Comments on other threads.

[Nessie]

There are documents to corroborate the witnesses, deniers have not debunked that

Yes, they have debunked that. But why would you waste time reading the books and papers of people you call "deniers" ?

I have read various denials and so-called debunking, but they are evidentially and logically flawed. I refer to that as denial, because it is not revisionism, as it fails to provide an alternative evidenced history. For example, Mattogno claims that documents that refer to special action or treatment at the Kremas, refer to hygiene actions that he can provide no witnesses or other evidence to prove that is what took place inside the Kremas.

and historians have not dropped anything about the narrative of usage of the Kremas. Your false assertion is merely evidence of how you have fallen for the denial hoax.

I didn't say that they did. I said that they no longer even try to use Pressac's so-called "criminal traces" to support the assertion that the morgues of Auschwitz-Birkenau crematoria were turned into homicidal gas chambers at some point. They just reverted back to their only-testimonies methodology, like mere Ufologists and ghost hunters.

Please evidence that claim, quoting to and linking to a historian who has used documents from the Construction Office to corroborate witnesses and then stopped doing that, because the historian now accepts that Pressac was debunked.

That is because it is evidence that there was not a mass framing of Nazis for gassings. That flys in the face of your believe that there was such a conspiracy.

If that was the case, which it is not, why were the Dachau Nazis not all charged and convicted of mass gassings? You claim there was an assumption the gassings were true, and then produce evidence of that not being the case and a camp alleged to have had gas chambers, that none of the staff were tried for.

I've provided enough evidence showing that the mass gassing at Dachau was regarded and portrayed as an established fact before the Dachau show trial had even begun! The "common design" trick and the "judicial notice" trick just made the use of false confessions to mass gassing at Dachau superfluous. No surprise. Who needs more bogus evidence of a so-called fact of common knowledge after all ? Unnecessary to get a 100% conviction rate and sell a "good versus evil" narrative, as the future has vastly demonstrated in the following years and decades. In 1945, the U.S. military didn't need the gas-chamber story more than all the other atrocity stories the Allied propagandists were telling abou the Enemy to strengthen the fictive moral high ground of the Allies and divert public attention away from the appaling results of their own bombing policy. They didn't need to focus on the gas-chamber story more than Netanyahu needs to focus on the decapitated-babies story to keep ethnically cleasing the lands singled out for future Jewish colonization. A general impression of good Allies versus evil Nazis & Japs was enough for that.

You have shown evidence that the newspaper rumours and prisoner claims Dachau had gas chambers and gassings took place, were debunked by the war crimes investigators and historians, who researched those claims and found evidence to contradict them. The SS camp staff denied gassings took place, and no evidence, such as an eyewitness who worked at the gas chambers, was found. Camp records also showed a trail for those who arrived, such that unlike arrivals at A-B, hundreds of thousands of prisoners did not go missing.

The evidence that was found at A-B, that you claim has been debunked, did not exist at Dachau. So, Dachau had SS staff denying gassings with no evidence to prove they were lying and A-B had SS staff who admitted to gas chambers and evidence to corroborate them.

You just don't get that, because your beliefs are not evidence based.

Gassings were not a fact of common knowledge, as each camp's trial had to produce evidence of the use of gas chambers. Such evidence was produced for A-B and TII, but not for Dachau or Bergen-Belsen.

You're lying. In 1945, all the Nazi camps were labelled as "death camps." That's why horror pictures of typhus victims at Buchenwald, Belsen and Dachau were so easily sold as undeniable graphic evidence of a Nazi extermination policy.

All camps were called death camps in 1945, due to the sheer numbers of dead found at each one. It was the subsequent war crimes investigations, that determined what camps had gas chambers that were used for gassings, how many were gassed and what camps had no gas chambers. Those investigations were evidence based, whereby testimonies, documents, physical and circumstantial evidence was gathered, to determine what happened. Historians later differentiated between the camps and the death camps have now come to mean those where mass gassings or shootings took place.

No evidence has ever been produced to show an Allied bomb hit a supply transport to a camp, that explains why only Jews in the camps starved to death and not any of the other prisoners. It was Nazi policy to withhold food from the Jews.

A big liar caught with his pants (on fire) down once again...

Destroying the Reich's transport system was a primary military goal of the Allies.







Why did you think that Allies performed a big starvation experiment in Minnesota if they were not starving Europe with their obliteration bombing policy ?

You have provided no evidence that an Allied bomb hit a transport to a camp that somehow caused the Jewish prisoners, but not the other prisoners to starve to death.

Why would you expect autopsies performed on corpses in 1945, when gassings ended in 1944 and those corpses were cremated, to find evidence of gassed corpses? How could a gassed corpse from 1944 survive to 1945, to be autopsied?

That's the late narrative. In 1945, Allied propagandists claimed that the Anglo-American armies had just captured Nazi extermination camps and that the horror pictures of emaciated camp inmates were the undeniable proof that all the Nazi camps had been mass murder factories ("so it was true," as they put it).

It was believed in 1945, as camps were liberated that gas chambers had been operating till the very end. That was not the case. It is hardly surprising that in 1945, a lot was not yet known or understood about what had happened. As evidence was gathered, the narrative of all camps were death camps changed, to it was certain camps under certain operations, primarily Action Reinhardt.

[HansHill]

Uh oh Nessie!! Time to move the goalposts! Quick!

[Nessie]

Uh oh Nessie!! Time to move the goalposts! Quick!

I have acknowledged that initial reports about TII, Belzec and Dachau were wrong. It is not moving the goalposts to say that after investigation, the claims about steam at TII and Belzec and gassings at Dachau were established to be incorrect and to then alter the narrative. Early rumours and claims were superseded by corroborated evidence that engines were used at TII and Belzec and Dachau's gas chambers were certainly not used for mass gassings and may not have been used at all. That change to the narrative is evidence lead and is genuine historical revision, which is something you cannot do.

[HansHill]

Despicable.

These aren't rumours, claims or reports. These are sworn affidavits from Justice Jackson's own legal team.

[Eye of Zyclone]

There are documents to corroborate the witnesses, deniers have not debunked that

Yes, they have debunked that. But why would you waste time reading the books and papers of people you call "deniers" ?

I have read various denials and so-called debunking, but they are evidentially and logically flawed. I refer to that as denial, because it is not revisionism, as it fails to provide an alternative evidenced history. For example, Mattogno claims that documents that refer to special action or treatment at the Kremas, refer to hygiene actions that he can provide no witnesses or other evidence to prove that is what took place inside the Kremas.

You're [deliberately] missing the point, as usually. The point was not that you call them deniers. The point was that you have of course not read the books of researchers you call deniers and that you have therefore no knowledge about their debunking of Pressac's alleged "criminal traces". It's very patent in your comment on Mattogno. Mattogno didn't write that hygiene actions took place inside the crematoria of Birkenau. He wrote that emergency hygiene facilities were contemplated and discussed for a while regarding the Birkenau crematoria, but that those sanitary facilities were finally never built because other hygiene facilities were completed elsewhere in the camp in the meantime.

That being said, your assertion is a gross distortion. The first revisionists named as such, like Arthur Ponsonby & Harry Elmer Barnes, were not required to write a whole book about the German carcass-exploitation establishments (i.e. kadaververwertungsanstalten, mistranslated as "corpse utilisation establishments" for anti-German propaganda purposes in 1917) when they debunked the British corpse-factory lie after WW1. And they were not required either to write detailed biographies of thousands of Belgian kids when they debunked the Belgian-children's-hacked-hands lie during the interwar years. Showing that there was nothing to those atrocity stories was enough. And they were not called "deniers" by forum crackpots in spite of that.

Please evidence that claim, quoting to and linking to a historian who has used documents from the Construction Office to corroborate witnesses and then stopped doing that, because the historian now accepts that Pressac was debunked.

I was not talking about orthodox/antirevisionist historians deleting things in the next editions of their books like Raul Hilberg did when he was caught in a lie about 2 of Hitler's nonexistent extermination orders. I was talking about the orthodox historians avoiding Pressac's debunked "criminal traces" like the plague in all the books they wrote after 2005.

You have shown evidence that the newspaper rumours and prisoner claims Dachau had gas chambers and gassings took place, were debunked by the war crimes investigators and historians, who researched those claims and found evidence to contradict them. The SS camp staff denied gassings took place, and no evidence, such as an eyewitness who worked at the gas chambers, was found. Camp records also showed a trail for those who arrived, such that unlike arrivals at A-B, hundreds of thousands of prisoners did not go missing.

Wrong. I have shown evidence that Allied propagandists and military portrayed the Dachau gas chamber(s) like an undeniable fact from day one.
Do you have war crime investigation reports concluding that there was (were) no gas chamber(s) at Dachau ?
Do you have books showing that orthodox/antirevisionist historians denied before 1960 that gassings took place at Dachau ?
Can you quote some camp staff denying that gassings took place at Dachau in front of an Allied "court" ?
No, no , and no ? So you lied once again !

You have provided no evidence that an Allied bomb hit a transport to a camp that somehow caused the Jewish prisoners, but not the other prisoners to starve to death.

You don't need to hit a transport to a camp to starve camp inmates. Destroying all the roads, bridges and railways is enough for that. And for info, no prisoner was starved to death. They were killed by typhus. Starvation weakened them, but typhus killed them. That's why the British army had to incinerate the Belsen camp with flame-throwers shortly after the end of their big propaganda show there. Fire is useless to clean areas where many people died of starvation. But fire is very useful to sanitize areas where many people died of disease.

[Nessie]

Yes, they have debunked that. But why would you waste time reading the books and papers of people you call "deniers" ?

I have read various denials and so-called debunking, but they are evidentially and logically flawed. I refer to that as denial, because it is not revisionism, as it fails to provide an alternative evidenced history. For example, Mattogno claims that documents that refer to special action or treatment at the Kremas, refer to hygiene actions that he can provide no witnesses or other evidence to prove that is what took place inside the Kremas.

You're [deliberately] missing the point, as usually. The point was not that you call them deniers. The point was that you have of course not read the books of researchers you call deniers and that you have therefore no knowledge about their debunking of Pressac's alleged "criminal traces". It's very patent in your comment on Mattogno. Mattogno didn't write that hygiene actions took place inside the crematoria of Birkenau. He wrote that emergency hygiene facilities were contemplated and discussed for a while regarding the Birkenau crematoria, but that those sanitary facilities were finally never built because other hygiene facilities were completed elsewhere in the camp in the meantime.

How does that alleged hygiene facilities planning debunk the construction and use of gas chambers? If Mattogno agrees there were no such facilities constructed inside the Kremas, that leaves them open to be gas chambers.

That being said, your assertion is a gross distortion. The first revisionists named as such, like Arthur Ponsonby & Harry Elmer Barnes, were not required to write a whole book about the German carcass-exploitation establishments (i.e. kadaververwertungsanstalten, mistranslated as "corpse utilisation establishments" for anti-German propaganda purposes in 1917) when they debunked the British corpse-factory lie after WW1. And they were not required either to write detailed biographies of thousands of Belgian kids when they debunked the Belgian-children's-hacked-hands lie during the interwar years. Showing that there was nothing to those atrocity stories was enough. And they were not called "deniers" by forum crackpots in spite of that.

It is reasonable to call someone a denier, who denies something took place, but then fails to evidence what did. Holocaust revisionists cannot agree on a revised history for the Kremas, as they come up with multiple suggestions, none of which are supported by any eyewitness.

Please evidence that claim, quoting to and linking to a historian who has used documents from the Construction Office to corroborate witnesses and then stopped doing that, because the historian now accepts that Pressac was debunked.

I was not talking about orthodox/antirevisionist historians deleting things in the next editions of their books like Raul Hilberg did when he was caught in a lie about 2 of Hitler's nonexistent extermination orders. I was talking about the orthodox historians avoiding Pressac's debunked "criminal traces" like the plague in all the books they wrote after 2005.

Please evidence historians using the documents Pressac used prior to 2005 and then none doing so after 2005.

You have shown evidence that the newspaper rumours and prisoner claims Dachau had gas chambers and gassings took place, were debunked by the war crimes investigators and historians, who researched those claims and found evidence to contradict them. The SS camp staff denied gassings took place, and no evidence, such as an eyewitness who worked at the gas chambers, was found. Camp records also showed a trail for those who arrived, such that unlike arrivals at A-B, hundreds of thousands of prisoners did not go missing.

Wrong. I have shown evidence that Allied propagandists and military portrayed the Dachau gas chamber(s) like an undeniable fact from day one.
Do you have war crime investigation reports concluding that there was (were) no gas chamber(s) at Dachau ?
Do you have books showing that orthodox/antirevisionist historians denied before 1960 that gassings took place at Dachau ?
Can you quote some camp staff denying that gassings took place at Dachau in front of an Allied "court" ?
No, no , and no ? So you lied once again !

If you look at the list of SS camp staff tried for crimes at Dachau, 1945-8, none were for killing prisoners in gas chambers.

https://www.expostfacto.nl/dtrr/dtnames01.html

Instead, they were for crimes such as;

Sponsel, Johann Georg US176, "After receiving custody of an American airman the accused shot and killed the flyer en route to a nearby airfield"

Bayha, Wilhelm US458, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camp, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling (partly fatal) and shooting of prisoners. Medical mistreatment of prisoners. Performing selections for so-called invalid transports to KL Auschwitz)"

Alberth, Ludwig US396, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camps, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling of prisoners, in part with fatal results"

Therefore the US military investigators and prosecutors, who ran the trials between 1945 and 1948, had already accepted that there were no gas chambers or mass gassings. If it was a hoax, why did they ignore the propaganda about gas chambers at the camp and not charge any staff with running them?

You have provided no evidence that an Allied bomb hit a transport to a camp that somehow caused the Jewish prisoners, but not the other prisoners to starve to death.

You don't need to hit a transport to a camp to starve camp inmates. Destroying all the roads, bridges and railways is enough for that. And for info, no prisoner was starved to death. They were killed by typhus. Starvation weakened them, but typhus killed them. That's the British had to incinerate the Belsen camp with flame-throwers shortly after the end of their big propaganda show there. Fire is useless to clean areas where many people died of starvation. But fire is very useful to sanitize areas where many people died of disease.

Thankyou for admitting there is no evidence Allied bombing hit a supply due to go to a camp. You now need to explain how Allied bombing caused only Jewish prisoners to starve to death.

[Nessie]

Despicable.

These aren't rumours, claims or reports. These are sworn affidavits from Justice Jackson's own legal team.

...

They were sworn affidavits that after investigation, were found to be based on rumours and hearsay, as none of the claims were made by anyone who said they worked at the Dachau gas chambers and saw gassings.

[Keen]

I have acknowledged that initial reports about TII, Belzec and Dachau were wrong.

But you lack the courage, integrity and character to admitt that the follow reports were fraudulent as well:

OPENING / FUNDAMENTAL STATEMENT OF FACT: It is alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the bodies and burnt remains of hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of Jews were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II. However, despite all the deceptive, unsubstantiated allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 100 graves in question that are fraudulently alleged to have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at these five sites, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology, contained the remains of - ONLY SIX PEOPLE.

Note: Using the information presented on this website and applying legal standards used in U.S. courts, the above opening / fundamental statement of fact, which is written as, and can be defined as - a rebuttable presumption - can be - LEGALLY - ACCEPTED - AS - TRUE - in a U.S. court.

...

If the physical evidence for an alleged crime that - HAS TO EXIST - for the crime to have

actually happened - DOES NOT EXIST - then the alleged crime obviously - DID NOT HAPPEN.

Ergo: The orthodox “pure extermination center” story is - A PROVEN, NONSENSICAL BIG-LIE.

http://thisisaboutscience.com/

[Eye of Zyclone]

How does that alleged hygiene facilities planning debunk the construction and use of gas chambers? If Mattogno agrees there were no such facilities constructed inside the Kremas, that leaves them open to be gas chambers.

It debunks the construction and use of gas chambers because it explains Pressac's alleged "criminal traces" as a mere exchange of ideas about delousing gas chambers (fumigation cubicles for the killing of typhus-carrying lice in clothes and beddings) and actual shower rooms (not dummy shower heads in homicidal gas chambers for the mass execution of jews).

It is reasonable to call someone a denier, who denies something took place, but then fails to evidence what did. Holocaust revisionists cannot agree on a revised history for the Kremas, as they come up with multiple suggestions, none of which are supported by any eyewitness.

Would you call the Israelis "deniers" if they disproved an atrocity story told by some Palestinians claiming that Israeli soldiers kill and eat babies in Gaza by showing that there is no solid evidence for that assertion ?

• Do you have war crime investigation reports concluding that there was (were) no gas chamber(s) at Dachau ?

• Do you have books showing that orthodox/antirevisionist historians denied before 1960 that gassings took place at Dachau ?

• Can you quote some camp staff denying that gassings took place at Dachau in front of an Allied "court" ?

No, no , and no ? So you lied once again !

Therefore, the answer to these three questions is no. In other words, you lied. QED

If you look at the list of SS camp staff tried for crimes at Dachau, 1945-8, none were for killing prisoners in gas chambers.

https://www.expostfacto.nl/dtrr/dtnames01.html

Instead, they were for crimes such as;

Sponsel, Johann Georg US176, "After receiving custody of an American airman the accused shot and killed the flyer en route to a nearby airfield"

Bayha, Wilhelm US458, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camp, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling (partly fatal) and shooting of prisoners. Medical mistreatment of prisoners. Performing selections for so-called invalid transports to KL Auschwitz)"

Alberth, Ludwig US396, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camps, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling of prisoners, in part with fatal results"

Therefore the US military investigators and prosecutors, who ran the trials between 1945 and 1948, had already accepted that there were no gas chambers or mass gassings. If it was a hoax, why did they ignore the propaganda about gas chambers at the camp and not charge any staff with running them?

Nope. Therefore the U.S. military prosecutors who ran the Dachau trial didn't exploit the gas-chamber story for their mock trial. They didn't need it. They were able to convict 100% of the accused without it. Proves that propagandizing a populace and lynching defeated enemies can be two distinct things. Unlike the Nuremberg parody of justice, the Dachau "trial" was more a vengeful internal Army matter than a big propaganda show.

Thankyou for admitting there is no evidence Allied bombing hit a supply due to go to a camp.

Complete nonsense!! With all the roads, bridges and railways destroyed, there's of course no such thing as a supply due to go anywhere! This is axiomatic...

The Allied pilots proudly straffed and bombed anything that moved, even the horses grazing in the pastures. This new nonsense of yours is even more ridiculous than your usual nonsenses.

You now need to explain how Allied bombing caused only Jewish prisoners to starve to death.

There were very few Jews at Dachau and the camp was nevertheless littered with emaciated dead bodies when the US Army captured that camp. Therefore not only Jewish starved and died in Nazi camps at the very end of WW2. And once again, typhus more than starvation emaciated and killed those prisoners when sanitary measures couldn't be properly carried out anymore. Similar scenes were seen in typhus-stricken Serbia during WW1.

[Nessie]

How does that alleged hygiene facilities planning debunk the construction and use of gas chambers? If Mattogno agrees there were no such facilities constructed inside the Kremas, that leaves them open to be gas chambers.

It debunks the construction and use of gas chambers because it explains Pressac's alleged "criminal traces" as a mere exchange of ideas about delousing gas chambers (fumigation cubicles for the killing of typhus-carrying lice in clothes and beddings) and actual shower rooms (not dummy shower heads in homicidal gas chambers for the mass execution of jews).

But no document uses the words for delousing or shower rooms. Instead, they do refer to gas chambers. A "mere exchange of ideas" does not prove what the rooms were used for and my point stands that Mattogno fails to prove actual usage.

It is reasonable to call someone a denier, who denies something took place, but then fails to evidence what did. Holocaust revisionists cannot agree on a revised history for the Kremas, as they come up with multiple suggestions, none of which are supported by any eyewitness.

Would you call the Israelis "deniers" if they disproved an atrocity story told by some Palestinians claiming that Israeli soldiers kill and eat babies in Gaza by showing that there is no solid evidence for that assertion ?

No. You have failed to prove that there is no solid evidence for mass gassings, instead you merely assert and rely on illogical arguments. There is no evidence babies were eaten in Gaza, there is evidence of mass gassing. Isreali soldiers deny eating babies. SS camp staff admit there were mass gassings. Do you see the difference?

• Do you have war crime investigation reports concluding that there was (were) no gas chamber(s) at Dachau ?

• Do you have books showing that orthodox/antirevisionist historians denied before 1960 that gassings took place at Dachau ?

• Can you quote some camp staff denying that gassings took place at Dachau in front of an Allied "court" ?

No, no , and no ? So you lied once again !

Therefore, the answer to these three questions is no. In other words, you lied. QED

I have not denied that early war crime reports concluded there were gas chambers at Dachau. I have given you a link to what each Dachau staff member was charged with and none involve gas chambers, meaning by the trial, the war crimes investigators had concluded there were no gassings at Dachau.

I do not see how my inability to show you historians denying Dachau gassings before 1960, or camp staff denying gassings at the Allied trial, is me lying.

If you look at the list of SS camp staff tried for crimes at Dachau, 1945-8, none were for killing prisoners in gas chambers.

https://www.expostfacto.nl/dtrr/dtnames01.html

Instead, they were for crimes such as;

Sponsel, Johann Georg US176, "After receiving custody of an American airman the accused shot and killed the flyer en route to a nearby airfield"

Bayha, Wilhelm US458, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camp, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling (partly fatal) and shooting of prisoners. Medical mistreatment of prisoners. Performing selections for so-called invalid transports to KL Auschwitz)"

Alberth, Ludwig US396, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camps, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling of prisoners, in part with fatal results"

Therefore the US military investigators and prosecutors, who ran the trials between 1945 and 1948, had already accepted that there were no gas chambers or mass gassings. If it was a hoax, why did they ignore the propaganda about gas chambers at the camp and not charge any staff with running them?

Nope. Therefore the U.S. military prosecutors who ran the Dachau trial didn't exploit the gas-chamber story for their mock trial. They didn't need it. They were able to convict 100% of the accused without it. Proves that propagandizing a populace and lynching defeated enemies can be two distinct things. Unlike the Nuremberg parody of justice, the Dachau "trial" was more a vengeful internal Army matter than a big propaganda show.

It proves the investigations were fair and evidence based, such that where no evidence was found a camp was used as a death camp, the staff were not accused of such. It proves there was no mass hoaxing of the use of gas chambers.

Thankyou for admitting there is no evidence Allied bombing hit a supply due to go to a camp.

Complete nonsense!! With all the roads, bridges and railways destroyed, there's of course no such thing as a supply due to go anywhere! This is axiomatic...

The Allied pilots proudly straffed and bombed anything that moved, even the horses grazing in the pastures. This new nonsense of yours is even more ridiculous than your usual nonsenses.

Prove that all supplies ground to a halt, across the entire of Germany and then explain how the SS camp staff and non-Jewish prisoners, such as POWs, got fed and did not starve.

You now need to explain how Allied bombing caused only Jewish prisoners to starve to death.

There were very few Jews at Dachau and the camp was nevertheless littered with emaciated dead bodies when the US Army captured that camp. Therefore not only Jewish starved and died in Nazi camps at the very end of WW2. And once again, typhus more than starvation emaciated and killed those prisoners when sanitary measures couldn't be properly carried out anymore. Similar scenes were seen in typhus-stricken Serbia during WW1.

There were only a few hundred thousand Jews liberated from the camps in 1945. So, where were the millions who had been arrested and sent to the camps, 1939-44?

You have failed to explain how only Jews starved and camp staff and POWs did not.

[Eye of Zyclone]

How does that alleged hygiene facilities planning debunk the construction and use of gas chambers? If Mattogno agrees there were no such facilities constructed inside the Kremas, that leaves them open to be gas chambers.

It debunks the construction and use of gas chambers because it explains Pressac's alleged "criminal traces" as a mere exchange of ideas about delousing gas chambers (fumigation cubicles for the killing of typhus-carrying lice in clothes and beddings) and actual shower rooms (not dummy shower heads in homicidal gas chambers for the mass execution of jews).

But no document uses the words for delousing or shower rooms. Instead, they do refer to gas chambers. A "mere exchange of ideas" does not prove what the rooms were used for and my point stands that Mattogno fails to prove actual usage.

Problem is the word gaskammer was the German name of the fumigation cubicles used for the anti-typhus delousing of lice-infested clothes and beddings.





Tellingly, a blueprint of such life-saving sanitary facilities was distorted and used by Netanyahu (in collaboration with the "German" newspaper Bild) in 2009 in order to get carte blanche for starting a regime change war against Iran. During this gross deception, Netanyahu also distorted and used the debunked minutes of the notorious Wannsee Conference of January 1942. And these were the 2 alleged smoking guns Israel's Prime Minister himself brandished before the UN to prove the Holocaust !!













Who can believe that the Prime of Israel himself would have resorted to such a dirty trick, with a high risk of getting caught with his pants down, if incriminating documents of homicidal killings in Nazi gas chambers had really existed ?!?





Moreover you've just demonstrated once again that you're an ignoramus and/or a big liar because documents mentioning showers were among Pressac's so-called "criminal traces." But the now-fallen champion of antirevisionist scholarship Jean-Claude Pressac claimed without a proof that those bathing devices were dummy shower heads used to make homicidal gas chambers look like mere shower rooms (deceptive camouflage theory).

It is reasonable to call someone a denier, who denies something took place, but then fails to evidence what did. Holocaust revisionists cannot agree on a revised history for the Kremas, as they come up with multiple suggestions, none of which are supported by any eyewitness.

Would you call the Israelis "deniers" if they disproved an atrocity story told by some Palestinians claiming that Israeli soldiers kill and eat babies in Gaza by showing that there is no solid evidence for that assertion ?

No. You have failed to prove that there is no solid evidence for mass gassings, instead you merely assert and rely on illogical arguments. There is no evidence babies were eaten in Gaza, there is evidence of mass gassing. Isreali soldiers deny eating babies. SS camp staff admit there were mass gassings. Do you see the difference?

What about the Jews who admitted that Jews kill Gentile kids to use their blood in religious rituals ? Did their confessions prove that the so-called blood libel is more than a canard ?

And no, there is no evidence of mass gassing (see the Netanyahu gross deception above). Repeating it won't help prove it. See the difference ?

Therefore, the answer to these three questions is no. In other words, you lied. QED

I have not denied that early war crime reports concluded there were gas chambers at Dachau. I have given you a link to what each Dachau staff member was charged with and none involve gas chambers, meaning by the trial, the war crimes investigators had concluded there were no gassings at Dachau.

Wrong.

... meaning, by the trial, the US prosecutors felt that false confessions to mass gassing at Dachau were not necessary to lynch the defenseless defeated enemies in their gaols (see the "common design" trick in past comments). No surprise. The Dachau trial was more a vengeful lynching party than a show trial held for propaganda purposes. It was almost unreported by mass media.

I do not see how my inability to show you historians denying Dachau gassings before 1960, or camp staff denying gassings at the Allied trial, is me lying.

It is you lying because you claimed that antirevisionist historians dropped the Dachau-gas-chamber allegation when they saw that there was nothing to it, that is, before it was officially dropped by Martin Broszat in the name of the Allied powers for damage control purposes (i.e. in August 1960), and also because you claimed that camp staff denied the Dachau gassings at the Dachau trial.

If you look at the list of SS camp staff tried for crimes at Dachau, 1945-8, none were for killing prisoners in gas chambers.

https://www.expostfacto.nl/dtrr/dtnames01.html

Instead, they were for crimes such as;

Sponsel, Johann Georg US176, "After receiving custody of an American airman the accused shot and killed the flyer en route to a nearby airfield"

Bayha, Wilhelm US458, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camp, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling (partly fatal) and shooting of prisoners. Medical mistreatment of prisoners. Performing selections for so-called invalid transports to KL Auschwitz)"

Alberth, Ludwig US396, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camps, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling of prisoners, in part with fatal results"

Therefore the US military investigators and prosecutors, who ran the trials between 1945 and 1948, had already accepted that there were no gas chambers or mass gassings. If it was a hoax, why did they ignore the propaganda about gas chambers at the camp and not charge any staff with running them?

Nope. Therefore the U.S. military prosecutors who ran the Dachau trial didn't exploit the gas-chamber story for their mock trial. They didn't need it. They were able to convict 100% of the accused without it. Proves that propagandizing a populace and lynching defeated enemies can be two distinct things. Unlike the Nuremberg parody of justice, the Dachau "trial" was more a vengeful internal Army matter than a big propaganda show.

It proves the investigations were fair and evidence based, such that where no evidence was found a camp was used as a death camp, the staff were not accused of such. It proves there was no mass hoaxing of the use of gas chambers.

No, it proved that the Dachau gassing story was not even needed to hang 100% of the defeated enemies who were lynched at that fake trial.

Where are the U.S. investigation reports concluding that there was no homicidal gas chamber at Dachau ? Feel free to prove that this is not only another groundless story made up by yourself...

Thankyou for admitting there is no evidence Allied bombing hit a supply due to go to a camp.

Complete nonsense!! With all the roads, bridges and railways destroyed, there's of course no such thing as a supply due to go anywhere! This is axiomatic...

The Allied pilots proudly straffed and bombed anything that moved, even the horses grazing in the pastures. This new nonsense of yours is even more ridiculous than your usual nonsenses.

Prove that all supplies ground to a halt, across the entire of Germany and then explain how the SS camp staff and non-Jewish prisoners, such as POWs, got fed and did not starve.

Come on, Ness !! The All-Lies were still struggling hard with the deadly consequences of their own obliteration-bombing policy 6 months after the end of the war in Europe !







And the horrific pictures that make you erroneously believe that the camp inmates were starved to death were above all pictures of typhus victims. Hence the flame-throwers used in Belsen after the propaganda show was over. QED.

You now need to explain how Allied bombing caused only Jewish prisoners to starve to death.

There were very few Jews at Dachau and the camp was nevertheless littered with emaciated dead bodies when the US Army captured that camp. Therefore not only Jewish starved and died in Nazi camps at the very end of WW2. And once again, typhus more than starvation emaciated and killed those prisoners when sanitary measures couldn't be properly carried out anymore. Similar scenes were seen in typhus-stricken Serbia during WW1.

There were only a few hundred thousand Jews liberated from the camps in 1945. So, where were the millions who had been arrested and sent to the camps, 1939-44?

They were unsurprisingly unreported by the victors in order to avoid debunking their own atrocity propaganda and then resettled in Palestine, the United States and other countries around the world.

“There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics” - Mark Twain

"The only statistics you can trust are the ones you have falsified yourself." - Winston Churchill

[Nessie]

It debunks the construction and use of gas chambers because it explains Pressac's alleged "criminal traces" as a mere exchange of ideas about delousing gas chambers (fumigation cubicles for the killing of typhus-carrying lice in clothes and beddings) and actual shower rooms (not dummy shower heads in homicidal gas chambers for the mass execution of jews).

But no document uses the words for delousing or shower rooms. Instead, they do refer to gas chambers. A "mere exchange of ideas" does not prove what the rooms were used for and my point stands that Mattogno fails to prove actual usage.

Problem is the word gaskammer was the German name of the fumigation cubicles used for the anti-typhus delousing of lice-infested clothes and beddings.

That is not a problem. The documents that refer to the construction of gas chambers inside the Kremas, are part of the evidence gas chambers were installed. The documents do not evidence what was gassed, and that comes from other evidence. That other evidence consists of eyewitnesses to the gassings and the circumstantial evidence around the operation of the Kremas.

You cannot produce any evidence the gas chambers inside the Kremas were used to delouse clothing and the Rudolf and Leuchter Reports both dispute that happened, due to the low HCN residues, when compared to known delousing chambers.

Tellingly, a blueprint of such life-saving sanitary facilities was distorted and used by Netanyahu (in collaboration with the "German" newspaper Bild) in 2009 in order to get carte blanche for starting a regime change war against Iran. During this gross deception, Netanyahu also distorted and used the debunked minutes of the notorious Wannsee Conference of January 1942. And these were the 2 alleged smoking guns Israel's Prime Minister himself brandished before the UN to prove the Holocaust !!

What the gas chambers were used for, is proven by evidence. You cannot produce any evidence they were used for a different purpose.

Who can believe that the Prime of Israel himself would have resorted to such a dirty trick, with a high risk of getting caught with his pants down, if incriminating documents of homicidal killings in Nazi gas chambers had really existed ?!?

Where is your evidence of life saving facilities in operation inside the Kremas II to V, in 1943-4? All the eyewitnesses contradict your claim of life saving facilities.

Moreover you've just demonstrated once again that you're an ignoramus and/or a big liar because documents mentioning showers were among Pressac's so-called "criminal traces." But the now-fallen champion of antirevisionist scholarship Jean-Claude Pressac claimed with a proof that those bathing devices were dummy shower heads used to make homicidal gas chambers look like mere shower rooms (deceptive camouflage theory).

The corroborating eyewitness, documentary and physical evidence, is that the gas chambers were made to look like showers. You have no evidence they were intended to be showers, let alone used for showering.

It is reasonable to call someone a denier, who denies something took place, but then fails to evidence what did. Holocaust revisionists cannot agree on a revised history for the Kremas, as they come up with multiple suggestions, none of which are supported by any eyewitness.

Would you call the Israelis "deniers" if they disproved an atrocity story told by some Palestinians claiming that Israeli soldiers kill and eat babies in Gaza by showing that there is no solid evidence for that assertion ?

No. You have failed to prove that there is no solid evidence for mass gassings, instead you merely assert and rely on illogical arguments. There is no evidence babies were eaten in Gaza, there is evidence of mass gassing. Isreali soldiers deny eating babies. SS camp staff admit there were mass gassings. Do you see the difference?

What about the Jews who admitted that Jews kill Gentile kids to use their blood in religious rituals ? Did their confessions prove that the so-called blood libel is more than a canard ?

And no, there is no evidence of mass gassing (see the Netanyahu gross deception above). Repeating it won't help prove it. See the difference ?

There is evidence to prove mass gassings. The eyewitnesses are corroborated by documents and cricumstantial evidence.

Therefore, the answer to these three questions is no. In other words, you lied. QED

I have not denied that early war crime reports concluded there were gas chambers at Dachau. I have given you a link to what each Dachau staff member was charged with and none involve gas chambers, meaning by the trial, the war crimes investigators had concluded there were no gassings at Dachau.

Wrong.

... meaning, by the trial, the US prosecutors felt that false confessions to mass gassing at Dachau were not necessary to lynch the defenseless defeated enemies in their gaols (see the "common design" trick in past comments). No surprise. The Dachau trial was more a vengeful lynching party than a show trial held for propaganda purposes. It was almost unreported by mass media.

I do not see how my inability to show you historians denying Dachau gassings before 1960, or camp staff denying gassings at the Allied trial, is me lying.

It is you lying because you claimed that antirevisionist historians dropped the Dachau-gas-chamber allegation when they saw that there was nothing to it, that is, before it was officially dropped by Martin Broszat in the name of the Allied powers for damage control purposes (i.e. in August 1960), and also because you claimed that camp staff denied the Dachau gassings at the Dachau trial.

I am still waiting for you to evidence a historian who said the Dachau gas chambers were used for mass gassings and then dropped that claim. Camp staff at Dachau did deny gassings, and there was no evidence of gassings, which is why they were not referenced at the trial. You are getting confused about process and chronology.

If you look at the list of SS camp staff tried for crimes at Dachau, 1945-8, none were for killing prisoners in gas chambers.

https://www.expostfacto.nl/dtrr/dtnames01.html

Instead, they were for crimes such as;

Sponsel, Johann Georg US176, "After receiving custody of an American airman the accused shot and killed the flyer en route to a nearby airfield"

Bayha, Wilhelm US458, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camp, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling (partly fatal) and shooting of prisoners. Medical mistreatment of prisoners. Performing selections for so-called invalid transports to KL Auschwitz)"

Alberth, Ludwig US396, "Performing guard and supervisory duties in the concentration camps, thereby participating in the subjection of POW's and civilian nationals of nations at war with Germany to cruelties and mistreatment. Mishandling of prisoners, in part with fatal results"

Therefore the US military investigators and prosecutors, who ran the trials between 1945 and 1948, had already accepted that there were no gas chambers or mass gassings. If it was a hoax, why did they ignore the propaganda about gas chambers at the camp and not charge any staff with running them?

Nope. Therefore the U.S. military prosecutors who ran the Dachau trial didn't exploit the gas-chamber story for their mock trial. They didn't need it. They were able to convict 100% of the accused without it. Proves that propagandizing a populace and lynching defeated enemies can be two distinct things. Unlike the Nuremberg parody of justice, the Dachau "trial" was more a vengeful internal Army matter than a big propaganda show.

It proves the investigations were fair and evidence based, such that where no evidence was found a camp was used as a death camp, the staff were not accused of such. It proves there was no mass hoaxing of the use of gas chambers.

No, it proved that the Dachau gassing story was not even needed to hang 100% of the defeated enemies who were lynched at that fake trial.

Where are the U.S. investigation reports concluding that there was no homicidal gas chamber at Dachau ? Feel free to prove that this is not only another groundless story made up by yourself...

If a false narrative was not required for Dachau, why was it needed for the AR camps and A-B? Prisoners were subject to cruelty at those camps.

I am concluding that the US investigations concluded there were no homicidal gas chambers, because none of the staff were charged with killing people by gassing them.

Thankyou for admitting there is no evidence Allied bombing hit a supply due to go to a camp.

Complete nonsense!! With all the roads, bridges and railways destroyed, there's of course no such thing as a supply due to go anywhere! This is axiomatic...

The Allied pilots proudly straffed and bombed anything that moved, even the horses grazing in the pastures. This new nonsense of yours is even more ridiculous than your usual nonsenses.

Prove that all supplies ground to a halt, across the entire of Germany and then explain how the SS camp staff and non-Jewish prisoners, such as POWs, got fed and did not starve.

Come on, Ness !! The All-Lies were still struggling hard with the deadly consequences of their own obliteration-bombing policy 6 months after the end of the war in Europe !







And the horrific pictures that make you erroneously believe that the camp inmates were starved to death were above all pictures of typhus victims. Hence the flame-throwers used in Belsen after the propaganda show was over. QED.

You now need to explain how Allied bombing caused only Jewish prisoners to starve to death.

There were very few Jews at Dachau and the camp was nevertheless littered with emaciated dead bodies when the US Army captured that camp. Therefore not only Jewish starved and died in Nazi camps at the very end of WW2. And once again, typhus more than starvation emaciated and killed those prisoners when sanitary measures couldn't be properly carried out anymore. Similar scenes were seen in typhus-stricken Serbia during WW1.

There were only a few hundred thousand Jews liberated from the camps in 1945. So, where were the millions who had been arrested and sent to the camps, 1939-44?

They were unsurprisingly unreported by the victors in order to avoid debunking their own atrocity propaganda and then resettled in Palestine, the United States and other countries around the world.

“There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics” - Mark Twain

"The only statistics you can trust are the ones you have falsified yourself." - Winston Churchill

Jews starved because the staff decided to stop feeding them. They died from typhus, because the staff stopped treating them. That cannot be blamed on Allied bombing.

[Keen]

So, where were the millions who had been arrested and sent to the camps, 1939-44?

Somewhere other than the 100 fraudulently alleged "huge mass graves" that you allege they ended up in.

Somewhere other than the 800 "huge mass graves" that Patrick Desbois allege they ended up in.

[Eye of Zyclone]

You cannot produce any evidence the gas chambers inside the Kremas were used to delouse clothing and the Rudolf and Leuchter Reports both dispute that happened, due to the low HCN residues, when compared to known delousing chambers.

I don't know if you're actually an idiot or just playing it dumb,
but Carlo Mattogno didn't say that those emergency delousing facilities were actually built and that the project ever came into fruition.
He said that those facilities were only contemplated and discussed for a while until the project was finally dropped
because large delousing facilities like the Zentralsauna had been completed and put into operation elsewhere in the meantime.

Jews starved because the staff decided to stop feeding them. They died from typhus, because the staff stopped treating them. That cannot be blamed on Allied bombing.

The assertion that one could possibly feed and delouse numerous people with obliterated supply lines is complete nonsense. The proudly-proclaimed & zealously-implemented Allied obliteration-bombing policy was, of course, largely responsible for that situation, as the Red Cross complained.

Not to mention the boundless ridiculousness of the theory that the Nazis went to great lengths to evacuate many forced laborers westward through devastated lands only to starve them and leave great food for Allied atrocity propaganda behind...

[Nessie]

You cannot produce any evidence the gas chambers inside the Kremas were used to delouse clothing and the Rudolf and Leuchter Reports both dispute that happened, due to the low HCN residues, when compared to known delousing chambers.

I don't know if you're actually an idiot or just playing it dumb,
but Carlo Mattogno didn't say that those emergency delousing facilities were actually built and that the project ever came into fruition.
He said that those facilities were only contemplated and discussed for a while until the project was finally dropped
because large delousing facilities like the Zentralsauna had been completed and put into operation elsewhere in the meantime.

Mattogno spends a lot of time telling us what the Kremas were not used for, 1943-4, which is an odd approach to history. That he cannot evidence what they were used for, means he has failed at the basic task of any historian. You will never convince me that there were no gas chambers, until you produce corroborating evidence to prove what those buildings were used for.

Jews starved because the staff decided to stop feeding them. They died from typhus, because the staff stopped treating them. That cannot be blamed on Allied bombing.

The assertion that one could possibly feed and delouse numerous people with obliterated supply lines is complete nonsense. The proudly-proclaimed & zealously-implemented Allied obliteration-bombing policy was, of course, largely responsible for that situation, as the Red Cross complained.

Not to mention the boundless ridiculousness of the theory that the Nazis went to great lengths to evacuate many forced laborers westward through devastated lands only to starve them and leave great food for Allied atrocity propaganda behind...

SS camp staff chose to starve Jews and not treat typhus victims. If supply lines were completely obliterated, how come the staff and non_Jewish prisoners did not starve?