John Ball's complete, utter, total, absolute vindication

[offlinejnovitz]

August 25 image as released by the CIA




August 25 image as held in Edinburgh archives (cf Kiwiwriter's thread)



Game, Set and Match to Mr Ball.

[offlineMojo]

Forgive my ignorance but, what are we looking at? Is the bottom image supposed to be rotated 180 degrees so it's in the same orientation as the top one?

[offlineIlikerealhistory]

I don't understand either. They look the same except on is rotated 180 degrees and is blurry.

[offlineDrew J]

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5792
Once I read in there and scroll down to Hannover's post which has two older topics, I think we are looking at the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz in that second photo that is a blowup of a certain part of the camp.

[offline Pappy Yokum]

August 25 image as released by the CIA




August 25 image as held in Edinburgh archives (cf Kiwiwriter's thread)



Game, Set and Match to Mr Ball.

Yes. The photos are of crematoria II and III at Birkenau. You need to rotate the photo on the bottom 180 degrees to see the image from the same angle.
If you are not familiar with the history, I will give a brief symopsis.

In 1976, Dr. Arthur R. Butz published THE HOAX OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY. It was first published in the U.S. a year later. In it, he wrote that Auschwitz had been overflown and photographed by Allied aircraft for bombing the Monowitz buna rubber plant. This was common practice and the photos had to exist. However, since they were never used as evidence, it can be assumed what they showed didn't support the Auschwitz legend. [See Chapter 3.]

Someone at the CIA must have read Butz' book, or was told about it because in February, 1978, Dino Brugioni and Robert Poirier published "THE HOLOCAUST REVISITED: A Retrospective Analysis of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Extermination Complex." In it, the two CIA photo analysts examined the photos with an eye toward discovering the evidence of the extermination that Butz assumed wasn't there. Twenty one years later, Brugioni wrote a book titled PHOTO FAKERY about the history of faking photographs. In it, he proudly revisited his role in the CIA pamphlet analysis.

In 1992, John Ball published AIR PHOTO EVIDENCE (see his site http://www.air-photo.com/ ). After examining the photos he was certain the photos had been altered. Every piece of the images interpreted by the two CIA analysts as indicating possible evidence of the extermination: pits; an open gate; groups of people walking and standing in formation, and in lines; fences around the crematoria; smoke; openings in the roofs of the crematory morgues, had all been added to the photos after the fact. Ironically, seven years after Ball wrote his book claiming fraud in the air photos, Brugioni publishes a book showing he has expertise in faking photos.

So, what we have above is the top CIA photo with the added fence drawn around crematory II, complete with artistically rendered open gate. On the roofs of the morgues are the dark spots, rendered in the tradition of the Dutch Masters, representing the openings in which the Zyklon B was to be dumped for gassing Jews. Advancing to the imaginary open gate is an imaginary group of people coming off an imaginary train.

The bottom photo, allegedly taken on the same date, shows none of that even though the shadow from the crematory II chimney indicates it was taken about the same time of day.

What has me puzzled is why the obvious difference in quality between the two images. Nevertheless, good catch, jnovitz.

[offline Occam's Razor]

No holes, no holocaust.

Faurisson was right.

Go to Germar Rudolf, Lectures on the holocaust, p.215/216.
The black dots that are allegedly the Zyklon B insertion holes are visible in the CIA photo, but not in the British photo. They should be visible. There seems to be nothing. I wonder how they will try to explain THAT.

[offlineMojo]

Thanks Pappy!

There are some discrepancies between the two, like the crook in the road between the womans camp and Krema II. I'm on a backlit HD monitor @ 1920x1200, with a pair of Nvidia 9800GTX video cards, using Fireworks at 200% magnification. The layout of the round objects (forgive my ignorance again) to the south of Krema II do not match. In the British photo they seem to be on an angle, not parellel to each other, & further away from each other. There also seems to be some sort of structure just to the west of the circular objects in the British photo that doesn't appear in the CIA verison. The column of prisoners create a higher shadow than the undressing rooms. Did everyone walk in this camp? I see no reference of vehicles. This is just from a cursory glance.

There are some obvious differences which should raise more than an eyebrow but, to really try to prove or disprove the Zyklon roof stacks, I'd need a few more pixels. I am not a doubter, so don't get me wrong. Without a similar resolution, it's really hard to tell. I'm no expert so if I'm missing something, someone please tell me.

Thanks,

[offline Pappy Yokum]

Thanks Pappy!

There are some discrepancies between the two, like the crook in the road between the womans camp and Krema II. I'm on a backlit HD monitor @ 1920x1200, with a pair of Nvidia 9800GTX video cards, using Fireworks at 200% magnification. The layout of the round objects (forgive my ignorance again) to the south of Krema II do not match. In the British photo they seem to be on an angle, not parellel to each other, & further away from each other. There also seems to be some sort of structure just to the west of the circular objects in the British photo that doesn't appear in the CIA verison. The column of prisoners create a higher shadow than the undressing rooms. Did everyone walk in this camp? I see no reference of vehicles. This is just from a cursory glance.

There are some obvious differences which should raise more than an eyebrow but, to really try to prove or disprove the Zyklon roof stacks, I'd need a few more pixels. I am not a doubter, so don't get me wrong. Without a similar resolution, it's really hard to tell. I'm no expert so if I'm missing something, someone please tell me.

Thanks,

MOJO:
I am not sure I understand the discrepancies you describe. I can see where the road turns to cross the tracks in both photos. The round structures are water treatment tanks. The area behind Krema II is a water treatment plant. Its purpose was to treat sewage. There are more water treatment facilities to the north of Krema III.
The area to the west of the treatment tanks is taken up by settling ponds. It was probably pretty stinky there. I think the reason the treatment plant and the crematories were put at that end of the camp was because the prevailing winds would blow any smell away from the camp barracks area.
There is another photo from September 1944 that is from a bombing mission against Monowitz. It shows the hole-free roof of Krema II's Leichenkeller more clearly, though I think the CIA fence line is drawn around it.


There were some vehicles. Trucks moved material to the scrap processing area.

[offlinejnovitz]

actually I am just interested in the the no holes, no holocaust line. Or perhaps more importantly does the CIA tamper with evidence.

I cant help thinking that of the August 23, 25 and Sept 13 photos they all derive from a single flight and have been variously cropped and manipulated

August 23 had smoke added-
August 25 had holes added or not added and a fence added or not added
September 13 had fence and bombs added.

[offline Pappy Yokum]

actually I am just interested in the the no holes, no holocaust line. Or perhaps more importantly does the CIA tamper with evidence.

I cant help thinking that of the August 23, 25 and Sept 13 photos they all derive from a single flight and have been variously cropped and manipulated

August 23 had smoke added-
August 25 had holes added or not added and a fence added or not added
September 13 had fence and bombs added.

I ordered two prints from the National Archives back in 1979 along with the Brugioni-Poirier booklet from the CIA.
(There is a funny story that goes along with that. I was trying to figure out how to get a copy of the booklet, so I called telephone operator to get the number for the Central Intelligence Agency. When I asked the operator for the telephone number of the Central Intelligence Agency, her reply was in a hushed, serious, almost worried tone. "Do you mean the C-I-A?", she asked. "Um, yeah. I think those are the initials." I replied. She provided the number. I had to make a couple of calls to get the number of their P.R. office, but when I did, the booklet was sent to me free of charge.)
The Archives got the copies of the negatives from the CIA at that time. One of the prints provided was from August 25th, 1944. It doesn't contain as much information as the September 13 picture. The August 25th picture is mostly fields and rail yard. The harvesting of crops/hay is visible in the fields around Birkenau. The CIA-labeled photo is what appears in one corner of the frame. It doesn't include Krema IV and V or the Canada section of Birkenau like the September 13 picture does. It looks to me like the September picture was taken at a higher altitude, but I have not seen the original frame, so I don't know for certain. I also have a photo from June 26th, 1944 that the National Archives printed for me. It is taken at a much higher altitude and includes Auschwitz, Birkenau, and Monowitz in it. The Vistula River is visible along with the town of Auschwitz and the surrounding countryside. So, I guess my point is there were multiple flights to the area in June, July, and August leading up to the bombing raid in September. In fact, I think Auschwitz was overflown by USAAF and RAF planes on an average of once every couple of weeks during all of 1944 and into early 1945.

[offlinejnovitz]

or perhaps they were sure what to do with the bunker area.

I think there is only one plane as the angle of the chimney shadows is the same in all versions

23 August UK
25 August US
25 August UK
13 September US

[offline Pappy Yokum]

or perhaps they were sure what to do with the bunker area.

I think there is only one plane as the angle of the chimney shadows is the same in all versions

23 August UK
25 August US
25 August UK
13 September US

Please explain the point of altering the same photo four times.

All the shadow angle would indicate is the photos were taken about the same time of day on three occasions by four aircraft. That would not be surprising given the planes originated from the same place and the photographing of the target would be planned to render the clearest imagery. Because the two August 25th pictures are of such disparate quality, it appears to me the UK photo was taken at a higher altitude.

Also, the August 23rd photo was taken at a higher altitude than the USAAF photo from the 25th. It contains an image of the whole Birkenau camp. Also, the Krema II chimney shadow appears shorter and angle a bit farther to the east indicating it was taken later in the day than the one on the 25th. Both would have been taken in the morning with the photo from the 23rd being closer to midday.

The September 13th photo was taken during the air raid. Does anyone know what time of day that took place? The shadows indicate it was mid to late morning. It is definitely later in the day than the August 23rd photo.

[offlinejnovitz]

the only airraid documented prior to 1979 was in late August on Monowitz.

After 1979 a lot of survivor memoirs remembered an air raid on Birkenua during September, September 13 if I recall correctly.

Please explain the point of altering the same photo four times.

Well it allows Wahrheitseeker to go around saying Mattogno accepts open air cremations. A noble endeavour on the part of the gallant Truthsucher.

[offlinetheTRUTH]

The air photos were altered so they could be released to the public, so they were not re-touched during the 1940's, but rather in 1978, just before they were placed in a location where Brugioni and other C.I.A. photo interpreters would discover them, which shows that up to at least 1978, official government evidence was being altered.

[offline Pappy Yokum]

The air photos were altered so they could be released to the public, so they were not re-touched during the 1940's, but rather in 1978, just before they were placed in a location where Brugioni and other C.I.A. photo interpreters would discover them, which shows that up to at least 1978, official government evidence was being altered.

I think the more likely scenario is Brugioni took part in the fraud. If he is the expert in photo fakery he says he is, he would have detected the alterations and either blown the whistle on it or refused to put his name on the C.I.A. He also would not have reminded everyone of his participation in the photo analysis when he published his book PHOTO FAKERY ten years ago. Being the cynic that I am, my interpretation of that is Brugioni was proud of the 1978 propaganda brochure he helped produce and was just tickled the fraud was still the official line. He even rubbed people's noses in it by including the Auschwitz-Birkenau photos at the end of his chapter titled "Spotting Fakes." He doesn't say those pictures were "enhanced," but the message seems pretty clear to people in on the joke.

No holes, no holocaust.

Faurisson was right.

Go to Germar Rudolf, Lectures on the holocaust, p.215/216.
The black dots that are allegedly the Zyklon B insertion holes are visible in the CIA photo, but not in the British photo. They should be visible. There seems to be nothing. I wonder how they will try to explain THAT.

During the Zundel Trial, Kenneth Roy Wilson was called by the defense to give his opinion of the air photos. He testified that the "insertion holes" had no elevation and appeared to be discolorations on the roof to him. He also doubted the photos could have been tampered with without it becoming obvious on the 12X enlargements he studied.

The explanation given so far for the missing Zyklon B ports in some of the photos is the photos without the dark patches were "smoky and hazy." The holes were missing because the pictures were not clear enough to show them. Wilson, who looked at the photos, disagreed with that assessment. He stated he believed the area of the crematories in the September 13 photo he examined was clear of smoke and haze.

Whatever the photos show, there are no insertion holes in the roof of either Leichenkeller now. Either the photos were "enhanced" at the CIA, or the dark patches on the roof were misinterpreted by Brugioni and Poirier. The jagged holes that exist today in roofs of the ruins are a joke. They are not the dark patches in the photos. The idea that the Nazis punched the holes in the roof after the buildings were completed contradicts testimony that the crematories were built specifically for the gassing of Jews. An after-the-fact breaching of the roof for communicating gas into the room below suggests a retro-fit or last minute change to a system they has supposedly been using since 1941. The notion that the Nazis were devoting so much attention to the extermination of the Jews since Hoess got his orders in 1941, yet, in 1943 ,they forgot to put the holes in the roof when the buildings were designed is silly. To claim this was also missed this when the buildings were constructed and they had to come back later to punch some holes through the concrete is sillier.