By Jürgen Graf
Edited for brevity
1. Underground Reports
The Reports by the Polish Resistance Movement about the Gas Chambers of Auschwitz (1941-1944)
In September 1939, western Poland was overrun by the Germans, and the eastern part by the Soviet armies. Soon thereafter, Poland disappeared as an independent state. The government in Warsaw went into exile in Britain. From 1940 to 1945, the Delegatura held office, in the underground, as the Polish government’s representative in the areas that were occupied by Germany. It had representatives in the individual provinces and districts.
The Delegatura was de facto a shadow government contesting the command of the
country with the German occupying power. It was an underground state with its
own educational system, own judiciary as well as its own armed forces, the Armia
Krajowa.
It was obvious that the “German crimes” formed a central part of the reports, and that the concentration camps, especially Auschwitz as the largest of these, drew the special attention of the “Department for Information and Press.” The bulk of the respective reports has been published in the Polish book Obóz koncentracyjny Oświęcim w świetle akt delegatury rządu RP na kraj (Concentration Camp Auschwitz in the Light of Documents of the Delegation of the Government of the Polish Republic in the Homeland).
We are dealing with a total of 32 reports that fall into the period from October 24, 1941 until July 7, 1944. For unknown reasons, no documents have been preserved of the period July 1944 until January 1945.
Here are just two of thirty two examples, the remaining are in the source article…
[These two reports correspond to the first alleged homicidal gassing in the beginning of September 1941 at Auschwitz. The remaining reports are filled with more nonsensical allegations, such as the “air hammer” (you mean like the pedal driven brain bashing machine?), gassing showers, thievery of gold and valuables of around 60 million reichsmarks, electric chambers, electric baths, homicidal camp dogs, finger scratches in concrete, deadly air pressure chambers, jews thrown into an ‘eternal fire’ while still alive, collecting corpse hair for practical purposes…you get the picture.] CloverGrass
Document No. 2
Published in: Obóz, p. 14.
Date: November 15, 1941.
Header: –
Title: “Situation Report for the period from August 15 to November 15, 1941.”
“The camp became the scene of a gruesome crime when, during the night of 5 to 6 September, about 600 Soviet prisoners, including ‘Politruks’ of the army, and about 200 Poles were driven into a bunker; after the bunker was sealed, they were poisoned with gas, the bodies were taken to the crematorium and burned.”
Document No. 3
Published in: Obóz, p. 14.
Date: November 17, 1941.
Header: 1631. Informacja bieżąca 21.
Title: –
“Auschwitz. The news of a sinister crime committed in the camp is confirmed. On the night of September 5 to 6, 1941, about 600 Soviet civilian prisoners brought there were driven into the bunker in Auschwitz, whereby their hands and feet were broken with clubs. Included were about 250 Poles. All openings of the bunker were sealed off, and the trapped people were poisoned with gases. Overnight, the corpses of the poisoned were hauled on 80 wagons into the crematorium, where they were burned.”
2. Auschwitz Protocols
As we’ve seen previously, from October 1941 on, the Polish resistance regularly distributed reports of mass murders in Auschwitz in which gas was mentioned as one of several means of execution. The reports were forwarded to the Polish government in exile in London, and without a shadow of a doubt were made accessible to Allied politicians and journalists – obviously without a response of any kind. The horror stories about “Kreuzolit”, “Hammerluft” and “electric bath” were clearly too incredible to provoke more than a yawn among the Allies.
Very well-noted, however, were the three reports that in the historical literature are generally referred to as the “Auschwitz Protocols.” Their foundations were the testimonies of detainees who had escaped Auschwitz. Via detours they arrived at the War Refugee Board (WRB), an organization established by the Roosevelt administration and led by the jew US Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau that published these testimonies in English in November 1944. This “WRB Report” (an alternative term referring to the “Auschwitz Protocols”) consisted of three parts:
1. Vrba-Wetzler Report: The two young “Slovak” jews Rudolf Vrba (original name Walter Rosenberg) and Alfred Wetzler escaped from Auschwitz on April 7, 1944 and fled to Slovakia. In Pressburg [present-day Bratislava], Oskar Krasnansky, representative of the Jewish Council in Pressburg, wrote a report in German based on the testimonies of these two escapees. Vrba and Wetzler depicted the way the camp was organized and made estimations with regards to the number of jews who had been gassed up to the moment of their escape.
2. Mordowicz-Rosin Report: The two jews Czesław Mordowicz and Arnost Rosin who succeeded in escaping from Auschwitz on May 27, 1944, got to the Slovak border on June 6, and also compiled a report about Auschwitz in which they described the mass murder of “Hungarian” jews, among other things.
3. Report by the Polish Major Jerzy Tabeau: Tabeau had escaped from Auschwitz already in November 1943.
It seems extremely strange that none of the five authors was called as a witness before the Nuremberg court – what first-class witnesses were missed out on!
However, Vrba and Wetzler were witnesses at the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial.
Only Two Former Auschwitz Inmates Take The Nuremberg Witness Stand
Marie-Claude Vaillant-Couturier
At the time of the Nuremberg Trial, the perception of Auschwitz as the largest human slaughterhouse of all times had already begun to take shape. The Soviets had submitted to the court as Document 008-USSR the article published May 7, 1945 in Pravda that spoke of four million victims in Auschwitz.
Hence, one might assume that the Nuremberg judges were trying to get as many eyewitnesses of the mass murders as possible onto the witness stand, but strangely enough, this was not the case: neither the authors of the “Auschwitz Protocols” nor the members of the Sonderkommando, who – according to the reports – had been permanently at work in the gas chambers and crematories, and thus had to be the most credible witnesses of the “industrial genocide”, was summoned to Nuremberg.
The only two former Auschwitz inmates to take the Nuremberg witness stand were the Frenchwoman Marie-Claude Vaillant-Couturier and the Polish woman Seweryna Szmaglewska (whose short and inconsequential testimony will not be dealt with here).
Marie-Claude Vaillant Couturier, later a member of the Central Committee of the French Communist Party, had been deported to Auschwitz in January 1943 as a resistance fighter. In August 1944, she was transferred from there to the Ravensbrück Concentration Camp. On January 28, 1946, she appeared in Nuremberg as a witness for the prosecution.
In summary it can be said that in Nuremberg Marie-Claude Vaillant-Couturier presented her private Auschwitz version. Madame’s version is a proven fantasy…
3. Sonderkommandos
Chaim Herman
What is revealing about the buried manuscript of Chaim Herman is not so much what he mentions in it, but what he doesn’t mention. Strangely enough, he only writes about the extermination of his fellow sufferers who “went to the gas and then to the ovens” in a short phrase and only with regard to an event immediately upon his arrival at the camp at a moment when he couldn’t have had first-hand experience. He rather lends more space to “shaving the head, to speak nothing of the beard and moustaches.”
For 20 months Herman was with the Sonderkommando. If the commonly accepted idea about Auschwitz is correct, he therefore was an involuntary part of an infernal extermination machine. Day after day he had to witness how his fellow sufferers were sent into the gas; he had to drag their corpses out of the gas chamber and to the furnaces.
The gruesome height of the murdering was reached in the spring and summer of 1944, when, so we are told by orthodox Holocaust historians, about 400,000 “Hungarian” jews were gassed, and their remains were incinerated partly in the crematories, partly in pits.
But about all these eerie things, no word from Chaim Herman. To him, pointing out that he is well dressed and fed, has good quarters, is in perfect health, is very thin and muscular as well as has a youthful look is a lot more important.
The worn-out metaphor of “hell”, that in comparison to this “Dante’s hell” appears ridiculous, seems to be somewhat misplaced considering the described conditions (“we have a sufficiency of everything (except of dear freedom)”), all the more so as in July 1944 he was able to receive mail from his family.
Salmen Gradowski
We can be brief here. The author had been active as a member of the Sonderkommando for a while, but he doesn’t give the reader a clue about the kind of work he did. Gas chambers and crematories melt into the mystical “gas furnaces” that occasionally lurk through the media cracks to this day.
On the one hand, Gradowski’s family was “burnt alive”, on the other hand these “gas ovens” “swallow people alive and throw away their dead, cold bodies.” While reading this account, the inescapable conclusion arises that it wasn’t buried by members of the Sonderkommando during the existence of the Auschwitz Camp, but by totally different people after its liberation, “so that the world should find material traces of the millions of murdered people.”
This becomes a near certainty, when we read that he writes in the past tense about having buried this text. How can he write something on a piece of paper that has been buried already?
Alter Feinsilber, alias Stanisław Jankowski, alias Kaskowiak, alias Alter Szmul Fajnzylberg
Let us now turn to those members of the Sonderkommando who survived the war and testified about their experiences. Several of these men already testified in 1945, of whom Alter Feinsilber was the first. In April of that year, he testified before the Polish Commission for the Investigation of “NAZI” Crimes in Krakow. Feinsilber occasionally called himself Stanisław Jankowski or Kaskowiak; in September 1980 he handed a written testimony to lawyer Pierre Atal in Paris, this time using the name Alter Szmul Fajnzylberg.
Just as his name, he also appears to have occasionally changed his date of birth; according to his Krakow testimonies he was born on October 23, 1910, according to his testimony in Paris this was October 23, 1911. As an adolescent already, Feinsilber (alias Jankowski, alias Kaskowiak, alias Fajnzylberg) had become a member of the Communist Party in his Polish homeland for which he was sentenced to two years of imprisonment.
After an interlude in Spain, where he had fought on the side of the Republicans, he was detained in France in several camps but managed to escape. End of 1941 or beginning 1942 he was apprehended again and sent via the transit camp Drancy to Auschwitz, where he arrived March 27, 1942.
Szlama Dragon
Therefore, as is so often the case, we depend on eyewitness reports. Key witness of the bunkers is, without any question, the “Polish” jew Szlama Dragon, born in 1920 and a tailor by profession. On February 26, 1945, hence already one month after the Soviet occupation of Auschwitz, Dragon was questioned by a judge of the Soviet military judiciary, Captain Levin. During that interrogation, Dragon elaborated liberally on the two “gas chambers.” (For these he does not yet use the term “Bunker”; apparently this term became customary only later.)
The four million gassing victims claimed by Dragon indicate to whose tune he had been singing. In order to make these numbers seem plausible, he, too, made the usual outrageous statements about the cremation capacity of the furnaces: three corpses concurrently within 15-20 minutes, instead of one per hour.
Try to picture this action: 1,500 corpses had to be dragged through a small corridor to the undressing room and then to the furnaces. Truly a stupendous proof of a perfectly organized genocide! This truly German perfection is also proven by the fact that the cremation of a corpse in Auschwitz was performed nine times faster than anywhere else, that a single barber sufficed to cut the hair of 1,500 corpses, and as well only a single dentist was needed to pull their (gold) teeth.
Henryk Tauber and Michał Kula
Another member of the Sonderkommando who testified before the Commission for the Investigation of “NAZI” Crimes was the “Polish” jew Henryk Tauber, born in 1917, occupation shoemaker. He was admitted to the Auschwitz Camp on January 19, 1943. His testimony was given in Krakow on May 24, 1945.
Again, we stumble across more than 4 million murder victims. Although none of the former Auschwitz detainees dealt with in the present book had been capable of having even the slightest knowledge of the total number of Auschwitz victims, this number emerges over and over again in their testimonies. The fact that these witnesses mentioned the same number of victims as the Soviet “experts” did in their report of May 7, 1945, clearly shows that their testimonies had been coordinated by the Soviets and/or by their Polish communist puppets.
The non-jewish Pole Michał Kula, born in 1912, occupation mechanic, was employed as a lathe operator in the inmate metal workshop of Auschwitz and later of Birkenau where he came into contact with Sonderkommando people. In Krakow, on June 11, 1945 Kula appeared before the Commission for the Investigation of “Nazi” Crimes.
Dov Paisikovic
In 1963 in Vienna, Dov Paisikovic, former member of the Sonderkommando of Auschwitz, issued a statement about his term in that camp which then was used at the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial. The French historian Léon Poliakov, who for many years was seen as one of the leading experts on the “Final Solution”, reproduced Paisikovic’s statements in his book Auschwitz published in 1964. Paisikovic, born in 1924 in Carpatho-Ukraine, had in May 1944 been deported from the Munkacs Ghetto to Auschwitz.
Exactly as the other members of the Sonderkommando, Paisikovic reports things that are technically impossible and against the laws of nature, and are an insult to common sense:
1. “We senselessly had to drag stones back and forth” – in the light of the scarcity of manpower for the important war industries of the region, it’s extremely implausible that the SS would have allowed this.
2. “SS Hauptscharführer Moll […] in a white uniform” – the SS did not wear white uniforms.
3. According to Paisikovic, the gassing took three to four minutes; then ventilation took place after opening the door. Due to already-mentioned reasons (evaporation time and the difficulty of ventilating Zyklon), these given times are completely unrealistic.
4. “Often the bodies were in tatters” – possibly caused by Zyklon bombs?
5. Paisikovic indicates the number of people crammed into the gas chamber to be 3,000, which – at a surface area of 210 m² – results in 13 people per square meter. An impressive number; one is to experimentally verify whether this can be correct.
6. The author himself makes it clear that victims could not fall down when being so closely pressed together. A few sentences earlier, however, some of the victims were lying on the floor in front of the gas-chamber door.
7. “Most victims did not know what to expect. But some already knew what fate awaited them.” Imagine it: Three thousand people standing in a chamber packed like sardines in a can, but most of them still do not sense what is going to happen to them, because they think they would soon be taking a shower! How stupid did Poliakov think his readers would be that he expected them to believe such imbecility?
8. The most ludicrous of all of Paisikovic’s statements is that the cremation of a corpse took four minutes on average. (3,000 corpses within 183 hours in 15 muffles = 16,67 corpses per hour and muffle, or 3.6 minutes per corpse = 216 seconds.) This claim alone reduces the credibility of the whole “witness report” to zero. If despite the previous, Poliakov thought Paisikovic to be worthy of including him in his book, then surely only because nothing better had been available to him.
Filip Müller
Of all the members of the Sonderkommando, the “Slovak” jew Filip Müller undoubtedly has gained the most publicity. Raul Hilberg quotes him in his definitive book The Destruction of European Jewry no less than twenty times as witness to the mass murders in Auschwitz (cf. Graf 2015, p. 98).
Müller, born in 1922 in Sered, had been deported to Auschwitz in April 1942, where he was soon admitted to the Sonderkommando, of which he was a member until the end. After the evacuation of Auschwitz, he was transferred to Mauthausen, where he was liberated at the end of the war.
Thirty-four years later in 1979, Müller published his book Sonderbehandlung: Drei Jahre in den Krematorien und Gaskammern von Auschwitz (Müller 1979a), which he wrote with the help of the ghostwriter Helmut Freitag. An English translation with the title Auschwitz Inferno: The Testimony of a Sonderkommando appeared that same year (Müller 1979b).
In this book, Müller depicts the gassing and cremation process in Crematory I in the Main Camp as well as in the crematoria of Birkenau (but not in the bunkers) in greater detail than any other witness.
It’s now time to draw an interim recap:
As already emphasized several times, the members of the Sonderkommando – provided the orthodox Auschwitz version is correct – must have been the most credible of all witnesses, as they would have known all details of the extermination process very well.
Up to now, I have quoted nine reports of such Sonderkommando men. If we put aside here the four “buried manuscripts” for reason of their dubious origin, five reasonably detailed reports by key witnesses remain: Alter Feinsilber; Szlama Dragon (the most important witness with regard to the bunkers by far); Henryk Tauber (for Jean-Claude Pressac the most credible witness bar none); Dov Paisikovic (who was extensively cited by the famous Holocaust scholar Léon Poliakov in his Auschwitz book) and Raul Hilberg’s favorite witness Filip Müller.
The results are devastating: All these reports turn out to be a tangled mass of absurdities and shameless lies, with the lowlight being reached with Filip Müller whose performance can hardly be undercut. The witnesses contradict each other and at times even themselves on all manner of points.
With these eyewitnesses, the entire orthodox Auschwitz narrative collapses like a house of cards.
No comments:
Post a Comment