The problem with facile "gotcha" documents (prooftexts)

[Nessie]

...

You're right, 'gassing cellar' would be the correct translation, which would also align it with actual delousing facilities in the camp that also started with 'Vergasungs-'.

Here you argue it cannot have been used as a gassing cellar, for delousing, or any other form of gassing;

viewtopic.php?p=9993#p9993

So, what were the Leichenkellers in Kremas II to V at Birkenau used for 1943-4?

[Nazgul]

So, what were the Leichenkellers in Kremas II to V at Birkenau used for 1943-4?

As there were crematoria a Leichenkeller is a morgue.

[Nessie]

So, what were the Leichenkellers in Kremas II to V at Birkenau used for 1943-4?

As there were crematoria a Leichenkeller is a morgue.

Please evidence its use as a morgue 1943-4 and explain why others claims it was a delousing chambers, shower, bomb shelter, corpse store.

[Nazgul]

Please evidence its use as a morgue 1943-4 and explain why others claims it was a delousing chambers, shower, bomb shelter, corpse store.

Leichenkeller is a morgue. This is true a priori, by definition. A morgues primary purpose is to serve as a temporary storage space for bodies of the recently deceased. Bodies are kept at the morgue if an autopsy needs to be done. As bodies decompose quickly, the gases emitted can be hazardous, so they are kept as cool as possible. Morgues are temperature controlled. Autopsies are also held in morgues. A corpse store is a morgue.

Any underground building can function as a bomb shelter, though in Birkenau the guards had trenches to lie in.

[Nessie]

Please evidence its use as a morgue 1943-4 and explain why others claims it was a delousing chambers, shower, bomb shelter, corpse store.

Leichenkeller is a morgue. This is true a priori, by definition. A morgues primary purpose is to serve as a temporary storage space for bodies of the recently deceased. Bodies are kept at the morgue if an autopsy needs to be done. As bodies decompose quickly, the gases emitted can be hazardous, so they are kept as cool as possible. Morgues are temperature controlled. Autopsies are also held in morgues. A corpse store is a morgue.

Any underground building can function as a bomb shelter, though in Birkenau the guards had trenches to lie in.

What about all the documents that recorded the construction of gas chambers, with gas tight doors, and gas detection devices? Gotcha.

[Callafangers]

What about all the documents that recorded the construction of gas chambers, with gas tight doors, and gas detection devices? Gotcha.

I just provided you the source documentation not even two days ago which clarifies this. These items were usually bought during a series of other clearly routine or normal installations/upgrades to the morgues in the Crematoria. See again:

Critics like Samuel Crowell argue this term, more accurately translated as “wire net sliding device,” likely refers to benign safety features like removable mesh screens for ventilation openings or emergency exits, consistent with anti-gas shelter literature of the time[21], rather than devices for Zyklon B introduction. This case for benign interpretation is further supported in light of general modifications taking place at Auschwitz-Birkenau throughout March 1943 across Crematoria 2, 4, and 5, driven by a need to improve airflow, containment, sanitation, and safety for normal morgue and camp functions, and disinfection processes.[22] Multipurpose potential as an air raid shelter is supported by at least one witness.[23]

https://wiki.codohforum.com/pages/index ... _Chemistry

[Nessie]

What about all the documents that recorded the construction of gas chambers, with gas tight doors, and gas detection devices? Gotcha.

I just provided you the source documentation not even two days ago which clarifies this. These items were usually bought during a series of other clearly routine or normal installations/upgrades to the morgues in the Crematoria. See again:

Critics like Samuel Crowell argue this term, more accurately translated as “wire net sliding device,” likely refers to benign safety features like removable mesh screens for ventilation openings or emergency exits, consistent with anti-gas shelter literature of the time[21], rather than devices for Zyklon B introduction. This case for benign interpretation is further supported in light of general modifications taking place at Auschwitz-Birkenau throughout March 1943 across Crematoria 2, 4, and 5, driven by a need to improve airflow, containment, sanitation, and safety for normal morgue and camp functions, and disinfection processes.[22] Multipurpose potential as an air raid shelter is supported by at least one witness.[23]

https://wiki.codohforum.com/pages/index ... _Chemistry

That is the hypothesis, now prove usage. You could start by showing me other camps that had gas chambers, gas tight doors, and mesh insertion devices installed in their Krems, if that was normal procedure.

[Callafangers]

That is the hypothesis, now prove usage. You could start by showing me other camps that had gas chambers, gas tight doors, and mesh insertion devices installed in their Krems, if that was normal procedure.

'Proving usage' is exactly where you fail in spectacular fashion. You have a questionable pool of witnesses engulfed in WW2 and political/ideological motives. You also have the science currently working against you (FeCN levels), which you at best can only hand-wave away, even though the scientific method credits this as significant.

How do you reconcile all of this?

[curioussoul]

...

You're right, 'gassing cellar' would be the correct translation, which would also align it with actual delousing facilities in the camp that also started with 'Vergasungs-'.

Here you argue it cannot have been used as a gassing cellar, for delousing, or any other form of gassing;

viewtopic.php?p=9993#p9993

So, what were the Leichenkellers in Kremas II to V at Birkenau used for 1943-4?

When did I allege it was used for delousings? Please point me to the specific post.

[Nessie]

That is the hypothesis, now prove usage. You could start by showing me other camps that had gas chambers, gas tight doors, and mesh insertion devices installed in their Krems, if that was normal procedure.

'Proving usage' is exactly where you fail in spectacular fashion. You have a questionable pool of witnesses engulfed in WW2 and political/ideological motives. You also have the science currently working against you (FeCN levels), which you at best can only hand-wave away, even though the scientific method credits this as significant.

How do you reconcile all of this?

I do not have a questionable pool of witnesses. They are corroborated and your allegation of they all colluded and lied is not evidenced. You are the one with the motive, who cannot evidence usage or even agree with other so-called revisionists.

I have some scientists working against me and others with me. That means the science is inconclusive. At least, I am going with the side that had evidence of usage with it.

[Nessie]

...

You're right, 'gassing cellar' would be the correct translation, which would also align it with actual delousing facilities in the camp that also started with 'Vergasungs-'.

Here you argue it cannot have been used as a gassing cellar, for delousing, or any other form of gassing;

viewtopic.php?p=9993#p9993

So, what were the Leichenkellers in Kremas II to V at Birkenau used for 1943-4?

When did I allege it was used for delousings? Please point me to the specific post.

I quoted the specific post where you say it was a gassing cellar, that aligned with other delousing facilities.

[curioussoul]

Here you argue it cannot have been used as a gassing cellar, for delousing, or any other form of gassing;

viewtopic.php?p=9993#p9993

So, what were the Leichenkellers in Kremas II to V at Birkenau used for 1943-4?

When did I allege it was used for delousings? Please point me to the specific post.

I quoted the specific post where you say it was a gassing cellar, that aligned with other delousing facilities.

The word "Vergasungs-" does align with delousing related facilities in the camp. That's correct.

[Nessie]

When did I allege it was used for delousings? Please point me to the specific post.

I quoted the specific post where you say it was a gassing cellar, that aligned with other delousing facilities.

The word "Vergasungs-" does align with delousing related facilities in the camp. That's correct.

The claims and tests by Leuchter and Rudolf, who are supported by many so-called revisionists, do not align with delousing in the Leichenkeller.

[Wetzelrad]

It occurred to me today that this fake Dwight D. Eisenhower quote, often trotted out whereever Holocaust skepticism comes up as a topic, is another example of this prooftext phenomenon. The fake Eisenhower quote is this:

Get it all on record now – get the films – get the witnesses – because somewhere down the track of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened.

This fake quote was even used by President Stjepan Mesić of Croatia. The quote has no basis in fact, however it is often said to be a paraphrase -- though if so it must be an extremely inaccurate one -- of this passage from an April 15, 1945 letter Eisenhower wrote to Chief of Staff George C. Marshall:

But the most interesting – although horrible – sight that I encountered during the trip was a visit to a German internment camp near Gotha. The things I saw beggar description. While I was touring the camp I encountered three men who had been inmates and by one ruse or another had made their escape. I interviewed them through an interpreter. The visual evidence and the verbal testimony of starvation, cruelty and bestiality were so overpowering as to leave me a bit sick. In one room, where they were piled up twenty or thirty naked men, killed by starvation, George Patton would not even enter. He said that he would get sick if he did so. I made the visit deliberately, in order to be in a position to give first-hand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to "propaganda".

This quote is featured prominently at the USHMM, at the National Holocaust Museum, in many textbooks including those by semi-serious historians like Gutman, Lipstadt, Dawidowicz, and Van Pelt, as well as in government textbooks, always with the intent being to establish the Holocaust Narrative's truthfulness in the face of skepticism. One of the latter that really makes my point is titled Holocaust: The Documentary Evidence, as if to imply that this quote is documentary evidence, i.e. a prooftext. Snopes also cites numerous social media posts as examples of this claim.

There are four obvious reasons this Eisenhower quote fails as proof of the Holocaust Narrative:

1. The camp Eisenhower described was Ohrdruf, a small subcamp of Buchenwald. Ohrdruf was not a "death camp" but merely another work camp.
2. Ohrdruf's dead were not gassed or shot. They died, according to Eisenhower, from starvation. Their deaths lack the claimed intent to kill.
3. Ohrdruf was not a Jewish camp. Jews were probably less than one-quarter of the diverse camp population.
4. Eisenhower presided over the US Army's Psychological Warfare Branch, so "propaganda" was literally his job. He was personally responsible for inviting legislators, newspapers, and soldiers to tour Dachau and Buchenwald, where they were misinformed about gassings, human soap, human skin lampshades, and other atrocities now admitted to be fake.

This anecdote from Eisenhower therefore serves as a perfect proof for revisionism! Prisoners of many nationalities were put in a work camp where they died of starvation and other war conditions. The US Army and the media took advantage of this real human suffering to claim torture and murder and -- in the case of bigger camps -- gassings and other nonsense.

(Anyone who might be tempted to think Eisenhower was leaving anything out should themselves look at the graphic photos and videos of Ohrdruf. The Army was unusually thorough in documenting this location. The number of bodies in a pile was in fact around "twenty or thirty". That this was the most graphic thing Eisenhower made mention of is because it was the most graphic thing there. They were not dismembered, they were not turning colors, they were not turned into furniture, they were not hanged, poisoned, shot, or executed in any way.)

So, even though it comes from the wrong team, it perfectly fits the pattern laid out in the OP. Eisenhower obviously wasn't writing about the extermination of Jews with Zyklon B at Auschwitz, but that is exactly what people come to think he meant because they have been primed for that interpretation. Eisenhower's comments are read and presented as if they were a defense of the Holocaust Narrative. It's a gross misinterpretation. And if they can that badly misinterpret something an Allied general said, they can obviously do the same thing for quotes from the enemy.