Responses on HCN etc; Kurt Gerstein

Peter Myers, February 9, 2009; update May 1, 2009.

My comments within quoted text are shown {thus}; write to me at contact.html.

You are at

Please report broken links. Write to me at contact.html.

Back to the previous bulletin in the debate: holocaust-debate20.html.

{start of bulletin 21}

Responses on HCN etc; Kurt Gerstein

1) Holocaust Denial "a surrogate for Nazism as a cause" (2) Greens and Trots, Nazis and Historical Debate (3) Hitler was "forced" to initiate the war (4) War War II "incited by Roosevelt & Churchill" (5) Provan's study on Diesel Toxicity (6) HCN Ventilation (7) to (9) FAO manual on HCN toxicity (10) How can I prove that which never happened? - Frederick Toben (11) Pressac's Proof - Evading the question (12) Pressac's intermediary view (13) "The Decalogue of Inconvenient Facts" is interesting but complete rubbish (14) Testimony of Kurt Gerstein and other SS officers (15) Norman Finkelstein on "Holocaust Survivors" (16) Faurisson Vs. Mark Weber of IHR on Gas Vans

(1) Holocaust Denial "a surrogate for Nazism as a cause"

From: patrick <> Date: 25.02.2009 03:51 AM

Thank you for your efforts in continuing and moderating this discussion and in providing several long selections from the Holocaust affirmers.

Your statement below really caught my eye. The statement is useful in showing the political framework from which you approach this. My comments are below your statement. ----- "Only recently have I realised that anti-Zionist dissidents are being dragged towards Nazism, as a current drags swimmers down a beach without them being aware of it. In the case of a beach, the force is the moving water; if you don't take action in time, it might sweep you into a rip. In the case of anti-Zionism, the force is Nazi propagandists, and their vehicle is Holocaust Denial. This has become a surrogate for Nazism as a cause: these are "holy warriors", for whom Hitler is a prophet and debate a form of warfare." -----

Peter, I believe you are absolutely and 100% wrong. The only form of Nazism active and effective today is Judeo-Nazism (a term made up and used by Jewish critics of the state-terrorist government of Israel). The main weapon and all-purpose alibi of the Judeo-Nazis is the holocaust story. The main victims of the holocaust industry are Germans, Europeans, and now Palestinians. Everything you attribute to the revisionists is 1000 times more applicable and relevant to the Judeo-Nazis in the international holocaust jet set. It is very sad to see that a sincere and honest activist like you has swallowed the chief lie used by the holocaust industrialists to stifle dissent and prohibit discussion of their story and that you are, thereby, unintentionally giving aid and comfort to the criminal racists driving the policies of the racist JewState (Herzl`s term), which in turn is driving the anti-Islamic and anti-Arab crusade being carried out by Washington. You may recognize several terms that I use from Finkelstein`s "The Holocaust Industry."

Sine ira et studio!

Patrick Henry

Reply (Peter M.):

There are people like you, for whom Denial is not a surrogate for Nazism. And there are other Deniers - those I would call leaders of the movement - for whom it is.

I've come across a number of Deniers who would scare me to death if they got power. But there are others like Toben & Krege who are relatively affable.

We would would change the system do our cause no good by espousing Denial. We start out as would-be saviours of the common people from manipulative elites. But when we become Deniers, we're put on the Defensive, and seen as tainted with Hitler's blood. That's why the Zionists like to depict even people like Finkelstein as "Deniers".

No doubt they'll call me one too, despite my contrary efforts.

To adopt Denial, when all you really want to do is change the system, is the height of foolishness.

Despite Jewish leadership of the Trotskyist movement, which drives the Cultural Revolution (Radical Feminism, Gay Marriage, Open Border immigration), and despite Zionists' getting us to fight their wars, there are Jews who are innocent of both. And in any case, only leaders should be punished.

I now believe in the Gas Chambers, not from watching propaganda on TV - I haven't watched any TV shows on this topic for many years - but from reading Revisionist/Denier literature; from "Revising Revisionism" as Provan put it. And now those Gas Chambers are a much more vivid reality to me than they ever were before. I'm appalled. It doesn't matter what Jews did - nothing deserves that treatment. And I'm shocked that other people in this debate seem not to be appalled.

(2) Greens and Trots, Nazis and Historical Debate

From: Syd Walker Date: 25.02.2009 02:22 AM

Peter, you wrote (emphasis ADDED): "I discovered Zionism in 1995, and wrote about it that year. Feeling somewhat ostracised, I sought out others of like mind, but who were not extremist. I wanted to create a middle position in this mailing list, but not having studied Holocaust literature until recently, I avoided making comments on what happened and allowed Denier viewpoints to go unremarked.

Only recently have I realised that anti-Zionist dissidents are being dragged towards Nazism, as a current drags swimmers down a beach without them being aware of it.

In the case of a beach, the force is the moving water; if you don't take action in time, it might sweep you into a rip. In the case of anti-Zionism, the force is Nazi propagandists, and their vehicle is Holocaust Denial. This has become a surrogate for Nazism as a cause: these are "holy warriors", for whom Hitler is a prophet and debate a form of warfare.

IN THE SAME WAY, BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF POLITICS, TROTSKYTES WORK AMONG GREEN GROUPS." Peter, I think your analysis is false. I don't believe that exposure to ideas and analyses is the sort of contagious peril that you suggest. In free debate, ideas most likely to succeed are characterized by truthfulness and explanatory power, irrespective of previous labels. What's not to like about that? I won't talk initially, however, about the issue of Zionists, Nazis and Mass Murders real and imagined. I'd like to contribute something which I do know a fair amount: green groups in Australia. I've been involved in the conservation movement here for about 25 years, paid and unpaid. I know a lot of conservationists. I've met a lot of 'green groups'. I'm rather out of the frey these days, because I'm away from the major cities. But I keep in contact. For 15 years I lived and breathed conservation activism. Your statement: "on the other side of politics, Trotskyists work among Green groups." is true as far as it goes. Biut how far does it go... and is it even worth pointing out? Is it worth pointing out at all, with sinister overtones, in this particular context? I think not. In Australia, members of the Labor Party work among green groups. So do members of the Liberal Party. So do Democrats, Greens and even National party members. The conservation movement is a very broad Church. It may even includes Nazis, although I've never met any. So what? If, as you attempted to do in previous emails, you wish to suggest again that Trotskyites influence the policies of the conservation movement as a whole to a significant extent (and in a malign way), you'll need to provide some evidence. I haven't seen you provide far. Just insinuation. It concerns me that you are (or so it seems to me) haphazard on topics which I do know something about. It makes me more concerned about your analysis on other topics. I'm also a little disappointed that you didn't relay my earlier comments re: 'belief' v 'denial'. I utterly reject the dichotomy, which to my way of thinking represents loaded terminology that helps to thrwart fair and balanced discussion..I believe what I consider to be true; I disbelieve what I consider to be untrue; I suspend judgment on many things. I do not expect to be categorized into a 'believer' or 'denier' on other topics. Why on this? One thing is clear about the events of World War Two. There have been vigorous attempts to manipulate public opinion about that war from before it started, continuing through the war and (amazingly) perpetuated even until the present day. This entailed requiring assent to propositions that have changed over time. First they (were required to) believe in lampshades made out of Jewish skin; now they're not. First they (were rewquired to) believe in soap made out of Jewish fat; now they're not. One is reminded of cult members, whose beliefs are like chameleons, matching whatever the cult leaders tell them at the time. If those who believe the (latest?) official narrative 'have the goods' and want to prove their case beyond doubt to the satisfaction of all (not just for yes-men), they have a very simple remedy. Call off the repression of intellectual opponents! Open the prisons! Free up public debate! Let them prove their case against naysayers in precise, clear, open dialogue, backed up by renewed forensic studies. It's the choice they never seem to make. Why not, Peter? Why evade an open match they're so likely to win? Perhaps those who advocate repressing people that disagree with them have rather more scepticism about the their case than you do?

Reply (Peter M.):

I have written the story of the Trotskyist attempt to take over the Nuclear Disarmament Party - which I was a member of - in Australia in 1984-5, at

An image of a report in The Australian "'Raiding party' saw chance to take over" is at

Peter Garrett and Jo Valentine quit the NDP over this; Jo Valentine was elected to the Senate, and she then founded the WA-Greens.

(3) Hitler was "forced" to initiate the war

From: Joe Fallisi <> Date: 25.02.2009 04:41 AM

In your last reply to Bill you wrote: "You depict the Nazi soldiers as valiant martyrs, forgetting that this war had been initiated by Hitler". I think we should be, even in this realm, fair and searching- telling the truth. It's not so simple. It's for sure possible, out of and against the propaganda of winners so called "democrat" and "progressive" (who was - and are - horrible criminals as well), to show that in many ways Hitler was "forced" to initiate the war. We must seriously read and consider what says about that the counter- party too (see, for instance: Walendyfr2.pdf).

Reply (Peter M.):

You're ignoring Hitler's plans for an Empire in the East in Mein Kampf and in Table Talk.

Oswald Spengler warned in his 1934 book The Hour of Decision that an offensive on the USSR would fail:

"The great industrial areas which are important to power-politics have one and all been built up east of Moscow, for the greater part east of the Urals as far as the Altai and on the south down to the Caucasus. The whole area west of Moscow ... could be sacrificed without a crash of the whole system. ... any idea of an offensive from the West has become senseless. It would be a thrust into empty space" (p. 61).

(4) War War II "incited by Roosevelt & Churchill"

From: Ramon Fonseca Molina <> Date: 26.02.2009 05:06 PM Subject: The Secret Polish Documents & FDR

I don't know if you are aware of the "Polish Documents" but this might be of interest.

President Roosevelt's Campaign To Incite War in Europe: The Secret Polish Documents MARK WEBER

Reply (Peter M.):

I knew of those documents. They show that the US & Britain had encouraged Poland not to give in to Nazi demands. Given that Hitler had just taken over Czeckoslovakia, this US & British initiative was a way of drawing a line. It was a line Hitler did not have to cross, so you cannot blame the war on the Allied side. Anyway, Hitler had laid out the general plan for an empire in the East, years earlier in Mein Kampf. The same plan is described many times in Table Talk.

(5) Provan's study on Diesel Toxicity

From: Charles Krafft <> Date: 26.02.2009 04:25 PM

Provan's Diesel Toxicity Statistics Please

The Leuchter, Luftle, Rudolph, and Crackow (Jan Sehn Institute) Reports all pretty much corroborate eachother as to Leuchter's findings. Below David Irving mentions the Luftel Report and further on in the testimony he gives Justice Gray the names of two more engineers (I assume) who have backed Leuchter's study up. The fact that Roth back peddled AFTER he discovered what the tests he conducted for Leuchter were for indicates to me, anyway, that he was probably trying to stay out of the sort of trouble that ruined Fred Leuchter's career as America's premiere execution device expert.

You don't seem have any reserve about quoting Van Pelt and Browning at length. How about presenting us with, say, a chunk of the Luftle Report in conjunction with another of the Crackow Report and some commentary summing these up. According to revisionists The Crackow Report was so inconclusive and such an embarrassment to Dr. Franccizek Piper that it has remained filed away out of sight. Jan Sen, by the way, was a biased Polish Communist war crimes judge who presided over the Auschwitz trials, I believe.

The revisionist expert on diesel gassings Fritz Berg has written:

"Ask Meyers what the CO and CO2 levels were in the diesel exhaust in Provan's test. Surely, he should be able to give you that information if Provan's test has any value at all. The fact is he can't give you those numbers because they were never published, as far as I know.

When I first got your message about Provan's experiment, I thought there might be some more info there, but there is nothing new. The news reporter Reddy of the Gazette story to whom I actually spoke after his story broke merely insisted that by changing the injection timing, Provan got lethal results. So, merely on the basis of this vague say-so, the world is supposed to believe I am wrong and that nearly 2 million Jews were killed with diesel exhaust. It is too stupid. Injection timing does not change the amount of CO because there is still an enormous amount of excess oxygen within the hot exhaust as the exhaust leaves the engine and passes through the tailpipe. Whatever CO is present, it tends to easily react with the oxygen present to form CO2 which is NOT toxic--contrary to Provan's insane theory."

Now, do you consider the currently jailed revisionists - Ernst Zundel, Gerd Honsik, Germar Rulolph, Attorny Sylvia Stoltz (Zundel's lawyer), Wolfgang Froelich and indicted revisionists Pedro Varela, Vincent Raynouard, Horst Mahler, Sigfried Verbeke, and Georges Theil, along with the self-indicted German Dirk Zimmerman and the refugee Holocaust satirists Stephen Whittle and Simon Sheppard ('The Heretical Two") all part this nazi rip tide you worry will carry unsuspecting anti-Zionists over to the extreme right? Could you elaborate a bit more about the hijacking of your morally superior brand of Leftist Chomskyist anti-Zionism by depraved nazis? Besides the holocaust "deniers" who are these dangerous people?!

-whodareswings (for Joan Baez)

THE WITNESS: The first document, my Lord, is the one headed "Institute for Historical Review". This is a letter written by the Institute for Historical Review to Professor Gerald Fleming who is an acknowledged expert on the Holocaust. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. A. And I draw your Lordship's attention purely to the paragraph on the second page which I printed in bold face, the last paragraph. Your Lordship was enquiring about what other reports after the Leuchter report continued to support that contention, and here is a very useful summary of them: "Rudolf reached essentially the same conclusion as had American gas chamber specialist, Fred Leuchter, in his 1988 forensic investigation of the allied gas chambers at Auschwitz and Birkenhau. You may also be aware that as a result of Leuchter's findings, the Institute of Forensic Research in Cracow conducted a partial investigation and that its forensic analysis, given in a confidential September 1990 report, corroborated Leuchter's findings". Your Lordship may remember that I referred to the fact --- MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, you did. MR IRVING: --- that the Auschwitz authority had locked it away. "This report was published in the summer 1991 Journal of Historical Review. Moreover, Austrian engineer, Walter Luftel, who was, in fact, the President of the Austrian Federation of Engineers, explicitly endorsed Leuchter's findings in the detailed March 1992 report published in the winter 1992 to 1993

Reply (Peter M.):

I believe that Provan would have presented his findings to the IHR; he did present his paper No Holes? No Holocaust? there.

However, no Revisionist website seems to have published his writings, except on Dr Nyiszli, who was co-opted to work for Dr Mengele.

I am trying to obtain Provan's articles.

(6) HCN Ventilation

From: Joe Fallisi <> Date: 25.02.2009 04:20 AM

Truth Seeker wrote in his last message to the list: "you do realize that 4 out of the 6 gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau had NO mechanical ventilation? This despite that mechanical ventilation was a requirement for delousing chambers using Zyklon-B. Had these been real gas-chambers, mechanical ventilation would exist (or at least be added) to all of them." Do are true, Peter, his assertions? As for I know they aren't.

(7) FAO manual on HCN toxicity

From: Dr. Gunther Kümel <> Date: 25.02.2009 05:01 AM

This discussion is of high value to resolve the issue of the historical holocaust thesis. Of course a totally decisive method of clarification would be the opening of the archives of Arolson and the opening of the archives of the Vatican. In Arolson the fate of millions of inmates of the camps is scrupulously put together. The archives of the Vatican would, for good, show if the h.-thesis has a counterpart in reality. All camps had catholic priests, and the Poles are a strictly professing catholic nation, and the priests side with their people. If a mass annihilation program was executed in the camps, situated in open landscape between Polish villages and farms and fields, the catholic priests in all probability would have known precisely and would have reported to the Vatican. We should not forget that inmates were sometimes released from a camp, worked in farms around the camps and had contact to people from outside the camps. It is a highly interesting issue to contemplate about the reason, why the archives of Arolson are still closed today for independent scholars (while they have been opened for Yad Vashem and the h.-museum in New York) and the archives of the Vatican are disclosed to scholars only up to the year of 1939! This time barrier has not been loosened since 1945!

The discussion centers around the issue, if a mass extermination had been technically possible, rather than elucidating whether it has been executed.

I am a (retired) university lecturer, chemist. If I had to plan a mass annihilation method for millions of people, I would do anything but suggest poisoning with ZyclonB. It is a really clumsy method. Any technician or engineer could have designed a more effective method. As you know, Eisenhower reached this aim by simple starvation of the German POW's. Did Germany in these days have not one engineer to suggest a less clumsy method to the government, if the assumption of a central plan of mass annihilation is made? The Germans were able to develop jet air planes and helicopters, TV and computers and the most advanced rockets, but on the field of mass murder they lacked any skill.

ZyclonB is a solid, cannot be distributed through shower heads, as sometimes assumed. If a large room had to be supplied with ZyclonB through holes in the ceiling to provide a certain concentration of HCN in the whole room within minutes, it was mandatory to use a vast surplus of the fumigant. HCN is adsorbed to the surface of a solid in ZyclonB. Rapid desorption is possible only at elevated temperatures. And desorption of the poisonous HCN can never be achieved at once. The desorption is a process that starts immediately after opening the can, but goes on and on for a long time. Even after hours the process is not complete, dependant on room temperature. Highly effective ventilation for an extended period of time would help to remove the free poisonous gas from the room. However, the pellets of ZyclonB hidden between the corpses would continue to deliver further HCN. The danger for the personnel busy with the removal of thousands of corpses would partly lie in the ZyclonB pellets still emanating HCN.

(8) FAO manual on HCN toxicity

From: mirk <> Date: 25.02.2009 10:14 PM

It is difficult to follow the discussion below. It is difficult to figure out who is asking and who is responding to whom - a normal occurence in emails which circulate among various addressees

In regard to Decalogue you seem correct that delousing required many hours of fumigation and on higher concentrations than homicidal use. Moreover tramendous affininty of hemoglobin in human lungs, very fast leached most of CN from the surrounding air what many deniers do not note. However claim of Roth that HCN penetrates only a few microns of brick is preposterous. In delousing chambers it penetrated (albeit selectively) interior plaster 35 centimeters of brick and showed as blue blotches on the exterior plaster.

You and others scientists are correct that essential lack of ferrocyanides does not exclude homicidal gassings. On the other hand it nearly prooves that this was not done on a mass scale.

From my point of view there is/are another far more important "inconvenient facts" about the gassings in gas chambers.

- the broken up but essentially complete and extant originally underground poured concrete (now exposed) roof of the gas chanber in crematory II shows absence of the Zyclone B inlets. This means Zyclon B discs or pellets could not be introduced as reported by survivors through four small chimmneys and wire mesh column described by some Pole who allegedly manufactured it. The haphazard gapping holes in the concrete slab made with a hammer most likely long after the war.

- The photogrammetry of the famous Nazi 1943 photo of the smoking locomotive and roof of the gas chamber almost finished with refutes that the objects on its roof were the inlets located symmetrically along its long axis, see drawings of Van Pelt.

Careful photogrametry proves that these were stacks of building materials located under the window of crematory and on the edges of the roof.

- For deniers an "inconvenient fact" is found on the Allied air photos of the roof of the gas chambers. There are four fuzzy objects on the roof distributed in irregular manner on the roof of the gas chambers of cremat. II and III. Deniers claim that they were pencilled in by Holocaust forgers i.e. Brugnioni.

I think theirs is unsubstantiated claim. It is difficult to impreceptibly forge air photos even if we deal with copies of originals. At the National Archives they are not sure if these are original films or copies. They think these are copies and originals are kept at the Iron Mountain cold depository. Perhaps you could investigate farther. I will not because I am busy with my work.

Most importantly i think the four spots represent tomato plants tendend by the Jewish workers at the Crematories. In May photos they are intensly black (succulent green originally) and in September photo fading away (i.e. wilting tomato plants). Concrete roofs of the gas chambers were covered with about 15 inches of brought in soil which became much warmer then surrounding terrain. This surely did not escape the notice of crematory workers who expected an early crop of tomatos by mid-july instead late August and this could be the reason for the succulent green of the late May plants. Sure it is only theory. But the lack of bona fide holes in the concrete roof is supportive of it.

Still the homicidal gassing could go on by

a) pumping HCN released by heat from the pellets via reverse flow into ventilation shafts

b) locking up the door and suffocating 2,000-2,500 victims with the lack of oxygen which in this packed and low space would occur in 10-20 minutes as reported by survivors. -----

Another 'inconvenient fact' obvious and overlooked by all is the extensive use of delousing chambers/facilities. Zyclon B was an expensive strategic material in short supply for the delousing of clothing and bedding of German soldiers.

Why then Germans would use it to delouse clothing of inmates whose way out of the camps was throught the crematory chimmney??? Why to delouse and prevent sickness of people who were to be exterminated??? Why to preserve life of inmates who were unfit for work???

For a reason In Jan 1994 NY Times editors put an long title on an interesting letter " Do Not Cut Off All Debate Abut Holocaust". Ackward but 15 years later still valid

(9) FAO manual on HCN toxicity

From: Don <> Date: 25.02.2009 12:42 AM

>Conclusion: from these FAO statistics, to kill people by HCN gassing requires only about 1/30 to 1/40 the concentration required for fumigation. So one would expect much more blue staining in Delousing chambers than in Chambers for Gassing people. In addition, the latter were force-ventilated to all workers to enter soon after. This ventilation would have removed nearly all the HCN.

Peter, I have to wonder if you are being deliberately obtuse. No one is disputing that a lower concentration of HCN is needed to kill insects than to kill humans. What is being said is that in order for eyewitness testimony regarding the use of Zyklon B to be accurate, the Nazis would have needed to use a much higher concentration of HCN to kill humans than the minimal concentration necessary to kill humans.

Zyklon B does not release the poison HCN suddenly, as does the chemical reaction that releases HCN in an american gas chamber. It does so slowly. For the nazis to have been able to kill 100% of the victims after only 15 minutes, they would have needed to use a higher concentration than the 1/40th necessary to kill insects. Most statistics on the safety of HCN are designed for human safety. Thus, they use a lower safety margin to make sure that no one is killed. On the other hand, if one wants to kill EVERYONE, even the strongest people, in a mere 15 minutes, one must use much higher concentrations. This concentration is still lower than that needed to kill insects, but only by about a factor of 4. I have already provided sources on the matter.

>Calculations by Peter Myers, February 24, 2009
>200 ppm quickly kills human beings and other mammals. ( = .02 % by volume)

Unfortunately, Peter, your sources do not define what "quickly" means. Keep in mind that when are talking about gassing insects, we are usually talking about killing them in hours. So what do they mean by "quickly"? Do they mean 5 hours? Do they mean 30 minutes? Do they mean 5 minutes? Do they mean 5 seconds? What we really need is the 100% mortality rate for humans after 15 minutes. Rudolf provided data from American execution HCN gas chambers. You have not provided accurate data. Your sources are not precise enough. Rudolf is a chemist. You are not, and neither was Pressac.

>Weevils (normal) require 8.2 mg/L for 5h
>8.2 mg/L = 8.2 x 829 = 6795 ppm
>San Jose scale requires 6 mg/L for modern vacuum fumigation, 10 mg/L for older methods
>6 mg/L = 6 x 829 = 4972 ppm >10 mg/L = 10 x 829 = 8290 ppm
>Given that the Nazi camps did not use our modern methods, the higher figure would apply.
>Conclusion: from these FAO statistics, to kill people by HCN gassing requires only about 1/30 to 1/40 the concentration required for fumigation. So one would expect much more blue staining in Delousing chambers than in Chambers for Gassing people. In addition, the latter were force-ventilated to all workers to enter soon after. This ventilation would have removed nearly all the HCN.

Your conclusion regarding the blue staining is incorrect, even if we accept your 1/40th ratio. I have already stated why this is so. Simply put, the difference in the concentration of HCN between the alleged homicidal gas chambers and the delousing chambers is on the order of 1,000 to 10,000a far cry from your 1/40th ratio!

1) According to eyewitnesses and mainstream historians, the gas chambers ran essentially 24 hours per day. Thus they would have been exposed to high concentrations of HCN for most of the time in the day. The delousing chambers, in contrast, did not run 24 hours per day. Thus the alleged homicidal gas chambers were exposed to HCN for a longer total period of time than the delousing chambers.

2) I have noticed that you are not very precise. You do not use exact numerical estimates, even though these are available. I repeat to refresh your memory. The difference in the concentration of HCN compounds between the delousing chambers and the alleged execution gas chambers is in the order of 1,000 to 10,000. This ratio is much, much higher than the ratio of 1/40 that you cite. Thus, even if we accept your 1/40th ratio (and I do not), at best, you can still only account for a difference of 40 times. But the difference in the concentration is actually 1,000-10,000! If we divide those numbers by your ratio of 1/40, we still have a discrepancy in the order of 25-250. Calculation: 1,000 (being generous) and divide it by 40 (your ratio, which is also generous) and we still have a ratio of discrepancy of 25 times. If we use a factor of 10,000, for the difference between the delousing and "execution" gas chambers, then we have an even bigger difference of 250 times.

So you still have to account for the fact that the concentrations of HCN compounds in the delousing gas chambers is 1,000 to 10,000 times higher than in the alleged execution gas chambers. Your theory of 1/40th cannot account for this.

Source data:

(10) How can I prove that which never happened? - Frederick Toben

From: Adelaide Institute <> Date: 25.02.2009 10:47 PM

1. Painful, painful, Peter - you are not only re-inventing the wheel but you are pioneering the construction of a square wheel. 2. The skeptic Peter Myers has become a believer - that's a sign of moral and intellectual decline, if not bankruptcy.

3. Add to that your knowledge of Revisionist persecution by the believers using the force of law to silence those who refuse to become believers and you have disconnected scientists from the equation who would tell you outright that building a cart with square wheels will present massive logistics problems - and induce personal disconforts...

4. Faurisson summed up all this so well by labelling such work "busy work", and Zundel reminded us that "the story keeps on changing".

5. Remember what Pressac told me in 1997: van Pelt/Dwork 'stole' his work - as presented in 'Auschwitz: From 1270 to the present' wherein Krema I is de-commissioned, thereby following Revisionist thoughts.

6. Fritjof Meyer in 2002 de-commissioned Auschwitz-Birkenau, Krema II, et al, and placed the gassings in two bunkers - again following the argument set down by Germar Rudolf/ Carlo Mattogno/ Jurgen Graf, among others - and as stated in 1976 by Arthur Butz in his 'The Hoax of the Twentieth Century'.

7. Relax, Peter, and console yourself that the highly cultured German nation never fell into barbarism as did the WWII Allies and as we currently witness what the Jewish Nation of Israel is doing to the Palestinians, especially during December 2008 and January 2009 and continuing.


Reply (Peter M.):


You say it never happened. But that should be your conclusion, not your starting point.

At least we agree about the barbarism. That appears to be the reason Hitler kept "the highly cultured German nation" from knowing what was happening.

Kurt Gerstein and various other SS officers have testified to the Gas Chambers - see item 14 below. Gerstein gave his evidence without any pressure; on the contrary, he went around trying to alert people to what was going on, at great risk to himself.

What about the quotes from Hitler's Table Talk?

e.g. {pdf 241} The Jew must clear out of Europe ... But if they refuse to go voluntarily, I see no other solution but extermination. {endquote}

or {pdf 682}.. until Jewry, which is the bandits' Intelligence Service, is exterminated, we shall not have accomplished our task. ... Any and every nation which fails to exterminate the Jews in its midst will sooner or later finish by being itself devoured by them. {endquote}

David Irving says of these notes of Hitler's conversations "They are genuine, in the first person, and highly reliable."

"a particularly insightful work, as it related -- and in the first person too -- Hitler's private thoughts"

You can look them up at

(11) Pressac's Proof - Evading the question

From: G Date: 25.02.2009 09:58 PM

I put those questions to you because you are stubbornly refusing to read and evaluate the revisionists' answers to Pressac.

Pressac wrote:

"A gas-tight door can be intended only for a gas chamber."

Faurisson replied:

"A gas-tight door can be found, as I've already stated, at any place in a structure in which, as is the case in a crematorium, ovens operate at high temperatures, with the risk of fire, explosion, and gas leakage. They may also be in air-raid shelters, in disinfection gas chambers, in morgues, etc."

Pressac is wrong, Faurisson is right. The use of gas-tight doors is not and has never been confined to "gas chambers" alone.

Pressac claimed the 14 showers were "DUMMY SHOWERS made of wood or other materialls [sic]".

He has no proof for that. The inventory he quotes simply lists 14 "Brausen".

In his second book, Les crématoires d'Auschwitz (1993), Pressac added the word "false" when mentioning the 14 showers ("quatorze (fausses) douches", pp. 80 and 121)

Faurisson commented:

"As we have seen, where one document (p. 80) mentions "fourteen showers" (or shower-heads), the author [= Pressac] discusses "fourteen (false) showers". In slipping in the parenthesized word "false" he distorts the sense of the document he cites and insinuates that we are in the presence of a true homicidal gas chamber equipped with false shower-heads to lure the victims."

Faurisson is right.

Pressac's "Proof" rests on two assumptions that are erroneous and unproven.

It's worth noting that Van Pelt abandoned Pressac's idée fixe that the 14 showers were "dummies". He wrote:

"To complete the arrangement in the gas chamber, the 14 real showers were complemented with an unknown number of fake showers, not listed in the inventory, but mentioned in various testimonies given by eyewitnesses."

Thus he admitted that there's no documentary evidence for the "fake showers".

Reply (Peter M.):

The point is that shower-heads and gas-tight doors were listed on the same inventory for the same chamber.

If the chamber were merely a Delousing chamber, why the shower-heads? That's what you have to answer, and have not. Neither has Faurisson.

(12) Pressac's intermediary view

From: Eric Walberg <> Date: 25.02.2009 09:44 PM

Many thanks for assembling your thoughts. Mayer's position seems the correct one. I sort of understand Pressac's plangent cry: "Once you know enough balanced facts, you can no longer be a 'denier'."

It's easy to swing from naive believer to denier, given the lies and hypocrisy. This is the first I've heard that the Nazis blew up the gas chambers but left the delousing ones to confuse people. Still no 'smoking gun' on this explanation? But surely it is just plain maudlin to gas people and then burn their bodies. Why not just work them to death or shoot them, like it seems OGPU and the NKVD did? Does this show something about Nazi psychology? And surely very few were actually gassed (presuming that this occurred). Just the disposal logistics are beyond comprehension, especially if it was Jews who had to dispose of Jews. I can't fathom it.

I agree that extreme 'deniers' seem to fall into a pro-Hitler position. Their motivation seems to be fanatical anti-communism. The Zionist and communist 'conspiracies' are very different -- even opposite. An understanding of this is my main preoccupation these days.

It will be very interesting to see what Williamson does. He is in an incredibly powerful position now. Whatever happens, it will fuel the fires of doubters-in-the-6-million. The Zionists never know when to quit while they're ahead. They should stop pestering the pope to put him on the rack. Don't they see how idiotic this makes them look? That, sadly, is our only hope for ending the tragedy in Palestine. So what is our label -- 'skeptic of the 6 million'? I guess we must be always ready with a cogent argue along Mayer's lines, refusing to capitalize or exclusivize the 'Nazi holocaust'.

(13) "The Decalogue of Inconvenient Facts" is interesting but complete rubbish

From: Palestine Remembered <> Date: 25.02.2009 07:29 AM

Congratulations on circulating "The Decalogue of Inconvenient Facts". First thing to note is that this list first appeared on a racist blog:

Links to NFTW's Most Popular Articles, A List of Jewish People That Help Control the World <>, According To The US State Department FACTS ARE ANTI-SEMITIC, etc etc

Why does it matter that "News from the West" (NFTW) are obsessed about the Jews? Well, because people who hate the Jews ultimately hate everyone else. And people who hate the Jews always lie. And because people who hate the Jews justify Zionism (despite being very similar to the Zionists themselves!). And because this kind of race-hatred will lead to the use of WMD (specifically nuclear) by Israel on Gaza, as Israel's king-maker predicts. (Mainstream Israeli sources here and here interpret Lieberman's words as a direct threat the same as you and I do).

Moreover, the arguments in "The Decalogue of Inconvenient Facts" are stupid. When they're not laughable:

1) In 1919, commiserating Martin Glynn, Governor of the State of New York publicized in America the 'holocaust of six million Jews - Irrelevant - the "six million" number was indeed invented years earlier, but by coincidence it's more or less true for the number of Jews murdered in WWII. (The first estimate for the Shoah was 5.1 million, it's crept up a bit since then. Some of the less well-regarded estimates say over 6 million).

2) ... For example, at Babi Yar in Kyiv (Kiev) the mass graves could contain at most 2,400 corpses (instead of 250,000) - Never heard of it, unlikely. Go and dig them up and count them if you want us to believe it (as Israel should do to the victims of Deir Yassin).

3) ... Diesel exhaust is claimed to be the second killing agent of the WW II Holocaust (over 2,000,000 victims) ... pathologists world-wide determined that Diesel exhaust is non-toxic - Untrue, as previously noted in this debate and must be obvious to all, the engines can be easily tampered with to produce poisonous fumes. Other sources say they were petrol anyway.

4) The common pesticide ZyklonB left a thick layer of blue ferrocyanides deposits on the walls of the delousing chambers at Auschwitz, but almost none in the plaster and bricks of the alleged homicidal gas chambers. - Untrue - at least one problem previously noted in this debate, lice require 250(?) times more HCN to kill them than do people. And sampling problems.

{More like 30 to 40 times, from FAO statistics - Peter M.}

5) Liberation footage of the Nazi camps taken by the US Signal Corps preserved at US National Archives shows 98% of inmates in perfect shape of nutrition (some even obese) including Jewish orphans and plump Jewish babies. - ridiculously unlikely, Germans themselves were starving by April 1945, let alone concentration camp victims.

6) ... there was no starvation at that Nazi camps and the low level of emaciation was caused by GI epidemics post liberation. - ridiculously unlikely.

7) In the 1956 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica ... cognizant of the WW I 'holocaust' propaganda, Rabbi Marcus ignored genocidal claims of the Nuremberg 1945-48 International Military Tribunal. - intriguing but trivial.

8) To forestall the Maquis Terror of the Franco-Prussian (1871) and of subsequent wars, the Articles of Hague (1905) and Geneva (1921) Conventions on the conduct of war, authorized wartime executions of ununiformed, civilians caught using or carrying arms - intriguing but trivial in this context.

9) ... in January 1994, The New York Times acknowledged the Holocaust Survivor Syndrome as the cause of false memories of WW II survivors. By 2009, at least half a dozen of WW II Holocaust memoirs writers are caught as hoaxers. - Irrelevant - the Holocaust Industry is an immense swindle, but it came about after the facts were generally accepted, and in a non-politicized way.

10) In 2003, Israeli demographers determined that there were '1,092,000 needy survivors worldwide' - Irrelevant for the same reason, the Holocaust Industry funds blackmail of politicians to protect Israel - but the facts themselves are more or less entirely true.

To all who seek to understand this business, I urge you to buy "The Holocaust Industry" by Norman Finkelstein. He can personally testify to the reality of the Holocaust - then lays bare the subsequent abuse of this horror for money and for Israel. And for the genocide to come.

(14) Testimony of Kurt Gerstein and other SS officers

Kurt Gerstein

SS officer with conscience

This is the story of one remarkable man who refused to surrender his conscience in the face of mass murder as one of the few SS officers in the Third Reich. Kurt Gerstein showed true heroism, tirelessly denounced Hitler's Nazi genocide and alerted the Allies, the Pope, the Germans and the church of the crimes during World War 2.

The mission of Kurt Gerstein was to expose the horrors of the Nazism to the world and to mitigate the suffering around him. The conscience-stricken Gerstein left one of the most horrifying testimonies of the Holocaust - he visited the death camps Belzec and Treblinka in August 1942 and witnessed the mass gassing of Jewish men, women and children.

"There are not ten people alive, who have seen or will see as much as you," he was told by SS Major Christian Wirth, responsible for overseeing the murder of more than two million Jews in the death camps Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka.

Kurt Gerstein, thirty-seven-year-old head of the Waffen SS Technical Disinfection Services, was shocked by what he had seen. Yet, he realized that as a witness, his position was unique, and he was determined to expose what he knew to the world to stop the atrocities.

The Pulitzer Prize-winning historian John Toland describes how Kurt Gerstein upon arrival in Warsaw set off immediately for Berlin, resolved to tell those who would listen of the ghastly sights he had witnessed:

"A modern Ancient Mariner, he began spreading the truth to incredulous colleagues. As a rock thrown into a pond creates ever widening ripples, so did the tale of Kurt Gerstein .."

Eventually he risked his life to inform the Allies: "I was one of the handful of people who had seen every corner of the establishment, and certainly the only one to have visited it as an enemy of this gang of murderers ..."

Kurt Gerstein continued to tell people what he had seen, anyone he felt would spread the word about the atrocities. Later during the war evidence shows how a despairing Gerstein risked everything stopping shipments of gas by marking it no good and ordering it buried.

All his efforts proved futile and Kurt Gerstein died in a French prison on July 25, 1945 - overwhelmed by a sense of personal responsibility and guilt ..

Whether he committed suicide out of despair and guilt in not being able to stop the Holocaust or whether he was murdered by other SS officers in the prison to silence an accuser remains a mystery.

The author Gitta Sereny later wrote:

"Gerstein's life is perhaps the most significant testimonial to the presence of moral convictions and heroism in the midst of the Nazi monstrosities .. a man in Germany who at almost unimaginable personal risk had tried, actively and from the start, to stop Hitler's genocide."

His friend, Pastor Martin Niemoller, later said: "He was a very special kind of saint, but perfectly pure and of irreproachable rectitude. He was prepared to sacrifice, and indeed did sacrifice, his honor, his family and his life ..." ==

A document made by Kurt Gerstein on the extermination camps at Belzec and Treblinka. Gerstein wrote down his evidence on May 26, 1945.

"Hearing of the massacres of insane people at Grafeneck, Hadamar, etc., shocked and greatly affected me, having such a case in my family. I had but one desire - to gain an insight into this whole machinery and then to shout it to the whole world! With the help of two references written by the two Gestapo employees who had dealt with my case, it was not difficult for me to enter the Waffen SS.

In January, 1942, I was named chief of the Waffen SS technical disinfection services, including a section for extremely toxic gasses.

One day SS-Sturmbannhfuhrer Gunther of the RSHA came into my office, dressed in civilian clothing. I did not know him. He ordered me to get him 100 kilos of prussic acid and to go with him to a place known only to the truck driver. When the truck was loaded, we ledt for Lublin (Poland). We took along Dr. Pfannenstiel, occupant of the chair of hygiene at the University of Marburg.

SS Gruppenfuhrer Globocnick was waiting for us at Lublin. He told us, 'This is one of the most secret matters there are, even the most secret. Anybody who talks about it will be shot immediately.'

He explained to us that there were three installations:

1) Belzec, on the Lublin-Lwow road. A maximum of 15,000 people per day. 2) Sobibor (I don't know exactly where it is), 20,000 people a day. 3) Treblinka, 120 kilometers NNE of Warsaw 4) Maidanek, near Lublin (under construction).

Globocnick said: 'You will have to disinfect large piles of clothing coming from Jews, Poles, Czechs, etc. Your other duty will be to improve the workings of our gas chambers, which operate on the exhaust from a Diesel engine. We need a more toxic and faster working gas, something like prussic acid. The Fuehrer and Himmler - they were here the day before yesterday, August 15 - ordered me to accompany anybody who has to see the installation.'

Professor Pfannenstiel asked him: 'But what does the Fuhrer say?' Globocnick answered: 'The Fuhrer has ordered more speed. Dr. Herbert Lindner, who was here yesterday, asked me, 'Wouldn't it be more prudent to burn the bodies instead of burying them? Another generation might take a different view of these things.' I answered: 'Gentlemen, if there is ever a generation after us so cowardly, so soft, that it would not understand our work as good and necessary, then, gentlemen, National Socialism will have been for nothing. On the contrary, we should bury bronze tablets saying that it was we, we who had the courage to carry out this gigantic task!' Then the Fuhrer said: 'Yes, my brave Globocnick, you are quite right.''

The next day we left for Belzec. Globocnick introduced me to SS [Wirth?] who took me around the plant. We saw no dead bodies that day, but a pestilential odor hung over the whole area.

Alongside the station there was a 'dressing' hut with a window for 'valuables.' Further on, a room with a hundred chairs, [designated as] 'the barber.' Then a corridor 150 meters long in the open air, barbed wire on both sides, with signs: 'To the baths and inhalants.' In front of us a building like a bath house; to the left and right, large concrete pots of geraniums or other flowers. On the rood, the Star of David. On the building a sign: 'Heckenholt Foundation.'

The following morning, a little before seven there was an announcement: 'The first train will arrive in ten minutes!' A few minutes later a train arrived from Lemberg: 45 cars with more than 6,000 people, Two hundred Ukrainians assigned to this work flung open the doors and drove the Jews out of the cars with leather whips.

A loud speaker gave instructions: 'Strip, even artificial limbs and glasses. Hand all money and valuables in at the 'valuables window.' Women and young girls are to have their hair cut in the 'barber's hut.'' (An SS Unterfuehrer told me: 'From that they make something special for submarine crews.')

Then the march began. Barbed wire on both sides, in the rear two dozen Ukrainians with rifles. They drew near. Wirth and I found ourselves in front of the death chambers. Stark naked men, women, children, and cripples passed by.

A tall SS man in the corner called to the unfortunates in a loun minister's voice: 'Nothing is going to hurt you! Just breathe deep and it will strengthen your lungs. It's a way to prevent contagious diseases. It's a good disinfectant!'

They asked him what was going to happen and he answered: 'The men will have to work, build houses and streets. The women won't have to do that, they will be busy with the housework and the kitchen.'

This was the last hope for some of these poor people, enough to make them march toward the death chambers without resistance. The majority knew everything; the smell betrayed it!

They climbed a little wooden stairs and entered the death chambers, most of them silently, pushed by those behind them. A Jewess of about forty with eyes like fire cursed the murderers; she disappeared into the gas chambers after being struck several times by Captain Wirth's whip.

Many prayed; others asked" 'Who will give us the water before we die?' [A Jewish rite] SS men pushed the men into the chambers. 'Fill it up,' Wirth ordered; 700-800 people in 93 square meters. The doors closed.

Then I understood the reason for the 'Heckenholt' sign. Heckenholt was the driver of the Diesel, whose exhaust was to kill these poor unfortunates. SS Unterscharfuehrer Heckenholt tried to start the motor.

It wouldn't start! Captain Wirth came up. You could see he was afriad because I was there to see the disaster. Yes, I saw everyting and waited. My stopwatch clocked it all: 50 minutes, 70 minutes, and the Diesel still would not start!

The men were waiting in the gas chambers. You could hear them weeping 'as though in a synagogue,' said Professor Pfannenstiel, his eyes glued to the window in the wooden door.

Captain Wirth, furious, struck with his whip the Ukrainians who helped Heckenholt. The Diesel started up after 2 hours and 49 minutes, by my stopwatch. Twenty-five minutes passed. You could see through the window that many were already dead, for an electric light illuminated the interior of the room. All were dead after thirty-two minutes!

Jewish workers on the other side opened the wodden doors. They had been promised their lives in return for doing this horrible work, plus a small percentage of the money and valuables collected.

The men were still standing, like columns of stone, with no room to fall or lean. Even in death you could tell the families, alll holding hands. It was difficult to separate them while emptying the rooms for the next batch.

The bodies were tossed out, blue, wet with seat and urine, the legs smeared with excrement and menstual blood.

Two dozen workers were busy checking mouths which they opened with iron hooks. 'Gold to the left, no gold to the right.' Others checked anus and genitals, looking for money, diamonds, gold, etc. Dentists knocked out gold teeth, bridges, and crowns, with ahmmers.

Captain Wirth stood in the middle of them. He was in his element, and, showing me a big jam box filled with teeth, said, 'See the wieght of the gold! Just from yesterday and the day before! You can't imagine what we find every day, dollars, diamonds, gold! You'll see!' He took me over to a jeweler who was responsible for all the valuables.

They also pointed out to me one of the heads of the big Berlin store Kaufhaus des Westens, and a little man whom they forced to play the violin, the chiefs of the Jewish workers' commandos. 'He is a captain of the Imperial Austrian Army, Chevalier of the German Iron Cross,' Wirth told me.

Then the bodies were thrown into big ditches near the gas chambers, about 100 by 20 by 12 meters. After a few days the bodies welled and the whole mass rose up 2-3 years {the translation in Vrba's book I Escaped From Auschwitz says "meters"} because of the gas in the bodies. When the swelling went down several days later, the bodies matted down again.

They told me that later they poured Diesel oil over the bodies and burned them on railroad ties to make them disappear." ==

Testimony of Hans Stark, registrar of new arrivals in the death camp Auschwitz. Quoted in The Good Old Days - E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The Free Press, NY, 1988, p. 255:

"At another, later gassing - also in autumn 1941- Grabner ordered me to pour Zyklon B into the opening because only one medical orderly had shown up. During a gassing Zyklon B had to be poured through both openings of the gas-chamber room at the same time. This gassing was also a transport of 200-250 Jews, once again men, women and children.

As the Zyklon B - as already mentioned - was in granular form, it trickled down over the people as it was being poured in. They then started to cry out terribly for they now knew what was happening to them. I did not look through the opening because it had to be closed as soon as the Zyklon B had been poured in. After a few minutes there was silence. After some time had passed, it may have been ten to fifteen minutes, the gas chamber was opened. The dead lay higgledy-piggedly all over the place. It was a dreadful sight." ==

Testimony of SS private Hoeblinger. Extracted from Der Auschwitz Prozess by Hermann Langbein, Vol. I. Quoted in Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers - J.C Pressac, the Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, NY, 1989, p. 174:

"I was detailed to the transport service and I drove the Sanka which was to carry the prisoners .. Then we drove to the gas chambers. The medical orderlies climbed a ladder, they had gas masks up there, and emptied the cans. I was able to observe the prisoners while they were undressing. It always proceeded quietly and without them suspecting anything. It happened very quickly ..." ==

Testimony of SS private Boeck. Extracted from Der Auschwitz Prozess by Hermann Langbein, Vol. I. Quoted in Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers - J.C Pressac, the Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, NY, 1989, p. 181:

"Q: were you present at a gassing operation one day?

A: Yes, it was one evening. I accompanied the driver Hoeblinger. A transport had arrived from Holland and the prisoners had to jump from the wagons. They were well-off Jews. There were women with Persian furs. They arrived by express train. The trucks were already there, with wooden steps before them, and the people climbed aboard. Then they all started off. In the place Birkenau once stood, there was only a long farmhouse (Bunker 2) and beside it four or five big huts. Inside, the people were standing on clothes which were building up on the floor. The block leader and the sergeant, carrying a cane, were there. Hoeblinger said to me 'lets go over there now'. There was a sign 'to disinfection'. He said 'you see, they are bringing children now'. They opened the door, threw the children in and closed the door. There was a terrible cry. A member of the SS climbed on the roof. The people went on crying for about ten minutes. Then the prisoners opened the doors. Everything was in disorder and contorted. Heat was given off. The bodies were loaded on a rough wagon and taken to a ditch. The next batch were already undressing in the huts. After that I didn't look at my wife for four weeks." ==

Testimony of SS-Unterscharführer Perry Broad, describing gassing in Krema I in Auschwitz. Quoted in KL Auschwitz as Seen by the SS, p. 176:

" The disinfectors were at work. One of them was SS-Unterscharführer Teuer, decorated with the Cross of War Merit. With a chisel and a hammer they opened a few innocuously looking tins which bore the inscription "Cyclon, to be used against vermin. Attention, poison! to be opened by trained personnel only!". The tins were filled to the brim with blue granules the size of peas. Immediately after opening the tins, their contents was thrown into the holes which were then quickly covered.

Meanwhile Grabner gave a sign to the driver of a lorry, which had stopped close to the crematorium. The driver started the motor and its deafening noise was louder than the death cries of the hundreds of people inside, being gassed to death." ==

Testimony of SS-Unterscharführer Schluch in the Belzec-Oberhauser trial. Quoted in Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps, Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 70-71:

"After leaving the undressing barracks, I had to show the Jews the way to the gas chambers. I believe that when I showed the Jews the way they were convinced that they were really going to the baths. After the Jews entered the gas chambers, the doors were closed by Hackenholt himself or by the Ukrainians subordinated to him. Then Hackenholt switched on the engine which supplied the gas ...

I could see that the lips and tips of the noses were a bluish color. Some of them had their closed, other's eyes rolled. The bodies were dragged out of the gas chambers and inspected by a dentist, who removed finger rings and gold teeth ..." ==

Testimony of SS-Oberscharführer Kurt Bolender in the Belzec-Oberhauser trial. Quoted in Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps, Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 76:

"Before the Jews undressed, Oberscharführer Michel made a speech to them. On these occasions, he used to wear a white coat to give the impression that he was a physician. Michel announced to the Jews that they would be sent to work, but before this they would have to take baths and undergo disinfection so as to prevent the spread of diseases ... After undressing, the Jews were taken through the so-called Schlauch. They were led to the gas chambers not by the Germans but by the Ukrainians ...

After the Jews entered the gas chambers, the Ukrainians closed the doors. The motor which supplied the gas was switched on by a Ukrainian named Emil and by a German driver called Erich Bauer from Berlin. After the gassing, the door were opened and the corpses removed ..." ==

Testimony of SS-Untersturmführer Oberhauser on the death camp at Belzec. Quoted in The Good Old Days - E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The Free Press, NY, 1988., p. 228-230:

"The camp of Belzec was situated north-east of the Tomaszow to Lemberg road beyond the village of Belzec. As the camp needed a siding for the arriving transports the camp was built about 400 meters from Belzec station. The camp itself was divided into two sections: section 1 and section 2. The siding led directly from Belzec station into section 2 of the camp, in which the undressing barracks as well as the gas installations and the burial field were situated ...

The gassing of Jews which took place in Belzec camp up till 1 August 1942 can be divided into two phases. During the first series of experiments there were two to three transports consisting of four to six freight cars each holding twenty to forty persons. On the average 150 Jews were delivered and killed per transport. At that stage the gassings were not yet part of a systematic eradication action but were carried out to test and study closely the camp's capacity and the technical problems involved in carrying out a gassing ...

At the beginning of May 1942 SS-Oberführer Brack from the Führer's chancellery suddenly came to Lublin. With Globocnik he discussed resuming the extermination of the Jews. Globocnik said he had too few people to carry out this program. Brack stated that the euthanasia program had stopped and that the people from T4 would from now on be detailed to him on a regular basis so that the decisions taken at the Wannsee conference could be implemented. As it appeared that it would not be possible for the Einsatzgruppen to clear individual areas of Jews and the people in the large ghettos of Warsaw and Lemberg by shooting them, the decision had been taken to set up two further extermination camps which would be ready by 1 August 1942, namely Treblinka and Sobibor. The large-scale extermination program was due to start on 1 August 1942.

About a week after Brack had come to Globocnik, Wirth and his staff returned to Belzec. The second series of experiments went on until 1 August 1942. During this period a total of five to six transports (as far as I am aware) consisting of five to seven freight cars containing thirty to forty people came to Belzec. The Jews from two of these transports were gassed in the small chamber, but then Wirth had the gas huts pulled down and built a massive new building with a much larger capacity. It was here that the Jews from the rest of the transport were gassed.

During the first experiments and the first set of transports in the second series of experiments bottled gas was still used for gassing; however, for the last transports of the second series of experiments the Jews were killed with the exhaust gases from a tank or lorry engine which was operated by Hackenholt." ==

Testimony of Treblinka's second commandant, Franz Stangl. Quoted in Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps. Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 184:

"Michel told me later that Wirth suddenly appeared, looked around on the gas chambers on which they were still working, and said: 'right, we'll try it out right now with those twenty-five working Jews. Get them up here'. They marched our twenty-five Jews up there and just pushed them in and gassed them. Michel said Wirth behaved like a lunatic, hitting at his own staff with his whip to drive them on ..." ==

Testimony of Willi Mentz about Treblinka. Quoted in The Good Old Days - E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The Free Press, NY, 1988, p. 245-247:

"When I came to Treblinka the camp commandant was a doctor named Dr. Eberl. He was very ambitious. It was said that he ordered more transports than could be "processed" in the camp. That meant that trains had to wait outside the camp because the occupants of the previous transport had not yet all been killed. At the time it was very hot and as a result of the long wait inside the transport trains in the intense heat many people died. At the time whole mountains of bodies lay on the platform. The Hauptsturmführer Christian Wirth came to Treblinka and kicked up a terrific row. And then one day Dr. Eberl was no longer there ...

For about two months I worked in the upper section of the camp and then after Eberl had gone everything in the camp was reorganized. The two parts of the camp were separated by barbed wire fences. Pine branches were used so that you could not see through the fences. The same thing was done along the route from the "transfer" area to the gas chambers ...

Finally, new and larger gas chambers were built. I think that there were now five or six larger gas chambers. I cannot say exactly how many people these large gas chambers held. If the small gas chambers could hold 80-100 people, the large ones could probably hold twice that number ...

Following the arrival of a transport, six to eight cars would be shunted into the camp, coming to a halt at the platform there. The commandant, his deputy Franz, Kuettner and Stadie or Maetzig would be here waiting as the transport came in. Further SS members were also present to supervise the unloading: for example, Genz and Belitz had to make absolutely sure that there was no one left in the car after the occupants had been ordered to get out.

When the Jews had got off, Stadie or Maetzig would have a short word with them. They were told something to the effect that they were a resettlement transport, that they would be given a bath and that they would receive new clothes. They were also instructed to maintain quiet and discipline. They would continue their journey the following day.

Then the transports were taken off to the so-called "transfer" area. The women had to undress in huts and the men out in the open. The women were than led through a passageway, known as the "tube", to the gas chambers. On the way they had to pass a hut where they had to hand in their jewelry and valuables ..." ==

Testimony of Kurt Franz on Treblinka. Quoted in The Good Old Days - E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The Free Press, NY, 1988., p. 247-249:

"I cannot say how many Jews in total were gassed in Treblinka. On average each day a large train arrived. Sometimes there were even two. This however was not so common.

In Treblinka I was commander of the Ukrainian guard unit as I had been in Belzec. In Treblinka as in Belzec the unit consisted of sixty to eighty men. The Ukrainians' main task was to man the guard posts around the camp perimeter. After the uprising in August 1943 I ran the camp more or less single-handedly for a month; however, during that period no gassings were undertaken.

It was during that period that the original camp was demolished. Everything was leveled off off and lupines were planted ..." ==

Testimony of SS Oberscharführer Heinrich Matthes about Treblinka. Quoted in Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps. Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 121:

"During the entire time I was in Treblinka, I served in the upper camp. The upper camp was that part of Treblinka with the gas chambers, where the Jews were killed and their corpses laid in large pits and later burned.

About fourteen Germans carried out services in the upper camp. There were two Ukrainians permanently in the upper camp. One of them was called Nikolai, the other was a short man, I don't remember his name ... These two Ukrainians who lived in the upper camp served in the gas chambers. They also took care of the engine room when Fritz Schmidt was absent. Usually this Schmidt was in charge of the engine room. In my opinion, as a civilian he was either a mechanic or a driver ...

All together, six gas chambers were active. According to my estimate, about 300 people could enter each gas chamber. The people went into the gas chamber without resistance. Those who were at the end, the Ukrainian guards had to push inside. I personally saw how the Ukrainians pushed the people with their rifle butts ...

The gas chambers were closed for about thirty minutes. Then Schmidt stopped the gassing, and the two Ukrainians who were in the engine room opened the gas chambers from the other side." ==

Testimony of SS Scharführer Erich Fuchs, in the Sobibor-Bolender trial, Dusseldorf. Quoted in Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps. Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 31-32:

"We unloaded the motor. It was a heavy Russian benzene engine, at least 200 horsepower. We installed the engine on a concrete foundation and set up the connection between the exhaust and the tube.

I then tested the motor. It did not work. I was able to repair the ignition and the valves, and the motor finally started running. The chemist, who I knew from Belzec, entered the gas chamber with measuring instruments to test the concentration of the gas.

Following this, a gassing experiment was carried out. If my memory serves me right, about thirty to forty women were gassed in one gas chamber. The Jewish women were forced to undress in an open place close to the gas chamber, and were driven into the gas chamber by the above mentioned SS members and the Ukrainian auxiliaries. when the women were shut up in the gas chamber I and Bolender set the motor in motion.

The motor functioned first in neutral. Both of us stood by the motor and switched from "Neutral" to "Cell", so that the gas was conveyed to the chamber. At the suggestion of the chemist, I fixed the motor on a definite speed so that it was unnecessary henceforth to press on the gas. About ten minutes later the thirty to forty women were dead."

(15) Norman Finkelstein on "Holocaust Survivors"

Norman G. Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, Verso, New York, 2000.

{p. 4} The initial stimulus for this book was Peter Novick's seminal study, The Holocaust in American Life ... {p. 5} Novick's central category is "memory." Currently all the rage in the ivory tower, "memory" is surely the most impoverished concept to come down the academic pike in a long time.

My original interest in the Nazi holocaust was personal. Both my father and mother were survivors of the Warsaw Ghetto and the Nazi concentration camps. Apart from my parents, every family member on both sides was exterminated by the Nazis. ...

{p. 6} ... Apart from this phantom presence, I do not remember the Nazi holocaust ever intruding on my childhood. The main reason was that no one outside my family seemed to care about what had happened. My childhood circle of friends read widely, and passionately debated the events of the day. Yet I honestly do not recall a single friend (or parent of a friend) asking a single question about what my mother and father endured. This was not a respectful silence. It was simply indifference. In this light, one cannot but be skeptical of the outpourings of anguish in later decades, after the Holocaust industry was firmly established.

I sometimes think that American Jewry "discovering" the Nazi holocaust was worse than its having been forgotten. True, my parents brooded in private; the suffering they endured was not publicly validated. But wasn't that better than the current crass exploitation of Jewish martyrdom? Before the Nazi holocaust became The Holocaust,

{p. 7} only a few scholarly studies such as Raul Hilberg's The Destruction of the European Jews and memoirs such as Viktor Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning and Ella Lingens-Reiner's Prisoners of Fear were published on the subject. But this small collection of gems is better than the shelves upon shelves of shlock that now line libraries and bookstores.

Both my parents, although daily reliving that past until the day each died, lost interest by the end of their lives in The Holocaust as a public spectacle. One of my father's lifelong friends was a former inmate with him in Auschwitz, a seemingly incorruptible left-wing idealist who on principle refused German compensation after the war. Eventually he became a director of the Israeli Holocaust museum, Yad Vashem. Reluctantly and with genuine disappointment, my father finally admitted that even this man had been corrupted by the Holocaust industry, tailoring his beliefs for power and profit. As the rendering of The Holocaust assumed ever more absurd forms, my mother liked to quote (with intentional irony) Henry Ford: "History is bunk." The tales of "Holocaust survivors" - all concentration camp inmates, all heroes of the resistance - were a special source of wry amusement in my home. Long ago John Stuart Mill recognized that truths not subject to continual challenge eventually "cease to have the effect of truth by being exaggerated into falsehood."

My parents often wondered why I would grow so indignant at the falsification and exploitation of the Nazi genocide. The most obvious answer is that it has been used to justify criminal policies of the Israeli

{p. 8} state and US support for these policies. There is a personal motive as well. I do care about the memory of my family's persecution. The current campaign of the Holocaust industry to extort money from Europe in the name of "needy Holocaust victims" has shrunk the moral stature of their martyrdom to that of a Monte Carlo casino. Even apart from these concerns, however. I remain convinced that it is important to preserve - to fight for - the integrity of the historical record. In the final pages of this book I will suggest that in studying the Nazi holocaust we can learn much not just about "the Germans" or "the Gentiles" but about all of us. Yet I think that to do so, to truly learn from the Nazi holocaust, its physical dimension must be reduced and its moral dimension expanded. Too many public and private resources have been invested in memorializing the Nazi genocide. Most of the output is worthless, a tribute not to Jewish suffering but to Jewish aggrandizement. The time is long past to open our hearts to the rest of humanity's sufferings. This was the main lesson my mother imparted. I never once heard her say: Do not compare. My mother always compared. No doubt historical distinctions must be made. But to make out moral distinctions between "our" suffering and "theirs" is itself a moral travesty. "You can't compare any two miserable people," Plato humanely observed, "and say that one is happier than the other." In the face of the sufferings of African-Americans, Vietnamese and Palestinians, my mother's credo always was: We are all holocaust victims.

{p. 82} Indeed, many scholars have cast cloubt on the reliability of survivor testimony. "A great percentage of the mistakes I discovered in my own work," Hilberg recalls, "could be attributed to testimonies." Even within the Holocaust industry, Deborah Lipstadt, for example, wryly observes that Holocaust survivors frequently maintain they were personally examined by Josef Mengele at Auschwitz.

Apart from the frailties of memory, some Holocaust survivor testimony may be suspect for additional reasons. Because survivors are now revered as secular saints, one doesn't dare question them. Preposterous statements pass without comment. Elie Wiesel reminisces in his acclaimed memoir that, recently liberated from Buchenwald and only eighteen years old, "I read The Critique of Pure Reason - don't laugh! - in Yiddish." Leaving aside Wiesel's acknowledgment that at the time "I was wholly ignorant of Yiddish grammar," The Critique of Pure Reason was never translated into Yiddish.

{p. 83} In recent years, "Holocaust survivor" has been redefined to designate not only those who endured but also those who managed to evade the Nazis. It includes, for example, more than 100,000 Polish Jews who found refuge in the Soviet Union after the Nazi invasion of Poland. ... The Israeli Prime Minister's office recently put the number of "living Holocaust survivors" at nearly a million. The main motive behind this inflationary revision is again not hard to find. It is difficult to press massive new claims for reparations if only a handful of Holocaust survivors are still alive.


(16) Faurisson Vs. Mark Weber of IHR on Gas Vans

From: reportersnotebook <> Date: 25.02.2009 11:24 PM

Dr. Robert Faurisson Vs. Mark Weber

{no longer at

but is at}

Dr. Robert Faurisson Vs. Mark Weber

Two Revisionists Disagree on Gas Vans

- and Dr Bob Countess chips in as well

Mark Weber, Director of the Institute for Historical Review December 19, 2003 Dr. Robert Faurisson Vs. Mark Weber

Two Revisionists Disagree on Gas Vans

- and Dr Bob Countess chips in as well

Mark Weber, Director of the Institute for Historical Review December 19, 2003

Dear Robert,

For more than 20 years, you have been on the Editorial Advisory Committee of the IHR's Journal of Historical Review. During those years, you never insisted on a declaration about Nazi gas chambers or gas vans from any Journal editor or IHR director.

Now, for the first time ever, you insist -- as a condition for remaining with the Committee -- on an affirmative reply to your query: "Tell me whether or not you say, as I myself have so clearly stated for so many years, that the alleged Nazi gas chambers and the alleged Nazi gas vans never existed." To the best of my knowledge, you have not made, and do not make, such a demand of any other associate. You seem to be holding me to a standard to which you do not hold others.

In your e-mail message to me of Wednesday, December 17, you wrote that you are "ill at ease" with what I wrote to you in response to your query, and you therefore ask that we take your name off the Committee list. Of course, we will do as you wish.

At the same time, I am very disappointed with your handling of this matter. Specifically, I am unhappy that you sent to others a copy of an e-mail message to me that I regard as misleading and unfair. For one thing, it is misleading because you quoted only part of my response to your question. That may give some people the false impression that I accept or believe the Holocaust story.

Here, as you will recall, is my complete response.

"To respond to your repeated gas chamber question: I don't believe the claims about the alleged Nazi gas chambers.

"In that regard, an important experience for me was my visit to Dachau, Mauthausen and Hartheim with you and Fred Leuchter in April 1989. I have also been impressed with the technical arguments that you, Leuchter and others have presented. However, the 'gas chamber' question is not as significant for me as other aspects of the 'Holocaust,' in large part because my knowledge of technical or chemical matters is so limited.

"I do not like to say that 'the Nazi gas chambers never existed,' in part because I do not regard myself as any kind of specialist of 'gas chambers,' and in part because I avoid making such categorical statements (on any subject).

"Given that you have not pressed me for my view of Nazi gas chambers during the past ten years or so, I don't understand why you have been pressing me on this in recent weeks.

"As you know, my view of the 'Holocaust,' including the 'gas chambers' is detailed in my testimony over five days during the 1988 Zundel trial, in the July 1995 'Holocaust debate' with Michael Shermer, and in numerous essays, reviews, and speeches, and so forth, published over the years."

In your message of yesterday, you also wrote that I agreed not to say that "we (or I) do not deny the Holocaust..." You add that you "no longer trust" my "promises in such matters." Well, I think that your memory is faulty on this point. I cannot find any record of such a pledge, and I do not recall making any such statement or promise to you. Moreover, your unhappiness on this point is strange, given that you yourself have publicly declared that "revisionists to do not deny the genocide and the gas chambers." These words appeared, for example, in a short declaration by you published (with your permission) in the Jan.-Feb. 1999 Journal of Historical Review (p. 21). Of course, both you and I normally explain just what we mean when we say that we do not "deny" the "Holocaust."

This entire matter is particularly unpleasant for me because I hold you in esteem, and regard you as a friend. Over the years, probably no person has done more than I to make your writings available in English. As you know, I have devoted many hours working together with you to present your writings, as clearly and as effectively as possible, to English-speaking readers.

In my view, the effectiveness and long-term survival of the Institute for Historical Review requires that we avoid dogmatism, even about the "Holocaust." Accordingly, I have published writings with which you (and I) do not agree, including contributions by persons who accept "the Holocaust."

Cordially, Mark Institute for Historical Review ==


22 December 2003

Reply to Mark Weber

I shall briefly sum up for you what, precisely, our recent exchange of correspondence has been. For greater clarity, I find myself obliged to emphasise certain words of this exchange, although I do not care for the practice. You will see that, contrary to what you venture to say, the letter that I sent you and made public on 17 December was neither "misleading" nor "unfair". You will also see, at the end of this reply, that you have made a monumental muddle of a text of mine of which you quote a very brief fragment; by so doing, you have been "misleading" or "unfair" or both. In conclusion, I will show that this controversy may in the end lead to a heartening prospect for the future of revisionism.

My question of 17 December was: "Tell me whether or not you SAY, as I myself have so clearly STATED for so many years, that the alleged Nazi GAS CHAMBERS and the alleged Nazi GAS VANS never EXISTED". The question was clear: it focused 1) on what you SAY or STATE, 2) on the very EXISTENCE, 3) of the alleged

Nazi GAS CHAMBERS, 4) and of the alleged Nazi GAS VANS.

Instead of answering this question directly, you wrote back: "I don't believe the claims about the alleged Nazi gas chambers". That act of faith was not what I was looking for. Effectively, whereas I was waiting to see what you, as a historian, would SAY or STATE, you answered by what you DIDN'T BELIEVE. Then, you asserted that you did not BELIEVE in CLAIMS, a particularly vague word; the remark may mean that you refuse to believe certain statements concerning the said gas chambers, but not necessarily all such statements; the choice of the word "CLAIMS" may mean that you call into question certain aspects of the story of the Nazi gas chambers (their number, location, performance) but not necessarily the affirmation of their existence itself. Finally, with such a sentence you do not, as all may see, breathe a word of the "gas vans"

Noting that with so vague a sentence you had not gone into the subject, I did not feel the need to deal with it in my letter itself, but, in the accompanying message, addressed to Jean Plantin, Yvonne Schleiter and Arthur Butz at the same time as to you, I plainly told you: "I did not ask for your 'beliefs' (?) about 'claims' (?) and, moreover, you do not mention the Nazi gas vans".

Nor did I deal with your prologue regarding at once Dachau, Mauthausen, Hartheim and your "limited" knowledge of technical and chemical matters. As is my habit, I went straight to the heart of the matter and so it was that, leaving to one side everything of the order of more or less trifling preliminary remarks, I extracted from your response the lone sentence that constituted an answer, FINALLY, to the question put. And that answer was as follows: "I do not like to say that the 'Nazi gas chambers never existed', in part because I do not regard myself as any kind of specialist of 'gas chambers' and in part because I avoid making such categorical statements."

I think it useless here to run once more through the remarks that such a pitiful answer inspires me to make. It is typical of what I call "spineless Revisionism". At the 2002 conference, I protested against this form of revisionism and suggested that, in future, revisionists come out fighting. I find comical the insistence of some revisionist "researchers" on still looking into "the problem of the gas chambers". We are not about to carry on this way till the end of time killing what has already, on the commonsense level, been "overkilled". But with our "researchers" the corpse of the "Nazi gas chambers or vans" is buried, then exhumed to be put in a coffin into which one more nail is driven. The role of an Institute like the IHR ought to be to come out with a formal assertion, one requiring neither technical nor chemical expertise but rather of the simplest kind: For more than half a century, Germany's accusers have in the end revealed their inability to let us see a single specimen of the alleged weapons of mass destruction that the Nazis are said to have designed, built or used for "The Destruction of the European Jews" (Raul Hilberg).

Whatever you do, don't moan that "Given that you have not pressed me for my view on Nazi gas chambers during the past ten years or so, I don't understand why you have been pressing me on this in recent weeks". In reality, you know perfectly well that there has been this point of discord between us for quite a long time. I have reminded you of the instance at which you and I confronted one another on it ten years ago in Washington. There was also, though you seem not to remember, another instance, over the telephone, on the subject of a statement of yours during a talk-show on a Black radio station. And I am not the only one to deplore Mark Weber's shilly-shallying with regard to the gas chambers. I can recall Fritz Berg rightly complaining of your dodging the question. Carlos Porter also seems to find you are dancing around. I myself have had to approach you more than once in order to get you to respond. And now, finally, that your response is known, it is understandable why you have tried to dodge an irksome question. But, is it normal, Mark Weber, to conceal from the IHR's readers, members, dues-paying supporters that their editor perhaps refuses, to a certain degree, to BELIEVE a lie and a historic slander but DOES NOT LIKE to have to say so? How many people imagine that for the Editor of the Journal of Historical Review a proper reply to that slander is: "I do not like to say that 'the Nazis gas chambers never existed'"?

During the above-mentioned talk-show, you stated: "I do not deny the Holocaust happened but " I immediately told you how deadly wrong it was to make such a CONCESSION to The Big Lie and Defamation. You retort now that in 1991 I myself declared: "Revisionists do not deny the genocide and the gas chambers". There you make a fine muddle. I said then, on the contrary, that by the acceptance of the word "deny" an untoward CONCESSION was made to the liars. I give you below the full text of my remark, that was published under the altogether unambiguous title "AFFIRMATION, NOT DENIAL":

A reminder: Revisionists do not deny the genocide and the gas chambers. This is a MISCONCEPTION. Galileo didn't deny that the earth was stationary; he AFFIRMED, at the conclusion of his research, that the earth was not stationary, but that it rotated on its axis and revolved around the sun. In the same way, the revisionists, after concluding their own research, AFFIRM that there was no genocide and no gas chambers, and that the « final solution of the Jewish question » consisted of the removal of the Jews from Europe ­ by emigration if possible, and by deportation if necessary. ­ The revisionists strive to establish what happened ; they are positive while the exterminationists doggedly continue to tell us about things which didn't happen : their work is negative. ­ The Revisionists stand for the reconciliation of the antagonists in the recognition of what really happened. (Robert Faurisson, The Journal of Historical Review, January-February 1999, p. 21).

In other words, I make with that remark the opposite of a CONCESSION. In a general way, not only do I expose the enthusiasts of the Big Lie for what they are, but I also refuse to borrow their least turn of phrase. The revisionists must show themselves to be candid, unbending and without CONCESSION. The time for CONCESSIONS is over.

I come now to the possibility, mentioned at the outset, of an interesting prospect for the future of revisionism. ...

{end of bulletin 21}

On to the next bulletin in the debate: holocaust-debate22.html.

Back to the Holocaust Denial Debate menu: holocaust-debate.html.

Write to me at contact.html.