In my own personal opinion, Krema I and the whole narrative surrounding it is particularly weak and it seems like that aspect of the official narrative will be the first to collapse. The entire thing is a mess. We may already be seeing signs of its collapse in that it tends to get increasinly less attention in places like Codoh! However, for now, Orthodoxy has chosen to lock itself into the "where there were crematories, there were gas chambers" narrative.
Conclusion
The four openings now in the roof of the morgue are not original, and the dark
spots, which appear on the photograph published by J.-C. Pressac, were not
traces of openings (as borne out by the fact that no trace of a square opening
on the ceiling corresponds to any of these dark spots).
Furthermore, sealing any openings in the roof of the crematorium would
hardly have left depressions of such clarity. Leveling of the surface of an
opening that has been filled with sand mortar and cement needs only a simple
wooden board larger than the hole itself; but if one had wanted to create such
depressions, it would have been necessary to painstakingly scratch out the
cement from the surface of the hole filled with mortar. It would have amount-
ed to a form of sabotage on the part of the bricklayer Kommando to leave such
obvious traces of the alleged openings. No detainee would have risked that
because on the inside, on the ceiling of the morgue, obvious traces of the clo-
sure of the holes would have remained apparent anyway.
The detainees of the roofing detail would have had to perform a similar
kind of sabotage by shaping the roofing felt to fit exactly the profile of the al-
leged quadrangular depressions in the cement.
The explanation of the dark spots is much simpler: they were caused by
compression of the roofing felt, which had become soft from sunlight, under
the weight of a flat and heavy object such as a cement vase or other decoration
from the Soviet-Polish dance frolic – and that explains why the fold in the
roofing felt is so marked along the edges instead of being slightly concave.
Summary
1. There is no proof that the alleged openings for the introduction of Zyklon
B ever existed in the ceiling of the morgue of Crematorium I.
2. There is no proof that the morgue was ever equipped with two gas-tight
doors.
3. In contradiction with any kind of logical planning, these alleged gas-tight
doors are said to have been later removed by the SS when the crematorium
was converted to a gas-tight air-raid shelter and replaced by one normal
door and one standard gas-tight door (such as it currently exists in the
crematory).
4. The traces of cyanides present in the walls of the morgue do not prove that
the room was used as a homicidal gas chamber.
5. The number of openings made by the Poles after the war (four) is at vari-
ance with all available testimonies. This also goes for the number (five)
adopted by the members of the Holocaust History Project.
6. The Polish “reconstruction” of both the location of the openings and the
structure and dimensions of the Zyklon B introduction shafts has neither
basis in documents nor in witness statements. In fact there are no docu-
ments, and no witness has furnished any information on these.
7. There is no proof that the four dark spots visible on the roof of Crematori-
um I in the photograph published by Pressac are traces of former openings
that were later sealed; on the contrary, no trace on the ceiling of the
morgue corresponds to any of these dark spots.
8. The remaining traces of former openings in the ceiling are circular and are
no doubt connected to the transformation of the crematorium into an air-
raid shelter.
9. The openings created by the Poles make sense, geometrically speaking, on-
ly in the context of the present state of the morgue, but are totally asym-
metric and irrational when seen in the context of its original state. This is
further proof that they have nothing whatsoever to do with any alleged
original openings.
Yes, it's obvious Pressac based his claim of 'three holes in a straight line' from this photo. I too think it's a stretch. As for the 2004 report, I question how this can be published with little to no substantial evidence. The report acknowledges that hole Z5 isn't even visible, but it's assumed to be there. It also presumes the other four 'marks' are square holes, even though only one (Z1) vaguely resembles a square. The rest appear to be mere dark spots.Archie wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2025 7:14 am Here's where Pressac talks about this. He claims that "it is possible to see THREE places where the former traps for introducing Zyklon B have been filled in" (I think this is a leap) but he also says that soon after the war there was a dance held on the roof of the gas chamber which he admits is strange.
https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-his ... 0149.shtml
I'm assuming the rebar is temporary rebar installed when they were patching the holes up? Thanks for the Mattogno reference. I wasn't aware, and I've since updated my findings.HansHill wrote: ↑Mon Feb 24, 2025 1:39 pm Forgot to address the rebar issue. And this is a feature at the Birkenau site also.
The presence of rebar alone demonstrates that they were not zyklon insertion holes and were cut away after the war in a sloppy attempt at post-war fabrication of evidence. In the case of Birkenau this is even more strongly demonstrated as the rebar is bent back seemingly by hand, and would be a physical impediment to the secure fastening of the non-existent Kula columns.
were to guess why no t4 personnel were chosen to perform gassing that had experience with gassing, it would be because THERE WERE NONE.