Happy Fuehrertodestag!
Cf. Orac, Andrew.
12:00 trip, Friedrichsruh airport, Loetzen18 July:
12:45 takeoff Loetzen
RFSS, Prof. Wuest, Kersten, Grothmann, Kiermeier
15:15 landing, Kattowitz
Pick up Gauleiter Bracht, O’Gruf. Schmauser
and Stubaf. Hoess
Trip to Auschwitz
Tea in the Commandant’s quarters
Talk with Stubaf. Caesar and O'Stubaf. Vogel,
Stubaf. Hoess
Inspection of the agricultural operations
Inspection of the prisoners’ camp and of the FKL
Dining in the Commandant’s quarters
Auschwitz-Kattowitz trip
to the residence of
Gauleiter Bracht
Evening with Gauleiter Bracht
09:00 breakfast with Gauleiter Bracht and wifeOn the first day Himmler visited the prisoners' camp and women's camp (FKL). At that time FKL was in the main camp, not in Birkenau (cf. D. Czech, Auschwitz Chronicle, p. 211). Birkenau was not a prisoners' camp, but POW camp (KGL, Kriegsgefangenenlager).
Trip to Auschwitz
Talk with O'Gruf. Schmauser
" Stubaf. Caesar
" the Commandant of the FKL
Inspection of the factory grounds of the Buna
Auschwitz-Kattowitz trip
13:00 flight, Kattowitz-Krakow-Lublin
15:15 landing, Lublin
Pick up O'Gruf. Krueger and
Brigf. Globocnik. tea with Globocnik
Talk with Staf. Schellenberg
Trip to the Jastrow fruit concern
21:00 talk at Globocnik’s with SS O’Gruf. Krueger, SS O’Gruf.
Pohl, SS Brigf. Globocnik, SS O’Stuf. Stier.
The next meeting was in the summer of 1942, when Himmler visited Auschwitz for the second and last time. The inspection lasted two days and Himmler looked at everything very thoroughly. Also present at this inspection were District Leader Bracht, SS General Schmauser, Dr. Kammler, and others. The first thing after their arrival was a meeting in the officers’ club. With the help of maps and diagrams, I had to show the present condition of the camp. After that we went to the construction headquarters, where Kammler, using maps, blueprints, and models explained the planned or already progressing construction. He did not, however, keep quiet about the difficulties that existed which hindered the construction. He also pointed out those projects which were impossible not only to start, but to finish. Himmler listened with great interest, asked about some of the technical details, and agreed with the overall planning. Himmler did not utter a single word about Kammler’s repeated references to the many difficulties. Afterwards there was a trip through the whole area of concern: first the farms and soil enrichment projects, the dam-building site, the laboratories and plant cultivation in Raisko, the cattle-raising farms and the orchards. Then we visited Birkenau, the Russian camp, the Gypsy camp, and a Jewish camp. Standing at the entrance, he asked for a situation report on the layout of the swamp reclamation and the water projects. He also wanted a report on the intended expansion projects. He watched the prisoners at work, inspected the housing, the kitchens, and the sick bays. I constantly pointed out the shortcomings and the bad conditions. I am positive he noticed them. He saw the emaciated victims of epidemics. The doctors explained things without mincing words. He saw the overcrowded sick bays, and the child mortality in the Gypsy camp and he also witnessed the terrible childhood disease called noma (a gangrenous mouth disease in children weakened by disease and malnutrition). Himmler also saw the overcrowded barracks, the primitive and totally inadequate toilet and wash facilities. He was told about the high rate of illness and the death rate by the doctors and their causes. He had everything explained to him in the greatest detail. He saw everything in stark reality. Yet he said absolutely nothing. He really gave me a tongue lashing in Birkenau, when I went on and on about the terrible conditions. He screamed, ‘I don’t want to hear anymore about any existing difficulties! For an SS officer there are no difficulties. His task is always to immediately overcome any difficulty by himself! As to how? That’s your headache, not mine!’ Kammler and Bischoff got the same answers. After inspecting Birkenau, Himmler witnessed the complete extermination process of a transport of Jews which had just arrived. He also looked on for a while during a selection of those who would work and those who would die without any complaint on his part. Himmler made no comment about the extermination process. He just looked on in total silence. I noticed that he very quietly watched the officers, the NCOs and me several times during the process. The inspection continued to the Buna Works, where he inspected the plant as thoroughly as he had done with the prisoner workers and how they did their jobs. [...] From the Buna Works we went to the sewer gas installations. There was no program at all because the materials were not available. This was one of the sorest points at Auschwitz and was everyone’s main concern. The almost untreated sewage from the main camp was draining directly into the Sola River. Because of the continuing epidemics raging in the camp, the surrounding civilian population was constantly exposed to the danger of epidemic infections. The district leader quite clearly described these conditions and begged Weise to remedy this situation. Himmler answered that Kammler would work on the matter with all his energy.So Hoess gives a vivid and detailed description of the supposed visit, upon which Himmler's diary casts serious doubt. Now, does that mean that Hoess lied, was tortured, etc.? "Revisionists" will undoubtedly say "yes".
Himmler was much more interested in the next part of the inspection, the natural rubber plantations Koc-Sagys. [...]
On the evening of the first day of the inspection tour, all the guests and camp officers of Auschwitz were present at a dinner.
After dinner the district leader invited Himmler, Schmauser, Kammler, Caesar, and me to his house near Katowice. Himmler was also supposed to stay there because on the following day he had to settle some important questions concerning the local population and resettlement with the district leader. [...]
On the second day Schmauser and I picked him up at the district leader’s house, and the inspection continued. He looked at the original camp, the kitchen, and the women’s camp. At that time the women were located in the first row of barracks, numbers 1 to 11, then next to the SS Headquarters building. Then he inspected the stables, the workshops, Canada, and the DAW (German armaments factories), the butcher shop, the bakery, the construction units, and the planning board for the troops. He examined everything thoroughly and saw the prisoners, asked about their reasons for being there, and wanted an accurate count. He did not allow us to lead him around. Instead he demanded to see the things he wanted to see. He saw the overcrowding in the women’s camp, the inadequate toilet facilities, and the lack of water. He demanded to see the inventory of clothing from the quartermaster, and saw that everywhere there was a lack of everything. He asked about the food rations and extra rations given for strenuous labor down to the smallest detail. In the women’s camp he wanted to observe the corporal punishment of a woman who was a professional criminal and a prostitute. She had been repeatedly stealing whatever she could lay her hands on He was mainly interested in the results corporal punishment had on her. He personally reserved the decision about corporal punishment for women. Some of the women who were introduced to’ him and who had been imprisoned for a minor infraction he pardoned. They were allowed to leave the camp. He discussed the fanatical beliefs of the Jehovah’s Witnesses with some of the female members. After the inspection we went to my office for a final discussion.
[...]
This is how Himmler finished his important inspection of Auschwitz. He saw everything and understood all the consequences. I wonder if his ‘I am unable to help you’ statement was intentional? After our meeting and discussion in my office, he made an inspection of my home and its furnishings. He was very enthusiastic about it and talked at length with my wife and the children. He was excited and in high spirits. I drove him to the airport; we exchanged brief goodbyes, and he flew back to Berlin."
No. | Hoess' description | Corresponding item in Pohl's itinerary |
1 | After that we went to the construction headquarters, where Kammler, using maps, blueprints, and models explained the planned or already progressing construction. Anschließend ging es zur Bauleitung, wo Kammler an Hand von Karten, Bauplänen und Modellen die beabsichtigten oder im Bau befindlichen Bauvorhaben erklärte... | Discussion of the construction projects of the KL Auschwitz in the construction headquarters. Besprechung der Bauvorhaben des KL Auschwitz in der Bauleitung |
2 | Afterwards there was a trip through the whole area of concern: first the farms and soil enrichment projects, the dam-building site ... Hiernach Fahrt durchs ganze Interessen-Gebiet. Zuerst die landwirtschaftlichen Höfe und Meliorationsarbeiten, den Dammbau... | Dam-building site at Vistula Dammbau an der Weichsel |
3 | ... the laboratories and plant cultivation in Raisko ... ... die Laboratorien und die Pflanzenzucht in Raisko ... | Raisko |
4 | Standing at the entrance [tower], he asked for a situation report on the layout of the swamp reclamation and the water projects. Vom Eingangsturm aus ließ er sich die Lage-Einteilung und die im Bau befindlichen Be- und Entwässerungsanlagen erklären, ebenso die beabsichtigten Erweiterungen. | Inspection of the whole area from the tower of HWL. Besichtigung des gesamten Gelaendes vom Turm des HWL |
5 | After inspecting Birkenau, Himmler witnessed the complete extermination process of a transport of Jews which had just arrived. (From an earlier testimony: "During his visit in the summer of 1942, Himmler very carefully observed the entire process of annihilation. He began with the unloading at the ramps and completed the inspection as Bunker II was being cleared of the bodies.") Nach der Besichtigung in Birkenau sah er sich den gesamten Vorgang der Vernichtung eines gerade eingetroffenen Juden-Transportes an. ("Der Reichsführer SS sah sich anläßlich seines Besuches im Sommer 1942 den gesamten Vorgang der Vernichtung genau an, angefangen von der Ausladung bis zur Räumung des Bunkers II.") | Station 2 of operation Reinhardt Station 2 der Aktion Reinhardt |
6 | From the Buna Works we went to the sewer gas installations. Vom Buna-Werk ging es zur Faulgas-Anlage... | Sewer gas installations Faulgasanlage |
7 | Then he inspected the workshops, the stables ... ... die Werkstätten, die Ställe ... | new stables neuer Pferdestallhof |
8 | ... Canada ... ... "Kanada" ... | Disinfestation and effects chamber /operation Reinhard/ Entwesung u. Effektenkammer /Aktion Reinhard/ |
9 | ... and the DAW (German armaments factories) ... ... und DAW ... | DAW |
10 | ... the butcher shop ... ... Fleischerei ... | Inspection of the butcher shop Besichtigung der Fleischerei |
11 | ... the bakery, the construction units ... ... und Bäckerei, Bauhof ... | Construction yard Bauhof |
12 | ... and the planning board [?] for the troops. ... und Truppenwirtschaftslager. | Troops' camp at Birkenau Truppenlager Birkenau |
It may have been June [an obvious mistake for July - SR] 17 or 18, 1942. On that fine sunny day everything was hastily cleaned, ‘general cleaning’ was the order of the day. We watched the excited SS people and realized that something was going on, but we did not know what, we could only surmise that some visitor was expected. Around ten o’clock, a high-ranking SS officer appeared in the door, wearing a white uniform, accompanied by two SS men - it was Himmler himself. He inspected everything meticulously. He saw us in the room, in which the clothes and underclothes of those executed were stored. When he saw those blood-stained clothes, he was surprised and asked our SS bosses why there was this blood. Not satified with their answer, he became angry and said sharply: ‘We need the clothes of these dirty dogs for our German people! It is a waste to gas those people with their clothes on!’Did Himmler also witness a gassing in crematorium I? We don't know, but further research may help to answer this question.
So what can we learn from the archive. First of all, the archive contains some copies of paperwork that was in general circulation among the various departments in the camp, and which more than hint at the possibility that Auschwitz was not a normal concentration camp. One such document is a copy of a pep-talk given by Oswald Pohl, the business administrator of the SS, to senior SS personnel during his visit to Auschwitz on September 23, 1942.During today’s observations I have silently noticed that you have an ideal inner relation to the issue at stake and an ideal attitude towards the tasks at hand. This conclusion is especially necessary in relation with the issues and the special tasks, about which we do not have to speak words—issues that belong however to your responsibilities. I observe that you do your duty from an inner obligation and this is the precondition for results.In what way was Auschwitz vastly different from other concentration camps? In what way could the job of a concentration guard be compared to that of a soldier in the field? It is obvious that Pohl referred to the so-called “Final Solution of the Jewish Question” that, shortly before, had become an official part of the operation of Auschwitz.
There remains a very large field of action ahead, on which we may create furthermore great values. In this respect you have ahead of you a wide and vast terrain.
In the last months I have made many of these inspections, and I am pleased to state here that Auschwitz significantly transcends everything else. I have noted a very good relationship between men, NCO’s and officers, and I call upon you to remain conscious of your responsibility in this matter.
I would like to remind you about the importance about the tasks set by the Reichsführer-SS, tasks that will be very important for the time when we will have achieved the final victory. Even when you are not with the fighting troops, your tasks do not demand less from you, tasks the importance of which will only be recognized in the time after the victory. It are those tasks that on the other hand put great pressure on each individual, pressures that are equal to those faced by the fighting troops on the front.
New York, NY, April 18, 2006 …The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today said it was "appalled" by plans to present the musical "Jesus Christ Superstar" at the Majdanek Concentration Camp outside Lublin, Poland.Musical in Majdanek? What kind of idea is that?
Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, and a Holocaust Survivor, issued the following statement:
We are appalled at the poor taste behind the decision to present this musical at the site where Jews were enslaved and killed. A site such as Majdanek, the second largest Nazi concentration camp in Europe, cannot be treated as if it were a public park or an entertainment venue. It is a sacred place dedicated to the memory those who suffered and to the more than 230,000 Jews and others killed within its gates.
We call on the organizers of this event to move it to another venue.
the most plausible explanation is that a story of Barry the Terrible was floating around among prosecution witnesses, and the two Sobibor witnesses Dov Freiberg and Moshe Bahir became confused as to which camp the dog was supposed to have been at, and appropriated him to bolster their stories of Sobibor.So survivors' testimony is unreliable, case closed. Or is it?
Untersturmfuehrer - Lalka is the representative of the Camp Commander. He is tall, strong, athletic and good looking, with a round doll-like face and a pair of gleaming eyes. He walks rolling from side to side, haughty and self-satisfied. Barry, his big hairy dog trots behind him lazily. But woe to the person that Lalka points to, saying: "Barry, get him". Many a Jewish behind has been tasted by Barry’s teeth...Note the missing "man, get the dog" and "bitten genitals" motifs. This signifies that it is indeed an independent account, although the motifs themselves are not necessarily false or embellished.
After having sent off the letter to Eli Rosenbaum below, it came to my attention that Barry might be a favorite name given in children's stories of brave St. Bernards, as evidenced for example in Amazon offering the following two books for sale:Oh gee. So what is that supposed to mean? We know for a fact that Barry was in Treblinka. How are children's books relevant here? Note that Prytulak never explicitly says that survivors just applied the common St. Bernard name to the Treblinka dog, but merely implies that they did.
B. Hurlimann, Barry the Story of a Brave St. Bernard, and
Lynn Hall, Barry: The Bravest St. Bernard, whose cover is shown on the left.
Although it is possible to imagine that two almost-identical dogs existed, one at Sobibor and one at Treblinka, or that a single dog Barry spent some of his time at Sobibor and some at Treblinka, perhaps the most plausible explanation is that a story of Barry the Terrible was floating around among prosecution witnesses...The first explanation is implausible. But what about the second one - that Barry was both at Sobibor and Treblinka at different times? Did Prytulak cite any evidence to refute this alternative? No. He just brushed it off as implausible. But what is so implausible about Barry first living in Sobibor, and then being transferred to Treblinka?
Barry was later taken to Treblinka by Stangl.We know that there was a rotation of Aktion Reinhard(t) men between the camps. Thus, Stangl served in Sobibor and Treblinka, Kurt Franz served in Belzec and Treblinka, Groth served in Belzec and Sobibor.
"Stangl did improve things", Suchomel said later. "He alleviated it a bit for people, but he could have done more, especially from Christmas 1942; he could have stopped the whipping post, the 'races', 'sport', and what Franz did with that dog, Bari - he was Stangl's dog originally. He could have stopped all that without any trouble for himself.So the most plausible explanation is that Barry originally belonged to Paul Groth in Sobibor. Later Stangl, then at Sobibor, adopted Barry (probably after Groth had been transferred elsewhere for drunkenness) and brought it with him to Treblinka. Later it became Kurt Franz's dog.
As we know that witnesses testifying about their experiences at such death camps are lying, then it becomes much more likely that they are passing along a fantasy that they have heard, and have become confused about which camp to attribute the fantasy to, than that the dog was moved from one camp to another.I replied as follows:
you seem to be arguing in circle. Why are witnesses' testimonies discredited? Because they placed Barry in a wrong camp. Why assume they placed Barry in a wrong camp? Because their testimonies are discredited.Prytulak's suprising (... well, OK, not suprising) reply (February 9, 2005. 12:33 pm):
The simple truth is that whether AR camps were extermination centres or not,witnesses' testimonies are not contradictory on this particular point. At first Barry was with Paul Groth at Sobibor (and possibly Belzec), then it was with Kurt Franz at Treblinka.
To repeat - one can assume, of course, that it is the instance of one motif repeated in different stories, but _only_ if one assumes that testimonies are already discredited. One cannot then prove that Bahir's or Freiberg's testimonies are discredited _because_ they repeat this motif.
You have a point if you disregard the vast amount of evidence on ukar.org that these and similar witnesses were lying.So, the witnesses were lying in this case because allegedly they had been lying in other cases, no matter that the contradiction between the testimonies about Barry existed only in Prytulak's imagination. How can one argue with such "logic"?
Population is still strongly irritated because of murder of many Ukrainians by the Russians during their retreat. After Russians left, Ukrainians took revenge and killed about 350 Jews.
These days there is no excuse for not understanding science. Every university with its eye on the zeitgeist, not to mention public funding, has a kindly professor whose job it is to help those of us who left school with a single O-level in biology to get to grips with the exciting world of genomes and string theory. Richard Dawkins holds just such a chair at Oxford, while at Bristol the telegenic Kathy Sykes does the same sort of thing, only with more screen time. Professors Lewis Wolpert, David Phillips and Susan Greenfield, meanwhile, head up committees and win honours that have "public understanding of science" somewhere in their unwieldy rubric....
What a shame that we don't have professors for the public understanding of other subjects. I'm thinking of history.
We are surrounded by books, television programmes and heritage sites peddling their version of the past, yet we have no way of knowing which of these productions matter and which are dreamscapes dressed up in crinoline. We are left to muddle through, hoping the version we're getting of Anglo-Saxon England, the slave trade or the Victorian music hall is more or less kosher, in a manner that would seem casual if applied to a television programme about global warming or a book on Parkinson's disease.
The reason for this unwillingness to ask an expert must be that, while few of us would fancy ourselves as scientists, most of us are happy to think of ourselves as soi-disant historians.... This is not to suggest that history should be professionalised (which means academised), so that only people with a lot of letters after their name are allowed to do it.... None the less, if we are to avoid using the past as a kind of personal playpen, then we need someone on hand to act as an astringent warning voice. For the past really is another country, and we need guidebooks, translators and mountain guides to ensure it doesn't trip us up.
Kathryn Hughes is right about the lack of quality control in popular history (This historical swaggering, April 17). I find the proliferation of shoddy scholarship and crackpot theories being peddled as "history" in the bestseller market very disturbing: look in any bookshop for works on such subjects as ancient Egypt, the Albigensian Crusade or the Templars and you will find pseudo-mystical, pseudo-histories side-by-side with works of reputable scholarship, and nothing to help the novice know what to choose.
There are also the "popular" histories which aim to make areas of the past more "accessible", yet are riddled with factual errors and discredited interpretations. I should like to see more professional historians entering the fray and demolishing the amateurs and cranks with reasoned argument and primary sources. We need to get involved, not just turn a blind eye as if it were beneath our dignity.
Dr MM Gilchrist
Glasgow
Kathryn Hughes is right to reject a professionalised authority for history, but wrong in equating professional with academic. On her own analogy with science it is clear that it is not professionalism (ie earning a living by) which gives the Dawkins of this world their status, it is their method of acquiring knowledge - scientific method. So the historian is one who is academic - scholarly transparent in showing how all the available evidence leads to justified conclusions. This is why we need to stop calling the likes of David Irving "historians" just because they write about the past.
They are very depressed by the weakness that America is showing to these psychotics in the Muslim world. They say, "Oh, there's a billion of them." I said, "So, kill 100 million of them, then there'll be 900 million of them." I mean, would you rather die -- would you rather us die than them? I mean, what is it going to take for you people to wake up? Would you rather we disappear or we die? Or would you rather they disappear and they die?Or take Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler's hysterical rant:
The majority of paleswinians just decided that they want war until every last Joooo is dead. They had a choice. They made the wrong one.What about children? Should they be murdered?
Now wipe the kaffiyeh’ed genocidal subhumans out.
No excuses, no more diplomatic kabuki theater, no more waffling.
Wipe them out.
They want war.
Let them have it.
Now.
NEVER AGAIN!
Why not? Think of it as post partum abortion…Now, this is a very familiar logic. Here's what police secretary Walter Mattner (from Vienna) was writing from Mogilev to his wife in October of 1941 (C. Browning, The Origins of the Final Solution, 2004, University of Nebraska Press, p. 298; emphasis mine):
After all, they just grow up to be mass murderers...
When the first truckload [of victims] arrived my hand was slightly trembling when shooting, but one gets used to this. When the tenth load arrived I was already aiming more calmly and shot securely at the many women, children, and infants. Considering that I too have two infants at home, with whom these hordes would do the same, if not ten times worse. The death we gave to them was a nice, quick death compared with the hellish torture of thousands upon thousands in the dungeons of the GPU. Infants were flying in a wide circle through the air and we shot them down still in flight, before they fell into the pit and into the water. Let's get rid of this scum that tossed all of Europe into the war and is still agitating in America. ... I am actually already looking forward, and many say here that after our return home, then it will be the turn of our own Jews. Well, I'm not allowed to tell you enough.
I wish to believe, that when you made the statement you were not driven by ill will. But it rather resulted from your unfamiliarity with the subject. I do not dare to suspect you of making a suggestion that Poles are, to a certain degree, responsible for Auschwitz, and “The government in Warsaw wants […] make clear that Poland had no involvement in the death camp”.Note: I don't think it has been proven that one of the aims of the Nazis when establishing the camp has been extermination of the Poles. But that does not diminish Swiebocki's other points.
Are you aware of the fact, that Auschwitz, before it became one of the death centers for Jews, had been established by Nazi Germany to exterminate Polish population? And of the fact that its first victims were Polish citizens? And that at least 75 000 Poles perished in the camp, being the second largest group of victims?
2 charged for Holocaust denial
18/04/2006 22:26 - (SA)
Berlin - German prosecutors say they have charged a German far-right activist, extradited from the United States, and a Belgian man, handed over by the Netherlands, with incitement for allegedly denying the Holocaust. On Tuesday, prosecutors in the western city of Mannheim said Germar Rudolf and Siegfried Verbeke were accused of "systematically" denying or playing down the Nazi genocide of Europe's Jews in documents and on the internet, and of stirring anti-Semitic hatred.
Denying the Holocaust is a crime in Germany. It carries a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment. Rudolf, 41, published a study claiming to prove that the Nazis did not gas Jews at the Auschwitz concentration camp. He was deported to Germany from the US in November, to serve a 14-month prison sentence for a 1995 conviction on similar charges. Verbeke, 64, was arrested in the Netherlands and also extradited to Germany in November. Prosecutors in Mannheim are leading a similar, but unrelated case, against Ernst Zundel, a German deported from Canada last year.
Last update - 20:29 18/04/2006
Germany agrees to open Holocaust records for use by historians, survivors
By The Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Germany agreed Tuesday to clear the way for the opening of Nazi records on some 17 million Jews and enslaved laborers who were persecuted and slain by the Nazis and their collaborators more than 60 years ago during the Holocaust.Justice Minister Brigitte Zypries said at a news conference in the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum that Germany would work in partnership with the United States to assure the opening of the archives, held in Bad Arolsen, Germany, and allow historians and survivors access to some 30 million to 50 million documents.Until now, Germany resisted providing access to the archives, citing privacy considerations. "We always put it forward that way in meetings," Zypries said.
But in a meeting Tuesday with Sara Bloomfield, the museum's director, Zypries said Germany had changed its position and would seek immediate revision of an 11-nation accord that governs the archives.She said that should take no more than six months.Speaking in German, the minister said, "We now agree to open the data in Bad Arolsen in Germany," she said. "We now assume the data will be safeguarded by those countries that copy the material and use it, and now that we have made this decision, we want to move forward."In an interview, Bloomfield called the decision "a great step; a really important step."She said, "I will be completely thrilled when I get the material in the archives."For 60 years, the International Red Cross has used the archived documents to trace missing and dead Jews and forced laborers, who were systematically persecuted by Nazi Germany and its anti-Semitic confederates across central and eastern Europe before and during World War II.The archives have remained off-limits over the decades to historians and the public.Zypries and Bloomfield credited France and Poland with being especially helpful in trying to resolve the dispute. However, the German minister said, "the ICRC has not been particularly helpful."
Germany to open Holocaust records on 17 million Jews
Germany agreed Tuesday to clear the way for the opening of Nazi records on some 17 million Jews and enslaved laborers who were persecuted and slain by the Nazis and their collaborators more than 60 years ago during the Holocaust.
++ KL AUSCHWITZ NR. 5405 28.5.44 150 = SCHA
1. AN DAS RSHA ROEM 4 C BERLIN -
2. AN DAS RKPA POTSDAM -
3. AN DAS SS-WVHA. AMTSGRUPPE D, ORANIENBURG. -
4. AN ALLE OESTL. STAPO-LEIT- KRIPO-LEIT STELLEN
UND GREKO BESONDERS NUERNBEERG/FUEHRT [SIC]
DRINGEND SOFORT VORLEGEN.
BETR.; FLUCHT DER SCHUTZHAEFTLINGE
1. MORDOWICZ CZESLAUW ISRAEL, GEB. AM 2.9.1911 ZU MIELAU, EINGELIEFERT AM
17.12.42 VOM RSHA.
2. LEYSMAN ABRAM ISRAEL, GEB. A29.2.24 ZU MACKHEIM, EINGELIEFERT AM 10.12.42
VOM RSHA.
3. ROSIN ERNST ISRAEL, GEB. AM 20.3.13 ZU SNINA. - ZULETZT WOHNHAFT GEWESEN:
SNINA/SLOW. - EINGELIEFERT AM 18.4.42 VOM RSHA.
- DES RUSSISCHEN SCHUTZH. -
4. ZEMENKO BORIS, GEB. AM 24.6.07 ZU BOROWIEJTZE, EINGELIEFERT AM 13.5.43
VON DER STAPO NUERNBERG/FUERTH. ZUM AKTZ. NR. 581 KL. G/43 ROEM. 2 A
(62KGF.)
DER RUSSISCHEN KRIEGSGEFANGENEN
5. ASTACHOW, WASILIJ, GEB. AM 3.5.21 ZU OSORKI, EINGELIEFERT AM 1.11.43 VOM
STALAG 358. KENN-NR 28822
6. RADJONOWSKI, DMITRY, GEB AM 15.10.14 ZU NAGADA, EINGELIEFERT AM 7.10.41
VOM STALAG 308. KENN-NR 35008
7. ILJIN, IWAN, GEB. AM 1.5.23 ZU KIEW, EINGELIEFERT AM 12.11.43 VOM OFLAG
58, KENN-NR 9667
8. POPTSCHENO, MICHAEL, GEB. AM 29.4.19 ZU PYCHAU, EINGELIEFERT AM 12.11.43
VOM KR. GEF. L. ZEITHAIN, KENN-NR 4163
9. MASURENKO, WOLODYMYR, GEB. AM 14.11.20 ZU TSCHESNOPIL, EINGELIEFERT AM
8.10.43 VOM STALAG 318, KENN NR 65245
10. PJETKO, ANATOLY, GEB AM 19.4.18 ZU HORBARZOW, EINGELIEFERT AM 16.4.43
VOM STALAG 318, KENN-NR 36074
11. PJEGOW, WLADIMIR, GEB, AM 22.12.19 ZU RAZNIEZJE, EINGELIEFERT AM 14.4.43
VOM STALAG 318. KENN NR 38.- [SIC]
DIE UMSEITIG GENANNTEN SIND AM 27.5.44 VON VERSCHIEDENEN AUSSENKOMMANDOS AUS
DEM KL. AU. ROEM. 2 ENTFLOHEN. DIE SOFORT EINGELEITETE SUCHAKTION BLIEB
BISHER OHNE ERFOLG. ES WIRD GEBETEN, VON DORT AUR WEITERE
FAHNDUNGSMASSNAHMEN EINZULEITEN UND IN ERGREIFUNGSFALLE DAS KL. AUSCHWITZ
UMGEHEND ZU BENACHRICHTIGEN. DIE AUSSCHREIBUNG DER 7 KRIEGSGEFANGENEN WURDE
BEI DER ZUSTAENDIGEN KRIMINALPOLIZEI BEANTRAGT.
II/84216/ 28.5.44 SCHU.-BR.- KL .AU. AU. II
GEZ. KRAMER
From APMO microfilm no. 90/118, 119, published as facsimile in Henryk
Swiebocki (ed.), 'London Has Been Informed'. Reports By Auschwitz Escapees,
Oswiecim, 2002, pp. 50-51
then made offensive statements about Jewish people and invited me to agree with them. For example, when I said the Daily Express was the worst pro-war, anti-Muslim paper in the land they asked, "Because it's owned by a Jew?"
"No," I said, "Because it’s owned by a pro-war anti-Muslim pornographer."
More seriously, they then moved on to doubt the Holocaust. "You're not allowed even to quibble about the numbers," said Fernando, "Not even to say it might have been 5 million..."
I weighed in, “People should never go down that road….David Irving isn't quibbling about the numbers…in his heart he supports the Holocaust… I’m always telling Muslims never to get involved in that debate. The Holocaust is the greatest crime in human history and it should be accepted as such."
'Has anyone heard anything recently on the possibility of a "Holocaust denial law" being passed in the UK? Didn't Blair say he was considering it?'
Europe is the home of freedom of speech, but I remind noble Lords that Europe is also the home of the Holocaust. In Germany, the Netherlands and Austria, you can be imprisoned for making public remarks about the Holocaust. You can be imprisoned for Holocaust denial - someone is on the point of being imprisoned for that - and for making various kinds of anti-Semitic remarks. These, in a sense, are our sensitivities. They are a part of our sacred values in a European context.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: What about someone who writes and publishes in Britain a book or article denying the Holocaust that is then circulated in Germany? Germany, of course, has strict laws about Holocaust denial; it is an offence punishable by a term of three years. They have that offence because they want to assuage their guilt about what happened under the Nazi regime, including the Holocaust and all the other awful things that were done. There is no reason, however, why we should suffer for that as well.
According to him, the construction of crematoriums 1 and 2 (II and III in the official German numeration) began in March 1942: "The foundations of these imposing red brick buildings were laid in March 1942."
This is not correct, because the Central Construction Office of the Waffen-SS and Police in Auschwitz took bids for the construction of the first Birkenau crematorium on 1 July 1942 ....
Once again according to Dr. Bendel, the crematoriums were completed in January 1943: "Completed in January 1943, their dedication was honored by the presence of Himmler in person".
This is likewise incorrect. The Construction Office of the Waffen-SS and Police of KGL-Auschwitz finished construction on crematoriums II and III on 31 March and 25 June 1943 respectively. It is also untrue that Himmler was present for the openings.
If such a disaster is true, why should the people of this region pay the price? Why does the Palestinian nation have to be suppressed and have its land occupied?Pray tell, what does the Holocaust have to do with the Palestinian situation?
On May 15, 1948, the State of Israel was proclaimed. A new political reality was thus established. In the words of the Israeli diplomat Walter Eytan: If this Jewish state came into being...it was not primarily because the United Nations had recommended it...When the day of independence dawned, the decision was Israel's alone.
[...]
Was there, then, a connection between the Holocaust and the creation of Israel? Is it conceivable that the two most decisive events in modern Jewish history could occur almost simultaneously and not be linked? Is it possible that the emergence of the Jewish state was unrelated to the terrible disaster of the Jewish people and to the remorse of the nations of the world? Regarding the deliberations of the United Nations and its bodies in 1947-1948, it is difficult to find evidence that the Holocaust played a decisive or even significant role. No bloc of nations proclaimed during the UN discussions on Palestine that its foremost aim was the creation of a Jewish state. (On the other hand, an important group of countries did favor the transformation of Palestine into an Arab state.) What impelled the international body was the practical problem of the Jewish refugees and, even more, the awareness that the Palestinian problem was drifting toward chaos and war.
[...]
True, some of the countries of the Western bloc did display an understanding - and, in a few cases, even a genuine interest - in Jewish and Zionist aspirations, but, for most of the states represented at the UN, the Jewish problem was something far removed from their concerns. It was, however, natural and understandable for them to go along with the Soviet-American proposition, given the great political and moral weight of such an agreement between the super-powers.
And since the measure of agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union neutralized clear-cut international rivalries, their tendency was to consider the Palestine question in terms of political realities. Factors such as the historical connection of the Jewish people to Palestine, or feelings of remorse because of the recent Jewish tragedy were hardly heard, if at all. Indeed, were they to be expected? It is only reasonable to assume that the great majority of UN members considered the Palestine question in "practical" terms. That attitude was well expressed in Article XII of the UNSCOP principles, which stressed that there could be no connection between the Palestinian issue and the Jewish problem.
Consequently, when at the beginning of 1948, it became increasingly clear that partition was not going to prevent a war in Palestine, the UN (spurred by the United States) started looking for a different, "practical" solution. All of which only emphasizes how modest a role the facts about and the reactions to the Holocaust played in the considerations of the international community. Even if there were a similarity in the actual outcome under consideration, there was little in common between the reasons impelling Jews and Zionists toward Jewish statehood and the reasoning behind the United Nations resolution for the partition of Palestine.
I have been involved in several discussions lately and all I hear in response is how evil those who does not believe in the allegations that the Germans are supposed to have "gassed" people are, all they can come up with in response is that he or she is a "nazi", and my discsussion partners will even use the quote at the index of the NIZKOR organisation to prove that it is the aim of not believing in such absurdities to "white-wash" National Socialism. A quote from somebody who NIZKOR probably believes represents our thoughts and feelings--what else could they be thinking when they put such tripe so prominently; in any case people will use it to win the argument by labeling the non-Believer a "nazi" and somebody who wants to "white-wash", or as the quote alleges, make National Socialism an "acceptable political alternative again". I just shake my head. I don't know what to reply to such idiocy.
Instead of trying to prove how evil those who does not share their belief are, why can't they explain the procedure of burning one thousand or two thousand people in a swamp, each day and night? Perhaps they would be willing to explain the procedure required for maintaining and cleaning a "gas chamber" in which two thousand bodies has been "gassed" with a fumigant? Why do they not answer such questions. How does one cremate multiple bodies in mere minutes, when it is perfectly known, that it takes sometimes more than one hour to burn just one?
These are just three questions which I have never seen one answer for.
Let us make a new beginning today so that we can annihilate the Jew[*]
the Jews are our misfortune. [meta tag at *]
Thanks for giving us such interesting insights of this ancient race of coprophiliacs, urolagniacs, menstruophobes, incest addicts, child rapists, child murderers, slavers, pimps, pornographers, con artists, genocide artists, bloodsuckers, extortioners, and purveryors of filth etc,. etc,. -- the JEW. [*]
[About the above quote:] Those were not insults but rather ambient facts. I need not insult the Jews, one may only note their behaviour; but doing so will earn you the well-known 'anti-Semite' label, which Jews are generous of handing out whenever they wish. [*]
Two thousand children rejoiced with Julius Streicher....
The Gauleiter [Streicher] told the little ones about the terrible times after the war, when the Devil dominated mankind. "Do you know who the Devil is," he asked his breathlessly listening audience. "The Jew, the Jew," resounded from a thousand children's voices.[*]
Obviously untrue and only a Jew would continue after being instructed that the claim is not true. [*]
It is true, isn't it, Mathis? Somebody instructs you that your claims has no basis in reality, that they lack merits and that there simply isn't any proof whatsoever for your claims - yet you continue in the same spirit. It is only possible in the mind of a Jew. They never get it, and when you tell them, they just deny the information, pretend they never saw it, and repeat their false claims. [*]
Maybe you two should ask the question why Jews lie so often and so much. It should prove interesting even for your low standards. [*]
Jews' are famous for arson.
:) [*]
It does make a difference to point out that you are a Jew, another one in the line, to make false and fictitious claims. This is what Jews are famous for and I don't understand why it should be considered 'anti-semitism' to point that out. [*]
Jewish logic is incredibly awkward. It is truly idiotic. [*]
No, Mathis, you're a Jew. A quick look in the mirror will certainly tell, those 'eyes of death' [yes; they truly look lifeless], the ugly shape of the thin cranium, those obscenely huge ears, lets not even mention the nose. The mouth looks like a small hole, lips are hard to tell, probably a puffy under-lip. Apart from that, it looks like your forehead is retreating. No manly traits, either.
You're a Jew. Be proud [*]
Dear Mr. Mathis,
Can you verify if it really is you on the below photograph or if it isn't?
andrew.mathis.net/mathis.jpg
The eyes of that person look very deceitful. You say you are a Jew and
I have seen this trait in other Jews aswell. I can give examples.
Faithfully,
-F. H [*]
Well, that at least proves that you're not an anti-Semite.Exactly. I hope you mean it, because it is a well-known fact, that many Jews will write one thing and it will mean something entirely different. [*]
If there was a "holocaust" it must have been of insignificant and absolutely laughable proportions; if so, why are the Jews moaning about it so much, whenever they get a chance?
The German civilian population who was the victim of repeated fire-bombs are "holocaust" victims a hundred times more than the Jews who were just sent to concentration camps (safe-keeping), where they learned how to work, how to be somewhat decent.
There was no "jewish holocaust", no "gas chambers" and no "systematic extermination". A couple of them died in the end of the war because of the conditions imposed on Germany by the Allied bombers (the infrastructure broke down completely), and a couple of them died while trying to play soldiers without belonging to a proper army, and whilst not wearing a recognized uniform -- you know, terrorists or as it used to be called; partisans. Cowards who usually ambushed the victims, but never engaged the enemy in a honest way.
To hell with the "holocaust" lies and those who try to uphold them. [*]
Germany was forced into war. The jews declared war on Germany 1933[*]
I guess you have just verified that what I said in regards to Jews, making false claims whilst having been informed of their false nature, was true afterall. [*]
Bring every little Jud' with you from America and various European countries so that we might have some peace, decency and also a reinstatement of morals, values and such.
With your people at the controls there is nothing else to expect but a decline of what I just mentioned above. These are perfectly normal observations and is not "hatred", which I am sure you will probably "spew" out from the tip of the lip, its always like that, when confronted with something you cannot handle. [*]