Wall St. Journal article on 'preserving forensic evidence'

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Wall St. Journal article on 'preserving forensic evidence'

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:22 am)

It would seem the die is cast, in spite of what this ranter wants to believe, what he tries to cling to. It's evident that the Believers and the 'holocau$t' Industry are on the defensive, they are still in denial of irrefutable Revisionist research. Obviously though, we are being heard.

In an attempt to right the Titanic, this story is loaded with squirming desperation, strawmen, and the usual lies which Revisionists have demolished one by one. Even bizarre nutcase Primo Levi is trotted out.

Comments welcomed.

- Hannover

excerpt:
While most serious historians refuse to dignify such statements with a response, Polish administrators have taken the bait. In response to revisionist charges, they tested the gas chamber walls for residual traces of cyanide gas but found none.

WALL STREET JOURNAL
Wednesday, July 7, 2004

Forensic evidence of the Holocaust must be preserved

By Timothy Ryback

LAST month, Jarek Mensfelt, spokesman for the Auschwitz memorial site, announced plans to preserve the ruins of the gas chambers and crematoria in the notorious death camp at Birkenau near the Polish town of Oswiecim. "This is an attempt to keep it as it is now -- in ruins -- but not let the ruins go," he said. "It was meant to be here forever as a warning."

In the coming weeks, as the Auschwitz preservationists begin their work, they should be guided by the knowledge that these heaps of dynamited concrete and twisted steel are not only historic artifacts but among the few remnants of untainted, forensic evidence of the Holocaust.

Of course, the historical and circumstantial evidence of a premeditated Nazi plan to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe is overwhelming.
There are the watch-tower-girded enclosures of Nazi concentration camps and the extensive testimonials of Holocaust survivors, as well as the court protocols of Nazi war criminals, but there is little forensic evidence proving homicidal intent. The Nazis were scrupulous when it came to obscuring the "Final Solution" in bureaucratic euphemism and also dismantling or obliterating their machinery of death. The dearth of hard evidence has fueled a growth industry in Holocaust-denial.

The revisionists' plaint is simple: They demand a proverbial "smoking gun" to prove that the Nazis deliberately and systematically designed an industrial system of extermination. They do not deny that millions of European Jews died from malnutrition, exhaustion and disease. They do not even deny that Zyklon B gas was employed at Auschwitz, but they claim it was used for delousing rather than homicidal purposes. One French critic has denounced them as "assassins de la memoire" -- murderers of memory.

Auschwitz has been a particular target of Holocaust deniers -- in particular, the gas chamber in Auschwitz I, the original base camp a mile east of Birkenau. It was here that some of the first experiments with poison gas were undertaken in a converted air-raid shelter refitted with air-tight doors and special ducts for homicidal purposes. Dynamited by the Nazis in the autumn of 1944, the gas chamber was reconstructed after the war. As one revisionist notes:

"The official view holds that the Soviets and Poles created a 'gas chamber' in an air-raid shelter that had been a 'gas chamber.' The revisionist view holds that Soviets and Poles created a 'gas chamber' in an air-raid shelter that had been an air-raid shelter."
While most serious historians refuse to dignify such statements with a response, Polish administrators have taken the bait. In response to revisionist charges, they tested the gas chamber walls for residual traces of cyanide gas but found none. Unlike the delousing chambers, whose walls still show cyanide "staining," the gas chambers betrayed no residual traces of Zyklon B. The homicidal process was so murderously brief that the cyanide never penetrated the interior surface. Similarly, it was found that repeated postwar "cleaning" had leached the last traces of cyanide from the heaps of human hair, one of the most damning pieces of Holocaust evidence.

Four years ago, this evidence was used by the revisionist David Irving in his libel suit against Emory University historian Deborah Lipstadt. Though the judge handed down an unequivocal verdict against Mr. Irving, the Holocaust deniers remain undeterred. "While the judgment in the Irving-Lipstadt trial is certainly a heavy blow for Irving personally," a leading revisionist publication observed, "it is only a temporary setback for the ultimately unstoppable march of revisionist scholarship."

IN the battle against Holocaust deniers, Birkenau's extermination facilities remain important forensic evidence. Today, the ruined structures lie at the far end of the camp -- beyond the railway line and the infamous "ramp" where Josef Mengele once stood to make his "selections" -- tumbled and broken plates of concrete that rise from the earth like arctic ice shoals, the remnants of a once horrifically efficient piece of machinery.

Between 1942, when they were first put into operation, and 1944, when they were dynamited, more than a million human beings -- mostly Jewish -- were fed into these extermination plants, forced into subterranean chambers and gassed, their corpses removed and transported by mechanical conveyance to the crematoria ovens. The chimneys belched smoke into the air. The remnant ash was scattered in the surrounding fields, or dumped in a nearby pond whose muddied bottom, even today, is of a sticky gray viscosity laced with matchstick-size splinters of human bone.

The horrors of this machinery have been preserved in the classic memoirs of survivor-authors like Elie Wiesel (left) and Primo Levi, in the myriad recorded testimonies of Holocaust survivors, and in the trial protocols of Nazi perpetrators.

But, as with any account filtered through human memory, this "evidence" is subject to challenge and rebuttal. There is no arguing with presence of the Birkenau gas chambers. Here the proof of the Holocaust is written in concrete and steel.

This summer, as the preservationists clear the weeds and sort through the rubble, they should work in the knowledge that they are not just preserving a "warning" for the future but also excavating the hard evidence of evil.

Mr. Ryback is the author of "The Last Survivor: Legacies of Dachau."
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Hyman
Member
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2002 2:42 am

Postby Hyman » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Jul 08, 2004 11:12 am)

This is another one of those "YOU SHALL BELIEVE" articles occasionally fed to the sheeple in the hopes that all will be stricken from entertaining a dissidenting thought about this most sacred era in history (according to the establishment) under which all lessons can be learned and all contemporary actions can be justified.

My favourite part: "Similarly, it was found that repeated postwar "cleaning" had leached the last traces of cyanide from the heaps of human hair, one of the most damning pieces of Holocaust evidence. "

What the....??? In the time since the war has ended sneaky Nazis and/or revisionists have been stealing into the former camps and current tourist attractions and cleaning the cyanide off the human hair? Once again proving its all good when it comes to Holocaust evidence and there is always more where that came from.

The promoters of the orthodox story would be wise to bulldoze Auschwitz rather than preserve it, for the forensic evidence that is there has been a bonanza for the revisionists.

neugierig
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 7:01 pm

Postby neugierig » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Jul 08, 2004 11:52 am)

I like this part:
“[...]forced into subterranean chambers and gassed, their corpses removed and transported by mechanical conveyance to the crematoria ovens[...]”

‘Mechanical conveyance’? Me tinks this guy has his stories mixed up. The very first account of the ‘Death Factory’ Auschwitz came from a Russian reporter, the name escapes me, who wrote about death by electrocution, the corpses then transported, by conveyor belt, to the top of blast furnaces and dropped in. Later, the story changed to ‘Gas-chambers’, and corpses removed by inmates, manually.

Liars have to have a good memory, these guys don't. :lol:

Regards
Wilf

User avatar
Haldan
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1371
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: <secret>
Contact:

Postby Haldan » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:38 pm)

Hyman wrote:The promoters of the orthodox story would be wise to bulldoze Auschwitz rather than preserve it, for the forensic evidence that is there has been a bonanza for the revisionists.


Well said Hyman! It would benefit them much more if they did that. But they cannot espcape the lies which has been told.
<?php if ($Holocaust == false ) {deny_repeatedly(); } else { investigate(); } ?>
Homage to Catalin Haldan

Juan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 11:11 am
Location: Chile

Postby Juan » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:14 pm)

some unfortunate accident with bombs may happen to the morgue cellar, then they will put the blame on revisionists and skins.

User avatar
Scott
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 306
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 7:00 am

Postby Scott » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:55 pm)

All they have to do is have archaeologists carefully clear away the rubble covering up the mythical fourth Zyklon insertion hole in the roof of LK-1 of KII and they would prove their case from the Holes Report. Of course, considering that the visible holes look like they were chiseled after the war one doubts whether there is a fourth hole as promised.

:D
Last edited by Scott on Fri Jul 09, 2004 3:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1658
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Postby Moderator » 1 decade 5 years ago (Fri Jul 09, 2004 12:25 am)

comrade seinfeld:

Various threads here have dealt with the elements within this article. Please avail yourself to them rather than simply repeating the assertions made by Believers, and then claiming Revisionists have not addressed the issues.

If you like, start separate threads on any point which you find compelling. You will undoubtedly be challenged for evidence to support any and all of those points.

With that in mind, I pulled your largely redundant post.

- Moderator1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

User avatar
comrade seinfeld
Member
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:27 pm

Wall St. Journal article on 'preserving forensic evidence'

Postby comrade seinfeld » 1 decade 5 years ago (Fri Jul 09, 2004 12:59 am)

I would be interested to know what happened to my previous post in this thread, which immediately followed Scott's last post, and which appeared in the list of messages. Was there some technical mishap which caused it to be deleted, or did I somehow breach the seemingly Byzantine forum rules for posting? -- which some might impertinently assert are designed to exclude forum dissidents!

I have that post saved on a floppy disk, but I would be hesitant to post it again, as I don't like to either indulge in futile exercises, or to impose my presence where it is not welcome. Therefore, I would welcome the Moderator's advice in this matter. Furthermore, I would just say that obviously the "Holocaust" (and I use inverted commas in recognition of the quantitatively more immense non-Jewish suffering during WW2) is a subject of vast moral dimensions, so that one has a moral duty not to be flippant with what one thinks is the perceived truth.

User avatar
Moderator3
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 4:01 am

Postby Moderator3 » 1 decade 5 years ago (Fri Jul 09, 2004 8:30 am)

comrade seinfeld,
Please see the post just before your inquiry. The guidelines are clearly stated up front and applied to all, you agreed to them when you registered. If you know of any on topic points of dissent which have been censored please post to the thread which asks for such opinions:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=1202
M3

Temporary on hold
Member
Member
Posts: 119
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:31 pm

Postby Temporary on hold » 1 decade 5 years ago (Fri Jul 09, 2004 3:45 pm)

The dearth of hard evidence has fueled a growth industry in Holocaust-denial.



As Hannover cites, people who have been around revisionism can see what is being worked-around here. The article has an obvious "damage control" aspect to it. For instance what isn't mentioned above is how a surplus of false claims and phony evidence has fueled "holocaust denial" itself.

They do not even deny that Zyklon B gas was employed at Auschwitz, but they claim it was used for delousing rather than homicidal purposes. One French critic has denounced them as "assassins de la memoire" -- murderers of memory.



Of course, the recognition of delousing is treated as an excuse here instead of the perfectly-accepted practice it was at the time. The suggestion being that the majority of Zyklon was produced for homicide. Simple war history research shows even holocaust advocates agree that something like 99% of the Zyklon was produced for delousing. Who is "murdering the facts" here?

In response to revisionist charges, they tested the gas chamber walls for residual traces of cyanide gas but found none.



Let me get this straight, in a critical tone this author is trying to persuade us how preposterous revisionist claims are towards gas chambers by showing us how no evidence exists for them? Chambers that were claimed to have killed millions were washed completely clean in a cover-up program for which there is no record, or credible testimony, and for which previous testimonies contradict themselves? The problem here is that revisionist evidence that would back their case is completely left out. The author commits a drastic oversimplification and preclusion of object facts.


"While the judgment in the Irving-Lipstadt trial is certainly a heavy blow for Irving personally," a leading revisionist publication observed, "it is only a temporary setback for the ultimately unstoppable march of revisionist scholarship."


Ryback forgets to relate how Judge Grey admitted that revisionism was compelling and how his decision was mainly based on Irving's poor legal representaion.



The horrors of this machinery have been preserved in the classic memoirs of survivor-authors like Elie Wiesel (left) and Primo Levi, in the myriad recorded testimonies of Holocaust survivors, and in the trial protocols of Nazi perpetrators.



Here is where Ryback tries to push the usual Holocaust package through in one sweep. Wiesel never mentioned gas chambers in his original book. Levi admitted in court that he never actually witnessed any gas chambers and used "poetic license" in his book when describing them. The Nuremberg Tribunals are no-longer considered serious reference by any credible researcher on the subject. Ryback's solid core is actually his weakest offering to anyone with any knowledge of the subject. The general public will never see this, though, according to the form offered for sale by Ryback.



But, as with any account filtered through human memory, this "evidence" is subject to challenge and rebuttal. There is no arguing with presence of the Birkenau gas chambers. Here the proof of the Holocaust is written in concrete and steel.



From this fractured base Ryback moves to his final word. Revisionists realize that eye-witness accounts are self-condemning as far as veracity. Ryback tries to moderate this by claiming human memory is never perfect. Readers will therefore never see some of the crazy claims that have nothing to do with memory.

There is certainly SERIOUS arguing with the presence of Birkenau gas chambers. Arguing that you will never see in the WSJ.


It's obvious that promoters are being forced to recognize the serious flaws in their legend. In order to avoid the damage control collective dismissing above revisionists need to counter by assembling the best half-dozen or so cases as a counter to this article. That way the public won't be able to discount them offhand as Ryback hopes...

Of course, the official media will respond to this counter by saying it "won't respond to such nonsense" and won't "take the bait"...

Secret Anne X
Member
Member
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 11:12 pm

Postby Secret Anne X » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sat Jul 10, 2004 3:56 pm)

Hi,

I think it was Rudolf Vrba who was shown up in court for not really being an eyewitness. Primo Levi was never even at Birkenau, as I recall, he was working at the plant in Monowitz. I seem to remember reading somewhere that when he wrote "Survival at Auschwitz" or rather when it was translated from Italian into English there was some concern because there was nothing about gas chambers in it. Later on, some stuff was added. But he could not have been an eyewitness, either.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:46 pm)

See 'eyewitness' Primo Levi deconstructed here:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=152

See 'eyewitness' Rudolph Vrba debunked here:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=321

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
gonzo
Member
Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 12:03 am

Postby gonzo » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Jul 11, 2004 12:24 am)

While they are "preserving " the remains. Nothing is stopping them from adding some traces of Zyklon-B themselves. So easy to do... Then they can invite some sucker for a well publicized independent investigation and voila ...Zyklon cyanide traces found !...

these people are sick and twisted puppies...they will do whatever is necessary to keep this lie going.

They are masters at deception and propaganda.

Malle
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:53 pm
Location: Sweden

Postby Malle » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Jul 11, 2004 5:41 pm)

My favourite quote from the article is this:

Of course, the historical and circumstantial evidence of a premeditated Nazi plan to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe is overwhelming. (Emphasize added)


When are we allowed to see the overwhelming evidence? :roll:
I must be a mushroom - because everyone keeps me in the dark and feeds me with lots of bullshit.

User avatar
TruthSeeker
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 3:45 pm
Location: Lebanon

Postby TruthSeeker » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Jul 11, 2004 10:26 pm)

Forensic evidence of the Holocaust must be preserved

Uhh, what forensic evidence? Did I miss something while I was sleeping?


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests