Hoess and Broad Speak of Same Gassing Experiments

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Hoess and Broad Speak of Same Gassing Experiments

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sat Jun 18, 2005 10:14 pm)

Anyone have a comment on this -

"Hoess talks about the temporary gassing experiments at Auschwitz I, the two "Bunkers" at Birkenau, the construction of the four large structures at Birkenau that included undressing rooms, gas chambers, and crematoria, just like Broad. " http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/america ... ic-12.html

These two didn't know each other, of each other and spoke and or wrote of their witness accounts of experimentation at completely different times and places.

Mind you this is taken from Shermer's 'convergence' to conclusion theory but it is a curious conundrum.

Regards
semblance7

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2359
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:00 am)

Shermer writes:
Broad and Hoess never saw each other before Hoess's capture on March 11, 1946 (10 months after Broad). But even if one wanted to fantasize a secret meeting between the two before Broad was captured, why would they confabulate a story that would surely convict them? There is no way to rationalize this convergence of evidence.

Well, perhaps the interrogators had something to do with the content of Broad's and Hoess' confession.

The interrogation agencies saw to it that the stories matched along with other "signed confessions" as well. I only read about half the article but this possibility never seems to cross Shermer's mind. Rather he goes on and on about the amazingness of how these two men never met, yet had confessions that were so similar. A convergence of evidence.

Not to mention that Broad's testimony goes out of reality with how long zyklon B took. Total: 4 minutes.
After about two minutes the shrieks die down and change to a low moaning. Most of the men have already lost consciousness. After a further two minutes . . . it is all over.

One of Germar Rudolf's books starts out with a Zyklon B execution in one of the American states, that doesn't even go that fast. And that's trying to execute one person.

I want to stay on topic to what Semblance7 is asking but Schermer lost all credibility with his strawman arguments and sophistry within 5 minutes of reading the article which semblance7 linked to. With the icing on the cake being where I was reading about him supporting an eyewitness, Berg, who on national TV claimed she saw the Nazis making soap out of bodies.
Last edited by Carto's Cutlass Supreme on Sun Jun 19, 2005 1:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

code yellow
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 8:07 am

Postby code yellow » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:44 am)

:) Why would gas chamber have to mean homicidal?They could have been refering to delousing chambers.

code yellow
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 8:07 am

Postby code yellow » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:52 am)

:? OK,I just read the thread from nizkor.It is primarily based on post war testimonies.Hoess,Eichman,Gerstien,and all the other so-called eyewitnesses have long been put to rest.That whole page is nothing but desperate garbage.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9839
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 2:21 am)

According the shyster Michael Shermer's logic, alleged UFO/alien abductees who have similar abduction stories means their stories are true. Search 'Shermer' here for more.

As for Hoess & Broad, the following excerpt from Judge Wilhelm Staeglich's: 'Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence' shows that there are superficial similarities yet vast inconsistencies.
The contradictions and increasing "exactness" of Rudolf Hoess's claims about the beginning of the alleged exterminations of the Jews, made in various stages of his testimony, are noteworthy enough, but they are surpassed by the IMMENSE CONTRACTIONS between Pery Broad's Nuremberg affidavit and the so-called Broad Report.

These two "documents" are in total disagreement with one another. The Broad Report, which - as mentioned - was not made public until the year 1965, by a Polish source, also contradicts Hoess's Cracow memoir on essential points, though - when considered superficially - they seem to be in agreement.

We have already seen (see p. 175 above) that Broad, in his affidavit, claims to have witnessed only one "gassing" in the old crematorium from a distance, and that was from a hiding place which offered limited possibilities of observation. In the Broad Report, however, this alleged event is described in complete detail (op.cit. pp. 51-55). The SS men involved are mentioned by name. The content of the conversation of the victims as well as that of the SS personnel concerned, as well as the appearance of the victims and the whole procedure of their murder are all described as though Broad had been right there. Now Broad is suddenly aware that those gassed at that time all wore "yellow Stars of David on their wretched clothing", while, in his affidavit, he made no mention of their ethnic background.

According to Hoess - as we remember - the victims were Russian prisoners of war. Moreover, the number of victims also increased in the Broad Report: the 200 people mentioned in the affidavit have now become "three to four hundred people". In the Hoess memoirs, of course, as many as 900 Russians are said to have been put to death with gas at that time in the old crematorium, an operation that supposedly lasted "several days".
The Broad Report states, in conclusion, that the gassing of Jews began in 1942, and that every day "one transport after another" disappeared in the Auschwitz crematorium. This, too, is in contradiction to the Broad affidavit. There Broad merely states that these " measures...were repeated several times in the crematorium in Auschwitz in 1942" without his having observed them.

The greatest contradiction between the Hoess memoirs and the Broad Report, however, is that, according to the latter, the alleged gassings in the "farm houses" of Birkenau did not begin until 1943, and then only because - according to the Broad Report - the capacity of the old crematorium in Auschwitz was no longer sufficient. Until that time, according to the Broad Report, the old crematorium in Auschwitz, which Hoess mentions only in connection with the liquidation of Soviet commissars and other functionaries was the only facility for the extermination of Jews.

In the Broad Report, an essentially more thorough, and in some ways different - description is given of the location, appearance, and use of the provisional extermination facilities of Birkenau. They consisted of "two pretty and clean-looking farm houses...brilliantly whitewashed, with quaint thatched roofs, surrounded by fruit trees" They were set "in a lovely landscape, separated from each other by a small wood." The buildings had "no windows and a disproportionate number of remarkably heavy doors, with rubber gaskets and screw closings."Several large stables" had been erected in the vicinity, like the ones that served as quarters for the prisoners in the Birkenau camp. The victims had to undress in these before they were driven into the "gas chambers." After the "gassing" the corpses were loaded on "flatbed trucks" and hauled to "pits that were surrounded with gigantic fences" from which "clouds of smoke ascended day and night". "Specialists" stacked "a thousand and more" corpses, layer upon layer, in such pits, with wooden boards between each layer, and used methanol to set this "open-air stage" ablaze.

So much for the Broad Report, which undoubtedly gives the impression that Broad witnessed all this himself. From the Broad affidavit, the authenticity of which is probably not to be doubted, it emerges that Broad had only heard of these things and did not know any details of them. He states:

"I discovered from SS men that the bulk of the people designated for gassing were brought directly to Birkenau, where farm houses which had been converted into gassing bunkers were located. The capacity of these two provisional bunkers was 800 to 1000 people."

In another passage of the affidavit (paragraph 6), Broad mentions, as at least partially his own observation, that there were only "about 10 large cremation places, where 800 to 1,000 people were cremated on funeral pyres,", the glow of which 'was visible with a circumference of at least 30 kilometers."

Thus it may be regarded as an established fact that the Broad Report published by the Poles is a later amplification and falsification of the statement Broad made for the British

more:

- Broad was in the pay of the British as an 'interpreter'

- One piece of information contained in Irving's testimony, that SS guards would certainly have noticed, is the part about the 1,000 Germans hanged by the British at Hammelin. It no doubt occurred to prisoners that a lack of cooperation, combined with a professional witness or two, could find them hanging from the end of a rope.

- Commandant Hoess was tortured. Tons of material at this forum on Hoess .... his so called 'testimony' is laughable and has been utterly demolished by Revisionists

an interesting observation:
Something that has long puzzled me is this: Why did Höss, first in British and then in American custody, consistently testify to the greatly exaggerated death toll of "three million people" killed at Auschwitz (2.5 million by "gassing" and half a million from disease and other causes).

Höss offered the excuse that he was relying on a figure of 2.5 million deportees to Auschwitz given to him by Adolf Eichmann in March or April 1944. One cannot take that seriously: At that time, the actual number deported to Auschwitz would have been in the region of 800,000 -- why should Eichmann exaggerate the real figure by over 200%?

I now suspect that the witness Pery Broad is the key to solving the mystery. Just days before Mr. Höss's arrest, he had testified in the Zyklon B trial, as a prosecution witness, that "2.5-3 million people" had been gassed at Auschwitz. The numerical coincidence is more than striking.

It seems not unlikely that some version of Broad's testimony, perhaps his earlier affidavit of December 14, 1945 (Nuremberg Document 11397-NI), was used by the British to prompt Höss in their interrogations of him. The claims made by George Wellers, Robert Van Pelt and others that the confessions of Höss and Broad were made independently of eachother should probably be re-examined in this light.

David Hebden


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

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2359
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 3:09 am)

That last quote Hannover offers is particularly interesting. The convergence of testimony where they both mention 2.5 to 3 million killed. Yet it's a completely false number even according to exterminationist historians like Raul Hilberg.

Richard Perle
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:45 am

Postby Richard Perle » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:24 am)

These 'convergences' are written about by Crowell in "The Gas Chamber of Sherlock Holmes".

http://www.vho.org/GB/c/SC/sh.html

Not Broad specifically, but the way in which eyewitness and perpetrator testimony converges with the rumours and propaganda as they exist at the time.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9839
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 9:37 am)

There obviously seems to have been a contrivance in the making with these two men. The Allies were attempting to establish their propaganda as fact by having Hoess & Broad repeat similar tales, while losing control of many details, as has been shown. Lies are always difficult to maintain under full scrutiny.

What the 'holocau$t' profiteers and judeo-supremacist/Zionists want you to do is ignore what exactly is being alleged by Broad, Hoess, or any other claimed 'eyewitness'.

It becomes almost comical to argue whether Broad & Hoess spoke independently of each other when the stories themselves are scientifically, technically, and rationally impossible.

Repetition of lies and impossibilities does not make them facts, regardless of who or how many repeat them.

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

semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 11:22 am)

It seems that Broad and Hoess were speaking, though, of the same physical structures and referring to them in the same jargon.

I'm quoting from the same article -

"the early gassing experiments in Block 11 of Auschwitz, the temporary chambers set up in the two abandoned farms at Birkenau (Auschwitz II), which he correctly called by their jargon name of "Bunkers I and II." He also recalled the construction of Kremas I, II, III, and IV at Birkenau, accurately depicting (by comparison with blueprints) the design of the undressing room, gas chamber, and crematorium. "

"Further, the Nuremberg Tribunal, when trying Hoess, were also unaware of the Broad document."

Hannover tells us that Hebden states -

"Just days before Mr. Höss's arrest, he (Broad) had testified in the Zyklon B trial, as a prosecution witness ..."

I'll grant that this may be the crux of the matter and perhaps Hannover might expand on it a bit more: Were the prosecutors the same? Were they all part of the same trial? Where were they in proximity to each other?

Don't you think, though, that Broad's memoir, written well before the trials (because he had a bout of conscience) and not released until 1965 in conjunction with his testimony 'immediatley before' Hoess giving prosecutors the opportunity to 'get their story straight' might be, in a way, a bit of Revisionist Convergence?

Regards
semblance7

Turpitz
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 12:57 pm

Postby Turpitz » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 3:35 pm)

It is primarily based on post war testimonies


Of course it is what else is there?

"the early gassing experiments in Block 11 of Auschwitz, the temporary chambers set up in the two abandoned farms at Birkenau (Auschwitz II), which he correctly called by their jargon name of "Bunkers I and II." He also recalled the construction of Kremas I, II, III, and IV at Birkenau, accurately depicting (by comparison with blueprints) the design of the undressing room, gas chamber, and crematorium. "


I would be interested in seeing the floorplans, elevations, sections and spec sheets for these “gas chambers” where are they? I am particularly interested in the forced ventilation system, maybe you can point me in the direction as to where they might be?

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2359
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 7:06 pm)

Semblance wrote

Don't you think, though, that Broad's memoir, written well before the trials (because he had a bout of conscience)......

How about because he was captured and put in jail, and saw the specter of hanging.

....and not released until 1965 in conjunction with his testimony 'immediately before' Hoess giving prosecutors the opportunity to 'get their story straight' might be, in a way, a bit of Revisionist Convergence?

Not sure what you mean by this.
Last edited by Carto's Cutlass Supreme on Sun Jun 19, 2005 10:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.

semblance7
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:23 pm

Postby semblance7 » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun Jun 19, 2005 9:58 pm)

Thanks CCS

I grant I can't speak to why Broad wrote it. It does not seem to have been coerced however.

Also, the article states: "Further, the Nuremberg Tribunal, when trying Hoess, were also unaware of the Broad document."

Those trying Hoess (torturing, coercing, etc.), per this article, did not know of Broad or his memoir.

It is only after Nuremberg it was discovered that the two stories happened to coincide in detail about physical structures and the jargon that referred to their use.

What I was referring to before about Revisionist Convergence is the suggestion that was made that the two stories seem to 'converge' to suggest coersion.
semblance7

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9839
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:23 am)

semblance says:
Also, the article states: "Further, the Nuremberg Tribunal, when trying Hoess, were also unaware of the Broad document."

Those trying Hoess (torturing, coercing, etc.), per this article, did not know of Broad or his memoir.

It is only after Nuremberg it was discovered that the two stories happened to coincide in detail about physical structures and the jargon that referred to their use.

That's logically absurd. Can anyone really believe that the Allies didn't communicate with each other and attempt some form of coordination of certain points of 'evidence' they were manufacturing? Ofcourse they did, and key points within the wacky Broad - Hoess stories prove that. But, like all lies, they spiraled out of control, as I have shown.

I notice that semblance7 has ignored the many other specific & critical points made. Why?

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

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2359
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 4 years ago (Mon Jun 20, 2005 3:45 am)

Hi Semblance7,

You wrote
It is only after Nuremberg it was discovered that the two stories happened to coincide in detail about physical structures and the jargon that referred to their use.

A big problem with your thesis is that they both put the deaths at 2.5-3 million.

In 1985 Raul Hilberg gave the number of 1 million and maybe it's even lower in his 2003 Destruction of the European Jews. For both Broad and Perry to pull a vastly erroneous number out of a hat independently of each other is unlikely and supports a coerced testimony. Particularly since one of the guys was the head of the camp. He's the head of the camp, he should know the number of deaths.

Richard Perle
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:45 am

Postby Richard Perle » 1 decade 4 years ago (Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:20 am)

The Hoess and Broad statements need not have influenced one another nor the people interogating them. The story had already been written by the Soviets in their Auschwitz report, and it is this report which clearly influences the testimony of the era immediately following it.
The 'converging' testimonys of Hoess and Broad concerning the 3million trace back to the confessions of Grabner in September 1945.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests