In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful
=== News Update ===
Lectures on the Holocaust: Public Controversies 2.2
By: atheo on: 14.03.2008 [04:02 ] (118 reads)
Written by Germar Rudolf
2.2. Gas Chambers in the German Reich Proper
R: During the International Military Tribunal, Sir Hartley Shawcross, chief prosecutor for the United Kingdom, stated:88
“Murder conducted like some mass production industry in the gas chambers and the ovens of Auschwitz, Dachau, Treblinka, Buchenwald, Mauthausen, Maidanek, and Oranienburg =Sachsenhausen.”
R: These claims of mass murder in homicidal gas chambers in those camps are based upon witness testimonies like the one by Charles Hauter, who was a prisoner in the Buchenwald camp:89
“An obsession with machinery literally abounded when it came to extermination. Since it had to occur quite rapidly, a special form of industrialization was required. The gas chambers answered that need in a very different way. Some, rather refined in conception, were supported by pillars of porous material, with which the gas formed and then seeped through the walls. Others were simpler in structure. But all were sumptuous in appearance. It was easy to see that the architects had conceived them with pleasure, devoting great attention to them, gracing them with all the resources of their aesthetic sense. These were the only parts of the camp that had truly been constructed with love.”
R: The French government was particularly fanciful in their description of the alleged gas chamber at Buchenwald in an official document:90
“Everything had been provided for down to the smallest detail. In 1944, at Buchenwald, they had even lengthened a railway line so that the deportees might be led directly to the gas chamber. Certain of the gas chambers had a floor that tipped and immediately directed the bodies into the room with the crematory oven.”
L: But didn’t you just state in the previous chapter that there was no gas chamber at the Buchenwald camp?
R: Quite right, and this fact is basically agreed upon by all historians today. Yet during the immediate postwar years, things were a little different. As another example, take the confession by Franz Ziereis, last commander of the Mauthausen camp, who was shot into the stomach three times and was therefore – not sent to a hospital, but instead interrogated by a former inmate of Mauthausen, Hans Marsalek, while bleeding to death. In his “deathbed confession,” Ziereis is said to have testified the following:91
“SS Gruppenführer Glücks gave the order to designate the weak prisoners as sick and to kill them by gas in a large installation. There, around 1-11/2 million persons were killed. The area in question is named Hartheim and is located 10 kilometers in the direction of Passau.”
L: Who would take such a “confession” of a deadly wounded man seriously, who is bleeding to death and who does not only not receive any help, but who is also “interrogated” by one of his former inmates?
R: Well, today no one really does. But right after the war and during the Nuremberg Military Tribunal, these confessions were taken seriously.92 The room in Hartheim castle that is today claimed to have been this gas chamber measures some 280 sq ft.93
L: Excuse me? A million people or more killed in a tiny chamber of a castle?
R: Yes, three to five times as many people are said to have been killed in this tiny room, if we follow Ziereis or Marsalek, respectively, than Americans ever died during WWII in the European theater of war.
Anyway, it took some 15 years before these outrageous claims were challenged. In the beginning of the 1960s, a storm went through the German media: an activist of the political right had publicly questioned the existence of homicidal gas chambers in the Dachau concentration camp, even though every visitor could view this gas chamber in Dachau. The journalists were shocked, the cry to bring charges was heard.94 But nothing came of it, for among other reasons German historiography at that time wasn’t itself entirely certain of the existence of homicidal gassings in Dachau. During the course of the argument, for example, Martin Broszat of the German federal Institute for Contemporary History (Institute für Zeitgeschichte) – he later became Director of that Institute – wrote a letter to the editor of the German weekly newspaper Die Zeit, in which he stated:95
“Neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners gassed. The gas chamber in Dachau was never entirely ‘completed’ and put into operation. Hundreds of thousands of prisoners who perished in Dachau or other concentration camps in the territory of the Reich proper, were victims above all of the catastrophic hygienic and supply conditions …. The mass extermination of the Jews by gassing began in 1941/1942 and took place exclusively at several … locations, above all in the occupied Polish territory (but nowhere in the Reich proper): in Auschwitz-Birkenau, in Sobibor on the Bug, in Treblinka, Chelmno, and Belzec. There, but not in Bergen-Belsen, Dachau or Buchenwald, those mass extermination facilities disguised as shower baths or disinfection rooms were set up ….
Dr. Martin Broszat, Institut für Zeitgeschichte, Munich”
L: What was the German Reich proper?
R: That is Germany within the borders of December 31, 1937, thus before the reunification with Austria, the Sudetenland, and the Memel region.
L: Broszat contradicts himself here though: If no extermination facilities were set up in Dachau, how can he say at the same time that the mass extermination facilities in Dachau were never completed?
R: This internal contradiction is absolutely symbolic of the disagreement among historians with respect to this question. But Broszat was not alone in having this opinion. On January 24, 1993, no less a person than the famous “Nazi hunter” Simon Wiesenthal joined Broszat in his opinion, when he wrote in the U.S. magazine Stars and Stripes (see p. 185):
“It is true that there were no extermination camps on German soil and thus no mass gassings such as those that took place at Auschwitz, Treblinka and other camps. A gas chamber was in the process of being built at Dachau, but it was never completed.”
R: Both, however, contradict other researchers, as for example a work which was published in 1983 by authors who the mainstream considers to be the most reputable authorities in this field. The main editors of it were Eugen Kogon…
L: Didn’t we just make his acquaintance as a propagandist exposed by Rassinier?
Ill. 7: Memorial plaque at the alleged site of the “gas chamber” in the Ravensbrück concentration camp: “Location of the gas chamber – December 1944 – Spring 1945″
R: … Adalbert Rückerl, the then Director of the Zentrale Stelle der Landesjustizverwaltungen zur Aufklärung nationalsozialistischer Verbrechen (ZStL, Central Office of State Administrations of Justice for the Investigation of National Socialist Crimes) in Ludwigsburg…
L: What’s that?
R: … That is the official federal German “Nazi hunter” authority. The third editor was the communist and Chairman of the Auschwitz Committee, Hermann Lang-bein.96
L: An objective group, that is for certain!
R: Objective or not, we don’t want to get into a discussion of that here. The fact is, the claim was made in this book that there were homicidal gas chambers in the Neuengamme, Sachsenhausen, and Ravensbrück camps of the Reich proper, in which hundreds or even thousands of victims are supposed to have been gassed.97 So whereas the official book claims that there were mass execution facilities set up at camps located in the German Reich proper, the official German Institute for Contemporary History stated that there were no such facilities ever set up in those camps. Both cannot be true.
In the case of Dachau, the editors begin by assuming the existence of gas chambers, but write with reservation:98
“It has not been conclusively proven that killings by poison gas took place at the Dachau concentration camp.”
R: It is a further fact that in the museums of the former camps at Sachsenhausen, Dachau, and Ravensbrück, all located within the borders of the German Reich proper, anyone can view the sites where the gas chambers are supposed to have been located. In the Dachau concentration camp, the gas chamber is even shown in its alleged original condition.
L: Alleged – how so?
R: There is no documentation proving that the present condition corresponds to the original. Furthermore, as I just quoted, this alleged gas chamber is said to have never been completed, whereas it certainly seems complete today. So who completed it?
In the Ravensbrück concentration camp there is merely a memorial plaque, see Illustration 7.
L: So it is generally agreed upon that some of the gas chambers claimed after the war by witnesses or even government officials, like the one in Buchenwald, never existed. And their existence in other camps on the territory of the Old Reich is disputed as well.
R: Quite so, although in mainstream historiography the tendency prevails since the1980s to maintain the claim that these gas chambers did indeed exist. Just imagine what would happen if it would be generally admitted that no gas chambers existed in those camps at all. This would logically include the admission that many witnesses lied and that the conclusions of government officials, criminal trials, and investigative commissions were false. How could one then stem the flood of doubts that would necessarily result from this admission of a large-scale fraud? How could you then maintain the claim that gas chambers existed in the eastern camps in Poland, for which the evidentiary basis is just as shaky as for those camps in the Reich proper, as we will see later?
In order to prevent a revisionist landslide, the dogma needs to be upheld by all means and with all its aspects, however dubious they may be.
continues at the link:
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW