Chronology of the Holocaust

[bombsaway]

Gassing is the least hands on and visible form of killing. It allows multiple people to be killed at the same time, with the fewest number of staff and there is an obvious deception, getting people to undress for a shower, which also removes a task for the staff. That there was a wholesale transfer of T4 staff to AR is a direct chronological link between the two operations. That Hitler signed the order allowing euthanasia of the disabled, chronologically links him to AR. There is also the chronological link between senior Nazis and doctors working on T4 and Action 13f14, the euthanasia of concentration camp prisoners, by gassing. Those actions in 1941 are directly linked to AR. It is the people who worked on the actions who provide the strongest link as they moved between Actions and AR camps.

I see most revisionists as accepting the evidence for T4, but then they refuse to accept the evidence for AR, which makes little sense. Why accept the use of bottled CO in a secured, as tight room inside a hospital, but not the construction of secured gas tight rooms and an engine to produce CO, in an AR camp? Or, a gas van at Chelmno? Indeed, T4, 13f14, AR and Chelmno were separate, but chronologically interlinked operations.

I'm going to get to all of this Nessie, please allow me to proceed at my pace. It's important not to move too fast. Thank you , have patience

Stubble, plz disregard, I think it's important to finish with and understand the t4 gassing claims first

[HansHill]

Mr Stubble and BA, I have written a very brief primer on eugenics in the 3R forum, and I intend to expand that to euthanasia when I get a bit more time.

In the meantime, Rudolf's write-up of euthanasia in his Encyclopedia is an excellent starting point. Revisionists can approach euthanasia openly and accept it as fact without any contradictions with regards "the holocaust", in fact in an ironic twist the existence of T4 strengthens the Revisionist position rather than weaken it.

Some quick points:

- Euthanasia has grown very controversial and unpopular in modernity, but this was not the case at the time. We can point to other developed nations also practicing euthanasia at this exact period, we can even quote such high profile euthanasia patients as King George of England in 1936 in an act of non-voluntary euthanasia.

- There doesn't exist direct proof that the killing method of T4 was CO, however this is at least feasible and Revisionists can accept this as plausible, if not very practical and probable. If the killing method indeed was CO, it would very likely have been performed by administering via CO tank, through a pipe to a restrained patient, and certainly not, as we will discuss in the next point, diesel exhaust.

- Regarding Nessie's point that Aktion T4 staff were transferred to the Eastern Front be regarded as suspicious (or proof of genocide) is ridiculous. These were trained medical personnel! Assigning medical staff to the Eastern front is absolutely consistent with the revisionist account. And if the claim is that they cross-trained in operating Soviet Tank / Submarine engines, rather than merely medical personnel, (or indeed, if despite all their medical training that this impractical sloppy method was the method they chose to design at AR) this would need to be demonstrated in some meaningful way.

- Aktion T4 was indeed extended from its original target demographic of Reich citizens to camp inmates. However, if selected for euthanasia, camp inmates were then transported to euthanasia centres, mostly located in the interior of the Reich. This alone implies the camps had no means of safely gassing inmates (!)

[Stubble]

Gassing is the least hands on and visible form of killing. It allows multiple people to be killed at the same time, with the fewest number of staff and there is an obvious deception, getting people to undress for a shower, which also removes a task for the staff. That there was a wholesale transfer of T4 staff to AR is a direct chronological link between the two operations. That Hitler signed the order allowing euthanasia of the disabled, chronologically links him to AR. There is also the chronological link between senior Nazis and doctors working on T4 and Action 13f14, the euthanasia of concentration camp prisoners, by gassing. Those actions in 1941 are directly linked to AR. It is the people who worked on the actions who provide the strongest link as they moved between Actions and AR camps.

I see most revisionists as accepting the evidence for T4, but then they refuse to accept the evidence for AR, which makes little sense. Why accept the use of bottled CO in a secured, as tight room inside a hospital, but not the construction of secured gas tight rooms and an engine to produce CO, in an AR camp? Or, a gas van at Chelmno? Indeed, T4, 13f14, AR and Chelmno were separate, but chronologically interlinked operations.

I'm going to get to all of this Nessie, please allow me to proceed at my pace. It's important not to move too fast. Thank you , have patience

Stubble, plz disregard, I think it's important to finish with and understand the t4 gassing claims first

I'll ignore most of it.

I'll tell you right here and now though a syringe involves far fewer people to operate than a damn gas chamber. It also doesn't require workmen to be brought in to make it. After plans are made, and so on.

I'll tell you something else too, I can give you a scenario where a nurse could euthanize an entire hospital wing and be unaware she even held the murder weapon...

Oh, but it just has to be a gas chamber. Disguised as a shower room.

You know, my explanation of babi yar, nobody said anything. It was a great holocaust story though, I figured everybody would love it. There was a shower ruse and everything. I guess it needed an orchestra, eh? Like the gas chambers at Auschwitz?

Come off it with your stupid gas chambers, and your stupid gas vans. Again, if you find a homicidal gas van, I will cut it into pieces with a right angle grinder and eat it on camera.

[bombsaway]

I'll ignore most of it.

I'll tell you right here and now though a syringe involves far fewer people to operate than a damn gas chamber. It also doesn't require workmen to be brought in to make it. After plans are made, and so on.

I'll tell you something else too, I can give you a scenario where a nurse could euthanize an entire hospital wing and be unaware she even held the murder weapon...

Oh, but it just has to be a gas chamber. Disguised as a shower room.

Having a room with say a door that you can fit a bottle into seems trivial to me. What I basically am hearing from you is all the evidence MUST be disregarded because of implausibility concerns, which are a) not properly explicated IMO, and b) gas chambers were used for executions, consistently and widely throughout the world. If the implausibility is so strong and clear cut I would think that all of these must have been faked as well.

In addition to the possible resistance of patients to injections, I think involuntary euthanization is psychologically difficult for the administering nurse or physician. Whereas killing by gas chambers is less personalized way to do it.

Basically you are asserting a conspiracy to fake T4 gassings, involving fabrication of many documents and witness statements, on the basis of zero evidence and completely speculative reasoning, which can be countered. I can't follow you at all here. I've had issues with some other things you've said which I've moved on from for the purposes of facilitating discussion, but this is a clear cut case for me. Even other revisionists aren't following you down this path of impossibility.

Again the documentary evidence


https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... arbon.html

AI analysis

Let me analyze these documents carefully and explain their significance regarding the gassing of patients:
Key pieces of evidence from these documents that indicate patient gassing:

Direct reference to gassing patients in Document #1 (Film script from 1942):
"In a hermetically sealed room the patient is exposed to the effects of carbon monoxide gas" and describes how the gas is "completely odourless and initially robs the patient of their powers of judgement, and then their consciousness."
The systematic ordering and tracking of carbon monoxide gas bottles between various Nazi organizations:


Multiple letters between IG Farben and the Criminal Technical Institute about CO gas bottle deliveries
Specific technical details about the bottles (40L capacity, pressure ratings)
Regular ordering patterns suggesting ongoing use
Use of code names and careful paperwork tracking


Connection to known Nazi euthanasia locations and personnel:


Friedrich Lorent was involved in the Nazi euthanasia program
Communication with Werner Blankenburg of Hitler's Chancellery, who was involved in the T4 program
Letters mention "Tiergartenstrasse 4" - the headquarters of the Nazi euthanasia program


Technical specifications matching known euthanasia facilities:


The bottles were designed for carbon monoxide specifically
The pressure and volume specifications match those found at killing centers
Use of "Jennerwein und Brenner" as owners on the bottles (documented code names)

These documents are significant because they provide direct documentary evidence of:

The intent to use CO gas for killing patients
The systematic nature of the gassing operation through detailed logistics
The involvement of major Nazi organizations (IG Farben, Criminal Technical Institute, Hitler's Chancellery)
The technical specifications of the actual killing method

This collection of documents helps establish the organized, bureaucratic nature of the Nazi euthanasia gassing program through original German records, rather than just post-war testimony.

[Stubble]

I'll ignore most of it.

I'll tell you right here and now though a syringe involves far fewer people to operate than a damn gas chamber. It also doesn't require workmen to be brought in to make it. After plans are made, and so on.

I'll tell you something else too, I can give you a scenario where a nurse could euthanize an entire hospital wing and be unaware she even held the murder weapon...

Oh, but it just has to be a gas chamber. Disguised as a shower room.

Having a room with say a door that you can fit a bottle into seems trivial to me. What I basically am hearing from you is all the evidence MUST be disregarded because of implausibility concerns, which are a) not properly explicated IMO, and b) gas chambers were used for executions, consistently and widely throughout the world. If the implausibility is so strong and clear cut I would think that all of these must have been faked as well.

In addition to the possible resistance of patients to injections, I think involuntary euthanization is psychologically difficult for the administering nurse or physician. Whereas killing by gas chambers is less personalized way to do it.

Basically you are asserting a conspiracy to fake T4 gassings, involving fabrication of many documents and witness statements, on the basis of zero evidence and completely speculative reasoning, which can be countered. I can't follow you at all here. I've had issues with some other things you've said which I've moved on from for the purposes of facilitating discussion, but this is a clear cut case for me. Even other revisionists aren't following you down this path of impossibility.

Again the documentary evidence


https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... arbon.html

AI analysis

Let me analyze these documents carefully and explain their significance regarding the gassing of patients:
Key pieces of evidence from these documents that indicate patient gassing:

Direct reference to gassing patients in Document #1 (Film script from 1942):
"In a hermetically sealed room the patient is exposed to the effects of carbon monoxide gas" and describes how the gas is "completely odourless and initially robs the patient of their powers of judgement, and then their consciousness."
The systematic ordering and tracking of carbon monoxide gas bottles between various Nazi organizations:


Multiple letters between IG Farben and the Criminal Technical Institute about CO gas bottle deliveries
Specific technical details about the bottles (40L capacity, pressure ratings)
Regular ordering patterns suggesting ongoing use
Use of code names and careful paperwork tracking


Connection to known Nazi euthanasia locations and personnel:


Friedrich Lorent was involved in the Nazi euthanasia program
Communication with Werner Blankenburg of Hitler's Chancellery, who was involved in the T4 program
Letters mention "Tiergartenstrasse 4" - the headquarters of the Nazi euthanasia program


Technical specifications matching known euthanasia facilities:


The bottles were designed for carbon monoxide specifically
The pressure and volume specifications match those found at killing centers
Use of "Jennerwein und Brenner" as owners on the bottles (documented code names)

These documents are significant because they provide direct documentary evidence of:

The intent to use CO gas for killing patients
The systematic nature of the gassing operation through detailed logistics
The involvement of major Nazi organizations (IG Farben, Criminal Technical Institute, Hitler's Chancellery)
The technical specifications of the actual killing method

This collection of documents helps establish the organized, bureaucratic nature of the Nazi euthanasia gassing program through original German records, rather than just post-war testimony.

I understand ALL of that. I've also been making an effort, when I can, to vet said evidence, and no, eyewitnesses aren't going to sway me from my position.

Personally, the only reason I can see for gas chambers at the tiergarten facility, or any other facility, is to introduce a plot device so you can have an orchestra at Auschwitz playing while jews get gassed with zyclon be, which distinctly isn't carbon monoxide, isn't supported by any physical evidence, and also doesn't pass muster as a method of execution.

Again, the problem here isn't the how, it's the why.

[bombsaway]

I understand ALL of that. I've also been making an effort, when I can, to vet said evidence, and no, eyewitnesses aren't going to sway me from my position.

Personally, the only reason I can see for gas chambers at the tiergarten facility, or any other facility, is to introduce a plot device so you can have an orchestra at Auschwitz playing while jews get gassed with zyclon be, which distinctly isn't carbon monoxide, isn't supported by any physical evidence, and also doesn't pass muster as a method of execution.

Again, the problem here isn't the how, it's the why.

So here's a question for you, why have homicidal gas chambers been used widely throughout the world over long periods of time?

[Stubble]

I understand ALL of that. I've also been making an effort, when I can, to vet said evidence, and no, eyewitnesses aren't going to sway me from my position.

Personally, the only reason I can see for gas chambers at the tiergarten facility, or any other facility, is to introduce a plot device so you can have an orchestra at Auschwitz playing while jews get gassed with zyclon be, which distinctly isn't carbon monoxide, isn't supported by any physical evidence, and also doesn't pass muster as a method of execution.

Again, the problem here isn't the how, it's the why.

So here's a question for you, why have homicidal gas chambers been used widely throughout the world over long periods of time?

What the hell has that to do with euthanasia?

Why would the go to be, hey guys, you know what, we need to mix things up a bit. The Americans use hydrogen cyanide gas to execute murderers in complicated homicidal gas chambers that use stringent handling protocols and intensive maintenance. Why don't we use a completely different gas to euthanize people?

Further, why carbon monoxide? Why would that be the go to?

You want to camouflage a murder weapon and you want to keep from psychologically damaging the executioner?

Label insulin as a sedative and tell the nurse you need to sedate the patient for transport...

[Archie]

I'm serious as a fucking heart attack, there is no doubt in my mind if Adolf Hitler found out someone was killing people with gas, he would have had them hung by the neck with piano wire without giving them the courtesy of an adequate drop.

It was personal with that man and gas.

Is this your sole argument that poison gas wasn't used for euthanization? I think this is an entirely speculative point.

I looked for all mentions of poison gas by him and found this from mein kampf Volume 2.

English (James Murphy translation, 1939):
“If at the beginning of the War, and during the War, twelve or fifteen thousand of these Hebrew corrupters of the people had been held under poison gas, just as hundreds of thousands of our very best German workers from all walks of life and professions had to endure in the field, then the millions of sacrifices made at the front would not have been in vain. On the contrary, if twelve thousand of these malefactors had been eliminated in time, the lives of a million decent men, who would now be living to the general benefit, might have been saved.”

Original German (1943 edition):
“Wenn man zu Beginn und während des Krieges statt unserer deutschen Lanzenträger zehntausend dieser hebräischen Volksverderber unter Giftgas gehalten hätte, [...] dann wären nicht umsonst die Millionenopfer an der Front gefallen.”

So I don't know, I don't see it. You can take a comment like this as a joke of some kind, but I think if he was as serious as you say he was about no gas, he wouldn't even be joking about it.

From my perspective it seems like it would be hugely hypocritical for historians to discount all the evidence of poison gas being used for euthanasia by NS Germany, based on this, while believing whole heartedly in lethal injections.

So from my perspective, this all seems like 'just cuz'. It seems like you are very resistant to the idea of NS Germany using poison gas, this a strong bias, but if you're engaging in proper historical work you have to have grounding in evidence and non-speculative theories, otherwise biases will lead you astray.

Mein Kampf is from 1925-1926. Too early. More informed anti-revisionists stopped quoting that passage years ago.

Hitler's obviously talking about the notorious chemical warfare of WWI. Hitler himself was gassed during the war. He's saying the Jews as a whole didn't do their part for Germany in the war.

Another thing you are ignoring here was that Germany was sitting on a large stockpile of Sarin and other chemical weapons yet Hitler refused to use it. In contrast, we have Churchill on record as being eager to use chemical warfare against the Germans (thankfully it seems that maniac didn't get his way). So, yes, I think we can argue that Hitler did show some disinclination to use gas, certainly compared to Churchill.

[bombsaway]

What the hell has that to do with euthanasia?

With involuntary euthanasia you are killing someone against their will

With execution you are killing someone against their will

Further, why carbon monoxide? Why would that be the go to?

I see many many different gasses have been used outside of NS Germany, including HCN. I see CO2 has been used for killing animals, contradicting your prior statement. The use case for CO is actually that it's fairly painless for victims, that's why people kill themselves by sticking their heads in ovens and letting their car run in the garage.

CO is probably the best chemical for "humane" killing via gas. The main issue is it takes a long time, but victims become unconscious pretty quickly.

Mein Kampf is from 1925-1926. Too early. More informed anti-revisionists stopped quoting that passage years ago.

Hitler's obviously talking about the notorious chemical warfare of WWI. Hitler himself was gassed during the war. He's saying the Jews as a whole didn't do their part for Germany in the war.

Another thing you are ignoring here was that Germany was sitting on a large stockpile of Sarin and other chemical weapons yet Hitler refused to use it. In contrast, we have Churchill on record as being eager to use chemical warfare against the Germans (thankfully it seems that maniac didn't get his way). So, yes, I think we can argue that Hitler did show some disinclination to use gas, certainly compared to Churchill.

I think you're wrong here, but we can get check this if you want in another part of the site. I wasn't bringing this up for reasons of evidencing extermination of Jews, you are very debate-pilled my friend.

The Nazis did use chemical weapons in combat on several occasions along the Black Sea, notably in Sevastopol, where they used toxic smoke to force Soviet resistance fighters out of caverns below the city, in violation of the 1925 Geneva Protocol.[87] The Nazis also used asphyxiating gas in the catacombs of Odessa in November 1941, following their capture of the city, and in late May 1942 during the Battle of the Kerch Peninsula in eastern Crimea.[87] Victor Israelyan, a Soviet ambassador, reported that the latter incident was perpetrated by the Wehrmacht's Chemical Forces and organized by a special detail of SS troops with the help of a field engineer battalion. Chemical Forces General Ochsner reported to German command in June 1942 that a chemical unit had taken part in the battle.[88] After the battle in mid-May 1942, roughly 3,000 Red Army soldiers and Soviet civilians not evacuated by sea were besieged in a series of caves and tunnels in the nearby Adzhimushkay quarry. After holding out for approximately three months, "poison gas was released into the tunnels, killing all but a few score of the Soviet defenders."[89] Thousands of those killed around Adzhimushkay were documented to have been killed by asphyxiation from gas.[88]

In February 1943, German troops stationed in Kuban received a telegram: "Russians might have to be cleared out of the mountain range with gas."[90] The troops also received two wagons of toxin antidotes.[90]

[Stubble]

What the hell has that to do with euthanasia?

With involuntary euthanasia you are killing someone against their will

With execution you are killing someone against their will

Further, why carbon monoxide? Why would that be the go to?

I see many many different gasses have been used outside of NS Germany, including HCN. I see CO2 has been used for killing animals, contradicting your prior statement. The use case for CO is actually that it's fairly painless for victims, that's why people kill themselves by sticking their heads in ovens and letting their car run in the garage.

CO is probably the best chemical for "humane" killing via gas. The main issue is it takes a long time, but victims become unconscious pretty quickly.

Mein Kampf is from 1925-1926. Too early. More informed anti-revisionists stopped quoting that passage years ago.

Hitler's obviously talking about the notorious chemical warfare of WWI. Hitler himself was gassed during the war. He's saying the Jews as a whole didn't do their part for Germany in the war.

Another thing you are ignoring here was that Germany was sitting on a large stockpile of Sarin and other chemical weapons yet Hitler refused to use it. In contrast, we have Churchill on record as being eager to use chemical warfare against the Germans (thankfully it seems that maniac didn't get his way). So, yes, I think we can argue that Hitler did show some disinclination to use gas, certainly compared to Churchill.

I think you're wrong here, but we can get check this if you want in another part of the site. I wasn't bringing this up for reasons of evidencing extermination of Jews, you are very debate-pilled my friend.

The Nazis did use chemical weapons in combat on several occasions along the Black Sea, notably in Sevastopol, where they used toxic smoke to force Soviet resistance fighters out of caverns below the city, in violation of the 1925 Geneva Protocol.[87] The Nazis also used asphyxiating gas in the catacombs of Odessa in November 1941, following their capture of the city, and in late May 1942 during the Battle of the Kerch Peninsula in eastern Crimea.[87] Victor Israelyan, a Soviet ambassador, reported that the latter incident was perpetrated by the Wehrmacht's Chemical Forces and organized by a special detail of SS troops with the help of a field engineer battalion. Chemical Forces General Ochsner reported to German command in June 1942 that a chemical unit had taken part in the battle.[88] After the battle in mid-May 1942, roughly 3,000 Red Army soldiers and Soviet civilians not evacuated by sea were besieged in a series of caves and tunnels in the nearby Adzhimushkay quarry. After holding out for approximately three months, "poison gas was released into the tunnels, killing all but a few score of the Soviet defenders."[89] Thousands of those killed around Adzhimushkay were documented to have been killed by asphyxiation from gas.[88]

In February 1943, German troops stationed in Kuban received a telegram: "Russians might have to be cleared out of the mountain range with gas."[90] The troops also received two wagons of toxin antidotes.[90]

You are completely missing my point.

So far as Soviet nazi gas atrocity propaganda goes, you will just eat whatsoever is put on the plate, won't you.

Further, a thought occurs to me, my agreement with your assertion is not necessary for the advancement of the chronology.

Perhaps we should mark this as a point of divergence.

[Nessie]

Mr Stubble and BA, I have written a very brief primer on eugenics in the 3R forum, and I intend to expand that to euthanasia when I get a bit more time.

In the meantime, Rudolf's write-up of euthanasia in his Encyclopedia is an excellent starting point. Revisionists can approach euthanasia openly and accept it as fact without any contradictions with regards "the holocaust", in fact in an ironic twist the existence of T4 strengthens the Revisionist position rather than weaken it.

Some quick points:

- Euthanasia has grown very controversial and unpopular in modernity, but this was not the case at the time. We can point to other developed nations also practicing euthanasia at this exact period, we can even quote such high profile euthanasia patients as King George of England in 1936 in an act of non-voluntary euthanasia.

The Nazi attitude towards euthanasia is evidence of opportunity. They had the opportunity due to attitudes at that time, and their technical ability, to kill those deemed not worthy of life and to use methods such as gas chambers.

- There doesn't exist direct proof that the killing method of T4 was CO, however this is at least feasible and Revisionists can accept this as plausible, if not very practical and probable. If the killing method indeed was CO, it would very likely have been performed by administering via CO tank, through a pipe to a restrained patient, and certainly not, as we will discuss in the next point, diesel exhaust.

Why is it feasible that Germans could convert rooms inside hospitals to gas people with compressed CO, but not for them to build gas chambers and use Soviet engines to generate CO, or convert a mortuary and use Zyklon B?

The diesel claims are hearsay, the eyewitnesses either said petrol, or they did not say the fuel type.

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... _9432.html

"A re-examination of the relevant testimonies with the Reinhard camps and gas vans reveals an interesting feature, one long ignored by MGK: witnesses who had closer experiences to the actual gassing engine share a large agreement that they were run by gasoline/petrol, while those witnesses with only an indirect hearsay knowledge of the engine were more likely to identify it as diesel."

- Regarding Nessie's point that Aktion T4 staff were transferred to the Eastern Front be regarded as suspicious (or proof of genocide) is ridiculous. These were trained medical personnel! Assigning medical staff to the Eastern front is absolutely consistent with the revisionist account. And if the claim is that they cross-trained in operating Soviet Tank / Submarine engines, rather than merely medical personnel, (or indeed, if despite all their medical training that this impractical sloppy method was the method they chose to design at AR) this would need to be demonstrated in some meaningful way.

It is proven that T4 staff went to work in the AR camps, with evidence from witnesses naming others and photos of the staff at TII and Sobibor. As for operating the AR camp engines, Erich Fuchs, was a mechanic before the war and there were Ukrainian SS camp staff who also worked on the engines. Quite where you get the Eastern Front from, only your imagination or ignorance can tell.

- Aktion T4 was indeed extended from its original target demographic of Reich citizens to camp inmates. However, if selected for euthanasia, camp inmates were then transported to euthanasia centres, mostly located in the interior of the Reich. This alone implies the camps had no means of safely gassing inmates (!)

That the concentration camps sent prisoners to be gassed, under 13f14, is further evidence to prove the Nazis could and would use gas to kill. That is evidence of motive and opportunity and circumstantial evidence for AR gassings, because of the staff links.

[Stubble]

Mr Stubble and BA, I have written a very brief primer on eugenics in the 3R forum, and I intend to expand that to euthanasia when I get a bit more time.

In the meantime, Rudolf's write-up of euthanasia in his Encyclopedia is an excellent starting point. Revisionists can approach euthanasia openly and accept it as fact without any contradictions with regards "the holocaust", in fact in an ironic twist the existence of T4 strengthens the Revisionist position rather than weaken it.

Some quick points:

- Euthanasia has grown very controversial and unpopular in modernity, but this was not the case at the time. We can point to other developed nations also practicing euthanasia at this exact period, we can even quote such high profile euthanasia patients as King George of England in 1936 in an act of non-voluntary euthanasia.

- There doesn't exist direct proof that the killing method of T4 was CO, however this is at least feasible and Revisionists can accept this as plausible, if not very practical and probable. If the killing method indeed was CO, it would very likely have been performed by administering via CO tank, through a pipe to a restrained patient, and certainly not, as we will discuss in the next point, diesel exhaust.

- Regarding Nessie's point that Aktion T4 staff were transferred to the Eastern Front be regarded as suspicious (or proof of genocide) is ridiculous. These were trained medical personnel! Assigning medical staff to the Eastern front is absolutely consistent with the revisionist account. And if the claim is that they cross-trained in operating Soviet Tank / Submarine engines, rather than merely medical personnel, (or indeed, if despite all their medical training that this impractical sloppy method was the method they chose to design at AR) this would need to be demonstrated in some meaningful way.

- Aktion T4 was indeed extended from its original target demographic of Reich citizens to camp inmates. However, if selected for euthanasia, camp inmates were then transported to euthanasia centres, mostly located in the interior of the Reich. This alone implies the camps had no means of safely gassing inmates (!)

Perhaps this thread may merit a look;

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=30

[Nessie]

...
Further, why carbon monoxide? Why would that be the go to?
...

Gassings are not hands on, the dying is out of sight and multiple people can be killed at the same time. The victims can be also be persuaded to undress, making burial or cremation easier. That is why they became the favoured method, over the mass shootings by the Einsatzgruppen.

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/ ... 4-facility

"The systematic gassing of disabled patients began at Bernburg on November 21, 1940. From this date until the “euthanasia” pause in August 1941, it is estimated that 9,000 victims were murdered at the facility. Upon arrival, nursing staff led patients into a basement area in the men’s pavilion. There, the victims undressed and were divided by gender. After a brief examination by one of the physicians, who noted a plausible fictive cause of death for each death certificate, the patients were led to the gas chamber. The gassing physician then introduced chemically produced carbon monoxide gas into the gas chamber. He observed the killing through a small window in the gas chamber door. After ensuring that the patients were dead, he summoned the stokers. The stokers then removed the victims’ dental gold and cremated their bodies in adjacent crematory ovens."

The director of Bernberg was Irmfried Eberl, the first commander at TII.

[bombsaway]

You are completely missing my point.

So far as Soviet nazi gas atrocity propaganda goes, you will just eat whatsoever is put on the plate, won't you.

Further, a thought occurs to me, my agreement with your assertion is not necessary for the advancement of the chronology.

Perhaps we should mark this as a point of divergence.

It's not just a point of diversion, it's a point where I can't follow you at all. I disagree with your claims about shooting details like the Jews acquiescence to their fate invalidating much of the testimonial and documentary evidence, but even that's more understandable.

So maybe elucidate your point.

I already responded to your concerns about WHY and also your speculations about Hitler never agreeing to gassings.

The stuff about gassings against USSR too, also seems like a 'just cuz' rationale. If NS Germany had used gas in tunnels and stuff, this is also evidenced in Warsaw, how would we know? You're not relying on analysis and debunking of evidence, it feels like these are just predetermined conclusions on your part.

If this is your approach, then I think going further seems fruitless for me.

[bombsaway]

Perhaps this thread may merit a look;

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=30

It's noteworthy that revisionists like John Wear seem to confirm gassings, and he's not even evaluating most of the evidence

https://codoh.com/library/document/evid ... a-program/

German doctors determined that carbon monoxide gas was the most painless and humane way to euthanize people. The use of carbon monoxide gas therefore became the standard technique to kill people in the adult euthanasia program, with the first killings probably beginning in January 1940. Dr. Karl Brandt, Albert Widmann, Dr. Leonardo Conti and others all stated that they determined carbon monoxide gas to be the most humane method of euthanizing adults.[12]

Dr. Karl Brandt wrote in his personal notebook:[13]

“Adolf Hitler asked me which method, based on current considerations and experiences, was the mildest, that is to say the safest, quickest and the most effective and painless one. I had to concede that this was death through the inhalation of carbon monoxide gas. He then said that this was also the most humane. I myself then took on board this position and put to one side my medical concerns for external reasons… I am convinced that the procedure with carbon monoxide was right.”

The German euthanasia program is a well-documented reality. Hitler authorized the euthanasia program in writing, the defendants at the Doctors’ Trial admitted their involvement in the program, the best method for killing victims was discussed among the participants in the program, the carbon-monoxide gas used in the German euthanasia program can safely and effectively kill people, and the euthanasia program was widely known by the German public. In fact, public opposition to the program was so strong in Germany that Hitler ordered the end of the first phase of the euthanasia program in August 1941.