and that they’d be executed for it.

Mark, one thing that stood out to me from John’s early arguments was that Hoss’ wife was living in the family farm and was easily found by Prosecutors. This doesn’t make sense to me.

For somehow who had just murdered hundreds of thousands of people, it struck me as something terribly naive or foolhardy for Hoss not to have his wife and children also go into hiding. Just 0.1% of surviving relatives bent on revenge would condemn his family to a horrible death. If anyone of us were in his position, we would have sent our families into hiding far away.

By the time the camp was liberated in January 1945, only a few thousand were left. Most of them were transferred on death marches to other camps in the central and western parts

This part does not make sense to me. If the Germans had intended to kill the inmates, why even bother to undertake a death march, and have them viewed by the public?

Would it not be far easier to just shoot the inmates or simply starve or thirst them to death?

Obviously, if the American media and academic establishment of that period didn’t believe in the Holocaust doesn’t necessarily mean it didn’t happen. For example, almost no one ever mentioned Operation Pike or the Suvorov Hypothesis either.

But Sisley Huddleston wrote about Operation Pike in the early 1950s. He wasn’t American, and he was just one person, but he wrote infinitely more about Pike than anybody wrote about the Holocaust during that period, no?

Suvorov had access to the Kremlin and defected to the West – a unique background that surely was necessary in order for him to piece together his hypothesis. So, it’s different from the Holocaust, which, if it had occurred, certainly could’ve been written about extensively by American or British authors in the 50s.

I find it inconceivable that the Holocaust happened but then nothing was written about it for a decade and a half.

Patrick McNally #226 says:

“That Canadian News link which you gave is the first thing which seems to make some kind of claim about Niuta Teitelbaum and Spartacus. Unfortunately, it seems rather confused and in need of editing:
https://thecanadian.news/the-jewish-women-who-challenged-the-nazis/ ”

LOL! Typical Patrick McNally or Shlomo Slimestein, whatever your name is.
Always nitpicking instead of coming up with some solid counter arguments.

Why do you think Canadian News would mention “SPARTACUS” and “Niuta Teitelbaum” in their article?

How about this one then; an article by Professor Ber Mark:
THE UPRISING IN THE WARSAW GHETTO mentioning “SPARTACUS” 3 times.

Ber Mark was a noted Jewish Historian who died in Poland in 1966 at the age of 58.
https://www.jta.org/archive/professor-ber-mark-noted-jewish-historian-dies-in-poland-was-58

Born in Lomzha, Poland, he was working in the pre-war years on the editorial staff of Der Moment, large Jewish daily which appeared in Warsaw. He became known after World War II for his books on the revolt against the German occupation army in the Warsaw Ghetto and other works dealing with life of the Jews under the Nazis in Poland. He is also the author of a two-volume History of the Jews in Poland. He visited Israel where he lectured at the Hebrew University. Some of his works have been translated into English, French, Spanish, German and Portuguese.

THE UPRISING IN THE WARSAW GHETTO by Ber Mark (Warsaw)
https://www.jewishgen.org/Yizkor/Warsaw/war913.html

The First Revolutionary Circles and the First Rebellious Steps Forward

Two strong feelings motivated the conscientious Jewish revolutionary in the ghetto to an active resistance. It was, first of all, the desire to participate in the struggle against the Hitlerist tormentors, to lock themselves into the camp of a struggle for liberty, to throw off the hateful yoke; this desire arose in the minds of the anti–fascist Jews even before the swastika nation of murderers thought of the total destruction of the Jewish people; in other words, this very fact completely disclaims the theory of “a desperate act.”

The way to join in with the people who were freedom fighters, however, had a tremendous blockage: the ghetto wall. Thus, the first mission of the resistance–yearning elements in the ghetto was to surmount this forceful interfering obstacle. On the other side of the ghetto wall there were also Polish anti–fascist elements who were making efforts to put moral cracks in the wall, and together with their idealistic Jewish friends, they did so.

This breakthrough was made by the Polish “SPARTACUS”– activist Kazhik Dembjak (Vladislav Bucinski); this breakthrough was done by the Polish workers who grouped themselves around the first leftist circles, and who sent their Jewish friends tools for this work.

Masses of Jewish workers and working intelligentsia participated in the heroic defense of Warsaw.

And in the first few weeks after Warsaw’s fall, the first Jewish youth circles of “SPARTACUS” arose in the depths of the underground, who worked hand in hand with the Polish circles of this organization.

At that time, a conspiratorial Jewish organization was created, of intellectuals and former military staff, which was known by the name “kotowtzes,” which is from the name of one of their organizers, the young Kot, who was of Jewish roots.

This organization, which began its activities of collecting arms, quickly fell apart. It seemed that Kot, when arrested, put up resistance and killed a policeman. There were bloody repercussions, also with many members of the Jewish intelligentsia being killed as well. This organization disappeared at the first hit, because it had no roots among the people and also no clear political platform.

The fate of “SPARTACUS” was different. Deeply anchored among the youth and armed ideologically, this organization managed to integrate itself later on into the Polish Workers’ Party and then produced a gallery of active personalities who later became prominent in the resistance movement, in the partisan camps, and during the times of the resistance.

Care to comment on Professor Ber Mark’s article, Patrick McNally?

John gave good reasons not to regard Hess’ testimony as a priori true. You began to refute it, but from my point of view, not very successfully. You need to show that the details in his testimony match а) documentation of the time Hess speaks of b) testimonies of other people – and c) show that it is unlikely that at least some of these intersecting details were caused by threats/torture/financial interests/memory distortions. Your ideas about continuum – “True,” “Mostly True,” “Mostly False,” or “False – is a good step in the right direction.

I am in this discussion as an observer (who sometimes comments). In order to argue on one side or another, one must know the literature very well. I do not pretend to be (although I read a lot to sometimes comment).

You could confuse me with another person – since I commented on your answer to him. I think that missing people are the weak point of revisionism and I have doubts that the revisionists will find them. Personally, your discussion of the Hungarian Jews seemed to me – and seems – reasonable.