Wilfried Heink lies

In a recent thread on the RODOH forum, Wilfried Heink ("neugierig"), the rabid old Nazi who together with Thomas Kues runs the Inconvenient History blog, disgraced himself by falsely claiming that a recent German research publication endorses the notion of homicidal gassing with diesel exhaust.



The following are some of Heink’s heavy-handed assertions in this respect (emphases added).

From Heink’s post 4333:

I need some help here, for this Trunk has me baffled. He states that research assumes, “geht davon aus”, that diesel exhaust was used at Treblinka, to tell us that this would have been a disadvantage, near impossible, but still, diesel was used at Treblinka. Trunk, in desperation, even invents a second engine, see footnote 39 above, going from the ridicouless to the idiotic. He also admits that putting a load onto a powerful diesel engine, artificially, for the engine to use up most of the excess oxygen and thus producing poisonous exhaust, is cumbersome and impossible to do over long periods of time. This however does not deter him from stating that diesel exhaust was used at Treblinka.

So now, dearly beloved brain dead True Believers, how about that then, hmmm? Please explain how it was possible to commit mass murder with diesel exhaust, when diesel exhaust is not suitable, and that serious researchers dismiss diesel exhaust, except for the serious Treblinka researchers, or something like that. And please do remember that 200 scientists worked on this for 2 ½ years, 2 years longer than originally planned, and that this is the latest of the latest “Holocaust”, pardon, Shoah research.

From Heink’s post 4335:

Research “geht davon aus”, bases their research on the assumption that diesel engines were used in Treblinka, Herr Muehlenkamp, no mention of eyewitnesses here. And don’t forget, 200 Wissenschaftler compiled this, i.e., gave it their blessings. Thus, the nonsense you and your Russian compatriot, forget his name, come up with is just that, nonsense. Scientists have determined that diesel exhaust was the killer at Treblinka, not vacuum or steam. You just will have to live with it, Herr Muehlenkamp.

From Heink’s post 4336:

You forgot to say “Amen”, Herr Muehlenkamp. Still, all I can do is feel sorry for you, and I do. The book under discussion – and BTW why don’t you buy a copy? – is the result of 200 scientists putting their heads together to come up with a method to fight Holo-Revisionism. And, no matter what you think you know, diesel exhaust is what was used at Treblinka according to Trunk, with this destroying the Treblinka tale, lie, completely. And your tantrums won’t change that, no matter how often you repeat: “The 200 scientists are wrong, but me and my buddy are right”, making a fool of yourself again.

"This however does not deter him [Trunk] from stating that diesel exhaust was used at Treblinka", according to Heink.

"Scientists have determined that diesel exhaust was the killer at Treblinka", according to Heink.

"Diesel exhaust is what was used at Treblinka according to Trunk", according to Heink.

Whoever claims that "the 200 scientists" were wrong in concluding that diesel and not gasoline exhaust was used at Treblinka is making a fool of himself, according to Heink.

Unfortunately for the author of these big words, RODOH poster maximusolson had Mr. Trunk's writings at his disposal and pointed out the falsehood of Heink’s claims:

That is not correct. His conclusion is, concerning all the Aktion Reinhardt camps, that "zur Erzeugung der tödlichen Gase ausschliesslich Benzinmotoren eingesetzt wurden" (page 37). It is somewhat puzzling why did you omit his conclusion and instead invented one of your own.

At my request this poster kindly sent me the pertinent text, which is transcribed hereafter (without the footnotes):

Aus den Abgasanalysen und den Tierversuchen kann abgeleitet werden, dass es prinzipiell möglich ist, mit Dieselabgasen Menschen – auch viele gleichzeitig – zu ermorden. Um hochtoxische Abgase zu erzeugen, die innerhalb von maximal 20 Minuten töten, hätten die Dieselmotoren in den Gasmordeinrichtungen allerdings unter hoher Last betrieben, d.h. irgendwie abgebremst werden müssen. Ein solches abbremsendes und leistungskonsumierendes Gerät (etwa ein Dynamometer) was nun weniger einfach und billig zu beschaffen als der große Motor aus einem zerschossenen Fahrzeugwrack. Die Abbremsung eines leistungsstarken Diesels in den Gasmordeinrichtungen hätte des Weiteren bedeutet, dass der Motor nochmals viel lauter geworden wäre und sehr vibriert hätte. Seine Abgase müßten zudem stark gerußt haben. Ob solche Eigenschaften beobachtet wurden (oder ob es Hinweise auf Leistungskonsumenten gibt), ist keine Frage an die Toxikologie mehr, sondern eine an die Quellen und die Quellenkritik. Nach Kenntnisstand des Verfassers liegen bislang keine Hinweise in dieser Richtung vor.

Naheliegend ist eine andere Erklärung, der zufolge die Motoren durchgängig Ottomotoren waren. Solche Benzin verbrennenden Motoren waren zur Tatzeit wesentlich weiter verbreitet als Dieselmotoren, und sie erzeugten bereits im Leerlauf tödliche Abgase. Dass in den Vernichtungslagern der „Aktion Reinhardt“ tatsächlich Ottomotoren verwendet wurden, geht aus zuverlässigen Quellen hervor. So sprach Rudolf Reder, einer der ganz wenigen Überlebenden des Vernichtungslagers Bełżec , von einem mit Benzin angetriebenen Motor, der in einem kleinen Raum bei den Gaskammern gestanden habe. Dieser habe täglich 80 bis 100 Liter Benzin verbraucht. Für das danach eingerichtete Vernichtungslager Sobibór, bei dem auf die Erfahrungen aus Bełżec zugegriffen werden konnte, liegen präzise Aussagen der Täter vor, dass es sich bei dem Mordaggregat um einen Benzinmotor handelte; nur ob er in der Sowjetunion oder in Frankreich gebaut worden war, ist offen. Im Falle Treblinkas, des zuletzt errichteten (und größten) Vernichtungslagers der „Aktion Reinhardt“, geht die Forschung dagegen bisher davon aus, dass ein Dieselmotor verwendet worden sei. Hier ist zu fragen, wieso ein aus Sicht der mordenden Institutionen erfolgreich eingeführtes Verfahren durch ein anderes, technisch weit schwierigeres hätte ersetzt werden sollen. Es erscheinen Verwechslungen denkbar, die sich etwa daraus ergaben, dass offenbar jeweils ein Generator zur Stromversorgung des Lagers – möglicherweise eben eine Dieselmaschine – und ein zweites Aggregat zur Erzeugung giftiger Gase nebeneinander installiert wurden.

Berichte über die Tötungen mittels Gaswagen nennen explizit Benzinmotoren als Quellen des tödlichen Gases. Der im Vernichtungslager Kulmhof eingesetzte SS-Mann Walter Burmeister beschrieb die dort verwendeten Gaswagen als „mittelschwere Renault-Lastwagen mit Ottomotor“. Der SS-Mann Walter Piller, der in einer späteren Phase stellvertretender Lagerführer in Kulmhof war, sagte aus, die Insassen der „Spezialwagen“ seien durch „Gase, die durch den Benzinmotor erzeugt wurden“, getötet worden. Auch für die in den besetzten sowjetischen Gebieten benutzten Gaswagen gibt es entsprechende Aussagen. Der Holocaust-Überlebende Dr. Zalman Levinbruck berichtete von einer in Baranoviči durchgeführten Mordaktion mit einem Gaswagen, in dem die Menschen mit Abgasen vergiftet worden seien, „die durch das Verbrennen von Benzin im Motor entstanden sind“.

Die Angaben zur Betriebsweise- und Dauer der Mordmaschinen in den Gaswagen zeugen ebenfalls von der Verwendung von Benzinmotoren, So wurden die Motoren häufig zehn bis 20 Minuten im Leerlauf in den Anstalten, an denen sie die Opfer abholten, betrieben, damit die Schreie der Opfer nicht auf der Fahrt über Land von Unbeteiligten zu vernehmen waren. Der SS-Mann Paul Zapp wohnte einer Gaswagenmordaktion bei Sewastopol bei und berichtete, man habe den Motor im Stehen laufen lassen, bis (angeblich schon nach kurzer Zeit) keine Lebenszeichen der Eingeschlossenen mehr festzustellen gewesen seien. Und der SS-Mann Johannes Schlupper erinnert sich an eine Mordaktion in Tscherkess: „Der Gaswagen blieb in der Nähe des Massengrabes ca. 10 Minuten mit laufendem Motor stehen“. Innerhalb möglichst kurzer Zeit sollte hierbei die Kohlenmonoxid-Konzentration von 1 % erreicht werden. Es handelte sich als jeweils um Motoren, deren im Leerlauf produzierte Abgase so giftig waren, dass ihr Einsatz innerhalb von zehn, maximal 20 Minuten tödlich wirkte – also um Benzin- und nicht um Dieselmotoren.

Um es zusammenzufassen: Die mit Hilfe der Abgase von Verbrennungsmotoren durchgeführten Morde sind vielfach und sicher belegt. Die Behauptung von Revisionisten, mit den Abgasen von Dieselmotoren könne man prinzipiell keine Massenmorde verüben, ist unzutreffend. Richtig ist vielmehr, dass Dieselmotoren als Mordwaffe weit weniger geeignet sind als Benzinmotoren – eine Aussage, der kein seriöser Holocaust-Forscher widerspricht. Der Einsatz von Benzinmotoren wird in vielen wichtigen Quellen explizit erwähnt. Einzelne Zeugen berichten dagegen in der Tat über den Einsatz von Dieselmotoren. Dass jene Zeugen in diesem einen Aspekt einem Irrtum unterliegen, erscheint nicht ausgeschlossen; die Angaben über den Ablauf der Tötungen durch Motorenabgase, die den Quellen zu entnehmen sind, lassen sich technisch und toxikologisch am besten damit erklären, dass zur Erzeugung der tödlichen Gase ausschließlich Benzinmotoren eingesetzt wurden.

(Achim Trunk, "Die todbringenden Gase", in: Günter Morsch, Bertrand Perz, Astrid Ley (editors), Neue Studien zu nationalsozialistischen Massentötungen durch Giftgas, 2011 Metropol Verlag, Berlin, pp. 23 ff., pp. 34-37)

This is my translation of the above (emphases added):

From the exhaust analyses and the experiments with animals it can be deducted that it is in principle possible to murder human beings with diesel exhaust – also many at the same time. However, in order to issue highly toxic gasses that kill within 20 minutes at most the diesel motors in the gas murder facilities would have had to be operated under high load, i.e. somehow slowed down. Now, a slowing down and performance-consuming device (e.g. a dynamometer) could be obtained less easily and cheaply than the huge motor from a shot-up vehicle. The slowing down of a strong diesel in the gas murder facilities would furthermore have meant that the motor would have become much louder and strongly vibrated. Its exhaust would furthermore have been very sooty. Whether such characteristics were observed (or whether there are indications about performance consumers) is no question to toxicology but one of sources and source criticism. To the author's knowledge there are no indications in this direction so far.

The obvious explanation is another, according to which the motors were in all cases gasoline motors. Such motors burning gasoline were far more widespread than diesel motors, and they issue lethal exhaust already in idle running. That gasoline motors were indeed used in the camps of “Aktion Reinhardt” becomes apparent from reliable sources. Thus Rudolf Reder, one of the very few survivors of Bełżec extermination camp, spoke of a motor running on gasoline that stood in a small room by the gas chambers. This motor, according to Reder, consumed 80 to 100 liters of gasoline per day. For the Sobibór extermination, which was installed later and could use the experience gained at Bełżec, there is precise information from the perpetrators whereby the murder device was a gasoline motor; the only thing open is whether it had been built in the Soviet Union or in France. In the case of Treblinka, the last (and largest) "Aktion Reinhardt" extermination camp to be erected, research has on the other hand so far assumed that a diesel engine was used. Here one must ask why a procedure successfully introduced from the point of view of the murdering institutions should have been replaced by another that was technically much more difficult. It is possible that there were mix-ups, which may for instance have resulted from the fact that apparently in each case a generator for the camp’s power supply – possibly a diesel machine – and another device for generating toxic gas were installed next to each other.

Accounts of killings by means of gas vans explicit mention gasoline motors as sources of the lethal gas. SS-man Walter Burmeister, serving at Kulmhof extermination camp, described the gas vans used there as "medium-heavy Renaut trucks with gasoline motors". SS-man Walter Piller, who in a later phase was deputy commandant in Kulmhof, testified that the people inside the "special vans" had been killed by "gasses that were generated by the gasoline engine". Also for the gas vans used in the occupied Soviet territories there are corresponding testimonies. Holocaust survivor Dr. Zalman Levinbruck reported about a murder action carried out in Baranoviči with a gas van, in which the people had been poisoned by exhaust "that was produced by combustion of gasoline in the motor".

Information about the mode and duration of the gas vans' murder machines also points to the use of gasoline motors. Thus the motors were frequently operated in idle running at the places where the victims were picked up, so that the victims' cries would not be heard by bystanders while the vehicles were driving through the country. SS-man Paul Zapp witnessed a gas van murder action near Sevastopol and reported that the motor had been left to run with the vehicle standing until (allegedly already after a short time) no signs of life from the trapped persons could be noticed. And SS-man Johannes Schlupper recalled a murder action in Cherkess: "The gas van remained standing near the mass grave for about 10 minutes with the motor running". It was intended that the carbon monoxide concentration of 1 % be reached within the shortest time possible. Thus the motors in each of these cases were such whose exhaust produced in idle running was so toxic that their use led to death within ten, maximally 20 minutes – i.e. gasoline and not diesel motors.

To sum it up: The murders carried out with exhaust from combustion motors are multiply and surely proven. The claim made by revisionists that one could generally not carry out mass murder with diesel motors is incorrect. What is correct is that diesel motors are far less suitable as a murder weapon than gasoline motors – a statement that no serious Holocaust researcher objects to. The use of gasoline motors is explicitly mentioned in many important sources. Some witnesses, on the other hand, indeed report the use of diesel motors. It cannot be excluded that these witnesses were mistaken in this respect; the information about the killing procedure with motor exhaust that can be gathered from the sources can be best explained technically and toxicologically by assuming that only gasoline motors were used for generating the deadly gasses.

One can clearly see that Trunk’s arguments are similar to and his conclusions are the same as those made and reached by Peter Witte and Sergey Romanov, which are also supported by my own modest contribution to the subject: that gasoline engines and not diesel engines were used throughout in mobile killing operations with gas vans, at Kulmhof (Chełmno) extermination camp and at the extermination camps of Aktion Reinhard(t).

One can also see that Wilfried Heink shamelessly misrepresented Mr. Trunk’s writings to make believe that Trunk endorsed the notion of gassing with diesel exhaust, at least or especially at Treblinka. Not only shamelessly but also rather unintelligently, as the Neue Studien are a readily available source and Heink’s falsehoods could therefore be easily shown up as such.

Heink’s pathetic attempt to defend his misrepresentation is addressed in my RODOH post 12856.