Pages

Friday, December 13, 2019

Correction Corner #9: Höß on how long the crematoria could work continuously.

In his methodologically brilliant rebuttal of the Auschwitz Holocaust denial of the David Irving variety The Case for Auschwitz, 2002, Robert Jan van Pelt quotes an excerpt from Rudolf Höß' testimony during his Cracow trial (p. 262):
Even as we added another 1,000 additional inmates to the squads sorting the luggage, there was no way to speed up the action. We had not enough space to store all these things, and this is why we failed in our effort to faster send out of the camp all the clothing and belongings these people had brought to Auschwitz. No improvements could be made to the crematoria. After eight to ten hours of operation the crematoria were unfit for further use. It was impossible to operate them continuously. As Eichmann had mentioned that we should expect by the end of the year 1944 and in 1945 more transports, we planned a larger crematorium. It was to be a huge, circular brick furnace, to be built underground. Due to lack of time, it was never designed.”
This quote was seized upon by the semi-revisionist Fritjof Meyer, whose pretty pathetic 2002 article on the number of the victims of Auschwitz misused various sources to severely reduce the number of the Jewish Auschwitz victims. The quote was one of the cornerstones of Meyer's argument, signifying to him that the ovens couldn't be used 24/7 and thus the number of the victims had to be lower.

Meyer's overall thesis was soundly debunked, but when responding to this particular point, Meyer's opponents merely appealed to Höß' other statements indicating that the ovens could indeed be operated longer than the 8-10 hours in the quote. This was done by Albrecht Kolthoff, John Zimmerman and Franciszek Piper. While this response did its job, it is necessary to check the Polish transcript in question.

Here is the relevant page (AIPN NTN 108, p. 170):

Höß testified about 8-10 "tygodni", i. e. weeks, not hours.

Meyer's argument had already been null and void, but this simply destroys any possibility of it having been correct. Höß merely claims that the operation couldn't be literally continuous since after a few weeks of use crematoria would have to have some repair work done (which doesn't mean they wouldn't be made operational very soon, just that the operation was not contunous - but that's nothing new, we already knew about the regular breakdowns of the crematoria due to heavy use, among other things).

While both Zimmerman and Kolthoff did not have an easy access to the transcripts, Piper did, but for some reason never bothered to check the correctness of the citation.

(For fairness' sake I will mention that this mistranslation was first pointed out by the otherwise deceptive and ignorant Holocaust denier Mattogno in his article "Über die Kontroverse Piper-Meyer: Sowjetpropaganda gegen Halbrevisionismus", VffG, 2004, Heft 1, p. 76, though it was his second attempt, in his earlier article on the Meyer affair he merely speculated about a translation mistake without however going to the original text.)

Lesson: try to go to the original sources as much as possible.

28 comments:

  1. 1) Weeks or Hours, and I'll grant you tygodni is weeks, this is about crematoria, not about gas chambers.
    2) Therefore it doesn't adress how long gas chambers could work continuously or with how much pause.
    3) Höß could have been tortured or under extortion during the trial.

    "On 25 May 1946, he was handed over to Polish authorities and the Supreme National Tribunal in Poland tried him for murder. In his essay on the Final Solution in Auschwitz, which he wrote in Kraków, he revised the previously given death toll."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_H%C3%B6ss#Arrest,_trial,_and_execution

    "The Supreme National Tribunal (Polish: Najwyższy Trybunał Narodowy [NTN]) was a war-crime tribunal active in Stalinist-era Poland from 1946 to 1948. Its aims and purpose were defined by the State National Council in decrees of 22 January and 17 October 1946 and 11 April 1947. The new law was based on an earlier decree of 31 August 1944 issued by the new Soviet-imposed Polish regime, with jurisdiction over "fascist-Hitlerite criminals and traitors to the Polish nation".[1][2] The Tribunal presided over seven high-profile cases involving a total of 49 individuals."

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

    So, could have been the confessions typical of a Stalin trial.

    Plus, if I am correct about why NS faked gas chamber murders in their Lao Gais, Höß could have acted on Hitler's orders or under oath in making a fake confession.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Checked tygodni ... "Tygodnik Powszechny" = "is a Polish Roman Catholic weekly magazine," so, confirms my half memory from Polish studies ...

      Delete
    2. We know he wasn't tortured in Poland since he routinely denied accusations against him during the trial and in his essay directly debunked 4 million, which was a quasi official number at the time. He also described in his memoir how he was tortured by the British.

      Your other comments (on gas chambers) don't make any sense so don't require a response.

      Delete
    3. Oh, they do make sense in light of what you described as "random offtopic comment" ... on another post.

      Specifically these parts:

      I am also impressed by the argument that a gas chamber cannot be effectively voided of gas in half an hour between two loads of people to murder by gassing.

      One on your side has tried to solve that, and here is one article responding to one attempted solution:

      YOU do the mathematics.

      I am responding to an article I can no longer find but which existed.

      Ah, fortunately, I made a back up to it:

      https://www.webcitation.org/5p9oXae9q

      So, I am responding to Harry Mazal.

      As to pictures [on Mazal's essay] of outdoor fumigation in California, or even New York temperatures are a bit different there in summer from what they are in winter in Poland.

      Relevant, since you claim that gas chambers functioned all year round.

      "Hydrogen cyanide (HCN), sometimes called prussic acid, is a chemical compound[11] with the chemical formula HCN. It is a colorless, extremely poisonous and flammable liquid that boils slightly above room temperature, at 25.6 °C (78.1 °F)."

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

      Boiling point = limit between gas form and liquid form.

      In December in Auschwitz, it would outdoors be a liquid, and spread through the air only as aerosol, not as a gas.

      In summer in New York or California, it would outdoors often be a precisely gas, volatile as Harry W. Mazal OBE mentioned.

      However, you claim Jews and perhaps others too were being gassed all year round.

      Delete
    4. To add to Sergey Romanov's point.

      Hoess did the job the defense asked him to and tried to >absolve< Ernst Kaltenbrunner, who he was testifying for. At the prodding of his German Defense Attorney, Hoess insisted that he never received any orders from Kaltenbrunner and that most of his orders came from Himmler and Muller. He also tried to pin the start date of the Final Solution to mid 1941, when Heydrich was the head of the RSHA and not Muller. Basically your typical Defense witness dodging.

      The British and the IMT suck at Torture, since Hoess repeatedly went against the IMT's narrative lol.

      Delete
    5. Actually no, your initial comment still doesn't make sense since we are not talking about crematoria, and the gas chambers aren't some complicated mechanisms that can stop functioning but just rooms. As for the rest, it's sheer nonsense (also offtopic in this particular thread). The gas chamber would quickly be heated by the human heat, could be preheated if needed, HCN evaporates from Zyklon B relatively quickly even in freezing temperatures. The gas chambers were not the bottlenecks, the cremation was, so there were hours and days between gassings in one chamber, there didn't have to be "half an hour" as the maximum amount of time lol.

      You simply don't know anything about the topic.

      Delete
    6. "and the gas chambers aren't some complicated mechanisms that can stop functioning but just rooms"

      But, with a certain hazard involved in walking in too soon.

      "The gas chamber would quickly be heated by the human heat,"

      Might depend on how many, how long they were in, how exited they were. Air heats less quickly from body heat than water would, aka as water cools you quicker than air.

      "could be preheated if needed,"

      Which we see how many mentions of in any witnesses (survivors', technicians', confessions)?

      "HCN evaporates from Zyklon B relatively quickly even in freezing temperatures"

      Would like a source for that, since wikipedia stated "that boils slightly above room temperature, at 25.6 °C".

      "The gas chambers were not the bottlenecks, the cremation was,"

      Speaking of which, have you read "En tom säck kan inte stå" by a Swedish lawyer who has noted the lack of human remains found, even cremation doesn't just leave a simple powder. How would you explain that one?

      "so there were hours and days between gassings in one chamber, there didn't have to be "half an hour" as the maximum amount of time lol."

      That poses the question of how many gas chambers there were near the crematoria.

      "You simply don't know anything about the topic."

      I know sufficient to know there is a kind of problem, at least. If you have data to solve it, go ahead ...

      Delete
    7. "The British and the IMT suck at Torture, since Hoess repeatedly went against the IMT's narrative lol."

      The point presupposes that the thing he was tortured for was agreeing to all of their narrative.

      What if he was asked to agree on only one, and again, what if he was acting on Hitler's orders when admitting gassings?

      Delete
    8. - The Point presupposes that the thing he was tortured for was agreeing to all of their narrative -

      Uhh, yes? That’s the whole point of legal coercion. Even the relatively benign “Plea Bargaining” is a type of coercion: you admit to a lesser charge that’s similar to the one you’re being charged for, so you avoid an even worse sentence. The CIA and others waterboard Suspected terrorists to either get them to admit they’re terrorists, or give the names of other terrorists.

      Which makes Hoess and other Nazis all the more remarkable. Hoess was beaten by the Brits, yet he tried his hardest to defend the Man (Kaltenbrunner) the IMT was trying to convict. The pattern holds for most Nazi defendants and witnesses at the Nuremberg Trials. I guess being forced to drink liquor and being hit repeatedly with a whip (from Hoess’ own memoirs) hurts less than “modern” techniques like Waterboarding.

      - what if he was asked to agree in only one, and again, what if he was acting on Hitler’s orders when he admitted gassings -

      This is incoherent gibberish, lol.

      Delete
    9. "That’s the whole point of legal coercion."

      We were enquiring about illegal. Both first trial in Nuremberg and second trial in Poland.

      "This is incoherent gibberish, lol."

      Perhaps your English is bad? Or perhaps you pretend?

      what if he was asked to agree in only one - that is specifically allowed to remain incompliant with other charges

      and again, what if he was acting on Hitler’s orders when he admitted gassings - that is, what if Hitler was the Zionist the constitution of Israel ironically makes him? What if he wanted fake threats of gassings to reeducate Jews, and then faked confessions of gassings to give them a homeland? What if that was the final solution decided at Wannsee?

      Delete
    10. - we were talking about illegal coercion -

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

      No, we were talking about legal coercion: i.e. how it works and is used in the legal system. Not whether it is “legal” or “not.” You have no business telling me that my english is bad, after demonstrating extremely poor english reading comprehension yourself.

      Delete
    11. - Hitler was the Zionist-

      Lmao no. All this shows is your ignorance.

      Delete
    12. There is no poor reading comprehension in saying that torturing someone to a false confession is illegal and constitues illegal coercion.

      Dito for extortion by threats against the family.

      That is what I brought up and therefore what we were talking about.

      So, unless your English is bad, you would need t admit to having changed the subject without saying so.

      Hitler tried to give Jews a homeland in Madagascar and he had a correspondence with the Mufti or Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, presumably (I do not have the details) starting about the question of getting German Jews to Holy Land.

      ERGO he showed some Zionist priorities.

      So, Madagascar off, Grand Mufti against, what would he do, as a Zionist? Perhaps bring in the international community, by showing a huge need for a homeland. Faking a death threat would be one way of doing that. Extra bonus for those interested in paedagogics, which has been a German interest since Goethe, if Jo and Rachel were shown a death threat, they would be extra eager to avoid it and therefore to obey.

      When Rachel, now Gleitman, went singing in the cold, I think she passed her inofficial and hidden from herself exam in Bund Deutscher Mädel ... sorry, Bund Jüdischer Mädel ... if you doubt it, see Triumph des Willens.

      Delete
    13. Lol. How thick can you get?

      Again, my point was to talk about the aims and function of coercion in the legal system. Not whether it was "illegal" or "not".

      There's really no point in "debating" someone who can't even read.

      Delete
    14. The aims and function of coercion is not relevant to the question whether Höß was in fact forced to admit things he hadn't done, while - to make it more convincing - he denied other things he was accused of.

      But either you didn't read what I had written (leading to some suspicion you can't read) or you had haste to change the subject and on top of that a superiority complex leading you mistakenly to believe I should accept that without referring to my previous point as still unanswered.

      Delete
    15. > But, with a certain hazard involved in walking in too soon.

      And?

      > Might depend on how many, how long they were in, how exited they were.

      Usually many. The rest is automatic.

      > Which we see how many mentions of in any witnesses (survivors', technicians', confessions)?

      Most gassings wouldn't have required this, so I don't expect such a tertiary detail to be mentioned.

      > Would like a source for that, since wikipedia stated "that boils slightly above room temperature, at 25.6 °C".

      If you are asking for a source on this, you haven't done the basic homework and are utterly ignorable (but we knew that already). What does boiling have to do with anything?

      https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/works/peters-rasch-1941/
      https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/works/irmscher-1942/

      > r who has noted the lack of human remains found

      There is no lack of human remains. While most cremains were disposed of in the nearby rivers and cannot be expected to be found, there's plenty of human remains in the Auschwitz soild to go around, which you would have known had you done basic research.

      > That poses the question of how many gas chambers there were near the crematoria.

      And once again you reveal yourself to be an ignoramus who hasn't done any basic research.

      > I know sufficient to know there is a kind of problem

      No, you don't know anything.

      Delete
    16. Yes, Nathan, only a clown could call Hitler a Zionist.

      Delete
    17. "And?"

      You know, the guys who are supposed to carry out the corpses, it is more practical if they do not drop dead before getting the corpses out.

      THIS is what makes Efficiency of Prussic acid in low temperatures irrelevant for this matter. It would only be relevant for the first killing, not for avoiding deaths while carrying corpses out.

      "only a clown could call Hitler a Zionist."

      azi Collaborators, Zionists Don't Represent Jews
      https://www.henrymakow.com/091202.html


      I was looking for another item, the photo of a ship with NS and Zionist flags ...

      Delete
    18. > You know, the guys who are supposed to carry out the corpses, it is more practical if they do not drop dead before getting the corpses out.

      Sure, and?

      > THIS is what makes Efficiency of Prussic acid in low temperatures irrelevant for this matter. It would only be relevant for the first killing, not for avoiding deaths while carrying corpses out.

      Not at all.

      > "only a clown could call Hitler a Zionist."

      Still stands.

      Delete
  2. The Gas Chambers were preheated.

    Experiments with Zyklon B showed that within an hour, even at -18 to -19 degrees 32.5% of Prussic Acid is released. Another key factor was the heat generated by several human bodies in a tight space. Even Holocaust Controversies' favorite victim mattogno acknowledged that the combined body temperature of several people in a tight room is enough to cause HCN to rapidly release.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The Gas Chambers were preheated."

      Source?

      "Experiments with Zyklon B showed that within an hour, even at -18 to -19 degrees 32.5% of Prussic Acid is released."

      Leaving 67.5 % - and "released" refers to what? Release of aerosol from pellets or gas from aerosol?

      "Another key factor was the heat generated by several human bodies in a tight space."

      Would be different according to how calm or agitated people were and also according to size.

      Would for instance explain why more than once children were not gassed - Jo Wajsblat, Rachel Gleitman here:

      Survivor Testimony: Escaping the Auschwitz Gas Chambers - Rachel Gleitman
      11.XII.2014 | HMTC
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4c5NSkpQThw


      I had another theory, which I discussed with a man illegal in France and in exile in England. Gas chambers being a paedagogic death threat.

      "mattogno"

      Who that?

      Delete
    2. Speaking of Jo Wajsblat and Rachel Gleitman, there seems to be a discrepancy about the capacity of gas chambers ... she seems at least to say 500 people were walking in and out of same gas chamber at once, while Jo specified 650 were divided into 13 groups of 50.

      Delete
    3. - there seems to be a discrepancy about The capacity of the gas chamber -

      Lmao, no. This is likely two different people witnessing two different incidents. The number of people in the transports would also be a factor.

      Delete
    4. - Leaving 67.5 % - and "released" refers to what? -
      The point was that Prussic Acid/HCN released quickly from the pellets, even at low temperatures. This was in response to your whining about the Gassings not being possible in Winter. It was very possible.

      As for the “remaining percent”, big deal. It’s as easy as letting the pellets air out and dissipate into the open, or pouring water on them to stop the outgassing.

      - would be different according to how calm or agitated people were and also according to size -

      Someone should ride a crowded train or bus in a third world country, to see how irrelevant this is.

      We’re talking about very stressed people who spent several days in very cramped train cars. Your examples mentioned several hundreds of people, which was the norm. Big deal.

      Preheating of the Gas chamber is acknowledged in German wartime records.

      Delete
    5. "This is likely two different people witnessing two different incidents."

      Two different inceidents, but the number of gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau is limited. A gas chamber that on one occasion can take 500 children and youth at a time doesn't shrink so that on another occasion 650 boys have to be taken apart into 13 groups of 50.

      On the other hand, I said "seems" - what if in Rachel Gleitman's case the 500 were divided into 10 groups of 50? In that case it would seem there was a technical glitch 10 times, ten failed gassing attempts.

      Suggesting some power for my guess, Jo Wajsblat's group was not the only one which heard Mengele shout "rauß!"

      "This was in response to your whining about the Gassings not being possible in Winter."

      Your English is REALLY bad, or you are REALLY pretending.

      I didn't say anything about a first gassing not being possible. I said something about a re-gassing within half an hour not being so.

      The question is, if the HCN is released as a gas (chemical term referring to something above boiling temperature of its substance) or as "gas" colloquially, more properly speaking aerosol. Both will kill.

      The thing is, the aerosol, that is the small drops of liquids, will also kill those touching the bodies. It is just the gas (properly speaking) that will dissipate quickly into the air.

      "As for the “remaining percent”, big deal. It’s as easy as letting the pellets air out and dissipate into the open, or pouring water on them to stop the outgassing."

      Air out when the problem is an aerosol, that is a liquid in small drops?

      In temperatures below 25.6 °C, gas before getting aired out (even if actually gas) would risk getting condensated into drops of liquid on the bodies. And drops of liquid would in temperatures below 25.6 °C not get aired out as gas. Hence the problem of voiding a gas chamber after its killing use.

      "Someone should ride a crowded train or bus in a third world country, to see how irrelevant this is."

      I suggest you ride a crowded school bus in the morning after riding it as a crowded bus of people getting to work in the very early morning when it is dark and cold. Arguably, you will both times get temperatures in the bus below 25.6 °C.

      "We’re talking about very stressed people who spent several days in very cramped train cars."

      We are also talking of people who have been described as panicking, and after panic had gone on for some while, the Zyklon-B-container was dropped. In the case of the children, both Wajsblat's group, which had waited for hours and Gleitman's, we see no panicking. And, also, no gassing.

      "Your examples mentioned several hundreds of people, which was the norm."

      Are you panicking too much to actually pay attention to details?

      In Wajsblat's case, there were 13 groups of only 50 each.

      Also, doubtful if one container of Zyklon B would suffice to kill off 500 people at a time.

      "Big deal."

      I thought you memory dutifuls were into preserving every detail of every testimony, letting nothing be forgotten ... perhaps you change the rule when dealing with a revisionist or semi-revisionist?

      "Preheating of the Gas chamber is acknowledged in German wartime records."

      When the gassings themselves (of people) are not?

      Delete
    6. >> "mattogno"

      > Who that?

      And once again you wander into the discussion laughably unprepared. Mattogno is, for all intents and purposes, the main Holocaust denier. And he tried to "debunk" the German gas chamber preheating document by saying that such preheating would be unnecessary for a gassing because human heat would do the trick in a couple of minutes.

      If he is wrong about the heat, well then, he hasn't explained away the preheating document LOL.

      Delete
    7. "he hasn't explained away the preheating document"

      Again, me laughably unprepared, I wonder, what exact documents are there about pre-heating?

      Delete
    8. Well then, return after you've finally done your homework.

      Delete

Please read our Comments Policy