John C. Zimmerman proves Hoess Memoirs legitimate?

[Otium]

I was discussing with Wyatt on twitter, the first time he presented some kind of article was in relation to his claims about Hoess. He doesn't deny he was tortured, but he still thinks that his arguments are legitimate and even cited this article by John Zimmerman: https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/hoess-memoirs/

I haven't been able to find it refuted, or even cited by revisionists at all. I know there's a Holocaust Handbook on Hoess, I've already cited it to Wyatt, but specifically on this article, has it been addressed?

[Lamprecht]

The article is from 1999 and uses the 1994, Kracow's Institute for Forensic Research report which has been exposed as scientific fraud by various revisionists, especially Rudolf.

From another thread (I replaced a dead link):

The Polish chemical study of cyanide in the walls of Auschwitz was alluded to by the University of Nevada professor John Zimmerman (‘How Reliable are the Hoss memoirs?’). He writes, http://web.archive.org/web/201705151120 ... s-memoirs/

in 1994, Cracow's Institute for Forensic Research did a comprehensive study of the structures at Auschwitz identified as homicidal gas chambers. The Institute found traces of hydrocyanic acid, the poison gas used for mass murder, in the cellar of Block 11, the place identified by Höss as the site of the first gassing. Moreover, the Institute also found that there were low levels of such acid when compared to the other gassing sites, thus substantiating Höss's statement that Block 11 was abandoned early on as a gassing site because of unsuitability. The Institute also found hydrocyanic acid in Crematorium I, where Höss states that the gassing operations for Soviet POWs were moved to.

Turning to the Polish study, the ‘traces of hydrocyanic acid’ in the ‘cellar of Block 11’ averaged 14 parts per billion. This is, as he points out, several times lower than that which they found for Krema–I, which averaged around 70 parts per billion. Zimmerman neglects to inform his readers, that other investigations, but not the Polish study, have found 0.1-0.5 per cent cyanide in the de-lousing chamber walls. These are the rooms which are called ‘gaskammers’ in the German design-plans, i.e. gas-chambers.

That means that the levels he is claiming as ‘criminal traces,’ to use Pressac’s phrase, are around one million times lower concentration than that now present in the blue walls of the gaskammer rooms. I suggest that Professor Zimmerman’s students would fall about laughing if this argument were put to them.

I recommend you search CODOH for more on this report often called:
- Markiewicz, Jan et al. report
- Krakow/Crakow report
- Institute for Forensic Research report

Germar Rudolf's Cyanide Chemistry at Auschwitz book (and I believe video) has a good section on it. Also see here where it is mentioned: viewtopic.php?t=12736


From: Subject: Fumigation of barracks and other buildings at Auschwitz

An additional point on the very low cyanide readings in the alleged homicidal gas chambers and random control samples in the camp. Cyanide residue in solid material that is rich in carbonates (for instance lime, a main component of mortar and concrete), is detectable with some reliability only above 10 mg per kg, as a high concentration of carbonates can imitate a small quantity of cyanide. Lower values are therefore regarded as inconclusive.

Germar Rudolf:

8.2.2. Interferences and Reproducibility

Before discussing the individual assays in detail, a few words are necessary to understand the problems involved, illustrating them already here with a few analytical results.

One major challenge when analyzing masonry samples is the presence of carbonate. Concrete, mortar and plaster samples that are several decades old are all carbonated to a high degree, hence contain major quantities of carbonates mainly in the form of calcium carbonate (CaCCE). Meeussen/ Temminghof et al. (1989) have determined the false positives caused by carbonate in liquid solutions of 0.1 mg of cyanide per liter of water as listed in Table 26.

Considering that masonry samples can easily contain several thousand milligrams of carbonate per liter - for instance, apart from its sand portion, lime plaster consists basically only of CaCO3 - cyanide values in the range of 1 mg per kg sample material and lower may reflect to a considerable degree the samples’ carbonate rather than cyanide content. Since the photometric method used by Meeussen/Temminghof et al. is not necessarily identical to those used by the laboratories dealt with here, however, those values should be taken only as a caveat that large quantities of carbonate yield false positive near the detection limit, rendering them unreliable in addition to the problems involved in general when testing solid samples, as discussed above.



To prove this point, Leuchter’s laboratory re-analyzed two low-level samples and made a spike analysis for a third. I had four of my samples reanalyzed by a different laboratory. The results are given in Table 27.

Whereas all of Leuchter’s samples are described as “brick,” hence should have low contents of interfering carbonates (but that description may simply be due to Leuchter’s negligence when labelling them), my Samples 3, 8, and 11 were plaster samples rich in carbonates, whereas the only sample which could be reproduced with accuracy, #25, was a brick.

As can be seen from this, the reliability of analytic results even of samples with high levels of cyanide can be problematic. In the case of Sample R11, the first result, by Fresenius, was obtained not by photometric but by titrimetric analysis. The lab assistant working on this informed me that she had not expected to find such huge amounts of cyanides in any of the samples. Therefore, when the first sample with a large cyanide content was measured photometrically, it was too dark to yield any useful reading. Instead of simply diluting the sample 1:10 or 1:100 and measuring it then while correcting the reading with the proper factor, she resorted to titrimetry. The second result was obtained by IUS Stuttgart after having been told the order of magnitude to expect, so they diluted the sample before putting the cuvette into the photometer. I therefore consider the second result by IUS more reliable.



When being confronted with this unacceptable discrepancy, I wanted to have all samples retested, but as a student I did not have the financial means to do so, and no one else wanted to finance it either.

In the following, I will assume that there is a systematic difference between the two sets of analytic results, that Fresenius’s results are correct at least within one order of magnitude, and that differences between individual samples are correct at least regarding their respective ratios.

The reliability of analytic results of masonry samples rich in carbonate with cyanide levels close to the formal detection limit is approaching zero. To put this into perspective, a spike-recovery rate of up to ±10% is considered to signifya reliable analytic method. The acceptability limits are generally considered to be at ±25%. Here, however, we are dealing with limits between +40% and –100% near the detection limit.

[Footnote]

362 Driving out the hydrogen cyanide by boiling the sample for one hour in aqueous HC1 in a slightly reductive medium (SnCk), driving out in the continuous stream of air, collection in the aqueous KOH collector. Finally, photometric or titrimetric testing depending on the concentration in each case. Proof of iron was achieved here by the ICP spectrometer.

From:
Germar Rudolf: The Chemistry of Auschwitz—The Technology and Toxicology of Zyklon B and the Gas Chambers – A Crime-Scene Investigation
https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/02-tcoa.pdf

[Lamprecht]

From the previous thread: Subject: Wyatt the Twitter guy RETURNS! & it's so damn hilarious

Wyatt claims that even though Hoess was tortured, "doesn't change anything". Wyatt believes that Hoess still told the truth even though he was tortured, forced to sign documents and explicitly said that h "There are methods to get anybody to confess to anything regardless of whether it is true or not.", meaning, he was tortured and just confessed to whatever was told to him.

Wyatt makes more claims about Hoess.PNG

Wyatt has also claimed that Hoess's memoirs were "backed up by secondary sources"

Wyatt claims Hoess is a good source.PNG
He cites https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/hoess-memoirs/

Zimmerman's 1999 article has been torn to shreds in the past 2 decades.

A book on the subject (updated 2020) might be a good start:
(PDF) Commandant of Auschwitz—Rudolf Höss, His Torture and His Forced Confessions
https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/35-coa.pdf

Another book, by Graf:
Auschwitz: Eyewitness Reports and Perpetrator Confessions of the Holocaust
HTML: https://web.archive.org/web/20200412210 ... rutinized/
PDF: https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/36-aerapcoth.pdf


A thread on Wyatt contradicting himself on Hoess' clams:

Wyatt admits to torture of Hoess; claims he's a reliable source despite "no evidence" for the absurd claims
viewtopic.php?ft=12725

More related threads on Hoess:

Auschwitz Commandant Hoess 'confessions' debunked in review
viewtopic.php?t=2429

The Confessions of Rudolf Hoess
viewtopic.php?t=2656

[Werd]

The fact that people are still trotting out Zimmerman, Markiewicz and Keren is pathetic.

[Hektor]

The fact that people are still trotting out Zimmerman, Markiewicz and Keren is pathetic.

Weren't those pals of Nizkor's Ken McVeigh?

The Hoess Memoirs have been produced with Hoess being under control of a totalitarian regime that adhered to an ideology that made deception, lying and forging obligatory, if it served the goal of the (Communist) Party. A lot of details in such documents may actually be true, while certain details of key importance are actually not. Ask yourself what would have been the motive of Communists with such a document. Of course framing their most dangerous enemy ("Fascism") with atrocity accusations. Again what were Communist and their Proxies calling their opponents for decades after 1945? "Fascist", "Nazi", "Racist", "Antisemite".

With other words it is definitely UNRELIABLE. Anybody that claims otherwise is either foolish or malicious and that isn't even mutually exclusive.

One a side note it would be interesting to see how mainstream Holocaust Historians are viewing the "Hoess confession" and "Hoess memoirs" nowadays. To they consider those documents reliable?
If so, Why? If not, Why not? What gives them the confidence that allegations of homicidal gassing in Auschwitz are essentially true?
Why don't they consider that this may have been based on Rumours, agitprop, Black propaganda, malice witnessing by people having an axe to grind, coerced testimony or the tales from pathological liars?! That there is a common theme in many of those stories isn't proof that they are true, it is rather the result of communication, copying and pasting stories and of course the bombardment of populations via the media over the years... Now that would be during the later 1940s, but also during later phase as e.g. during the Eichmann trial.

Think about it. Consider how the Holocaust may have been socially constructed over several decades until we have the widely believed and viciously defended of it we know today or approximately since the 1980s with some orthodox revisions during the last decades.

[PrudentRegret]

I have learned that Holocaust Historians don't like what Hoess has to say about Action Reinhardt, as it does not conform to their dogma about what it was:

Action Reinhardt was the code name given to the collecting, sorting, and use of all articles acquired as a result of the transports of the Jews and their extermination.

The "extermination" part fits Hoess's story, but Hoess identifying AR as the bureaucratic code-name for the collection and utilization of property is problematic for their narrative, since "Aktion Reinhardt" is supposed to be the code-name of the extermination in their view.

The memoirs of Hoess read like the memoirs of Eichmann. Some paragraphs seem like they were written by a different author, and they probably were.

[Lamprecht]

I have learned that Holocaust Historians don't like what Hoess has to say about Action Reinhardt, as it does not conform to their dogma about what it was:

Action Reinhardt was the code name given to the collecting, sorting, and use of all articles acquired as a result of the transports of the Jews and their extermination.

The "extermination" part fits Hoess's story, but Hoess identifying AR as the bureaucratic code-name for the collection and utilization of property is problematic for their narrative, since "Aktion Reinhardt" is supposed to be the code-name of the extermination in their view.

The memoirs of Hoess read like the memoirs of Eichmann. Some paragraphs seem like they were written by a different author, and they probably were.

According to Holocaust believer Mark Roseman:
"Eichmann, for his part, was at pains to establish a clear set of orders that absolved him of responsibility."
also:
"Adolf Eichmann spoke more openly, but his testimony is unreliable, particularly on his own aspirations, concerned as he was to portray himself as a dutiful errand boy, with neither initiation nor knowledge."
further:
"Both Rudolf Hoess's and Eichmann's testimonies lack credibility."
(Roseman, Mark (2002) "The Wannsee Conference and the Final Solution: A Reconsideration")

Aktion Reinhardt's purpose is revealed in the following document:

5 January 1944 Globocnik Report to Himmler (4024-PS) on Operation Reinhard(t)
viewtopic.php?t=12359

Globocnik was responsible for the construction of the alleged "pure extermination camps" of AR: Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka. By some sources, he committed suicide; others claim he was killed by partisans.

Höfle was Globocnik's deputy and responsible for the deportations of Jews to the AR camps. After the war, he was imprisoned by the British but then later released. In the 60s he allegedly committed suicide by hanging himself in a prison cell before his trial.

Himmler's "suicide" is also suspicious, but there are threads about that. Hannover just posted one recently.