New to Studying Revisionist Research: 3 Questions (Sonderkommandos & PPE, Krema Destruction, & Langfus 'Found Diary')

[Hektor]

I did not have any specific record in mind there. My thinking is that, if you get hold of your enemies record and they don't say what you would people like to think they say. One course of action is changing the records in a way that it sounds as if they support what you insist your enemy did. Forging fictitious records can become a problem, since they stand out too much. But what you can do is do changes to components of records to change the content in a way that it seems to support your thesis. That then can be picked up and shown around, giving you and your supporters the opportunity to do a "I told you so", afterwards.

[hermod]

I did not have any specific record in mind there. My thinking is that, if you get hold of your enemies record and they don't say what you would people like to think they say. One course of action is changing the records in a way that it sounds as if they support what you insist your enemy did. Forging fictitious records can become a problem, since they stand out too much.

Forging fictitious records is no problem when original documents are never required and provided. You can neither travel with a photocopy of your passport nor get a new job with a photocopy of your diploma(s) for a reason.

But what you can do is do changes to components of records to change the content in a way that it seems to support your thesis. That then can be picked up and shown around, giving you and your supporters the opportunity to do a "I told you so", afterwards.

In the constitutive charter of the Nuremberg show trials, there was an article that enabled the victors of 1945 to dismiss any document contradicting their own narrative on WWII. A pile of documents can say absolutely anything, and even the exact opposite of the truth, if "properly" (deceptively and dishonestly) selected and expurgated. The distortion and the "omission" (dismissal) of genuine documents can be as misleading as the fabrication of fake documents.

[Hektor]

I did not have any specific record in mind there. My thinking is that, if you get hold of your enemies record and they don't say what you would people like to think they say. One course of action is changing the records in a way that it sounds as if they support what you insist your enemy did. Forging fictitious records can become a problem, since they stand out too much.

Forging fictitious records is no problem when original documents are never required and provided. You can neither travel with a photocopy of your passport nor get a new job with a photocopy of your diploma(s) for a reason.

In Nuremberg "Photocopies" were a big thing it seems. But it is of course more persuasive, if you can present something that looks like a genuine document.

But what you can do is do changes to components of records to change the content in a way that it seems to support your thesis. That then can be picked up and shown around, giving you and your supporters the opportunity to do a "I told you so", afterwards.

In the constitutive charter of the Nuremberg show trials, there was an article that enabled the victors of 1945 to dismiss any document contradicting their own narrative on WWII. A pile of documents can say absolutely anything, and even the exact opposite of the truth, if "properly" (deceptively and dishonestly) selected and expurgated. The distortion and the "omission" (dismissal) of genuine documents can be as misleading as the fabrication of fake documents.

Indeed, deception by omission is far more common. And it is also more effective. Especially, when you can repetitively can make a case for your narrative over and over again... And when nobody that would contradicts you does do so. E.g. for the lack of resources.

This was easy in the Communist Countries. In the Western Countries, it was of course a bit more difficult. Stuff needed to be made palatable for the audience. WW2 was however overshadowed by the cold war during the 1950s, 1960s. That got the initial atrocity allegations onto a backburner for a while.

Once a narrative is established in people's mind. It's difficult to get it out again. Especially when it is a thought-terminating cliche. And when media and institutions frequently repeat the narrative as some sort of underlying truth. It becomes part of 'common sense' like "Adolf Hitler gassed six million Jews and wanted to conquer the world". Now you can make anyone that you don't like 'another Hitler'. At the moment it is Putin that is the prime candidate for this.

[hermod]

In Nuremberg "Photocopies" were a big thing it seems. But it is of course more persuasive, if you can present something that looks like a genuine document.

It seems that most people regard photocopies as more than persuasive enough. No surprise. How many people will ever visit and consult archives after all?

Indeed, deception by omission is far more common. And it is also more effective. Especially, when you can repetitively can make a case for your narrative over and over again... And when nobody that would contradicts you does do so. E.g. for the lack of resources.

This was easy in the Communist Countries. In the Western Countries, it was of course a bit more difficult. Stuff needed to be made palatable for the audience. WW2 was however overshadowed by the cold war during the 1950s, 1960s. That got the initial atrocity allegations onto a backburner for a while.

Once a narrative is established in people's mind. It's difficult to get it out again. Especially when it is a thought-terminating cliche. And when media and institutions frequently repeat the narrative as some sort of underlying truth. It becomes part of 'common sense' like "Adolf Hitler gassed six million Jews and wanted to conquer the world". Now you can make anyone that you don't like 'another Hitler'. At the moment it is Putin that is the prime candidate for this.

Ironically, this doesn't prevent Putin from playing the Evil Hitler card as often as possible, what turned the current war between Russia and Ukraine into an alleged Nazi-Nazi war, with Adolf Putin (Nato-Ukrainian propaganda) fighting for the denazification of Ukraine (Russian propaganda).

[Hektor]

....

Ironically, this doesn't prevent Putin from playing the Evil Hitler card as often as possible, what turned the current war between Russia and Ukraine into an alleged Nazi-Nazi war, with Adolf Putin (Nato-Ukrainian propaganda) fighting for the denazification of Ukraine (Russian propaganda).

The joke is that both sides do. And they do that for justification, assuming that everyone will understand and 'follow that logic'. They have of course reasons to believe so. After all the majority of people in both the former USSR, but also Europe and the US do believe that tse eewill Hitler did do the Holocaust. Hence it 'makes sense' for the audience at least in a very rough way.

1. The Russians and Putin claim that the Ukraine is somehow 'full of Nazis' and that they have to defend themselves against them to save the world from Hitler coming back and taking it over.
2. The Putin-haters claim that Putin is 'just like Hitler', that he is a dictator that oppresses 'innocent people' and that he wages aggressive war against the Ukraine.

That the Ukrainian Nationalists aren't National Socialists, especially not the cartoon version of it and that they are not the government of the Ukraine is ignored by the Russian. They of course several other reasons to go in their. And they may actually have a Casus Belli given what Ukrainian government did do in some areas do to the civilian population. Additionally the present Ukrainian regime is essentially puppets for the neocon's cultural imperialism. Sure Russia may have simple geopolitical reasons as well. Ironically NS-Germany may have had a stronger Casus Belli in there intervention in Poland September 1939. The general public is however entirely ignorant about this.

Almost funny is that the worst war-mongers against Russia are also those that in the past supported the 'peace movement' and of course did condemn Hitler more than average. The affair actually illustrates the charade around Hitler and the invocations of Hitler2.0. quite clearly. One only has to analyze the arguments thoroughly to see that.

Concerning PR and communications management the West is of course far more professional than the rustic Russians and it shows.
The trick Western media uses is making it look as if they present objective information or news. The actually propaganda is far more subtle build into the presentation of information. There is a myriad of tricks to do that and I thing describing this can fill a whole book.

Just because they don't call it propaganda doesn't mean that it isn't.

[hermod]

The joke is that both sides do...

Just shows how efficient the global propaganda campaign of Zionist-Globalist indoctrination was during and after WWII. Christianity is obsolete. Anti-Nazism is the new sacred cultural reference on both sides of the former Iron Curtain. The propagandists of WWI needed to invoke Yahweh --- the Germans with the motto "Gott mit uns" (God is with us) and the British with the allegation that the Evil Huns & their Turkish allies were Muslims at war on Christianity and a Messianist military conquest of Jerusalem --- to send their cannon fodder to the slaughterhouse. The propagandists of WWII needed to turn Hitler into a new Satan with Holohoax atrocity propaganda lies for the very same purposes. And the propagandists of all the following wars only needed to claim that a new Hitler had emerged somewhere (most often in a country where a regime change was needed in order to advance the Zionist-Globalist agenda) and threatened their fantasized freedom to fuel their peoples' war hysteria.

[Morimont]

I just want to say thank you again for all those who are responding and conversing in this thread. I've read all the posts and found them to be really informative and entertaining. Check out this funny ChatGPT dialogue:



I'm hoping some day an AI will come around and be 100% unbiased on the matter. That'll be extremely entertaining and also helpful to the cause.

Also I'd just like to highlight a post of mine that came through in Page 1 (below) - it was hidden for a long time until it got approved by the mods (because I'm new here). I feel like we as holocaust revisionists need to push as hard as we can about the impossibility of handling HCN bodies. This in and of itself, highlighted in the beginning of Germar Rudolph's Chemistry of Auschwitz, is arguably enough in and of itself to totally disprove the lies from "sonderkommandos" and other orthodox proponents. It's unfortunate to see a lot of surface-level discussion (not here) about wooden doors and this and that. Talk about HCN and all the cases where it has injured/killed rescue workers with PPE on! "Gas masks and gloves" from a few sonderkommando testimonies is not enough.

The "best" counter-argument I've seen to this is when an orthodoxer replies (similar to this ChatGPT reply): "They forced the sonderkommando labor and if they did die from the labor, they simply replaced them with someone else." To this I typically reply: Then why have there been so many aged sonderkommandos giving testimony, even saying things like eating and smoking around the exposed area? How could any workforce do ~1,500 bodies at a time and be healthy enough to continue during exposure without light-headedness and passing out? And if you want to say that they waited for decontamination, that is arguably infeasible (removing HCN off skin? working in highly exposed areas near the meshes? ridding the area of the dank basement humidity with all the extra exhaled moisture from the people and their released bodily fluids?) and if it was eventually feasible it would take many, many, many, days to clear out safely, and likely after many injured personnel trying to do the job.

^I don't know, it's still tricky for me to articulate. I am annoyed that I'm the one who has to continue arguing in places that are absurdities to begin with, but I like to have a retort for everything. Does anyone else have more to say in reply to this argument? I need to read Carlo Mattogno's Sonderkommando's books to get a better grasp at the inconsistency of those testimonies. In the meantime I'm thankful for GreatMystery's posts about it, tagged Sonderkommando.

Question #1 inspired today's article for my site, you can read it here, https://www.holocaust.claims/auschwitz- ... amber-ppe/

You may find my site useful for sharing with Holocaust believers. I have taken the info from CoDoH and made bite sized articles with all the sources of the claims laid out. I've been working on it since October and it has a fair amount of content so far.

That's an awesome idea! Thank you so much for putting in the work; a bunch of bite-sized chunks are great for the attention span of many people nowadays. I'm honored that you took inspiration here, from which I originally took inspiration from Germar Rudolph when I started reading his book last week. I think the safety issues surrounding HCN and logistics of the gas chambers is a big area that can be further expounded upon, and more ammo in refutation of the absurdity.

Moving hundreds of bodies would have caused a hot sweaty environment ideal for cyanide absorption through the skin yet MoT makes no mention of protective clothing.

One extra point you may want to make in that post is that Krema 1 is inside a soil mound, and Krema 2 & 3 are underground (to keep the morgues at a stable low temperature), and these environments tend to have more humidity than their surroundings. That, plus 1,500+ people breathing/hyperventilating means lots of H20 getting exhaled. I have metal barn with concrete flooring filled with animals, and it's super humid in there; if I spend more than 5 minutes I start to perspire. Also in the winter when it's colder it's crazy - I'll open up the doors and from the outside it looks like a dragon is breathing steaming fumes out, again due to the built up humidity from animals rapidly escaping the building (more info on what I mean here).

So, all in all, from a chemistry/engineering perspective it would certainly be a warm and humid environment with 1,500 bodies. Not to mention inevitable piss and shit from 1,500 bodies, either in panic or upon death (googled it: "Your muscles loosen immediately after death, releasing any strain on your bowel and bladder. As a result, most people poop and pee at death"). Inevitable sweating from "sonderkommandos" (I use sarcastic quotes because of how Rudolph pointed out "sonderkommandos" as a misnomer) in a humid environment with shit-tons (non-scientifically speaking..) of zyklon b pellets in the big baskets = absorption to their bodies via high ambient temperatures and relative humidity.

IF they did have full hazmat suits, which they didn't. Where's the nearby decontamination room? Oh yeah, doesn't exist because The Holocaust (tm) is a collection of stories from the perverted minds of certain Jews who decided to lie for gain (while of course some did not, and disagreed).

[Hektor]

The joke is that both sides do...

Just shows how efficient the global propaganda campaign of Zionist-Globalist indoctrination was during and after WWII. Christianity is obsolete. Anti-Nazism is the new sacred cultural reference on both sides of the former Iron Curtain. The propagandists of WWI needed to invoke Yahweh --- the Germans with the motto "Gott mit uns" (God is with us) and the British with the allegation that the Evil Huns & their Turkish allies were Muslims at war on Christianity and a Messianist military conquest of Jerusalem --- to send their cannon fodder to the slaughterhouse. The propagandists of WWII needed to turn Hitler into a new Satan with Holohoax atrocity propaganda lies for the very same purposes. And the propagandists of all the following wars only needed to claim that a new Hitler had emerged somewhere (most often in a country where a regime change was needed in order to advance the Zionist-Globalist agenda) and threatened their fantasized freedom to fuel their peoples' war hysteria.

The sykewar campaign used the top of the art management and manipulation techniques at that time. But the real power of the Myth unfolded once this turned into a Multi-Level-Marketing Scheme. Meaning they showed the propaganda pieces to 'multipliers'. By multipliers I mean teachers, preachers, historians, politicians, trade unionists, journalists. The theme was connected to a 'duty of never again'. In terms of 'thought reform' this is 'turning the target into a deployable agent of the organization'. Now there is not ONE organization but a myriad of players involved in this. And yes, I recall a priest mentioning the 'six million' at some stage. He was actually of Sudeten descent. Perhaps he should know better what went on in world war two.

The invocation of God or religion for political purposes was considered an obscenity by many (and I agree). Seems some had the correct understanding of the commandment: "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain". It wasn't exactly a new thing I should add. In fact (ab)use of religion for worldly gain is sort of 'universal'. And well, it worked. With the Churches backing the government on this a war effort will work. And I admit it is a dilemma. Your country is at war with another country that could easily overrun you. You are a preacher or church leader, what should you do? Where it cuts definitely the line, is were the atrocity lying starts AND persists even after the war.

One should bear in mind that, according to Claude Lanzmann (producer of the movie Shoah), "Auschwitz is the Refutation of Christ". And well, the bigger Protestant Churches did actually start agreeing with him, responding with "Holocaust Theology". That the whole affair is based upon swindles and atrocity propaganda none of those dimwits seems to have ask themselves openly. Tell you a secret there: The Nazi/Holocaust issue was the leftist theologians wonderweapon against socially and theologically conservative members of their denominations. In the case of Germany, they first had the 'Stuttgarter Schuldbekenntnis' and then, when reeducation started that was used to marginalize conservative pastors and theologians step by step within the church. After 68 this almost completely exchanged conservative Lutherans with leftist or leftish pastors often of a Barthian inclination. Given a changing Zeitgeist and given that the process is slow, the parishes hardly notice. There was however some resistance against this. Karl Barth is a real gem on many things. He became a member of the Socialist Party in Switzerland before the Communists split of and he got some influence on the, otherwise rather conservative, 'Confessing Church' lead by Martin Niemoeller. He however left Germany for Switseland again and well encouraged Czechs to wage war against Germany. And after World War Two, he refused to critique Stalin essentially exonerating hit, while taking jabs at National Socialists. Niemoeller also took a left turn even accepting honors from Communist countries, when they invaded the CSSR in 1968. And well the 'peace movement' was heavily infested with Protestant clergy. That was even before the Holocaust themes became popular. Today it is a woke church blessing homosexual couples. And they are first in line to clap hands at the train stations screaming 'refugees welcome'. It should be noted that there was some more socially conservative opposition against this. Klaus Motschmann and others wrote even books on this "Rotbuch Kirche" Describing how the church was infiltrated by communist sympathizers and even supported leftist terrorists on several occasions. Pointing this out to the leftist Protestants and that it is in conflict with the traditional core teachings of their church, is futile they have an excuse for anything using mental acrobatics partially obvious leaps of logic and in other cases rather clever ones that are difficult to detect for the layman. The layman on the other hand, while not being able to argue against those people, draw their conclusions and have left the church by the millions, since the proto-Marxist takeover. But those 'new theologians' do not care. They are blind for the consequences of their political theology and that it leads to more conflicts in society or that taxing 'the rich' actually becomes a burden for the poor, as long as their proclamations for 'social justice' sound good. And well, they always can play the Holocaust-card, when everything else fails. They even have a "Holocaust Theology" they can invoke. And it is 'theological' in the highest degree that Holocaust. A false one, void of logic. But one that can be used to gas light gullible christians on demand. That they have to throw out of the window anything the professed to believe. In fact they replace Jesus at the cross on Golgotha with six million Jews gassed in Auschwitz.

It isn't where it stops, though. One teaching gets thrown out after the other. And the attack is on 'folk, family, fatherland'. Folk is dismissed as 'exclusive' as 'hateful to other nations and races'. Family is 'opressive', because it is husband over wife and parents over children. Fatherland i 'oldfashioned' and against humanity. Having a home is 'selfish'. Oh yeah, if you don't give them what they want, then you are selfish.

This whole 'Holocaust Theology' sums up the condition 'Western christianity' is in right now. It's essentially the foundation for woke theology, which is a while corruption of humanitarianism. The non-mainliners aren't necessary much better. It is prosperity cults and Christian Zionism, which is a turn around on almost 2000 years of Christian teachings. That clearly state that the promises of the old covenant are not for the Judaists or biological Israelites, but for those that have faith in Christ regardless of their backgrounds. Most christians (small C) are ignorant about what Jews (Judaists) actually believe. They think that the Jews are just stuck in the old testament. Not so fast. They use Moses and the prophets of course, but they use Talmudism and Kabbalah to interpret it. And calling this interpretation is rather an Euphemism. It's rather vindictive and self-aggrandizing for Jews (and disparaging towards the Goyim). If Jews believed the Old Testament ,they'd be (big C) Christians, but they are not. So not even that figment flies. The common denominator for Jews seems to be Anti-Christian. As long as a Jew doesn't convert to Christianity, he's somehow OK. Can be Atheist, Buddhist or whatever... Even a Muslim would still be fine. But Jesus Christ not that. He will be ostracized big time. Although there is some compromising sect like the "Messianic Jews" essentially a bridge between Judaism and Christianity.

The for 'God and Country' jingoism has been replaced by wars for 'democracy, freedom and Human Rights'. In other words, Humanism is the established civic religion now. Some form of Liberalism the ideology. It's of course for other interest (for plutocracy and Israel), but saying this would be 'anti-semitic'. The Churches have essentially accepted to play the second violines in the orchestra now. Simply find some theological justification for whatever policy is hip at the moment. For the government or for some think tanks... And you can still be friends with the world.

[greatmystery]

I just want to say thank you again for all those who are responding and conversing in this thread. I've read all the posts and found them to be really informative and entertaining. Check out this funny ChatGPT dialogue:



I'm hoping some day an AI will come around and be 100% unbiased on the matter. That'll be extremely entertaining and also helpful to the cause.

I also had some fun with chatgpt too. It's funny what you can get it to admit, although it is obviously hardwired to say the Holocaust is real.
I got it to admit that Holocaust survivor testimony is treated differently and is not scrutinized as much AND that when it comes to the Holocaust facts can be established on the basis of testimony alone.
https://www.holocaust.claims/survivors/ ... testimony/
So that means Holocaust privilege is real and we must do our part to dismantle it in the name of equality, lol.

[Hektor]

Hello and welcome, Morimont.
...

It's basically confessions by torture, false testimony from professional witnesses, plagiarized stories and Communist fabrications.

In the case of Auschwitz-Birkenau, the most prominent and cited "witness" is claimed Sonderkommando Filip Mueller. He died in 2013. I read everything I could of the guy, burrowing like a tick into his past and gathered as many testimonies of his that I could, and it came out worse than I thought. His oft-cited memoir which is used as required reading in holocaust studies courses is more fabrication than reality. What I came across about him was so bad that I began to write about it. It ended up an essay and CODOH kindly published it for me. My essay came out in April of 2009 and in the four years between then and Mueller's death, he had no response. In fact, nobody did. The Holocaust Industry, all their boosters and court historians and the blowhards at the Holocaust-Controversies blog were, and remain, dead quiet. But they still use Mueller as a source, without explanation.

So this is my essay: The Lies, Slips, Bungles and Perjuries of Filip Mueller, Professional Witness of Auschwitz-Birkenau https://codoh.com/library/document/the-lies-slips-bungles-and-perjuries-of-filip/en/

.....

Filip Mueller interviewed by Lanzmann:
https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn1003921
Perhaps his longest performance. But he was at the Frankfurter Auschwitz Prozess as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxUe4RiKzU8

First impression: "Drama Queen".

If he approached people in a social setting, they wouldn't believe him without even testing the story. But this is on close up and many people notice intuitively, when someone is a liar.

He does however tell his story elaboratively and confidently... So without knowing him, many people will believe him. Or believe that he 'only exaggerates a bit'. One definite problem with his 'testimony' is the volume of it.
For the Auschwitz Trial it is '20 years' in the past. For the interview 35 years later. While some people have an excellent memory, especially when they are dedicated, they won't memorize stories like this in that volume of detail. But he does. And that implies lots of coaching and training.
He migrated from CSSR to (West-)Germany in 1969, which wasn't exactly easy at this time. Books were also published in his name. One sold at a figure of 100.000... This could actually have made him a millionaire at the time.

And well, with his frequent appeals to emotion he would have reached a broader class of educated people already. The sort that swallows anything that is in a 'reputable' book that got good reviews in the media. If it does say 'true story', they believe that. They'd be very critical then on anyone questioning him. But anyone that could do that directly would be either dead or have no good memory of what he's describing.

The very fact that something like this can pass on without major critiquing should make one already suspicious. But people don't notice, they think that must be like that, because it is so true.

Here is sort of an obituary:
https://lagergemeinschaft-auschwitz.de/ ... 014_01.pdf
Claim is that he was a 'attack target' for 'Holocaust Deniers'.
It's linked to harassment he received (from Sweden) publishing his address amongst other things. To me that smells like something intelligence services would do, if they want someone to be able to play the victim. Pretty convenient, when your 'crown witness' is critiqued and he suddenly becomes a victim again.

[cold beer]

or the Soviets destroyed them.
Note that what is famously missing from the Soviet Auschwitz liberation film are pictures of the crematoria.

Exactly.
This thought has crossed my mind many times. The most important thing they would have shown in their flyover film at the liberation of Auschwitz is the crematoriums in ruin. But instead it's the one thing then didn't put on film!
In a video that was on youtube (I don't know if it's still there) one of their film crew said he was inside the crematorium and it looked perefectly normal to him until he was told the stories.

[Hieldner]

There’s an interesting old thread on the destruction of the Auschwitz crematoria where an article well worth reading by Carolyn Yeager is discussed (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8240). From the article:

The photograph at right, a still from a Soviet propaganda film about the Auschwitz “liberation,” had been thought to be of the clothing warehouses burning. But new research suggests it is more likely regular barracks, probably in Compound B1. If this is true, it makes little difference when the picture was taken, as it was certainly after the Russians arrived.

Building burning at Birkenau is caught on film by a Soviet “liberation” photographer. The controversy over the time and location of the picture may have been solved.

Is there any credible testimony from those prisoners remaining in the Birkenau camp that they heard or saw explosions of these crematorium buildings on the 20th or the 26th? If so, it has been kept awfully quiet.

If the Germans abandoned the camp on the 18th of January and the Russians didn’t arrive until the 27th, 9 days later, why didn’t more of the inmates just walk away and return to their homes, as many are said to have done later? Considering 8,000 of them sat tight right where they were for 9 entire days, there must, at least, have been decent care provided for them. I find no attempt to properly answer these questions.

Carolyn Yeager. The “Liberation”. https://jan27.org/the-liberation

Moreover, as Carlo Mattogno explains in Mis-Chronicling Auschwitz, the evidence for the destruction of Krematorium V by the SD on January 26th, 1945, is an eye-witness testimony by a 12 year old boy.

26 January 1945 (p. 801)

“At 1:00 A.M. the SS squad with the task of eliminating the traces of SS crimes blows up Crematorium V, the last of the crematoriums in Birkenau.”
Source: “APMO, Dpr.-Hd/1, p. 79, Statement of Former Prisoner Luigi Ferri.”

Czech forgets to point out that this detainee was an Italian Jew born on 9 September 1932, who was deported from Trieste to Auschwitz on 18 August 1944 and registered under Reg. No. B-7525, when he was still only 11 years of age, but the editor of the Auschwitz Chronicle assures that children “up to 14 years of age” were gassed immediately upon arrival (p. 563). Even-more-striking is the case of the Bucci sisters, both deported from Trieste to Auschwitz on 23 September 1944. 5-year-old Alessandra, born on 1 July 1939, was registered with Reg. No. 76483, while 7-year-old Tatiana Liliana, born on 19 September 1937, was given Reg. No. 76484. To this we can also add 6-year-old Sergio de Simone, born on 29 November 1937, and deported from Trieste on 29 September 1944, who received Reg. No. 179614, and 11-year-old Arianna Szorenyi, born on 18 April 1933, deported on 21 June 1944, and registered with Reg. No. 89218 (Picciotto Fargion, pp. 157, 217, 575).

Luigi Ferri was interrogated on 21 April 1945, when he said the fateful phrase referred to by Czech:

“As the last step, the V Crematorium [ostatnie V krematorium] was blown up on 25 January 1945 at one o’clock in the morning.”

It is at least unique that, in order to substantiate the fact that Crematorium V had been destroyed, she was forced to refer to a meager sentence of a boy who was not even 13 years old at that time.

She also cites Luigi Ferri for other events, starting with the alleged shooting of six Soviet PoWs on 22 January 1945 (p. 798), then for the open-air cremation of those allegedly killed on 23 January (p. 800). In this regard the witness stated immediately after the sentence I quoted earlier:

“On January 22nd, after the shooting of the Russians, some soldiers came again and ordered the bodies of those shot at Crematorium V brought. It eluded them that one of the shot Russians was missing. The corpses were placed on a pyre that the soldiers set on fire themselves. Even today there are still in that place the incompletely burnt remains of these Russians.”

Czech didn’t even wonder how this kid could possibly have knowledge of all this.

Carlo Mattogno. Mis-Chronicling Auschwitz, 2022, pp. 285–6.

[hermod]

or the Soviets destroyed them.
Note that what is famously missing from the Soviet Auschwitz liberation film are pictures of the crematoria.

Exactly.
This thought has crossed my mind many times. The most important thing they would have shown in their flyover film at the liberation of Auschwitz is the crematoriums in ruin. But instead it's the one thing then didn't put on film!

Ditto for the alleged homicidal gas chamber at Dachau. In 1945, some American propagandists filmed everything in that room except the alleged chutes and grids for the introduction of Zyklon pellets, we're told. An absurd oddity. That's because the Zyklon chutes and grids were not there in 1945 and the alleged gassing procedure was changed in the meantime. In 1945, it was claimed that poison gas was introduced as a gas with a valve and now it is claimed that poison gas was introduced as a solid (Zyklon pellets) with a chute.

[Hektor]

or the Soviets destroyed them.
Note that what is famously missing from the Soviet Auschwitz liberation film are pictures of the crematoria.

Exactly.
This thought has crossed my mind many times. The most important thing they would have shown in their flyover film at the liberation of Auschwitz is the crematoriums in ruin. But instead it's the one thing then didn't put on film!

Ditto for the alleged homicidal gas chamber at Dachau. In 1945, some American propagandists filmed everything in that room except the alleged chutes and grids for the introduction of Zyklon pellets, we're told. An absurd oddity. That's because the Zyklon chutes and grids were not there in 1945 and the alleged gassing procedure was changed in the meantime. In 1945, it was claimed that poison gas was introduced as a gas with a valve and now it is claimed that poison gas was introduced as a solid (Zyklon pellets) with a chute.
...

Now who added the chutes and grids and to what purpose?


This is actually so bad, it wasn't found believable, before the times of Martin Broszat.

[Horhug]

3) Is there any revisionist research into the Leib Langfus diary that was apparently found near krema 3? Could someone link me? Below is a description from Wikipedia. What I find interesting is he claims that some bodies were turned "completely blue under the influence of the gas" yet victims of cyanide are typically said to have cherry-pink or red skin due to oxygen will staying in the blood and not getting into the cells.

Langfus is mentioned in these Holocaust Handbooks :

Volume 33 : Healthcare in Auschwitz Medical Care and Special Treatment of Registered Inmates

Volume 37 : An Auschwitz Doctor’s Eyewitness Account The Bestselling Tall Tales of Dr. Mengele’s Assistant Analyzed

Volume 41 : The Making of the Auschwitz Myth

Volume 45 : Sonderkommando Auschwitz II The False Testimonies by Henryk Tauber and Szlama Dragon

Volume 46 : Sonderkommando Auschwitz III They Wept Crocodile Tears A Critical Analysis of Late Witness Testimonies

Volume 47 : Mis-Chronicling Auschwitz Danuta Czech’s Flawed Methods, Lies and Deceptions in Her Auschwitz Chronicle