Mattogno: The Deportation of Hungarian Jews

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
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Mattogno: The Deportation of Hungarian Jews

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun May 04, 2003 9:24 pm)

The Deportation of Hungarian Jews from May to July 1944
A preliminary account
By Carlo Mattogno

This piece is with over 21 pages rather long. In order to keep the posting (and the time involved for the translations) reasonable I plan to post the text in the following sections, one per day or so:

In the Beginning
How many Hungarian Jews were Deported to Auschwitz?
The »Durchgangslager« (Transfer Camp) of Birkenau.
Transfers from the »Durchgangslager«.
Were only Employable Jews Deported from Hungary?
The Criteria for the Selection of Employables
Were Hungarian Jews only Deported to Auschwitz?
Original Purpose and Destination of the Deportations of Hungarian Jews.
What was the fate of the Non-Employable Hungarian Jews?
How many Jews were Deported from Hungary?
The Statistical Documents about the Deportations of the Hungarian Jews.
Considerations about the Thesis of Arthur Butz.



In the Beginning

In the first edition of the Kalendarium of Auschwitz are 91 transports of Jews from Hungary listed for the period between May 2 and October 1944. A total of 29,159 of the deportees were registered in the camp Auschwitz.

According to the Kalendarium:
»The others were gassed.«

The French-Jewish historian Geeorges Wellers based his investigation about the number of victims in the camp on D. Czech’s Kalendarium and maintained about Hungary, that 87 train loads with 437,402 Jews were shipped from that country to Auschwitz, which results in an average transport of 5,028 persons per train. After subtracting the registered – he counts 27,758 – Wellers comes to the conclusion that 409,640 Jews from Hungary died in gas chambers in Auschwitz.

I criticized Weller’s study in an article Wellers e i "gasati" di Auschwitz and pointed out a contradiction about the Hungarian Jews in the Kalendarium: During the Jerusalem-Eichmann trial it was alleged, based on a report by the Hungarian Lieutenant-Colonel Ferenczy of July 9, 1944, that between the middle of May and July 6, 1944 147 trains with 434,351 Jews were deported from Hungary, but the Kalendarium mentions only 91 trains, of which 33 arrived in Auschwitz after July 11 (when the last train arrived from Budapest). Therefore it can be concluded, that only 58 of the trains mentioned in the Kalendarium arrived in Auschwitz, and that the remaining 33 did not exist. Before I accepted this conclusion, I asked several “Holocaust” institutes for a clarification – the Institute for Zeitgeschichte, Zentrale Stelle der Landesjustizverwaltung, the Centre de la Documentation Juive Contemporaine, the Wiener Library, Yad Vashem, the Auschwitz-museum and Wellers personally. Nobody could explain the contradiction. Finally, after I went public with the contradiction, the Auschwitz-museum answered as follows:

1. A part of the Hungarian Jews who arrived in Auschwitz were assigned without registration to the transfer camp. A part of these was gradually registered in the camp. Therefore the registrations which took place after July 11 were not for the transports from Hungary but for internal admissions from the transfer camp.

2. The registration of the Hungarian Jews was cumulative, so that a registration could have referred to several transports which arrived the same day.


This explanation was then adopted two years later by D. Czech in the second edition of her Kalendarium.
In it the author states, that a part of the Hungarian Jews, who were deported to Auschwitz, were assigned to the Sectors BIIe, BIIc, BIIb and BIII of Birkenau, which are labeled as »Durchgangslager KL Auschwitz« (transfer camp Auschwitz). The registrations of Hungarian Jews are often marked with the comment »From the transports of the RSHA from Hungary«, by which D. Czech indicates, that one and the same registration comprised several transports.

As an aside it should be pointed out, that the Auschwitz-museum was aware of the truth about the Birkenau transfer camp already long before the publication of the first Kalendarium edition. For example Otto Wolken, a well respected witness during the trial against the first Auschwitz-commandant Rudolf Höß, declared that the Hungarian Jewesses were quartered in the beginning in the camp BIIIc, where they had to sleep in shifts; then they were transferred to the construction section III, where 50,000 of them were housed.

In 1946, a year before the Höß-trial, an important Polish collection of documents contained the transcript of a letter from the administration head of Auschwitz II (Birkenau) to the head of the central administration, in which was stated, that the camp BII of Birkenau was »utilized as admission- and transfer-camp.« The fact was also known that about 30,000 Hungarian Jews who were being held in the transfer-camp, who were not registered in the camp, as was described in the second Kalendarium-edition and analyzed by myself in the following sections. This means, that the Auschwitz-museum kept silent about the truth as long as possible.

In 1989 did Jean-Claude Pressac accept my carefully formulated conclusions as explained in my writing against Wellers, that under the (unfounded) assumption, that all 91 trains mentioned in the first edition of the Kalendarium arrived in Auschwitz, one has to start with about 271,000 Hungarian Jews deported to that camp.

In his first Auschwitz-book Pressac still talked about 200,000 to 250,000 Hungarian Jews which were gassed in Auschwitz; he obviously arrived at these numbers, by accepting the number of 271,000 Jews deported to Auschwitz which I calculated, subtracted from it the 29,000 registered in the camp and for safety reasons left a wide margin (271,000 minus 29,000 equals 242,000).

Pressac accepted in 1993 also my radical conclusion. He briefly summarized the above sketched problematic and wrote, that according to the 2nd edition of the Kalendarium 53 Jewish transports arrived from Hungary in Auschwitz, which amounts to approximately 160,000 deportees. Pressac came up still with another second number of deportees – 240,000 - , which however is based on erroneous starting numbers. He thought that 20,000 to 30,000 Hungarian Jewesses were transferred from Auschwitz to Stutthof. Together with the approximately 28,000 registered and the approximately 25,000 transferred to other camps this would result in a number of 80,000. These – throughout employable – inmates would amount to one third of the deportees, which would give a total number of 240,000. But in actuality were only about 12,100 Hungarian Jewesses transferred to Stutthof.

Pressac granted an interview to a Valérie Igounet on June 15, 1995, in which he gave the following to protocol:

Concerning the Hungarian Jews he [Mattogno] was right, when he wrote in 1987, that the deportations took place from May to June [correctly: beginning of July], whereas Danuta Czech, the Polish editor of the “Kalendarium of the Events in the Concentration Camp Auschwitz-Birkenau 1939-1945”, as well as Georges Wellers, who used these sources unchecked, have alleged, that they lasted from May to October. Wellers refused, to get into contact with Mattogno by letter about this question, because from his point of view one does not discuss with revisionists. A super-zealous judge even issued an [international] order to arrest Mattogno, in case he should enter French territory. Czech published her “Kalendarium” in the sixties, on which Wellers based his calculation of the number of Auschwitz-victims (1.6 million instead of four million [which was at that time still alleged by the Auschwitz-museum]). A corrected second edition of the “Kalendarium” came out in 1989. Of the [in the first edition] mentioned 91 transports remained only 50. Czech made a mistake and thought that the camp-internal transfers in Birkenau were transports.[…]
Since only 50 transports remained which comprised 150,000 people instead of the originally assumed 438,000, Czech “in order to compensate” increased the number of transports which arrived in May and June by – without any proof – alleging that on this or that day “transports” instead of “a transport” arrived, by which she made herself guilty of history falsification. However no international order for the arrest of Czech was issued. About Weller’s calculation, they are worthless since the second “Kalendarium” edition, which however did not prevent the Poles to announce the erroneous results of Weller as a “serious” source.«


For the sake of completeness I want to indicate, that Wellers wrote me a highly insulting letter and accused me hat I »distort the historic truth«. Evidently he did not like it at all, that I uncovered his deceits with which the oh so honest announcer of alleged falsifiers invented 594,191 “gassed” Jews!

About the thesis of Arthur Butz I will come back at the end of this essay.

The general problem of the deportation of Hungarian Jews comprises several specific points, which necessarily have to be analyzed more closely, if one wants to arrive to a solid conclusion.

(to be continued :D )



avatar
Germania
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 4:48 am

Postby Germania » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon May 05, 2003 2:53 am)

in short danuta was wrong, carlo was right!!!

----
there will be a schoolary debate between belivers and revisionists elsewhere. go to:

The Scholars Debate!

or search google for

R O D O H (one word!)
Last edited by Germania on Sat Dec 27, 2003 8:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon May 05, 2003 9:52 pm)

Germania wrote:in short danuta was wrong, carlo was right!!!


As a skeptik I also have to look at the situation that Carlo is wrong and Danuta is right.

Or both are right. Or wrong.

:D

User avatar
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue May 06, 2003 11:34 pm)

How many Hungarian Jews were Deported to Auschwitz?

On August 22, 1944 a member of the secret resistance movement in Auschwitz, who was active under the name »Urban«, prepared a thorough statistic of the number of inmates for the day before, the 21st of August. This table includes the number of inmates per camp and by inmate-category. The total number of the prisoners according to this statistic is 104,891, distributed as follows:

Auschwitz I: 15.974
Auschwitz II: 19.424
Auschwitz III: 30.539
Women Camp: 38.954

This numbers can be considered as reliable, which is shown from the only documented comparison: According to the statistical report »Arbeitseinsatz« (work deployment) of August 21, 1944 was the number of inmates in Birkenau – Auschwitz II – 19,468 inmates, which is about identical with above number.

»Urban« mentions the presence of 11,821 registered male Hungarian Jews in the camp Auschwitz. Of these 3,881 were in Auschwitz I and 7,940 in Auschwitz III (Monowitz). Additionally there were 16,187 Hungarian Jewesses quartered in the women camp of Auschwitz II. Therefore there were on August 21, 1944 28,008 registered Hungarian Jews and Jewesses in the camp complex of Auschwitz.

Are these numbers reliable?

From the »Liste der Judentransporte« (list of transports of Jews), which exclusively contains the registrations under the serial numbers A and B, we know, that until August 21, 1944 12,374 male Hungarian Jews as well as 15,288 Hungarian Jewesses were registered in Auschwitz, a total of 27,662 Jewish people from Hungary. But Hungarian Jews were also registered under the usual serial number. Thus of the two transports of Jews, which left Hungary on April 29, 1944 were in Auschwitz on May 2, 486 men (serial numbers 186 645 to 187 130) and 616 women (serial numbers 76 385 to76 459 and 80 000 to 80 540) included in the registry.

Thus grew the number of the registered Hungarian Jews to 28,764 (12,860 men as well as 15,904 women), »Urban« however talks about 16,187 Hungarian Jews. This can be explained, that small groups of Hungarian Jews arrived with other transports. For example on April 1, 1944 were at least 10 Hungarian Jews with the numbers between
177 354 and 178 122 registered.

It can be concluded, that the number of registered Jews who arrived since May 17, 1944 from Hungary, who were in Auschwitz on August 21, was about 27,500.

In his statistical report »Urban« reported:

»In Birkenau are besides the above mentioned [inmates] about 30,000 non-registered Hungarian Jews, who are designated for the gas. This number is subject to variations.[…] To this has to be added – also subject to variations –the number of “Durchgangshäftlinge” (transfer prisoners), at the moment 30,000 Hungarian Jews.«

Here also has to be investigated, how reliable these reported numbers are. For this it is quite necessary to understand how the admission procedure of Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz was actual done.

The »Durchgangslager« (transfer camp) of Birkenau

After their arrival in Auschwitz the Hungarian Jews were divided into three categories:

1. Employable, who were registered right after their arrival in the camp.
2. Non-registered employable.
3. Non-registered non-employable.

The prisoners who were registered right after their arrival were employed in the camp itself.

The non-registered employable came into a transfer camp, which consisted of the camp BIIc, a part of camp BIIa and later a part of the camp BIIe and the camp BIII.

A non-published, important German document sheds light on the way the reception of the prisoners, which belonged to the last category, was handled. On June 26, 1944 the direction of the camp Dachau complained to the administration of Auschwitz, that prisoners who were transferred from Auschwitz and who arrived in Kauferling, a sub camp of Dachau, were clothed only in rags. The chief of the clothing-warehouse for inmates of Birkenau wrote a letter to the camp administration in order to justify his situation, of which I quote the most important parts:

»In order to clarify the situation, the following describes the complete process from the arrival of the Hungarian Jewish prisoners to the train embarkation. After the arrival of the admissions in this concentration camp all civilian clothes are taken away from the prisoners and after a thorough delousing procedure these prisoners are fitted out with prison garb which is provided by the administration.
[…]
After the individual transports which arrived are clothed, they are transferred to the “Durchgangslager” (transfer camp) in Auschwitz II and taken over by the “Arbeitsdienstführer” (work leader) Uscha [Unterscharführer] Olexius. He then prepares a receipt for the types of clothes and indicates with what pieces of clothing the admitted prisoners are provided. These receipts are submitted for review. The admitted stay several days, up to 2 to 3 weeks in the transfer camp. Because of the lack of sufficient quarters 1000 to 1200 inmates are accommodated in each barrack, which are normally suited for 300 prisoners. This condition alone results in a serious contamination of the pieces of clothing. The inmates who are quartered in the “Durchgangslager” (transfer camp) are grouped into transports and placed in “Quarantänelager” (quarantine camps) where they will stay for several days until their departure.
[…]
The clothing-department of the camp Auschwitz have clothed since May 16, 1944 until today about 57,000 inmates and prepared 48 transports with 45,132 prisoners for the departure, without receiving the least complaint until now.«


The quarantine camp was identical with camp BIIa. In Moscow J. Graf and myself discovered an important report about the purpose of this camp as “Durchgangslager” (transfer camp) for the Hungarian Jews. The document, dated July 26, 1944 survived only incomplete (the second page is missing, and the right margin is partially crumbled). The title is as follows:

»HKB Ambulance BIIa. Monthly Reports about temporary place “u [ngarische Juden (Hungarian Jews)].«

The report covers the time period from June 26 to July 26, 1944; from this can be deduced, that there was with great probability a previous report which dealt with the time period from the middle of May to June 15. The paragraph which is of interest to us is as follows:

»During the report time June 26 to July 26, 1944 […gap in text…] average 2,500 Hungarian Jews ready for transportation in the camp in 3 blocks, they stay 3 – 10 days in the camp.
They were subjected to a thorough medical check-up each during the admission and during the departure and checked for lice. Daily fever- and lice-check ups, lice carrier delousing in in-camp disinfestation plant, clothes and laundry disinfected in steam boilers and impregnated with “lauseto” (German anti-lice agent).
Those found seriously sick retransferred to BIIf or transferred to another camp.
On July 1, 1944 admission of 450 juvenile Hungarian Jews from BIId. […]
Because too many prisoners were housed in the blocks, up to 1000, many had to sleep on the bare concrete floor or on humid earth ground, consequently frequent colds and diarrheas. The youths in “Sonderquarantäne” (special quarantine)in block 12 did not change their underwear since 10 weeks, the Hungarians in block 8 since 8 weeks. Since both groups did not belong to the same camp population, soap could not be distributed to them. Allocation of soap urgently needed.«


There is also a report about the »POW-Construction Section III«, which was prepared on June 16, 1944 by the »Hygienist of the Construction Inspection “Silesia”«. In it are the devastating sanitary conditions in this camp sector described. The author of the report says:

»The first transport with prisoners arrived on June 9, 1944. at this time the construction section is occupied by approximately 7,000 female (Jewish) prisoners.«

About the quarantine measures is said:

»Because the prisoners of the construction section III have to be called to work at an accelerated speed, an actual quarantine is not performed. In order to avoid during a possible occurrence of epidemics longer delays in the work assignments, it is necessary to subdivide through fencing the camp into four sections . This way at least part of the inmates can further be deployed or evacuated in case of occurring epidemics.«

The camp BIIc consisted of 32 dwelling barracks. According to above documents each barrack had from 1,000 to 1,200 persons penned up, so that in the average about 35,000 non-registered Hungarian Jews were in the camp. And when on June 16, 7,000 Jewesses – evidently from Hungary – were housed in Sector BIII under difficult circumstances, it is clear, that the accommodation possibilities of the camp BIIc must have been exhausted. From all this it appears, that at that time in Birkenau must have been at least 42,000 non-registered Hungarian Jews. By the way, on October 2, 1944, 17,202 Jewesses were taken in by the camp from the transfer camp, but not registered. About the female inmates the »list of prisoner transports« ended on September 20, 1944 with the number A-25378.

The highest number, which was assigned to a Hungarian Jewess, who was later, in January 1945, liberated by the Soviets, was A-27841. Her name was Ilona Schlamovitz and was deported in May 1944. If the 17,202 above mentioned Jewesses were registered, the highest numbers of the series A- would have been higher than 42 000. Finally it is to be noted, that of the 500 Jewesses, who were evacuated from Auschwitz on about October 10 and arrived in Buchenwald on the 12th, at least 200 did not have a registration number.

However, the Jewesses who were accepted into the camp on October 2 were counted separately, under the section »Durchgangs-Juden« (transfer Jews).42
From all that was said it can be concluded, that the number stated by »Urban« for August 21, 1944 of 30,000 non-registered Hungarian Jews is believable; the actual number was presumably even higher.

(to be continued)

User avatar
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 5 years ago (Fri May 09, 2003 10:14 am)

Transfers from the »Durchgangslager«.

From May 17 on a very large number of Hungarian Jews were evacuated out of the Birkenau transfer camp. Up to the 21st of August the Kalendarium (2. edition of 1989) registered a total of 21,497 of such Jews. The actual number however is more than twice as high, as can be seen from the table below, which supplements the information supplied by D. Czech with additional impeccable documented data.

Transfer of Hungarian Jews out of Auschwitz-Birkenau to other Camps
DATE NUMBER CONCERNS DESTINATION
5/17 1.500 Hung. Jews KL Groß-Rosen
5/23 1.000 Hung. Jews KL Buchenwald
5/24 3.000 Hung. Jews KL Groß-Rosen
5/24 189 Hung. Jews KL Groß-Rosen
5/28 2.000 Hung. Jews KL Mauthausen
25/28 963 Hung. Jews KL Mauthausen
5/29 1.000 Hung. Jews KL Mauthausen
6/1 1.000 Hung. Jews KL Buchenwald
6/5 2.400 Hung. Jews KL Sachsenhausen
6/5 2.000 Hung. Jews KL Buchenwald
6/6 2.000 Hung. Jews KL Mauthausen
6/8 4.000 Hung. Jews KL Groß-Rosen
6/11 2.000 Hung. Jews KL Mauthausen
6/14 500 Hung. Jews KL Mauthausen
6/15 ? Hung. Jews KL Dachau (Kauferling)
6/17 1.000 Hung. Jews KL Buchenwald
6/17 1.500 Hung. Jews KL Mauthausen
6/23 434 Hung. Jews KL Buchenwald
6/29 2.502 Hung. Jewesses KL Stutthof
7/1 2.000 Hung. Jewesses KL Buchenwald
7/6 2.500 Hung. Jews KL Buchenwald
7/10 800 Hung. Jewesses KL Dachau
7/13 2.500 Hung. Jews KL Buchenwald
7/15 2.500 Hung. Jews KL Buchenwald
7/20 2.500 Hung. Jewesses KL Stutthof
7/30 530 Hung. Jewesses KL Buchenwald
8/13 1.000 Hung. Jewesses KL Buchenwald
8/14 2.800 Hung. Jewesses KL Stutthof
8/16 2.800 Hung. Jewesses KL Stutthof
8/20 270 Hung. Jews KL Buchenwald
Total: 49.188

According to the earlier quoted report of the head of the clothing department for the inmates were 45,132 prisoners evacuated out of Birkenau during the time period from May 15 until July 14,1944. According to above table were during this time 49,188 prisoners deported to other camps. The difference – 4,056 prisoners – can be traced back to the transports of Hungarian Jews out of Auschwitz I and Auschwitz II.

The above mentioned numbers now make it possible for us to determine for August 21, 1944 the following numbers:

Registered Hungarian Jews in the camp: 27.500
Hungarian Jews transferred to other camps 49.200
Non-registered Hungarian Jews in the transfer camp 30.000
Total about.: 106.700
Therefore we arrived so far at the well founded conclusion, that the number of employable Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz was at least 106,700.

Were only Employable Jews Deported from Hungary?
In a report dated May 26, 1944 Eberhard von Thadden, an expert on Jews within the German Foreign Ministry, wrote:

»According to the observations so far, about 1/3 of the deported Jews are able to work. They are immediately after their arrival in the camp Auschwitz distributed to the agencies of Gauleiter Sauckel, the OT [Organization Todt] etc.«

The photographs in the Album d’Auschwitz, to which I will return later, show clearly, that also Hungarian Jews who were unable to work (disabled, old people and children) arrived. Therefore employable as well as non-employable Jews were deported from Hungary.

That only one third of these deportees were suitable for work deployment, as von Thadden noted, is also confirmed by a letter which Ernst Kaltenbrunner wrote on June 30, 1944 to the SS-Brigadeführer Blaschke, which was about Hungarian Jews which were sent to Straßhof in Austria:

»According to the experiences so far these transports will consist of an estimated 30% (in this case about 3,600) employable Jews […]«

Accordingly there have to be for about 106,700 employable Jews about twice as many – about 213,400 – non-employable, which results in a total number of Jews who were deported from Hungary to Auschwitz of appr. 320,000.

The Criteria for the Selection of Employable Jews
The criteria for the selection of employable Jews were quite flexible. The 300 Hungarian Jews who were registered on August 14, 1944 from the transfer camp of Birkenau, were assigned the numbers B-5860 to B-6159. They were then sent to work in the refineries of Trzebinia, a sub camp of Auschwitz. A further 101 Jews from Hungary were registered with the numbers B-10072 to B-10172 and sent to the same refinery.
These inmates belonged to the following age groups:

Group on August 14 Group on September 15
14 years (1930) 9 0
15 years (1929) 106 7
16 years (1928) 84 8
17 years (1927) 29 4
18-20 years 22 7
21-30 years 14 9
31-40 years 24 20
41-50 years 7 32
51-60 years 3 12
61-68 years 2 2
Total 300 101

On July 3rd 174 Hungarian Jews of the transfer camp were registered with the numbers A-15857 to A-16030. On the list with the names are two children of 11 and 8 years: Laszlo Leszlauer, born in Budapest on March 2, 1933, Number A-15952, and Isnac Herskowitz, born in Czanahosz on February 4, 1936, Number A-15922.

The already quoted report of July 26, 1944 mentions, that on July 1,450 young Hungarian Jews were transferred from the camp BII/d to the quarantine camp BIIa. The youths who were later sent to Trzebinia presumably come from this group.

A further point: Those 578 Hungarian Jews, who were still in Auschwitz at the time of the Soviet liberation, belonged to the following age groups:

1 to 10 years : 29
11 to 14 years: 52
15 to 49 years: 433
50 to 60 years: 50
61 to 70 years: 9
71 to 79 years: 3
Age unknown: 2

In contrast to the adults, the children were mostly twins. The historian Szita Szabolcs, who prepared among others the most thoroughly documented study about the Jews who were deported to Straßhof, gives the following information about the age groups of the 16,600 who were sent to that camp:

Male Female
0-2 Years 200 250
3-6 Years 500 500
7-12 Years 900 900
13-14 Years 400 350
15-20 Years 800 1.300
Over 31 Years [sic] 4.500 6.000
7.300 9.300

Straßhof was certainly a special case, but it should be noted, that in Austria also inmates were conscripted to work who were theoretically not able to work. S. Szabolcs published a letter of the Technical Emergency Help. Office Bad-Vöslau to BdS and SD., Sondereinsatzkommando for Hungarian Jews, Aussenkommando Vienna II, which mentions a list of 42 Hungarian Jews who were working »for the construction of a SS-hospital since October 1, 1944«. This letter mentions further:

»These Jews are from the camp Straßhof and worked in Klein-Mariazell and Bernhof for the construction of temporary housings after the catastrophic thunder-storms.«

These were therefore people who were actually employed to work. The lists mentions 13 Jews with over 70 years, one each of 15, 13 and 10 years, two of eight and one of four years. The oldest, Arnold Singer, born March 28, 1868 was 76 years old, the youngest, Agnes Anisfeld, born August 31, 1940, counted 4 years.

Although the non-registered Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz were quartered in the transfer camp under primitive conditions – because as we shall see later the camp administration was not prepared to receive such masses of people -, did the SS-people not only not “gass” the sick, but treated them medically, and if necessary even with surgically. The earlier quoted report of June 28, 1944 includes the following information about the medical and sanitary care of these Hungarian Jews:

»Medical Treatment:
During the reported time 3,138 inmates were treated in the hospital. Of these:

Surgical Cases 1426
Diarrhea 327
Constipation 253
Angina 79
Diabetes 4
Heart Condition 25
Scabies 62
Pneumonia 75
Influenza 136
Internal Disorders 268
Others 449
Infections:
Scarlet Fever 5
Mumps 16
Measles 5
Erysipelas 5.«

(to be continued. Question: How are Lists typed on this Forum?)

User avatar
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon May 12, 2003 11:01 am)

Were Hungarian Jews Deported to Auschwitz only?

According to Randolph Braham, 6 or 7 trainloads with deported Hungarian Jews from the Zone IV (presumably 20,787 persons) departed to Straßhof.[54] These deportees are therefore included with the number of 437,402, which Edmund Veesenmeyer, German ambassador in Budapest, mentioned in a telegram of July 11, 1944.[55] On June 30 a further transport with 1,684 Hungarian Jews left with a detour over Vienna for Bergen-Belsen, where it arrived on July 8.[56]

Already in May did several transports with Hungarian Jews arrive in Austria, in Gänserndorf close to Vienna. One of the first departed with 4200 prisoners from Baja Bácska on May 26. From the beginning of June were Jews from East Hungary employed as forced laborers in the Gau Niederdonau (District of Lower Danube).[57]
The presence of Hungarian Jews in other localities sounds rather strange. In Stutthof arrived from Kaunas in Latvia:

· 54 Hungarian Jewesses (Registration Numbers 48947 – 49,000) on July 19 as part of a transport with a total of 1,097 Jewesses.[58]
· 588 Hungarian Jewesses on August 4 as part of a transport with 793 Jewesses, of which 743 are known by name.[59]

From Riga in Latvia arrived in Stutthof:

· 484 Hungarian Jewesses known by their names on August 9 as part of a transport with 6,383 Jewesses, of which 1,858 are known by name. The percentage of Hungarians among these Jewesses known by name is therefore 26%.[60]
· 15 Hungarian Jewesses on October 1 as part of a transport of 1,777 Jewesses, of which 817 are known by name.[61]

A total of at least 1,141 Hungarian Jewesses were transferred from Kaunas and Riga to Stutthof. From where were they sent to the Baltic States? I will address this question in the next section.

Also worthwhile mentioning is the case of Płaszów. This work camp was not far from Cracow. According to the Polish historian Aleksander Bieberstein the SS-Standartenführer Gerhard Maurer asked the commandant of Płaszów on May 14, whether he would be in a position, to take 10,000 Hungarian Jewesses, who were to be employed by the weapons industry.[62] In fact several thousand Hungarian Jewesses were then transferred to Płaszów. On August 6 about 8,000 Jewesses arrived in Auschwitz from this camp, from where shortly after 4,000 to 5,000 were passed on to Stutthof.[63] These are of course the transports which came to Struthof on August 14 and 16, each with 2,800 Hungarian Jewesses. [64]

How did these Hungarian Jewesses get to Płaszów? Directly from Hungary or through Auschwitz?

The transports from East-Hungary (Karpato-Ukraine and Transylvania) came all from the east through Cracow to Auschwitz [65]. It is therefore almost certain, that the Jewesses who were sent to Płaszów underwent a selection in Cracow before they arrived in Auschwitz. The total number of these Jewesses could very well have been 10,000, as Maurer requested, and it is also conceivable, that in Cracow further Jews were selected for other destinations.

Original Purpose and Destination of the Deportations of Hungarian Jews.

On April 9, 1944 Adolf Hitler informed the air force chief Erhard Milch, that Reichsführer SS Himmler received the order to make 100,000 Jews available for the erection of underground factories within the framework of the Jäger-construction program.[66] On May 9 Hitler ordered that 10,000 men shall be pulled out of Sevastopol in order to guard the 200,000 Jews who were to be transferred to the concentration camps of the Reich for work deployment within the Jäger-construction program.[67]
However the preparations for the deportations of the Hungarian Jews did not meet these plans at all. On May 2 von Thadden sent the following telegram to the German embassy in the Slovakian town of Preßburg (Bratislava):[68]

»A travel schedule for the transport of a larger number of Hungarian Jews for work deployment in the eastern territories will arrive in Vienna on May 4 – 5. Presumably a large part of transports will have to be channeled through Slovakia. Please notify us in case there are serious preconceptions.«

Ludin, German minister in Preßburg, answered on May 3:[69]

»Please do not go through the territory of Slovakia for the transportation of a larger number of Hungarian Jews for work deployment in the eastern territories if possible.«

On May 5 von Thadden Ludin sent a further message about the subject »Transport of Hungarian Jews for work deployment in the eastern territories«, which said:[70]

» There are the following difficulties about this subject:
A transport route through Lemberg is because of military reasons very difficult, a transport from East-Hungary – in this territory the deportation is supposed to start – over Budapest-Vienna would lead to a considerable and partly undesirable disquieting of the population in Budapest. Therefore the RSHA desires very much that at least the transports from Eastern Hungary, if they cannot pass though Lemberg, should go through Slovakia.[…]
Note: The RSHA [Reichssicherheitshauptamt (Reich’s security main office)] is also very much interested in a transport route over Lemberg, because it would be the shortest way. To the extent as the passage through Lemberg is made accessible at all by the military, it will be made use of.«


Let us summarize:
The deportation of Hungarian Jews was to begin in the east of the country;
The purpose of the transports was for work deployment;
The shortest way to reach the destination was over Lemberg.


Already a cursory look on the map shows, that the shortest way from East Hungary into the »eastern territories« was indeed over Lemberg.

It is therefore clear that the original plan for the deportation of Hungarian Jews was the transport of work-capable Jews to the occupied eastern territories, where they undoubtedly were to build fortifications against the Soviets within the frame work of the organization Todt. This could possibly be in connection with the Hitler-order of March 8, 1944 for the erection of fortifications in the eastern territories, among others in Bobrujsk, Mogilew, Orša and Witebsk.

The presence of Hungarian Jews in Kaunas and Riga could be explained under this circumstance. Presumably some transports were sent directly from Hungary via Lemberg to the Baltic states.

Many transports from East Hungary (Felsővisó, Kőrömezó, Máramarossziget, Huszt, Iza, Munkács) went indeed over Stryj to Lemberg,[71] and everything therefore indicates, that some transports did not go westward to Przemysl-Auschwitz, but northward into the eastern territories, as was provided by the original plan. This is further confirmed by the fact that on May 25 at least one Jewish transport from Hungary arrived in Lublin/Majdanek, which without doubt came from East-Hungary.[72]

The 1,141 Hungarian Jewesses who were deported from Kaunas and Riga to Stutthof, but who were only a part of the deportees, would in this case correspond to the number of two transports.[73] (This of course is also true in the case that these Jewesses were sent from Auschwitz to thee Baltic states.[74]

It is worth to mention in this connection, that exactly at the time when the deportations from Hungary started, i.e. on May 15, 1944 a transport with 878 – almost all employable – Jews from the French Drancy left for Kaunas.[76]

However it is certain, that Auschwitz as a “Sammellager” (collection camp) was only a temporary solution, because as we have seen the camp administration was totally taken by surprise by the enormous inflow of prisoners and had no time to make the necessary provisions for an orderly housing of the future forced laborers of the Reich. This of course would have been true to even larger measure for the alleged “Ausrottungsvorrichtungen” (extermination devices).

The deportation of Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz was officially designated as »Sonderaktion Ungarn-Programm« (special action Hungarian program),[77] where the word »Programm« refers to the planned work deployment like for example the »Jäger-Bauprogramm« (Jäger construction program), while the expression »Sonderaktion« (special action) refers only to the deportation.[78]

What was the fate of the Non-Employable Hungarian Jews?

At the present level of knowledge we cannot answer this question with certainty and supported by documents. The revisionist criticism has proven, based on air-photos taken by US reconnaissance planes as well as the capacity of the crematoriums, that non-employable Jews were not at all »gassed after their arrival«. This is further confirmed by the pictures in the previously mentioned Album d’Auschwitz.

First several photos in this album show all chimneys of the crematoriums (Crematoriums II and III: photo 6 on p. 51, photo 7 on p. 53, photo 17 on p. 63; crematoriums IV and V: photo 99 on p. 131, photo 125 on p. 155), but from none of these exits smoke.[79] But if the non-employable Hungarian Jews were gassed, the crematoriums would have been in continuous operation day and night in the second half of May 1944 (the pictures in the Album d’Auschwitz were taken on May 26), and even then could they only have cremated a small part of the “gassed”.[80]

Secondly, the pictures show that the employable Jews left all their luggage back on benches, while on the other hand the non-employable could keep some luggage, consisting of knapsacks and bags. Especially clear on this are photos 6 on p. 51, photo 163 on p. 185 (where the non-employable, mostly children, even carried two large cooking pots), photo 165 on p. 187 as well as photo 169 on p. 191. Why were the non-employable sent into the “gas chambers” with bags, knapsacks and cooking pots? The photos show further that the non-employable rested in the orchard close to the fire water pond east of the crematorium IV. (the photo 174 on p. 194 shows in the foreground an old man who is about to climb down the slight bank of the fire pond in order to scoop up water into a metal container.) In none of the photos are people shown in the yards of the crematoriums II and III, although these were quite spacious. Especially important are in this connection the photos 152 and 153 on p. 176 and 177, which are shown in the wrong chronological sequence. The events shown on photo 153 actually preceded those on photo 152, because on the latter the group of people, which appears on the first one in front of the east wing of crematorium III, already passed the entrance gate to the yard of the crematorium, which can be seen on the right margin of the picture. And finally, the entrance gate is closed. It is therefore obvious that the non-employable went down the camp street, which lead parallel to the railroad track passed the crematorium II and III, then turned right, through the “Zentralsauna” (central sauna) and the “Effektenlager” (storage for valuables), then continued past the west side of crematorium IV, then again to the right and finally entered the orchard at the fire pond.

If these non-employable were destined for “gassing”, why then was a large part of them not sent to the yards of the crematoriums II and III with alleged gas chambers of much higher capacity and – actually - much more capable cremation ovens than in crematoriums IV and V? Is not the assumption much more logical that these people who kept their hand luggage, waited for the departure from Auschwitz?

The question to where these non-employable were sent is however much more difficult to answer. The case of the Hungarian Jews who were deported to Straßhof could give us an idea how they were housed. In the “Gau Niederdonau” (State of Lower Danube) the Jews were accommodated in 175 quarters, where also the non-employable stayed and which were called “family camps”.[81] And at least until June 22, 1944 was the military front in the north still east of the line Narva-Opocka-Vitebsk-Bobrujsk, and a considerable part of the eastern territories, infinitely much larger than the Gau Niederdonau, was still in German hand.
(to be continued)

avatar
Hebden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:17 am
Location: Here and there, mostly there

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon May 12, 2003 6:50 pm)

Sailor wrote:What was the fate of the Non-Employable Hungarian Jews?

At the present level of knowledge we cannot answer this question with certainty and supported by documents. The revisionist criticism has proven, based on air-photos taken by US reconnaissance planes as well as the capacity of the crematoriums, that non-employable Jews were not at all »gassed after their arrival«. This is further confirmed by the pictures in the previously mentioned Album d’Auschwitz.


Proven is too strong a word, in our view. Regarding the May 31st air-photos, taken after the commencement of the Hungarian deportations, one should, at least, acknowledge the expert opinion of Mr. Carroll Lucas, given in an appendix to the book Holocaust Denial by Mr. Zimmerman. He notes the existence of a smoke plume from an area alongside Krema IV which is 'consistent with collateral data on body disposal by incineration'. He also identifies a number of excavated trenches which 'have all the appearances of hand dug, mass grave sites used to dispense the residue from the adjacent crematoria'.

The June 26 air-photos which do not show any signs of mass outdoor burnings present a problem because they coincide with a lull in the deportation program.

There is said to be a July 8th Luftwaffe photo, not analysed by Mr. Lucas, which shows 'heavy smoke' in the vicinity of Krema V.

Air-photos dating from August 25 and September 13, which again, do not provide any evidence of mass cremations, post-date the period of the Hungarian deportations.

First several photos in this album show all chimneys of the crematoriums (Crematoriums II and III: photo 6 on p. 51, photo 7 on p. 53, photo 17 on p. 63; crematoriums IV and V: photo 99 on p. 131, photo 125 on p. 155), but from none of these exits smoke.[79] But if the non-employable Hungarian Jews were gassed, the crematoriums would have been in continuous operation day and night in the second half of May 1944 (the pictures in the Album d’Auschwitz were taken on May 26), and even then could they only have cremated a small part of the “gassed”.[80]


And there were we thinking that none of the crematoria gave off smoke.....
But even if they did, what would it prove?

User avatar
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon May 12, 2003 7:18 pm)

Hebden wrote:Proven is too strong a word, in our view. [...]


I checked the German text. Here it is:
Die revisionistische Kritik hat anhand der von US-Aufklärern aufgenommenen Luftfotos sowie der Kapazität der Krematorien bewiesen, daß die arbeitsunfähigen ungarischen Juden keinesfalls »nach ihrer Ankunft vergast« worden sind. Dies wird auch durch die Aufnahmen im bereits erwähnten Album d' Auschwitz erhärtet.[...]


Mattogno did use the word "proven". Maybe he should have said "...did not seem to indicate...".

About the smoking chimneys: I also always thought that these crematoriums were designed in such a way that they don't produce any smoke.

avatar
Hebden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:17 am
Location: Here and there, mostly there

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon May 12, 2003 7:30 pm)

Sailor wrote:About the smoking chimneys: I also always thought that these crematoriums were designed in such a way that they don't produce any smoke.


In one of his articles, we recall Mr. Mattogno did state that some smoke was given off by the chimneys. But no flames.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9649
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon May 12, 2003 8:46 pm)

I notice that this alleged aerial photo expert, Lucas, is nowhere to be found. The reader should be aware that he has made no public statements, held no press conferences, done any interviews, has never published the photos and his opinions in technical journals.

Where is this 'smoke' he claims?... it's not evident.

What size and how deep were these 'trenches which have the appearance of mass graves'?

Hebden states the photos do not match up to the deportation dates, as if the alleged gassings & alleged cremations weren't supposed to have been in progress after the arrivals. The standard story states that the alleged gassings & cremations were stopped AFTER the date of the transports and AFTER the date of the photos.

Also on Lucas:
- perhaps he can explain why the alleged columns for inserting Zyklon, that have been embarassingly drawn on some photos, when measured to scale are about 10' long (vastly contradicting the so called eyewitness testimony)

- perhaps he can explain why the shadows of these faked columns don't align with other shadows

- perhaps he can explain why other photos do not show these columns

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

User avatar
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon May 12, 2003 9:36 pm)

Hebden wrote: The June 26 air-photos which do not show any signs of mass outdoor burnings present a problem because they coincide with a lull in the deportation program.


This may not be quite so.
Mattogno lists at the end of his article several statistical tables which I will also post here. One lists day by day the deportation of Hungarian Jews.

For June 26, 1944 he lists from Szeged in Hungary 3,199 deported, 25,841 as per Veesenmayer and 11,866 from a R.L.Braham.

There was a deportation lull for 10 days before June 26. But continued deportation afterwards.

Mattogno’s article came out in December 2001, and was probably written 6 months earlier.

Question: Could Mattogno have known at that time about the the expert opinion of Mr. Carroll Lucas?

avatar
Hebden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:17 am
Location: Here and there, mostly there

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue May 13, 2003 7:59 am)

Sailor wrote:
Hebden wrote: The June 26 air-photos which do not show any signs of mass outdoor burnings present a problem because they coincide with a lull in the deportation program.


This may not be quite so.
Mattogno lists at the end of his article several statistical tables which I will also post here. One lists day by day the deportation of Hungarian Jews.

For June 26, 1944 he lists from Szeged in Hungary 3,199 deported, 25,841 as per Veesenmayer and 11,866 from a R.L.Braham.

There was a deportation lull for 10 days before June 26. But continued deportation afterwards.


According to Mr. Zimmerman, deportations were suspended from the 17-24th June. So they resumed on either on the 25th or 26th. Note that it took 2-3 days (or 3-4 days according to Mr. Zimmerman) for these trains to reach Auschwitz. The Auschwitz Chronicle reflects this because the next record of registration numbers being issued to Hungarian Jews is on the 29th.

Mattogno’s article came out in December 2001, and was probably written 6 months earlier.

Question: Could Mattogno have known at that time about the the expert opinion of Mr. Carroll Lucas?


The Zimmerman book was published in 2000, but we have no way of knowing if Mr. Mattogno invested in a copy.
Last edited by Hebden on Tue May 13, 2003 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

avatar
Hebden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:17 am
Location: Here and there, mostly there

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue May 13, 2003 9:23 am)

Hannover wrote:I notice that this alleged aerial photo expert, Lucas, is nowhere to be found. The reader should be aware that he has made no public statements, held no press conferences, done any interviews, has never published the photos and his opinions in technical journals.


Well neither, to our knowledge, has Mr. John Ball, our resident air-photo expert.

From what we know, Mr. Ball first published the booklet Air Photo Evidence in 1992. A version of this material was incorporated into the 1994 revisionist compendium Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte (later appearing in 2000 as Dissecting the Holocaust). We assume the air-photo website came on-line some time in the late 1990s.

Apart from this Mr. Ball's activities over the last decade are something of a mystery. He hasn't, to our knowledge, appeared at revisionist conferences, published any new material or made himself available to respond to criticisms or questions about his work.

Mr. Hannover, could you use your influence to encourage him to come onto this forum and discuss his work?

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9649
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue May 13, 2003 10:13 am)

What about a detailed website does Hebden not understand?
www.air-photo.com

To my knowledge Mr. Lucas does not have a website where he carefully explains his alleged interpretations....as does John Ball, where Mr. Ball outlines his position photo by photo.

In fact there is nothing about Lucas anywhere except what is claimed by the less than credible Zimmerman.

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

avatar
Hebden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:17 am
Location: Here and there, mostly there

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue May 13, 2003 11:03 am)

Hannover wrote:What about a detailed website does Hebden not understand?
www.air-photo.com


Quit stalling. Are you going to ask him to come on this forum or not? Expert witnesses should be available for cross-examination. If Mr. Ball consents, that will be the time for putting forward questions.

To my knowledge Mr. Lucas does not have a website where he carefully explains his alleged interpretations....as does John Ball, where Mr. Ball outlines his position photo by photo.

In fact there is nothing about Lucas anywhere except what is claimed by the less than credible Zimmerman.


We can also ask Mr. Zimmerman to request that Mr. Lucas come on the forum.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests