The doors to wisdom are shut - Rudolf on the crematorium in Auschwitz main camp

The Holocaust denier Germar Rudolf published an article on "The Thin Internal Walls of Krematorium I at Auschwitz" with supposedly "far-reaching consequences" - summed up as yet another nonsensical slogan: "No doors, no destruction".

Rudolf argues that the internal walls of the crematorium were "unable to support the installation of massive steel doors". Even if - for the sake of argument - the internal walls of the crematorium were too weak for a "massive steel door", there is no reason the Nazis had to have used a "massive steel door" in the first place. The screwing shut mechanism mentioned by witnesses does not point to "massive steel fixtures", as Rudolf presumes, but to the makeshift gas-tight strong wooden doors pictured in Pressac's Technique and Operation of the Auschwitz Gas-Chambers (see also Rebutting the "Twitter denial"). Nothing suggests, let aside proves, that these doors and their anchoring could not withstand the pressure from inside the homicidal gas chambers (Viewer's Guide to "Auschwitz - The Surprising Hidden Truth").

The homicidal gassings in the crematorium in Auschwitz main camp are demonstrated by numerous pieces of evidence (e.g. Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 2: Gas Introduction at the Crematoria). It does not 'hinge' on the gas-chamber's door. There is no indication that the gas-tight wooden doors produced in the camp's workshop could not do the job for the provisional crematorium 1 gas chamber (or any other, for that matter).

Rebutting the "historical" appendix to David Cole's book "Republican Party Animal".

A post on David Stein/Cole's book Republican Party Animal, or rather on the historical appendix to it in which he explains his views on the Holocaust.

Short intro: Cole used to be a hardcore Holocaust denier in the early 1990s, shot a comical video about Auschwitz which became a hit among the deniers (the deceptions of this video are fully exposed here). He reinvented himself as a Republican event organizer in Hollywood and there was a moderately large scandal when his cover got blown up.

He tells about this event and many others in his "tell all" book. He moderated his historical views considerably, coming to the conclusion that extermination camps did exist. His shtick had always been being a Jewish denier. Now it's a drunken ex-denier who kinda saw the light, but is still an asshole towards both sides. He condemns total hardcore denial, but also claims that Auschwitz wasn't an extermination camp at least from 1943 on and the well-documented gas vans didn't exist.

In fact, Cole didn't find anything new or big about the Holocaust, he simply takes the extremely well-known documents like the Korherr report and interprets them with varying degrees of plausibility, while ignoring the documents that contradict his other positions. All banal, nothing notable. But for some reason some see his position as the "golden middle", or something. Nonsense. This deeply confused and superficial individual has nothing new or interesting to add to the Holocaust historiography.

In the appendix to his book Cole tries to lay out his views. Let's take a look at a couple of points.

Jankowski and the Krema I "ventilators".

On 16.04.1945 Stanislaw Jankowski aka Alter Feinsilber testified before the investigative judge Jan Sehn and deputy prosecutor Edward Pechalski about his experiences in the Auschwitz Sonderkommando. Among other things he said this about the morgue of crematorium I in the main camp (Amidst a Nightmare of Crime, 1973, p. 40):

This big hall had no windows, only two vents in the ceiling, electric light and one door leading from the corridor, the other door leading to the ovens.

On 29.09.1980 he testified before a Paris notary as follows:

This room had no windows, but there were ventilators [ventilateurs] in the ceiling.

Carlo Mattogno also quotes Jankowski's 06.09.1985 statement (Auschwitz: Crematorium I, 2016, p. 34):

... in the ceiling, as far as I remember, there were two openings for the introduction of the gas; there were no false showers, I do not remember any ventilators.

Mattogno sums up (p. 35):

It is, moreover, very curious to see that Jankowski did not know anything about "ventilators" in 1945, then miraculously remembered them in 1980, only to forget about them again in 1985!

But did he? Notice how in the first two statements "vents" and "ventilators" follow the claim about there having been no windows. This hints at a possibility that Jankowski meant the same thing by them. Moreover, if he didn't, one would have to conclude - implausibly - that he forgot to mention the Zyklon B introduction openings at all.

Did he use some word to describe the vents that was mistaken by the French notary as "ventilateurs"?

Let's go to the Polish text of the 1945 statement (AIPN NTN 82, p. 13):

Ta duża sala była bez okien posiadała tylko dwa wentyle w suficie...

So the word translated as "vent" was "wentyl". French was not Jankowski's native language, so most probably in 1980 he used the Polish word which was then misunderstood as referring to a ventilator. He then failed to catch the mistake in the text.

This explains both why in 1980 "ventilators" appear instead of "vents", unlike in 1945, and also why in 1985 he knew of no ventilators. This is the most parsimonious explanation, which Mattogno, who has read the Polish text, could have thought of if he weren't such a hack.

How Reliable is the Statement of Maximilian Grabner?

The post-war statement scripted by the former head of the Political Department in Auschwitz Maximilian Grabner in Vienna, probably in late September 1945, was recently published by Sergey. In this posting, the reliability of his testimony will be assessed in some more detail. As a result, Grabner is a fairly reliable witness on most of the Auschwitz history touched by him, including atrocities. Only anything tangent to his own role and fate in the camp has been distorted and perverted to serve his purpose and discharge himself from any misconduct.

A point for point dissection of his testimony can be found in the appendix. This exercise is meant to assist in gauging the reliability and credibility of his account. A trained historian may do such en passant while studying the source, but it's use full to remind Holocaust deniers that corroboration forms a bond between evidence that needs to be broken first else it is greatly enhancing their mutual strength and that pointing out a few deliberate or undeliberate mistakes in a lengthy testimony (of which typically only some are real mistakes, while others are simply made up by denier's historical ignorance and personal incredulity) is not sufficient to dismiss it as uncredible, nor does it explain anything.

On the Number of the Zyklon B Introduction Holes in the Roof of Crematorium I

With the publication of Daniel Keren, Jamie McCarthy, Harry W. Mazal’s article “The Ruins of the Gas Chambers: A Forensic Investigation of Crematoriums at Auschwitz  I and Auschwitz-Birkenau” (Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 2004, vol. 18, no. 1) the slow-burning debate on the number of the Zyklon B introduction openings in the morgue of crematorium I in Auschwitz Stammlager moved forward. It was not the last word on the topic, but it was a very prominent contribution.