Some Holes, Some Holocaust
Michael Ragland
Some Holes, Some Holocaust.
The Provan and Mazal Theses
By George Brewer
Ever since the early 1970's, there has been an attempt to
establish the veracity of the widely reported claim that millions of
human beings were gassed and burned in the four crematoria at the
Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp in Southwestern Poland. To
be sure, there has always been testimony. But the essence of the
revisionist challenge, from Paul Rassinier, through Arthur Butz, Robert
Faurisson, and Wilhelm Stäglich, and including many more modern
researchers, has been simply this: If testimony is all there is, then
one should be free to question the claims.
In response particularly to the goads of Robert Faurisson, French
Holocaust enforcers funded an effort by the French pharmacist Jean
Claude Pressac to prove the facticity of the claim that millions were
gassed and burned at Auschwitz on the basis of something other than
testimony: in particular, documentary evidence and forensic
(archaeological) evidence. The culmination of this effort was the
famous, albeit rare, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas
Chambers in 1989.
Unfortunately, while Pressac's documentary discoveries left
something to be desired, his archaeological efforts created more
questions than they answered. This was particularly true in connection
with the holes in the roof of the main "gas chamber" in Crematorium II
at Birkenau, in which half a million persons were said to have been
killed. After lengthy onsite inspections, Pressac was forced to admit
that he was unable to find the holes in the roof through which the
poison gas Zyklon B was poured into the gas chamber. As he wrote:
According to the American aerial photograph of 24th August 1944, the
four introduction points were located along a line running the length of
the room in the EASTERN half. In the present ruins, two of these
openings are still visible at the southern end but in the WESTERN half.
Nobody up to now seems to have been concerned by this contradiction, nor
to have explained it.
Since Pressac's book was specifically directed against Faurisson,
it was left to Faurisson to respond. While the French professor of
literature did in fact write several analytical critiques of Pressac's
book, he was unable to contain his sense of the absurd: for while
Pressac was admitting the absence of the right kind of holes in the roof
of Crematorium II, he was essentially also admitting that no gassings
could have taken place there. To the extent that these specific mass
murders were essential to one's understanding of the Holocaust, it
followed -- to be sure with some impudent hyperbole -- that the
Holocaust did not happen. Hence, Faurisson applied a reductio ad
absurdum to Pressac's admission: "No Holes, No Holocaust."
The recent efforts of Charles Provan and Harry Mazal OBE constitute
an attempt to prove that Pressac was wrong, and in fact that at least
some of the holes in the roof are the holes through which the poison gas
was poured on to the victims.
There is a reason for this posture. Over the years, Faurisson's
famous quip has been widely used by revisionists to taunt the Holocaust
establishment over its inept approach to the historical record. To be
sure, the revisionist challenge does not depend on the issue of the
holes, but the admitted absence of even these holes tended to move the
establishment dependence on the revelations of testimony from the merely
incongruous to the distinctly ridiculous.
Thus, during his trial in early 2000, the British historian
David Irving challenged the highly touted Auschwitz expert, Robert Jan
van Pelt, to show him the holes in the roof of the Crematorium II "gas
chamber." Van Pelt, in turn, argued in his expert report as well as in
his testimony that the original holes through which the poison gas was
induced were no longer there, suggesting, somewhat vaguely, that they
had been filled in prior to the German attempt to blow up the roof. In
short, it was established at the trial of Irving v. Lipstadt that the
holes were not there now, but the Court's judgment held that the
gassings took place anyway.
The doublethink required to hold this position is the inspiration
to the now frantic efforts, not to find the missing holes, but to
declare some of the existing holes to be the right ones. Mazal, for
example, through the purchase of several photographs of still
undisclosed provenance, now argues that he has succeeded in finding at
least three of the holes used for poison gassing. Provan, meanwhile, has
argued the case for a different set of holes.
There are many problems with these efforts. In the first place, the
lack of expertise in these efforts are clearly exposed by Brian Renk,
whose revisionist writings are widely known, and who, incidentally, is
probably the only expert on either side with a master's knowledge of
masonry and concrete work. Renk's critiques can be read here, while
further comments on Provan's argument can be consulted here.
The second problem is that in their zeal to establish the reality
of the "holes in the roof", both Mazal and Provan are contradicting the
expertise of Jean Claude Pressac and Robert Jan van Pelt. That two
amateurs can so easily dethrone the expertise of the world's greatest
authorities on Auschwitz speaks volumes about the lack of competence and
rigor in the Holocaust establishment, and furthermore, by inference,
vindicates the revisionist challenge of that competence.
The third problem, as Renk's critiques show, is that these cracks and
fissures in the concrete roof cannot be the holes through which the gas
was poured in, and, if we accepted the claim for the sake of the
argument, we would be left with a scenario of mass gassing that was not
planned, never systematized, which was apparently improvised in the most
casual manner, and which could have been implemented in only the most
fitful fashion. In short, acceptance of the Provan or Mazal holes leads
one to a conception of occasional gassings in buildings that were in no
way designed or even built for the purpose. Yet such a conclusion
contradicts the establishment notion that the gassings were
systematically planned and carried out on a vast scale. In other words,
acceptance of the Provan or Mazal holes leads to a scenario of at best
some small-scale gassings. Some Holes. Some Holocaust.
Overall, it should be said that all of these efforts are based on a
false premise; Provan and Mazal seem to be operating under the illusion
that if they dispense with Faurisson's quip, they have somehow proved
the facticity of their claims. In the end, however, all that they have
managed to achieve is to denigrate their own experts, contradict their
own photographic "evidence", refute their own beliefs concerning
systematic and carefully planned gassings at Auschwitz-Birkenau, and,
quite possibly, make fools of themselves. And, last but not least, they
are left, as they began, with nothing but testimony. Yet this is the
inevitable result when one tries to carefully refute deliberately
hyperbolic slogans: it turns the patient search for historical truth
into the absurdity of overturning straw men.
____________________________________
"Four wire-mesh introduction devices,
four wooden covers"
This inventory of March 31, 1943 was written up at the time Krematorium
II was formally completed for the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp. (It had
actually been tested for the first time in early March.)
At the top left, we see the building being inventoried, "Krematorium 2,"
also known as "KGL 30." This building is one of the large
killing/cremation facilities built at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
Below that, the first two rooms listed ("Raum 1," "Raum 2") have been
written in as "Leichenkeller," which means "morgue." The Leichenkeller
numbered "one" is the homicidal gassing chamber.
Near the top right, we see that there are two inventory items which have
been written in by hand. They are a little difficult to make out,
especially in this reproduction, but they read
"Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung" and "Holzblenden." The numeral 4 is
written in each category. In this closeup, the text has been rotated
ninety degrees:
"Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung" is a large compound word. Words like
this are quite common in the German language. Its meaning is put
together from the words which form it:
der Draht - wire
das Netz - grid, net
einschieben - insert
die Vorrichtung - device, mechanism
This is best translated as "wire-mesh insertion device" or "wire-mesh
introduction device."
"Holzblenden" means "wooden covers."
Why is this significant? The room labeled as a morgue, the
Leichenkeller, was actually the homicidal gassing chamber in this
Krematorium building. We know from numerous sources - aerial
photographs, examination of the ruins of the building as they stand
today, and the testimony both of the Jewish witnesses and of the
perpetrators - that there were holes in the roof, four in number, where
the poison Zyklon-B was inserted.
This wartime document confirms key aspects of the testimonies. The
Zyklon granules were poured into the holes, falling into the wire
columns which held them and allowed them to give off their poison gas
freely. The wooden covers were placed over those holes to keep the gas
contained (though the SS men on the roof surely wore gas masks for
safety) and to shut out the screams of those below.
The wire mesh existed primarily to make cleanup faster and safer. If the
small pellets had simply fallen onto the floor, they might continue to
give off dangerous gas even after everyone had died. But since they were
poured into a wire "core" which could be lifted out of the gas chamber
and onto the roof after the killing operation was complete, they would
pose no danger to anyone inside. Removal of corpses could begin much
sooner, thus making the entire killing process more efficient.
This document is reproduced in Pressac, Jean Claude, Auschwitz:
Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld
Foundation, New York, 1989, p. 430. Its source is given as Auschwitz
State Museum Archive reference BW 30/43, p. 12.
As Pressac points out (pp. 429-30), it is Leichenkeller 1 which contains
the wire-mesh introduction devices and the wooden covers, though the
numerals "4" for these items are entered on the second line. We know the
numbers are switched because all the other evidence converges on
Leichenkeller 1 as the gas chamber, and not Leichenkeller 2 (which was
the room where the victims undressed). Pressac also points out that
there are other figures which are switched between the two lines,
referencing this document against drawing 2197 from the October
Revolution archives.
_____________________________________
I wonder how CODOH finds Pressac's documentary findings regarding
crematoria II left something to be desired. Pressac apparently based his
finding on actual documentary evidence whose source is the Auschwitz
State Museum Archive. It is an inventory which lists 'four wire mesh
introduction devices and four wooden covers". According to the
article through aerial photograghs and testimony there were four holes
in crematoria two for inserting the Zyklon B. The wire mesh was to hold
the Zyklon gas pellets in place so they could release their poison
freely and the wooden covers were to keep the gas contained.
Would any Holocaust denier like to explain away this piece of
documentary evidence? A copy of it can be found at
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/19430331-inventory/
According to the article two Holocaust researchers by the name of Mazal
and Provan went to Auschwitz to find the holes in Crematoria II which
were used to dispense the deadly gas. The article states Mazal purchased
several photographs of unknown origin which show three holes on the roof
of crematoria II while Provan has come up with a whole different set of
holes.
I trust CODOH about as much as a junkyard dog. I assume, however, if
their statements were false they could possibly be sued. Is anybody on
a.r. familiar with this case and whether Mazal actually bought
photographs showing three holes on the roof of Crematoria II and if
Provan actually came up with a different set of holes?
Holocaust deniers appear to have had a field day with Mazal and Provan's
expedition. They state that Mazal and Provan's findings denigrate their
own experts. How so? According to the article Pressac was not able to
find any holes on the roof on crematoria II and Robert Van Pelt stated
the original holes were no longer there having been filled in before the
Germans attempted to blow up the roof.
MR
June 19th post to alt.revisionism
Thread: David Michael versus George Wallace-similarities
Note: David Michael states even if "white" could be defined in terms of
the presence or absence of certain specific DNA characteristics, he
would not want such an objective scientific criterion for the purposes
of social policy (i.e. being "biologically white" isn't sufficient
enough for the purposes of social policy. One must ostensibly not only
be "biologically white" but their social behavior must conform to the
purposes of social policy.
David Michael asserts while distinctions between species are discrete
distinctions between "races" are continous. So while David Michael
acknowledges the possibility of the distinctions between races being
"discrete" this is secondary to distinctions between races being
"continous".
Curiously enough, David Michael believes distinctions between races are
continous and possibly even discrete, yet a possible objective
scientific criterion based on the absence or presence of certain DNA
characteristics defining "race" could never in and of itself be the
spinwheel for the distinction between races which are [continuous].
Sad to say, many people sympathize with Dr. Michael's ideas, either
directly or indirectly.
MR
_____________________________________
One chap e-mailed me an article suggesting that you could define 'white'
in terms of the presence or absence of certain specific DNA
characteristics. If so, then you would have a very clear 'objective'
criterion for such a definition. I don't, however, think that any such
objective definition would be using the term 'white' in quite the sense
that I would wish it to be used for the purposes of social policy!
David E. Michael
_____________________________________
The difference isn't between 'real' and 'imaginary' -- the difference is
that you've defined species in such a way that the distinctions between
species are discrete whereas the distinctions between races are
continuous (i.e. on continua) -- although if the chap who e-mailed me
about races being distinguishable in terms of the presence or absence of
DNA characteristics is correct then the distinctions between races could
certainly be discrete.
David E. Michael
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
In <25718-3D1...@storefull-2258.public.lawson.webtv.net> in
alt.revisionism, on Thu, 20 Jun 2002 03:13:44 -0400 (EDT),
ragl...@webtv.net (Michael Ragland) wrote:
> Some Holes, Some Holocaust.
> The Provan and Mazal Theses
> By George Brewer
> Ever since the early 1970's, there has been an attempt to
> establish the veracity of the widely reported claim that millions
> of human beings were gassed and burned in the four crematoria at
> the
> Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp in Southwestern Poland. To
> be sure, there has always been testimony. But the essence of the
> revisionist challenge, from Paul Rassinier, through Arthur Butz,
> Robert Faurisson, and Wilhelm Stäglich, and including many more
> modern
> researchers, has been simply this: If testimony is all there is,
> then one should be free to question the claims.
Crap. Revisionists have not questioned survivor testimony. They
have declared it all false as they must necessarily do.
> In response particularly to the goads of Robert Faurisson,
> French Holocaust enforcers funded an effort by the French
> pharmacist Jean Claude Pressac
Utter bullshit. Pressac was funded by none other than Robert
Faurisson. When Pressac turned out to be insufficiently malleable,
Faurisson looked for another dupe whom he found in Fred Leuchter.
> to prove the facticity of the claim that millions were
> gassed and burned at Auschwitz on the basis of something other than
> testimony: in particular, documentary evidence and forensic
> (archaeological) evidence. The culmination of this effort was the
> famous, albeit rare, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas
> Chambers in 1989.
> Unfortunately, while Pressac's documentary discoveries left
> something to be desired,
Translation: Revisionists had some explaining (away) to do.
> his archaeological efforts created more
> questions than they answered. This was particularly true in
> connection with the holes in the roof of the main "gas chamber" in
> Crematorium II at Birkenau, in which half a million persons were
> said to have been killed. After lengthy onsite inspections, Pressac
> was forced to admit that he was unable to find the holes in the
> roof through which the poison gas Zyklon B was poured into the gas
> chamber. As he wrote:
> According to the American aerial photograph of 24th August 1944,
> the four introduction points were located along a line running the
> length of the room in the EASTERN half. In the present ruins, two
> of these
> openings are still visible at the southern end but in the WESTERN
> half. Nobody up to now seems to have been concerned by this
> contradiction, nor to have explained it.
But it is ultimately explained by the mere fact that when the SS
dynamited the roof, it lifted up and twisted in a long s-shape while
shifting to the west. As Briank Renk even admits:
For now I shall mention that the explosive charge displaced
this southern section of the roof more than one metre to
the west. This is a significant displacement.
So what happens to a hole on the east side of the centr-line of a
roof if the roof shifts to the west. Suddenly, it is a hole on the
west side.
Boy, that was sure hard to explain.
> Since Pressac's book was specifically directed against
> Faurisson, it was left to Faurisson to respond. While the French
> professor of literature did in fact write several analytical
> critiques of Pressac's book, he was unable to contain his sense of
> the absurd: for while
> Pressac was admitting the absence of the right kind of holes in the
> roof of Crematorium II, he was essentially also admitting that no
> gassings could have taken place there. To the extent that these
> specific mass murders were essential to one's understanding of the
> Holocaust, it followed -- to be sure with some impudent hyperbole
> -- that the
> Holocaust did not happen. Hence, Faurisson applied a reductio ad
> absurdum to Pressac's admission: "No Holes, No Holocaust."
> The recent efforts of Charles Provan and Harry Mazal OBE
> constitute an attempt to prove that Pressac was wrong, and in fact
> that at least some of the holes in the roof are the holes through
> which the poison gas was poured on to the victims.
> There is a reason for this posture.
Yeah. They have both come to the realization that Revisionists tell
lies need to be debunked.
> Over the years, Faurisson's
> famous quip has been widely used by revisionists to taunt the
> Holocaust establishment over its inept approach to the historical
> record.
I love it it when untrained nobodies declare the ineptitude of the
historical profession.
> To be
> sure, the revisionist challenge does not depend on the issue of the
> holes,
It sure seemed like it, though, until most of the Revisionist
objections fell apart under the scrutiny of real historians.
> but the admitted absence of even these holes tended to move the
> establishment dependence on the revelations of testimony from the
> merely incongruous to the distinctly ridiculous.
Pretty much a non-statement.
> Thus, during his trial in early 2000, the British historian
> David Irving challenged the highly touted Auschwitz expert, Robert
> Jan van Pelt, to show him the holes in the roof of the Crematorium
> II "gas chamber." Van Pelt, in turn, argued in his expert report as
> well as in his testimony that the original holes through which the
> poison gas was induced were no longer there, suggesting, somewhat
> vaguely, that they had been filled in prior to the German attempt
> to blow up the roof.
That and the fact that the roof is a big chunk of rubble.
> In
> short, it was established at the trial of Irving v. Lipstadt that
> the holes were not there now, but the Court's judgment held that
> the
> gassings took place anyway.
> The doublethink required to hold this position is the
> inspiration to the now frantic efforts,
Malicious characterization.
> not to find the missing holes, but to
> declare some of the existing holes to be the right ones. Mazal, for
> example, through the purchase of several photographs of still
> undisclosed provenance,
Mazal went to Auschwitz and hired a helicopter and a photographer.
(No, it's not some diabolical Jewish plot).
> now argues that he has succeeded in finding at
> least three of the holes used for poison gassing. Provan,
> meanwhile, has argued the case for a different set of holes.
> There are many problems with these efforts. In the first place,
> the lack of expertise in these efforts are clearly exposed by Brian
> Renk, whose revisionist writings are widely known,
Among a small group of gullible people.
> and who, incidentally, is
> probably the only expert on either side with a master's knowledge
> of masonry and concrete work. Renk's critiques can be read here,
> while further comments on Provan's argument can be consulted here.
> The second problem is that in their zeal to establish the
> reality of the "holes in the roof", both Mazal and Provan are
> contradicting the expertise of Jean Claude Pressac and Robert Jan
> van Pelt.
So? Why is it these nobodies think that historical knowledge never
advances or that new dicoveries are never made?
> That two
> amateurs can so easily dethrone the expertise of the world's
> greatest authorities on Auschwitz speaks volumes about the lack of
> competence and rigor in the Holocaust establishment, and
> furthermore, by inference, vindicates the revisionist challenge of
> that competence.
Hardly.
> The third problem, as Renk's critiques show, is that these
> cracks and fissures in the concrete roof cannot be the holes
> through which the gas was poured in,
Oh, you mean like when he *conjectures* a delay in pouring the
concrete as alternate explanation?
> and, if we accepted the claim for the sake of the
> argument, we would be left with a scenario of mass gassing that was
> not planned, never systematized, which was apparently improvised in
> the most casual manner, and which could have been implemented in
> only the most fitful fashion. In short, acceptance of the Provan or
> Mazal holes leads one to a conception of occasional gassings in
> buildings that were in no way designed or even built for the
> purpose.
Why?
> Yet such a conclusion
> contradicts the establishment notion that the gassings were
> systematically planned and carried out on a vast scale.
Bollocks. Gassing was carried out on a small scale with a great many
repetitions.
Gassing was easy. It was body disposal that was difficult.
> In other words,
> acceptance of the Provan or Mazal holes leads to a scenario of at
> best some small-scale gassings. Some Holes. Some Holocaust.
> Overall, it should be said that all of these efforts are based
> on a false premise; Provan and Mazal seem to be operating under the
> illusion that if they dispense with Faurisson's quip, they have
> somehow proved the facticity of their claims. In the end, however,
> all that they have managed to achieve is to denigrate their own
> experts,
Or advance knowledge.
> contradict their
> own photographic "evidence",
But he can't say how.
> refute their own beliefs concerning
> systematic and carefully planned gassings at Auschwitz-Birkenau,
Because he says so.
> and,
> quite possibly, make fools of themselves. And, last but not least,
> they are left, as they began, with nothing but testimony.
And holes that were in the right place and usable.
> Yet this is the
> inevitable result when one tries to carefully refute deliberately
> hyperbolic slogans: it turns the patient search for historical
> truth into the absurdity of overturning straw men.
My goodness, what a revealing statement.
Mazal and Provan do not know each other and have never conducted
reserach together.
Provan is a former Holocaust denier.
> The article states Mazal purchased
> several photographs of unknown origin which show three holes on the
> roof of crematoria II while Provan has come up with a whole
> different set of holes.
> I trust CODOH about as much as a junkyard dog.
A wise stance.
> I assume, however, if
> their statements were false they could possibly be sued. Is anybody
> on a.r. familiar with this case and whether Mazal actually bought
> photographs showing three holes on the roof of Crematoria II and if
> Provan actually came up with a different set of holes?
Renk does his best to obfuscate the issue.
> Holocaust deniers appear to have had a field day with Mazal and
> Provan's expedition. They state that Mazal and Provan's findings
> denigrate their own experts. How so?
Revisionists seem to know nothing of how history as a discipline
works. Should medievalists *not* have reexamined K. B. MacFarlane's
definition of English bastard feudalism for fear of denigrating him?
Should bibliographic historians *not* have disputed Eleanor Hammond's
view that manuscripts were produced on an industrial scale in the
fifteenth century for fear of denigrating an otherwise great scholar?
Tell me, did Einstein denigrate Newton by refining his theory to
include the relativistic effects of great mass and great velocity?
> According to the article Pressac was not able to
> find any holes on the roof on crematoria II and Robert Van Pelt
> stated the original holes were no longer there having been filled
> in before the Germans attempted to blow up the roof.
It's true, but how hard did they look, and did they know how to look?
- --
John Morris <John....@UAlberta.CA>
at University of Alberta <Multi pertransibunt & augebitur scientia>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPRHy1ZQgvG272fn9EQKfkACfWHEObIYil7It2IOA8BYk9eLxxlUAoJmC
TDVrNlXn2okFOjtiRtAirMdd
=SQ3w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Daniel Keren
holes in the roofs of Kremas I&II is being prepared. As one of
the authors, I have to apologize for the time it took. Anyway, it
is nearly done and it will soon be submitted to a journal with
the hope of publishing it.
Some specific comments re Krema II:
1) The holes (going south-north) alternate sides, west-east-west-east.
They are not in the middle. That would not have made sense, since
there is a thick support beam in the roof's center, and the holes
would then have to go through it.
2) Of "the two holes in the west side" the first from the south is
indeed a Zyklon vent, the second is not.
3) The two other holes which have been found are the second and fourth
(from the south). The third hole's probable location is in an area
of the roof which is heavily damaged and covered with rubble.
4) There are some pretty interesting - in my totally objective opinion
of course! :-) - findings concerning the Krema I gas chamber Zyklon
vents as well.
Lastly, I note that most of the deniers who speak about the holes have
never been in Auschwitz. And as far as I can read between the lines,
those of them who do know something are cursing the day in which
the "no holes" axiom was declared. They wish they could have said that
the holes are there, but that they were really for emergency ventilation
of the "air raid shelter". Alas, it's too late now... poor bastards.
-Danny Keren.
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
In <SSYPB4...@sisyphus.ping.de> in alt.revisionism, on Fri, 21 Jun
2002 00:05:50 +0200, Albrecht Kolthoff <kolt...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Daniel Keren wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >Lastly, I note that most of the deniers who speak about the holes
> >have never been in Auschwitz. And as far as I can read between
> >the lines, those of them who do know something are cursing the day
> >in which the "no holes" axiom was declared. They wish they could
> >have said that the holes are there, but that they were really for
> >emergency ventilation of the "air raid shelter". Alas, it's too
> >late now... poor bastards.
> I have a hunch that they are looking out for fallback positions.
> The relatively smarter ones, I mean.
> Not that they would be that much ...
The gradual retreat of Revisionism is quite amazing. We've gone from
Rassinier declaring the crematoria were really ovens for baking bread
to Brian Renk arguing that maybe there were gassings but not
systematic gassings.
The official party line now, I gather, is that the Nazis killed
millions of Jews but not so many millions as history records. One
can almost forsee the day when they come clean and admit that they
are simply unhappy that NS-Genocide was not completed.
- --
John Morris <John....@UAlberta.CA>
at University of Alberta <Multi pertransibunt & augebitur scientia>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPRNIZpQgvG272fn9EQI/kACgtC8ZaFSeYOhh2uUYa3SncFy+7SEAni82
f0t3GQondyNRpkpUat0RF37W
=BmsX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
tom moran
Mr.Morris gets into some wishful thinking and tries to tell the reader
it's true:
>The gradual retreat of Revisionism is quite amazing. We've gone from
>Rassinier declaring the crematoria were really ovens for baking bread
>to Brian Renk arguing that maybe there were gassings but not
>systematic gassings.
>
>The official party line now, I gather, is that the Nazis killed
>millions of Jews but not so many millions as history records. One
>can almost forsee the day when they come clean and admit that they
>are simply unhappy that NS-Genocide was not completed.
Revisionism is way more than that - right Mr.Morris? In fact
Mr.Morris, revisionism isn't that it's something all together
different. Holocaust revisionist say simply - No gas chambers, no mass
exterminations, no mass cremations, no millions of Jews dead and say a
whole lot more to show it. Isn't that about right Mr.Morris?
Jeffrey G. Brown
(Tommy DUH Moron) wrote:
> Revisionism is way more than that - right Mr.Morris? In fact
> Mr.Morris, revisionism isn't that it's something all together
> different. Holocaust revisionist say simply - No gas chambers, no mass
> exterminations, no mass cremations, no millions of Jews dead and say a
> whole lot more to show it. Isn't that about right Mr.Morris?
All except that last part, Moron. Revisionists have never provided *evidence* of
their claims. They've had to lie, and lie prolifically -- just like you, Moron.
JGB
=====================================================================
For centuries, philosophers and theologians have debated what it means
to be human. Perhaps the answer has eluded us because it is so simple.
To be human is to choose. - "The Outer Limits: Feasibility Study", 1997
Kurt Knoll
Chamber. What do you get is a Holocaust.
Kurt Knoll.
=========
"John Morris" <John....@UAlberta.CA> wrote in message
news:doh6hucsjiimp9nav...@4ax.com...
Kurt Knoll
Kurt Knoll.
========
"tom moran" <t...@pacificnet.net> wrote in message
news:3d2050f6...@newsproxy.pacificnet.net...
Kurt Knoll
?.
Kurt Knoll.
==========
"Jeffrey G. Brown" <jeffrey...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jeffrey_g_br0wn-86...@news.alt.net...
Jeffrey G. Brown
bigot) Knoll" <kkn...@monarch.net> wrote:
> Jeffery your evidence is full of lies
What evidence are you referring to, lying subliterate bigot?
What "lies" can you document in said evidence, lying subliterate bigot?
How much would you like to bet that you can neither understand the two questions
I just asked, nor provide rational answers to them, lying subliterate bigot?
Reekard
Revisionism's greatest liability is that it has virulently antisemitic
front-men like the idiot Moran. Moran is to revisionism as Tom Arnold is to
stand-up comedy.
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
In <SSYPB4...@sisyphus.ping.de> in alt.revisionism, on Fri, 21 Jun
2002 20:58:31 +0200, Albrecht Kolthoff <kolt...@gmx.net> wrote:
> tom moran wrote:
> Hehe.
Hee hee hee.
> Keep the Faith fellow revisionists. The Nazis and the SS were the
> good guys--but the anti-Nazis and the anti-revisionists dare not
> admit it for fear of losing their fabulous, ill gotten gains from
> the war.
> (Fridrich Paul Berg aka "Hoaxbuster")
> http://www.codoh.org/dcforum/DCForumID9/143.html#10
Hey! Wait a second! Where are my ill-gotten gains!?
> Keep the faith, Mr. Moran, and believe you are the good guys.
Anyway, let's hear an "Amen" from Tom.
- --
John Morris <John....@UAlberta.CA>
at University of Alberta <Multi pertransibunt & augebitur scientia>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPROHrJQgvG272fn9EQIr+wCfUp5/CloLeWoVRwgGzQ7nTQyXWn0AoPf4
0KODf/c3CqWbxauFbCx4tuUw
=lGkr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
In <usKQ8.65164$_j6.33...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> in
alt.revisionism, on Fri, 21 Jun 2002 18:42:34 GMT, "Reekard"
<bar...@seville.com> wrote:
> "tom moran" <t...@pacificnet.net> wrote in message
> news:3d2050f6...@newsproxy.pacificnet.net...
> > Mr.Morris gets into some wishful thinking and tries to tell the
> > reader it's true:
> > >The gradual retreat of Revisionism is quite amazing. We've gone
> > >from Rassinier declaring the crematoria were really ovens for
> > >baking bread to Brian Renk arguing that maybe there were
> > >gassings but not systematic gassings.
> > >The official party line now, I gather, is that the Nazis killed
> > >millions of Jews but not so many millions as history records.
> > >One can almost foresee the day when they come clean and admit
> > >that they are simply unhappy that NS-Genocide was not completed.
> > Revisionism is way more than that - right Mr.Morris? In fact
> > Mr.Morris, revisionism isn't that it's something all together
> > different. Holocaust revisionist say simply - No gas chambers, no
> > mass exterminations, no mass cremations, no millions of Jews dead
> > and say a whole lot more to show it. Isn't that about right
> > Mr.Morris?
> Revisionism's greatest liability is that it has virulently
> antisemitic front-men like the idiot Moran. Moran is to
> revisionism as Tom Arnold is to stand-up comedy.
I'm trying to think if Tom Moran could do a successful turn as a
comic, if somewhat sleazy, sidekick like in _True Lies_.
- --
John Morris <John....@UAlberta.CA>
at University of Alberta <Multi pertransibunt & augebitur scientia>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPROI85QgvG272fn9EQKt4wCeM27aMNbaCuJ/aTxepLuWU923zuAAnjYz
c5krfCWMt9lPQK8PsYHOOM27
=2DsZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Kurt Knoll
Kurt Knoll.
=======
"Reekard" <bar...@seville.com> wrote in message
news:usKQ8.65164$_j6.3...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Philip Mathews
news:3d2050f6...@newsproxy.pacificnet.net...
> Mr.Morris gets into some wishful thinking and tries to tell the reader
That's certainly what the brain dead wing of the denier movement believes.
And Li'l Tommy is a charter member of the brain dead wing!
--
Philip Mathews
"Mankind have a great aversion to intellectual labor; but even supposing
knowledge to be easily attainable, more people would be content to be
ignorant than would take even a little trouble to attain it."
Samuel Johnson
Gord McFee
I think I would respect them more if they did. But anything is more
than zero.
--
Gord McFee
I'll write no line before its time
Michael Ragland
On 6/21/2002 11:37 AM, John Morris wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
In <SSYPB4...@sisyphus.ping.de> in alt.revisionism, on Fri, 21 Jun
2002 00:05:50 +0200, Albrecht Kolthoff <kolt...@gmx.net> wrote:
Daniel Keren wrote:
[...]
Lastly, I note that most of the deniers who speak about the holes have
never been in Auschwitz. And as far as I can read between the lines,
those of them who do know something are cursing the day in which the "no
holes" axiom was declared. They wish they could have said that the holes
are there, but that they were really for emergency ventilation of the
"air raid shelter". Alas, it's too late now... poor bastards.
DK
I have a hunch that they are looking out for fallback positions. The
relatively smarter ones, I mean.
Not that they would be that much ...
AK
The gradual retreat of Revisionism is quite amazing. We've gone from
Rassinier declaring the crematoria were really ovens for baking bread to
Brian Renk arguing that maybe there were gassings but not systematic
gassings.
The official party line now, I gather, is that the Nazis killed millions
of Jews but not so many millions as history records. One can almost
forsee the day when they come clean and admit that they are simply
unhappy that NS-Genocide was not completed.
JM
I think I would respect them more if they did. But anything is more than
zero.
--
Gord McFee
I'll write no line before its time
I wouldn't respect them more and I would argue if such a shift occurred
in the Holocaust denial movement in the U.S. and Western Europe it would
portend serious political danger. Apparently in the Arab world there
have already been major media publications which have essentially stated
what you think would accord "more" respect: that they are simply unhappy
the NS-Genocide wasn't completed.
Indeed, not that long a person posted how a major Egyptian publication
stated the Holocaust occured but that Hitler didn't go far enough. Was
this an isolated example. I don't think so. Not in many of the Arab
countries.
If you have children being taught in the territories the Holocaust
didn't occur; have Syria denying the Holocaust; have the "Palestinian"
intifida against Israeli civilians; and have Arab nations diverting
attention away from the need to address and reform their undeveloped,
barbaric and undemocratic societies by agitating for the destruction of
the state of Israel, then I would argue this is conducive to creating
conditions for Holocaust denial which takes the form "we're unhappy the
NS-Genocide wasn't completed".
This is hardly, in my opinion, indicative of coming "clean". Becoming
free of Holocaust denial means more than just merely publicly
acknowledging it occurred. For example, there are some, particularly in
the Arab world but also in the U.S. and Europe, who will tell you to
your face they are aware the Holocaust occurred and would like to see
something like it happen again. Yes, they are a minority but I'm using
this as an example.
Then you have those who will tell you they are aware of the Holocaust
and consider it a catastrophic tragedy which must never be allowed to
happen again. Both sides can publicly acknowledge the Holocaust happened
but their thoughts on it are fundamentally different. One side regrets
Nazi Germany wasn't able to finish the job of exterminating all of
Europe's Jews as well as its plans to assist the Arabs in exterminating
the Jews in the Middle East. The other side regrets the Holocaust ever
happened in the first place and hopes nothing like it will ever happen
again against the Jews.
So, strictly on the basis of whether the Holocaust event occured, it it
true that those who publicly acknowledge the Holocaust event occured and
wish Nazi Germany had been able to continue its genocidal program aren't
denying the Holocaust.
However, there are more elements involved in Holocaust denial than
whether a person publicly acknowledges it transpired or not. Many on
alt.revisionism are aware antisemitism and Holocaust denial are
interwoven with each other and that Holocaust denial is actually just
another form of antisemitism. Throughout the ages antisemitism has taken
many forms and Holocaust denial is the most recent incarnation of it.
Antisemitism is a certain kind of prejudice. Before I go further,
however, it will help to define what prejudice is: 1. a. An adverse
judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or
examination of the facts. b. A preconcieved preference or idea; bias. 2.
The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or
convictions. 3. Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group,
race, or religion. 4. Detriment or injury caused to a person by the
preconceived and unfavorable conviction of another or others.
We can see antisemitism has exhibited these characteristics for the last
2000 years or so. Common examples would be Jews are Christ killers, Jews
kill Christians and use their blood, Jews poison wells, Jews control
international finance, Jews control the media, Jews control the
government, Jews support miscegenation while keeping their "bloodline"
pure, Jews are the creators of egalitarianism and democracy, Jews were
behind the African slave trade, Jews corrupt moral values, Jews are
parasites on the bodies of nations, Jews are liars, etc., etc., etc.
All of these are adverse judgments and opinions formed beforehand
without knowledge or examination of the facts. As prejudice is defined
as irrational suspicion and hatred of a particular group, race, or
religion antisemitism is the irrational suspicion and hatred of a
particular group, race, and religion..Jews.
If one forms an adverse judgement or opinion beforehand without
knowledge or examination of the facts regarding Jews there is a high
liklihood those judgments and opinions will be mostly, if not totally,
reflective of ignorance.
It is often extremely difficult, if not impossible, to get a person with
preconcieved ideas (prejudice) who is an ignoramus (what came first the
chicken or the egg?) to be openminded to reevaluating his own ideas
about Jews and looking at other information.
Often, if you approach such a person with alternate information which
may contradict their prejudice towards Jews they will cite antisemitic
literature, tell you they don't want to talk about it, or deride you as
a Jew, "Jew lover", etc.
Assuming, however, you present them with information which shows their
prejudice towards Jews to be the result of ignorance they will "deny
it". They will declare its untrue or question your source. They will
refuse to believe what you have presented to them and will reject it.
I would submit those who publicly acknowledge the Holocaust occured and
state they wish the NS-genocide had been completed would definitely fall
into this latter category of denial. They may not be denying the actual
event of the Holocaust but they are engaging in antisemitic constructs
and if they are presented with evidence which refutes these constructs
they will deny such evidence.
The Holocaust Denial movement in the U.S. and I assume Western Europe
will only forfeit its current strategy of denying the Holocaust (Jews
were killed but not systematically) if it thinks its in its interests to
do so. Legally speaking, I would think publicly acknowledging the
Holocaust occured and emphasizing how you wish Nazi Germany had
completed its task wouldn't be currently received favorably in the West.
The Holocaust revisionist movement in the West is in it for the long
haul. They know peddling their lies will assure them they will get some
coverage in campus newspapers, in the mainstream media, and will attract
people who otherwise wouldn't read their material if they came right out
and stated the Holocaust occured and wished Nazi Germany had completed
its task but all is not lost because we want to pick up the slack.
MR
In a June 10th, 2002 post to alt.revisionism Reekard writes in response
to whether David Michael will ever admit he is a Holocaust denier, "Not
in public, he won't. To do so would strip away the very, very thin
veneer of civility he applies to himself in order to be able to deny to
the world at large that he is, like all other Holocaust deniers, a
virulent antisemite and a Nazi sympathizer and apologist."
tom moran
Mr.Morris gets into some wishful thinking and tries to tell the reader
it's true:
>>The gradual retreat of Revisionism is quite amazing. We've gone from
>>Rassinier declaring the crematoria were really ovens for baking bread
>>to Brian Renk arguing that maybe there were gassings but not
>>systematic gassings.
>>
>>The official party line now, I gather, is that the Nazis killed
>>millions of Jews but not so many millions as history records. One
>>can almost forsee the day when they come clean and admit that they
>>are simply unhappy that NS-Genocide was not completed.
Moran set the record straight:
>Revisionism is way more than that - right Mr.Morris? In fact
>Mr.Morris, revisionism isn't that it's something all together
>different. Holocaust revisionist say simply - No gas chambers, no mass
>exterminations, no mass cremations, no millions of Jews dead and say a
>whole lot more to show it. Isn't that about right Mr.Morris?
Mr.Morris reappeared with baby talk:
>I'm trying to think if Tom Moran could do a successful turn as a
>comic, if somewhat sleazy, sidekick like in _True Lies_.
Mr.Morris signed with his credentials:
Patrick Keenan
>
> Mr.Morris gets into some wishful thinking and tries to tell the reader
> it's true:
> >>The gradual retreat of Revisionism is quite amazing. We've gone from
> >>Rassinier declaring the crematoria were really ovens for baking bread
> >>to Brian Renk arguing that maybe there were gassings but not
> >>systematic gassings.
> >>
> >>The official party line now, I gather, is that the Nazis killed
> >>millions of Jews but not so many millions as history records. One
> >>can almost forsee the day when they come clean and admit that they
> >>are simply unhappy that NS-Genocide was not completed.
>
> Moran set the record straight:
> >Revisionism is way more than that - right Mr.Morris? In fact
> >Mr.Morris, revisionism isn't that it's something all together
> >different. Holocaust revisionist say simply - No gas chambers, no mass
> >exterminations, no mass cremations, no millions of Jews dead and say a
> >whole lot more to show it. Isn't that about right Mr.Morris?
Well, Tom, if that's setting the record straight, you've just redefined
'Holocaust Revisionism' as 'Holocaust Denial'.
Thanks for your efforts in making things clear.
-pk
Black Knight
Nazis didn't really kill anyone. Germany was invaded by Eskimos who
did all those horrible things. The revisionists are so dumb that they
cannot see the obvious truth-the Eskimos did the genocide and framed
the Nazis for it. Anyone who underestimates the cunning of Eskimos is
going to end up looking really silly, just like the revisionists do
now. Will they never learn???????
Bruno
Michael Ragland
Dr. Keren:
After reading Morris post where he states Provan was a former
Holocaust denier and Provan and Mazal conducted research independently
of one another I decided to do some further research myself. When I
first read the CODOH article it was written in a way which led me to
believe Provan and Mazal may have worked as a team even though it did
state Provan came up with a different set of holes.
I found out, as Morris already indicated, Provan was a "former"
Holocaust denier. Actually, I believe he still is but I will address
that momentarily. I did some research on Mazal and apparently he is
well known in the Holocaust movement. He is the founder of THHP and
the Mazal library and is affiliated with Nizkor. Apparently he is a
wealthy Jewish man in his 60s. All of this information can be
discovered merely by typing in his name in the search field for google
newsgroups. Apparently, he also used to post to a.r. and some other
usenet groups about 5 years ago.
I believe the Holocaust denial movement has attempted to set up Mr.
Mazal and cause the anti-revisionist cause damage. How so? I did a
little research and I believe Mazal decided to visit Auschwitz again
to look for the holes on the roof of crematoria two less than half a
year after Provan went there to look for holes. As you're aware both
Pressac and Van Pelt stated no holes could be found and Van Pelt had
stated the holes had been filled with cement before the Germans
attempted to blow it up.
As a Holocaust denier Provan, most likely at the urgings of other
Holocaust deniers or perhaps of his own volition, served as a
Holocaust denying decoy. How so? Well, both Pressac and Van Pelt
stated no holes could be found on the roof of crematoria two. Van Pelt
stated the holes had been filled in with concrete before the Germans
attempted to blow the structure up. Furthermore, Morris states part of
the structure was blown up and the surface of the roof is filled with
rubble. I would think under such circumstances finding some of the
Cyclon B holes would be very unlikely since they probably would have
been destroyed. Some of the Cyclon B holes, however, possibly could be
found as you've indicated they have been.
I think Provan's mission was rather easy. If he found no holes than
Mazal could go to Auschwitz and find some Cyclon B holes or Provan
could go to Auschwitz and find some holes but Mazal would find a
different set of holes. Actually, the last works best since Provan is
a "tainted "former" Holocaust denier who "found" some holes on the
roof on crematoria II which contradict the holes Mazal is alledged to
have found. Now, the Holocaust denier movement can state, "Look, our
"former" colleague Provan found some holes on the roof he claims were
for introducing Cyclon B to kill Jews and Mazal claims he has found
different holes on the roof for introducing Cyclon B to kill Jews.
Who's right? Are they both right? They can't both be right?
Furthermore, aren't they both disputing the expert opinion of Pressac
and Van Pelt? It just goes to show you what a farce the Holocaust is."
I looked at the Mazal image at
http://www.mazal.org/Auschwitz%20Aerial/klla-Color.htm and I can't
tell anything by it. It doesn't even look like a real photogragh but a
color computer generated image. The arrows pointing to the holes show
no holes. What is needed, assuming the holes still exist, is very
close up and detailed photography of the holes as well as an
explanation why they are Cyclon B holes. Mr. Moran states the work
you've participated in which is due to be published is by "Mazal and
Company". You stated at least one of the holes found is a Cyclon B
hole but Mr. Mazal stated three Cyclon B holes had been found.
Dr. Keren, how large is the surface of the roof of crematoria II? How
much rubble is on it and how much would it cost to remove it? What
restrictions are there which would hinder outsiders from getting
permission to engage in such an operation? It would seem to me this
would yield more definitive results than aerial or ground level
photography.
Perhaps Mr. Mazal could pursue and fund such a project.
That way Pressac and Van Pelt's findings could likely be refuted or
confirmed. Of course, the Holocaust denial movement will always deny
no matter what.
I found mention of your discoveries regarding Crematoria II to be
interesting. I know you've been to Auschwitz many times.
MR
tom moran
Mr.Morris had gotten an attack of wishful thinking and tried to tell
the reader
>> it's true:
>> >>The gradual retreat of Revisionism is quite amazing. We've gone from
>> >>Rassinier declaring the crematoria were really ovens for baking bread
>> >>to Brian Renk arguing that maybe there were gassings but not
>> >>systematic gassings.
>> >>
>> >>The official party line now, I gather, is that the Nazis killed
>> >>millions of Jews but not so many millions as history records. One
>> >>can almost forsee the day when they come clean and admit that they
>> >>are simply unhappy that NS-Genocide was not completed.
Moran set the record straight:
>> >Revisionism is way more than that - right Mr.Morris? In fact
>> >Mr.Morris, revisionism isn't that it's something all together
>> >different. Holocaust revisionist say simply - No gas chambers, no mass
>> >exterminations, no mass cremations, no millions of Jews dead and say a
>> >whole lot more to show it. Isn't that about right Mr.Morris?
"Patrick Keenan" says:
>Well, Tom, if that's setting the record straight, you've just redefined
>'Holocaust Revisionism' as 'Holocaust Denial'.
>
>Thanks for your efforts in making things clear.
But "Keenan" I don't have a problem with being called a 'denier'.
Holocaust revisionism is Holocaust denial. The 'deny/denial/denier'
word was coined by the Jews in order to imply that Holocaust
revisionists/deniers even deny any persecution/retaliation against
Jews. Of course the record shows that to be just another Jewish thing.
Philip Mathews
> Mr.Morris had gotten an attack of wishful thinking and tried to tell
> the reader
> >> it's true:
> >> >>The gradual retreat of Revisionism is quite amazing. We've gone from
> >> >>Rassinier declaring the crematoria were really ovens for baking bread
> >> >>to Brian Renk arguing that maybe there were gassings but not
> >> >>systematic gassings.
> >> >>
> >> >>The official party line now, I gather, is that the Nazis killed
> >> >>millions of Jews but not so many millions as history records. One
> >> >>can almost forsee the day when they come clean and admit that they
> >> >>are simply unhappy that NS-Genocide was not completed.
>
> Moran set the record straight:
> >> >Revisionism is way more than that - right Mr.Morris? In fact
> >> >Mr.Morris, revisionism isn't that it's something all together
> >> >different. Holocaust revisionist say simply - No gas chambers, no mass
> >> >exterminations, no mass cremations, no millions of Jews dead and say a
> >> >whole lot more to show it. Isn't that about right Mr.Morris?
>
>
> "Patrick Keenan" says:
> >Well, Tom, if that's setting the record straight, you've just redefined
> >'Holocaust Revisionism' as 'Holocaust Denial'.
> >
> >Thanks for your efforts in making things clear.
> But "Keenan" I don't have a problem with being called a 'denier'.
> Holocaust revisionism is Holocaust denial.
Then it is revisionism, it's denial.
> The 'deny/denial/denier'
> word was coined by the Jews in order to imply that Holocaust
> revisionists/deniers even deny any persecution/retaliation against
> Jews. Of course the record shows that to be just another Jewish thing.
Tommy thinks that whatever comes out of his mouth can be claimed to be what
the record shows.
Deniers are called that because they deny the Holocaust.
Most of them, being somewhat more intelligent than Li'l Tommy, try to
pretend otherwise in the hopes of attracting the gullible.
What's the matter Tommy, didn't get an invite to the IHR Conference?
Patrick Keenan
>
> Mr.Morris had gotten an attack of wishful thinking and tried to tell
> the reader
> >> it's true:
> >> >>The gradual retreat of Revisionism is quite amazing. We've gone from
> >> >>Rassinier declaring the crematoria were really ovens for baking bread
> >> >>to Brian Renk arguing that maybe there were gassings but not
> >> >>systematic gassings.
> >> >>
> >> >>The official party line now, I gather, is that the Nazis killed
> >> >>millions of Jews but not so many millions as history records. One
> >> >>can almost forsee the day when they come clean and admit that they
> >> >>are simply unhappy that NS-Genocide was not completed.
>
> Moran set the record straight:
> >> >Revisionism is way more than that - right Mr.Morris? In fact
> >> >Mr.Morris, revisionism isn't that it's something all together
> >> >different. Holocaust revisionist say simply - No gas chambers, no mass
> >> >exterminations, no mass cremations, no millions of Jews dead and say a
> >> >whole lot more to show it. Isn't that about right Mr.Morris?
>
>
> "Patrick Keenan" says:
> >Well, Tom, if that's setting the record straight, you've just redefined
> >'Holocaust Revisionism' as 'Holocaust Denial'.
> >
> >Thanks for your efforts in making things clear.
>
>
> But "Keenan" I don't have a problem with being called a 'denier'.
Thank you for making that clear. Please stop calling what you do,
'revisionism'. The proper term is 'denying'. .
> Holocaust revisionism is Holocaust denial.
I think you'll find little support for that gem. But please, show us the
references for that.
>The 'deny/denial/denier'
> word was coined by the Jews in order to imply that Holocaust
> revisionists/deniers even deny any persecution/retaliation against
> Jews. Of course the record shows that to be just another Jewish thing.
I'm looking forward to seeing your evidence.
-pk
Kurt Knoll
world saying anyone that does not believe in the Holocaust is a
Holocaust denier.
Kurt Knoll.
======
"tom moran" <t...@pacificnet.net> wrote in message
news:3d28ce89....@newsproxy.pacificnet.net...
Kurt Knoll
You are lying right here you also call people holocaust deniers that do
not believe all of it. And this my friend is playing dirty pool.
Kurt Knoll.
=======
"Philip Mathews" <philip...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:3lkR8.148255$6m5.1...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
Philip Mathews
news:10248508...@critter.monarch.net...
> Yes it really is another thing when the jews want to convince the whole
> world saying anyone that does not believe in the Holocaust is a
> Holocaust denier.
But it's not just Jews who say that Knoll. It's everyone.
You just like to pretend it's only Jews, rather than acknowledging that you
are a member of a tiny fringe of Jew haters and social outcasts.
Philip Mathews
> Deniers are called that because they deny the Holocaust.
> You are lying right here you also call people holocaust deniers that do
> not believe all of it. And this my friend is playing dirty pool.
No Knoll, I call people deniers who deny the Holocaust. You deny the
Holocaust.
Kurt Knoll
Kurt Knoll.
==========
"Philip Mathews" <philip...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:yXmR8.149157$6m5.1...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
Philip Mathews
> This is not Jeffery's way of looking at it.
Yes it is.
The Holocaust is fairly specific event in history.
Denial of the event is rather easy to determine.
Daniel Keren
# Dr. Keren:
#
# After reading Morris post where he states Provan was a former
# Holocaust denier and Provan and Mazal conducted research independently
# of one another I decided to do some further research myself. When I
# first read the CODOH article it was written in a way which led me to
# believe Provan and Mazal may have worked as a team even though it did
# state Provan came up with a different set of holes.
#
# I found out, as Morris already indicated, Provan was a "former"
# Holocaust denier. Actually, I believe he still is but I will address
# that momentarily. I did some research on Mazal and apparently he is
# well known in the Holocaust movement. He is the founder of THHP and
# the Mazal library and is affiliated with Nizkor. Apparently he is a
# wealthy Jewish man in his 60s. All of this information can be
# discovered merely by typing in his name in the search field for google
# newsgroups. Apparently, he also used to post to a.r. and some other
# usenet groups about 5 years ago.
#
# I believe the Holocaust denial movement has attempted to set up Mr.
# Mazal and cause the anti-revisionist cause damage. How so? I did a
# little research and I believe Mazal decided to visit Auschwitz again
# to look for the holes on the roof of crematoria two less than half a
# year after Provan went there to look for holes.
The research by Mazal et al. on the holes is totally unrelated to
Provan's research; the former commenced at 1998.
# As you're aware both Pressac and Van Pelt stated no holes could be found
Actually Pressac didn't say that. He does identify the southernmost
Zyklon vent as the hole via which it is possible to enter the
chamber's interior today.
# and Van Pelt had stated the holes had been filled with cement
# before the Germans attempted to blow it up.
He mentioned it as a possibility.
# As a Holocaust denier Provan, most likely at the urgings of other
# Holocaust deniers or perhaps of his own volition, served as a
# Holocaust denying decoy. How so? Well, both Pressac and Van Pelt
# stated no holes could be found on the roof of crematoria two. Van Pelt
# stated the holes had been filled in with concrete before the Germans
# attempted to blow the structure up. Furthermore, Morris states part of
# the structure was blown up and the surface of the roof is filled with
# rubble. I would think under such circumstances finding some of the
# Cyclon B holes would be very unlikely since they probably would have
# been destroyed. Some of the Cyclon B holes, however, possibly could be
# found as you've indicated they have been.
#
# I think Provan's mission was rather easy. If he found no holes than
# Mazal could go to Auschwitz and find some Cyclon B holes or Provan
# could go to Auschwitz and find some holes but Mazal would find a
# different set of holes. Actually, the last works best since Provan is
# a "tainted "former" Holocaust denier who "found" some holes on the
# roof on crematoria II which contradict the holes Mazal is alledged to
# have found. Now, the Holocaust denier movement can state, "Look, our
# "former" colleague Provan found some holes on the roof he claims were
# for introducing Cyclon B to kill Jews and Mazal claims he has found
# different holes on the roof for introducing Cyclon B to kill Jews.
# Who's right? Are they both right? They can't both be right?
# Furthermore, aren't they both disputing the expert opinion of Pressac
# and Van Pelt? It just goes to show you what a farce the Holocaust is."
I don't believe that is the case, both for the reasons stated above
and because the deniers seem to have been rather angry with Provan -
after all, he violated one of their most holy axioms.
# I looked at the Mazal image at
# http://www.mazal.org/Auschwitz%20Aerial/klla-Color.htm and I can't
# tell anything by it. It doesn't even look like a real photogragh but a
# color computer generated image. The arrows pointing to the holes show
# no holes.
I cannot judge this, as I cannot access that URL. I believe, however,
that I have seen this aerial photo (taken from a low height), and if
we're talking about the same photograph, I must say that I don't
understand your remarks.
# What is needed, assuming the holes still exist, is very
# close up and detailed photography of the holes as well as an
# explanation why they are Cyclon B holes.
All that appears in the paper which is now complete.
# Mr. Moran states the work you've participated in which is due to
# be published is by "Mazal and Company".
It will be submitted, and hopefully accepted and published.
# You stated at least one of the holes found is a Cyclon B
# hole but Mr. Mazal stated three Cyclon B holes had been found.
Three holes have been recovered.
# Dr. Keren, how large is the surface of the roof of crematoria II?
Well, the Krema is a large structure. I assume you're referring
to the gas chamber roof, it is 30 X 8 meters. But some parts
are buried as the roof folded wheh it was dynamited.
# How much rubble is on it
In some places none, in other places there is a considerable
amount, especially in the roof area close to the Krema (because
debris from the Krema fell on the roof).
# and how much would it cost to remove it?
I don't think it will cost much. We're not talking about tons.
# What restrictions are there which would hinder outsiders from getting
# permission to engage in such an operation? It would seem to me this
# would yield more definitive results than aerial or ground level
# photography.
Well, for Krema II it would help to check the location of hole #3. I
assume one will have to ask the Auschwitz Museum officials for
permission. However, I believe we have arrived at conclusive results
for three of the four holes.
There is the matter of Krema III. Some of its roof is covered
by a really huge amount of rubble. However, the rest of the roof
is so badly shattered that it I am not too optimistic about
locating anything in it. As for Krema II, there's a great deal
of rubble on its floor, and maybe lifting it would reveal
something.
# Perhaps Mr. Mazal could pursue and fund such a project.
#
# That way Pressac and Van Pelt's findings could likely be refuted or
# confirmed. Of course, the Holocaust denial movement will always deny
# no matter what.
That is for sure.
# I found mention of your discoveries regarding Crematoria II to be
# interesting.
Thank you.
# I know you've been to Auschwitz many times.
Twice actually. But that is twice more than David Irving. But if you
think you're God, you don't have to be there to know what's there, right?
-Danny Keren.
Kurt Knoll
Kurt Knoll.
==========
Simon Wiesenthal: Bogus 'Nazi Hunter'
Mark Weber
Simon Wiesenthal is a living legend. In a formal White House ceremony in
August 1980, a teary-eyed President Carter presented the world's
foremost
"Nazi hunter" with a special gold medal awarded by the U.S. Congress.
President Reagan praised him in November 1988 as one of the "true
heroes" of
this century.
He is the recipient of West Germany's highest decoration, and one of
world's
most renowned Holocaust organizations bears his name: the Simon
Wiesenthal
Center of Los Angeles. He was portrayed in flattering terms by the late
Laurence Oliver in the 1978 film fantasy "The Boys From Brazil," and by
Ben
Kingsley in the April 1989 made-for-television movie "The Murderers
Among
Us: The Simon Wiesenthal Story."
Wiesenthal's reputation is undeserved. The man whom the Washington Post
calls the "Holocaust's Avenging Angel" has a well-documented record of
reckless disregard for truth. [1] He has lied about his own wartime
experiences. He has misrepresented his postwar "Nazi-hunting"
achievements,
and has spread vile falsehoods about alleged German atrocities. He is
certainly no moral authority.
Different Stories
Szymon (Simon) Wiesenthal was born on December 31, 1908, in Buczacz, a
town
in the Galicia province of Austria- Hungary (now Buchach in Soviet
Ukraine).
His father was a prosperous wholesale sugar merchant.
In spite of all that has been written about him, what Wiesenthal did
during
the war years under German occupation is still not clear. He has given
disturbingly conflicting stories in three separate accounts of his
wartime
activities. The first was given under oath during a two day
interrogation
session in May 1948 conducted by an official of the U.S. Nuremberg war
crimes commission. [2] The second is a summary of his life provided by
Wiesenthal as part of a January 1949 "Application for Assistance" to the
International Refugee Committee.[3] And the third account is his
autobiography, The Murderers Among Us, first published in 1967. [4]
Soviet Engineer or Factory Mechanic?
In his 1948 interrogation, Wiesenthal declared that between 1939 and
1941
"he was a "Soviet chief engineer working in Lvov and Odessa." [5]
Consistent
with that, he stated in his 1949 declaration that from December 1939 to
April 1940 he worked as an architect in the Black Sea port of Odessa.
But
according to his autobiography, he spent the period between
mid-September
1939 and June 1941 in Soviet-ruled Lvov, where he worked "as a mechanic
in a
factory that produced bedsprings." [6]
Relative Freedom
After the Germans took control of Galicia in June 1941, Wiesenthal was
interned for a time in the Janowska concentration camp near Lvov, from
where
he was transferred a few months later to a camp affiliated with the
repair
works (OAW) in Lvov of the Ostbahn ("Eastern Railroad") of German-ruled
Poland. Wiesenthal reported in his autobiography that he worked there
"as a
technician and draftsman," that he was rather well treated, and that his
immediate superior, who was "secretly anti-Nazi," even permitted him to
own
two pistols. He had his own office in a "small wooden hut," and enjoyed
"relative freedom and was permitted to walk all over the yards." [7]
Partisan Fighter?
The next segment of Wiesenthal's life -- from October 1943 to June
1944 --
is the most obscure, and his accounts of this period are contradictory.
During his 1948 interrogation, Wiesenthal said that he fled from the
Janowska camp in Lvov and joined a "partisan group which operated in the
Tarnopol- Kamenopodolsk area. " [8] He said that "I was a partisan from
October 6, 1943, until the middle of February 1944," and declared that
his
unit fought against Ukrainian forces, both of the SS "Galicia" division
and
of the independent UPA partisan force. [9]
Wiesenthal said that he held the rank of lieutenant and then major, and
was
responsible for building bunkers and fortification lines. Although he
was
not explicit, he suggested that this (supposed) partisan unit was part
of
the Armia Ludowa ("Peoples Army"), the Polish Communist military force
established and controlled by the Soviets. [10]
He said that he and other partisans slipped into Lvov in February 1944,
where they were "hidden by friends of the A.L. ["People's Army"] group."
On
June 13, 1944, his group was captured by the German Secret Field Police.
(Although Jewish partisans caught in hiding were often shot, Wiesenthal
reports that he was somehow spared.) Wiesenthal told much the same story
in
his 1949 statement He said that he fled from internment in early October
1943 and then "fought against the Germans as a partisan in the forest"
for
eight months -- from October 2, 1943, to March 1944. After that, he was
"in
hiding" in Lvov from March to June 1944.
Wiesenthal tells a totally different story in his 1967 autobiography. He
reports there that after escaping from the Ostbahn Repair Works on Oct.
2,
1943, he lived in hiding in the houses of various friends until June 13,
1944, when he was discovered by Polish and German police and returned to
a
concentration camp. He makes no mention of any partisan membership or
activity. [11]
According to both his 1948 interrogation and his 1967 autobiography, he
tried to commit suicide on June 15, 1944, by cutting his wrists.
Remarkably,
though, he was saved from death by German SS doctors and recovered in an
SS
hospital. [12] He remained in the Lvov concentration camp "with double
rations" for a time, and then, he reports in his autobiography, he was
transferred to various work camps. He spent the remaining chaotic
months,
until the end of the war, in different camps until he was liberated from
Mauthausen (near Linz) by American forces on May 5, 1945. [13]
Did Wiesenthal invent a past as a heroic wartime partisan? Or did he
later
try to suppress his record as a Communist fighter? Or is the true story
altogether different -- and too shameful to admit?
"Nazi Agent"?
Did Wiesenthal voluntarily work for his wartime oppressors? That's the
accusation leveled by Austrian Chancellor Bruno Kreisky, himself of
Jewish
ancestry and leader for many years of his country's Socialist Party.
During
a wide-ranging interview with foreign journalists in 1975, Kreisky
charged
Wiesenthal with using "Mafia methods," rejected his pretense of "moral
authority," and suggested that he was an agent for the German
authorities.
Some of his more pertinent remarks, which appeared in Austria's leading
news
magazine Profil, include: [14]
I really know Mr. Wiesenthal only from secret reports, and they are
bad,
very nasty. I say this as Federal Chancellor . . . And I say that Mr.
Wiesenthal had a different relationship with. the Gestapo than I did.
That's
right. And it can be proven. Can I say more than that? Whatever else
there
is to say, I'll say in court.
My relationship with the Gestapo is indisputable. I was their
prisoner,
their inmate. I was interrogated by them. His relationship was
different.
That's what I say, and that will eventually come out. It's bad enough
what
I've already said. But he can't clear himself by charging me with
defaming
his honor in the press, as he might wish. It's not that simple, because
that
would mean a big court case ... A man like that doesn't have the right
to
pretend to be a moral authority. That's what I say. He doesn't have that
right...
Whether a man who, in my view, is an agent, yes, that's right, and who
uses Mafia methods ... That man has to go . . .
He is no gentleman, and I would say, to make this clear, so that he
won't
become a moral authorty, because he is not . . . He shouldn't pretend to
be
a moral authority ...
I say that Mr. Wiesenthal lived in that time in the Nazi sphere of
influence without being persecuted. Right? And he lived openly without
being
persecuted, right? Is that clear? And you perhaps know, if you know what
was
going on, that no one could risk that.
He wasn't a "submarine" ... that is, submerged and in hiding, but
instead,
he was completely in the open without having to, well, ever risk
persecution. I think that's enough. There were so many opportunities to
be
an agent. He didn't have to be a Gestapo agent. There were many other
services.
Mauthausen Myths
Before the "Nazi hunter" came the unscrupulous and deceitful
propagandist.
In 1946 Wiesenthal published KZ Mauthausen, a sensational work which
consists mainly of his own amateurish sketches purporting to represent
the
horrors of the Mauthausen concentration camp. One drawing depicts three
inmates who had been bound to posts and sadistically put to death by the
Germans. [15]
The sketch is completely phony. It was copied -- with some minor
alterations -- from photographs that appeared in Life magazine in 1945,
which graphically record the firing-squad execution in December 1944 of
three German soldiers who had been caught operating as spies behind the
lines during the "Battle of the Bulge." [16] The source of the
Wiesenthal
drawing is instantly obvious to anyone who compares it with the Life
photos.
[17]
The irresponsible character of this book is also shown by Wiesenthal's
extensive citation therein of the supposed "death bed confession" of
Mauthausen Commandant Franz Ziereis, according to which four million
were
gassed to death with carbon monoxide at the nearby Hartheim satellite
camp.
[18] This claim is totally absurd, and no serious Holocaust historian
still
accepts it. [19] Also according to the Ziereis "confession" cited by
Wiesenthal, the Germans supposedly killed another ten million people in
Poland, Lithuania and Latvia. [20] In fact, this "confession" is
fraudulent
and was obtained by torture. [21]
Years later, Wiesenthal was still lying about Mauthausen. In a 1983
interview with the daily newspaper USA Today, he said of his experience
in
Mauthausen: "l was one of 34 prisoners alive out of 150,000 who had been
put
there." [22] This is a blatant falsehood. The years have apparently not
been
kind to Wiesenthal's memory, because in his own autobiography he wrote
that
"almost 3,000 prisoners died in Mauthausen after the Americans liberated
us
on May 5, 1945." [23] Another former inmate, Evelyn Le Chene, reported
in
her standard work about Mauthausen that there were 64,000 inmates in the
camp when it was liberated in May 1945. [24] And according to the
Encyclopaedia Judaica, at least 212,000 inmates survived internment in
the
Mauthausen camp complex. [25]
After the war Wiesenthal worked for the U.S. Office of Strategic
Services
(the forerunner of the CIA) and the U.S. Army's Counter-Intelligence
Corps
(CIC). He was also vice chairman of the Jewish Central Committee in the
U.S.
occupation zone of Austrian. [26]
"Human Soap"
Wiesenthal has given circulation and credence to one of the most
scurrilous
Holocaust stories, the charge that the Germans manufactured soap from
the
corpses of murdered Jews. According to this tale, the letters "RIF" in
bars
of Garman-made soap allegedly stood for "Pure Jewish Fat" ("Rein
jüdisches
Fett"). In reality, the initials stood for "National Center for
Industrial
Fat Provisioning" ("Reichstelle für industrielle Fettversorgung"). [27]
Wiesenthal promoted the "human soap" legend in articles published in
1946 in
the Austrian Jewish community paper Der Neue Weg ("The New Path"). In an
article entitled "RIF," he wrote: "The terrible words 'transport for
soap'
were first heard at the end of 1942. It was in the [Polish] General
Government, and the factory was in Galicia, in Belzec. From April 1942
until
May 1943, 900,000 Jews were used as raw material in this factory." After
the
corpses were turned into various raw materials, Wiesenthal wrote, "The
rest,
the residual fat stuff, was used for soap production."
He continued: "After 1942 people in the General Government knew quite
well
what the RIF soap meant. The civilized world may not believe the joy
with
which the Nazis and their women in the General Government thought of
this
soap. In each piece of soap they saw a Jew who had been magically put
there,
and had thus been prevented from growing into a second Freud, Ehrlich or
Einstein." [28]
In another imaginative article published in 1946 entitled "Belzec Soap
Factory," Wiesenthal alleged that masses of Jews were exterminated in
electrocution showers: [29]
The people, pressed together and driven on by the SS, Latvians and
Ukrainians, go through the open door into the "bath." Five hundred
persons
could fit at a time. The floor of the "bath chamber" was made of metal
and
shower heads hung from the ceiling. When the room was full, the SS
turned on
the 5,000 volts of electric current in the metal plate. At the same time
water poured from the shower heads. A short scream and the execution was
over. An SS chief physician named Schmidt determined through a peep hole
that the victims were dead. The second door was opened and the "corpse
commando" came in and quickly removed the dead. It was ready for the
next
500.
Today no serious historian accepts the stories that Jewish corpses were
manufactured into bars of soap or that Jews were electrocuted to death
at
Belzec (or anywhere).
Wiesenthal's imaginative veiw of history is not limited to the twentieth
century. In his 1973 book Sails of Hope, he argued that Christopher
Columbus
was secretly a Jew, and that his famous voyage to the western hemisphere
in
1492 was actually a search for a new homeland for Europe's Jews. [30]
Fraudulent "Nazi Hunter"
Wiesenthal's reputation as the world's foremost "Nazi hunter" is
completely
undeserved. His greatest achievement in more than thirty years of
searching
for "Nazi criminals" was his alleged role in locating and capturing
Adolf
Eichmann. (Eichmann headed the wartime SS Jewish affairs department. He
was
kidnapped by Israeli agents in Buenos Aires in 1960 and was hanged in
Jerusalem after a trial that received worldwide media attention.)
But Isser Harel, the Israeli official who headed the team that captured
Eichmann, has declared unequivocally that Wiesenthal had "absolutely
nothing" to do with the capture. (Harel is a former head of both the
Mossad
and Shin Bet, Israel's foreign and domestic security agencies.) In
addition,
Arnold Forster, general counsel of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai
B'rith, the influential Zionist organization, reported in his book
Square
One that just before the Israelis seized Eichmann in Argentina,
Wiesenthal
was placing him in both Japan and Saudi Arabia. When the Israeli
government
refused to give Wiesenthal funds to search for Eichmann, the "Nazi
hunter"
issued a statement to the Israeli press claiming the government was
refusing
to help capture the former SS man. [31] One of Wiesenthal's most
spectacular
cases involved a Chicago man named Frank Walus. In a letter dated Dec.
10,
1974, he charged that Walus "delivered Jews to the Gestapo" in
Czestochowa
and Kielce in Poland during the war. This letter prompted the U.S.
government's investigation and legal campaign against Walus. [32] The
Washington Post dealt with the case in a 1981 article entitled "The Nazi
Who
Never Was: How a witchhunt by judge, press and investigators branded an
innocent man a war criminal." The lengthy piece, which was copyrighted
by
the American Bar Association, reported: [33]
In January 1977, the United States government accused a Chicagoan
named
Frank Walus of having committed atrocities in Poland during World War
II.
In the following years, this retired factory worker went into debt in
order to raise more than $60,000 to defend himself. He sat in a
courtroom
while 11 Jewish survivors of the Nazi occupation of Poland testified
that
they saw him murder children, an old woman, a young woman, a hunchback
and
others ...
Overwhelming evidence shows that Walus was not a Nazi War criminal,
that
he was not even in Poland during World War II.
... In an atmosphere of hatred and loathing verging on hysteria, the
government persecuted an innocent man.
In 1974, Simon Wiesenthal, the famous "Nazi hunter" of Vienna,
denounced
Walus as "a Pole in Chicago who performed duties with the Gestapo in the
ghettos of Czestochowa and Kielce and handed over a number of Jews to
the
Gestapo."
The Chicago weekly newspaper Reader also reported on the case in a
detailed
1981 article headlined: "The Persecution of Frank Walus: To Catch a
Nazi:
The U.S. government wanted a war criminal. so, with the help of Simon
Wiesenthal, the Israeli police, the local press and Judge Julius
Hoffman,
they invented one." [34] The article stated:
... It is logical to assume that the "reports received by Wiesenthal
[against Walus] actually were rumors ... In other words, Simon
Wiesenthal
had no evidence against Walus. He denounced him anyway.
While [Judge] Hoffman had the Walus case under advisement, Holocaust
aired
on television. During the same period, in April 1978, Simon Wiesenthal
came
to Chicago, where he gave interviews taking credit for the Walus case.
"How
Nazi-Hunter Helped Find Walus," was the Sun-Times headline on a story by
Bob
Olmstead. Wiesenthal told Sun-Times Abe Peck that he "has never had a
case
of mistaken identity." "l know there are thousands of people who wait
for my
mistake," he said.
It was only after an exhausting legal battle that the man who was
vilified
and physically attacked as "the butcher of Kielce" was finally able to
prove
that he had spent the war years as a peaceful farm laborer in Germany.
Wiesenthal's irresponsiblity and recklessness in the Walus case should
have
been enough to permanently discredit him as a reliable investigator. But
his
Teflon reputation survived even this.
After Wiesenthal was ultimately proven wrong in a similar case in
Canada,
the Toronto Sun newspaper commented in an editorial: "It seems that
material
provided by professional Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal is wrong, but
repeated
anyway [in the media]." [35]
Much of the Wiesenthal myth is based on his hunt for Josef Mengele, the
wartime physician at Auschwitz known as the "Angel of Death." Time and
time
again, Wiesenthal claimed to be close on Mengele's heels. Wiesenthal
reported that his informants had "seen" or "just missed" the elusive
physician in Peru, Chile, Brazil, Spain, Greece, and half a dozen
locations
in Paraguay. [36]
One of the closest shaves came in the summer of 1960. Wiesenthal
reported
that Mengele had been hiding out on a small Greek island, from where he
escaped by just a few hours. Wiesenthal continued to peddle this story,
complete with precise details, even after a reporter whom he had hired
to
check it out informed him that the tale was false from beginning to end.
[37]
According to another Wiesenthal canard, Mengele arranged for the murder
in
1960 of one of his former victims, a woman he had supposedly sterilized
in
Auschwitz. After spotting her, and her distinctive camp tattoo, at a
hotel
in Argentina where he was staying, Mengele allegedly arranged to have
her
killed because he feared that she would expose him. It turned out that
the
woman was never in a concentration camp, had no tattoo, had never met
Mengele, and her death was a simple mountaineering accident. [38]
Mengele regularly dined at the finest restaurants in Asuncion, the
Paraguayan capital, Wiesenthal said in 1977, and supposedly drove around
the
city with a bevy of armed guards in his black Mercedes Benz. [39]
Wiesenthal
announced in 1985 that he was "100 percent sure" that Mengele had been
hiding out in Paraguay until at least June 1984, and charged that the
Mengele family in West Germany knew exactly where. As it turned out,
Wiesenthal was completely wrong. It was later definitively established
that
Mengele had died in 1979 in Brazil, where he had been living for years
in
anonymous poverty. [40]
In truth, the bulging Mengele file in Wiesenthal's Vienna "Documentation
Center" was such a jumble of useless information that, in the words of
the
London Times, it "only sustained his self-confirmatory myths and gave
scant
satisfaction to those who apparently needed a definitive answer to
Mengele's
fate." [41] Even Israel's former ambassador to Paraguay, Benjamin Varon,
cautiously criticized the phony Mengele campaign in 1983: "Wiesenthal
makes
periodic statements that he is about to catch him, perhaps since
Wiesenthal
must raise funds for his activities and the name Mengele is always good
for
a plug." [42]
In the words of Gerald Posner and John Ware, co-authors of Mengele: The
Complete Story, Wiesenthal spent years assiduously cultivating a
mythical
"self-image of a tireless, dogged sleuth, pitted against the omnipotent
and
sinister might of Mengele and a vast Nazi network." Because of his
"knack of
playing to the gallery," Posner and Ware concluded, Wiesenthal
"ultimately
compromised his credibility." [43]
Bruno Kreisky once summed up his unambiguous attitude towards the "Nazi
hunter" in these words: [44]
The engineer Wiesenthal, or whatever else his title is, hates me
because
he knows that I despise his activity. The Wiesenthal group is a
quasi-political Mafia that works against Austria with disgraceful
methods.
Wiesenthal is known as someone who isn't very careful about the truth,
who
is not very selective about his methods and who uses tricks. He pretends
to
be the "Eichmann hunter," even though everyone knows that this was the
work
of a secret service, and the Wiesenthal only takes credit for that.
Wiesenthal is not always wrong, of course. In 1975 he acknowledged in a
letter published in a British periodical that "there were no
extermination
camps on German soil." [45] He thus implicitly conceded that the claims
made
at the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal and elsewhere that Buchenwald, Dachau
and
other camps in Germany proper were "extermination camps" are not true.
"Commercializing the Holocaust"
Simon Wiesenthal and the Los Angeles Center that bears his name
"commercialize" and "trivialize" the Holocaust, according to the
director of
Israelis Yad Vashem Holocaust center. The charge was reported by the
Israeli
daily newspaper Ha'aretz in December 1988. [46] The Brooklyn weekly
Jewish
Press commented on the charge: "The displeasure of Yad Vashem over what
it
sees as the commercialization of the Holocaust by the Wiesenthal Center
has
long been well known, but this is the most open attack yet."
Wiesenthal "threw out" the figure of "11 million who were murdered in
the
Holocaust -- six million Jews and five million non-Jews," said the
director.
When asked why he gave these figures, Wiesenthal replied: "The gentiles
will
not pay attention if we do not mention their victims, too." Wiesenthal
"chose 'five million (gentiles)' because he wanted a 'diplomatic'
number,
one that told of a large number of gentile victims but in no way was
larger
than that of Jews... "
The Los Angeles Center pays Wiesenthal $75,000 a year to use his name,
the
Yad Vashem director said. "The Jewish people does many vulgar things,"
the
report added, "but the Wiesenthal Center raised it to a complete level:
The
optimum use of sensitive issues in order to raise money ... " The Jewish
Press, which claims to be the largest-circulation English-language
Jewish
community paper in America, went on to comment: "What Wiesenthal and the
Los
Angeles Center that bears his name do is to trivialize the Holocaust, to
take from it its unique Jew-hatred. And of course, Jews will continue to
support it because it is so fashionable."
Wiesenthal is often asked why he does not forgive those who persecuted
Jews
more than forty years ago. His stock answer is that although he has the
right to forgive for himself, he does not have the right to forgive on
behalf of others. But this is Talmudic sophistry. On the basis of this
logic, neither does he have the right to accuse and track down anyone in
the
name of others. Wiesenthal has never confined his "hunt" to those who
victimized him personally.
It is difficult to say just what drives this remarkable man. Is it a
craving
for fame and praise? Or is he trying to live down a shameful episode
from
his past?
Wiesenthal clearly enjoys the praise he receives. "He is a man of
considerable ego, proud of [his] testimonials and honorary degrees," the
Los
Angeles Times has reported. [47] Bruno Kreisky has given a simpler
explanation. He said that Wiesenthal is "driven by hatred" ("von Hass
diktiert"). [48]
In light of his well-documented record of deception, lies and
incompetence,
the extravagent praise heaped upon this contemptible man is a sorry
reflection of the venal corruptibility and unprincipled self-deception
of
our age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
----
Notes
1.. Quoted in: M. Weber, "'Nazi Hunter' Caught Lying," Spotlight,
Washington, DC), Oct. 26,1981, p. 9.
2.. Interrogation of S. Wiesenthal on May 27 and 28, 1948, conducted
by
Curt Ponger of the Interrogation Branch of the Evidence Division of the
Office (U.S.) Chief of Counsel for War Crimes. Interrogation No. 2820.
On
file at the National Archives (Washington, DC), "Records of the U.S.
Nuremberg War Crimes Trials Interrogations, 1946-49," Record Group 238,
microfilm M-1019, roll 79, frames 460-469 and 470- 476. Also cited in
"New
Documents Raise New Doubts About Simon Wiesenthal's War Years," Journal
of
Historical Review, Winter 1988-89 (VoL 8, No.4), pp. 489-503.
3.. PCIRO (International Refugee Organization, Austria) "Application
for
Assistance filled out and signed by Wiesenthal. Dated Jan. 16, 1949.
(This
was a trial exhibit in the Walus court case. Photocopy in author's
possession.)
4.. Simon Wiesenthal, The Murderers Among Us, edited by Joseph
Wechsberg.
(New York: McGraw HilL 1967)
5.. Interrogation of S. Wiesenthal, May 27, 1948, pp. 1-2.
6.. Murderers Among Us, p. 27.
7.. Murderers Among Us, pp. 29-35. This account is not inconsistent
with
his 1948 and 1949 statements.
8.. Interrogation of May 27, 1948, p. 2.
9.. Interrogation of May 28, 1948, pp. 1-2.
10.. Interrogation of May 28,1948, p. 5.
11.. Murderers Among Us, pp. 35-37.
12.. Murderers Among Us, pp. 37-38. Interrogation, May 27, 1948, p. 2,
and
May 28, 1948, p. 5.
13.. Murderers Among Us, pp. 3944. Interrogation, May 27, 1948, pp.
2-3.
14.. Interview with foreign journalists in Vienna, Nov. 10, 1975. Text
published in: "War Wiesenthal ein Gestapo-Kollaborateur?," Profil,
Vienna
No. 47, Nov. 18, 1975, pp. 16, 22-23. See also reprint in. Robert H.
Drechsler, Simon Wiesenthal: Dokumentation (Vienna 1982), pp. 215-218.
15.. S. Wiesenthal, KZ Mauthausen (Linz: Ibis-Verlag, 1946). Facsimile
reprint in Robert H. Drechsler, Sirnon Wiesenthal: Dokumentation (Vienna
1982), p. 64.
16.. "Firing Squad," Life magazine, U.S. edition, June 11, 1945, p.
50.
17.. See also: M. Weber, "The Sleight-of-Hand of Simon Wiesenthal,"
Journal of Histoncal Review, Spring 1984 (Vol 5, No. 1), pp. 120-122.
18.. S. Wiesenthal, KZ Mauthausen (1946). See also facsimile reprint
in:
Robert H. Drechsler, Simon Wiesenthal: Dokumentation (Vienna 1982), pp.
42,
46. This "confession" is a somewhat altered version of Nuremberg
document
NO-1973.
19.. According to the Encydopaedia Judaica ("Mauthausen," EJ, VoL 11,
p.
1138), a grand total of 206,000 persons were inmates of Mauthausen and
its
satellite camps (including Hartheim) at one time or another.
20.. S. Wiesenthal, KZ Mauthausen (1946). Facsimile reprint in: R
Drechsler, Simon Wiesenthal: Dokumentation, p. 47.
21.. R. Faurisson, "The Gas Chambers: Truth or Lie?," Journal of
Historical Review, Winter 1981, p. 361. See also: Hans Fritzsche, The
Sword
in the Scales (London: 1953), p. 185; M. Weber, "AIlies Used Torture ...
The
Spotlight, Dec.24, 1979 (reprint), p.8; Gerald Reitlinger, The Final
Solution (London Sphere, pb., 1971), p. 515.
22.. USA Today, Thurs., April 21, 1983, p. 9A.
23.. Murderers Among Us, p. 44.
24.. Evelyn Le Chene, Mauthausen: The History of a Death Camp, (London
1971), pp. 166-168 and 190-191.
25.. "Mauthausen", Encylopaedia Judaica (New York & Jerusalem 1971),
vol
11, p. 1138.
26.. C. Moritz, ed., Current Biography 1975 (New York H.W. Wilson,
1975),
p. 442; Wiesenthal interrogation of May 27, 1948, p. 3.
27.. Robert Faurisson, "La savon juif," Annales d'Histoire
Révisionniste
(Paris), No.1, Printemps 1987, pp. 153- 159. (The "human soap" myth is
repeated, for example, in: H. Kamm, "Elie Wiesel's Hometown," The New
York
Times, Dec. 9, 1986, p. A9.)
28.. Der Neue Weg, Vienna, No. 17/18, 1946, pp. 4-5. Article entitled
"RIF" by "Ing. Wiesenth" (Simon Wiesenthal).
29.. Der Neue Weg, Vienna, Nr. 19/20, 1946, pp. 14-15. Article
entitled
"Seifenfabrik Belsetz" ("Belzec Soap Factory"), by "Ing. S. Wiesenth."
30.. S. Wiesenthal, Sails of Hope (Macmillan, 1973).
31.. S. Birnbaum, "Wiesenthal's Claim on Eichmann disputed by Former
Mossad head," Jewish Telegraphic Agency Daily News Bulletin (New York),
April 4, 1989. (Dispatch dated April 3). See also: "Israeli Spy Terms
Wiesenthal No Help in Finding Eichmann," Reuters dispatch from New York,
St.
Louis Post- Dispatch, April 9, 1989. Facsimile reprint in Christian
News,
April 24, 1989, p. 17.
32.. Michael Arndt, "The Wrong Man," Sunday, The Chicago Tribune
Magazine,
Dec. 2, 1984, pp. 15-35, esp. p. 23.
33.. "The Nazi Who Never Was," Washington Post, May 10, 1981, pp. B5,
B8.
34.. "The Persecution of Frank Walus," Reader (Chicago), Jan. 23.
1981,
pp. 19, 30.
35.. Quoted in: M. Weber, "The Sleight-of-Hand of Simon Wiesenthal,"
Journal of Historical Review, Spring 1984, pp. 120-122.
36.. Gerald L. Posner and John Ware, Mengele: The Complete Story (New
York: Dell 1987), pp. 220-221.; Gerald Astor, The 'Last' Nazi: The Life
and
Times of Dr. Joseph Mengele (Toronto: Paperjacks, 1986), p. 202.
37.. G. Posner and J. Ware, Mengele: The Complete Story (cited above),
p.
220.
38.. G. Posner and J. Ware, Mengele (cited above), pp. 179-180.; G.
Astor,
The 'Last' Nazi (cited above), pp. 178-180.
39.. Time magazine, Sept 26, 1977, pp. 36-38. Cited in G. Posner and
J.
Ware, Mengele (cited above), p. 219.
40.. "Hunting the 'Angel of Death.'" Newsweek, May 20, 1985, pp.
36-38.
See also: M. Weber, "Lessons of the Mengele Affair," Journal of
Historical
Review, Fall 1985 (Vol 6, No. 3), p. 382. Also, on Wiesenthal's
distortion
of truth in the Mermelstein-IHR case, see: M. Weber,
"Declaration,"Journal
of Historical Review, Spring 1982 (VoL 3, No.1), pp.42-43; M. Weber,
"Albert
Speer and the 'Holocaust,'" Journal of Histoncal Review, Winter 1984
(Vol.
5, Nos. 24), p. 439.
41.. Tom Bower in The Times (London), June 14, 1985, p.14. Quoted in:
G.
Posner and J. Ware, Mengele (cited above), pp. 222-223.
42.. Midstream, Dec. 1983, p. 24. Quoted in G. Posner and J. Ware,
Mengele
(cited above), p. 219.
43.. G. Posner and J. Ware, Mengele (cited above), pp. 222-223.
44.. "Was hat Wiesenthal zu verbergen?," D. National-Zeitung (Munich),
Nov. 11, 1988, p. 4.
45.. Letter by Wiesenthal in Books & Bookmen, London, April 1975, p.
5.;
he later mendaciously disclaimed this statement. In a letter dated May
12,
1986, to Prod John George of Central State University in Edmond,
Oklahoma,
(copy in author's possession), Wiesenthal wrote: "I have never stated
that
'there were no extermination camps on German soil.' This quote is false,
I
could never have said such a thing."
46.. Ha'aretz, Dec.16,1988. Reported in: Jewish Press (Brooklyn, NY),
Dec.
23, 1988.
47.. Quoted in: M. Weber, Spotlight, Oct. 26, 1981, p. 9.
48.. D. National-Zeitung (Munich), July 8, 1988, p. 7.
"Albrecht Kolthoff" <kolt...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:af9re3$ct148$1...@ID-3778.news.dfncis.de...
> Daniel Keren wrote:
>
> >ragl...@webtv.net (Michael Ragland) writes:
>
> [...]
>
> ># I looked at the Mazal image at
> ># http://www.mazal.org/Auschwitz%20Aerial/klla-Color.htm and I can't
> ># tell anything by it. It doesn't even look like a real photogragh
but a
> ># color computer generated image. The arrows pointing to the holes
show
> ># no holes.
> >
> >I cannot judge this, as I cannot access that URL.
>
> Mr. Ragland used two wrong characters; substitute the double "l" with
"i"
> like this:
>
> http://www.mazal.org/Auschwitz%20Aerial/kiia-Color.htm
>
> This works.
>
> [...]
>
> --
> Albrecht Kolthoff
Daniel Keren
# Daniel Keren wrote:
##ragl...@webtv.net (Michael Ragland) writes:
[...]
### I looked at the Mazal image at
### http://www.mazal.org/Auschwitz%20Aerial/klla-Color.htm and I can't
### tell anything by it. It doesn't even look like a real photogragh but a
### color computer generated image. The arrows pointing to the holes show
### no holes.
## I cannot judge this, as I cannot access that URL.
# Mr. Ragland used two wrong characters; substitute the double "l" with "i"
# like this:
#
# http://www.mazal.org/Auschwitz%20Aerial/kiia-Color.htm
Thanks. Hole #1 is clearly visible; #2 is in the shadow of the
"hump" in the roof caused by its collapse on one of the support
pillars; #3, as noted, is not visible; #4 is in a vertical roof
piece at the "fold" in the northern part.
-Danny Keren.
Kurt Knoll
?.
Kurt Knoll.
===========
"Daniel Keren" <dke...@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:GyA2s...@world.std.com...
~OżO~
> As I had posted a few times, a long and detailed report about the
> holes in the roofs of Kremas I&II is being prepared.
The question is, why did it take nearly sixty years to complete a long and
detailed report. Actually I tend to dismiss long and very detailed reports
because they spend so much energy using tons of circumstantial evidence and
off topic tandrums. Brief proof is all we need, just the facts, no promotion
or heresay.
>As one of
> the authors, I have to apologize for the time it took. Anyway, it
> is nearly done and it will soon be submitted to a journal with
> the hope of publishing it.
>
> Some specific comments re Krema II:
>
> 1) The holes (going south-north) alternate sides, west-east-west-east.
> They are not in the middle. That would not have made sense, since
> there is a thick support beam in the roof's center, and the holes
> would then have to go through it.
>
> 2) Of "the two holes in the west side" the first from the south is
> indeed a Zyklon vent, the second is not.
>
> 3) The two other holes which have been found are the second and fourth
> (from the south). The third hole's probable location is in an area
> of the roof which is heavily damaged and covered with rubble.
>
> 4) There are some pretty interesting - in my totally objective opinion
> of course! :-) - findings concerning the Krema I gas chamber Zyklon
> vents as well.
There you go. You don't need to go much further. You've made your point
--
Not Don Ellis
~OżO~
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> alt.revisionism, on Thu, 20 Jun 2002 03:13:44 -0400 (EDT),
> ragl...@webtv.net (Michael Ragland) wrote:
>
> > Some Holes, Some Holocaust.
> > The Provan and Mazal Theses
> > By George Brewer
>
> > Ever since the early 1970's, there has been an attempt to
> > establish the veracity of the widely reported claim that millions
> > of human beings were gassed and burned in the four crematoria at
> > the
> > Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp in Southwestern Poland. To
> > be sure, there has always been testimony. But the essence of the
> > revisionist challenge, from Paul Rassinier, through Arthur Butz,
> > Robert Faurisson, and Wilhelm Stäglich, and including many more
> > modern
> > researchers, has been simply this: If testimony is all there is,
> > then one should be free to question the claims.
>
> Crap. Revisionists have not questioned survivor testimony. They
> have declared it all false as they must necessarily do.
No they don't. They look at all them and find so many contradictions, you
must dismiss a large amount of them. Did the nazi's kill Jews? Sure they
did. However, the fact remains, there is a lot of contradicting testimony.
>
> > In response particularly to the goads of Robert Faurisson,
> > French Holocaust enforcers funded an effort by the French
> > pharmacist Jean Claude Pressac
>
> Utter bullshit. Pressac was funded by none other than Robert
> Faurisson. When Pressac turned out to be insufficiently malleable,
> Faurisson looked for another dupe whom he found in Fred Leuchter.
Yup, anyone who dares questions the Holocaust gets destroyed totally. Look
at Leuchter, he came in and what happened? They attacked him personally and
tried to ruin his life.
>
> > to prove the facticity of the claim that millions were
> > gassed and burned at Auschwitz on the basis of something other than
> > testimony: in particular, documentary evidence and forensic
> > (archaeological) evidence. The culmination of this effort was the
> > famous, albeit rare, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas
> > Chambers in 1989.
>
> > Unfortunately, while Pressac's documentary discoveries left
> > something to be desired,
>
> Translation: Revisionists had some explaining (away) to do.
>
> > his archaeological efforts created more
> > questions than they answered. This was particularly true in
> > connection with the holes in the roof of the main "gas chamber" in
> > Crematorium II at Birkenau, in which half a million persons were
> > said to have been killed. After lengthy onsite inspections, Pressac
> > was forced to admit that he was unable to find the holes in the
> > roof through which the poison gas Zyklon B was poured into the gas
> > chamber. As he wrote:
> > According to the American aerial photograph of 24th August 1944,
> > the four introduction points were located along a line running the
> > length of the room in the EASTERN half. In the present ruins, two
> > of these
> > openings are still visible at the southern end but in the WESTERN
> > half. Nobody up to now seems to have been concerned by this
> > contradiction, nor to have explained it.
>
> But it is ultimately explained by the mere fact that when the SS
> dynamited the roof, it lifted up and twisted in a long s-shape while
> shifting to the west. As Briank Renk even admits:
>
> For now I shall mention that the explosive charge displaced
> this southern section of the roof more than one metre to
> the west. This is a significant displacement.
>
> So what happens to a hole on the east side of the centr-line of a
> roof if the roof shifts to the west. Suddenly, it is a hole on the
> west side.
>
> Boy, that was sure hard to explain.
>
> > Since Pressac's book was specifically directed against
> > Faurisson, it was left to Faurisson to respond. While the French
> > professor of literature did in fact write several analytical
> > critiques of Pressac's book, he was unable to contain his sense of
> > the absurd: for while
> > Pressac was admitting the absence of the right kind of holes in the
> > roof of Crematorium II, he was essentially also admitting that no
> > gassings could have taken place there. To the extent that these
> > specific mass murders were essential to one's understanding of the
> > Holocaust, it followed -- to be sure with some impudent hyperbole
> > -- that the
> > Holocaust did not happen. Hence, Faurisson applied a reductio ad
> > absurdum to Pressac's admission: "No Holes, No Holocaust."
> > The recent efforts of Charles Provan and Harry Mazal OBE
> > constitute an attempt to prove that Pressac was wrong, and in fact
> > that at least some of the holes in the roof are the holes through
> > which the poison gas was poured on to the victims.
> > There is a reason for this posture.
>
> Yeah. They have both come to the realization that Revisionists tell
> lies need to be debunked.
>
> > Over the years, Faurisson's
> > famous quip has been widely used by revisionists to taunt the
> > Holocaust establishment over its inept approach to the historical
> > record.
>
> I love it it when untrained nobodies declare the ineptitude of the
> historical profession.
Anyone who questions the Holocaust either is a "untrained nobody" or
"becomes an untrained nobody" by the time the Holocaust Hustlers did done
with defaming them.
>
> > To be
> > sure, the revisionist challenge does not depend on the issue of the
> > holes,
>
> It sure seemed like it, though, until most of the Revisionist
> objections fell apart under the scrutiny of real historians.
>
> > but the admitted absence of even these holes tended to move the
> > establishment dependence on the revelations of testimony from the
> > merely incongruous to the distinctly ridiculous.
>
> Pretty much a non-statement.
>
> > Thus, during his trial in early 2000, the British historian
> > David Irving challenged the highly touted Auschwitz expert, Robert
> > Jan van Pelt, to show him the holes in the roof of the Crematorium
> > II "gas chamber." Van Pelt, in turn, argued in his expert report as
> > well as in his testimony that the original holes through which the
> > poison gas was induced were no longer there, suggesting, somewhat
> > vaguely, that they had been filled in prior to the German attempt
> > to blow up the roof.
>
> That and the fact that the roof is a big chunk of rubble.
>
> > In
> > short, it was established at the trial of Irving v. Lipstadt that
> > the holes were not there now, but the Court's judgment held that
> > the
> > gassings took place anyway.
> > The doublethink required to hold this position is the
> > inspiration to the now frantic efforts,
>
> Malicious characterization.
>
> > not to find the missing holes, but to
> > declare some of the existing holes to be the right ones. Mazal, for
> > example, through the purchase of several photographs of still
> > undisclosed provenance,
>
> Mazal went to Auschwitz and hired a helicopter and a photographer.
Harry Mazal I assume. Former Nizkor funder.
>
> (No, it's not some diabolical Jewish plot).
>
> > now argues that he has succeeded in finding at
> > least three of the holes used for poison gassing. Provan,
> > meanwhile, has argued the case for a different set of holes.
>
> > There are many problems with these efforts. In the first place,
> > the lack of expertise in these efforts are clearly exposed by Brian
> > Renk, whose revisionist writings are widely known,
>
> Among a small group of gullible people.
>
> > and who, incidentally, is
> > probably the only expert on either side with a master's knowledge
> > of masonry and concrete work. Renk's critiques can be read here,
> > while further comments on Provan's argument can be consulted here.
>
> > The second problem is that in their zeal to establish the
> > reality of the "holes in the roof", both Mazal and Provan are
> > contradicting the expertise of Jean Claude Pressac and Robert Jan
> > van Pelt.
>
> So? Why is it these nobodies think that historical knowledge never
> advances or that new dicoveries are never made?
Ah, again, question the Holocaust, you become a nobody.
>
> > That two
> > amateurs can so easily dethrone the expertise of the world's
> > greatest authorities on Auschwitz speaks volumes about the lack of
> > competence and rigor in the Holocaust establishment, and
> > furthermore, by inference, vindicates the revisionist challenge of
> > that competence.
>
> Hardly.
>
> > The third problem, as Renk's critiques show, is that these
> > cracks and fissures in the concrete roof cannot be the holes
> > through which the gas was poured in,
>
> Oh, you mean like when he *conjectures* a delay in pouring the
> concrete as alternate explanation?
>
> > and, if we accepted the claim for the sake of the
> > argument, we would be left with a scenario of mass gassing that was
> > not planned, never systematized, which was apparently improvised in
> > the most casual manner, and which could have been implemented in
> > only the most fitful fashion. In short, acceptance of the Provan or
> > Mazal holes leads one to a conception of occasional gassings in
> > buildings that were in no way designed or even built for the
> > purpose.
>
> Why?
>
> > Yet such a conclusion
> > contradicts the establishment notion that the gassings were
> > systematically planned and carried out on a vast scale.
>
> Bollocks. Gassing was carried out on a small scale with a great many
> repetitions.
>
> Gassing was easy. It was body disposal that was difficult.
If it was so difficult, was is there so few evidence remaining? Must not of
been that difficult if the bodies and ashes of most of them who were killed
have never been discovered.
ther words,
> > acceptance of the Provan or Mazal holes leads to a scenario of at
> > best some small-scale gassings. Some Holes. Some Holocaust.
>
> > Overall, it should be said that all of these efforts are based
> > on a false premise; Provan and Mazal seem to be operating under the
> > illusion that if they dispense with Faurisson's quip, they have
> > somehow proved the facticity of their claims. In the end, however,
> > all that they have managed to achieve is to denigrate their own
> > experts,
>
> Or advance knowledge.
>
> > contradict their
> > own photographic "evidence",
>
> But he can't say how.
>
> > refute their own beliefs concerning
> > systematic and carefully planned gassings at Auschwitz-Birkenau,
>
> Because he says so.
>
> > and,
> > quite possibly, make fools of themselves. And, last but not least,
> > they are left, as they began, with nothing but testimony.
>
> And holes that were in the right place and usable.
>
> > Yet this is the
> > inevitable result when one tries to carefully refute deliberately
> > hyperbolic slogans: it turns the patient search for historical
> > truth into the absurdity of overturning straw men.
>
> My goodness, what a revealing statement.
>
> > ____________________________________
>
> > "Four wire-mesh introduction devices,
> > four wooden covers"
>
> > This inventory of March 31, 1943 was written up at the time
> > Krematorium II was formally completed for the Auschwitz-Birkenau
> > camp. (It had actually been tested for the first time in early
> > March.)
>
> > At the top left, we see the building being inventoried,
> > "Krematorium 2," also known as "KGL 30." This building is one of
> > the large
> > killing/cremation facilities built at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
> > Below that, the first two rooms listed ("Raum 1," "Raum 2") have
> > been written in as "Leichenkeller," which means "morgue." The
> > Leichenkeller numbered "one" is the homicidal gassing chamber.
> >
> > Near the top right, we see that there are two inventory items which
> > have been written in by hand. They are a little difficult to make
> > out,
> > especially in this reproduction, but they read
> > "Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung" and "Holzblenden." The numeral 4 is
> > written in each category. In this closeup, the text has been
> > rotated ninety degrees:
> >
> > "Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung" is a large compound word. Words
> > like this are quite common in the German language. Its meaning is
> > put
> > together from the words which form it:
> >
> > der Draht - wire
> > das Netz - grid, net
> > einschieben - insert
> > die Vorrichtung - device, mechanism
> >
> > This is best translated as "wire-mesh insertion device" or
> > "wire-mesh introduction device."
> > "Holzblenden" means "wooden covers."
> >
> > Why is this significant? The room labeled as a morgue, the
> > Leichenkeller, was actually the homicidal gassing chamber in this
> > Krematorium building. We know from numerous sources - aerial
> > photographs, examination of the ruins of the building as they stand
> > today, and the testimony both of the Jewish witnesses and of the
> > perpetrators - that there were holes in the roof, four in number,
> > where the poison Zyklon-B was inserted.
> >
> > This wartime document confirms key aspects of the testimonies. The
> > Zyklon granules were poured into the holes, falling into the wire
> > columns which held them and allowed them to give off their poison
> > gas freely. The wooden covers were placed over those holes to keep
> > the gas contained (though the SS men on the roof surely wore gas
> > masks for safety) and to shut out the screams of those below.
> >
> > The wire mesh existed primarily to make cleanup faster and safer.
> > If the small pellets had simply fallen onto the floor, they might
> > continue to give off dangerous gas even after everyone had died.
> > But since they were poured into a wire "core" which could be lifted
> > out of the gas chamber and onto the roof after the killing
> > operation was complete, they would pose no danger to anyone inside.
> > Removal of corpses could begin much sooner, thus making the entire
> > killing process more efficient.
> >
> > This document is reproduced in Pressac, Jean Claude, Auschwitz:
> > Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld
> > Foundation, New York, 1989, p. 430. Its source is given as
> > Auschwitz State Museum Archive reference BW 30/43, p. 12.
> >
> > As Pressac points out (pp. 429-30), it is Leichenkeller 1 which
> > contains the wire-mesh introduction devices and the wooden covers,
> > though the numerals "4" for these items are entered on the second
> > line. We know the numbers are switched because all the other
> > evidence converges on
> > Leichenkeller 1 as the gas chamber, and not Leichenkeller 2 (which
> > was the room where the victims undressed). Pressac also points out
> > that there are other figures which are switched between the two
> > lines,
> > referencing this document against drawing 2197 from the October
> > Revolution archives.
>
> > _____________________________________
>
> > I wonder how CODOH finds Pressac's documentary findings regarding
> > crematoria II left something to be desired. Pressac apparently
> > based his finding on actual documentary evidence whose source is
> > the Auschwitz State Museum Archive. It is an inventory which lists
> > 'four wire mesh introduction devices and four wooden covers".
> > According to the
> > article through aerial photograghs and testimony there were four
> > holes in crematoria two for inserting the Zyklon B. The wire mesh
> > was to hold the Zyklon gas pellets in place so they could release
> > their poison freely and the wooden covers were to keep the gas
> > contained.
>
> > Would any Holocaust denier like to explain away this piece of
> > documentary evidence? A copy of it can be found at
> > http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/19430331-inventory/
>
> > According to the article two Holocaust researchers by the name of
> > Mazal and Provan went to Auschwitz to find the holes in Crematoria
> > II which were used to dispense the deadly gas.
>
> Mazal and Provan do not know each other and have never conducted
> reserach together.
>
> Provan is a former Holocaust denier.
So am I.
>
> > The article states Mazal purchased
> > several photographs of unknown origin which show three holes on the
> > roof of crematoria II while Provan has come up with a whole
> > different set of holes.
>
> > I trust CODOH about as much as a junkyard dog.
>
> A wise stance.
CODOH makes some false points and some valid points.
>
> > I assume, however, if
> > their statements were false they could possibly be sued. Is anybody
> > on a.r. familiar with this case and whether Mazal actually bought
> > photographs showing three holes on the roof of Crematoria II and if
> > Provan actually came up with a different set of holes?
>
> Renk does his best to obfuscate the issue.
>
> > Holocaust deniers appear to have had a field day with Mazal and
> > Provan's expedition. They state that Mazal and Provan's findings
> > denigrate their own experts. How so?
>
> Revisionists seem to know nothing of how history as a discipline
> works. Should medievalists *not* have reexamined K. B. MacFarlane's
> definition of English bastard feudalism for fear of denigrating him?
> Should bibliographic historians *not* have disputed Eleanor Hammond's
> view that manuscripts were produced on an industrial scale in the
> fifteenth century for fear of denigrating an otherwise great scholar?
>
> Tell me, did Einstein denigrate Newton by refining his theory to
> include the relativistic effects of great mass and great velocity?
>
> > According to the article Pressac was not able to
> > find any holes on the roof on crematoria II and Robert Van Pelt
> > stated the original holes were no longer there having been filled
> > in before the Germans attempted to blow up the roof.
>
> It's true, but how hard did they look, and did they know how to look?
>
> - --
> John Morris <John....@UAlberta.CA>
> at University of Alberta <Multi pertransibunt & augebitur scientia>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
>
> iQA/AwUBPRHy1ZQgvG272fn9EQKfkACfWHEObIYil7It2IOA8BYk9eLxxlUAoJmC
> TDVrNlXn2okFOjtiRtAirMdd
> =SQ3w
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
Michael Ragland
Mr. Kolthoff:
Thank you for correcting the URL As I had already mentioned it appears
like it is a computer generated image. It does not look natural. The
lush green looks like a Nintendo golf course and the roof is likewise
unnatural looking.
I was somewhat reluctant to post my comments regarding Mazal's research
on a.r. for several reasons. One is any mention of the imperfections or
flaws of Mazal's research would be be exploited by Holocaust deniers to
smear others who combat and/or educate against Holocaust denial in an
escalated campaign to broad brush the entire anti-revisionist movement
as a fraud. Or, put another way, if one apple is bad in the barrel then
they all are.
Another reason was concern for my safety. Mazal is a wealthy and
powerful man in the Holocaust education movement. He founded THHP, the
Mazal library (The world's largest private collection of Holocaust
materials) is affiliated with Nizkor, sits on the H-Genocide editorial
board and was until recently on the Board of Adjustment for City of Hill
County Village in Bexar County, TX.
Another concern for my safety was my conviction Mr. Mazal has been
somewhat unintentionally useful to the Holocaust denial movement. I've
posted on a.r. the only example I know of where I believe this to be the
case and that is in the "separate" research of Charles Provan and Harry
Mazal regarding the search for Cyclon B holes in the roof of crematoria
II.
Assuming I'm correct, the possible exposure of Mr. Mazal and how he has
unintentionally assisted the Holocaust denial movement may cause some
Holocaust deniers mild discomfort. Afterall, to have a person of Harry
Mazal's stature, money, and influence who is a major player in Holocaust
education inadvertently assisting the goals of Holocaust denial would be
most useful if nobody knew about it except for the Holocaust deniers.
I'm somewhat disturbed by the fact Holocaust denier Charles Provan went
to Auschwitz and allegedly discovered "eight holes" on the roof of
crematoria II and [less than six months later] Harry Mazal goes to
Aushwitz to look for the Cyclon holes on the roof of crematoria II and
"finds" three Cyclon holes.
I believe Dr. Keren stated there was no connection between Provan's
research and Mazal's research and that the former was begun in 1998.
However, just because their research was separate doesn't necessarily
mean there is no connection between the two. For example, what
specifically were the instigating agents which made Mazal go to
Auschwitz to conduct the research? Duh, to look for the Cyclon B holes
on the roof of crematoria II. But why at that particular time period?
Mazal must have been aware Provan was conducting his own research and
did that play any role in getting Mazal to go to Auschwitz to conduct
his own research? Furthermore, Mazal must have been aware Provan's
"results" would be compared against his own research by the deniers. If
you look at some of the major Holocaust denier sites they use Provan's
research against Mazal.
Danny Keren has responded he has participated in research on the
presence or absence of Cyclon B holes on the roof of crematoria II as
well as research on crematoria I and hopes to have this information
submitted and published in a journal soon. Great. However, I think a
detailed archeological and forensic team of professionals with knowledge
of the Holocaust is needed to do research on the Auschwitz crematoria
roofs to search for any remaining Cyclon B holes.
Mr. Moran stated the research Keren participated in was "Mazal and
Company".
Dr. Keren hasn't responded directly if his work is affiliated with Mazal
but I assume it is.
Keren didn't go into what the research was based on but he stated one
Cyclon B hole had been discovered on the roof of crematoria II. He
mentioned other holes were found but didn't explicitly state they were
Cyclon B holes.
If indeed Keren's work is affiliated with Mazal it appears there may be
an inconsistency since Mazal stated three Cyclon B holes were found but
Keren has stated only one Cyclon B hole has been found. Dr. Keren now
states three holes have been recovered. Have three Cyclon B holes
actually been recovered?
Proven allegedly actually went on top of the roof on crematoria two
although the rubble was not cleared. From what Morris has stated Mazal's
research consisted of aerial and ground level photography. There is no
mention of Mazal doing any research on the roof on crematoria II to
attempt to find Cyclon B holes.
I find it somewhat amazing that after fifty years no professional
archeological and forensic researchers with knowledge of the Holocaust
have been able to get permission to carefully remove the rubble from the
roof of crematoria two and conduct a careful inspection of all physical
surfaces in an attempt to locate any remaining Cyclon B holes.
Is the Auschwitz State Museum and Polish government preventing this? Are
Jewish organizations concerned about preseving the "sacredness" of
Auschwitz opposed to such an endeavor? Has any legitimate researcher
even proposed doing this?
Morris mentioned part of the roof had been blown up by the Germans.
Rather than this counter-productive "research" which is exemplified most
recently by Provan and Mazal which can best be summed up "I'll show you
my holes and you show me your holes" I would prefer to see an indepth
and comprehensive archeological and forensic examination of the surface
of the roof of crematoria II to see if there are any remaining Cyclon B
holes.
That way Pressac's and Van Pelt's opinions could be confirmed or refuted
based on the current remaining roof structure or at least a definitive
statement could be made the roof had sustained too much damage to locate
any hole(s). It would put this matter largely to rest at least in terms
of knowledge of this aspect of the Holocaust. Of course, the Holocaust
deniers will never accept the Holocaust no matter what.
Some might argue damage might be caused if there was professional
archeological and forensic research on the roof of crematoria II if no
Cyclon B holes were found or only one or two. I disagree. Having
so-called "researchers" like Provan and Mazal going to Auschwitz and
coming up with different Cyclon B holes which contradict the expert
opinions of Pressac and Van Pelt produces confusion, uncertainty and can
only continue to further assist the Holocaust denial movement.
If there was a landmark definitive study of the roof of crematoria two
and whether there were any remaining Cyclon B holes it is much less
likely these amateur Holocaust deniers and others would be going to
Auschwitz to conduct research on this subject. The Holocaust denial
movement would then have to mainly resort to slandering the results of
such an archeological and forensic study.
If there are few or no holes, then there argument against the Holocaust
is rather transparent since it was Pressac and Van Pelt, two experts who
acknowledge the Holocaust, who stated no holes could be found to begin
with. Dr. Keren corrected me since Pressac did state a hole was found on
the southernmost end. Van Pelt stated it was a possibility the Cyclon B
holes had been filled in with concrete before the Germans attempted to
blow it up.
Of course, it was Faurisson who quipped, "No holes, no Holocaust." But
that is garbage. There is other evidence such as the inventory document,
aerial photograghs which were taken before the Germans blowed part of it
up, not to mention other extermination facilities which used various
other methods of killing Jews as well as the Einsatzgruppen.
Finally, Dr. Keren stated it was unlikely the Holocaust deniers were
supportive of Provan since he violated one of their holy axioms i.e. no
holes, no Holocaust. Dr. Keren, I would merely say don't believe
anything a Holocaust denier says. These people are largely contrivances
and the material on their websites is contrived.
They don't care whether there are any holes. At one time it suited them
to state there were no holes. They still do that but at the same time
they are now supportive of people like Provan who "state" there are
Zyklon B holes in the roof on crematoria II.
Doesn't this totally demolish their cause of denying th Holocaust? No,
as I've explained before. Pressac stated no holes could be found except
for one on the southermost end and Van Pelt stated he could find no
holes and that maybe they had been filled with cement before the Germans
attempted to bomb the structure.
These two men were much more qualified than either Provan or Mazal. Does
that mean Pressac and Van Pelt were 100% correct? No, it doesn't. But
what is required is a detailed comprehensive archeological and forensic
examination of the roof structures by experts with knowledge of the
Holocaust.
What we have now is two amateurs coming up with different holes on the
roof which disputes Pressac and Van Pelt's findings. Don't think the
Holocaust denial movement isn't exploiting that to their advantage. If
one can tell me how this is contributing towards knowledge of the
Holocaust and combatting Holocaust denial I'm willing to listen.
Michael Ragland
Kurt Knoll
Kurt Knoll.
==========
"Michael Ragland" <ragl...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:10216-3D1...@storefull-2256.public.lawson.webtv.net...
Michael Ragland
Dr. Keren:
Just between you and me I find all the discussion and research on the
holes to be really offensive. I would support an exhaustive and
comprehensive professional archeological and forensic team clearing
the rubble and doing research on all the crematoria
roofs..specifically looking for Zyklon B holes. If any holes are found
perhaps our naked Holocaust deniers would like to test their belief
the Holocaust didn't happen by having Zyclon reintroduced through the
holes. As an incentive, a cashpot of $20 million would be offered to
anybody who survived. The Auschwitz State Museum would likely have to
make some additions such as a new gas chamber door. Statesmen from
around the world and the Pope could be invited to see the event and
pay-per-view could televise it to America, Europe, Saudi Arabia, and
elsewhere.
MR
Kurt Knoll
to take part or will it be another Jewish plot.
Kurt Knoll.
============
"Michael Ragland" <ragl...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:eaf50c6b.02062...@posting.google.com...
Michael Ragland
My post was facetious Kurt. It was not meant to be taken seriously.
MR
Michael Ragland
Michael Ragland
Dr. Keren:
I found this letter on Irving's site which purports to be a letter Harry
Mazal wrote October 23, 2000 in which he states he will briefly be going
to Auschwitz to do some final observations on the holes on the roof of
crematoria II. Mr. Mazal states in the letter earlier in the year he and
his colleagues identified three of the holes.
Although you mentioned Mazal had started to do research in 98' it
appears him and his colleagues didn't find the three holes until
sometime before October in th year 2000.
Charles Provan arrived at Auschwitz to do his research March 23, 2000. I
have no idea how many trips Mr. Provan made but on May 27, 2000 he
presented his findings to the IHR conference! Incidentally, while
deniers claim they were angry at ole Chuck it should be stressed Mr.
Provan has maintained contact with David Irving, including donating
money to him during the Lipstadt-Irving trial. Also, Irving has forgiven
Provan and hopes to publish his works. Am I being too subtle Dr. Keren?
Since Provan started his research at Auschwitz March 23, 2000 and Mr.
Mazal stated he and his colleagues had identified the three holes
earlier in the year, it seems possible Provan's discovery of the holes
preceded Mazal's discovery of the three holes. It's also possible
Mazal's discovery of the three holes preceded Provan's discovery of
holes. One thing seems almost certain and that is Provan and Mazal's
discovery of the holes occurred very close to each other.
Is this important? Maybe, maybe not. I think it is helpful, however, to
get things as crystal clear as possible.
Michael Ragland
http://www.post-gazatte.com/headlines/20010304provan2.asp
Note: I initially saw this article on David Irving's website and the
article for the date was listed as March 4th, 2000 which didn't make
sense since the article states Provan started his research at Aushwitz
March 23, 2000. I accessed the original article from the Pittsburgh
Post-Gazette and the actual date of the article is March 4, 2001. The
incorrect date from Irving's website can be viewed at
http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/03/PittsburghProvan.html
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, March 4, 2001
Why Holocaust deniers turned on one of their own
Charles Provan with daughter Keturah
(Franka Bruns, Post-Gazette)
By Dennis B. Roddy,
Post-Gazette Staff Writer
THE night he discovered the Holocaust, Charles D. Provan was reading --
again -- the book that was supposed to put the matter to rest. Before he
killed himself in 1945, Kurt Gerstein, an SS officer, gave a lengthy
account of killings he witnessed in the camps and, boy, were his numbers
strange.
Men, women, children -- 700 to 800 in all, more than half of them
children -- were forced naked into a 16-foot by 16-foot chamber in
Belzec, eastern Poland. Camp guards fired up a diesel engine. A
half-hour later, soaked in sweat and urine, columns of bodies stood
dead.
Seven hundred people in 256 square feet? Three people per square foot?
That's three human beings somehow crammed into the space of one square
of linoleum tile. Think about it. The Gerstein document, with its
ridiculous numbers, became a weapon for so-called "revisionist
historians" who regard the Holocaust as a wartime exaggeration or a
post-war hoax. Holocaust historians sometimes glossed over Gerstein's
dubious body counts, and Holocaust denier Henri Roques brought out a
handsome new edition of the Gerstein document with accompanying analysis
explaining the ridiculousness of the figures.
Provan, a Holocaust doubter, bought one right away. He believed Roques.
"I just thought the numbers were way off," he said.
That December night in 1990, though, the quizzical Provan was struck by
a line in Gerstein's account about the victims: "... more than half are
children ... ."
"Hey, kids!" Provan gave a yell. Shouting "hey, kids" in the Provan
house is risking a stampede. A printer by trade, he is by avocation a
Protestant lay theologian who has written against birth control. He now
has 10 children.
Matthias, Tobias, Nathanael, and Susanna came running.
"Let's do an experiment," Provan told them.
The kids peeled to their underwear in an upstairs bedroom. Provan moved
a chest of drawers and an old cabinet into a corner. The kids squealed
and giggled as he crowded them into a tiny, tiny space he'd created.
He grabbed a doll to round the number out to five. It had to be a sight:
Provan, a bearded, bulky fellow with a large, pear-shaped face,
perpetually set in a smile, looking like a man who is about to laugh or
has just finished, corralling kids in underwear to see how many could be
executed in as small a space as possible.
His wife, Carol, heard the noise.
"What are you doing?" she asked.
"I'm gonna' see how many kids can fit in a gas chamber!" he shouted.
"Oh." A pause. "You shouldn't do that!"
After crowding the youngsters into the tiny space, Provan went
downstairs to his parlor with a hand calculator, stretched out on the
recliner, and did a little math.
The numbers worked. Those bizarre, impossible numbers worked.
"Then it dawned on me," Provan said. "He saw that. He saw that!"
Gerstein saw those children, those old men, those mothers, he saw them
jammed into a room, 700 or more at a time, bleeding, sweating, urinating
in fear. He saw the doors open, saw bodies so tangled in death they
lacked even the power to fall. If Gerstein was telling a truth so
improbable, the other stuff had to be so, too. It happened.
Suddenly, Charles D. Provan, lifelong provocateur, was hearing the
off-key note in the symphony of denial and the discordant note was the
one that rang true.
"That's when I started to cry."
Some old friends still haven't forgiven him those tears.
Right from the start
The gears of Charles D. Provan have never quite meshed with the
machinery of ordinary society. He counts himself as a revisionist, but a
revisionist who believes the Holocaust did happen. His kids are home
schooled. He runs a small print shop with somebody else's name.
Profoundly conservative, he also is a local Democratic committeeman and
member of the printer's union.
Provan grew up nearer the political fringe than most. His parents,
Charles and Marjorie Provan, were longtime leaders in the John Birch
Society. They sent their son to Bob Jones University, renowned for its
fundamentalism and anti-Catholicism. Ian Paisley, the Catholic-baiting
minister from Northern Ireland, held his doctorate from Bob Jones.
At 17, the younger Provan gave a closer reading to "The Blue Book," the
handbook of John Birch Society beliefs, and told his parents he was
leaving the group.
"I sort of thought that he was going through a stage," remembered
Marjorie Provan. "When you reach 16 or 17 and you're a young man, you
know an awful lot more than your parents know. I never got upset about
it. He never became a socialist or anything like that."
What he became was an incessant questioner of authority. Provan left Bob
Jones after a few years, studied history at the University of
Pittsburgh, then quit before graduating and took a job at a Monongahela
print shop. He also got heavily into Bible study, and became a regular
contributor to The Christian News, a weekly publication run by Herman
Otten, a renegade Lutheran minister in Missouri.
Otten's publication targets liberalism in the Lutheran Church, propounds
conservative Christianity, but, weirdly, also argues editorially that
the Holocaust didn't happen.
"The more you study it, the more you see how everyone in the United
States has swallowed a line of bull," said Otten.
He published Provan "mainly for theological reasons. The guy's a whiz."
But as the 1980s wore on, Provan had begun reading denier literature and
concluded the Holocaust numbers were a gross exaggeration. Otten's paper
sent Provan to cover a meeting of the Institute for Historical Review.
The IHR, based in California, was the creation of Willis Carto, a
shadowy millionaire who founded the Liberty Lobby -- one of the few
Washington lobbies that advocated U.S. diplomatic relations with
Rhodesia. Carto's weekly newspaper, The Spotlight, regularly features
anti-Semitic and Holocaust denial articles. Its readers included Timothy
McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber. Another Carto creation, the Populist
Party ran as its 1988 presidential candidate former Ku Klux Klansman
David Duke.
But Carto and the IHR split, and split bitterly, in the early 1990s.
Aides there had him carried out of the building. They are still in
litigation over the ownership of the institution.
The man who remained in the director's chair after Carto's removal is
Mark Weber, who holds a master's degree in history and has studied in
Germany. The Simon Wiesenthal Center has accused Weber of having ties to
neo-Nazis in Germany.
Provan wrote one article for the IHR's journal, a 1993 piece about
American treatment of Japanese prisoners in World War II, but never
ventured a published opinion on the Holocaust. While Holocaust denial
has been IHR's major focus, Weber and his colleagues like to expand its
concept of self-described "historical revisionism" to cover other
subjects, something its critics view as merely an effort to provide a
scholarly cover for an otherwise blatant exercise in fascist apology.
"Revisionism is a skeptical, informed look at history," Weber explained.
But given that Provan had entered into the study of history as a
Holocaust skeptic, his role as a revisionist became one of revising
revisionism.
Such was the kind of curiosity that led to the top of the stairs one
December night 10 years ago.
Arguing the details
Provan repeated his experiments several times. One night, he rented
three mannequins from a clothing store near his home in Monongahela,
Washington County. They lacked the suppleness of humans.
"Then it occurred to me -- what if the revisionists say I just made this
up?"
So he built a 21-inch by 21-inch box the same height (74 inches) as the
chamber in Belzec. He invited some friends over and crammed them in and
took photos.
"I told them to wear some very thin clothes. We put the kids in
pajamas," he explained, showing a photo reminiscent of the old college
prank of jamming umpteen students into a telephone booth.
Having proved Gerstein's statement on chamber capacity, Provan set out
to prove a trickier problem. Gerstein and other Holocaust witnesses said
the camps in Eastern Europe used diesel exhaust to gas prisoners. While
Zyklon-B, the cyanide gas, was much publicized in Holocaust accounts,
the largest body counts -- in places such as Treblinka -- were
attributed to diesel exhaust, and diesel engines are usually touted for
their lack of toxic fumes.
Provan dug out diesel toxicity studies from the U.S. Department of
Mines. He hired an instructor from the Pittsburgh Diesel Institute, took
him to a neighborhood garage and asked to borrow their emissions testing
equipment.
He was surprised to find that, once the timing is changed in a diesel,
it burns both dirty and poisonously.
"Within a short while we had enough poison gas coming out to kill
anybody in 15 minutes," Provan said.
After no small amount of debate, and a large amount of writing, the
front page of the Christian News of Monday, Sept. 9, 1991, carried a
headline from outer space: "Provan Concludes: Nazis Gassed Millions of
Jews."
Otten, the Holocaust-denying minister, didn't mind one bit.
"My attitude was to publish everything," he said. "If it doesn't hold
up, the truth will shout him down."
Provan's problem was getting someone to shout back. He issued a public
challenge for debate. His primary target was Friedrich "Fritz" Berg, a
New Jersey engineer who has spent years arguing that the Holocaust was a
hoax, that diesels cannot easily kill anyone, and even, as he suggested
in one New York radio debate, that such Jews as were rounded up into
camps had it coming.
In Holocaust revisionism debate, details often get lost amid personal
rancor and arguments take on the atmospherics of a domestic dispute
among a family of professional wrestlers. Disputants offer to "crush"
each other, and quarrels often center on who last conceded some obscure
point.
In the case of Provan vs. Berg, the debate has been over whether each
has agreed to debate the other.
"I accepted his challenge. He's lied about that," Berg said. "This guy
is, as far as I'm concerned, a total wacko. Nobody died in gas
chambers."
By the early 1990s, Holocaust denial was becoming the focus of major
attention. Deborah Lipstadt, a professor of Jewish studies at Emory
University, wrote a book on the subject. Among her targets was David
Irving, a right-wing British historian whose early work had gained
critical acclaim. Increasingly, though, Irving was flirting with
Holocaust deniers and neo-Nazis and her criticism rankled him enough to
file a lawsuit.
Irving's major thesis had become that there were no gassings at
Auschwitz, and he based it on a chemical study done by a Massachusetts
man named Fred Leuchter, an inventor of machines used to execute
American prisoners by lethal injection. Holocaust deniers insisted that
the "gas chambers" at Auschwitz were, in fact, underground morgues for
storing bodies, and that eyewitness accounts of gas pellets being
dropped in through holes in the roof were untrue because there were no
holes.
Robert Faurisson, an early revisionist who lost his teaching job in
France for denying the Holocaust, created the slogan: "No holes, no
holocaust!"
Provan, who had become a regular correspondent with Irving, got curious.
He'd done his own gas chamber experiments at home. He scraped up money
and took two of his sons to see a real gas chamber. They reached the
ruins of Auschwitz-Birkenau on March 23 last year [2000].
Fleeing SS troops had blown up the buildings used for chambers, but
Provan rummaged about on the imploded roof and sent his son, Matthias,
into the ruins.
"I was standing on top, asking what was going on," Provan said.
"The whole place is a wreck down here," Matthias answered. Provan had
taken details from a written account of where the holes were. He
suspected they hadn't been found because the roof had shifted
drastically when the Nazis blew the place apart.
Provan and another son, Nathanael, took a metric measuring tape to mark
the spots where the central roof beam had been. They marked out the
spots where support pillars stood. Witnesses said four holes had been
punched in next to the support beams.
One. Two. Then a third. Provan and his sons started finding holes. They
had been blown wider by the implosion. But they were there.
This time, he didn't cry.
"It was odd. At Auschwitz, it was almost like business," he said. "It
showed I was right to put my trust in the witnesses."
Does that make sense?
"You even suffer for him. He is pathetic," says a man with a deep,
rolling French accent. The man is talking about Provan. "He's trying to
do his best. He's a failure, but a man who is trying to do his best."
The voice belongs to Faurisson, an elder statesman of Holocaust denial.
A French academic trained in literature, Faurisson grew up in occupied
France during the war. After visiting a Jewish research library where
librarians could not provide him a schematic of a gas chamber, he
decided the Holocaust was a hoax.
Faurisson was a disciple of Paul Rassinier, the founder of Holocaust
revisionism. Rassinier, though, argued simply that he could not find
proof of a deliberate, genocidal plan by the Nazis. By the end of his
life, Rassinier had concluded that at least some gas chambers did, in
fact, exist. Strangely, Rassinier, a socialist, spent time in Buchenwald
for hiding Jewish refugees.
But the movement he helped to create found fertile soil in the far
right. Some were anti-Semites and Nazi apologists. A few were people
such as Ernst Zundel, who started out as an indignant German expatriate
who wanted to exonerate his people and ended up a bitter man, prosecuted
in Canada for hate speech and now fixated on the idea that Zionists rule
the world.
"I think they get the feeling they've got the Jews on the run and this
is a nice stick to beat them with -- that this was a fraud for money. I
stand back dispassionately and watch this with the utmost amusement,"
says David Irving, the historian whose libel suit against Lipstadt
became a trial on the authenticity of the Holocaust. For three months in
a London courtroom, Irving tried to disprove the existence of gas
chambers at Auschwitz. His argument hinged on whether there were holes
in the roof. It was straight out of Faurisson's contention of, "No
holes? No holocaust!"
It turned into a disaster for Irving, once viewed as a promising, if
quirky, historian of World War II. At one moment, Irving, apparently
forgetting himself, addressed the court judge as "mein Fuhrer."
The judge's decision officially declared Irving to
be an anti-Semite and Third Reich apologist. Irving was saddled with $6
million in legal bills -- in Britain the losing side pays everyone's
costs -- and his reputation among other historians was left in shards.
But possibly the strangest turn in the bizarre spectacle was that
Provan, a declared Holocaust believer -- in fact, a man who claims to
have found the very holes Irving said were not there -- was providing
advice and cash contributions for Irving's side.
"He's probably like a lot of us," said Irving. "He's baffled and
mystified by the legend. I don't think he's anything but sincere."
Irving's diaries show Provan sending off a list of lawyers when Irving
was ousted from a military show at the Monroeville ExpoMart. Provan also
sent occasional checks and wished Irving luck in litigation the
historian brought when he was refused entry to Australia and Canada.
"He joined in various operations that I conducted personally," Irving
said. Perhaps most surprisingly, Provan provided money and advice for
Irving's lawsuit against Lipstadt.
"Looking back on it, I don't think I should have sent him money for the
Lipstadt case. I don't understand what he was doing. The other
donations, though, were pretty much justified," Provan said. "I wanted
to keep open the lines of communication. I was basically so pleased to
have access to his information files, that I considered the money to be
well worth it."
In short, he was pumping Irving for information to disprove Irving's own
thesis.
"Does that make sense?" Provan asked.
A traitor to the cause
When the Institute for Historical Review held its annual conference at a
California hotel May 27, [2000] guests got their directions in the usual
fashion. Arriving at an airport, they would telephone the organizers who
-- fearful word would leak to the Jewish Defense League -- would only
then direct them to the hotel.
Provan was a familiar face to members. He was invited to speak, but only
to debunk an eyewitness account of a Nazi doctor whose book detailing
Holocaust terrors, Provan discovered, had been published as a novel, not
a history.
His expose fit nicely with the deniers' idea that Holocaust witnesses
are not credible. For several years, Provan had been kept around
revisionist circles as a self-proclaimed curiosity -- a revisionist who
believes in the Holocaust.
"I continue to believe that he's the type of catalyst that revisionism
needs. He keeps us on our toes," said Michael A. Hoffman II, an
Idaho-based Holocaust denier.
Other observers thought the IHR found the presence of Provan convenient
cover to show that, unlike Holocaust believers -- "exterminationists"
they call them -- revisionists, which they call themselves, are open to
criticism from within.
Irving was there to speak about his David and Goliath battle against
Lipstadt and, by Irving's reckoning, the ominous force of world Jewry.
With the stage set, Provan arrived and, in the words of Hoffman, "may
have crossed the line." Before leaving his shop in Monongahela, he had
printed a 40-page booklet that turned Faurisson's slogan on its head:
"No holes?" the title asked. "No Holocaust?" it asked again.
Provan laid out his argument, displayed photos, explained how the
explosion had widened the holes enough to hide them in plain sight, and
included 14 color photos to back up his findings.
"The 'No Holes, No Holocaust' argument is no longer possible to make,"
his study concluded. "Since the revisionists are now deprived of their
absolutist argument, and since the other forms of evidence cannot prove
the case one way or another, we are again able to view the statements of
the various eyewitnesses as possible, and therefore the dominant
evidence in the case."
Holocaust deniers are still fulminating.
"Chuck Provan, to me, is almost irrelevant to this thing," said IHR
director Weber. "Charles Provan is not by training or background much of
a specialist in this thing."
Faurisson looked over the monograph and lectured Provan about his
failure to check for places where the steel reinforcement bars would
have had to have been cut if holes were put into the roof.
"I think he admitted, I'm sure he admitted, that he had to go back to
Auschwitz, to Birkenau because he had not in fact found those famous
holes," Faurisson said.
Irving, obviously stung by his old pal, was even more dismissive.
"I said, 'Charles, if you were going to do something like this it would
have been a good thing if you'd talked to your friends before doing it,"
Irving said. "In a way, that was designed to create maximum
embarrassment to the revisionist cause."
Ernst Zundel's newsletter lashed out at Provan, especially after John
Sack, a Jewish-born author, who also had been invited to speak before
the IHR, featured Provan in an article in Esquire magazine. Suddenly,
Provan, the harmlessly charming eccentric from an obscure town in Rust
Belt Pennsylvania, was blowing holes in a theory on which Holocaust
deniers had appended their hopes.
"Show us the smoking gun, John Sack," wrote Zundel's associate, Ingrid
Rimland, who seemed to drop all pretense about tolerance in a rant that
first let loose on Provan's appearance, then moved on to Sack's
religion.
"And don't haul forth a fringy hillbilly who happens to have bought into
your people's smoke-and-mirror plays -- and make him front page news.
You were privy to the fact that there were many at that conference who
felt that Provan should never have spoken. But do you know the
difference between us Gentiles and you Jews? We cut some folks some
slack. You don't."
Provan doubts he'll be invited again."It makes me wonder if part of them
could put up with me, something like a moth. Before then, I was just a
moth flitting it out. Till then, I was viewed as relatively harmless,"
Provan said. "But when I came up with the thing on the holes, I
contradicted Robert Faurisson, the great father of the holes theory."
Irving, licking his wounds in London, says he wants to remain friends
with Provan.
"I'm willing to allow people to have opposing views," he said. In fact,
Irving, who has been forced to self-publish his books, is hoping to
publish Provan.
No -- not the holes-at-Auschwitz expose. That, after all, did not happen
in the history David Irving writes. Provan once did a presentation on
American soldiers running amok at Dachau and slaughtering German guards.
Now there, Irving will tell you, is a war crime worth writing about.
"I do hope to publish his book," Irving said.
Provan, the obscure printer whose friends are going to be strangers,
isn't sure Irving means it. The moth has eaten enough holes in the cloak
that the emperor of denial is feeling an uncomfortable breeze.
______________________________________
H-Net Humanities & Social Sciences OnLine]
Reply-To: H-NET List for History of the Holocaust
<H-HOL...@H-NET.MSU.EDU>
Sender: H-NET List for History of the Holocaust
<H-HOL...@H-NET.MSU.EDU>
Monday, October 23, 2000
List Editor: Jim Mott
Gas Chamber at Auschwitz (Mazal)
From: Harry W. Mazal OBE
I am presently in London doing some research before departing for
another couple of weeks in Auschwitz and, time allowing, in Sobibor as
well.
While in Auschwitz I will make some final observations regarding the
holes on the roof of the gas chamber of Krema II. During an earlier
visit this year my colleagues and I identified three of these holes. The
purpose of this visit will be to locate the last one of the Zyklon
introduction holes. The prospects of this happening are good due to the
unique metrological method that we are employing.
On another matter...
During my visit here I have been told that David Irving has moved all of
his archives to the United States with the possible intent of taking up
residence there. It appears that he has not filed an appeal with the
higher court in his suit against Prof. Lipstadt and Penguin books.
Sic transit...
Harry W. Mazal OBE
Send comments and questions to H-Net Webstaff Copyright © 1995-2000,
H-Net, Humanities & Social Sciences OnLine Click Here for an Internet
Citation Guide.
[H-Net Humanities & Social Sciences OnLine] Send comments and questions
to H-Net Webstaff Copyright © 1995-98, H-Net, Humanities & Social
Sciences OnLine Click Here for an Internet Citation Guide.
In a June 10th, 2002 post to alt.revisionism Reekard writes in response
to whether David Michael will ever admit he is a Holocaust denier, "Not
in public, he won't. To do so would strip away the very, very thin
veneer of civility he applies to himself in order to be able to deny to
the world at large that he is, like all other Holocaust deniers, a
virulent antisemite and a Nazi sympathizer and apologist."
Michael Ragland
Dr. Keren:
To confirm if the H-Net letter on Irving's website was accurate I
accessed the H-Net log and indeed Mazal wrote this letter October 23,
2000.
MR
View the Prior Message in h-holocaust's October 2000 logs
by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in h-holocaust's October 2000 logs
by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the h-holocaust home page.
From: Harry Mazal <hma...@txdirect.net>
List Editor: "Mott, Jim" <jim...@spss.com>
Editor's Subject: Gas Chamber at Auschwitz (Mazal)
Author's Subject: Gas Chamber at Auschwitz (Mazal)
Date Written: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 14:23:04 -0500
Date Posted: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 14:23:04 -0500
I am presently in London doing some research before departing for
another couple of weeks in Auschwitz and, time allowing, in Sobibor as
well.
While in Auschwitz I will make some final observations regarding the
holes on the roof of the gas chamber of Krema II. During an earlier
visit this year my colleagues and I identified three of these holes. The
purpose of this visit will be to locate the last one of the Zyklon
introduction holes. The prospects of this happening are good due to the
unique metrological method that we are employing.
On another matter...
During my visit here I have been told that David Irving has moved all of
his archives to the United States with the possible intent of taking up
residence there. It appears that he has not filed an appeal with the
higher court in his suit against Prof. Lipstadt and Penguin books.
Sic transit...
Harry W. Mazal OBE
Contact Us
Copyright © 1995-2002, H-Net, Humanities & Social Sciences OnLine
Daniel Keren
# Dr. Keren:
#
# I found this letter on Irving's site which purports to be a letter Harry
# Mazal wrote October 23, 2000 in which he states he will briefly be going
# to Auschwitz to do some final observations on the holes on the roof of
# crematoria II. Mr. Mazal states in the letter earlier in the year he and
# his colleagues identified three of the holes.
#
# Although you mentioned Mazal had started to do research in 98' it
# appears him and his colleagues didn't find the three holes until
# sometime before October in th year 2000.
Two of the holes were found in the 1998 visit. The fourth was
found in the June 2000 visit. The October 2000 visit was made
in order to take some additional measurements.
# Charles Provan arrived at Auschwitz to do his research March 23, 2000.
# I have no idea how many trips Mr. Provan made but on May 27, 2000 he
# presented his findings to the IHR conference!
Again - this has zero relevance to the study of which I was part.
# Incidentally, while deniers claim they were angry at ole Chuck it
# should be stressed Mr. Provan has maintained contact with David
# Irving, including donating money to him during the Lipstadt-Irving
# trial. Also, Irving has forgiven Provan and hopes to publish his
# works. Am I being too subtle Dr. Keren?
No. I don't really care what Irving publishes or why he does things.
The man's a low-life liar and peddler of hate.
# Since Provan started his research at Auschwitz March 23, 2000 and Mr.
# Mazal stated he and his colleagues had identified the three holes
# earlier in the year, it seems possible Provan's discovery of the holes
# preceded Mazal's discovery of the three holes. It's also possible
# Mazal's discovery of the three holes preceded Provan's discovery of
# holes. One thing seems almost certain and that is Provan and Mazal's
# discovery of the holes occurred very close to each other.
I don't know what exactly Provan discovered, and therefore will
not comment.
# Is this important? Maybe, maybe not. I think it is helpful, however, to
# get things as crystal clear as possible.
I hope that the report which is now completed will achieve this.
-Danny Keren.
Michael Ragland
Note: I'm horrible with URLS. Below is the correct one to the Pittsburgh
Post-Gazette article on Provan.
Dr. Keren:
Michael Ragland
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010304provan2.asp
Note: I initially saw this article on David Irving's website and the
article for the date was listed as March 4th, 2000 which didn't make
sense since the article states Provan started his research at Aushwitz
March 23, 2000. I accessed the original article from the Pittsburgh
Post-Gazette and the actual date of the article is March 4, 2001. The
incorrect date from Irving's website can be viewed at
http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/03/PittsburghProvan.html
In a June 10th, 2002 post to alt.revisionism Reekard writes in response
Michael Ragland
Thank you Mr. Kolthoff. Positive is that Paul Zucchi's engineering
equations matched up with Daniel Keren, Jamie McCarthy, and Harry
Mazal's research that holes 1,2, and 4 identified as being Zyklon vents
were consistent of being created on the roof of the building during
construction.
Interestingly, however, despite the evidence of Daniel Keren, Jamie
McCarthy, and Harry Mazal, Van Pelt regarding the Appeal Court decided
to keep his comments on Rudolph's assertions to "a minimum" and that
"while the "discovery" of three of the four holes had effectively
answered Irving's challenge made on the eleventh day of the trial,
judged it wise to provide the Appeal Court with the historical context
of the issue. The holes were, so to speak, the fig leaf to hide the
nakedness of the negationists."
If Van Pelt felt there was such a strong and sustainable case as
evidenced by the Mazal team and corroborated by Paul Zucchi, then why
weren't Rudolph's assertions strongly countered and Mazal team's
evidence presented to the Appeal Court instead of merely being stuffed
in the appendix to a rebuttal to Rudolph?
Since the Holocaust deniers have made a big issue out of the fact Van
Pelt apparently stated during the trial he couldn't find any Zyklon B
holes on the roof of crematoria II and mentioned it was a possibility
they were filled in with concrete by the Germans before they attempted
to blow it up, I would think the next trial which deals with the
Holocaust the deniers will attempt to capitalize on that. Am I to assume
now Van Pelt believe three Zyklon holes have been found on the roof of
crematoria II?
Since David Irving may not appeal since he is in arrears and had his
property confiscated, the issue may be moot in this specific instance.
But it is quite likely there will be a similar trial in the
future...unfortunately.
If indeed there is strong and sustainable evidence for Zyklon B holes on
the roof of crematoria two (1, 2, and 4) then the strength of this
evidence alone will not be sufficient to keep it receded in the
background. Eventually, it will come to the fore.
I look forward to any future reports which state to have found Zyklon B
holes. I'm not an engineer or any other expert but based on the
photograghs I've seen of the crematoria roofs and knowing they've been
partly blown apart, they are a real fucking mess and I don't see how
anybody could determine 100% any remaining holes were Zyklon B holes.
Van Pelt states the clue was the rebars that were hooked in the slab and
embedded in the concrete.
Does the Auschwitz State Museum and Polish government ever plan to
refurbish Auschwitz? I understand the ceilings to the gas chambers are
crumbling and almost totally caved in. Ideally, I'd like to see the
entire entity razed to the ground and flowers planted. As long as people
deny the Holocaust though it needs to stand. So I expect the Auschwitz
structures to be around for hundreds, if not thousands of years,
assuming it is not obliterated in a nuclear blast.
MR
Michael Ragland wrote:
[...]
Having
so-called "researchers" like Provan and Mazal going to Auschwitz and
coming up with different Cyclon B holes which contradict the expert
opinions of Pressac and Van Pelt produces confusion, uncertainty and can
only continue to further assist the Holocaust denial movement.
The Mazal research is mentioned in the epilogue chapter of Robert Jan
van Pelt's "The Case for Auschwitz". I believe that some of your doubts
will be set straight by these quotes from pages 494-499:
Many months later I did
receive a draft copy of a richly illustrated 24-page report,
written by Daniel Keren, Jamie McCarthy, and Harry W. Mazal,
entitled "A Report on Some Findings Concerning the Gas
Chamber of Krematorium II in Auschwitz-Birkenau." From the
introduction it became clear that their investigation had
started in 1998 but that it had expanded in the aftermath of
the trial. Using a computer model, the authors had analyzed
the photo of Crematorium 2 showing the gas chamber with the
chimneys before it was covered with dirt, and as a result
had been able to identify precisely the location of the holes in
the plan of the building. Taking into account the fact that the
concrete slab that covered the gas chamber shifted when the
Germans dynamited the pillars that supported it, they set out to
look for evidence in the rubble. The problem, of course, was
that there were many holes, all irregular. Their approach
was sound: although the concrete revealed little about
whether the hole had been intended or not, the reinforcement
bars (rebars) that remained did. The team noticed that the
rebars in the slab were spaced 15 centimeters apart.
Believing that the holes had been larger than 15 centimeters
square, they knew that the builders would have created the
necessary opening by cutting one or two rebars on each side
and hooking them back into the slab. While the straight
edges of the holes had been blown away by the blast, there
were places where the end of a rebar that had been hooked
into the slab was still embedded in the concrete. This was the
essential clue.
As I studied the report,
it became clear that it could still serve a useful function
in the judicial process. When justice Gray handed down his
verdict in favor of Penguin and Lipstadt, Irving immediately
sought leave to appeal, which was refused at that time. In
the late summer of 2000 Irving reapplied for leave to
appeal, claiming, among other things, that not being a cremation
engineer or a chemist, I should not have been allowed to testify
as an expert witness on the Auschwitz crematoria. In response,
barristers Rampton and Rogers defended my position that as a
historian I had the duty to consider evidence concerning the
existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz and the function of
Auschwitz as a center of mass extermination from a variety
of sources, including eyewitness accounts, contemporary
documents, archaeological remains, photographic evidence,
and chemical analysis.
[...]
Besides engaging Green
to submit an expert report on the chemistry, I also ensured
that the recent research by Keren, McCarthy and Mazal on the
"holes" was made available to the Court of Appeal. Because
Rudolf had raised this issue in his affidavit, this gave me
an opportunity to submit the Keren, McCarthy, and Mazal
report as an appendix to my rebuttal of Rudolf. I added a
second report written by Paul Zucchi of Yolles Engineering in
Toronto. I had asked Zucchi to review the report on the holes, and
he had suggested engaging in a series of engineering
calculations on what would have been the most likely place
for holes to be inserted in the reinforced concrete slab
that covered the gas chamber. Zucchi concluded that "the
authors present a strong and sustainable case that openings
described as Zyklon vents 1, 2, and 4 were installed in the
roof of the building during the course of construction."
With such support, I felt justified in keeping my comment on
Rudolf's assertions to a minimum.
While the "discovery" of three of the four holes had effectively
answered Irving's challenge made on the eleventh day of the trial,
I judged it wise to provide the Appeal Court with the
historical context of the issue. The holes were, so to
speak, the fig leaf to hide the nakedness of the
negationists.
--
Albrecht Kolthoff
Kurt Knoll
Kurt Knoll.
=========
"Michael Ragland" <ragl...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:12029-3D...@storefull-2256.public.lawson.webtv.net...
Daniel Keren
[...]
# If Van Pelt felt there was such a strong and sustainable case as
# evidenced by the Mazal team and corroborated by Paul Zucchi, then why
# weren't Rudolph's assertions strongly countered and Mazal team's
# evidence presented to the Appeal Court instead of merely being stuffed
# in the appendix to a rebuttal to Rudolph?
That's an easy one. The "holes report" was written and submitted as a reply
to Rudolf's material submitted by Irving to the appeals court. However, in
the last moment, Irving withdrew his material. Therefore, the "holes
report" had to be withdrawn too, according to the law.
One may speculate on why Irving withdrew Rudolf's report, but that is
really quite clear.
-Danny Keren.
Michael Ragland
-Danny Keren.
Yes, it appears likely Irving withdrew his material at the last moment
because of the submission of Mazal team's report. Either that or Irving
decided he didn't have enough money to appeal and so withdrew the
material.
Has Irving submitted any other materials to the Appeal Court and either
withdrawn them or not withdrawn them? Was Rudolph's report the only
material Irving submitted to the Appeal Court he withdrew?
If Irving has submitted any materials to the Appeal Court is there a
time limit by which he has to take legal action or the materials will be
inactive or destroyed? How long does Irving have to appeal his loss or
has the mark already been reached?
Given Irving's current financial and legal circumstances it seems
unlikely he would have the resources available to appeal. But even if he
had all the money in the world he would be much more handicapped by the
fact he is a fraud.
Since you're not a lawyer you may not know the answers to some of my
questions but I would think you would know if Irving has submitted any
materials to the Appeal Court other than the Rudolph report he withdrew.
MR
Michael Ragland
Dr. Keren:
My mind is often like an editor which comes back to the subject again.
Assuming Irving did withdraw the Rudolph material that still doesn't
explain why Mazal team's report didn't strongly counter Rudolph's
assertions or why Mazal team's evidence was buried in the appendix to a
rubuttal to Rudolph. You're not dealing with a dummie Dr. Keren.
In an attempt to find some information regarding Irving's appeal and the
Germar Rudolph report I came across a CODOH discussion board. Yes, these
people are offensive to me but a few nevertheless make some interesting
points.
One stated the following:
"I am not familiar with the British legal rules for appeals. We had been
given the impression that Irving would provide new evidence in the
appeal (including possibly Germar Rudolph expert testimony) to shore up
his case. To this American lawyer that idea seemed odd. In
our courts an appeal is generally based on the record and evidence in
the trial court. It is not an opportunity to retry the case or to shore
up gaps in the original case, with rare exceptions. Basically, it is
intended to correct errors in
the interpretation of the law by the trial court."
And another responded:
"The Court of Appeal can overturn a decision if it was wrong. New
evidence can only be introduced after a written application has been
accepted by the Court of Appeal. Irving's barrister specifically said no
such application would be made to hear new evidence from Rudolf or the
eyewitness. I suspect that if an application to hear Rudolf had been
made, the Court of Appeal would have accepted it."
I'm confused. These people in the Holocaust denial movement seem sincere
in their belief that Irving never submitted any Rudolph material to the
Appeal Court. Also, the question is raised since the Rudolph Report was
not part of the original trial it would generally be impermissable on
appeal (at least in American courts). One respondent states in Britain
new evidence can only be introduced after a written application has been
accepted by the Court of Appeal.
My question to you is are these Holocaust deniers wrong about Irving not
submitting the Rudolph Report to the Appeal Court or is there some kind
of separate preliminary legal process at work here? If so, what is it
and how is it different from what has been described here?
You make it quite clear the "holes report" was written and submitted as
a reply to Rudolph's material submitted to the appeals court.
One thing I've learned is everything is politics and I hate politics.
Michael Ragland
Michael Ragland
The situation regarding Irving's submission of the Rudolph Report
doesn't make alot of sense. These are Rudolph's own words:
"David Irving refused to present Germar Rudolf as an expert witness.
Here is the price he has to pay for it: He lost his law suit, and has to
pay $3.2 million (AP) or even $4.5 million (Reuters). Justice Gray made
it pretty clear that refusing to present me as a witness forced him to
reject Irving's law suit."
Of course, the most pretentious, bombastic, narcissistic and incorrect
statement Rudolph makes is where he states, "Justice Gray made it pretty
clear that refusing to present me as a witness forced him to reject
Irving's law suit."
What I find odd is why Irving would submit the Rudolph Report to the
Appeal Court when he had declined to present Rudolph as an expert
witness.
So Irving decided to submit the Rudolph Report to the Appeal Court but
withdrew it and proceeded to appeal without it. If that is the case,
Rudolph was disregarded twice by Irving.
MR
Kurt Knoll
of them call each other windmill operators meaning they to do change
their mind with the wind of opportunity. You Van Pelt is no differed I
have seen him and his performance on Television he will tell you and
your Holohoaxers anything you want to hear. His explanation on how the
concrete slaps are supposedly moving after the collapse of the building
is simply amazing. Maybe you should once listening in the Construction
and demolition trade to get a basic education and understanding. But of
course like always you people will not . Why should you when his
fantasia will work to your and your Holohoax.
Kurt Knoll.
Canada.
"Albrecht Kolthoff" <kolt...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:afev71$dna0q$1...@ID-3778.news.dfncis.de...
> Michael Ragland wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >If Van Pelt felt there was such a strong and sustainable case as
> >evidenced by the Mazal team and corroborated by Paul Zucchi, then why
> >weren't Rudolph's assertions strongly countered and Mazal team's
> >evidence presented to the Appeal Court instead of merely being
stuffed
> >in the appendix to a rebuttal to Rudolph?
>
> Daniel Keren already answered that; Irving withdrew Rudolf's report.
>
> [...]
>
> >Since David Irving may not appeal since he is in arrears and had his
> >property confiscated, the issue may be moot in this specific
instance.
> >But it is quite likely there will be a similar trial in the
> >future...unfortunately.
>
> I don't think so. It seems to me that the "no holes, no holocaust"
denier
> rhetoric isn't used that much anymore these days.
>
> [...]
>
> >Does the Auschwitz State Museum and Polish government ever plan to
> >refurbish Auschwitz? I understand the ceilings to the gas chambers
are
> >crumbling and almost totally caved in.
>
> Nothing that I would know of.
>
> [...]
>
> --
> Albrecht Kolthoff
Daniel Keren
# Daniel Keren wrote:
## ragl...@webtv.net (Michael Ragland) writes:
### If Van Pelt felt there was such a strong and sustainable case as
### evidenced by the Mazal team and corroborated by Paul Zucchi, then why
### weren't Rudolph's assertions strongly countered and Mazal team's
### evidence presented to the Appeal Court instead of merely being stuffed
### in the appendix to a rebuttal to Rudolph?
## That's an easy one. The "holes report" was written and submitted as a
## reply to Rudolf's material submitted by Irving to the appeals court.
## However, in the last moment, Irving withdrew his material. Therefore,
## the "holes report" had to be withdrawn too, according to the law.
##
## One may speculate on why Irving withdrew Rudolf's report, but that is
## really quite clear.
# Yes, it appears likely Irving withdrew his material at the last moment
# because of the submission of Mazal team's report. Either that or Irving
# decided he didn't have enough money to appeal and so withdrew the
# material.
It was not a question of money, as he had already appealed. He didn't
halt the appeal process, he simply pulled the report.
# Has Irving submitted any other materials to the Appeal Court and either
# withdrawn them or not withdrawn them? Was Rudolph's report the only
# material Irving submitted to the Appeal Court he withdrew?
I am aware of only one additional item which he submitted and also
withdrew, a report by a Polish Auschwitz survivor.
# Since you're not a lawyer you may not know the answers to some of my
# questions but I would think you would know if Irving has submitted any
# materials to the Appeal Court other than the Rudolph report he withdrew.
I told you what I know.
-Danny Keren.
Daniel Keren
# Dr. Keren:
#
# My mind is often like an editor which comes back to the subject again.
# Assuming Irving did withdraw the Rudolph material that still doesn't
# explain why Mazal team's report didn't strongly counter Rudolph's
# assertions or why Mazal team's evidence was buried in the appendix to a
# rubuttal to Rudolph.
The "holes report" did counter Rudolf's claims about the holes.
Other material countered other claims he made. As for it being
in the appendix, I don't see any problem with that.
# You're not dealing with a dummie Dr. Keren.
I didn't suggest you're a dummy.
[...]
# I'm confused. These people in the Holocaust denial movement seem sincere
# in their belief that Irving never submitted any Rudolph material to the
# Appeal Court.
He obviously did. I know that the defense received a copy. He then
withdrew it.
[...]
# My question to you is are these Holocaust deniers wrong about Irving not
# submitting the Rudolph Report to the Appeal Court
Either wrong or lying.
# or is there some kind of separate preliminary legal process at work
# here? If so, what is it and how is it different from what has been
# described here?
I don't really know British Law. I do know that the defense was
allowed to present new material only in reply to new material
submitted by Irving (I guess that this is a privilege of the
party that appeals).
# You make it quite clear the "holes report" was written and submitted
# as a reply to Rudolph's material submitted to the appeals court.
It was being written anyway, but indeed it was submitted in reply
to a certain part of Rudolf's report. A lot of other material was
submitted in reply to other parts of Rudolf's report.
-Danny Keren.
Daniel Keren
# Dr. Keren:
#
# The situation regarding Irving's submission of the Rudolph Report
# doesn't make alot of sense. These are Rudolph's own words:
#
# "David Irving refused to present Germar Rudolf as an expert witness.
# Here is the price he has to pay for it: He lost his law suit, and has to
# pay $3.2 million (AP) or even $4.5 million (Reuters). Justice Gray made
# it pretty clear that refusing to present me as a witness forced him to
# reject Irving's law suit."
Yes, that was hilarious.
# Of course, the most pretentious, bombastic, narcissistic and incorrect
# statement Rudolph makes is where he states, "Justice Gray made it pretty
# clear that refusing to present me as a witness forced him to reject
# Irving's law suit."
Indeed. It really appears at times that these people just don't
live in the real world, but in some fantasy land.
# What I find odd is why Irving would submit the Rudolph Report to the
# Appeal Court when he had declined to present Rudolph as an expert
# witness.
Well, perhaps he was more desperate after losing the trial. Irving
is so arrogant that it is quite probable he thought he'd win the
case all by himself.
# So Irving decided to submit the Rudolph Report to the Appeal Court but
# withdrew it and proceeded to appeal without it. If that is the case,
# Rudolph was disregarded twice by Irving.
Exactly. Couldn't have happened to a nicer fellow, right?
-Danny Keren.
Michael Ragland
Dr. Keren:
My recent grilling of Mazal and peppering you with questions isn't the
result of some turn towards Holocaust denial. I had come across
information on the internet regarding Mazal (which I won't reveal) which
suggested he was somewhat of a negative factor in combatting Holocaust
denial. Without specific information, however, I didn't have anything to
go on. The poster who stated this may be completely wrong or may have a
point. I wanted to attempt to find out. So I was left with what I could
find on the internet about Mazal.
As you can see it has resulted in a dead end in establishing Mazal is
any kind of negative factor in combatting Holocaust denial. That premise
may seem preposterous in light of Mr. Mazal's contributions,
achievements, stature, etc. but there is often more than meets the eye.
At the very least I believe I've brought it to the attention of those on
a.r. more information about Harry Mazal. Here is a list:
(a) Harry Mazal OBE is allegedly affiliated with Nizkor affiliate in San
Antonio. Allegedly donations to Nizkor are received through him. I say
"allegedly" because this information is from deniers.
(b) Harry Mazal OBE is the founder of the Mazal library which claims to
be the world's largest private collection of Holocaust materials.
(c) Harry Mazal OBE is the founder of The Holocaust History Project
(THHP) who boasts in five years it will be the largest source of
documentation on the Holocaust on the internet.
(d) Harry Mazal OBE sits on the H-Net Genocide editorial board.
(e) Harry Mazal OBE has been active in local politics, having been a
previous member of the Board of Adjustment for City of Hill Country
Village.
Harry Mazal OBE has, in a short time, built a mini empire out of the
Holocaust. Let's hope he is doing it for the right reasons and not
primarily glorifying himself.
Michael Ragland
Yes, that was hilarious.
-Danny Keren.
In a June 10th, 2002 post to alt.revisionism Reekard writes in response
Gord McFee
> Dr. Keren:
Mr Mazal does not follow this sewer, so I will set you straight.
> My recent grilling of Mazal and peppering you with questions isn't the
> result of some turn towards Holocaust denial. I had come across
> information on the internet regarding Mazal (which I won't reveal) which
> suggested he was somewhat of a negative factor in combatting Holocaust
> denial.
Utter rubbish. He was one of the first to combat Holocaust denial back
in the early 1990s on Genie and elsewhere.
> Without specific information, however, I didn't have anything to
> go on. The poster who stated this may be completely wrong or may have a
> point. I wanted to attempt to find out. So I was left with what I could
> find on the internet about Mazal.
>
> As you can see it has resulted in a dead end in establishing Mazal is
> any kind of negative factor in combatting Holocaust denial. That premise
> may seem preposterous in light of Mr. Mazal's contributions,
> achievements, stature, etc. but there is often more than meets the eye.
Sure there is.
> At the very least I believe I've brought it to the attention of those on
> a.r. more information about Harry Mazal. Here is a list:
>
> (a) Harry Mazal OBE is allegedly affiliated with Nizkor affiliate in San
> Antonio. Allegedly donations to Nizkor are received through him. I say
> "allegedly" because this information is from deniers.
Incorrect.
> (b) Harry Mazal OBE is the founder of the Mazal library which claims to
> be the world's largest private collection of Holocaust materials.
>
> (c) Harry Mazal OBE is the founder of The Holocaust History Project
> (THHP) who boasts in five years it will be the largest source of
> documentation on the Holocaust on the internet.
Incorrect.
> (d) Harry Mazal OBE sits on the H-Net Genocide editorial board.
>
> (e) Harry Mazal OBE has been active in local politics, having been a
> previous member of the Board of Adjustment for City of Hill Country
> Village.
>
> Harry Mazal OBE has, in a short time, built a mini empire out of the
> Holocaust.
Absolute poppycock.
> Let's hope he is doing it for the right reasons and not
> primarily glorifying himself.
Don't worry about it.
--
Gord McFee
I'll write no line before its time
Michael Ragland
Veri Sign Whois
http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois
Enter mazal.org and read results
You are Here: WHOIS -> Search Results
Search Results
Registrant:
San Antonio Area Foundation - Nizkor Fund c/o BASIC (MAZAL2-DOM) 600
Sandau Suite 400
San Antonio, TX 78216
US
Domain Name: MAZAL.ORG
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact:
Mazal, Harry (HM1296) hma...@TXDIRECT.NET
The Mazal
Library 600 Sandau, Suite 400 San Antonio, TX 78216 US
210-377-2742
Record expires on 28-Jun-2006.
Record created on 27-Jun-1997.
Database last updated on 27-Jun-2002 22:55:14 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.VERDAD.ORG
209.142.81.242
NS2.IDWORLD.NET 209.142.64.253
______________________________________
Harry Mazal is on the H-Net Genocide editorial board:
http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~genocide/editorial-board.html
______________________________________
Harry Mazal is creator of the Mazal library:
http://www.holocaust-history.org/team
______________________________________
Mr. McFee, I see absolutely nothing wrong with this information being
posted on alt.revisionism since it is in the public domain anyway.
Furthermore, it speaks of the achievements and contributions of Mr.
Mazal.
What I do find odd is your comments this verifiable information is
"poppycock" and "incorrect". I get the impression you've reacted
defensively and I don't understand why.
Hubris is not a enviable quality, even when you are on the correct side.
MR
Michael Ragland
Michael Ragland
Mr. McFee this thread was dead to begin with. There were, however, a few
omissions on my part regarding my last post.
Harry Mazal also runs a successful company which distributes laboratory
instruments and reagents.
Harry Mazal, S.A.
Laguna de Tamiahua No. 204
Col. Anahuac
11320 Mexico, D.F.
Tel: (011-52-5) 396-1133
Fax: (011-52-5) 396-8649
Contact: Mr. Alberto Videz Galvan, Industrial Sales Director
According to a 1998 consultant's group/Latin America Harry Mazal, SA is
one of the most important third country equipment manufacturers
operating in the Mexican market.
Gas Conversion technology
Industry analysis
consulatant's group/Latin America
The most important third country equipment manufacturers operating in
the Mexican market are:
AF Snyder General
Asea Brown Bovery
Beckman de Mexico
Harry Mazal
Mitsubishi
Tokyo Electric Power
Samsung
ABB Sistemas
Allen Bradley de Mexico
Siemens
And last but not least Mr. Mazal was a new member of Rare Fruit in 97'.
1997 Rare Fruit News
Harry W. Mazal is a new member and sends information about where to get
the Muy Dulce papaya.
MR
Gord McFee
Which of the above "verifiable" events did I label as "poppycock" or
"incorrect"? Reread my post for retention this time.
> Hubris is not a enviable quality, even when you are on the correct side.
That makes no sense at all.
Gord McFee
On 6/28/2002 5:13 AM, Michael Ragland wrote:
> Mr. McFee this thread was dead to begin with.
Then why are you continuing it?