Why The Holocaust Must Be Questioned

[Don K Dyck]

But you can't prove the Holocaust, and that is the point of this thread.

(Also, if the Japanese were so dumb then why is it that it took until 1943 before the US Navy had even a single victory against the Japanese Imperial Navy? In every previous battle, the US Navy lost. In fact, one of the biggest naval losses that the US Navy had ever suffered was against the Japanese.)

Ok . . . uhmmmm . . .

1. Pearl Harbour, one of the greatest naval victories in modern history. It's only flaw was that it missed the aircraft carriers.

2. Battle for Midway . . . and American win completed at

3. The Coral Sea Battle that eventually broke the remaining carriers (and incidently 'saved' Australia from Japanese occupation . . . but that is a disputed point due to the Army actions on the Kokoda Track in PNG).


But the Japanese were not so smart under fire, either.

4. The two (2) attacks on Singapore harbour by the Z-Force commandos in the Krait were only discovered after the British Navy submarine sent to pick up the commandos failed to rendevous on schedule. (That British captain was promoted to Sea Lord after the war).

5. The sinking of the superbattleship Shimano at the dock by American submarine raider was a bitter blow to the Jap Navy.


But if we're going to get into holocaust stories . . . how about

6. the Japanese death marches in Borneo, six (6) survivors out of 1500 POWs;

7. the death railway in Burma, where 1,500 aussies were worked to death together with about 90,000 Asian coolies.

8. the daily horrors of Changi Prison Camp.

The Japanese are very good at ignoring their part in WWII. Go read Lord Liverpool, Knights of Bushido to learn the truth of Japanese atrocities in WWII . . . then also read about the 300,000 civilians slaughtered in the rape of Nanking. Many Chinese are still a little tichy about that piece of history.

 

[Don K Dyck]

Just a little fact for you to clear up your ignorance. The last time the Chinese government (you know the Commies, you really trust the Communist Party of China right?), made a big hooha about Japanese textbooks, do you know how big a deal it was about.

Only TWO privately-owned high schools out of the THOUSANDS in the whole of Japan had the textbooks which the Chinese were making a big deal about. They weren't government schools. They were owned by a rightwing-leaning group.

Amazing amount of noise for just TWO schools, neh? I mean there's at least 6,000 High Schools in Japan, and the Chinese want to make a big whinge about two little private schools which barely had a few hundred students all together.

Wow.

You even took them seriously. Congratulations, DC, you fell for a Chinese commie propaganda campaign.

This is just CIA bull manure!!

The Japs are kept in ignorance of their atrocities during WWII.

 

[Drinking Cap]

This message is hidden because Drinking Cap is on your ignore list.

It always cracks me up when people who put you on ignore feel the need to tell you they have you on ignore. This is because of a sad, sad case of "last word" syndrome.

But I brought up Midway Island and you ignored it. Fact is, it took the American Navy six months from the start of the war to win the most decisive naval battle of the pacific theatre that effectively decimated the Japanese fleet.

For any Japanese folks who might be reading, make sure before your next chickenshit surprise attack that you don't piss off the American Navy and Marines. They'll make 2 A-bombs feel like a back rub.

 

[Don K Dyck]

Odd that, considering the name is right up by my AV...scroll up and it's there.


While it's not my field of expertise, weren't all German divisions seriously understrength by 1943? I know that early that year, the German General Staff did an organizational shake-up, and reduced the size of the standard German infantry division from 9 battalions to six, which would give it a ration strength of 9,000 men at full TOE, which it seems they rarely did.

You DO know what TOE means, right?

AND, many divisions were divisions in name only, like the Flak Divisions. The Coastal divisions, if I'm reading this correctly, generally had a strength of only 2,000 men, sometimes as much as half of them made up of Russian volunteers.

My ROTC training was brief, but I know that simply counting divisions is misleading, so much so that Stalin kept "divisions" that had been reduced in strength to only 200 men on the Soviet Order of Battle, just as a bluff to confuse intelligence estimates. Hitler did the same thing.

Actual field strength is a matter of total manpower and field assets, such as heavy guns. Counting divisions doesn't give anybody a clue as to what actual strength in the field is, or who outnumbers who.

You weren't trained as an officer, were you? An officer would know that.

By the way, I checked, that British "Legion", made up of British POW's who volunteered for the German Army, was never stronger than 29 men.

And you're also not counting units that were neither American nor Commonwealth, like the Brazilian divisions.

Good points unculbact . . . historians frequently miss the military significance of these factors.

 

[hurricane64]

Wonder what a President like Harry Truman would do now?

 

[Don K Dyck]

Or being from a country so full of punks the only way they could "win" naval battles was by sneak attacks or directing their men to fly their planes into enemy ships.

Still, I guess that's what desperate, chickenshit people have to try when they fight an enemy that hands you your lunch whenever you try to go toe to toe.

Uhmmm . . . enough AmeriKKKan jingoism . . . the Allies had suicide squadrons too.

And being on the losing side does not make a brilliant strategy any less successful, or the damage to the 'victim' any smaller.

The Crete 'invasion' was a disaster partly because the aussie troops were sent in without weapons; only orders to capture their weapons from the enemy.

 

[Drinking Cap]

And being on the losing side does not make a brilliant strategy any less successful,

Actually, that's exactly what it makes it. It might not make it less brilliant but if you lose, it wasn't particularly successful.

 

[unculbact]

British POW's in the Auschwitz Complex, Part I

Ok, as promised, I've been analyzing that article by the Auschwitz State Museum, the one about the 1,200 British POW's assigned to work at Monowitz, for it's evidentiary value.

So here is the first of two posts on the British POW's at Monowitz.

I found a good reason why "The Holocaust Must Be Questioned", or to invert the title, why one should ask questions about the holocaust, especially when critically reading any article or testimony about it. If you read this article carefully, it gives some powerful clues on how the myth of extermination camps came to be.

First, here's the article.

BRITISH POWS AT I.G. FARBEN
http://www.auschwitz-muzeum.oswiecim.pl/new/index.php?language=EN&tryb=stale&id=228

The Museum probably intended the article to be proof that Auschwitz was an extermination camp, but they unwittingly gave two clues as to how the myth began.

Clue Number One. Exaggeration. A myth isn't a myth without exaggeration.

Other conflicts arose from the POWs’ demands for better working conditions and the issuance of protective clothing. The foremen who oversaw the POWs called the guards, who threatened to open fire, at the slightest display of insubordination. Over the winter of 1943-1944, a Corporal Reynolds was shot at the building site for refusing to climb up an ice-covered scaffold without safety equipment. News of this incident probably reached the Auschwitz Main Camp and served as the basis for the following report by the camp resistance movement: “The depths to which the bloodthirsty SS soldiery has sunk are indicated by the fact that they shot six English POWs laboring at Buna (Dwory). The reason for the shooting was sluggishness at work on the part of the phlegmatic Englishmen. The English POWs immediately marched off the work site in a gesture of protest.” [If this happened - a big if, considering the Communist source - it means a full-fledged labor strike took place in the Auschwitz complex, the second on record (the first is a strike by German craftsmen in December of 1942).]

Note: Dwory, Monowitz, Auschwitz III, Buna, it's all the same place, the big I.G. Farben coal hydrogenation plant. And is "phlegmatic" (Having or suggesting a calm, sluggish temperament; unemotional) a word that translates out of Polish? The etymology is the Middle English word "fleumatik". How did that get into what is supposedly a Polish resistance report?

So, the "camp resistance movement" apparently had it's own news service broadcasting to the world in idiomatic English? (In the second post, you'll see that it looks like they DID!) What happened to events at Auschwitz being kept a secret? Supposedly, the world didn't know what was going on there until Vrba and Wetzler escaped in April of 1944, but here we have a camp shooting being reported at least three months earlier?

All of these things are suspicious, probably exaggerations. But the indisputable exaggeration is the that the shooting of one British prisoner was, by the "camp resistance", exaggerated by a factor of six. That number is notable.

Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but currently the "official" death toll for the whole Auschwitz complex, 3 main camps and 41 sub-camps, is 1,100,000. Divide that by six, you get 183,334.

That's awfully darn close to the 135,000 deaths that are listed in the 46 volumes of the Auschwitz Sterbebücher, the camp death records and death certificates, held in Moscow and not released to scholars until 1989. Very few of the death certificates detail any murders, and those murders were inmate to inmate affairs, like the two Poles, one an inmate, another a free employee, who were hanged for robbing and then killing a Jewish inmate.

Maybe the numbers are a coincidence, but my antenna are now tuned for supporting examples.

Clue Number Two: Misinterpretation/Misrepresentation.

Misrepresentation is self-explanatory. Misinterpretation happens when there is already a mental paradigm in place that has one searching for specific evidence to prove a previously advanced thesis. If you look at the evidence in this article critically, there is an interesting misinterpretation or misrepresentation about one of the biggest buildings at Birkenau. Here again, from the Auschwitz State Museum article.

British POWs were also instrumental in spreading information about the crimes that the Nazis were committing in Auschwitz. They managed to contact POWs in a camp in Cieszyń [Teschen] and inform them about the existence in Birkenau of some kind of “modern bathhouse” in which poison gas was used to kill prisoners. The Cieszyń POWs, in turn, passed this information on to an International Red Cross inspection team that inspected that camp in September 1944.

Again, no problem contacting the outside world. I can't imagine why they had the POW's at Teschen communicate the report, since the Red Cross also inspected the POW camp at Monowitz, but there you have it. Teschen is right on the border between Poland and Slovakia, but they had no trouble getting a report from Auschwitz to Teschen that has the following properties:

1. There is a "modern bathhouse"
2. That uses poison gas
3. Which is used to kill prisoners

Let's critically examine the report. First question: was there a "modern bathhouse" at Auschwitz?

The answer is yes, to be specific, in Birkenau. It was called the Zentralsauna.

Showers (Zentralsauna)
http://www.auschwitz-muzeum.oswiecim.pl/html/eng/historia_KL/sauna_ok.html

Opened late in 1943, it had enormous shower facilities. The Zentralsauna was depicted in the movie "Schindler's List", the scene where the women get a shower on arrival. The Zentralsauna is currently the largest building standing in Birkenau in fairly good condition.

The Zentralsauna was used to clean up new arrivals, and to disinfest camp materials. When a new inmate arrived, after the shower and haircut (lice lay their eggs - "nits" - in hair), they were then kept in the quarantine camp near the Zentralsauna for three weeks, the incubation time of typhus.

After that period, if they showed no symptoms, they were assigned to a work detail. As Elie Weisel relates in NIGHT, after his three weeks there - where he bitches and moans about being forced to take two showers daily - both him and his father were sent to, yup, Monowitz. That's how the bathhouse story reached the British POW's.

Weisel, by the way, never once mentions gas chambers in Birkenau, in spite of the fact that from the quarantine barracks of the Zentralsauna, you have an excellent view of all four Krema's.

So, we have our bathhouse, AND a means for the British POW's to get a report of it.
----------------------------------------
Second question: Was poison gas used in this "modern bathhouse"?

Yes, and in several other installations at Birkenau. It was used to kill lice, and their eggs.

THE DELOUSING AND DISINFESTATION GAS CHAMBERS
OF BAUWERKEN 5a and 5b (Birkenau I)
http://www.mazal.org/Pressac/Pressac0053.htm

Zyklon-B was the world's most effective disinfestant until the invention of DDT, and clothing, bedding and other items were disinfested using it. Besides the Zentralsauna, there were no less than 19 disinfestation sites at Birkenau alone, some using Zyklon-B, others using Karbol or Lizol (Lysol!).

Other sections, including those in the Zentralsauna disinfested lighter clothing using hot air (lice or their eggs can't live at a temperature above 190 degrees). There was an autoclave for disinfesting small personal items, and a steam room for delousing such articles as knit clothing, which would have shrunk in the hot air rooms. (Note the extensive, and expensive efforts, to keep the camp hygienic and healthy).

Finally, in the first ever use of a microwave oven, in 1944 a microwave delousing machine was installed at Birkenau.

German 'Microwave' Technology To Combat Typhus - High Frequency Delousing Facilities At Auschwitz
http://www.rense.com/general67/mci.htm

So yes, poison gas was used in this "modern bathhouse". Along with other hygiene tools.
-----------------------------------------
Third question: Was poison gas used to kill prisoners at this "modern bathhouse"?

No. There was no homicidal gas chamber in the Zentralsauna. Among other things, the disinfestation chambers at the Zentralsauna that used Zyklon-B had all sorts of exposed equipment in the rooms, making them useless as execution chambers.

But there were rumors, such as this one.


A Hungarian survivor who spoke at the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles in 1998, said that every time the women were taken to the Central Sauna for a shower, they never knew whether water or gas would come out of the shower nozzles.

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Poland/Birkenau/Birkenau03.html

The source of the myth that prisoners were killed with poison gas at the "modern bathhouse". This is in the same scene in "Schindler's List", where the women wait for the gas, then sigh in relief as water comes out of the showers.

The showers at the Zentralsauna are not hermetically sealed, do not have locked doors, and you can't have a water pipe do double duty as a gas line. Hydrocyanic acid, the active ingredient in Zyklon-B, is a weak acid, but it still reacts vigorously - and sometimes violently - with most metals. Pumping HCN down a metal pipe will corrode it very quickly, as well as creating unpredictable sister and daughter products and dangerously reactive metal compounds such as zinc cyanide, should the pipes be galvanized.

To my surprise, the Weisenthal Center - which is the Museum of "Tolerance" (HAH!) - does not identify this survivor on their website, or post a transcript of her speech. A rumor within a rumor?
---------------------------------------
So the evidentiary value of the article from the Auschwitz State Museum is obviously very low, unless you're looking for evidence of rumor origination, in which case it's quite high. The British POW's at Monowitz were not "instrumental in spreading information about Nazi crimes", unless you consider a bath a crime, which for the hygienophobic population of Eastern Europe, may very well have been the case.

The "modern bathhouse" they describe did indeed exist, and used poison gas, but nobody was ever exterminated there.

The Red Cross was allowed to tour Birkenau, since they were delivering food parcels there, so they undoubtedly got their chance to follow up on the POW report. All they would have found was the most modern bathhouse in the world, at that time.

Exaggeration and misinterpretation, laced with rumor. A good recipe for creating the myth of mass extermination, as the story gets handed down and embellished by one group to another.

A final observation on the article. In the Auschwitz literature, there are many, many references to the "camp resistance" in Auschwitz and Birkenau. It's often times identified as a communist cell, which is quite possible. Vrba and Wetzler reference the "resistance committee" in their report, saying they asked for help in their escape, and the resistance replied they had none to give.

The Soviet Union overran the Auschwitz complex, and liberated many communist inmates, such as the French communist Marie-Claude Vaillant-Couturier, who stayed behind of their own free will to await the Russians, and the Germans let them do so unmolested. Undoubtedly, they liberated the "camp resistance'" cell too.

If Madame Vaillant-Couturier was not a member of this camp resistance, she certainly knew of it. The camp resistance was so organised, they arranged for free Polish employees to smuggle in gun powder to burn down (NOT blow up, as you usually read) Krema IV in the camp revolt of October, 1944.

Yet has anybody ever seen a book, which could be titled:
COMPREHENSIVE REPORT OF NAZI ACTIVITIES AND HITLERITE CRIMES AT AUSCHWITZ AND BIRKENAU, SUBMITTED BY THE CAMP RESISTANCE COMMITTEE?

In spite of the fact that it would be an organized eyewitness testimony, direct from the source, such a book has never been published. The organized resistance in Auschwitz has never given a single deposition or affidavit. All that's available are individual testimonies, such as Henryk Tauber's, which is so laced with absurdities as to actually be funny.

An overblown bureaucracy like the Soviets failed to commission a report from their own resistance cell? The SMERSH units attached to Soviet armies failed to debrief the camp resistance?

All in all, a lesson for the budding historian. Always read any piece of testimony at least three times, and always compare it to other testimony. That's what historiography is all about, comparing historical accounts to each other, and the laws of nature.

As I said, this is the first of two posts. Give me an hour, I'll give you excerpts and link you to the Nuremburg Military Tribunal testimony of Sgt. Charles Coward, the elected Red Cross liason for the British POW's at Monowitz. Yes, the Red Cross DID visit the POW's at Monowitz. There was no need to contact prisoners at Teschen.

The good Sergeant's testimony is a masterpiece of how myths get started.

 

[krastner]

Fully understand that you are not part of any team and I hate to think in those terms anyway. Team...that sounds too much like teaming up on someone, something that I have never been for.

I am not a historian as you evidently are. My field is Psychology . At least I have the minimum required hunting license in it. What I look at mostly when I try and determine truth is what is evident, to me at least, by the actions of a person or group. To me history is something that can be changed...well sort of like the bible. Now there is a piece of work. It was changed so much during the past that it's probably nothing like it was originally intended.

That's history to me. It is always made by the victors. What the winners say and what the looser say are quite often different. Even two people cannot agree on something that they are questioned about after the fact. People all have different ways of interpreting a given event. due to different symbolisms. I can imagine the task of sorting through all the "facts" to determine some truth. It is an impossible task.

But if you take actions and interpret them you get a better idea of what the truth is. Well a not so crystal clear Idea but still a better idea that written history. Just as an example...the king of a certain area had every Acton by him recorded. He dictated to his scribes what should and how it should be recorded. Any one reading these records a thousand years from the events would see the king as a rugged man of six and a half feet height that could hew a man into with a single stroke of his sword.. Sounds good but then suppose someone finds his grave and decides to dig him up. His remains show that he was a small man of less than five feet tall. That is the truth, never mind the recorded history. It was tainted by the kings ego.

So much for history. With psychology, however, it can be shown by observation that a particular person of group of persons are not congruent. The Jews are like that to me. At least the ones that are the primaries in Israel. I see that Israel is not at all what it claims itself to be. I see a country that is completely focused on what it wants, regardless of who it steps on to get it. I see Israel first garnering world sympathy over the "holocaust". I see them constantly having ceremonies that keep it foremost in peoples minds.

To me this means...in order for brainwashing to be effective then there has to be a regular schedule of reinforcement of the original brainwashing. Then I look at the way the people act. Do they act like people that have had to most despicable of all things done to them. Well I would have to say that people that have had horrible things done to them, completely undeserved, will have sympathy toward other people of similar horrors. I look at the ethnic cleansing in Kosova and I see that the Israelis never...never made the most minimum of protest against the slaughter going on there. That was when i first started to take a good look at the Israeli. At the Jew basically because the Israelis are Jews..plain and simple.

Then I look at things in the past. Things that were pretty much hushed up both by our government and the press alike. The USS Liberty.. The Uss Liberty lost some sixty of it's crew. Everyone knows about the USS Cole It got a lot more press than the Liberty. I see that the was the result of Arab terrorist. That made it different. The Liberty was the Israelis attacking what they knew was an American ship and they did not want it to spy on it's activities. So it simply tried to sink it. When I see how the American government hushed the incident up so well I wondered why?

The question was obvious. There were Jews within our government that controlled the government so well that they had the ability to do this. I see the map of the "promised land". the ultimate goal of all good zionist. I see that the "promisedland" lies within several Arab countries. Syria Lebanon, Iraq and Egypt.

I see Israel today having the US military as it's own little bully boy. I see the US first destabilize Iraq for many years in the future. This gives lie to the notion that it was done for oil. Iraq , destabilize, so no oil. I see that Iran is on the agenda next. Then I see Syria is always been on the agenda. The US agenda. It didn't make sense. Why invade a country and so destabilize it that no oil is going to come from Iraq for many years.

I ask myself if gas price hikes are the goal there. The goal of the US seems to be the goals of Israel. Next to fall would be Iran. Iran does not have any of the "promised land" within it but Iran surly scares the crap out of the Israelis. I thought that Syria was next in line. But it seems that the Israelis are more fearful of Iran. Next will come Egypt. No matter how much Egypt has rolled over with their tongue hanging out and presenting their bellies to the Israelis. Part of the "promised land' lies within Egypt's borders.

No matter how safe from Israel they are..it will cease when the Israelis get ready for their final assault..Or rather when the Israelis get ready for the final assault of America's young to be slaughtered for the Sake of the Jew. Damn right I do not like it. And damned if I will let them get away with it as long as I am able to write. As long as I can add my voice to those that try and make others aware of the danger.

I remember seeing just a few years ago, Iran under Katami. The US was acting like Iran was going to be an accepted player in world affairs wit the respect and the whole nine yards. Now all of a sudden under bush all that is changed. Iran is now the enemy, and all America is parroting the US/Israeli hatred for Iran. Yes it shows a real good brainwashing.

So in defense I go back and attack the Jews most sacred cow....The holocaust. If the Jew lied so much about so many other things. If they have played the deceit game so well in so many other areas then why not the holocaust. Surely here is their most sacred symbol of ..poor little Israel..poor little Jew..

Well I am not buying your lies Israel Jew. I am not buying the lies of your puppet bush and the entire misadministration.

 

[ImpWizard]

Have you seen the scan of the deathtoll figures from the 1979 Arolsen Red Cross report?

No, but I think I've seen quotes from it. The Arolsen archive actually released something?

Yes, then they denied it afterwards.

I kept a copy.

As Drinking Cap says;

I'm sure it's standard to deny the bodycounts of genocide..

Sometimes they're less than publicly declared as well if it fits somebody's agenda.

 

[unculbact]

British POW's in the Auschwitz Complex, Part II

Excerpts and an analysis of the testimony of Sgt. Charles Coward to the Nuremberg Military Tribunal on his observations at the POW Camp in Monowitz, part of the complex at Auschwitz.​

Note To Shamanskiss: Turns out there were commandos among the prisoner population, from the Long Range Desert Force.

But as you can read, Sgt. Coward, the Red Cross liaison who looked out for the interests of the prisoners, and frequently filed complaints on the work conditions, quality of food, quality of clothing, and Geneva Convention violations, in fact, the Germans supplied him with his own office for such purposes! - well, he never once mentions any British soldier being tattooed.
------------------------------------

3. AFFIDAVIT AND TESTIMONY OF CHARLES J. COWARD
a. Affidavit Copy of Document NI-11696, Prosecution Exhibit 1462
http://www.mazal.org/archive/nmt/08/NMT08-T0603.htm

Sgt. Coward, captured in May of 1940, found himself at Monowitz beginning in December of 1943.

He found himself in a unique position:

3. Having been selected by the Chief Red Cross Trustee, Regimental Major Lowe, for the position of Red Cross Trustee for our group, I was able to move about without too much difficulty. My functions as trustee included all matters relating to the welfare of the British prisoners of war such as the issue of clothing for the International Red Cross, British and American Red Cross, and the distribution of food parcels.

5. My work as liaison mate and trustee gave me access to surrounding towns, including Auschwitz.

Note that the Red Cross presence at Auschwitz is pretty prominent! Provided he checked in to have a guard escort him, he was given broad discretion to travel, almost at will, over the entire complex, including into Osweicem (Auschwitz) itself.

He details some pretty bad treatment of the concentration camp inmates 350 yards away from the British POW camp - including a summary execution, not by a member of the SS, but by a foreman, in other words, a trustee prisoner. But, he sees NO mass exterminations at Monowitz, using gas or machine guns.

But, he seems - SEEMS to get credible information that gassing and exterminations are happening in Auschwitz. For instance:

I made it a point to get one of the guards to take me to town under the pretence of buying new razor blades and stuff for our boys. For a few cigarettes he pointed out to me the various places where they had the gas chambers and the places where they took them down to be cremated. Everyone to whom I spoke gave the same story — the people in the city of Auschwitz, the SS men, concentration camp inmates, foreign workers — everyone said that thousands of people were being gassed and cremated at Auschwitz, and that the inmates who worked with us and who were unable to continue working because of their physical condition and were suddenly missing, had been sent to the gas chambers. The inmates who were selected to be gassed went through the procedure of preparing for a bath, they stripped their clothes off, and walked into the bathing room. Instead of showers, there was gas. All the camp knew it. All the civilian population knew it. I mixed with the civilian population at Auschwitz. I was at Auschwitz nearly every day...Nobody could live in Auschwitz and work in the plant, or even come down to the plant without knowing what was common knowledge to everybody.

Looks pretty bad for the German's, doesn't it? Sergeant Coward's information is highly detailed, and specific as to place. BUT - wait a minute, once again, HOW does he know all this information?

Even while still at Auschwitz we got radio broadcasts from the outside speaking about the gassings and burnings at Auschwitz. I recall one of these broadcasts was by Anthony Eden himself. Also, there were pamphlets dropped in Auschwitz and the surrounding territory, one of which I personally read, which related what was going on in the camp at Auschwitz. These leaflets were scattered all over the countryside and must have been dropped from planes. They were in Polish and German. Under those circumstances, nobody could be at or near Auschwitz without knowing what was going on.

He said he got the information from the people he met on his trips to Auschwitz - the town, not the camp. And from - radio broadcasts, and propaganda leaflets? Fine and dandy, but it's also hearsay.

What did Sgt. Coward see? Lets see how well he stands up under cross-examination.

DR. DRISCHEL (counsel for Defendant Ambros): Witness, it is remarkable that you state in your affidavit that for a few cigarettes you saw the gas chambers in Auschwitz and the crematoria. Can you tell its where that was in the city of Auschwitz?

COWARD: To my best belief the gas chamber and crematorium, as it was known, was about 50 yards from a railway station at the far end of, I think the name was Monowitz.

DR. DRISCHEL: Did I understand you to say that you saw the gas chambers in Monowitz?

COWARD: No, not actually in Monowitz, no. Where the station was at Auschwitz, you see — I very likely misunderstood your question. At Auschwitz there was a railway station, you see, and about 50 to 100 yards from Auschwitz there was a siding where they used to bring the civilians, you see; and about 20 yards on the other side of this siding was where this particular guard took me and showed me the place. —

Nobody has ever claimed that there were "gas chambers" in the city of Osweicem (Auschwitz). At that time, in early 1944, Krema I at Auschwitz itself had been shut down for years, and was used as an air raid shelter. The only gas chambers alleged at this time are in the camp in Birkenau, a good two miles from the city of Osweicem, and the railway there actually enters the camp. The railroad platforms of Birkenau are deep within the camp, pointed away from the city of Osweicem, and are not visible from the camp perimeter.

Coward's Red Cross business would never have taken him to Birkenau, and indeed, in his testimony, Coward never once mentions the name!

DR. DRISCHEL: Witness, could you please indicate to what is on the map that is behind you? I don't understand where these gas chambers are supposed to have been. If you will be kind enough to turn around you will see a map of Auschwitz.

COWARD: The city of Auschwitz, there [indicating] — Whereabouts is the station, farther over? You see, the station is not marked on the map, is it?

[Dr. Drischel is directed to be specific in his questioning]

DR. DRISCHEL: Yes, I understand. I can define by question by saying that you, Mr. Witness, are of the opinion that these gas chambers and crematoria were located in the vicinity of the station of the city of Auschwitz. That is the way you described it previously. Did I understand you correctly?

COWARD: That is correct.

The alleged gas chambers in Birkenau, the only ones that are alleged to have existed at that time, are not only not in the city of Auschwitz, but are not visible from it, and are separated from it by two miles and the Sola River.

[Coward is directed to a map of the whole complex]

DR. DRISCHEL: Very well. Then I understood you correctly that you were never in the main camp of Auschwitz, which is on the lower left-hand side of the map, because you said that you were in the camp which is a few hundred yards next to camp VI.

COWARD: That is correct.

Even with a map and some assistance, Coward cannot point to the location where gas chambers are alleged to have been. And even if he had been in Auschwitz Main, as I've pointed out, the Krema there had been shut down for years. Birkenau, which Coward seems to be ignorant of, is four miles from Monowitz.

DR. DRISCHEL: Then, Mr. Witness, is your description in the affidavit; at least not very misleading?

COWARD: I do not think so. The figures indicated 11 and 12 were known to us as the concentration camps, and when I mentioned about the gas chambers or crematoriums, I mean to infer that I had visited what was shown to me to be a gas chamber some distance from the railway station at Auschwitz.

In other words, the German guard, the one who pointed out where the gas chambers were in exchange for cigarettes from Coward, lied to him, probably to get more cigarettes. But of course, Coward says that he also got information from the townspeople in Osweicem. Dr. Drischel addresses that.

DR. DRISCHEL: Do you speak Polish?

COWARD: A little, sir, a few words or phrases like “Poniemaje Polski,” and so forth.

The Polish townspeople, who he was adamant "knew everything", could have told him nothing.

Under cross-examination, Sergeant Coward's testimony tells us that:

1. He never saw a gas chamber during his visits away from Monowitz, and indeed, could not point out where they were on a map.

2. He could not have communicated with the Polish citizens he met in Osweicem.

3. He was never in the Main Camp at Auschwitz.

4. He knew nothing about Birkenau, the alleged extermination center at this time, and indeed, does not seem to have known of it's existence.

5. The German guards were not truthful about what they were pointing out to him, and in fact, may not have known themselves.

So, Sergeant Coward is not an eyewitness. But hearsay, under certain circumstances, can be admissable, Depending On The Source. Sergeant Coward's sources for his detailed knowledge about exterminations at Auschwitz is as follows:

1. Reports From Other People

a: Townspeople (who would have been Poles)
Coward admitted he didn't speak Polish.

b. The SS.
As has been seen, the guard, who Coward relates he bribed with cigarettes for infomation, lied to him about where the gas chambers were.

c. Concentration camp inmates.
Coward was forced to admit that he had never been in any camp other than the ones near Monowitz. So the only concentration camp prisoners he ever talked to were the ones at Monowitz, the same ones who told the POW's about "the modern bathhouse", which we've already covered.

d. Foreign Workers
If by foreign he means "German", either civilian contractors for I.G. Farben or the SS, this is the only plausible source, since Coward spoke passable German. He would not have been able to communicate with any other foreigners. None of the contractors at Monowitz, specialists in coal hydrogenation, would have known anything first-hand about gas chambers. In Oswiecem, I suppose he could have talked to somebody, but who? All reports say that, in 1944, German contractors for the alleged gas chambers, from the firm of Topf and Sons, would have been there rarely, and only two or three at a time.

Without more detail, it's impossible from Coward's testimony to credit any foreign worker with eyewitness knowledge of gas chambers at "Auschwitz" - among other things, you'd think they would have told Coward those chambers were at Birkenau, but obviously, they never did.

Around the camps and in the town of Osweicem, everybody was repeating a rumor. But where could such a rumor have come from?

Coward told us when he mentioned his second source.

2. Radio broadcasts and leaflets from the British Government. (!)

Even while still at Auschwitz we got radio broadcasts from the outside speaking about the gassings and burnings at Auschwitz. I recall one of these broadcasts was by Anthony Eden himself. Also, there were pamphlets dropped in Auschwitz and the surrounding territory, one of which I personally read, which related what was going on in the camp at Auschwitz.

"Which related what was going on in the camp at Auschwitz". The one that Coward had never seen, and could not find on a map. That's how he "knew" about the gassings.

So, there you have it. Sergeant Coward, of the 1200 British POW's at Auschwitz, the one in the best position to know what was going on, saw nothing.

And what he heard didn't stand up under cross-examination. His evidence wouldn't be allowed past discovery in the trial of a shoplifter, much less for mass murder.
--------------------------------------------
There was a rumor flying around the Auschwitz complex that people were being gassed and cremated, a rumor helped by all the belching chimneys from the I.G. Farben plant, the steel foundry, the fuse plant and several coking plants, all visible on the horizon from whereever you stood.

Inmates who had been in the Zentralsauna at Birkenau saw people going into gas chambers (to disinfest clothing), and reported it to the British POW's as a killing center.

The guards used the story to scare people, and secure cigarettes and other rare goods, the sort of goods that the Auschwitz State Museum article claims bred "deep resentment in the German guards".

And the British fanned the rumor. As some of you know, there was a British Black Propaganda Unit, led by Sefton Delmar, whose job it was to create rumors and spread dissension in Occupied Europe. They were the ones making the radio broadcasts, and dropping the propaganda leaflets all over the Auschwitz complex.

Sefton Delmer : BLACK PROPAGANDA - THE WORLD WAR 2 TOP SECRET BRITISH PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE OPERATION.

http://www.seftondelmer.co.uk/index.htm

And this is the contribution of the British POW's at Monowitz to the myth of the HolocaustTM.

 

[Shamanskiss]

Don't know whether this is any use.

And is "phlegmatic" (Having or suggesting a calm, sluggish temperament; unemotional) a word that translates out of Polish? The etymology is the Middle English word "fleumatik". How did that get into what is supposedly a Polish resistance report?

.

It has been a while since I have dabbled with cyrillic or slavonic based languages, and I was never a master of them, rather a user as necessity arose. But...

Russian...I believe phlegmatic exists as флегматичный , which I believe has the phonetic pattern ? 'flegmateechnyaioy'..?. not so dissimilar.

Polish... I think it translates as flegmatyczny , with the phonetic pattern ,( bear with me here as all the consonant interactions were never a strongpoint with me) ?flegmatichnyih?....

IT crossed my mind that there was a significant academic presence in the Jewish communities, and inevitably the camps. I think it would be very likely that many spoke both Russian and Polish . Also significant numbers from teaching, commercial, and scientific milieus would also have good commands of English and its idiom.

Equally, the word itself, is from a latin root, fleumatic/k being an evolution of that earlier root. Thus there is a common thread of evolution of the word in all three languages, as they all share a significant latin derivation.

Both Russian and Polish possess definitions that feature the qualities of
' irresponsive to provocation, stolid , unexcitable , emotionally controlled '.
In an idiomatic useage, the best translation might be 'cool and controlled to a high degree'.
I had to smile at how close that gets to 'stiff upper lipped, old chap'.....

as stated earlier, I do not offer this as gospel as my Cyrillic/slavic/Balkan language skills were limited and a matter of necessity not passion, and they are VERY rusty from disuse.

 

[ImpWizard]

...surprise attack ...

I think Lovelynice was right in the case to put you and KRcummings on ignore, as you weren't keeping to the subject of the thread anyway. Most of your posts were only insults and nothing more. She made a couple of errors (1943 instead of 1942), but you made some dumb statements too.

Pearl Harbor wasn't a surprise attack. But that is off the subject and you apparently have great difficulty in maintaining your attention span on what the subject of the thread is. It's all about the Holocaust, stupid.

Shamanskiss appears to have problems staying on subject as well - but at least he at least TRIES to make a decent argument.

Overall, Drinking Cap, you're a disappointment.

 

[Drinking Cap]

I think Lovelynice was right in the case to put you and KRcummings on ignore, as you weren't keeping to the subject of the thread anyway. Most of your posts were only insults and nothing more.

I disagree. We were addressing the issue of why Lovelynice would believe such nonsense which is inextricably linked to the way Japan got their asses handed to them.

But you think he/she was right, good for you.

 

[Shamanskiss]

or in brief

I think Lovelynice was right in the case to put you and KRcummings on ignore, as you weren't keeping to the subject of the thread anyway. Most of your posts were only insults and nothing more. She made a couple of errors (1943 instead of 1942), but you made some dumb statements too.

Pearl Harbor wasn't a surprise attack. But that is off the subject and you apparently have great difficulty in maintaining your attention span on what the subject of the thread is. It's all about the Holocaust, stupid.

Shamanskiss appears to have problems staying on subject as well.

anyone who disagrees.

 

[Drinking Cap]

She made a couple of errors (1943 instead of 1942), but you made some dumb statements too.

Obviously Lovelynice's connection to history isn't terribly strong if she never heard of the battle of Midway Island.

 

[ImpWizard]

I disagree. We were addressing the issue of why Lovelynice would believe such nonsense which is inextricably linked to the way Japan got their asses handed to them.

No, you mostly used a whole lot of insults and tried to piss her off. And you damn well know it. You made personal attacks repeatedly. The majority of your posts consisted of them in your little lap-jumping session with KRcummings and made you appear as much of an airhead as KR.

You don't even know anything apparently about Lovelynice's background. Did you even bother to read her profile? Or did you just see location: "Japan" and left it at that?

If you think Lovelynice's posts are nonsense then use a reasoned argument and some facts, don't show off how much of a rednecked idiot you can be by resorting to personal insults in the majority of your posts.

Lovelynice didn't fight WW2 anymore than you did, yet you carried on like she personally was out there shooting people.

She had relatives on both sides. Ask her about it sometime.

 

[unculbact]

as stated earlier, I do not offer this as gospel as my Cyrillic/slavic/Balkan language skills were limited and a matter of necessity not passion, and they are VERY rusty from disuse.

You know, you're probably right. If the Poles used a Polish word describing a complex emotion that doesn't directly translate into English, like the ones you mentioned, the translator, if he knew his job, would have chosen something in English that was close to the thought.

After all, "Nekulturny", a Russian word, is usually translated as "uncultured", but I understand that's not completely correct, and that the word expresses a more complex insult.

 

[ImpWizard]

Obviously Lovelynice's connection to history isn't terribly strong if she never heard of the battle of Midway Island.

Neither is yours if you don't understand how dropping nukes on civilian targets and firebombing civilians is in breach of the Geneva Convention and a whole slew of treaties and international laws.

She probably got her dates wrong by a year, a 3 instead of a 2. If she sees this post about it, she will probably eat crow and apologize.

I wonder if you'll do the same if the exact articles of the Geneva Convention that the USA breached are quoted to you.

Anyway. that is not the subject of the thread. You should argue the Pacific War elsewhere.

 

[Drinking Cap]

If you think Lovelynice's posts are nonsense then use a reasoned argument and some facts, don't show off how much of a rednecked idiot you can be by resorting to personal insults in the majority of your posts.

Excuse me, but Japan getting their asses kicked up and down the Pacific by the US Navy and Marines is a stone cold, dyed in wool fact.

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree, though, about the quality and intent of my posts, Lovelynice's sanity and whether or not anyone here gives the slightest damn what you think of them.

 

[Drinking Cap]

Neither is yours if you don't understand how dropping nukes on civilian targets and firebombing civilians is in breach of the Geneva Convention and a whole slew of treaties and international laws.

I asked her "Which Geneva Convention was dropping the Nuclear bomb in violation of" if you can answer that, go nuts.

But like the Midway island issue, Lovelynice just ignored anything that didn't fit into her narrow worldview based on bullshit.

 

[unculbact]

I am not a historian as you evidently are.

Actor, playwright and sometimes journalist. Playwrights have to have deep research skills too.

And my day job, at least the one I had until a month ago, had me analyzing depositions and testimonies in preparation for litigation, something I've done since 1983.

If you think patent law disputes don't result in vicious, desperate, hate-filled court battles, where people lose all dignity and act like animals, think again. It's not a pretty sight.

Oh, and part-time pornographer too.

 

[ImpWizard]

Excuse me, but Japan getting their asses kicked up and down the Pacific by the US Navy and Marines is a stone cold, dyed in wool fact.
.

So what? You weren't trying to state cold hard facts, you were trying to piss her off with insults. Repeatedly. It was damn obvious.

 

[Drinking Cap]

So what? You weren't trying to state cold hard facts

And yet I did nothing but. I even corrected KR when she tried to imply that the Japanese lost WW2 because of Godzilla(When, really, their pop culture is just why the Japanese lost their self-respect)

Also, you should really look into the definition of Redneck. I don't mind it or anything but it doesn't apply.

 

[ImpWizard]

I asked her "Which Geneva Convention was dropping the Nuclear bomb in violation of" if you can answer that, go nuts.

But like the Midway island issue, Lovelynice just ignored anything ...(snip- I'm not going to quote your personal insults to her either.)

It's pretty easy to find out that information yourself.

And, Lovelynice more than likely put you on ignore before you mentioned Midway Island. It's still only an error by a 3 instead of 2 anyway. Great. She said 1943 instead of 1942.

Again, the Pacific War is not the subject of this thread. I might be sounding like a broken record, but I'll mention it again. This thread is about the Holocaust - evidence one way or another. If you have nothing to add that that little debate, then you really shouldn't be on the thread.