proving Treblinka hair invoice is a fraud

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
Coder62
Member
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:52 pm

Postby Coder62 » 1 decade 2 years ago (Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:23 pm)

What is more, everybody who has studied the SS or Wehrmacht organization in the East in some detail knows that the auxiliary work was done by "Hiwis," non-Germans who had volunteered for these jobs. So there is a very high probability that the SS-Unterscharführer from the Frachtbrief had never received an award in a spelling-bee contest at school, and that the typist was non-German, which together makes it equally highly probable that a simple copy of an everyday document contains a spelling error.


Hiwi was a term used for "voluntary assistant's" during WW2, these people's jobs were assiting German, allegedly they would be the ones who would dig mass graves for Jews and then shot them.
However these people were mainly trained to fight or police, I would need to see some evidence that they were ever used in concentration camps to type up invoices and the like, otherwise your point is moot.

Coder62.

User avatar
jnovitz
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 351
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 1:40 pm

Postby jnovitz » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:17 pm)

The state-of-the art method is to compare the suspect document with others, similar ones and certainly not forged, of the time. So if you want to prove that a Frachtbrief is a forgery, you must compare it with many other Frachtbriefe which you know are genuine. I have seen quite a lot of such Frachtbriefe - originals - when doing my archival research, Frachtbriefe that had nothing to do with the Holocaust. When concentration camps sent things by rail, they always demanded from the Reichsbahn to be granted the military tariff and declared that the items shipped (material goods or prisoners) were "Gut der Waffen-SS." It helped them cut the costs. And that an SS firm in Lublin can have branches in other places, is nothing new and occurs frequently in economy.


Joachim Neander is swaying in the breeze.

A. I dont think any claims that the Frachtbrief form is a forgery. Simply that it was a genuine blank form that was typed on by a genuine typewriter. Simply that it was done by the Russians or Allies, not Germans.

Your attempt to keep creating and demolishing strawmen is noted.

B. You are studiously ignoring the fact that this is a Wehrmacht form, not SS.

C. To claim that the Waffen SS Lublin Bekleidungswerke had a branch office in Treblinka simply begs the question - why has this historical fact gone undocumented before and why did they not make their own stamp?

Wahrheit
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:42 pm

Postby Wahrheit » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:51 pm)

To those of you whom believe the Treblinka hair document is faked, I have several questions:

-Who forged the document, and when?

-Why would such a document on something as harmless/innocent as human hair cutting and transfers be forged in the first place? (i.e. why not on something more important, something from Himmler, Heydrich, Eichmann, Hitler himself even...)

-Are all the other camp related documents regarding human hair and shipments of that hair forged as well?

-If so, please see above two points again.

-What are the sequence of circumstances that lead one to believe that the documents were forged? When did the Allies have time to forge it, which group/unit specifically forged it, orders for the forgery, etc...

-If it really was whipped up for propaganda value, please show when and how it was first used by the Allies in anti-German propaganda during the war.

-Why WOULDN'T the Germans use such an available source of material, if even to experiment with it's possibilities, as would be available from camp inmates hair?

Many of these "forgery" escapades on simple misspellings are dangerous and hurtful to revisionism, and easily fuel fire to the anti-revisionist charge and portrayal of many revisionists as "deniers" and "conspiracists." Do I believe in the authenticity of every document? No, but I believe a respectable criteria level needs to be reached, and that such a criteria should be met through many separate and individual avenues apart from one another.

As revisionists, we must be very careful when making forgery accusations.

Goethe
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 3:41 am

Postby Goethe » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:32 pm)

Wahrheit wrote:To those of you whom believe the Treblinka hair document is faked, I have several questions:

-Who forged the document, and when?

-Why would such a document on something as harmless/innocent as human hair cutting and transfers be forged in the first place? (i.e. why not on something more important, something from Himmler, Heydrich, Eichmann, Hitler himself even...)

-Are all the other camp related documents regarding human hair and shipments of that hair forged as well?

-If so, please see above two points again.

-What are the sequence of circumstances that lead one to believe that the documents were forged? When did the Allies have time to forge it, which group/unit specifically forged it, orders for the forgery, etc...

-If it really was whipped up for propaganda value, please show when and how it was first used by the Allies in anti-German propaganda during the war.

Many of these "forgery" escapades on simple misspellings are dangerous and hurtful to revisionism, and easily fuel fire to the anti-revisionist charge and portrayal of many revisionists as "deniers" and "conspiracists." Do I believe in the authenticity of every document? No, but I believe a respectable criteria level needs to be reached, and that such a criteria should be met through many seperate and individual avenues apart from one another.

As revisionists, we must be very careful when making forgery accusations.

Yes, we should be careful, but all these questions, while interesting, are irrelevant. Those questions do nothing to confront the obvious monkey business. Finding a hacked corpse and then asking why, who, when, what for, etc., does nothing to dispel the fact that we have a hacked corpse.
"The coward threatens when he is safe".
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

User avatar
Coder62
Member
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:52 pm

Postby Coder62 » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:11 pm)

Why would such a document on something as harmless/innocent as human hair cutting and transfers be forged in the first place? (i.e. why not on something more important, something from Himmler, Heydrich, Eichmann, Hitler himself even...)


Just because it might seem harmless doesn't mean it should never be looked into, I wouldn't have brought this matter up if I didnt believe it to be part of a bigger subject.
The allies put to the world that the Nazis cut human hair, of course they said it was for other reasons than to protect them from lice but by disproving invoices of which there are only a few, strips away, in my opinion the myth that the hair was cut for any purpose other than purely to save lives.

If it can be disproved then this, as you put it, "harmless/innocent human hair cutting and transfers" proves that the Nazis only goal in shaving heads was to save inmates lives, a massive piece of the Pro Holocaust puzzle brought down.
This is by far not a minor matter in the grand scheme of things, as the question must be asked if this document and the subject is disproved, "why did the Nazis shave the heads of EVERY inmate before being put into the gas chamber" it doesn't make sense.

-Are all the other camp related documents regarding human hair and shipments of that hair forged as well?


"All" is a bit of an over statement, there is about four or five of them of which only this one is readable, as far as Treblinka goes anyway.

-What are the sequence of circumstances that lead one to believe that the documents were forged? When did the Allies have time to forge it, which group/unit specifically forged it, orders for the forgery, etc...


I was led to believe it was forged by skimming over it and noticing the word, "Hanover".
I'm afraid the last part of your point doesn't really make sense, why would anyone make an order for a forgery to be made and then keep the order form?
As stated above, personally I would say it was the soviets who made this forgery, just purely because they pushed the hair subject at other camps.

-If it really was whipped up for propaganda value, please show when and how it was first used by the Allies in anti-German propaganda during the war.


Well I'm not sure if anyone mentioned any Anti-German propaganda, during the war but after the war came eye witness survivor accounts of terrible occurrences for woman who had their hair shaved off their heads and also between their legs:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/mighty1/essays/lessons2.htm

Please note the Footnotes at the bottom referencing their testimonies, this is the only propaganda I could find without looking into claims of hair clothes etc.


Many of these "forgery" escapades on simple misspellings are dangerous and hurtful to revisionism, and easily fuel fire to the anti-revisionist charge and portrayal of many revisionists as "deniers" and "conspiracists." Do I believe in the authenticity of every document? No, but I believe a respectable criteria level needs to be reached, and that such a criteria should be met through many separate and individual avenues apart from one another.


As I stated above previously I think this hairbill represents a large part of Holocaust revisionism, in the sense that as I wrote before, disproving this begs the question of why the Nazi's gassed every inmate after a hair cut.

PS: I'm sure with all the hair salons under Hitler's Europe in 1942 if there really was an industrial need for human hair there would have been more than enough.

Coder62.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9972
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:47 pm)

Just like the 'human soap fraud' and later attempts to spin that into the fallback lie that goes ... 'well, it was found, but not mass produced', there is a need to buttress the unsustainable hair canard. Propagandists know that if there isn't something to cling to in the form of further lies and bogus 'documents', the public will then become curious and start looking into the bigger fraudulent claims (gas chambers, enormous mass graves, 6M, etc.). And when the public looks under the rock, it's all over for the judeo-supremacist propaganda, cash, and political power machine.

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

Wahrheit
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:42 pm

Postby Wahrheit » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:44 pm)

Coder62 said:
Just because it might seem harmless doesn't mean it should never be looked into,


I agree completely. Sometimes the smaller aspects are more easily subverted to change the entire picture, but keep it relative. There were bigger and better things to be doctored then hair selling.

The allies put to the world that the Nazis cut human hair,


Was much abo really raised about it at the IMT? I suspect had it been so important to forge evidence, it would be referred to numerous times.

of course they said it was for other reasons than to protect them from lice but by disproving invoices of which there are only a few, strips away, in my opinion the myth that the hair was cut for any purpose other than purely to save lives.


Yes, hair was cut to save lives, to help eradicate the threat of typhus. Not such a big deal, nor could even Pressac see much of a "criminal trace" here.

If it can be disproved then this, as you put it, "harmless/innocent human hair cutting and transfers" proves that the Nazis only goal in shaving heads was to save inmates lives, a massive piece of the Pro Holocaust puzzle brought down.


When holocaustians discuss supposed atrocities against the Jewish people, shaving hair does not come up very much (from my experiences and from the believer histories that I have read). It's just not that important, as it shows nothing. Even if it was used to make socks/mattresses/etc., opportunistic economic exploitation of such a resource is hardly criminal.

This is by far not a minor matter in the grand scheme of things, as the question must be asked if this document and the subject is disproved, "why did the Nazis shave the heads of EVERY inmate before being put into the gas chamber" it doesn't make sense.


Well, hair is known to be great keepers of cyanide residue, but thats irrelevant. I just don't see how it is a big deal, one way or the other. They obviously cut the hair of inmates at least on some occasions, likely sold it to businesses as raw material, and....what?

"All" is a bit of an over statement, there is about four or five of them of which only this one is readable, as far as Treblinka goes anyway.


There are references to hair cutting-transfers in more than just five documents. Majdanek appears to be discussed most often.

I was led to believe it was forged by skimming over it and noticing the word, "Hanover".


A simple misspelling/typo led you to draw the conclusion that the document is fake?

I'm afraid the last part of your point doesn't really make sense, why would anyone make an order for a forgery to be made and then keep the order form?


Documents/testimonies/traces/references/benefits gained from, etc...would point to forgery. You have shown nothing like that. No unit designated to be the forger, no one in particular singled out as the author as a real investigation would lead to, etc...

These are by no means attacks on you personally Coder62, but on the simple belief that the document is a forgery is done far too easily. These arguments detract from the meat and bones of revisionism, IMHO, showing the technical, scientifical and illogical absurdities that fill the Holocaust candy bag.

BTW, going by your logic, why should researchers then expect to find orders or Nazi documents ordering murder of Europe's Jews (as common sense would suggest to destroy all evidence)?

Well I'm not sure if anyone mentioned any Anti-German propaganda, during the war but after the war came eye witness survivor accounts of terrible occurrences for woman who had their hair shaved off their heads and also between their legs


The motive you and others give for the forgery then (propaganda) is based on no evidence then. The link you provide is merely a collection of experiences by inmates who experienced the trauma of being publicly shaven head to toe, which came out decades after WWII. They lived to tell their tale (showing disconnect between shaving and killing).


Please note the Footnotes at the bottom referencing their testimonies, this is the only propaganda I could find without looking into claims of hair clothes etc.


Propaganda which came out decades after the war, and bears no real point or message. Who cares if Germans shaved inmates, militaries do it across; yet there is only one "Holocaust."

Matt
Member
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:47 pm

Postby Matt » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:26 pm)

Hello all!

I stumbled upon this discussion topic while doing my own reading about the Holocaust myth. So, I decided to join and give my "two pfennigs"!

What I noticed first and foremost is the poor rendition of the SS runes in the document typeface. It looks to me as if someone drew them in with a pen!

I also was curious as to what sort of typewriters were used in Germany during that time period. I found a guy online that was selling an Olympia typewriter used by the SS. The Olympia was a high-quality typewriter produced in Germany.

http://www.snyderstreasures.com/pages/s ... typewriter

I didn't do an exhaustive search, but from what I found, this hair document was not typed with an Olympia typewriter. I basically found a typeface supposedly based on an Olympia typewriter.

I found another sale for various German WWII documents:

http://65.160.172.250/doc.html

...and none of those documents seem to match up 100% with the type used on the hair document! What is especially noticeable is the style of the number "3". I have yet to find ANY manual typewriter that doesn't have a "3" with a flattened top. Also, the typewritten characters are far too "in line" to make me think this was done with an actual manual typewriter. I mean, look at some of those docs for sale on that page...

Maybe someone can do some research on Polish typewriters...to see if any of them match up! Since Treblinka is in Poland, maybe they "procured" a Polish typewriter. I don't believe they use umlauts, though.

Forging documents is nothing new...look at the flak Dan Rather got into for airing those faked documents about the President just before the last election! The tyepface gave it away.

Tschüs!
Matt

Matt
Member
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:47 pm

Postby Matt » 1 decade 2 years ago (Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:46 pm)

This hair document could have been cooked up merely to add some validity to the claims that some Treblinka survivors provide us, about the hair being shaved off so they could be gassed...and having the hair sent away to be put into mattresses and whatnot.

Every little minute detail has to have that "paper trail" to make it seem plausible. What got me thinking about the truth behind the Holocaust was the fact that it (the Holocaust) basically THE reason the nation of Israel exists today. Israel has received what, seventeen billion Marks from Germany as repairations...more billions from many other nations to fund Holocaust memorials and support "victims". And of course, to justify Britain "giving" the Jews Palestine, they had to show their losses equalled the millions of lives lost by people actually fighting the war...and civilians dying in the bombings. We'd have no sympathy for them if they weren't being slaughtered by those vicious German Christians.

If it's all proven a sham, then practically everyone on the face of the Earth WILL want the Jews all dead, because it will have been proven it's all a colossal swindle. So in my opinion, they're almost forced to spare no expense or effort to keep the story alive. It's a matter of life and death for them! That's why any hint of doubt by anyone in much of Europe will land them in jail longer than a lot of murders and rapists get here in the States...with all dissenting literature burned and destroyed and strictly verboten!!

User avatar
Coder62
Member
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:52 pm

Postby Coder62 » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:51 am)

Those are some decent posts Matt, I agree the SS runes do look drawn in if you look closely enough, its a slightly light blue color.

A simple misspelling/typo led you to draw the conclusion that the document is fake?


That's a misquote, you asked previously,
-What are the sequence of circumstances that lead one to believe that the documents were forged?


I answered with the first sequence being that I noticed the word, "Hanover" spelt incorrectly, please double check before you misquote.

Documents/testimonies/traces/references/benefits gained from, etc...would point to forgery. You have shown nothing like that. No unit designated to be the forger, no one in particular singled out as the author as a real investigation would lead to, etc...


You seem to be going by only one possible strand of communication, perhaps the order to create the forgery was by word of mouth, if so there would be no paper trail.

But now were speculating, what I have done is purely put something forward and allowing all CODOH members to come forward and add their points, be it that they agree or not.

While I might not agree with you I'm totally open to the possibility that you are entirely correct, but that cannot be achieved until this matter has been looked into further and unfortunately your still coming across like someone who would rather ignore inconsistences and write them off legit, at least in this case.

The motive you and others give for the forgery then (propaganda) is based on no evidence then. The link you provide is merely a collection of experiences by inmates who experienced the trauma of being publicly shaven head to toe, which came out decades after WWII. They lived to tell their tale (showing disconnect between shaving and killing).


I agree but you asked for propaganda so I gave a story of women who claim to have been hugely mistreated, this story also happened to contain stories revolving around hair, which is why I choose it.
Its just a point to show that human hair has at some stages been mixed into Holocaust survivors stories to promote the Holocaust.

Thank you for your points Wahrheit.

Coder62.

MrNobody
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 424
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:54 am

Postby MrNobody » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:40 am)

Wahrheit wrote:To those of you whom believe the Treblinka hair document is faked, I have several questions:

-Why would such a document on something as harmless/innocent as human hair cutting and transfers be forged in the first place? (i.e. why not on something more important, something from Himmler, Heydrich, Eichmann, Hitler himself even...)

the "Holocaust" as we know it was still in it's infancy by the time of the IMT trials & lots of wild & exaggerated claims were presented, wasn't it the US's chief Prosecutor Robert Jackson who alleged that the Germans had a "Mythical Vaporizing Machine & Electrocution Conveyor Belts"?
I'd imagine all sorts of "evidence & testimony" was initially cooked up, eventually the eyewitnesses got their stories straight & fantastic infernal machines were dropped, leaving the Prosecutors with the choicest & most plausible allegations, evidence & testimony.

-If it really was whipped up for propaganda value, please show when and how it was first used by the Allies in anti-German propaganda during the war.

Why assume that it was a wartime forgery for wartime propaganda use?
What were Baum & his Auschwitzpropaganda Crew doing in the intervening period between their liberation & the IMT trials?
Could they have been recruited & placed into the Soviet's own Propaganda Unit?
Wouldn't it make sense for the Soviets to utilize local Propaganda expertise, those already familiar with the lay of the land?
Materials ie Blank Documents would have been readily available anywhere a German Garrison existed.
I'd imagine the Soviets in the lead up to the IMT trials would have had a veritable industry for forging documents to fit their needs.

-Why WOULDN'T the Germans use such an available source of material, if even to experiment with it's possibilities, as would be available from camp inmates hair?

I think we've already seen that there is little use for Human hair in industrial applications.
Since 1933 Germany had been on a self sufficient drive, if there'd been an exploitable use for Hair the Germans would have found it before the War, not in 1945 & certainly not for the dumbass excuse of Women's only Mattress fillings!
The Allies needed to show that the Germans economically exploited their victims even after Death, so I'd imagine every possible use of a corpse would have been investigated by the Allies to vilify the Germans.
Wir brauchen eine Bewegung, die Deutschland endlich aus der Kontrolle der Kräfte von Versailles und Jalta befreit, die uns schon ein ganzes Jahrhundert lang von einer Kastastrophe in die andere stürzt.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

User avatar
jnovitz
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 351
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 1:40 pm

Postby jnovitz » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:22 pm)

An extra-ordinary series of questions by Wahrheit. I shall do my best to provide my weak answers

Who forged the document, and when?


No idea, my guess would be soon after the war
-Why would such a document on something as harmless/innocent as human hair cutting and transfers be forged in the first place? (i.e. why not on something more important, something from Himmler, Heydrich, Eichmann, Hitler himself even...)


1. It fitted into a pattern of Greulpropaganda of Death Factories linked to industrial production.
Hence Jews are turned into soap; fertilizer, fish food, even rubber and roading material and of course socks....

2. The second part of your question is predicated that there are no forgeries regarding senior Nazis......

Is that really your position?

-Are all the other camp related documents regarding human hair and shipments of that hair forged as well?


Absolutely, once the undeniable fact of the complete absence of human hair product is accepted then this becomes a very handy tool for assessing the authenticity of a number of collections.

For example the Police Decodes contained in the National Archives at Kew are full of references to human hair and NO OTHER important economic activity at Auschwitz. Auschwitz might have been full of armament firms, mines and so forth but apparantly the activities the SS wished to send by radio concerned a few pfennigs worth of human hair.

Hence the decodes have been altered prior to release in 1996. This is extraordinary helpful.


-If so, please see above two points again.

The answers are the same.

-What are the sequence of circumstances that lead one to believe that the documents were forged? When did the Allies have time to forge it, which group/unit specifically forged it, orders for the forgery, etc...


The complete absence of product.
I take it Wahrheit is channeling Nick Terry or Andrew Mathis when he demands orders to create the forgery.

I would suggest he read Black Boomerang as regards units, there is also a book on covert warfare of the OSS that boasts at some length at their ability to replicate paper, fonts, stamps and signatures of German documents. I am sure the Russians had similiar capacities.

There is no doubt that the Allies had the means.

-If it really was whipped up for propaganda value, please show when and how it was first used by the Allies in anti-German propaganda during the war.

I doubt if it was manufactured during wartime.


-Why WOULDN'T the Germans use such an available source of material, if even to experiment with it's possibilities, as would be available from camp inmates hair?


Given the only product allegedly surviving is the economically useless cotton cloth with 5% human hair randomly woven in which renders the cloth unusable for clothing it seems the reason is that no one can think of a viable use for human hair, aside from making wigs.

Certainly if the Germans HAD used such material it would leave a trail in patent applications, a mention in histories of rationing and raw material subsitiutions, descriptions of machinery modifications, posters from the Government "Donate your hair and keep our Uboat seamen's feet dry and snug", none of this exists.

Ironically the exact number of verified human hair product is exactly the same as human fat for soap.

1 piece for propaganda purposes.

joachim neander
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:39 pm

Postby joachim neander » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:31 pm)

I've read several times in this thread that cutting the hair of Nazi camp inmates was a hygienic measure, directed against lice to prevent the spread of "typhus" among the inmates.

Sorry, another minor mistake. Head lice are a nuisance, but never carriers of human diseases. The same holds for "crabs," a species of lice that lives in the pubic hair of men and women.

Spotted fever ("Flecktyphus" in German), however, is a serious illness with a high mortality rate. It is caused by a virus carried by a different species of lice that live in the clothing of people ("Kleiderläuse" in German - my dictionaries don't give me the English word) and in bed linen and blankets. Since the Kleider lice are quite mobile, an epidemic can quickly spread where people live or work together. It was this kind of disease the SS of the camps dreaded most.

Typhoid fever (simply "Typhus" in German) is caused by salmonella bacteria and transmitted by ingestion of contaminated material, such as food or water. The most important link in the chain of infection are human excrements.

The reason why the camp inmates had their hair cropped was to make fleeing more difficult for them. "Skinheads," at that time, were not yet in fashion, and a fugitive inmate would be easily recognizable by the population outside the camps.

Matt
Member
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:47 pm

Postby Matt » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:54 pm)

Considering the Germans employed many Jewish counterfeiters in the concentration camp at Sachsenhausen to produce fake British pound notes, it's not hard to believe that Zionists would resort to producing numerous forgeries to bolster their post war Holocaust claims. I saw a television program about it once..and the forgeries were extremely convincing. Look up "Operation Barnhard" on the internet!

There's no doubt in my mind that they were forging anything and everything, no matter how mundane. The "little things" make it seem more convincing while everyone is looking for documents of earth-shattering importance! I always thought the most subtle way to get away with counterfeiting was to make one dollar bills! Hehe. Who'd suspect it?

NovyMir
Member
Member
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 8:57 am

Postby NovyMir » 1 decade 2 years ago (Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:39 pm)

"joachim neander" wrote:
"The reason why the camp inmates had their hair cropped was to make fleeing more difficult for them. "Skinheads," at that time, were not yet in fashion, and a fugitive inmate would be easily recognizable by the population outside the camps."
---------------------------

Right.
The Germans didn't mind trading head-lice back and forth with the prisoners, since they were just a "nuisance".
The implication is also present that 'body-lice" could never end up on a person's head.
Also, there is scientific research that calls into question the idea that head-lice are never carriers of human disease. For instance:
"In a 1920 review paper Nicolle himself stated that "the head louse transmits typhus like the body louse." Similarly, Patrick Buxton, in his standard study, The Louse (1939), notes that "while most experimental work done on typhus has used body lice, it is known that head lice are capable of acquiring the infection and transmitting it."5 From---
http://www.headlice.org/faq/disease/zinsser.htm


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: HMSendeavour and 14 guests