Auschwitz: six facts, and seven questions

As we approach the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, to which celebration, bizarrely, the creators of the concentration camp, but not the liberators, have been invited - are we celebrating then the liberation, or the creation? - it seems an appropriate time to dig deeper into its history and find out what it truly was all about.

What follows are six indisputable facts, followed by my opinion.

Argue with the latter, if you like.

Any difficulty with length, here is the link

https://open.substack.com/pub/waltking/p/auschwitz-six-facts-and-seven-questions

FACT ONE:  AUSCHWITZ WAS A MAJOR MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX

Early on in WW2, Germany, lacking control of the seas, found itself cut off from vital supplies of petroleum and rubber for the war effort. The solution was to capitalise on their recent chemical developments in catalytic hydrogenation by building a giant military-industrial manufacturing complex, where IG Farben produced synthetic fuel from coal, and buna rubber, plus a huge Krupp munitions factory, for which there were five blast furnaces and five collieries. Needing a site which could provide plentiful coal and water at a distance from the war theatre, they chose a remote location in occupied southern Poland, a former Polish Army barracks, near the Vistula and Sola Rivers which provided the water. It became known as Auschwitz.

What they didn’t have was an adequate workforce: labour shortage for example hindered the buna project. To provide this they rounded up members of despised ethnic groups: Jews, Poles, Roma, etc, transported and housed them in a concentration camp adjacent to the factories to provide forced labour: hence the sardonic sign above the entry gate: Arbeit macht frei. Work sets you free.

Yes, you see, it was, first and foremost, a work camp.

QUESTION ONE:

When the German high command decided to remove a minority it found troublesome, which of these options did they consider?

1.     Attempt to arrange another location to receive them, eg Eastern Europe, Palestine, Madagascar, Siberia?

2.     Make use of them as forced labour for the war effort?

3. Send them to the nearest military camp to face a firing squad?

4.     Round them up from all parts of the country and transport them across vast distances to a remote industrial estate in the far south of an adjacent country which needed their labour, but then curiously to kill them with an inefficient method designed for an entirely different purpose?

FACT TWO: THE GAS CHAMBERS WERE INSTALLED TO CONTROL DISEASE

A severe health problem soon surfaced. Some of the prisoners arrived contaminated with lice, and some of these bore typhus bacteria: typhus was at that time endemic in Eastern Europe. Hygiene conditions at the camp initially were poor, epidemics soon broke out, there was no cure and so many were dying from the disease.

The solution was to strip their clothes when they arrived, shave their hair, send them to hot showers, and fumigate their clothing with the chemical ZyklonB which had been developed in Germany in the 1920s and which had been the standard defumigation treatment for typhus, within which hydrogen cyanide (HCN) was the active ingredient. This practice was enabled in all labour camps in 1942. The action was performed in small fumigation “gas chambers”, and it enabled the epidemics to be controlled. When supplies ran low, the epidemics returned, and deaths went up: when supply resumed, the disease was prevented, and the death rate diminished: the opposite of what you might have expected if you adhere to the standard text. The catastrophic death peaks occurred in mid to late 1942 and again in early 1943.

When safer DDT became available before the end of the war and microwave delousing was invented by Siemens (the forerunner of microwave ovens) the supplies to the camp of ZyklonB ceased entirely. But deaths then shot up disastrously towards the end because sanitation, transportation, provisioning and medical supplies had totally broken down because of allied bombing sorties from bases in Italy.

The bosses of Degesch, which manufactured this life saving chemical, were executed by the Allies after the war.

QUESTION TWO:

You are in charge of the work camp at Auschwitz and need to maintain a fit and healthy workforce for the factories. Do you divert treatment from protecting your workforce, running down scarce stocks of protective chemicals, to kill people who could otherwise be used to maintain workforce levels?

FACT THREE: NO POISON GAS EVER ENTERED THE SUPPOSED EXTERMINATION CHAMBER

When hydrogen cyanide gas meets the walls of a building it is absorbed to some extent and reacts there to form Prussian Blue:  Fe₄[Fe(CN)₆]₃ [ iron(III) hexacyanoferrate(II)], a water insoluble product which is very stable. Walls containing this compound exhibit a blue stain which remains for decades. The walls of the small (a mere ten cubic metres, too small for mass gassing) admitted fumigation chambers at Auschwitz display it (below), the walls of the alleged and exhibited “extermination” chamber do not.

On a number of occasions, wall samples have been secretly gathered and professionally analysed (by Fred Leuchter and later by Germar Rudolf). They confirmed that hydrogen cyanide residue was present in the walls of the fumigation chambers but absent in the “extermination” chamber.

There are numerous examples of how that “extermination chamber” which was “restored” after the war was faked by the Russians (it was in USSR occupied territory) - it is in effect just a post-war mock-op made for tourists that has neither a way of swiftly releasing the poison vapour, nor any ventilation system at all to get the poison out of the room after the deed, and a chimney that is not connected to anything - that are too many to elaborate here.

OK - just three more, then: there is a drain on the floor because it was originally partly a washroom (three rooms were combined to create the chamber); it could not have had any windows, or they would have been shattered by the panicking victims, and it would have needed large, outward opening strong steel doors, so that corpses lying in front of them couldn’t block them. Here is the flimsy door that opened the wrong way, which somehow prevented a thousand victims being gassed from smashing their way out.

QUESTION THREE:

If not at Auschwitz, where, then, did the gassing of Jews take place?

FACT FOUR: SIX MILLION DID NOT DIE AT THE LABOUR CAMPS

Far from wanting those people to die, the Nazis needed them for the forced labour. But of course, many did die of disease. But not six million. That magic number which had a long history of Jews at alleged risk of this or that threat, was frequently reported in the Jewish controlled press such as the NYT. It first appeared there in 1867 and was repeated 34 further times up to 1939. In all some 106 citations have been identified (by Kollerstrom) before 1942. So the final alleged figure of six million for Jewish losses as a result of National Socialist persecution seems to have been firmly set before the war.

The official number at Auschwitz has been continually rounded down and is now 1.1 million of which 1 million are said to have been Jews. Two of the most famous internees were definitely not gassed: Anne Frank died of typhus (actually at Bergen-Belsen) after a long but unsuccessful hospital treatment, while her father Otto was successfully treated and survived the war. There was a hospital building complex in Auschwitz known as Construction Sector 3. And a swimming pool, which apparently has had a sign erected saying “This is not a swimming pool”, where Olympic swimmer Alfred Nakache put on displays and gave lessons. Weddings took place….

But I digress.

The Arolsen Archive collected by the Red Cross is the biggest and most reliable collection of data from the work camps. Total deaths will no longer be released (I wonder why not?), but individuals’ may be sourced. Here the individual camp data from 1984.

The text adds data from other registries at the end of 1983 that amounted to about 91,000, so the overall total then amounted to 373,468. The last total data issued in 1993 (possibly raised since Gorbachev had released the Death Book records at the end of the Cold War) gave 60,056 at Auschwitz and their total of 291,081, plus other registries so a verifiable total of close on 400,000 in all, in all main camps. Not just Jews, but all minorities. Mainly Poles and Jews, roughly equal numbers it is said: so that’s about 200,000 verifiable Jewish victims, then, out of the alleged 6,000,000. And Arolsen made a statement in 2006 to the effect that they do not have a single death registered as having been due to cyanide gas.

Diversion. It’s interesting to note that the recorded death total at Mauthausen which was in Austria was greater than at Auschwitz. According to Wikipedia the murder method there was the “gas van”. Inmates were housed in the rear and were poisoned with the van’s diesel exhaust fumes by carbon monoxide and “after their deaths, their bodies were ‘thrown out blue, wet with sweat and urine, the legs covered with excrement and menstrual blood’". 

Two problems with that. The carbon monoxide (CO) level from diesel exhaust is too low to kill (Walter Luftl, Friedrich Paul Berg): diesel engines emit virtually no carbon monoxide but have a high percentage of oxygen; and CO poisoning victims turn cherry-red, not blue. Incidentally, cyanide does the same thing, and a number of ‘witnesses” such as on the Wikipedia entry make the same error saying the cyanide gassed victims turned blue. Nope.

There were supposedly also diesel gas vans in Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka. There seems little doubt now that they were merely transit camps, yet a figure of 2,000,000 diesel exhaust victims has been conjured up in them to get the total to the fabled six million. There would have had to have been hundreds of gas vans to achieve that number, and yet no examples were discovered at the end of the war, and not a single photograph exists. The “gas van” hypothesis has been totally discredited along with its 2,000,000 victims. But I am drifting away again now from my main topic!

Finally here we must consider the matter of disposing of the bodies. The ground conditions (high water table) could not support burial and there were crematoria for that purpose. I can’t go into the detail here, but work by Mattogno and Deana concluded that from February 16, 1942 to October 25, 1943, about 39 kilograms of coke were required per corpse based on verifiable death and coke delivery data, which tallies with reality, whereas for the claimed death rate it would have been 2 to 3, which is impossible; and looking at the capacity of all the crematoria installed at Auschwitz, the maximum possible number of cremations throughout the war would have been about 132,000. The reason for this relatively small capacity is that they were never designed for mass cremations, you see, they consist of standard single compartments such that remains could be returned to the relatives. That number, then, imposes an absolute upper limit on Auschwitz deaths from any cause. The official figure of alleged deaths there, which, remember, is 1.1 million, includes 880,000 “unregistered deaths”: how do you obtain unrecorded figures? How they have been arrived at I have been unable to discover. I can only think it works like this: how many do we think died, call that X, and how many are recorded, call that Y. Then unrecorded deaths must have been X-Y. Simple! I have seen one instance where X must have been the magic 6 million!

QUESTION FOUR:

Help me here with a bit of maths. Please bear with me while I set the scene.

German demographer Walter N. Sanning in his book Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry, from The International History Review, August, 1985, which contains 24 tables, 453 references and footnotes quoting 98 publications and authors (almost entirely Allied, Zionist, and other “sympathetic” sources), with 205 pages of text, arrived at a figure of slightly under 3 million Jews who in 1941, just before the Holocaust is said to have started, lived in areas of Europe that were or later came for a short time under the German sphere of influence.

Sanning’s work has been criticised in some respects, but in a letter regarding the Jewish question dated June 24, 1940, Foreign Secretary Ribbentrop told Heydrich, who was tasked with dealing with the matter:

Das Gesamtproblem —es handelt sich bereits um rund 3,25 Millionen Juden in den heute deutscher Hoheitsgewalt unterstehenden Gebieten – kann durch Auswanderung nicht mehr gelöst werden; eine territoriale Endlösung wird daher notwendig.

Yandex translation:

The overall problem - there are already about 3.25 million Jews in the areas under German jurisdiction today - cannot be replaced by emigration; a territorial final solution therefore becomes necessary.

So two well informed sources, in reasonable agreement, 3,000,000, then, give or take.

By 1965, the Bonn government had already received 3,375,000 applications from Jew “survivors” for Holocaust reparations. By 2009, this figure had reached 5,360,710.

So, if there were about 3 million Jews in the relevant area before the Holocaust, and about 5 million that survived it, how many perished between 1941 and 1945?

More on the Territorial Final Solution later.

FACT FIVE: ZYKLONB CANNOT FUNCTION WITHOUT BEING HEATED

The story of the extermination chambers was recounted in April 1946 at Nuremburg, when the camp commandant Rudolf Höss confessed to killing two and a half million Jews using cyanide gas. ZyklonB, the eight page confession he signed stated, was poured through holes in the ceiling and after three to 15 minutes, one or two thousand were dead: half an hour later, the staff dragged the corpses out.

Let’s look at the Degesch fumigation equipment which fed ZyklonB into the delousing chamber as it can be seen today in Dachau, and see how the technology could have been applied to the “extermination” chamber.

At the top, the can opener controlled from the outside. The Zyklon pellets slid through the pipe into a wire-mesh basket at the bottom, through which warm air at about 35C was conducted by the heater/fan unit (below the can opener). It would take about half an hour to release all the gas from the pellets. Fans circulated the gas around the chamber and after an hour or two, the delousing operation would be complete, the gas vented from the chamber, and the clothing, etc, removed.

The four main design features of the Degesch equipment were well thought out and were:

1. Heating to boil the hydrogen cyanide off, the boiling point is 25.7C so a temperature substantially above that is needed to provide enough energy (it is absorbed on diatomaceous earth pellets so extra energy is needed to release from that too), and 35C was chosen to do the job. Below 25.7C the gas can only slowly evaporate (think of boiling a kettle), and the cooler, the slower.

2. Fans to circulate the gas quickly through the chamber.

3. A rack to retain the degassed granules for safe, easy disposal.

4. Forced ventilation to enable the chamber to be cleared of gas and safely entered after the fumigation is complete.

Note, next, that the supposed “extermination” chamber contained none of those features. So how would that fact affect its operation, as described by Höss?

1. The need for a temperature of about 35C, with no heating provided. Here, the year round temperatures in southern Poland, (actually Krakow, about 50 km away).

The cold season lasts for 3.5 months, from November 20 to March 6, with an average daily high temperature below 6°C. That’s at the very least 30 Celsius degrees too cold to efficiently release the gas throughout that entire period. According to engineer Walter Luftl, without a heating provision, to release all the gas it would have taken 6 hours at 30C, 15.5 hours at 25C (that’s the peak summer average daily temperature), and 32 hours at 5C.

Previous writers have drawn attention to those facts, but they may have overlooked the heat of the bodies. Let’s take a look at that. So, four guys carry the canisters on to the roof, open the four hatches (which were installed after the war, in 1947), pour the contents in and close up. The pellets fall on to four small areas, any landing on the heads and shoulders of the inmates will fall on down to join the rest on the cold ground. The warm bodies heat up the air around them which convects up to the cold, poorly insulated walls and ceiling where it cools and returns, cold, to the cold floor. It’s warm air up, and cool air down (physics). So the floor remains cool and pellets there experience scarcely any body heat. And so Luftl’s calculations hold good.

2. No means of distributing the gas throughout the chamber. So the gas is generated very, very slowly within four small cold floor areas of the 210 square metre room, from where it has to diffuse throughout the whole room to equalise the concentration in all parts to about 200 ppm. Because of the slow rate of evaporation and the large volume of the room, this will take many, many hours, not three minutes. If the room were fairly airtight, then the entire population would have suffocated first anyway in a few hours: so you must wonder, then, what was the point of the gas.

3. No provision to retain the granules. Once everybody can be announced dead, the chamber is opened. Gas is still being very slowly liberated, the bodies and the floor are infested with granules still slowly emitting cyanide fumes, so I hope all the operatives are wearing effective gas masks while clearing up the mess.

4. No means of ventilating the chamber to enable safe easy removal of bodies. Operating staff would have to wear protective equipment at all times. Surely this and the other deficiencies would have been dealt with in the interest of health and safety of their workforce.

Some years after the war, British Military Intelligence sergeant Bernard Clarke, a Jew, proudly described how he and five other British soldiers tortured the former commandant Höss for three days and nights to obtain his “confession”. This was made public in 1983 in the book Legions of Death, written by Rupert Butler. Höss himself explained his actions in a conversation during a car journey between prisons in 1946, with a witness, Moritz von Schirmeister, who was sitting behind him. He was reported as saying:

“Certainly I signed a statement that I killed two and a half million Jews. But I could just as well have said that it was five million Jews. There are certain methods by which any confession can be obtained, whether it is true or not”.

So to summarise so far: the “extermination” chamber never inflicted any cyanide poisoning because the walls exhibit no traces, and even if it had been attempted as described, without heating, it was far too cold in there to permit any significant release of any poison gas.

QUESTION FIVE:

Do you think that the truth can be obtained through torture?

FACT SIX: NOBODY AT THE TIME REPORTED THE MASS KILLINGS

The war generals, Churchill, Eisenhower, writing their memoirs; The Red Cross, which actually visited Auschwitz, and published a 1,600 page account of its activities during the war. Not a single mention in any, not one. The British Intelligence who listened to communications at Auschwitz once the Enigma code was broken, transcripts of which were embarrassingly released in 1997 after the 50 year rule: the returns from Auschwitz, the largest of the camps with 20,000 prisoners, mentioned illness as the main cause of death, but included references to shootings and hangings.  There were no references in the decrypts to gassings. And all 29 volumes of diaries of Goebbels, Nazi second in command, each of 500 pages finally published, do not allude to a lethal intent towards any ethnic group, but consistently point towards an export programme as the ‘Final Solution.’ Hitler had repeatedly said that he wanted the solution of the Jewish Question put off until after the war was over, when all Jews would be removed from occupied Europe.

QUESTION SIX:

Is it not reasonable to suggest that if the Allies had discovered reliable evidence of German atrocities, these writers and organisations would have jumped on it and publicised it widely after the war to discredit the enemy?

The story that the Final Solution was extermination gained substantial publicity from a document presented at Nuremburg, (Document 710-PS). Originally issued by Göring to Heydrich, this is what it said.

Berlin, den 31.7.1941 In Ergän.zung der Ihnen bereits mit Erlass vom 24.1.39 übertragenen Aufgabe, die Judenfrage in Form der Auswanderung oder Evakuierung einer den Zeitverhältnissen entsprechend möglichst günstigen Lösung zuzuführen, beauftrage ich Sie hiermit, alle erforderlichen Vorbereitungen in organisatorischer, sachlicher und materieller Hinsicht zu treffen für eine Gesamtlösung der Judenfrage im deutschen Einflussgebiet in Europa.

Yandex translation:

Berlin, 31.7.1941. In addition to the task already assigned to them by decree of 24.1.39, the The Jewish question in the form of emigration or evacuation in accordance with the most favorable solution possible, I hereby entrust you with all necessary preparations from an organizational, factual and material point of view to meeting for an overall solution of the Jewish question in the German sphere of influence in Europe.

Auswanderung: emigration.

Evakuierung: evacuation.

The Nuremberg prosecutor Robert M.W. Kempner misinterpreted it, saying: “Thereby Heydrich and his henchmen were officially entrusted with the administration of murder.” And this misinformation has stuck, to this day.

QUESTION SEVEN:

You would be severely punished if you publicised the above in any of the following countries: Austria, Belgium, Czechia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Switzerland, and Ukraine.

Why do you think that is ?

I need to wind up by dealing briefly with what is widely described as the conventional master work on the Holocaust, The Destruction of European Jews by Raul Hilberg. In his review “The Incompleteness of a Masterpiece” which is otherwise full of praise, Gie van den Berghe wrote in 1990:

“Hilberg had to turn to eyewitnesses. Because he has always avoided using the sources created by them, he had no relevant criteria to separate chaff from wheat, and he cannot interpret and analyse these more subjective sources more or less correctly….

“In this chapter on the killing centers, the otherwise very accurate and conscientious Hilberg uses the ego-material in a remarkably inaccurate and uncritical way. Of the many thousand eyewitness reports on Nazi camps he has only used about ten. He considers events sufficiently proved if one eyewitness mentioned them. He generalises on the basis of one eyewitness report and even omits the conditional tense here. He is astonishingly ill informed about the consulted eyewitnesses and their writings. He also makes a number of capital errors. Unfortunately this unjudicious use of ego-documents makes the chapter on extermination camps less convincing than the rest of the book.”

So this Holocaust Believer finds that this number one Holocaust masterpiece’s flaw is that its treatment of the “extermination” camps is “less convincing”!

I think it is safe to stop at this point, don’t you? If you are not convinced by now, I can do no more.

That full review here:

https://www.journalbelgianhistory.be/en/system/files/article_pdf/BTNG-RBHC%2C%2021%2C%201990%2C%201-2%2C%20pp%20110-124.pdf

CONCLUSION

Well, what to make of all that? I went into the research with an open mind. That many died, is indisputable, but a holocaust requires intent. I looked at a lot of writings: many, many links I turned to had been taken down, censored, similarly many YouTube videos have disappeared (but I found some short vital ones on Rumble, links at the end, do watch them). I wound up with an examination of the very long Wikipedia entry. By then I was well aware of the classic errors (well let’s not pussyfoot, the lies) and found many of them repeated there, sufficiently to reject the whole article as unreliable. On such a topic, witnesses cannot be relied upon: they can lie, they can be bought, they can be mistranslated, they can be tortured. And undoubtedly have been. All we can safely rely upon are the established scientific and mathematical facts. I have put those key facts in bold in the text, and let’s be clear about this, to accept the Holocaust myth you have to demolish them, ALL OF THEM.

As a former professional chemist, I was surprised and delighted to find that chemistry was central to the argument, it spoke volumes to me, and I hope that I have conveyed the substance of the argument to you, because it is the essential scientific illiteracy that confounds the entire holocaust gassing story. It is simply nonsense. And so, based on those above unarguable facts, my opinion is that as it has been reported, that holocaust story is disproven, and that two misunderstandings (or more likely, wilful misdirections) arose originally, creating the “Holocaust”: that regarding the true reason for the existence of Auschwitz, and also the true purpose of the gas chambers.

But over the past 40 years the lack of foundations for that shaky edifice has been revealed by heroes such as Butz, Leuchter, Rudolf, Faurisson, Kollerstrom and others, often at great personal cost. Their revelations gave the authorities two choices: to back off and admit the mistake, or to double down on the myth and crack down ferociously on the truth seekers to silence them. The result has been unjust criminalising and the emergence of an evidence-free religion, some call it Holocaustianity, which has its temples and pilgrimages to its holy site, whose teachings must be obeyed by all and to refuse is to be labelled a heretic, and worse.

Future generations will marvel at the way in which discussion of a manifestly transparent, self-serving Zionist fabrication became taboo. I gather that the Zionist reputation for truth-telling, always tenuous, has been taking a terminal bashing of late, and so now it should be essential to question it. Who was that guy who said “… you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”? Well, it seems it depends now on where you live: I am fortunate to be both retired and to live in a country* where to seek the truth is not a crime.

Concluding thought, then. I think it is important to realise that Israel, with its long history of appalling conduct, now clearly having emerged as the world’s most abominable, barbaric, terrorist nation, feels wholly unconstrained by any humanitarian norms because of its supposed history of persecution; and that exposing the centrepiece of that history as a demonstrable fraud is an important step in an overdue act of reining it in and bringing its war criminals to justice. Now is the time.

If you think that is a worthwhile ambition, please share this article. We all must do what we can to turn the tide.

Let’s finish with a few more quotations.

“E pur si muove.” Galileo Galilei.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Article 19 in The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.

“That no one has ever found a written order for the physical extermina tion of the Jews originating with Adolf Hitler or any other leading National Socialist politician is agreed upon by historians of all orientations.” Jürgen Graf.

The impossible does not become any "truer" when it is claimed by many people. Walter Luftl.

“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” Kevin Strom.

Similarly, for nearly three generations Jewish and Zionist groups have maintained their gigantic ideological Ponzi scheme, successfully indoctrinating nearly all Westerners with enormous guilt over the six million murdered Jewish civilians, mostly killed in Nazi gas chambers, a historical event that almost certainly never happened. And by regularly drawing upon that nearly bottomless moral bank account, the Israelis have been empowered to commit some of the worst crimes in modern world history, perhaps now even bringing all of human civilization to the brink of nuclear annihilation in a Third World War. Ron Unz.

“If everyone who claims to be a survivor at Auschwitz really is one, then whom did Hitler kill?” Norman Finkelstein’s (Jewish) mother.

ANSWER TO QUESTION ONE:

Options one and two were pursued. Option one became impossible to fully implement as they failed to seize Eastern Europe and then lacked the ability to transport to the others. Some however had already gone to Palestine. The Madagascar plan was first discussed in 1938, but the Vichy government (it was a French colony) during the war wouldn’t accept it. There was a Jewish oblast in Siberia set up by Stalin but this did not succeed.

* China

NOW WATCH DAVID COLE IN AUSCHWITZ, 15 MINUTES.

https://rumble.com/v54n8tu-david-cole-in-auschwitz.html

AND INSIDE AUSCHWITZ, 15 MINUTES.

https://rumble.com/v4b3jol-inside-auschwitz..-15-minutes-video.html