The Significance of the Morgue Documents

[blake121666]

It is if you are trying to convince them they are taking a shower.

Try leaving 4 inches elbow room and 10 inches nut to butt and see how many people fit. It ain't very many.

After they were in there no one would be "trying to convince them they are taking a shower".

[Stubble]

They'd panic and buck. Nothing left to lose when death is on the table man.

[blake121666]

They'd panic and buck. Nothing left to lose when death is on the table man.

They'd be unsuccessful in such attempts.

[Stubble]

It would leave a record, they would kill everyone in that building before being put down. Hell, look at what happened at krema iv with just a few guys. Now you are talking a train load?

You might be selling it, I ain't buying it.

It would be a route and pandemonium until it was quelled.

I've seen no evidence that that ever happened.

Would you just walk into a death chamber with your wife and kids? Would your whole neighborhood?

[HansHill]

The Sonderkommando, like Dario Gabbai, said that after the gassings the bodies were standing up, there was no room for them to fall because it was so crowded. This suggests a level of cooperation from the victims that even well-trained soldiers would not be able to achieve, including with the presence of naked men and women touching each other. They would clearly understand that they were not there to take a bath and there would be riots, but according to the Holocaust, they were like sheep to the slaughter. This fact alone shows how absurd the gassings would be.

Gabbai also claims he and his fellow Sonderkommandos removed the bodies with a stick to the elevator shaft.

>"translation error" or "mispoken"

This was decades later where he had ample opportunity to get his story straight and articulate himself as appropriate. The man said he moved the bodies with a cane, so we should do him the service to take him at his word.

[TlsMS93]

The Sonderkommando, like Dario Gabbai, said that after the gassings the bodies were standing up, there was no room for them to fall because it was so crowded. This suggests a level of cooperation from the victims that even well-trained soldiers would not be able to achieve, including with the presence of naked men and women touching each other. They would clearly understand that they were not there to take a bath and there would be riots, but according to the Holocaust, they were like sheep to the slaughter. This fact alone shows how absurd the gassings would be.

Gabbai also claims he and his fellow Sonderkommandos removed the bodies with a stick to the elevator shaft.

>"translation error" or "mispoken"

This was decades later where he had ample opportunity to get his story straight and articulate himself as appropriate. The man said he moved the bodies with a cane, so we should do him the service to take him at his word.

In Spielberg's documentary, he said that they used ropes around their necks. I don't know why they preferred the cane as a method, but it's just as bizarre. Imagine the effort to lift 2,000 people up with a limited elevator, imagine dragging hundreds from the bottom of the gas chamber. By the tenth body, the guy is already exhausted, but that didn't stop them from saying that the gassings were night and day, almost non-stop.

[curioussoul]

I have answered the question. The Soviets, as an organisation, were not to be trusted. Why that culture of dishonesty developed amongst them, I do not know, but it is still apparent today, with the Russian leadership. The best known example of Soviet dishonesty and unreliability regarding their limited reporting on the Holocaust, was their inflated death tolls.

Still not answering the question, Nessie. Why is it that a Soviet report would be prima faciae useless and why were the Soviets not to be trusted? Circular answers are not acceptable.

I am answering your questions, not just here, elsewhere as well and your new tactic is to accuse me of not answering.

You are ignoring posts, hence why I had to remind you not to keep dodging.

A circular answer does apply to the Soviets. In general, they were caught lying and using propaganda, far too often, for anything they produced as evidence to be trusted.

Understood. What is the threshhold for getting caught in lies "far too often", and why? Also, would this apply to other parties involved in the conflict - why/why not?

[curioussoul]

Topf & Sons and Construction Office staff were not discussing using the Kremas as morgues to store corpses.

The morgues are consistently referred to as morgues in documents pertaining to their construction, going back all the way to before the Birkenau expansion plans.

Elsewhere in A-B, staff referred to the Kremas as morgues. You cherry-pick that reference and assert that is what the Kremas were used for, but it is contradicted by how the staff responsible for the Kremas describe them.

They referred to the morgues, their original purpose before they were supposedly secretely converted into homicidal gas chambers, being used as morgues. That's a bit odd, given the gassing story. Would you concede as much?

[curioussoul]

The staff responsible for the construction and operation of the Kremas, at the Construction Office, did not refer to them as being morgues to store corpses. Staff elsewhere in the camp, who sent corpses to the Kremas, did call them morgues.

More lies, Nessie. Would you stop? The Construction Office was not responsible for the operation of the Crematoria. That's why the Construction Office drafted a handover protocol when construction projects were finished, handing over ownership and management of the building to the camp administration. In other words, corpses were regularly stored in the morgues and were transported there on a daily basis, according to documents.

[Nessie]

Still not answering the question, Nessie. Why is it that a Soviet report would be prima faciae useless and why were the Soviets not to be trusted? Circular answers are not acceptable.

I am answering your questions, not just here, elsewhere as well and your new tactic is to accuse me of not answering.

You are ignoring posts, hence why I had to remind you not to keep dodging.

A circular answer does apply to the Soviets. In general, they were caught lying and using propaganda, far too often, for anything they produced as evidence to be trusted.

Understood. What is the threshhold for getting caught in lies "far too often", and why? Also, would this apply to other parties involved in the conflict - why/why not?

I have not quantified a threshold. I look at what is the least reliable source of evidence and largely discount it. The Soviet claims about the Holocaust have been proven to be the least reliable, such as inflated death tolls and how they examined the AR camps sites, Majdanek and A-B. They were also involved in a proven hoax, over who was responsible for Katyn. They also showed little interest in the Holocaust, preferring to concentrate on Soviet casualties. There was no official Soviet history, of all the victorious powers they conducted the lowest number of Holocaust related war crimes trials, which tended to be of Ukrainians who had joined the SS, and they produced no memorials.

That standard also applies to other "parties" as in countries, but the USA, UK, Poland and West Germany stepped up and conducted evidenced enquiries to a far higher standard, into the individuals responsible for the Holocaust and to produce histories and memorials, so that we remember and learn from history.

[Nessie]

Topf & Sons and Construction Office staff were not discussing using the Kremas as morgues to store corpses.

The morgues are consistently referred to as morgues in documents pertaining to their construction, going back all the way to before the Birkenau expansion plans.

Elsewhere in A-B, staff referred to the Kremas as morgues. You cherry-pick that reference and assert that is what the Kremas were used for, but it is contradicted by how the staff responsible for the Kremas describe them.

They referred to the morgues, their original purpose before they were supposedly secretely converted into homicidal gas chambers, being used as morgues. That's a bit odd, given the gassing story. Would you concede as much?

What is odd is discussion about a hot hair for a morgue, as they are kept cold for corpse storage;

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... ce-on.html

"Memo of 25 March 1943 on “hot air supply device for corpse cellar 1” in crematorium 2"

What is also odd is that a corpse store has gas tight doors and a peep hole.

"Order from Karl Bischoff of 31 March 1943 on “3 gas tight doors” of crematorium 4 and 5 and “gas door 100/192 for corpse cellar 1…with double 8 mm glass and peephole” of crematorium 2 and 3"

That staff who did not work at the Kremas, referred to them as morgues in documents, is not odd, considering that is what they were originally designed to include.

[Stubble]

The only thing full of hot air here is the author.

That memo is talking about the intake motor dropping. For the record, what is the word hot air in German? Hmmm?

The memo further explains that they aren't going to pay for that 15 horse motor and they will take an allocation of steel from the manufacturer in exchange.

This is like the unironic linking to a memo from Wirths asking for an undressing room and autopsy room and wash room in the vestibule in the cellar between the basements and calling that proof that corpse storage #2 was used as an undressing room.

Every single document in that blog I have stripped the paint off of has exposed nothing short of an absolute misframing by the author.

And you take this all, and swallow it whole without even the slightest sense of the irony.

You call revisionists confused at best and liars as worst while you propagandize and evangelize straight up lies.

It's kind of remarkable really.

[Nessie]

The only thing full of hot air here is the author.

That memo is talking about the intake motor dropping. For the record, what is the word hot air in German? Hmmm?

The memo further explains that they aren't going to pay for that 15 horse motor and they will take an allocation of steel from the manufacturer in exchange.

This is like the unironic linking to a memo from Wirths asking for an undressing room and autopsy room and wash room in the vestibule in the cellar between the basements and calling that proof that corpse storage #2 was used as an undressing room.

Every single document in that blog I have stripped the paint off of has exposed nothing short of an absolute misframing by the author.

And you take this all, and swallow it whole without even the slightest sense of the irony.

You call revisionists confused at best and liars as worst while you propagandize and evangelize straight up lies.

It's kind of remarkable really.

Show me an example of an undisputed corpse store in a crematorium in 1940s Germany, that is heated and has gas tight doors, with peepholes. It does not need to be in a camp, it could also be civilian. You will not find one. That equipment is unique to the Kremas.

[Stubble]

Show me the documentation and receipt for a supplemental heater to heat the corpse cellar #1, or a corresponding draft of the plans that shows some kind of secondary ventilation system from the stack to the air intake for the ventilation system....

Also, a secondary function of those semi basements was air raid shelters. Spec would have called for a peephole. It is outlined in the memoranda from the time pertaining to construction.

Hell, the word Heißluftgebläse doesn't appear in that memo, but you keep saying hot air. They were referring to a failure of the 15 horsepower fan motor for the fresh air side of the ventilation system. That they called it the warm air side should be controversial, but, you have keyed in on one word and ignored the rest of the document.

[Nessie]

Show me the documentation and receipt for a supplemental heater to heat the corpse cellar #1, or a corresponding draft of the plans that shows some kind of secondary ventilation system from the stack to the air intake for the ventilation system....

Also, a secondary function of those semi basements was air raid shelters. Spec would have called for a peephole. It is outlined in the memoranda from the time pertaining to construction.

Hell, the word Heißluftgebläse doesn't appear in that memo, but you keep saying hot air. They were referring to a failure of the 15 horsepower fan motor for the fresh air side of the ventilation system. That they called it the warm air side should be controversial, but, you have keyed in on one word and ignored the rest of the document.

I show you evidence that is contrary to the normal operation of a corpse store and you want more. Why do you need a peephole for an internal door inside an air raid shelter? You cannot evidence corpses being stored in the Liechenkeller and the one witness, Nyiszli, who references to sheltering there during an air raid, calls it a gas chamber and speaks to mass gassings taking place. Gassings are far better evidenced than suggested revisionist uses.

I don't speak German, so I am going by the source translation.