The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:24 pm)

Suspected Nazi guard Demjanjuk deported to Germany

By M.R. KROPKO
Associated Press
May 12 2009
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090512/ap_ ... _demjanjuk

CLEVELAND – Deported by the United States, retired autoworker John Demjanjuk was carried in a wheelchair onto a jet that departed Monday evening for Germany, which wants to try him as an accessory to the murders of Jews and others at a Nazi death camp in World War II.

Demjanjuk, 89, arrived in an ambulance at Cleveland Burke Lakefront Airport after spending several hours with U.S. immigration officials at a downtown federal building. Airport commissioner Khalid Bahhur confirmed Demjanjuk was on the plane and that its destination is Germany.

The deportation came four days after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider Demjanjuk's request to block deportation and about 3 1/2 years after he was last ordered deported.

The Ukrainian-born Demjanjuk (pronounced dem-YAHN'-yuk) is wanted on a Munich arrest warrant that accuses him of 29,000 counts of accessory to murder as a guard at the Sobibor death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland. The legal case spans three decades.

A German Justice Ministry spokesman, Ulrich Staudigl, said the retired autoworker was expected to be in Germany by Tuesday.

Demjanjuk denies Germany's accusations, saying he was held by the Germans as a Soviet prisoner of war and was never a camp guard. Demjanjuk's family fought deportation, arguing he is in poor health and might not survive the trans-Atlantic journey.

Rabbi Marvin Hier, a founder of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, said Demjanjuk deserves to be punished and that this will probably be the last trial of someone accused of Nazi war crimes.

"His work at the Sobibor death camp was to push men, women and children into the gas chamber," Hier said in a statement. "He had no mercy, no pity and no remorse for the families whose lives he was destroying."

The center was established to locate and help bring to justice Nazi war criminals.

The deportation capped a day in which Demjanjuk said goodbye to his family and was visited by two priests at his home in Seven Hills, a Cleveland suburb.

He then slipped quietly into an ambulance parked in his driveway, his family members standing at the edge of the garage and holding up a floral-patterned bedsheet to block the view of reporters and photographers across the street.

Earlier Monday, his son, John Demjanjuk Jr., said an appeal in a U.S. court would go ahead even if his father isn't in the country.

"Given the history of this case and not a shred of evidence that he ever hurt one person let alone murdered anyone anywhere, this is inhuman even if the courts have said it is lawful," Demjanjuk Jr. said.

Also Monday, a Berlin court rejected an appeal aimed at preventing deportation.

Once in Germany, Demjanjuk will be brought before a judge and formally charged. He will also be given the opportunity to make a statement to the court, in keeping with standard procedure, Staudigl said.

Demjanjuk is expected to be held in the medical unit of a Munich prison. The government has said preparations have been made at the facility to ensure he will receive appropriate care.

The case dates to 1977 when the Justice Department moved to revoke Demjanjuk's U.S. citizenship, alleging he hid his past as a Nazi death camp guard.

Demjanjuk had been tried in Israel after accusations surfaced that he was the notorious "Ivan the Terrible" at the Treblinka death camp in Poland. He was found guilty in 1988 of war crimes and crimes against humanity, a conviction overturned by the Israeli Supreme Court.

A U.S. judge revoked his citizenship in 2002 based on U.S. Justice Department evidence showing he concealed his service at Sobibor and other Nazi-run death and forced-labor camps.

An immigration judge ruled in 2005 he could be deported to Germany, Poland or Ukraine. Munich prosecutors issued an arrest warrant for him in March.


I really love Germar Rudolf's book DISSECTING THE HOLOCAUST. There was some important stuff in there about Damjanjuk.

http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndtreb.html
The Treblinka Holocaust
ARNULF NEUMAIER[1]

"Achieving our quest of a 'new world order'
depends on our learning the Holocaust's lessons."

-Ian J. Kagedan[2]

. The Demjanjuk Trial and Treblinka

1.1. Background of the Demjanjuk Trial

In the days of the Soviet Union, the American immigrants from Ukraine were split into two factions, one of which was favorably disposed towards Moscow. At that time, this group published a weekly paper titled News from Ukraine. Michael Hanusiak, one of the participants in this publishing venture, made no bones about his close ties to Soviet authorities in Moscow. H. P. Rullmann believes that one of the foremost tasks of this group was the defamation of the anti-Communist, nationalist Ukrainians in exile, whom they charged with collaboration with the 'German Fascists' during the Second World War.[3] This approach had already been practiced in other cases, which not only resulted in the creation of internal strife amongst these Ukrainians-in-exile but also detracted from their collective public reputation.[4] This Soviet method of combating opponents by means of disinformation and falsified or completely fabricated evidence is well-known. In the mid-1980s even the Federal Department of the Interior issued a warning regarding this practice.[5] It is all the more astonishing that the American authorities were taken in by the Communist Ukrainians-in-exile in the case of Demjanjuk in the mid-1970s.

In 1975, after allegedly in-depth research in Soviet archives, Michael Hanusiak submitted to the US Department of Immigration and Naturalization in New York, a list with 70 names of presumed National Socialist collaborators of Ukrainian origin; this list also included the name of John Demjanjuk, who until 1981 was an American citizen living in Cleveland, Ohio, where he worked as auto mechanic. In the case of Demjanjuk, Hanusiak came up with an incriminating statement by one H. Daniltschenko, according to whom Demjanjuk had served in the concentration camps Sobibor and Flossenbürg.[6] This, along with a picture of an ID card allegedly documenting Demjanjuk's employment in these two camps, prompted the American Immigration and Naturalization Office to take up the case of John Demjanjuk.[7] The role which pro-Communist Hanusiak played in building Demjanjuk up to be Ivan the Terrible can hardly be misinterpreted. The true instigators of what was in effect a new Eichmann Trial are not difficult to discern behind the scenes. After the News from Ukraine urged the American authorities in 1976 to take steps against Demjanjuk, the American Department of Justice requested that Demjanjuk be stripped of his citizenship due to false claims made in his immigration papers. Meanwhile, witnesses were found in Israel who identified John Demjanjuk on photographs as being Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka. Investigations regarding Sobibor as well as Treblinka followed. In 1979 the case was officially taken up by the OSI (Office of Special Investigations), the American 'Nazi-hunting' office set up under President Carter.

However, the Trawniki ID card No. 1393, issued to the name Demjanjuk, which had been reprinted in the News from Ukraine and later became the only piece of documentary evidence used in the trial, exists in two variations: the second card numbered 1393 and bearing the name Demjanjuk belongs to the papers of the concentration camp Flossenbürg, which are held in the Federal Archives in Koblenz. Similar names are very common in the Ukraine. But timewise the number does not correspond to Demjanjuk's stay in Trawniki. - Furthermore, ID numbers were only used once.

The 'original ID card' was not available for the pre-trial investigations in Jerusalem. This central piece of evidence was clearly not officially available from the Soviet Union, for which reason Armand Hammer, the American billionaire of Jewish extraction, was called in. Hammer had already enjoyed an extremely good business relationship with Soviet circles in Lenin's time.[8] In any case the Trawniki ID card did not get to Jerusalem through official channels, but personally via Armand Hammer. If the ID card were officially released, appropriate papers would have been present both in Moscow and in Israel.

Dieter Lehner, the expert from the Demjanjuk defense team, has exposed the ID card as a total fabrication,[9] a discovery matching those of the German Federal Criminal Police Office. Even though the Israeli authorities were already apprised of this fact by the Federal Criminal Police as early as 1987, the Court suppressed this information. Chief Prosecutor Michael Shadek commented merely:

"As far as I am concerned Demjanjuk did commit murders - whether in Treblinka, in Sobibor or elsewhere, that's secondary."

And in response to the objection that the Federal Criminal Police Office had proven the SS ID card to be fake:

"We are relying on our own expert reports and consider them no less convincing than before."[10]

But German authorities also played a strange game where the forged Trawniki ID card was concerned. For example, the Münchner Merkur reported that the Federal Chancellery itself saw to it that the Demjanjuk defense team did not learn of the German expert reports by Lehner and the German Federal Criminal Police Office [Bundeskriminalamt, BKA], and that the latter was ordered from higher-up to keep silent about its findings. And what is more: the expert witness from the BKA who did ultimately take the stand in the Jerusalem Court after all, had been instructed by the German authorities to draw up a partial report for this trial, dealing exclusively with certain similarities between the retouched ID card photo and John Demjanjuk's real-life features. In this way the impression was evoked in the Jerusalem Trial that the ID card was genuine. The partial report was submitted by BKA expert Dr. Altmann. In a memo he drew up at that time, BKA Department Chief Dr. Werner described these actions of the German authorities thus:

"Clearly, factual doubts had to be subordinate to the political considerations." [11]

It has turned out that the photograph on the ID card is an old photo of Demjanjuk from 1947 which was taken from his American immigration file(!) and retouched for the ID card.

When the first doubts were raised about the authenticity of the heretofore unknown ID card, the Jerusalem Court suddenly had several other specimens of identical make on hand; the origin of these cards, which were also fabrications, has not been determined.[9]

The supposition that the KGB might have officially fabricated the ID card is largely refuted by the poor quality of the fabrication and by the ignorance, shown by the card, of the administrative structure of that branch of the police that was responsible for issuing this kind of ID card, as expert Lehner was able to demonstrate convincingly.[9] This does not, however, rule out that a certain circle within the KGB contributed to the fabrication of the card, a circle which must also have had connections to the American immigration authorities, where the photo originated. These circles are in all probability identical to those who worked from the start to set Demjanjuk up as Ivan the Terrible in order to revitalize the Holocaust Religion.

The proceedings to expatriate Demjanjuk began in 1981 before the Cleveland District Court. Naturally, five survivors of Treblinka recognized Demjanjuk as Ivan the Terrible, and the Court's copies of the Trawniki ID card No. 1393 became the chief piece of evidence on whose basis judge Battisti stripped Demjanjuk of his American citizenship.[12]

On the request of Israel, deportation proceedings began in 1984, and the deportation itself followed in February 1986, in violation of all traditions of international law, as the alleged site of the crime (Treblinka) was located in Poland, and at a time when the state of Israel did not yet even exist. How very important this Trawniki ID card was to the OSI in this trial is demonstrated by the fact that the OSI, together with Israeli authorities, attempted to persuade a number of witnesses to confirm the authenticity of this fabricated card against their better knowledge.[13]

1.2. The Demjanjuk Trial in Jerusalem

With the start of the Demjanjuk Trial in Jerusalem on February 16, 1987, the Treblinka Holocaust was restored to the active memory of the world public. According to the testimony of Jewish witnesses, Treblinka had been a World War Two extermination camp where vast numbers of Jews were killed - between 700,000 and 3 million, depending on the source consulted.[14] The Jerusalem Court decided arbitrarily to set the number of victims at 875,000.[15]

The intended linchpin in this revival of the Treblinka Holocaust was the Ukrainian John Demjanjuk. This man was declared to be "Ivan the Terrible" of Treblinka where he was said to have committed every means of killing, cruelties and perversions imaginable. Not enough that he allegedly drove the Jews into the gas chambers personally, armed with iron canes and a sword, and cut off women's breasts with the bayonet - no, he also operated the Diesel engines whose exhaust gas was piped into the gas chambers, there to kill the Jews. The fact that these claims contradicted the sole alleged documentary proof, which indicated that Demjanjuk had been employed in the camps Sobibor and Flossenbürg (and only in those camps) - this fact was generously overlooked.

The chief witness for the prosecution in the Jerusalem Trial, Eliahu Rosenberg, had stated in Vienna on December 24, 1947, in a "fact report" whose twelve pages he had each initialed personally, that the Ukrainian Ivan had been clubbed to death in his sleep.[16] When Demjanjuk's defense attorney Dov Eitan pointed out to Rosenberg during the Jerusalem Trial that John Demjanjuk, present there in the courtroom, could not be Ivan the Terrible, since according to his - Rosenberg's - own testimony Ivan was already dead since 1943, Rosenberg said that this had been a misunderstanding on the part of the secretary recording his report at the time, and that he had had only third-hand knowledge of the death of Ivan the Terrible. The secretary in question, T. Friedman, refused to testify on this issue, since Jewish sources had threatened him with death in the event that he were to confirm that Rosenberg had really reported the death of Ivan the Terrible as his own personal experience at the time in question.[17] Clearly, therefore, Rosenberg had really affirmed Ivan's death under oath.

So had Ivan the Terrible been resurrected?

It is characteristic of the psyche and the mental state of this kind of witness to substantiate alleged mistakes with the wish for a specific reality; the truth is subordinated to intentions and wishes. Regarding the motives prompting the state of Israel to hold this trial, Jewish publisher A. Melzer wrote that in the mid-1980s the collective Israeli awareness of the Holocaust was on the wane. It had become little more than one chapter among many. Further, the view taken of the Jews by the world public at that time was becoming increasingly shaped by the actions of the Israelis towards the Palestinians, which began to be likened to those of Himmler's SS. This was probably the reason why the proceedings in the Jerusalem District Court dealt less with the case of John Demjanjuk than, essentially, with the total destruction of the Jews in Europe. The 'Auschwitz Cudgel' was in need of exercising.[18]

Ever since the mid-1970s, Ivan the Terrible, personified by John Demjanjuk, was systematically built up to be a symbol of the Treblinka Holocaust. The circumstance that the Monster of Treblinka had to be a Ukrainian probably has historical roots in the time when the Cossacks liberated the western part of the Ukraine from Jewish oppressors and tax-collectors.[19] Oaths of vengeance and instinctive hatred à la the Old Testament survive for centuries.

Two revealing circumstances may aid in the further assessment of the events and connections relating to the Trawniki ID card.

One rather strange event took place in Jerusalem on November 29, 1988. On November 20, 1988, Demjanjuk's attorney, Dov Eitan, had received a comprehensive report from the subject expert for the defense, a report which proved conclusively that the chief piece of evidence against Demjanjuk, the Trawniki ID card, was a fabrication. For the December 4, 1988, appeal date Eitan had announced a surprise for the Jerusalem Court, but mysteriously fell out of a 15th story window of the Eilon Hotel on November 29, 1988.[20] Dov Eitan's (un?)timely death was never solved. At his funeral, the second defense attorney was attacked by someone who threw acid in his face.[21]

Incidentally, the ID card no longer played a significant part in the verdict that was handed down against Demjanjuk in April 1988, whereas it had been a vital element in his extradition to Israel. The Jerusalem Court pointed out that it had been the witnesses, first and foremost, who had proven Demjanjuk's guilt beyond a doubt. But the testimony of those witnesses was of far more questionable evidential value, as Dr. Elisabeth Loftus, Jewish-American expert on eyewitness testimony, noted; Loftus had previously all but proven the unbelievable nature of witness testimony in hundreds of trials.[22] Many of the witnesses against Demjanjuk contradicted not only themselves or at least their earlier statements, but also usually recounted utterly incredible, even downright grotesquely unrealistic scenarios. The decisive factor for Dr. Loftus was that some of the witnesses, due to their advanced age, could barely recall the names of their own children, or how they had only just arrived in the courtroom, while professing to be perfectly capable of identifying John Demjanjuk and to remember all the details of the events in the Treblinka camp or elsewhere. Even though Dr. Loftus realized that the media hullabaloo about John Demjanjuk, about the Treblinka camp and about the eyewitness testimony given in the past few decades rendered impartial, uninfluenced, probative testimony impossible, she refused to make her services as expert witness available to the defense, since she wanted to be on Israel's and the Jews' side in this trial even though she was aware that in doing so she was deliberately opposing justice and truth. Her acknowledgement of the error she thus committed is devastating and well worth reading.

Aside from the manipulation of witnesses already mentioned, H. P. Rullmann tells of the many and varied insults, suspicions and threats hurled at witnesses for the defense, going as far as the arrests of those witnesses;[23] of orders issued by the Court to 'go easy' on the witnesses for the prosecution, in other words, not to analyze or cross-examine their testimony;[24] of unchecked applause etc. by court spectators when witnesses for the prosecution made incredible and grotesque, incriminating statements;[24] of the live television broadcasting of the trial in Israeli schools as well as the worldwide broadcasting of trial highlights;[25] of the interpretation of Demjanjuk's profession of innocence as stubborn denial motivated by a lack of remorse.[26] The ultimate high point of the trial was the verdict, which had been based exclusively on eyewitness testimony: it sentenced Demjanjuk to death by hanging and prompted an almost Purim-fest-like joyful dancing in the courtroom. Of course Demjanjuk's defense appealed this sentence.

The public statements of Elisabeth Loftus, one of the best-known experts on eyewitness testimony anywhere, already sufficed to discomfit the Jerusalem court responsible for Demjanjuk's appeal, since it had to expect that appeal proceedings would not only expose the SS ID card as fake, but also that the witnesses would be shown up to be perjured liars, and by a Jewish expert, no less! But by the early 1990s the case had taken on even far more interesting and, for Israel, more unpleasant aspects. In view of the fact that Demjanjuk's expatriation and extradition had been obtained by fraud, by means of a faked ID card, an increasingly powerful lobby group in the United States began to speak out for the reversal of the Jerusalem verdict as well as for Demjanjuk's return and repatriation to the States, since Israel was obviously not willing or able to conduct a lawful trial against a former American citizen.

The American Member of Congress, James V. Traficant, and Patrick Buchanan, one of the best-known American journalists, and assistant to President Reagan, numbered among the most active of these lobbyists. As early as 1986 Buchanan had called the trial of Demjanjuk a new Dreyfus Affair.[27] But in early 1990 Buchanan went a considerable step farther when, regarding Demjanjuk's alleged mass murders in Treblinka, he wrote in The Washington Times and The New York Post:[28]

"The problem is: Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody. The Environmental Protection Agency never requires emission inspections of Diesel cars or trucks. In 1988, ninety-seven youths, trapped 400 feet underground in a D.C. tunnel, while two locomotives spewed Diesel exhaust into the car, emerged unharmed after forty-five minutes. Demjanjuk's weapon of mass murder cannot kill."

In 1991 Pat Buchanan was George Bush sen.'s strongest Republican rival in the primaries for the American presidency. He did not deviate from his conviction even during these election campaigns. On television he even supplemented his previous statements by saying that Treblinka had no doubt been a terrible place where hundreds of thousands of Jews had been taken and where thousands had died - in other words, not hundreds of thousands, as was alleged![29] So Israel saw itself faced with a powerful current in American politics and journalism which was not only close to providing the next President of the United States but which also disputed that Treblinka had been an extermination camp.

At the same time as these developments, several eastern European émigrés groups drew up reports in defense of John Demjanjuk, and concluded on the basis of substantial evidence that no mass murder could have taken place in Treblinka and that even for this reason alone, John Demjanjuk must be innocent, as must any other accused.[30]

Only someone who was unaware of these events could have been surprised when the Jerusalem Appeal Court announced Demjanjuk's acquittal in the summer of 1993.[31] Demjanjuk was acquitted for lack of precisely that so-called evidence that had resulted in his death sentence before. Strangely enough, most of the American and all of the European media then proceeded to laud Israel as a state truly under the rule of law - even though the administration of justice in the Demjanjuk Trial had not measured up even remotely to any such standard. The gulf between a death sentence and an acquittal is too great. But if perchance the Court had realized that it was the false statements of the witnesses that had resulted in a miscarriage of justice, then the witnesses ought now to have been charged. But this was not done. For a time it was even debated in Israel whether one should not perhaps charge Demjanjuk for crimes he may have committed in the camps Sobibor and Flossenbürg, but eventually this option was rejected.[32] The iron had grown too hot for Israel, since any further trial could have resulted in other aspects of the Holocaust being drawn into undesirably controversial discussion. It is also possible that the collapse of the Soviet Union gave rise to factors - such as easier access to archives and to the supposed sites of the crimes - which made it more advisable to send Demjanjuk back to the United States in September 1993, acquitted, but nevertheless unlawfully handcuffed during his trip home.[33] In 1998, John Demjanjuk received his U.S. citizenship back,[34] only to have it revoked again in early 2002 after the OSI claimed that Demjanjuk allegedly was a guard in the camps of Sobibor, Majdanek, and Flossenbürg.[35]

Will the trial of John Demjanjuk become, in a sense, the writing on the wall? Will it bring a turning point in the Treblinka Holocaust, in the 'immolation of the Jews' as a whole? As the Prophet Daniel put it in Daniel 5: "mene, tekel, u-pharsin" - or, in English, 'weighed in the balances, and found wanting'.




Notes

[1] Arnulf Neumaier died in 2000. Three years after his death, Carlo Mattogno and Jürgen Graf published a thorough study of the Treblinka camp with numerous documents which were unknown to Neumaier: Treblinka. Vernichtungslager oder Durchgangslager?, Castle Hill Publisher, Hastings 2002 (online: vho.org/D/Treblinka). This book will soon appear in English at Theses & Dissertations Press. Some of the more important new findings of Mattogno and Graf were included in this revised edition of Neumaier's contribution.
[2] Director of government relations for B'nai B'rith Canada, "Memory of Holocaust central to new world order", Toronto Star, Nov. 26, 1991, p. A17.
[3] H. P. Rullmann, Der Fall Demjanjuk, Verlag für ganzheitliche Forschung und Kultur, Struckum 1987, p. 76.
[4] Cf. the cases of K. Linnas, F. Wallus and Feodor Fedorenko: H. P. Rullmann, op. cit. (note 3), pp. 87, 96ff., 164; U. Walendy, Historische Tatsachen (HT) no. 25, Verlag für Volkstum und Zeitgeschichtsforschung, Vlotho 1985, p. 35 (Wallus); U. Walendy, HT 34, ibid., 1988, p. 14 (Linnas).
[5] Memo of the Federal Minister of the Interior, Innere Sicherheit no. 1, Bonn, March 20, 1985.
[6] H. P. Rullmann, op. cit. (note 3), p. 77f., from News from Ukraine.
[7] Cf. memo from H. E. Wagner, Deputy Director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, New York, Jan. 29, 1976.
[8] Cf. A. Hammer's correspondence, in H. P. Rullmann, op. cit. (note 3), p. 87ff.
[9] D. Lehner, Du sollst nicht falsch Zeugnis geben, Vowinckel, Berg am See n.d. [1988]; cf. H. P. Rullmann, op. cit. (note 3), p. 103ff.
[10] stern, March 5, 1992, pp. 198ff.
[11] For details cf. A. Melzer, "Iwan der Schreckliche oder John Demjanjuk, Justizirrtum? Justizskandal!", SemitTimes, spec. ed., Dreieich, March 1992, esp. pp. 3, 13; also Münchner Merkur, March 26, 1992. I am grateful to D. Lehner for further information, cf. op. cit. (note 9).
[12] Personal info. D. Lehner, July 26, 1993.
[13] H. P. Rullmann, op. cit. (note 3), pp. 118ff., 174ff.
[14] 700,000 is the figure cited, for ex., by the Institut für Zeitgeschichte; cf. the chapter by G. Rudolf, this volume; the highest figure is given in World Jewish Congress et.al. (eds.), The Black Book - The Nazi Crime against the Jewish People, New York 1946, reprint: Nexus Press, New York 1981, pp. 400ff.
[15] Jerusalem District Court, Criminal Case 373/86.
[16] E. Rosenberg, Tatsachenbericht, Jewish Historical Documentation, Dec. 24, 1947; pub. in H. P. Rullmann, op. cit. (note 3), pp. 133ff.
[17] Ibid., pp. 132, 145.
[18] Cf. A. Melzer, op. cit. (note 11).
[19] Cf. S. T. Possony, "The Ukrainian-Jewish Problem: Historical Retrospective", Ukrainian Quarterly 2 (1975), pp. 141ff.
[20] United Press International, Nov. 30, 1988, p. 2; cf. Annales d'Histoire Révisionniste (AHR) 6 (1988/89), p. 167.
[21] United Press International, Dec. 2, 1988, p. 2; cf. AHR 6 (1988/89), p. 167; Demjanjuk's second defense attorney has published the entire scandal surrounding this trial: Yoram Sheftel, The Demjanjuk Affair. The Rise and Fall of the Show Trial, Victor Gollancz, London 1994. This book is highly recommended.
[22] E. Loftus, K. Ketcham, Witness for the Defense, St. Martin's Press, New York 1991; cf. J. Cobden, JHR 11(2) (1991), pp. 238-249 (online: vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/11/2/Cobden238-249.html); more general: E. Loftus, K. Ketcham, The Myth of Repressed Memory, ibid., 1994; in abbreviated form: E. Loftus, "Creating False Memories", Scientific American, Sept. 1997, pp. 50-55.
[23] H. P. Rullmann, op. cit. (note 3), pp. 23, 100, 124, 145, 191.
[24] Ibid., p. 19.
[25] Ibid., pp. 17, 21.
[26] Ibid., p. 26.
[27] The Plain Dealer (Cleveland/Ohio), Oct. 1, 1986; cf. H. P. Rullmann, op. cit. (note 3), p. 26.
[28] New York Post, March 17, 1990; The Washington Times, March 19, 1990; The New Republic, Oct. 22, 1990.
[29] "The Week with David Brinkley", ABC Television, Sunday, Dec. 8, 1991.
[30] T. Skowron, Amicus Curiae Brief, Polish Historical Society, PO Box 8024, Stamford, CT 06905, 1992; similar efforts were undertaken by the Ukrainian Friends of Fairfield Association, ibid., which, however, is probably to some extent identical to the Polish Historical Society. (Online: vho.org/GB/c/AmicusCuriaeDemjanjuk.html)
[31] The daily press of July 30, 1993.
[32] Die Welt, Aug. 2, 1993.
[33] For the history of the Demjanjuk Trial, cf. J. A. Brentar, JHR 13(6) (1993), pp. 2-8; J. Sobran, JHR 13(6) (1993), pp. 9f..
[34] The Plain Dealer, Cleveland, Feb. 21, 1998.
[35] CNN, Feb 21, 2002; http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/02/21/demja ... izenship/; cf. AP, March 14, 2000.

No Mass Graves or Gas Chambers at Treblinka.
http://www.nafcash.com
Sample quotes.
According to the orthodox version of the holocaust, at Treblinka the Germans murdered and buried, then dug up, burned and crushed the bones, and then - REBURIED all the crushed bone and ash of 870,000 Jews INTO THE SAME MASS GRAVES; thus, they allegedly -“obliterated all evidence of their crime.” If you’re unfamiliar with the controversies surrounding this “judicially proven fact,” then it’s imperative that before you begin reading this site, you understand the forensic argumentation presented in this link HERE:

“This is the biggest cemetery of Polish Jewry… There are 870,000 Jews buried in the enormous ditches… Within this area initially, the Jews were buried in enormous pits… Later on, a sort of grill from railroad tracks was built. The corpses were removed and this area served for burning the corpses… Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka - all three of them were utterly eradicated… Both Treblinka and the other camps, once they had fulfilled their task of extermination, were obliterated… Nothing remains - nothing.”

Nothing remains? Who in their right mind could believe that a perfect crime could be committed while murdering 870,000 people? Everyone knows that at every crime scene - EVIDENCE IS LEFT BEHIND:“Cremated remains weigh between three and nine pounds.” In order to believe the orthodox Treblinka holocaust legend, you must believe this: The Germans, by putting a layer of soil over millions of pounds of crushed bone and ash, tens of millions of teeth and tens of thousands of bullets and shell casings somehow, magically -“utterly eradicated” all evidence of their crime!

To put this UTTERLY ILLOGICAL FRAUD in perspective, it’s like someone claiming that he could murder every single man, woman and child in Montana and magically not leave a single trace of his crime! Do you see how incredibly easy a little common sense, logic and skeptical inquiry cuts right to the bone and exposes the ludicrous fraud of this classic example of the big lie technique? Nothing in the world could be easier to prove than the alleged Treblinka holocaust IF this legend is true. If all the time, money and effort that’s gone into the harassing, arresting, fining and imprisoning of the holocaust heretics went into locating the alleged huge mass graves of Treblinka, then this issue would have been settled years ago. Why do you think the Jews would rather have people sent to prison for not believing their nonsensical manufactured history than actually locating the alleged huge mass graves? Why do you think they incessantly lie about the Treblinka holocaust being a proven historical fact, shriek holocaust denier at and REFUSE TO DEBATE anyone with the intelligence and courage to call them on this ridiculous tall tale? Why do you think they never use the phraseology - scientifically or forensically proven fact? The answer is, of course, because there was no Treblinka holocaust and the alleged homicidal gas chambers were, in reality, DELOUSING FACILITIES.(This is a classic example of what happens when pseudo-intellectuals become so invested in an idea; after a while, even honest mistakes have to be sustained by ignoring and eventually falsifying the facts.)

Every alleged German “death camp” is best understood when looked at as a holocaust within the holocaust. No matter what anyone thinks about the holocaust per se, one thing is eminently clear - the Treblinka holocaust didn’t happen. To believe that the Germans could “obliterate” all evidence of the murder of 870,000 Jews requires incredible gullibility and a lack of intelligence, logic and critical thinking skills. It requires a belief in magic and a rejection of criminology, archeology and forensic science. IF there was a Treblinka holocaust, then there are huge mass graves filled with millions of pounds of crushed bone to prove it. Until the alleged huge mass graves of Treblinka are found - NO mass graves = NO crushed bone = NO burning of bodies = NO homicidal gas chambers = NO mass murder = NO death camp = NO Treblinka holocaust = THE TRUTH – TREBLINKA II WAS A TRANSIT CAMP, and the so called gas chambers were, in reality, delousing facilities designed to protect the health and prolong the lives of the shameless liars who fraudulently claimed to be the victims of a genocidal extermination program. It takes a special kind of credulous dullard to believe the preposterous Treblinka holohoax tale and a special kind of self-deceiving coward to deny the significance of this fraud. Remember, there are only two options: extermination center (for those who believe in magic) and TRANSIT CAMP (for those who believe in the scientific method). There is no third option - and only one truth.

NOTE: Historical “truths” are not exempt from THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD. Using the scientific method to prove that the largest mass gravesite in the history of mankind is, in reality, a fraudulent hoax is not “denying” the holocaust. Refusing to accept a logically absurd, demonstratively false, scientifically debunked historical event is not “denying” that something happened. Just because the dull-uding “experts” lack the curiosity to examine, the intelligence to understand, the courage to accept, the integrity to acknowledge and the character to speak the truth about this fraudulent COGNITIVE ILLUSION does not make a skeptic of the official holocaust story a “denier.”(By the way, you cannot “deny” something that never happened.)

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:25 pm)

http://www.natallnews.com/page.php?id=2



Jewish Hatred Exposed: The Case of John Demnjanjuk
The case of John Demjanjuk serves as one of the more blatant cases of blind Jewish hatred and outright lies over the so-called Holocaust. Jew liars have, by falsely accusing Demjanjuk, managed to not only expose their own vicious, unsubstantiated and appalling lies about the mythical "Holocaust," but, in the process, have ruined John Demnjanjuk's life as well.

The John Demjanjuk story begins in October 1975, when a list of names of alleged Nazi war criminals was circulated amongst members of the US senate. The list originated with the Soviet Union’s KGB, allegedly out of material captured by the Soviet Army at the end of World War II.

One of the names appearing on the list was that of John Ivan Demjanjuk – an Ukrainian who had immigrated to the USA in 1951 and who had been living in Cleveland, Ohio, since 1958.

The KGB document alleged that Demjanjuk had been a soldier in the Red Army who, after falling into German captivity, had volunteered for service in the S.S.

Demjanjuk, had, said the Soviet document, undergone training at the SS camp in the town of Trawniki, Poland. He had, continued the document, served from March 1943 as an SS guard at the Sobibor camp, and later at the Floenbuerg concentration camp.

US GOVERNMENT STARTS DENATURALIZATION AND CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION PROCEEDINGS

Acting on this information, the US government started proceedings to strip Demjanjuk of his citizenship, based on his alleged concealment of his Nazi past from the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

In addition, the US Government instructed its Department of Justice to start a full investigation into the allegations contained in the Soviet document, in preparation for a deportation hearing to send Demjanjuk to Israel for trial.

ISRAELIS FIND “EYEWITNESSES” WHO PLACE DEMJANJUK AT TREBLINKA

In February 1976, the American government requested the Israeli government’s co-operation in finding Israeli citizens who were survivors from the Sobibor camp who might be able to identify Demjanjuk. The source of identification was passport photographs submitted by Demjanjuk to the INS during his application for citizenship in 1950 – the logic being that Demjanjuk would still appear relatively similar to how he had looked in 1943.

During 1976, the Israeli police identified a number of Jews who were on record as having been rescued or escaped from the Treblinka or Sobibor camps.

These “survivors”, when shown the photographs of Demjanjuk, identified him as a guard called “Ivan the Terrible” who had allegedly operated the gas chamber at Treblinka.

Despite the American government actually having identified Demjanjuk as having been a guard at the geographically separate Sobibor camp, the “eyewitness survivors” placed Demjanjuk at the Treblinka camp, and of being the gas chamber operator there.

DEMJANJUK STRIPPED OF US CITIZENSHIP, DEPORTED TO ISRAEL

The next year, 1977, the INS instituted denaturalization proceedings against Demjanjuk. While these proceedings were underway, the US Department of Justice then created an Office of Special Investigations (OSI) who sole job it was to track down alleged Nazi war criminals in the USA.

Partly as a result of the delay caused by the creation of the OSS, Demjanjuk’s denaturalization hearing only began in February 1981. In June 1985, he was finally stripped of his US citizenship, and became the subject of a deportation hearing served by the state of Israel.

It took another five years of legal wrangling before Demjanjuk was finally deported to Israel in 1986 to stand trial.

ISRAELI CASE BASED ON EYEWITNESSES AND SS ID CARD

The State of Israel's application for extradition was based on the testimony of “eyewitnesses” and a SS identification card, allegedly issued to Demjanjuk upon completion of his training at the Trawniki SS camp.

Image
Above: The "Trawniki Certificate" - a SS identification card bearing Demjanjuk's name and photograph. Supplied by the KGB, it was a critical piece of evidence - until the collapse of the Soviet Union allowed it to be revealed as a KGB forgery.


This card, which became know as the ‘Trawniki certificate” was a pivotal piece of evidence, as it contained Demjanjuk’s photograph. The card itself had been provided to the prosecution directly out of Soviet records. Along with the identification card, the prosecution produced five “eyewitnesses” who all testified that Demjanjuk was “Ivan the Terrible” who operated gas chambers in Treblinka.

DEMJANJUK DENIES ALL CHARGES

Demjanjuk’s defense was that he had been captured by the Germans and had remained in their captivity throughout the war, never serving with the SS. The prosecution dismissed his defense, producing eye witness identifying him personally, and an SS-identification card with his photograph – the case against Demjanjuk seemed overwhelming, and unsurprisingly, no-one believed him.

EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS FINGER DEMJANJUK

The first ‘survivor’ to testify, Pinhas Epstein, took the stand on 23 February 1987, and told the court that “I am convinced that opposite me sits Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka” (Reuters, 23 February 1987).

Epstein said he saw a photograph of Demjanjuk in an album shown to him in 1978 by Israeli investigators. "I was shown an album and my attention was drawn to one picture, and I identified it as that of Ivan.” (Reuters, 23 February 1987).

“I said the photo was not particularly sharp. It was older than the Ivan I knew, but it was still him. The frame, the round face, the short neck, the wide shoulders and the protruding ears. I told them this is the Ivan I remember,” Epstein said. (Reuters, 23 February 1987.)


“I would go to the gas chambers to take out the corpses . . . he would stand and look at the result of his handiwork – the stabbing of girls, the gouging of eyes, the pieces of the girls' breasts . . . this would occur meters from me,” Epstein continued in his evidence (Reuters, 23 February 1987).

Image
The next ‘survivor eyewitness’, Eliyhau Rosenberg, then told the court on 25 February 1987: “This man is Ivan, without a shadow of a doubt – Ivan from Treblinka, from the gas chambers, - the man I am looking at now,” (Reuters, 25 February 1987).
Image
Rosenberg testified that he got to know Demjanjuk really well, and that once Demjanjuk had given him 30 lashes for stealing bread, and had then forced him to say “thank you.” (Reuters, 25 February 1987).


Rosenberg went to tell the court that at the age of 12, he was forced to remove bodies from the gas chambers and bury or burn them. “We soon discovered that women and children burned quicker than men. The Germans would tell us: ‘Throw the children first because they burn faster,’ ” Rosenberg said. (Reuters, 25 February 1987).
Image
DEMJANJUK CONVICTED, SENTENCED TO DEATH


To no-one’s surprise, the Israeli Court found Demjanjuk guilty on 18 April 18, 1988, and a week later, sentenced him to death for the only crime in Israel which carries the death penalty – being a Nazi. The conviction had been obtained based primarily on the SS identification card and the eyewitness accounts which identified Demjanjuk as the gas chamber operator at Treblinka.


The defense immediately appealed, citing numerous irregularities in court procedure, rules of evidence and other issues.


SOVIET UNION’S COLLAPSE REVEALS TRAWNIKI FORGERY


At a critical juncture in the appeal process – when Demjanjuk’s life hung in the balance- fate intervened. One of the appeal judges had a heart attack, and the case was postponed.


During the postponement, in 1990, the Soviet Union suddenly collapsed. As a result, the KGB archives on the case were opened (the reader will recall that the original list and Trawniki certificate had originated with the KGB).

In the KGB file dealing with Demjanjuk, the shocking truth was revealed - the Trawniki certificate had been forged to frame the Ukrainian as part of a campaign against Ukrainian nationalists.

Image
Above: Holocaust "survivor" and eyewitness: Eliyhau Rosenberg breaks down in the Israeli courtroom after identifying John Demjanjuk as 'Ivan the Terrible'. Rosenberg's testimony, like ALL the "survivors" who testified against Demjanjuk, was shown to be false.


CASE COLLAPSES - DEMJANJUK ACQUITTED ON APPEAL


Faced with the exposure of the Trawniki certificate as an outrageous forgery, the Israeli Supreme Court, to its credit, acknowledged that the entire case against Demjanjuk had been fabricated from start to finish, and acquitted him in July 1993, stating that there was no evidence to show that Demjanjuk was indeed ‘Ivan the Terrible.’

On 22 September 1993, John Demjanjuk was finally released and allowed to return home to Cleveland, Ohio – an innocent man who spent seven years in an Israeli jail, because of a KGB forgery and a pack of fabricated evidence from “holocaust survivors.”


Image
Above: John Demjanjuk, still in his Israeli prison clothes, laughs with delight after his acquittal - and the Israeli Supreme Court's dismissal of the "eyewitness" accounts which claimed to have seen him operating a gas chamber at Treblinka camp.


ISRAELI SUPREME COURT DISMISSES “EYEWITNESS” EVIDENCE

Implicit in its dismal of the case against Demjanjuk, the Israeli Supreme Court tacitly acknowledged that ALL of the eye witness accounts which placed Demjanjuk at Treblinka, were false - as of course they were.

For this reason, the John Demjanjuk case serves as an outstanding example of just how unreliable "holocaust survivor eyewitnesses” are. For if the Israeli Supreme Court could not bring itself to believe them – and that institution, of all, would be the most likely to take their word – then this serves as an indication of just how false these accounts are.

If the ‘survivors’ could lie so blatantly in identifying Demjanjuk, then it is fair to ask what else in their testimony was fabricated?

Now, in 2006, not content with unjustly detaining and sentencing John Demnjanjuk to death on an already proven pack of Jewish lies, this 85-year old man is still being harrassed by the Jewish influenced American legal system, and, already stripped of American citizenship, stands on the point of being deported back to Eastern Europe.

It is a disgrace, and one for which the perpatrators will one day be called to account.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:26 pm)

LIARS ON THE PHIL DONAHUE SHOW WITH DAVID COLE AND BRADLEY SMITH EXPOSED.

This classic footage is now not only available in full (as opposed to chopped up youtube clips), but it also includes bulletproof, perfect commentary interjected by the maker of the film One Third Of The Holocaust at http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com. His dissection of the so called authentic phone call from a holocaust survivor is AMAZING AND DAMNING!

Bradley Smith, David Cole and Michael Shermer Debate Jewish Gas Chamber Allegations

With WWII gas chamber controversy swirling around the Pope and generating some 2,210 articles on Google News so far alone, we thought this debate featuring the alleged German gas chambers is worth reviewing. Were gas chambers used to systematically kill millions of Jews during WWII, or rather were gas chambers used to delouse clothing inorder to save Jewish lives? We at DavidDuke.com take no position on disputed WWII history except to say that there should be freedom of speech on the matter, all sides of the debate are fairly represented here, we post and leave you to decide - David Duke

If below links won’t play try HERE
http://video.google.com/videosearch?num ... l=en&emb=0

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

In 1994, two gas chamber skeptics Bradley Smith and David Cole were joined on the Phil Donahue Show by Michael Shermer to debate Nazi era gas chamber allegations. The editor of One Third Of The Holocaust also adds additional commentary throughout the program.

That David Cole versus Michael Shermer on Donahue debate was a great show. I am glad to see you put that up. I suspect Michael Shermer is a Jew. Shermer also from Skeptic magazine. You may have seen him on Penn and Teller's episode of BULLSHIT where they attacked the bible. In part one he introduces himself at 3:38
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tgdQM9MO5s
Notice in part one he says that we live in the age of science and we need evidence for the things we say. This is a far cry from the special pleading we see him do when he's on Donahue trying to defend the Jewish orthodox version of the holocaust upon them. The hypocrisy of the Michael Shermer is further illustrated in this Penn and Teller episode if you have already watched him in action on Donahue. Here in part two [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTSjGNEdcPQ ] the skeptic and the believer are tackling the question of why there is no evidence other than the bible for Jews being held captive in Egypt, as told in the biblical book of Exodus. The believer says that the Pharaoh would not record a defeat of the Jews when they came out of bondage because it would diminish his glory. The Christian says at 5:14 that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absensce. Just because something isn't written down, doesnt' mean it didn't exist." Michael Shermer's reply is thus: "Sorry, in science we don't allow that form of reasoning. These guys want to play in the realm of science and say, 'we have evidence for our beliefs.' Okay, what is it?"

Now keep this in mind and recall the statement Shermer made when he was on that Donahue show. When he was getting grilled for the silly holocaust exaggerations, he said, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." He is making the same argument that he would not permit that Christian arguing for the Jewish liberation from Egypt to make. Very interesting.

Check out also:
The Shermer-Weber clash
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n1p22_Weber.html

Here is an interesting debate on that Donahue show that I am sure your readers will enjoy, as I'm sure they would also enjoy these links to the codoh forum topics below. Out of the many good things they say to shoot holes in the holocaust propaganda is the absurdity of the alleged authenticity of that phone call by the German woman into the Phil Donahue show claiming that the lamp shades, the soap, etc are all true.
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=4692

This website is also useful in showing the many holes in the arguments of one holocaust gas chamber theorist, named Andrew Mathis.

Library on Mathis being debunked. This individual post has collected many links to other contra Mathis topic all into one post. Magnificant.
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?p=28011

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:27 pm)

http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=402

Image
German Zionist Jews, Lala Suesskind (Head Of Berlin Jewish Community) &
Charlotte Knobloch (President of the Central Council of Jews in Germany)
Greet Zionist-shill, Angela Merkel, At The Synagogue Of Ryke Street In Berlin


GERMAN JEWS DEMAND ‘NO MERCY’ FOR DEMJANJUK
By Brother Nathanael Kapner, Copyright 2009

Image


“THERE SHOULD BE NO MERCY SHOWN TO ANY living Nazi war criminals regardless of their age,” declared the German Zionist-Jew, Charlotte Knobloch, President of the Central Council Of Jews In Germany, upon the arrival of 89 year-old John Demjanjuk from the United States on May 12, 2009.

Although never found guilty before a jury of his peers, Demjanjuk faces charges filed against him by German Jews that he was an “accessory to murder” in connection with his alleged time as a guard at the Sobibor internment camp in Nazi-occupied Poland.

Demjanjuk’s sorry plight began in 1986, when he was stripped of his US citizenship and deported to Israel when accused by Zionist Jewish leaders of being “Ivan the Terrible” - a notorious prison guard at the Treblinka internment camp.

The Israeli Supreme Court overturned Demjanhuk’s conviction and death sentence for war crimes, when evidence emerged that he was not “Ivan The Terrible.” Demjanjuk was returned to the US and settled in Cleveland, Ohio, where after regaining his citizenship in 1998, he was employed as an auto worker.

Image

But Knobloch and the rest of German Jewry, which Knobloch represents, not satisfied with Demjanjuk’s vindication, announced, “Now after Demjanjuk’s legal wrangling to block his expulsion from America, German authorities must move forward swiftly to try him.”

Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean and founder of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, said that Demjanjuk “deserves to be punished.” In other words, in Zionist-Jewish “justice,” a man is GUILTY before charges are proven.

Even though Demjanjuk denies the charges made against him by the bloodthirsty Jews, claiming that he was a prisoner of war when captured in German-occupied Ukraine and never a camp guard, Knobloch urges “swift justice” (”Zionist-Jewish justice”) against Demjanjuk, saying, “We have waited too long to see Demjanjuk answer for the charges filed against him.

Image

DEMJANJUK’S FAMILY HAD LONG FOUGHT his deportation from the United States, arguing that flying the wheelchair-bound man with a kidney disease and blood disorders to Germany would cause him pain amounting to torture. His deportation marked the end of months of legal resistance which culminated in an appeal to the Jewish-controlled US Supreme Court, which refused to even hear Demjanjuk’s case.

Germany, at the behest of Zionist Jews, to whom the once-Christian nation must bow, issued a warrant for Demjanjuk’s arrest in March of 2009 on charges of “assisting” in the murder of 29,000 Jews as a guard at the Sobibor internment camp in Nazi-occupied Poland. View Entire Story Here, Here & Here.

Image

ZIONIST JEWS CALL PAT BUCHANAN’S DEFENSE OF DEMJANJUK ‘OBSCENE’

ACCOMPANIED BY A DOCTOR AND AN ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN PRIEST, John Demjanjuk arrived in Germany on May 12, 2009, after being deported from the United States to face charges that he “assisted” in the murder of 29,000 Jews. (Where do the Holocaust-Hounding Jews come up with these numbers?)

Demjanjuk landed in a specially-chartered plane at an isolated area of Munich airport where he was met by officials from the state prosecutor’s office who greeted the ailing Demjanjuk with a public declaration of the charges made against him.

The Orthodox Christian Demjanjuk was then immediately transferred to the nearby Stadelheim prison where he must await the blood thirsty Jews’ vengeance of “no mercy” to be applied to his unproven case. Demjanjuk’s relatives affirm that there is nothing to tie him to any deaths at the camp.

Image

“Given the history of this case and not a shred of evidence that my father ever hurt one person let alone murdered anyone anywhere, this is inhuman even if the courts have said it is lawful,” Demjanjuk’s son, John Jr, told reporters the day prior to his father’s deportation into the hands of blood-thirsty Jews. “This is not justice,” John Jr emphasized, “this is a vendetta in the falsified name of justice.” View Entire Story Here.

In his syndicated column of April 14, 2009 - labeling Zionist Jews as the “true haters” - the world-renowned and highly respected political analyst, Pat Buchanan, called Demjanjuk an “American Dreyfus” and “the sacrificial lamb whose blood washes away the stain of Germany’s sins.” Buchanan continued in his April 14, 2009 article, “The True Haters:”

Image

“The spirit behind the US Justice Department’s efforts to bring Demjanjuk to justice is the same satanic brew of hate and revenge that drove another innocent Man up Calvary that first Good Friday 2,000 years ago.” View Entire Story Here & Here.

American Jewish leaders reacted in their typical vicious fashion against the conservative and devout Christian, Pat Buchanan, by calling his remarks in defense of Demjanjuk, “obscene.” Labeling Buchanan as a spokesmen for the “Christian right,” US Jewish leaders intensified their censure of Buchanan for “his offensive views on Israel and Jews.”

Image

Phillip Klein, Zionist Jewish publicist of The American Spectator, began the slanders against Buchanan on April 15, 2009, calling him a “Jew baiter:”

“It’s bad enough that Pat Buchanan is rising to defend John Demjanjuk, but his column is an example of classic ‘Jew-baiting.’

Buchanan attempts to paint contemporary Jews as hypocrites by referring to Demjanjuk as an ‘American Dreyfus,’ a reference to the high-profile case of Anti-Semitism and injustice. This is the typical, ’see, Jews aren’t victims, they’re persecutors,’ tactic routinely employed by Anti-Semites.”
View Entire Story Here.

On April 27, 2009, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, censured Buchanan for not only making an “obscene” defense of Demjanjuk, but vehemently denounced Buchanan for telling an audience: “Our culture is superior because our religion is Christianity and that is the truth that makes men free.” (Jews fear Christianity as a threat to their hegemony and to their cover as “innocent victims.”)

The JTA continued their maligning of Buchanan saying: “Buchanan has referred to Capitol Hill as ‘Israeli-occupied territory’ and he considers the State of Israel to be ‘a strategic albatross draped around the neck of the United States.’” View Entire Story Here.

Methinks, O Ye Zionist Jews, That Pat Buchanan Has It Right, Completely Right…

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:29 pm)

Well at another board,
http://www.dogeatdogsite.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1554
it seems that AL (Jew) isn't taking kindly to my view on Demjanjuk and he posted an article whereby ANOTHER WITNESS has now come forward JUST IN TIME for the Germany trial. My how the timing was perfect.

A.L. wrote:Two days ago and not from a raciest white power source:ID No. 1393

I could give you more but what would be the point? Your bigotry and deliberate ignorance prevents you from reading or believing the truth.


And my response.

Drew J wrote:So let me get this straight. It took this long to track this guy down? Is that the best you have? This guy is obviously being leaned on to say what he is saying.
Nagorny has told German authorities that he worked with Demjanjuk at a concentration camp in Flossenburg, Germany, and lived with him after the war in Landshut, a Bavarian city near Munich, said Guenther Maull, Demjanjuk's attorney in Germany.

What's the name of this camp? They can't even name it? Hahaha. That's how you know it's bullshit.

At 92, Nagorny says he recognized Demjanjuk's picture, worked with him at a German concentration camp and lived with him.

Okay, which picture.

Nagorny, a Ukrainian, also told German public television network ZDF that he knew Demjanjuk well and recognized him from a 1940s photo. The network declined to identify him. It called him "Alex N." on its Web site and used the pseudonym "Dimitri" in an on-air interview.

Oh really? Which photo? Can we see it? Can the media bear to have their claims stand up to scrutiny? Is it the same one that was on that forged KGB ID card?

In a television broadcast May 17, a reporter showed Nagorny a picture of Demjanjuk in a guard's uniform: "This is Ivan, absolutely. I recognize him. ... I'm saying what I saw. We slept in the same room."

He recognized him. You know that's exactly what other witnesses said in John's first trial.
The first ‘survivor’ to testify, Pinhas Epstein, took the stand on 23 February 1987, and told the court that “I am convinced that opposite me sits Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka” (Reuters, 23 February 1987).

Epstein said he saw a photograph of Demjanjuk in an album shown to him in 1978 by Israeli investigators. "I was shown an album and my attention was drawn to one picture, and I identified it as that of Ivan.” (Reuters, 23 February 1987).

“I said the photo was not particularly sharp. It was older than the Ivan I knew, but it was still him. The frame, the round face, the short neck, the wide shoulders and the protruding ears. I told them this is the Ivan I remember,” Epstein said. (Reuters, 23 February 1987.)

“I would go to the gas chambers to take out the corpses . . . he would stand and look at the result of his handiwork – the stabbing of girls, the gouging of eyes, the pieces of the girls' breasts . . . this would occur meters from me,” Epstein continued in his evidence (Reuters, 23 February 1987).

Funny how we aren't told which camp it was because we know thanks to the work of David Cole that those Auschwitz gas chambers were rebuilt into phony gas chambers by the Soviets. They are admitted reconstructions as admitted by the curator to David Cole on videotape. Secondly look at his claim. He said he would take the corpses from the gas chambers? Right there we know this is bullshit because that deadly gas would have killed anyone who hauled the bodies out. It gets in your skin and doesn't get out. That's how you know these Jews are liars and are full of shit. Read THE CHEMICAL AND TOXICOLOGICAL IMPOSSIBILITY OF THE AUSCHWITZ GAS CHAMBER STORY.

But as it turns out they were mistaken as Israel found no evidence of John being Ivan the terrible and so they acquit him. We're hearing the same old damn record again and again. There was another witness against John in the first trial who claimed that he worked the gas chambers in Treblinka.
The next ‘survivor eyewitness’, Eliyhau Rosenberg, then told the court on 25 February 1987: “This man is Ivan, without a shadow of a doubt – Ivan from Treblinka, from the gas chambers, - the man I am looking at now,” (Reuters, 25 February 1987).

Treblinka gas chambers is also how you know these people were lying on the stand. There was no mass extermination camp at Treblinka and there were no gas chambers. http://www.nafcash.com Archaeologists went there and found no evidence of soil or ground disturbance. No bones or ash either. In other words, no evidence of a holocaust at Treblinka.

Given these factors, it's no wonder Israel had to acquit him. Therefore I'm loathe to believe this cocksucker when we have already had two cocksuckers exposed as liars against John Demjanjuk. You obviously won't acknowledge that this is a witchhunt AL. As a Jew, you feel compelled, regardless of the lack of evidence, to find a nazi under every bed and on every street corner. Even if a court in Israel can't convict him, oh he must be guilty. An accusation is good enough in your book. But it doesn't work that way for rational people. There must be supporting evidence.

All the holocaust EXAGGERATIONS are starting to be exposed on the internet. That's why the media is showing Demjanjuk being attacked again. It's trying to reaffirm the bogus six million number and the phony gas chamber stories. Elie Wiesel was just exposed as a liar and a phony witness not too long ago.
http://www.savethemales.ca/translated_f ... arian.html
=http://www.henrymakow.com/elie_wiesel_stole_friends_iden.html
And some nutcase made up a bogus holocaust story a while ago too. According to him, in his imagination, it was true.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/US/Story?id=6903068&page=1
Oh, here's another whopper. This guy survived SEVERAL gas chambers. Boy for a supposedly methodical killing machine, the Nazis really fucked up here didn't they?
http://www.judicial-inc.biz/Moshe_gassed_six_times.htm

The 'False News' Trial of Ernst Zündel -- 1988

Joseph G. Burg was the twelfth witness called by the defense. He testified on Tuesday, March 29 and Wednesday, March 30, 1988.

In his books, Burg dealt with the subject of the alleged Nazi extermination camps. Burg had spoken to hundreds of people who had been in Auschwitz and had visited the camp in the fall of 1945. Burg had wanted to see the crematoria, the hospitals, and in particular, a large new bakery. He also wanted to find the gas chambers although at that time gassings were not yet in fashion. He did not find any gas chambers. Burg formed the opinion that there were no "extermination" camps at all, that gas chambers had never existed and that there had been no plan to exterminate the Jews of Europe. These opinions were published in his books and in his correspondence with Zündel. (25-6825 to 6838)

Burg also visited Majdanek three times. He did find gas chambers in Majdanek, but testified that they were disinfection gas chambers for liquidating lice and fleas: bugs which caused epidemics. The chambers were standard in each camp and had the German words "Attention! Poisonous Gas!" under a death skull. Zyklon B was the new formula used to disinfect the clothing. It destroyed the bugs but not the fabric. (25-6839)

Burg testified that he spoke to hundreds of people who serviced and operated the crematoria but the people who operated gas chambers were impossible to find. Nobody had published anything in which it was claimed that he worked in a gassing institution for human beings. There was literature about gassing that was completely contradictory. Why? Because it was all made up. These opinions were published in his books. (25-6840)

Like all other activities in the camp, the inmates looked after the crematoria. It was the most difficult work because of the heat and the lifting of corpses into the ovens. The inmates worked very often in three shifts around the clock. (26-6998) These workers did it voluntarily. They were asked by the Jewish council or the Jewish police. It was important to ask how the Jewish council or police co-operated with the German SS. (26-6900)

When they were in full operation, the chimneys had an increased amount of smoke. So, logically, depending on the weather or the time of day, the colour of the flames was different. People invented stories that inside devilish things were going on. They said living human beings were being burned. They invented the story that every crematorium was a gas chamber. It had even gotten to the point that the authors had such large imaginations that when they saw the blue colour of the smoke, they knew that Jews were being burned. (26-6898, 6899)

Others invented the story that living Jews were being pushed in to be burned. Burg testified that he would like to see a Jew who had given such statements during a trial. He said such a Jew should be forced to take an oath under the rabbi rites with the skull cap, without pictures of Christ, with the Hebrew Bible, in the presence of a rabbi or a pious religious Jew. Then he should swear an oath that he had seen something like that. Then these false statements, these sick statements, would go down by 99.5 percent because the superficial oath was not morally binding for these Jews. (26-6900)

At the time he was in a displaced persons camp, Burg spoke to thirty or forty people about gas chambers and to about five to ten people about the crematoria. He had a special permit allowing him to visit the different areas where Jewish displaced persons were. He tried to get interviews from various ghettos and camps because at that time he had already checked various false statements. (26-6901)

In 1946 Burg attended the Nuremberg trials at times when matters involving Jews were being raised. During one of these attendances he met Ilya Ehrenburg and a Jewish publisher who had been in Auschwitz for several years. Burg asked the publisher whether he had seen any gassing institutions for human beings and he said no. Ehrenburg, who had been the head of propaganda for the Red Army during the war, told Burg he had been to Auschwitz but he too had not seen anything of gassings. Burg had discussed this information with Zündel in general. (25-6857, 6858) Burg could not understand the emphasis on gassings. (26-6904)

Incase anyone forgot, Burg testified to this under oath in a Canadian courtroom. In other words, Ehrenburg felt comfortable admitting to another Jew that there was no evidence of Auschwitz gas chambers. He didn't think that Burg would go and blab to the Gentiles I bet. Ehrenburg was the main guy trying to claim six million Jews died. All the while he knew there were no Auschwitz gas chambers. So we have another lying Jew hell bent on revenge on the German nation.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:36 pm)

Revisionist Reflections on the Upcoming “Holocaust” Demjanjuk Trial in Germany

By Paul Grubach

Copyright 2009

John Demjanjuk and a US Judge’s Ruling

After losing a long legal battle to stay in the US, John Demjanjuk was deported to Germany on May 12 to stand trial for alleged war crimes. He is charged with helping to murder 29,000 Jews.

In 2002, US District Court Judge Paul R. Matia claimed in his ruling that Demjanjuk served as a guard at the Sobibor concentration camp, circa March 27, 1943 to October 1, 1943. In regard to this alleged “extermination camp,” Matia asserted that the guards “assigned to Sobibor met the arriving transports of Jews, forcibly unloaded the Jews from the trains, compelled them to disrobe, and drove them into gas chambers where they were murdered by asphyxiation with carbon monoxide.” Matia charged Demjanjuk with a specific crime: “In serving at Sobibor, Defendant [John Demjanjuk] contributed to the process by which thousands of Jews were murdered by asphyxiation with carbon monoxide.”1

The “Holocaust affirming” Judge further claimed that the “guards assigned to Sobibor also guarded a small number of Jewish forced laborers kept alive to maintain the camp, dispose of the corpses, and process the possessions of those killed.”2

Further on in his ruling, Matia made this most important statement: “This [case against John Demjanjuk] is a case of documentary evidence, not eyewitness testimony. ”3

What Matia wrote is misleading. The current case about Demjanjuk allegedly serving at Sobibor is based upon purportedly authentic documents. But what Matia asserts about Sobibor being an “extermination camp” is based exclusively upon eyewitness testimony and nothing else.

Indeed, Holocaust historian Robert Jan van Pelt conceded the evidence for the mass killings of Jews at Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec—where allegedly millions were murdered—is very meager. In reference to these three camps, he wrote: "There are few eyewitnesses, no confession that can compare to that given by [Auschwitz commandant Rudolf] Höss, no significant remains, and few archival sources."4 The statements by Sobibor historian and former inmate of the camp, Thomas Toivi Blatt, harmonize with Professor van Pelt, for he admitted: “Sobibor was the most secretive of the extermination camps, and very little official documentation survives. Most of what was written in the camp or by [German officials in the Lublin district of Poland] was destroyed.”5

Clearly, the only support for the traditional Sobibor extermination story is the testimony of former inmates and the post war statements of German officials who were on trial for alleged war crimes. Let’s examine this “evidence.”

Matia claims that Jews were murdered in gas chambers at Sobibor, and carbon monoxide was the death-gas. Yet, there are former prisoners who claimed that chlorine was the death-gas.

Sobibor witness Hella Fellenbaum-Weiss told the story of how Jews on their way to Sobibor were gassed with chlorine. We let her pick up her narrative here: “The arrival of another convoy distressed me in the same way. It was thought to come from Lvov, but nobody knows for sure. Prisoners were sobbing and told us a dreadful tale: they had been gassed on the way with chlorine, but some survived. The bodies of the dead were green and their skin peeled off.”6

The allegation that Jews were gassed on their way to Sobibor with chlorine has been quietly discarded by the Holocaust promoters—an implicit admittance that it must be false.

In his thorough study of Belzec concentration camp, Belzec in Propaganda, Testimonies, Archeological Research, and History, Revisionist historian Carlo Mattogno cited Sobibor inmates who specifically stated that chlorine was a gas used to asphyxiate Jews at Sobibor.7 We give you Zelda Metz in her own words: “They [the alleged ‘gas chamber’ victims] entered the wooden building where the woman’s hair was cut, and then the ‘Bath’, i.e., the gas chamber. They were asphyxiated with chlorine. After 15 minutes, they had all suffocated. Through a window it was checked whether they were all dead. Then the floor opened automatically. The corpses fell into the cars of a train passing through the gas chamber and taking the corpses to the oven.”

The mainstream historians of Sobibor have quietly abandoned the “chlorine death gas” and “trap-door-in-the-gas-chamber” stories—once again, an implicit admittance that they are both false.

Leon Feldhendler also declared chlorine was a “death-gas,” although he also claimed the Germans experimented with other gases.8 Alexander Pechersky alleged that some type of “heavy, black substance” was the death-gas.9 Chlorine is a greenish-yellow gas. Stanislaw Szmajzner believed the Germans used exhaust fumes, but also Zyklon B gas.10 Alterations in the story abound.

The chlorine gas, Zyklon B gas and “other un-named” gas stories have clearly been discreetly dumped by the “official history” of the Holocaust—an implicit admittance that they are false. At this point Judge Matia should ask himself this question: since the stories of Jews being gassed with chlorine, Zyklon B and other un-named gases at Sobibor are false, isn’t it also possible that his claim of Jews being asphyxiated with carbon monoxide is also false?

I again call the reader’s attention to Matia’s precise wording about the alleged method of murder at Sobibor. He claims the guards “drove them [the Jews] into gas chambers where they were murdered by asphyxiation with carbon monoxide.” Notice that Matia did not mention the specifics of the murder weapon. Did the Germans use a diesel engine or a benzene engine to generate the carbon monoxide?

Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg and the statement of SS officer Kurt Gerstein claimed a diesel engine was used.11 Nevertheless, Sobibor expert Yitzhak Arad cites the testimony of the German soldier Erich Fuchs, who testified that a benzene engine was used.12 These are no minor discrepancies. In any murder investigation the nature of the murder weapon is of prime importance.

Matia did not say if the Germans used a diesel or benzene engine to generate the carbon monoxide, because if he did, he would have involved himself in another dilemma that casts serious doubt on the traditional Sobibor extermination story. And of course, in this short article I will not even mention all of the contradictions regarding the number, dimensions and capacity of the Sobibor “gas chambers.”13

I call attention to Matia’s statement about what allegedly happened to the bodies of the murder victims. He wrote that the guards “assigned to Sobibor also guarded a small number of Jewish forced laborers kept alive to maintain the camp, [and] dispose of the corpses…”

Once again, notice how vague Matia’s wording is. He only refers to the “disposal of corpses.” By failing to note that the “official history” claims that 167, 000 to 250,000 were burned in mass graves, he avoids entering into all of the problems associated with this allegation. For example, one Sobibor survivor, Kurt Thomas, claims the bodies were burned with coal.14 Yet, this is conflicts with Sobibor historian Jules Schelvis, who says that wood was used.15 Another, Thomas Toivi Blatt, also says that wood was used, but the funeral pyres were sometimes doused with kerosene.16 Still another, Alexander Pechersky, says the bodies were burned with gasoline.17

The burning of bodies in open mass graves leaves behind bones and teeth. Sobibor historian Arad realizes this problem, and he cites a Sobibor “eyewitness” who claimed that the bones were smashed into dust with hammers!18 Imagine that! The bones and teeth of hundreds of thousands of burned Jewish corpses were manually smashed into dust by Sobibor inmates with hammers! The forensic evidence was thus destroyed. The highly questionable nature (to put it mildly) of this allegation should be intuitively obvious with anyone with an ounce of common sense.

The Commission for the Investigation of Nazi Crimes in Poland asserted that 250,000 people were murdered at Sobibor.19 Yet, Israeli and Polish archaeologists, who are firm believers in the Holocaust ideology, admit that it is hard to imagine how this could be so. In their own words: “The camp was destroyed by the Germans after the prisoner revolt, so it is very difficult to imagine that the killing of 250, 000 people took place here.”20

The pre-eminent Holocaust authority, the late Raul Hilberg, engaged in “Holocaust denial.” He denied that 250,000 people were murdered at Sobibor. He reduced this figure by twenty percent, as he claimed that up to 200,000 people were murdered at Sobibor.21 Sobibor historian Jules Schelvis engaged in an even more serious form of “Holocaust denial.” He even denied that 200,000 people were slaughtered there! He minimized the number of alleged Sobibor deaths down to 167,000!22 How come they are not on trial for “Holocaust denial?”

Here is my most important point. If a true believer in the orthodox Sobibor “extermination story” like Judge Matia would make a thorough study of this issue, even he will find enough evidence to be very skeptical of the “gas chamber” claim. The contradictions, story changing, falsehoods and improbabilities that I’ve enumerated here are exactly what one should expect from a historical propaganda myth. One wonders if Judge Matia has the courage to publicly face up to the evidence that undermines what he wrote in his ruling against John Demjanjuk.

The reader should keep this in mind during the future trial of John Demjanjuk for the crime of “leading Jews to the gas chambers.” Indeed, as I’ve shown in another of my essays, the promoters of the Holocaust mythology want to use a show trial to fight the phenomenal growth of “Holocaust denial.” This is precisely the ulterior reason for the further prosecution of the hapless Demjanjuk.23

The testimony of Thomas Blatt: A Witness Against Demjanjuk?

After John Demjanjuk was deported to Germany, German television reported that a survivor of the Sobibor camp could help confirm Demjanjuk's identity. The witness, 82-year-old Thomas Blatt, is a somewhat well-known Sobibor survivor who authored a book about his experiences at the camp during WWII. He described the state of affairs at Sobibor akin to a death factory.

Here is what Blatt told the German magazine, Spiegel: “"They abused us. They shot new arrivals who were old and sick and could not go on. And there were some who pushed naked people into the gas chambers with bayonets…Sobibor was a factory. Only a few hours passed between arrival and the burning of a body."24

Blatt provides one with a very obvious reason to be skeptical of his story. It says on the back cover of his book that Blatt survived a total of six months at Sobibor.25 If what Blatt says is true—that Sobibor was a death factory where people were murdered and their bodies burned within a few hours of arrival—then it is logical to infer that Blatt himself should not be around to tell his story. How did Blatt survive a whole six months in the camp? Blatt makes it perfectly clear in his memoir that he never worked in the area that housed the alleged “gas chambers.” Since he was never needed for this job, why would the Germans allow him to survive a half of a year in the camp if “only a few hours passed between arrival [of Jewish prisoners] and the burning a body?”

By the mere fact that Blatt was allegedly at Sobibor for six months and was not murdered, is consistent with the Revisionist hypothesis that Sobibor was not an extermination center for Jews, but rather a transit camp where Jews were deported further east.

But just as importantly, one is led to conclude that his most important claims about the “gas chambers” are just “hearsay” or word of mouth gossip. Blatt claims that inmates such as himself were not allowed to see inside the “top secret” area of Sobibor that contained the “gas chambers.” In his own words: “Prisoners from the other lagers [areas that did not have “gas chambers”] were never allowed to see the inside of Lager III [the area of Sobibor that harbored the “top secret gas chambers”].”26 His friend who did peek inside the “gas chamber” area was presumably killed.27 This is consistent with the official Sobibor extermination story. According to the Polish and Israeli archeologists who investigated the camp, prisoners who survived Sobibor never saw the “gas chambers,” because “seeing it implied instant execution.”28

Thus, if Blatt would have actually seen “naked people being driven into the gas chambers,” he should have been killed by the Germans--according to the official story.

Elsewhere Blatt says the Nazis made it difficult to collect “any direct evidence” of the alleged mass exterminations in gas chambers. After the war, the information about the “gas chambers” allegedly came from inmates who spoke with other inmates who worked around the gas chambers or from “limited observations” of the extermination area from a different area of the camp. The testimony of Ukrainian and German guards filled in the rest of the story.29

Nevertheless, Blatt offers some “detailed knowledge” of the Sobibor “gas chambers.” He says they were “decorated with flowers, a Star of David, and the inscription ‘Bathhouse.’”30 How did he get this “information?” Did he actually see the “gas chambers?” If he did, then how come he was not killed by the Germans, as “seeing” implied instant execution? Or did he get these “facts” by word of mouth from other prisoners or from former guards?

Nowhere in his 1997 book does Blatt claim he actually saw, with own two eyes, “naked people being pushed into the gas chambers with bayonets.”

Finally, another of Blatt’s claims is inconsistent with the official lay out of Sobibor. We let Blatt pick up his story here: “Our job in this section done, SS Oberscharführer Karl Frenzel randomly chose four prisoners, myself included, and led us to the hair-cutting barrack, less than twenty feet from the gas chambers.”31 Notice what Blatt is saying: the barracks where the hair of the female victims was cut (before they went to the gas chambers) was less than twenty feet (6.1 meters) from the gas chambers. Elsewhere he again states that the special barrack where the women’s hair was cut before entering the gas chambers was “just steps away from the gas chambers.”32

Yet, Sobibor historian Yitzhak Arad claims the path (the “tube”) that led from the reception area for Jews (Lager II) to the extermination area (Lager III) was 150 meters long. Arad adds: “Halfway through the ‘tube’ was the ‘barber shop,’ a barrack where the hair of the Jewish women was cut before they entered the gas chambers.”33

If the path from Lager II to the gas chambers was 150 meters long, and the “barber shop” was halfway through the “tube,” then the “barber shop” was 37.5 meters from the gas chambers, not 6.1 meters from the gas chambers. The “barber shop” was not, as Blatt says, just steps away from the gas chambers.

Does the reader see the dilemma here? If Blatt is correct, in that the “barber shop” was just steps away (6.1 meters) from the gas chambers, then Arad’s official story that the “barber shop” was 37.5 meters from the “gas chambers” is false. But if Arad is correct, then this calls into question the veracity of Blatt’s testimony.

Once again, inconsistencies like this should make even the most hardcore believer in the Sobibor extermination story to be very skeptical.

Footnotes

1. See page 27 of Judge Paul R. Matia’s Ruling on the Demjanjuk case. Online: http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:c7O ... clnk&gl=us

2. Ibid.

3. Ibib, p.97.

4. Robert Jan van Pelt, The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial (Indiana University Press, 2002), p. 5.

5. Thomas Toivi Blatt, From the Ashes of Sobibor: A Story of Survival (Northwestern University Press, 1997), pp. 227-228.

6. Miriam Novitch, ed., Sobibor: Martyrdom and Revolt (Holocaust Library, 1980), p. 50.

7. See Carlo Mattogno, Belzec in Propaganda, Testimonies, Archeological Research, and History (Theses & Dissertations Press, 2004), p.10. Online: http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/b/index.html

8. Ibid.

9. Ibid.

10. Jules Schelvis, Sobibor: A History of a Nazi Death Camp (Berg, 2007), p.68.

11. Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews: Student Edition (Holmes & Meier), p. 229. See Gerstein’s testimony in Yitzhak Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka: The Operation Reinhard Death Camps (Indiana University Press, 1987), p.101.

12. Arad, p. 31.

13. For these contradictions, see Paul Grubach, “The Sobibor ‘Death Camp’ in the Context of the Demjanjuk Case.” Online: http://www.codoh.com/viewpoints/vppgsobibor.html

14. Novitch, p.78.

15. Jules Schelvis, Sobibor: A History of a Nazi Death Camp (Berg, 2007), p. 112.

16. Thomas Toivi Blatt, From the Ashes of Sobibor: A Story of Survival (Northwestern University Press, 1997), p.232.

17. See Mattogno, p. 10.

18. Arad, p. 172.

19. Novitch, p.13.

20. See the “News and Reports” section of http://www.undersobibor.org/

21. Hilberg, p. 338.

22. Schelvis, back cover. On page 1, he says that approximately 170,000 were gassed at Sobibor.

23. See Paul Grubach, “Hunting Demjanjuk: Injustice, Double Standards, and Ulterior Agendas.” Online: http://www.codoh.com/revisionist/tr08demjanjuk.html

24. “Demjanjuk vows to fight death camp charges,” The Local: Germany’s News in English, 12 May 2009. Online: http://www.thelocal.de/national/20090512-19237.html

25. See Blatt, footnote 15.

26. Ibid, p.103.

27. Ibid.

28. Gilead, I.; Haimi, Y.; Mazurek, W.. Excavating Nazi Extermination Centres. Present Pasts, North America, 110 05 2009. Online: http://presentpasts.info/journal/index. ... e/view/3/7

29. Blatt, p232n7.

30. Ibid, p231n2.

31. Ibid, p.101.

32. Ibid, p230n2.

33. Arad, p. 33.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:38 pm)

Remember to beware of forged documents that boost the exterminationist view. Check this out.
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=288

Oh and this too.
Himmler's "extermination of the Jews" speech. A likely forgery
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5474

Friedrich Berg on Michael Collins Piper on the absurdity of the diesel van story.
http://www.nazigassings.com/MP3/MCPiperandFPBerg.mp3


Formerly in the Red Army, John Demjanjuk volunteered for the German SS and became a Wachman at Sobibor concentration camp. He somehow managed to emigrate to and live in the US since 1951, and in Cleveland since 1958. On 25 June 1981 a Federal count stripped Demjanjuk of his US Citizenship because he obtained it under false pretenses, namely, hiding the fact that he worked in German concentration camps. In 1986 he was extradited to Israel, and was convicted of war crimes and sentenced to death there in 1988. Things thus seemed fairly tidy, the matter settled.

But Demjanjuk was freed of his death sentence several years later when evidence surfaced that he was the victim of mistaken identity. Apparently instead of volunteering for the SS, he was held prisoner in a forced labor camp by the Nazis in Poland. The guard, "Ivan the Terrible", was in fact some other individual. Demjanjuk regained his U.S. citizenship in 1998.

http://www.nndb.com/people/327/000045192/

And he has maintained that to this day. And that is a fact. Which is why Israel had to let him go in court years ago. Now look at what German Jews are doing to this poor man to whip up the lower rank and file Jews into a frenzy.

Demjanjuk appears in German court[

Last Updated: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 | 7:35 PM ET
CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/05/1 ... zi012.html

John Demjanjuk appeared in a Munich courtroom Tuesday as a German judge read a 21-page warrant accusing him of acting as an accessory to the murder of 29,000 people at a Nazi death camp.

U.S. immigration authorities deported the 89-year-old retired autoworker from his Ohio home Monday after the Supreme Court refused to hear his appeal to block the move.

Demjanjuk, who sat in a wheelchair and used a breathing tube, sat silently as an interpreter translated the warrant into his native Ukrainian, his lawyer Guenther Maull told reporters afterward.

"He understood what was being read to him," his lawyer Guenther Maull told reporters he has filed a challenge against the warrant, arguing the evidence was not solid and Germany's jurisdiction questionable.

German authorities, who say formal charges could be filed within weeks, allege Demjanjuk served as a prison guard at the Sobibor death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland in 1943.

American authorities shared Nazi-era documents with prosecutors in Munich, including a photo ID identifying Demjanjuk as a guard at the Sobibor death camp. German prosecutors also have a transfer roster for Sobibor that lists Demjanjuk by name and birthday and puts him at the camp, and statements from former guards who remembered him being there.

Demjanjuk maintains he was a Red Army soldier who was a prisoner of war at the death camp.

Sorry but I'm not buying this evidence. Let's see the photo.
The United States originally accused Demjanjuk of being a Nazi prison guard at the Treblinka death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland known as Ivan the Terrible.

However, after being extradited to and convicted in Israel, that country's Supreme Court ruled there was not enough evidence to prove he was the notorious guard. Records from Soviet archives contained depositions from Treblinka guards who said Ivan the Terrible was another Ukrainian, Ivan Marchenko.

Demjanjuk was allowed to return to the U.S., but American authorities renewed charges against him in 2002 after new evidence suggested he had concealed his service at Sobibor

Yea right. Must be that new photo that the Americans have. Let's see it first.

Image
Suspected Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk is seen inside an ambulance car as it arrives in front of the Stadelheim prison in Munich, southern Germany, on Tuesday. (Uwe Lein/Associated Press)

This is just sick. Leave this man alone. Israel let him go because they know the truth.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:41 pm)

From Ryan Dawson.

http://www.rys2sense.com/anti-neocons/v ... 11&t=19730

Ry wrote:James Traficant gets out of jail and goes after AIPAC again. He tells it exactly how it is.
Israel takes 15 billion dollars a year from the US. He was thrown in jail after winning against AIPAC in 1983.

"Ivan the terrible" was Ivan Marchenko. More here if you are unfamiliar with this Ivan the not-so terrible. Just more holes in the Holocaust tale.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl_6NAUJjs0

Greta's only response was "Are you and anti-Semite?" How pathetic.

Run for congress Traficant, just so I can see Foxman's head explode.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:35 pm)

http://johndenugent.com/blog/2009/08/28 ... -deportee/

The “Nazi Extermination Camp” of Sobibor in the Context of the Demjanjuk Case
Paul Grubach

Introduction

Claiming he spent most of WWII as a prisoner of the Germans, John Demjanjuk gained entry to the United States in 1952. In 1977, he was first sought out by US Federal Prosecutors, who insisted he was a war criminal who murdered Jews during WWII. Years later, in 1986, the former autoworker was extradited to Israel where he stood trial, accused of herding Jews into “gas chambers.” In 1988, he was sentenced to death for crimes against humanity after former concentration camp inmates identified him as the notorious “Ivan the Terrible”, a guard at the purported death camp of Treblinka.

In 1993, the Israeli Supreme Court acquitted Demjanjuk with regard to the allegations that he was “Ivan the Terrible,” and his United States citizenship was restored shortly thereafter. Unfortunately, the travails of the hapless Seven Hills, Ohio resident did not end here.

The Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations (OSI) revived his case in 1999 by bringing a new legal complaint against the Ukrainian born retiree. They maintained Demjanjuk was a guard in other Nazi concentration camps and he lied about his wartime activities. After losing a long legal battle to stay in the US, John Demjanjuk was deported to Germany on May 12, 2009 to stand trial for alleged war crimes. German prosecutors formally charged him in July with helping to murder 27,900 Jews at the Sobibor camp.

Eli M. Rosenbaum, director of the US Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations (OSI), summed up the US and German governments’ stance on Demjanjuk: “Thousands of Jews were murdered in the gas chambers of Sobibor, and John Demjanjuk helped seal their fate.”1

The original charge against John Demjanjuk—that he was a brutal guard who operated the “gas chambers” of Treblinka—was shown to be unfounded. Could it be that this new charge against Mr. Demjanjuk—that he herded Jews into the “gas chambers” of Sobibor—is even more baseless than the original one?

The reader should take note of this oddity. In 1962, SS man Erich Bauer mentioned a Ukrainian who had been on duty at the alleged gas chambers of Sobibor, who went by the name of Iwan and was nicknamed “The Terrible.” Holocaust historian Jules Schelvis suggested that perhaps Bauer was referring to John Demjanjuk.2 The Israeli Supreme Court already acquitted Demjanjuk with regard to the allegations that he was the notorious “Ivan the Terrible” of Treblinka. Will the international Holocaust lobby attempt to make Demjanjuk into a new mythological character, “Ivan the Terrible” of Sobibor?

The Traditional Sobibor Extermination Story and John Demjanjuk

Camp Sobibor was located in a sparsely populated, woody and swampy area of eastern Poland. According to the orthodox Holocaust story, the first stage of the extermination operation went on for three months, from the beginning of May to the end of July 1942, during which 90,000 to 100,000 Jews were allegedly murdered. The second stage of the purported murder operation ran from October 1942 to September 1943, which brought the total number of Jews killed to approximately 250,000, the official etched-in-stone Sobibor statistic. At first, the bodies were buried in trenches. At the end of the summer of 1942, the burial trenches were opened and the burning of the victims’ corpses was begun. A prisoner revolt broke out on October 14, 1943, and some three hundred prisoners managed to escape, but most were later killed. In the aftermath of the uprising, the Germans destroyed the camp. By the end of 1943, the official story says that no trace of Sobibor was left.3

Image

Illustration 1. The famous ID card showing Demjanjuk being transferred to Sobibor. Much has been written about this card including the charge that it is a forgery. It has no date of issue, the SS symbol was entered by hand, and it has been asserted that the photo of Demjanjuk was added after the fact. Photo: US Department of Justice.

In 2002, US District Court Judge Paul R. Matia claimed in his ruling that John Demjanjuk served as a guard at Camp Sobibor, circa March 27, 1943 to October 1, 1943. In regard to this alleged extermination camp, Matia asserted that the guards “assigned to Sobibor met the arriving transports of Jews, forcibly unloaded the Jews from the trains, compelled them to disrobe, and drove them into gas chambers where they were murdered by asphyxiation with carbon monoxide.” Matia charged Demjanjuk with a specific crime: “In serving at Sobibor, Defendant [John Demjanjuk] contributed to the process by which thousands of Jews were murdered by asphyxiation with carbon monoxide.”4

The Holocaust affirming Judge further claimed that the “guards assigned to Sobibor also guarded a small number of Jewish forced laborers kept alive to maintain the camp, dispose of the corpses, and process the possessions of those killed.”5

Further on in his ruling, Matia made this most important statement: “This [case against John Demjanjuk] is a case of documentary evidence, not eyewitness testimony.”6 Here, what Matia wrote is misleading. The current case about Demjanjuk allegedly serving at Sobibor is based upon purportedly authentic documents. But what Matia asserts about Sobibor being an “extermination camp” is based exclusively upon eyewitness testimony.

No Physical or Forensic Evidence to Prove Traditional View of Sobibor

Professor Christopher Browning is considered one of the world’s foremost authorities on the WWII concentration camps of Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor, collectively known as the Operation Reinhardt Camps. In his formal statement for the David Irving vs. Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books libel trial in London in 2000, Browning admitted that documents relating to mass gassings at these camps are scant. The same holds true for the material evidence (the mass graves and remains of the camps themselves): it is scarce.7

Holocaust historian Robert Jan van Pelt also conceded the evidence for the mass killings of Jews at Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec—where allegedly millions were murdered—is very meager. In reference to these three camps, he wrote: “There are few eyewitnesses, no confession that can compare to that given by [Auschwitz commandant Rudolf] Höss, no significant remains, and few archival sources.”8 The statements by Sobibor researcher and former inmate of the camp, Thomas Toivi Blatt, harmonize with Professor van Pelt, for he admitted: “Sobibor was the most secretive of the extermination camps, and very little official documentation survives. Most of what was written in the camp or by [German officials in the Lublin district of Poland] was destroyed.”9

Israeli and Polish archeologists who investigated the Sobibor site found no physical/archeological evidence to prove the Sobibor “gas chambers” existed, or that 250, 000 people were murdered there. To date, archeological science cannot determine the site of the “gas chambers” or even if they existed. The reader is strongly encouraged to read the forensic study to see that this is indeed the case.10 For sure, these forensic scientists (who are firm believers in the traditional Holocaust extermination story) find it difficult to imagine how 250, 000 could have been murdered there.11 This allegation was first made by the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland in 1946-1947.12

Clearly, the only support for the traditional Sobibor extermination story is the testimony of former inmates and the post war statements of German officials who were on trial for alleged war crimes.

How Were the Jews Allegedly Murdered at Sobibor?

Judge Matia and the mainstream historians claim that Jews were murdered in gas chambers at Sobibor, and carbon monoxide was the death-gas. Yet, there are former prisoners who have claimed that chlorine was the death-gas.

Sobibor witness Hella Fellenbaum-Weiss told the story of how Jews on their way to Sobibor were gassed with chlorine: “The arrival of another convoy distressed me in the same way. It was thought to come from Lvov, but nobody knows for sure. Prisoners were sobbing and told us a dreadful tale: they had been gassed on the way with chlorine, but some survived. The bodies of the dead were green and their skin peeled off.”13

The allegation that Jews were gassed on their way to Sobibor with chlorine has been quietly discarded by the Holocaust promoters—an implicit admittance that it must be false.

In his thorough study of Belzec concentration camp, Belzec in Propaganda, Testimonies, Archeological Research, and History, Revisionist historian Carlo Mattogno cited Sobibor inmates who specifically stated that chlorine was a gas used to asphyxiate Jews at Sobibor. Inmate Zelda Metz recounted: “They [the alleged ‘gas chamber’ victims] entered the wooden building where the woman’s hair was cut, and then the ‘Bath’, i.e., the gas chamber. They were asphyxiated with chlorine. After 15 minutes, they had all suffocated. Through a window it was checked whether they were all dead. Then the floor opened automatically. The corpses fell into the cars of a train passing through the gas chamber and taking the corpses to the oven.”14

The mainstream historians of Sobibor have abandoned the “chlorine death gas” and “trap-door-in-the-gas-chamber” stories—once again, an implicit admittance that they are both false.

Leon Feldhendler also declared chlorine was a “death-gas,” although he also claimed the Germans experimented with other gases. Alexander Pechersky alleged that some type of “heavy, black substance” was the death-gas.15 However, chlorine is a greenish-yellow gas.

Stanislaw Szmajzner believed the Germans used exhaust fumes, but also Zyklon B gas.16 Dr. Joseph Tenenbaum, a well known author and renowned Jewish civic leader, went on a fact-finding tour of Poland in April to June 1946. He too “discovered” the “fact” that Jews were murdered with Zyklon B gas at Sobibor. In his own words: “The Germans used Cyclon [sic] as the lethal medium.”17

Alterations in the story abound. In 1943, one Sobibor witness even claimed the Jews were killed with electricity and gas.18

The chlorine gas, Zyklon B gas, “other un-named” gas, and electrocution stories have clearly been discreetly dumped by the “official history” of the Holocaust—an implicit admittance that they are all false. At this point Judge Matia should ask himself this question: since the stories of Jews being murdered with electricity, chlorine, Zyklon B and other un-named gases at Sobibor are false, isn’t it also possible that the “official truth” that Jews were murdered with carbon monoxide is also false?

I again call the reader’s attention to Matia’s precise wording about the alleged method of murder at Sobibor. He claims the guards “drove them [the Jews] into gas chambers where they were murdered by asphyxiation with carbon monoxide.” Notice that Matia did not mention the specifics of the murder weapon, because he does not know what the alleged murder weapon really was. Did the Germans use a diesel engine or a benzene engine to generate the carbon monoxide?

The pre-eminent historian of the Holocaust, the late Raul Hilberg, claimed that a diesel engine supplied the deadly gas to “gas chambers.”19

This is supported by Israeli historian Arad, as he published a large portion of the post-war testimony of Kurt Gerstein, a German officer who was allegedly deeply involved with the extermination of Jews in the Operation Reinhardt camps. In the Gerstein testimonial, it is stated that a diesel engine was used at Sobibor, and also at Majdanek, Treblinka, and Belzec. More specifically, Gerstein quotes SS and Police Leader Odilo Globocnik, who gives Gerstein his alleged instructions: “Your other duty will be to improve the service of our gas chambers, which function on diesel engine exhaust.”20 According to the traditional Holocaust story, Globocnik was a major supervisor of the alleged mass exterminations at Sobibor, and he should have most certainly known the exact nature of the “gas chamber” weapon.

Arad then undermines this “evidence” by quoting the testimony of SS soldier Erich Fuchs, a German official who supposedly operated the engine that supplied the death gas to the “gas chamber,” and was subsequently put on trial for alleged war crimes committed at Sobibor. He “identified” the engine that supplied the deadly gas as a “heavy Russian benzene engine (presumably a tank or tractor motor) at least 200 horsepower (V-motor, 8 cylinder, water cooled).”21 A diesel engine is not a benzene engine.

The exact identity of the engine is further complicated by the testimony of SS man Erich Bauer, an alleged “operator of the gas chambers” who was nicknamed “the Gasmeister.” He identified the engine in question as follows: “In my opinion it was a petrol engine, a big engine. I think a Renault.” Renault is a French built engine, and not Russian as claimed by Fuchs.22

Another German who allegedly operated the “gassing engine” at Sobibor, Franz Hödl, offers us another problematic “identification” of the murder weapon. Here is his description of the “gassing engines” that serviced the “gas chambers”: “In the engine room there were indeed two engines. There was a petrol engine, probably from a Russian tank, and a diesel engine. The latter was never used, however.”23

The instructions from an alleged supervisor of the gassing operations at Sobibor and the other Operation Reinhardt camps, SS leader Odilo Globocnik, described the engine that supplied the deadly gas as a diesel engine. Yet, Franz Hödl, who allegedly operated the engine, says that the diesel engine was never used.

Even mainstream Sobibor expert Christopher Browning admits that the type of engine used to generate the death gas cannot be determined, for he wrote: “Gerstein, citing Globocnik, claimed the camps used diesel motors, but witnesses who actually serviced the engines in Belzec and Sobibor (Reder and Fuchs) spoke of gasoline engines.”24

We repeat the statement of Judge Matia. He claims that the Sobibor guards “drove [the Jews] into gas chambers where they were murdered by asphyxiation with carbon monoxide.” Notice that Matia’s wording is vague and imprecise; he failed to mention the exact identity of the murder weapon. Matia did not mention the exact nature of the “murder engine” that generated the carbon monoxide, because if he did, he would have involved himself in another dilemma that casts serious doubt on the traditional Sobibor extermination story. The reader is reminded that this is no “trivial inconsistency” in the testimony. In any murder investigation, the exact nature of the murder weapon is very important.

By the mere fact that the men who allegedly directed this “gas chamber” process and operated the engines that generated the carbon monoxide contradict each other on the important issue of what type of engine was used, is consistent with the Revisionist hypothesis that these testimonies are unreliable. By the mere fact that these “eyewitnesses” produced such divergent testimony on a murder weapon that they should have known about, witnessed, observed and examined very closely for an extended period of time, lends further credence to the Revisionist view that their testimonies on this matter are false, and these “gas chambers” never existed.

At the very least, this divergent testimony should give a true believer in the Holocaust, such as Judge Matia, a reason to be skeptical of the traditional Sobibor extermination story.

The Number, Dimensions and Capacities of the Sobibor “Gas Chambers”

Holocaust historian Leon Poliakov claimed there were five gas chambers, fifty square meters each, and built to hold approximately 2,000 people. Each chamber was packed with 400 victims.25 He may have taken this from the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland inquiry, where they allege that there were probably five chambers that could hold 500 victims each.26

Holocaust historian Miriam Novitch gives a different story on the number, dimensions and capacities of the “gas chambers.” She claims that each “original” gas chamber (three of them) were ten square meters and could hold 50 people.27 Later, she says that new gas chambers were built: there were now five gas chambers, each 4 x 12 meters (48 square meters), with a capacity of 70 to 80 people. Thus, 400 victims could be put to death at the same time, if children were included.28

This is all contradicted by another “expert” on the Sobibor camp, Yitzhak Arad. He insisted there were originally three gas chambers, each 4 x 4 meters and able to hold about 200 people.29 In the autumn of 1942, Arad claims the Germans added three new gas chambers, to make a total of six gas chambers. They were of the same dimensions as the old gas chambers, 4 x 4 meters (sixteen square meters). This information was published in 1987.30 In a 1990 article in The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, Arad changed the capacity of the gas chambers. He said that each chamber could hold 160 to 180 victims, not 200.31

Franz Hödl, an alleged operator of the Sobibor “gas chambers,” put forth another problematic testimony. He stated: “In Lager 3 [the area of the camp that had the ‘gas chambers’] a concrete building, 18 to 20 meters long with about 6 to 8 gas chambers, had been erected. The gas chamber had either 4 or 6 chambers on either side of the central corridor, three on the left, three on the right.”32 So, were there 3 chambers on each side of the central corridor as Arad claimed, or were there 4 on each side? Were there a total of 6 chambers as Arad claimed, or were there 8 chambers?

These discrepancies on the number, dimensions and capacities of the “gas chambers” are not trivial. As stated earlier, in any murder investigation the nature of the murder weapon is of prime importance. Indeed, even the official mainstream historian of Sobibor, Jules Shelvis, finally admitted that the capacities of the chambers cannot be determined: “It is virtually impossible to deduce from the various witness examinations and documents how many people were actually killed at any one time in the gas chambers; the numbers given by the SS men and one Ukrainian are too divergent.”33

The mere fact that the dimensions, capacities and the number of the Sobibor “gas chambers” cannot be resolved is consistent with the Holocaust revisionist hypothesis that these “murder devices” never existed, and what these “eyewitnesses” are claiming is false. Once again, at the very least this is one more reason for the hardcore Holocaust believer to doubt the traditional Sobibor extermination story.

What Were the “Gas Chambers” Made Of?

Serious contradictions in the traditional Sobibor extermination story are seemingly endless. Operation Reinhardt expert Arad says this: “The first gas chambers erected in Sobibor were in a solid brick building with a concrete foundation.”34 This is challenged by Sobibor historian Schelvis, who writes that “[T]he first gas chambers of Sobibor had been constructed of wood.”35 Let us delve into this very important issue in more detail.

In the aftermath of the war, the inquiry of the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland found that the alleged gas chambers “were situated in a building with stone-inside walls and wooden outside-walls.” They did admit, however, that their data is imprecise because none of their witnesses were actually employed in the “gas chamber” area.36

Franz Stangl, who oversaw the last phase of the camp’s construction and served as commandant from March to September 1942, described the first installation as a “brick building” in his interview with British journalist Gitta Sereny.37 On the other hand, he told a German court a different story. Arriving at Sobibor early April 1942, he said “I noticed a stone construction on a partially wooded site which had not yet been fenced off. This building had not been included in the plans. After some days I began to suspect that gas chambers were being built.”38 Were the first “gas chambers” made of brick or stone? Stangl apparently changed his story.

Erich Fuchs, who supposedly installed the gassing engine and also participated in the first trial gassings, implied in 1963 that the chambers were housed in “a concrete structure.”39 Historian Schelvis “corrected” Fuchs, for he wrote: “Because he [Fuchs] had put into place so many installations over the course of time, he did not remember that the first gas chambers at Sobibor had been constructed of wood.”40

Erich Bauer was supposedly nicknamed “The Gasmeister of Sobibor”. In 1950 he was sentenced to death (later commuted to life imprisonment) by a West German court for operating the “Sobibor gas chambers.” According to a “confession” penned by Bauer while in prison, the first gas chambers were in a “wooden building on a concrete base.”41

Revisionist historian Thomas Kues sums up the dilemma: “While, on the one hand, Sobibor’s first commandant, Franz Stangl, testified that the first gas chambers were housed in a brick building, ‘Gasmeister’ Erich Bauer on the other hand penned a ‘confession’ which described the same building as made of wood. To confuse things further, former SS-Unterscharführer Erich Fuchs stated in his 1963 testimony that the first Sobibor gas chambers were in a ‘concrete structure.’”42

Kues rightly asks a most important question: “How is it that Stangl and Bauer, two men who both should have been familiar with this building, produced such divergent testimony?”43

Kues then makes a very important point. Stangl and Bauer are two men that would have been intimately familiar with the “gas chambers,” as they were in charge of supervising and carrying out the alleged gassings. By the mere fact that these two important “eyewitnesses” produce such divergent testimony on a structure that they should have witnessed, observed and examined very closely for an extended period of time, lends further credence to the Revisionist view that their testimonies on this matter are unreliable. Their testimonies on this matter undermine each other and tend to cancel each other out.44

How long did it take to asphyxiate the Victims in the “Gas Chambers?”

The Israeli and Polish archeologists who excavated Sobibor made this claim about the Sobibor “gas chambers.”: “When the gas chambers were filled with victims, the gas was vented into the rooms asphyxiated the victims in about 20-30 minutes.”45 They provide no source for this claim.

Nevertheless, this is contradicted by The Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, where they “found” something different in 1946-7, about the operation of the Sobibor “gas chambers.” They wrote: “According to the statements of witnesses it did not take more than some 15 minutes to kill a group of about 500 persons.” They admit that their data is imprecise because none of their witnesses were actually employed in the “gas chamber” area.46

Once again, here we have a major discrepancy about the alleged murder weapon. The archeologists say it took 20-30 minutes to asphyxiate the victims. Yet, the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland claimed it did not take more than about 15 minutes to do the same. And might I add, Erich Fuchs, an alleged gas chamber operator, declared he witnessed a “trial gassing” in which 30 to 40 women were killed in about ten minutes.47

Once again, this is no trivial inconsistency. How the murder weapon operated is a very important issue in any murder investigation.

How Were the Corpses Removed from the “Gas Chambers”?

The next logical question: how were the bodies removed from the “gas chambers?” Historian Arad says that the victims entered through one door and their dead bodies were extracted through the other.48

This is contradicted by Sobibor inmate Moshe Bahir. He claimed that after the conclusion of a mass gassing, when all of the victims were dead, the “gas chamber operator” Bauer would open the “trap doors” in the floor of the gas chamber (the “bathhouse”) and the bodies would fall into wagons positioned below. In his own words: “At his [Bauer’s] order the machinery which opened the floor of the ‘bathhouse’ was activated, and the corpses fell into small carts which took them at first to mass graves and, later when time was short, to cremation ovens instead.”49 This is sustained by Sobibor survivor Chaim Engel, who also claimed that the bodies fell through trap doors.50

According to Arad, however, when three new gas chambers were added in autumn of 1942, they were the same size as the “old” gas chambers, 4 x 4 meters. He made no mention of any “trap doors” through which the bodies fell into carts positioned below.51

The “gas chamber-trap door” story of Bahir and Engel has been quietly abandoned by the mainstream Sobibor historians. Historian Schelvis even implies that it is false.52 Keep in mind that Bahir’s testimony was considered by the German legal system to be very credible, so much so that he testified at the Sobibor trial in Hagen, West Germany in 1965.53

Let us move onto the next logical question: how were the dead bodies transferred from the gas chambers to the mass graves, where they were allegedly burned?

According to Sobibor expert Arad, the bodies were originally put in carts, which were horse-drawn or pushed by prisoners. Eventually, this inefficient system was replaced by a narrow railway trolley that ran to the burial pits.54

Yet, even here, the testimony of Bahir is substantially different from the story presented by Holocaust expert Arad. Toward the end of July 1942, the Germans supposedly installed giant cranes to transport the bodies from the “gas chambers” to a crematorium. In Bahir’s own words: “After a few days, two giant cranes were brought to camp and set up near the gas chambers. These cranes worked unceasingly, three shifts a day, taking the bodies out of the chambers and transferring them to the new crematoria which had been built nearby.”55

This “giant crane” story of Bahir has also been abandoned by the mainstream Sobibor historians—again, an admittance that it is false. The reader should again note that Sobibor inmate Bahir was considered by the German legal system to be an accurate witness, as he testified at the Sobibor trial in Hagen, West Germany in 1965.

Was the Site of the Sobibor “Gas Chambers” Found?

In a 1972 visit to Sobibor, British journalist Gitta Sereny claimed she identified the site of the “gas chambers.” British Holocaust historian Martin Gilbert identified a different location for the “gas chambers” in a 1997 book. The Israeli and Polish archaeologists who are investigating the camp now say that both are wrong, and the exact site of these Sobibor “gas chambers” has not been scientifically determined.56

Was Judge Matia aware of all of these false claims in the Sobibor extermination story when he declared in his ruling that the orthodox Sobibor extermination story is true?

How Did the Germans Dispose of the Hundreds of Thousands of Corpses?

I call attention to Judge Matia’s statement about what allegedly happened to the bodies of the murder victims. He wrote that the guards “assigned to Sobibor also guarded a small number of Jewish forced laborers kept alive to maintain the camp, [and] dispose of the corpses…”

Notice how vague Matia’s wording is. He only refers to the “disposal of corpses.” By failing to note that the “official history” claims that 170,000 to 250,000 bodies were all eventually burned in open air mass cremations, he avoids entering into all of the problems associated with this allegation.

So, how did the Nazis dispose of the bodies of the Jewish murder victims? Holocaust expert Hilberg claimed that no crematoria ovens were ever installed; the bodies were burned in mass graves.57 Nevertheless, Dr. Joseph Tenenbaum, the Jewish leader who carried out a fact-finding mission in Poland from April to June 1946, “established” a different and contradictory version of events. He wrote: “The crematorium [at Sobibor] was fenced in. After the gassing, the victims’ bodies were tossed into pits and sprinkled with chlorine powder. The pits were open and the stench escaped into the air. This fact compelled the Germans to build a modern stench-free crematorium.”58 (This information was gleaned from Sobibor inmate Leon Feldhendler, who was said to have been chosen by the Germans for “special work.” This could mean that he was chosen to work around the “gas chambers.”)

Hilberg says no crematoria were ever installed. Tenenbaum “established” that the Germans built a “modern stench-free crematorium.” The “official truth” about Sobibor has stuck with Hilberg’s versions of events. No crematoria were ever installed at Sobibor, as the bodies were burned in mass graves—rendering Tenenbaum’s “established fact” that the Germans built “stench-free crematoria” at Sobibor as untrue.

Sobibor survivor Stanislaw Szmajzner’s map of Sobibor supports Tenenbaum’s falsehood. On his map, a building is drawn in where the crematorium was allegedly housed.59 Israeli historian Arad’s map points out that there were no crematoria housed in a building. Szmajner’s claim of a crematorium housed in building is just another falsehood to add to the long list of other Sobibor falsehoods.60

The official history now says the bodies were burned in open air mass burnings. It is said that rails were used for the cremation pyres on which the bodies were burned. Nevertheless, the Israeli and Polish archeologists who are investigating the camp admit: “To the best of our knowledge, no rails used for cremation have yet been found at Sobibor.”61

What substance was used to burn the bodies? One Sobibor survivor, Kurt Thomas, claims the bodies were burned with coal.62 Yet, this is conflicts with Sobibor historian Jules Schelvis, who says that wood was used.63 Another, Thomas Toivi Blatt, also says that wood was used, but the funeral pyres were sometimes doused with kerosene.64 Still another, Alexander Pechersky, says the bodies were burned with gasoline.65 Unsubstantiated alterations in the traditional Sobibor story are seemingly endless—another good reason for believing that the orthodox extermination story is a historical falsehood.

An important source of information about Sobibor was the SS man Franz Suchomel, who worked with Sobibor Commandant Franz Stangl. “In Sobibor,” Suchomel stated, “one couldn’t do any killing after the snow thawed because it was all under water. It was very damp at the best of times, but then it became a lake.”66

Yet, the official history of Sobibor states that the killing of Jews started at the beginning of May 1942 (after the snow thawed) and went to end of July 1942: all total, 90,000 to 100,000 Jews were allegedly buried in mass graves, and the burial trenches were not opened and the bodies were not burned until the end of the summer of 1942.67

Judge Matia and the mainstream historians never figured out how the Germans buried tens of thousands of bodies in an area that was like a lake.

The burning of bodies leaves behind a large amount of unburned bones and teeth, as the official historians of Sobibor are clearly aware.68 Holocaust historian Arad declares that the bones of the hundreds of thousands of alleged murder victims at Chelmno were “destroyed with a special bone-crushing machine.”69 Yet, on the next page, he quotes Sobibor survivor Leon Feldhendler, who declared: “The bones were crushed into ashes with hammers [at Sobibor]…”70 This allegation is highly improbable, if not downright ridiculous.

Why did the Germans use a special “bone-crushing machine” at Chelmno, and then resort to inefficient manual hammering at Sobibor? And if they did use a special bone-crushing machine at Chelmno, where is the physical proof that such a device even existed? Did Israeli historian Arad ever think that the story of the “special bone-crushing machine” is another concocted Holocaust tale, like the “steam chambers” of Treblinka and the “soap factories” that utilized the bodies of dead Jews?71

Furthermore, Arad never considers the enormous problems associated with crushing the charred teeth and bones of hundreds of thousands of victims into ash with hammers. There were the charred bones and teeth of 200,000 to 250,000 victims. Imagine how long it would take the small number of Sobibor inmates who allegedly worked in the “gas chamber area” to manually crush into ash with hammers the millions of bones and teeth from these hundreds of thousands of victims!

Holocaust researcher Thomas Dalton discussed the enormous problems in regard to the unburned bones and teeth of the corpses. The ash from the burnt corpses would have to be sifted every day for bones and teeth. Imagine how long it would take to find and smash millions of bones and teeth with hammers! If not found and ground to ash, they are still in the earth, waiting to be discovered.72

The “Top Secret” Extermination Camp Sobibor: Another Contradiction

According to the official US government position on Sobibor, as contained in Judge Matia’s ruling on the Demjanjuk case, Sobibor was a top secret camp. In his own words: “The extermination camp [Sobibor] was a secret operation, not well known during World War II.”73 This is congruent with the orthodox Sobibor saga, as historian Schelvis points out that the camp “was surrounded by very sparsely populated marshland, as far as possible from prying eyes to prevent the outside world from ever discovering the camp’s secret purpose.”74

Schelvis then provides evidence that undermines this orthodox Sobibor saga. Even though he too claimed that Sobibor was a “top secret” extermination camp, he still wrote: “[B]y September or October of 1942, when the Germans had started to burn rather than bury the bodies after gassing them, virtually everyone in the surrounding area soon realized precisely what was going on at the camp. The glow from the fire was clearly visible for miles around, especially by night, while the foul stench of burning human flesh also polluted the air over a wide area.”75

Again, Schelvis claims that: “The mass cremations resulted in huge fires, which flared so high they could be seen far and wide, especially at night…They were visible even…in the village of Zlobek, three kilometers to the north-west…”76

According to Erich Lachmann, a German “eyewitness” who was put on trial for war crimes, what was allegedly going on in Sobibor was well known: “Any child in Poland could tell you that these were extermination camps. It was obvious that Jewish transports kept arriving at the camp and that no Jews ever came back out.”77 (The Jews were being deported elsewhere; this is why they were never seen again.)

Consider the testimony of Sobibor survivor, Zelda Metz. She claims the village in which she lived was only fifty kilometers from Sobibor, and Polish peasants were well aware that it was an extermination center for Jews; they “saw evidence” of this with their own two eyes. She recalls: “Polish peasants told me that Jews came to Sobibor in all directions, and that they were murdered. ‘We see the flames of the crematoria from a distance of fifteen kilometers,’ they used to say. We lived in terror.”78

If Sobibor was the most secretive of the extermination camps, why was the surrounding population well aware of the mass murders that were allegedly taking place there? If Sobibor was this ultra-secretive extermination center as Judge Matia and historian Schelvis state, why did the Germans call mass attention to the killings by allowing the flames, glow and smoke of the mass burnings to be seen from a distance of fifteen kilometers? Directly contradicting what they claim, there was nothing secret about the alleged exterminations at Sobibor. Rumors of mass exterminations of Jews at Sobibor were widely circulated.

Perhaps the earliest reference to Sobibor as an “extermination camp” is in the New York Times of Nov 25, 1942 (p.10). They quote from a report by the Polish Government in exile in London: “Wherever the trains arrive half the people are dead. Those surviving are sent to special camps at Treblinka, Belzec, and Sobibor. Once there the so-called settlers are mass-murdered.” So Sobibor obviously wasn’t top secret after that!

What is the significance of all this? That is, the official history alleges that Sobibor was a top secret extermination camp. Yet, we have cited “evidence” from those same “official histories” that shows that the alleged exterminations and mass burnings at Sobibor were well known and not top secret.

Bizarre contradictions like this are exactly what one should expect from a historical falsehood. The official history says that Sobibor was a top secret extermination camp. Yet, the eyewitnesses—upon whom the official history is based—claim that the mass exterminations were well known and not top secret. If the official history is correct, then the eyewitnesses are wrong. But if the eyewitnesses are correct, the official history is wrong. The official history and the eyewitnesses undermine each other, and tend to cancel each other out.

Here is my most important point. If a true believer in the orthodox Sobibor extermination story simply consults academically acceptable sources, even he will find enough evidence to be very skeptical of the Sobibor “gas chamber” claim. The contradictions and falsehoods that I’ve enumerated here are exactly what one should expect from a historical myth.

How Many Were Allegedly Murdered at Sobibor?

In the aftermath of WWII, the Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland asserted that 250,000 people were murdered at Sobibor.79 This is the official, etched in stone truth still promoted by the Polish authorities.

In the climate of anti-German hatred that followed WWII, wild and irresponsible exaggerations and distortions about the number allegedly killed at Sobibor abounded. In his 1948 book, Jewish civic leader and author, Dr. Joseph Tenenbaum, wrote that from May 1942 to October 1943, a half a million human beings were murdered at the site.80 This is twice the estimate made by the Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland in 1946-1947. This example shows how easy it was in the aftermath of WWII to openly promote outright falsehoods about Sobibor.

In March 1972, British journalist Gitta Sereny noted what was stated on a Sobibor memorial, very near the camp site: “In this place from May 1942 until October 1943 there existed a Hitler extermination camp. At this camp 250,000 Russian, Polish, Jewish and Gypsy prisoners were murdered […].”81 The “official truth” about Sobibor now claims that this is false.

On the road to the camp in present day Poland, there are five plaques along the road by the camp, which read: “At this site, between the years 1942 and 1943, there existed a Nazi death camp where 250,000 Jews and approximately 1000 Poles were murdered.”82

The reader should take note of the variation in the propaganda. In 1972, when Poland was under Communist rule, it was 250,000 Polish, Russian, Jewish and Gypsy prisoners who were murdered—so claimed the memorial plaque. The Communists refused to “recognize” that mostly Jews were supposedly targeted for death by the Germans. Yet, in present-day Poland, with the disappearance of Communism, now it is 250,000 Jews and 1000 Poles who were allegedly murdered at Sobibor. The Sobibor extermination story has evolved in a way that reflects the propaganda needs of the moment and the interests of political elites.

Even so, the Israeli and Polish archaeologists who investigated the site and are firm believers in the “reality” of the Holocaust admit that it is hard to imagine how 250,000 could have been murdered there. In their own words: “The camp was destroyed by the Germans after the prisoner revolt, so it is very difficult to imagine that the killing of 250,000 people took place here.”83

The pre-eminent Holocaust authority, the late Raul Hilberg, engaged in “Holocaust denial.” He denied that 250,000 people were murdered at Sobibor. In the 1985 edition of his magnum opus, he reduced this figure by twenty percent, as he claimed that up to 200,000 people were slaughtered. In the final 2003 edition, his “Holocaust denial” reached new heights of outrage. He says the number supposedly murdered was “over 150,000.” 84

Sobibor historian Jules Schelvis, who wrote the definitive mainstream history of the camp, also engaged in a serious form of “Holocaust denial.” He too denied that 250,000 people were slaughtered there! He minimized the number of alleged Sobibor deaths down to 167,000.85

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:36 pm)

How come Hilberg and Schelvis were never put on trial for “Holocaust denial?”

Sobibor expert Christopher Browning recommended Miriam Novitch’s, Sobibor: Martyrdom and Revolt, as an “authoritative source” for the history of the alleged extermination process at Sobibor.86 What do we learn from one important witness account in this “authoritative source”? Sobibor witness Moshe Bahir claimed that Heinrich Himmler visited the camp for the second time in order to celebrate the completion of the first million Jews murdered at the camp.87

German soldier Erich Fuchs’s estimate of the number of victims was 650,000 less than Bahir’s, as he estimated the total number of Sobibór victims to have been 350,000.88 This is still 100,000 more than the official estimate of 250,000 made by the Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, and more than twice the estimate given by Sobibor expert Schelvis.

I repeat: Polish forensic scientists cannot imagine how 250,000 people could be murdered at Sobibor. Nevertheless, Moshe Bahir, whom the German legal system believed to be a credible witness, claimed that four times 250,000 were murdered at the site! Fuchs claims that 100,000 more than the wild exaggeration of 250,000 were killed at Sobibor. Erich Fuchs is a looked upon as an important source for the “facts” about Sobibor.

Such is the quality of the “eyewitnesses” upon which the traditional Sobibor extermination story is based.

A Question for Judge Matia

Since Judge Matia effectively sealed John Demjanjuk’s fate, I would like to ask him this pointed question. Since we cannot determine how many “gas chambers” there were, nor their dimensions and capacities; what the exact death gas really was; what type of engine was used to generate the death gas; what the chambers were made of; where these structures were located; how long it took for the victims to be asphyxiated; how the corpses were removed from the chambers; how the bodies were buried in a lake-like area; what substance was used to burn the bodies; how the millions of unburned bones and teeth were disposed of; and how many were killed: how then can Judge Matia rule with any confidence that John Demjanjuk “contributed to the process by which thousands of Jews were murdered?”

The testimony of Thomas Blatt: A Witness against Demjanjuk?

After John Demjanjuk was deported to Germany, German television reported that a survivor of the Sobibor camp could help confirm Demjanjuk’s identity. The witness, 82-year-old Thomas Blatt, is a somewhat well-known Sobibor survivor and researcher who authored a book about his experiences at the camp during WWII. He described the state of affairs at Sobibor akin to a death factory.

Here is what Blatt told the German magazine, Spiegel: “”They abused us. They shot new arrivals who were old and sick and could not go on. And there were some who pushed naked people into the gas chambers with bayonets…Sobibor was a factory. Only a few hours passed between arrival and the burning of a body.”89

The official history of the camp calls Blatt’s claims into serious question. The late Holocaust historian Gerald Reitlinger explains: “Only sixteen women and three men returned after the war to Holland from Sobibor, where the chance of avoiding immediate death in the gas chamber was not one in four, but less than one in forty. From most trains about 40-80 young men were picked for the services of the death camp, but they lasted only a few weeks.”90

Blatt provides one with a very obvious reason to be skeptical of his story. It says on the back cover of his book that Blatt survived a total of six months at Sobibor.91 If what Blatt says is true—that Sobibor was a death factory where people were murdered and their bodies burned within a few hours of arrival—then it is logical to infer that Blatt himself should not be around to tell his story. How did Blatt survive a whole six months in the camp? Blatt makes it perfectly clear in his memoir that he never worked in the area that housed the alleged “gas chambers.” Since he was never needed for this job, why would the Germans allow him to survive a half of a year in the camp if “only a few hours passed between arrival [of Jewish prisoners] and the burning a body?”

If the official history is correct—in that a Jew could survive only a few weeks at most—then isn’t Blatt’s claim that he survived six months untrue? But if Blatt’s story is true—that he survived six months in the camp—then this calls into question the traditional Sobibor extermination story.

By the mere fact that Blatt was allegedly at Sobibor for six months and was not murdered, is consistent with the Revisionist hypothesis that Sobibor was not an extermination center for Jews, but rather a transit camp where Jews were deported further east.

Just as importantly, one is led to conclude that his most important claims about the “gas chambers” are just “hearsay” or word of mouth gossip. Blatt claims that inmates were not allowed to see inside the “top secret” area of Sobibor that contained the “gas chambers.” In his own words: “Prisoners from the other lagers [areas that did not have “gas chambers”] were never allowed to see the inside of Lager III [the area of Sobibor that harbored the “top secret gas chambers”].”92 His friend who did peek inside the “gas chamber” area was presumably killed.93 According to the Polish and Israeli archeologists who investigated the camp, prisoners who survived Sobibor never saw the “gas chambers,” because “seeing it implied instant execution.”94

Thus, if Blatt would have actually seen “naked people being driven into the gas chambers,” he should have been killed by the Germans–according to the official story.

Elsewhere Blatt says the Nazis made it difficult to collect “any direct evidence” of the alleged mass exterminations in gas chambers. After the war, the information about the “gas chambers” allegedly came from inmates who spoke with other inmates who worked around the gas chambers or from “limited observations” of the extermination area from a different area of the camp. The testimony of Ukrainian and German guards filled in the rest of the story.95

Nevertheless, Blatt offers some “detailed knowledge” of the Sobibor “gas chambers.” He says they were “decorated with flowers, a Star of David, and the inscription ‘Bathhouse.’”96 How did he get this “information?” Did he actually see the “gas chambers?” If he did, then how come he was not killed by the Germans, as “seeing” implied instant execution? Or did he get these “facts” by word of mouth from other prisoners or from former guards?

Nowhere in his 1997 book does Blatt claim he actually saw, with own two eyes, “naked people being pushed into the gas chambers with bayonets.”

Finally, another of Blatt’s claims is inconsistent with the official lay out of Sobibor. We let Blatt pick up his story here: “Our job in this section done, SS Oberscharführer Karl Frenzel randomly chose four prisoners, myself included, and led us to the hair-cutting barrack, less than twenty feet from the gas chambers.”97 Notice what Blatt is saying: the barracks where the hair of the female victims was cut (before they went to the gas chambers) was less than twenty feet (6.1 meters) from the gas chambers. Elsewhere he again states that the special barrack where the women’s hair was cut before entering the gas chambers was “just steps away from the gas chambers.”98

Yet, Sobibor historian Yitzhak Arad claims the path (the “tube”) that led from the reception area for Jews (Lager II) to the extermination area (Lager III) was 150 meters long. Arad adds: “Halfway through the ‘tube’ was the ‘barber shop,’ a barrack where the hair of the Jewish women was cut before they entered the gas chambers.”99

If the path from Lager II to the gas chambers was 150 meters long, and the “barber shop” was halfway through the “tube,” then the “barber shop” was 37.5 meters from the gas chambers, not 6.1 meters from the gas chambers. The “barber shop” was not, as Blatt says, just steps away from the gas chambers.

If Blatt is correct, in that the “barber shop” was just steps away (6.1 meters) from the gas chambers, then Arad’s official story that the “barber shop” was 37.5 meters from the “gas chambers” is false. But if Arad is correct, then this calls into question the veracity of Blatt’s testimony.

Once again, inconsistencies like this should make even the most hardcore believer in the Sobibor extermination story somewhat skeptical.

Did the Germans Destroy Evidence of Mass Murder?

In Sobibor historian Schelvis’s own words: “Very few documents relating to Sobibor and the other death camps had actually survived. After the uprising, Globocnik wrote to Himmler that ‘the evidence should be destroyed as quickly as possible, now that all else has been destroyed,’ and virtually all of the incriminating documents were burnt soon thereafter.”100

First, I will assume the document in question—a Globocnik to Himmler letter of 5 January 1944—is authentic and accurately translated, and not an altered document or outright forgery. (It is in the Bundesarchiv Koblenz, Germany.)

Even if it is authentic and accurately translated, it does not necessarily support the view that exterminations of Jews were taking place at Sobibor. There is a non-criminal interpretation one could give to the document. As Holocaust historian Gerald Reitlinger pointed out in his The Final Solution: The Attempt to Exterminate the Jews of Europe, SS leader Himmler told a representative of the World Jewish Congress toward the end of the war: “In order to put a stop to the epidemics we were forced to burn the bodies of incalculable numbers of people who had been destroyed by disease. We were therefore forced to build crematoria, and on this account they are knotting a noose for us.”101

The German leadership was well aware of the false atrocity tales of the First World War, and they were just as aware of the false atrocity tales of the war then in progress. Mainstream Holocaust historian Richard Breitman points out that in September 1942, Rabbi Stephen Wise, president of the American Jewish Congress, related to American Undersecretary of state Summer Welles the story that the Nazis were making soap from the flesh of gassed Jews and artificial fertilizer from their bones. This news ultimately leaked back to Himmler. Breitman then admits that this particular rumor was a false atrocity tale: “Himmler knew that no one was supposed to be manufacturing fats or artificial fertilizers from corpses (in fact, it turned out that this part of the report was erroneous).”102

Schelvis wants the reader to believe that Globocnik and Himmler wanted to destroy “evidence of exterminations.” Quite the contrary. The Germans were aware of the false atrocity tales of the Allies and Zionists, and they may have wanted to destroy Camp Sobibor so that its remains could not be used to create propaganda lies that could ultimately be used against them.

Sobibor Archeology: Religion Masquerading as Science?

Israeli and Polish archeologists, whose forensic investigations of Sobibor are ongoing, made this statement: “We regard the extermination process as a past reality, a series of historically established events, which do not need to be proven by archeological excavations. Archaeology, in our case, has the role of supplementing and filling gaps, especially in terms of site layout, structures and artifacts.”103

Evolutionary Biologist, atheist, and prominent critic of religion Richard Dawkins explains what he believes to be characteristic of religious fundamentalism: “Fundamentalists know they are right because they have read the truth in a holy book and they know, in advance, that nothing will budge them from their belief. The truth of the holy book is an axiom, not the end product of a process of reasoning. The book is true, and if the evidence seems to contradict it, it is the evidence that must be thrown out, not the book.”104 On this issue of religious faith, again, here is what Dawkins writes: “Faith is evil precisely because it requires no justification and brooks no argument.”105

According to the Sobibor archeologists, the physical evidence is not to be used to test the entire Sobibor extermination story, to see if it is true or false. Rather, the physical evidence is to be used to “corroborate” and “support” the “official truth” about Sobibor. The official extermination story of Sobibor is thus a non-scientific axiom, because it cannot be falsified. It is just assumed to be true—just like a religious dogma. The Sobibor “gas chamber” story has only eyewitness testimony to support it—just like a religious dogma.

What the Sobibor archeologists say fits the pattern of Dawkins’s description of religious fundamentalism. These Holocaust fundamentalists regard the extermination process as “historically established,” and it does not need to proven by forensic investigations. The extermination process is an axiom—it is not the end product of scientific evidence. Their belief in the extermination process needs no scientific evidence to prove it, and they simply refuse to honestly evaluate the Revisionist critique of the traditional Holocaust story.

Why Did German Soldiers “Confess” to “Nazi Gas Chamber” Crimes at Sobibor?

Long before the enactment of the present laws in Germany that criminalize any “denial” of the Holocaust, there were still social and political pressures that induced German officials on trial for alleged war crimes to “confess” to the “truth” of the extermination of the Jews.

The “Nazi extermination camp” mythology was declared “historical truth” at the Nuremberg trials, and it was then used as an ideological cornerstone for the Allied installed governments in postwar Germany. Since the German government is based upon the “Nazi gas chamber” ideology, to dispute it in a German court is virtually impossible.

Indeed, in April 1999, the German Federal Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer stated: “All democracies have a basis, a cornerstone. For France it is 1789, for Germany it is Auschwitz.”106 In the highly respected German daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Patrick Bahners put forth a founding belief of the present German government. If one “denies the murder of the Jews, he repudiates the legitimacy of the Federal Republic.”107

It is any wonder that former German soldiers who served at Sobibor “confessed” that there were “gas chambers” at the camp? From a legal standpoint they had no choice but to give credence to this legend. The tribunals that these German military men and National Socialist officials faced were committed to the dictum that there was a Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews, and it was done with the use of “gas chambers.” It was out of the question for them to contest this in court, so they simply built their defense strategies accordingly. In a word, it was simply in their best legal interests to simply “admit” the “truth” of the orthodox Jewish extermination story and then build their defense strategy around it–thus falsifying the historical record along the way.

The late Dr. Wilhelm Stäglich, a former judge who was punished by the German government for his “Holocaust denial,” expressed this dilemma when he stated: “From the outset, the defendants in the ‘Nazi Crimes of Violence’ trials knew that it was utterly pointless to dispute all or part of the picture of the ‘mass murder of the Jews’ in which they were accused of having taken part, since that picture had been inculcated into the public mind long before the trials began. To the defendants it must have seemed the most expedient course not to dispute that the alleged murders occurred, only that they were involved in them. Particularly if they lacked an airtight alibi, the defendants had to secure the goodwill of the court. In short, they had but one aim in mind: their own acquittal.”108

Evidence in favor of this view is provided by Holocaust expert Christopher Browning. One of Browning’s key pieces of evidence for alleged mass exterminations at Belzec is the post- war testimony of former SS Sergeant Josef Oberhauser. Buried in a footnote Browning provides us with a reason to be skeptical of Oberhauser’s testimony. He accuses Oberhauser of falsifying the dates of events in order to create an adequate defense at the “Belzec trial” in Germany in the 1960s. Specifically, he writes that Oberhauser is guilty of “clearly falsifying chronology to give the impression that until August 1942—i.e., for the period for which he was on trial—only a small number of test gassings were being carried out in a single gas chamber capable of holding 100 people.”109

Why didn’t Oberhauser claim that until August 1942 (the period for which he was on trial) he never witnessed or operated any homicidal gas chambers? This would have been the best defense, would it not? No, because of the nature of the German legal system that he was entrapped in, it would have been hopeless to attempt to repudiate the Belzec gas chamber story. So, it was simply in Oberhauser’s best legal interests to “confess” to the existence of “gas chambers,” and then claim that there were only a small number of “gassings” while he was in the camp.

Professor Browning also admitted that even the memoirs of Adolf Eichmann contain “calculated lies for legal defense.”110 This would not be the first time that a German officer in a post-war statement falsely claimed that there was a Nazi policy to exterminate Jews in order to create a defense at his upcoming trial. Browning’s colleague, Final Solution Historian Ian Kershaw, pointed this out in his latest book.

Kershaw concedes that some post-war court testimony of German military officers about the existence of an order from Hitler to exterminate the Jews is bogus: “The early post-war testimony of Einsatzkommando leaders about the prior existence of a Führer order [to mass exterminate the Jews] has been shown to be demonstrably false, concocted to provide a unified defense of the leader of Einsatzgruppe D, Otto Ohlendorf, at his trial in 1947.”111

We see a similar legal defense strategy in regard to the Germans who stood trial for alleged crimes committed at Sobibor. Karl Werner Dubois, who was sentenced to three years imprisonment at the 1966 Sobibor trial for his alleged involvement in mass murder, explained an overall defense strategy: “What should be taken into account is that we did not act on our own initiative, but in the context of the Reich’s Final Solution to the Jewish problem.”112

British journalist Gitta Sereny interviewed Franz Stangl, a former commandant of Sobibor, while he was in prison and his sentence was on appeal. Sereny was aware that Stangl would attempt to make his case in way that would be in his best legal interests. It simply was not in Stangl’s interests to contest the Sobibor “gas chamber” claim. Indeed, it was in his best legal interests to simply “go along” with the Sobibor extermination ideology, and then attempt to mitigate his alleged guilt.113

At the present time, it is impossible for anyone (including John Demjanjuk) to contest the traditional extermination story in a German court. Revisionist historian Robert Faurisson profiled the situation perfectly when he pointed out that “Holocaust denial” is “an offense which is punishable with up to five years imprisonment. In Germany, no exonerating evidence may be introduced in such trials, since the same evidence would constitute ‘denial’ as well and would merely lead to another criminal indictment of the defendant and his lawyer.”114

In such a judicial climate, is it any wonder that German officials on trial for alleged war crimes “confessed” to the existence of the Sobibor “gas chambers?”

Does Browning’s Convergence of Evidence Prove the Sobibor Extermination Story?

In a court document prepared for the Irving-Penguin Books/Lipstadt trial in London, Professor Browning put forth his argument as to why human testimony “proves” that the mass extermination of Jews took place at the Operation Reinhardt camps. He admitted that “eyewitness” reports of mass exterminations at Sobibor and other camps are contradictory and somewhat unreliable, but nevertheless, we should believe them anyway. He wrote: “Once again, human testimony is imperfect. The testimonies of both survivors and other witnesses to the events in Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka are no more immune to forgetfulness, error, exaggeration, distortion, and repression than eyewitness accounts of other events in the past. They differ, for instance, on how long each gassing operation took, on the dimensions and capacity of the gas chambers, on the number of undressing barracks, and on the roles of particular individuals. Gerstein, citing Globocnik, claimed the camps used diesel motors, but witnesses who actually serviced the engines in Belzec and Sobibor (Reder and Fuchs) spoke of gasoline engines. Once again, however, without exception all concur on the vital issues at dispute, namely that Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka were death camps whose primary purpose it was to kill in gas chambers through carbon monoxide from engine exhaust, and that the hundreds of thousands of corpses of Jews killed there were first buried and then later cremated.”115

Browning is mistaken. His claim that–without exception all witnesses concur on the vital issue that Jews were murdered in gas chambers using carbon monoxide from engine exhaust—is demonstrably false. There are Sobibor survivors who claimed that Jews were murdered en masse with chlorine gas, Zyklon B gas, “unnamed gases” and electricity at Sobibor, and not with the use of “carbon monoxide/engine exhaust chambers.” Browning failed to inform his readers of the serious problems such false eyewitness testimony raises.

Just because some of the “eyewitnesses” do concur on some points, it does not follow that their claims are therefore true. A series of false testimonies can converge on a falsehood. Let it suffice to say that even false testimony can be “corroborated” by other false testimony; a series of false and lying testimonies can “corroborate” and “vindicate” each other, for even historical lies can develop a certain consistency.116 Browning fails to take this into consideration. For example, consider the false story of the phony “homicidal steam chambers” at Treblinka, or the bogus claim that the Germans manufactured soap from the bodies of dead Jewish corpses.117 Both lies have a chain of “evidence” with a certain logical coherency to “corroborate” them.

Why Should We Reject the Traditional Extermination Story?

The traditional extermination story at Sobibor has no authentic war-time documentation to support it, nor does it have any forensic or physical evidence to prove it. It is based exclusively upon the testimony of former Sobibor inmates and the post-war testimony of former German and Ukrainian soldiers who served at Sobibor.

There are good reasons for even the most hardcore believer in the Holocaust to be very skeptical of the Sobibor extermination story. As the Scottish philosopher David Hume pointed out centuries ago, the veracity of human testimony is undermined when “the witnesses contradict each other; when they are but few, or of a doubtful character; when they have an interest in what they affirm; when they deliver their testimony with hesitation, or on the contrary, with too violent asseverations, etc.”118

As we have shown here, the “eyewitnesses” to Sobibor do contradict each other; they are of a doubtful character, and they do have an interest in what they affirm.

The German officials who “confessed” to the existence of the Sobibor “gas chambers” had a vested legal interest in promoting this falsehood. They could not do otherwise in the judicial system they were entrapped in. Former Sobibor inmates had a burning desire for revenge. For sure, former Sobibor inmate Zelda Metz admitted that: “We [Sobibor inmates] all wanted to escape and tell the world the crimes of Sobibor. We believed that if the people knew about it, Nazi Germany would be wiped out. We thought that if mankind knew of our martyrdom, we would be admired for our endurance, and revered for our sufferings.”119

Many of these Jewish survivors from Sobibor put forth testimony that is truly doubtful, and they did have an interest in promoting horrendous atrocity stories about Sobibor. This would help to defeat and forever degrade their hated enemy, National Socialist Germany, and they would come away as heroes in the eyes of the world. These former Sobibor inmates were embroiled in the German-Jewish hatreds of the war, and their testimonies must be evaluated with this in mind.

A Rebuttal to Judge Matia’s Ruling

Judge Matia charged Demjanjuk with a specific crime: “In serving at Sobibor, Defendant [John Demjanjuk] contributed to the process by which thousands of Jews were murdered by asphyxiation with carbon monoxide.”

Even if it is proven that Demjanjuk served as a guard at Sobibor, there is no evidence he ever contributed to the process by which Jews were murdered in “gas chambers”—because there is no credible evidence the “gas chambers” of Sobibor ever existed. And for those hardcore believers in the traditional Sobibor extermination story, who still insist that the “gas chambers” existed, it is up to them to provide the physical proof of their assertions, something they cannot do.

As Judge Matia wrote, the current case against Demjanjuk is based upon purportedly genuine documents that allegedly show that he served as a guard at Sobibor. At his trial in Israel, however, the late forensic expert Dr. Julius Grant claimed there is good reason to believe that certain documents used against Demjanjuk were forgeries. Matia dismissed at least some of Grant’s testimony in Israel as “not reliable or credible.”120 Yet, Demjanjuk’s former Israeli attorney, Yoram Sheftl, discussed the evidence that suggests Grant’s claims very well may have been correct.121

We don’t have possession of the documents in question, so we cannot subject them to a thorough examination to determine if they are genuine. But even if it is proven that Demjanjuk served as a guard at Sobibor, there is no credible evidence that he ever harmed a single person. Recently, a Canadian court ruled in a case similar to Demjanjuk’s that Ukrainian-born Wasyl Odynsky’s citizenship should not be revoked, even though he served at the German forced labor camp of Tranwiki. Odynsky served as a perimeter guard, and the Federal Court of Canada ruled there is no evidence he harmed a single person.122 The same could be true for John Demjanjuk.

We now give the reader one of Judge Matia’s most important conclusions in regard to his ruling against John Demjanjuk: “This is a case of documentary evidence, not eyewitness testimony. It is not at all unusual sixty years after an event that eyewitnesses are not available. Indeed, if they were, their testimony would be subjected to close scrutiny because of the effect of time and the ravages of age upon memories and eyewitness identifications. The defendant’s successful defense against the ‘Ivan the Terrible’ charges shows the unreliability of eye witness testimony so long after the event.”123

Once again, what Matia wrote is misleading. The current case about Demjanjuk allegedly serving at Sobibor is based upon purportedly authentic documents. But what Matia and the official history assert about Sobibor being an extermination camp is based upon the grossly unreliable testimony of former Sobibor inmates and the equally unreliable testimonies of German soldiers that were given years after the events in question and in grossly unfair courts. Indeed, it was not possible for the Germans who were put on trial for alleged crimes at Sobibor to contest the official extermination story

Judge Matia rightly pointed out that Demjanjuk’s successful defense against the ‘Ivan the Terrible’ charges shows the unreliability of eyewitness testimony so long after the event. Now it is time for Judge Matia to admit the “eyewitness testimony” that the Sobibor “gas chamber” story is built upon is as equally unreliable as the “eyewitness testimony” that the original “Ivan the Terrible” charges were built upon.

Hunting Demjanjuk: Injustice, Double Standards, Ulterior Agendas

The late historian and journalist John Sack documented how Jewish officials in Poland persecuted and murdered large numbers of German prisoners in the aftermath of World War Two in his book, An Eye for an Eye. After committing such dastardly deeds, many of these Jews came to America.124 If it is right and just that alleged non-Jewish war criminals like Demjanjuk be legally hounded and deported, then Jewish war criminals should be met with the same fate. If the U.S. government devotes resources to the rooting out of non-Jewish war criminals, then they should devote resources to the rooting out of Jewish war criminals. To concentrate only upon non-Jewish war criminals is selective justice. And selective justice is in fact injustice. Why the hypocritical double standard? What really lies behind this campaign?

Holocaust revisionism, the theory that the traditional view of the Jewish Holocaust contains lies, exaggerations and other falsehoods, is a serious threat to Zionist power and the German government that is subservient to Israeli/Zionist interests. Various governments have resorted to “war crimes trials” to combat its phenomenal growth. Indeed, Israel’s former Attorney General, Yitzhak Zamir, publicly admitted that this was one of the major purposes of the Israeli Demjanjuk trial: “At a time when there are those who even deny that the Holocaust ever took place, it is important to remind the world of what a fascist regime is capable of…and in this respect the Demjanjuk trial will fulfill an important function.”125

In 1993, as the case against Demjanjuk was falling apart, an Israeli prosecutor close to the case acknowledged a political motive for continuing the campaign. “So the important thing now is at least to prove that Demjanjuk was part of the Nazi extermination machine…otherwise…we will be making a great contribution to the new world-wide movement of those who deny the Holocaust took place.”126

It is not just the international Jewish-Zionist lobby that wants to benefit from another Demjanjuk “Holocaust” trial. The government of Germany, installed upon a prostrate German people by the victorious Allies, believes it gets the imprint of legitimacy from these Holocaust trials. As mainstream historian of Jewish-German relations, Jeffrey Herf, noted: “The Auschwitz trial conducted in Frankfurt-am-Main in 1964, as well as trials of those who had participated in murders in the Einsatzgruppen and at the extermination camps in Belzec, Treblinka, Sobibor, Chelmo, and Maidanek, offered further details to the West German public about the Holocaust and the death camps in Poland.”127

As French Revisionist Robert Faurisson so rightly pointed out, one of the reasons that Ernst Zundel was deported from Canada to a prison cell in Germany is because the Canadian authorities believed his Holocaust revisionist views destabilize the government of Germany.128

The reader should keep this in mind during the upcoming German trial of John Demjanjuk for the crime of “helping to lead Jews to the gas chambers.” Indeed, this is among the ulterior reasons for the further prosecution of the unfortunate Demjanjuk. The promoters and the beneficiaries of the Holocaust ideology—International Zionism, Israel and the current German government–want to use a Demjanjuk show trial to fight the phenomenal growth of Holocaust revisionism, a movement that poses a dire threat to the Zionist government in Israel and the government subservient to Zionism in Germany.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:47 pm)

1.John Caniglia, “Demjanjuk’s family vows to keep fighting,” The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio), 30 December 2005, p. B.3.
2.Jules Schelvis, Sobibor: A History of a Nazi Death Camp (Berg, 2007), p.35.
3.Yitzhak Arad, “Sobibor,” Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, vol. 4, Israel Gutman, ed., (Macmillan, 1990), pp. 1373-1378.
4.See page 27 of Judge Paul R. Matia’s Ruling on the Demjanjuk case. United States of America (Plaintiff) vs. John Demjanjuk (Defendant). Case No. 1: 99CV1193. Online: http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com ... 102jud.pdf
5.Ibid.
6.Ibid, p.97.
7.Christopher R. Browning, “Evidence for the Implementation of the Final Solution: Electronic Edition.” Online: http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/e ... owning/003
8.Robert Jan van Pelt, The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial (Indiana University Press, 2002), p. 5.
9.Thomas Toivi Blatt, From the Ashes of Sobibor: A Story of Survival (Northwestern University Press, 1997), pp. 227-228.
10.Gilead, I.; Haimi, Y.; Mazurek, W., “Excavating Nazi Extermination Centres,” Present Pasts, North America, 110 05 2009, vol. 1, no. 1, 2009. Online: http://presentpasts.info/journal/index. ... e/view/3/7
11.See the “News and Reports” section of http://www.undersobibor.org/
12.Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, German Crimes in Poland: Volumes 1 and 2 (Howard Fertig, 1982), vol. 2, p. 103. This was first published in English in 1946-1947.
13.Miriam Novitch, ed., Sobibor: Martyrdom and Revolt (Holocaust Library, 1980), p. 50.
14.See Carlo Mattogno, Belzec in Propaganda, Testimonies, Archeological Research, and History (Theses & Dissertations Press, 2004), p.10. Online: http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/b/index.html
15.Ibid.
16.Ibid.
17.Joseph Tenenbaum, In Search of a Lost People: The Old and the New Poland (The Beechhurst Press, 1948), p. 285.
18.Shelvis, p. 215.
19.Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews: Student Edition (Holmes & Meier, 1985), p. 229.
20.See Gerstein’s testimony in Yitzhak Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka: The Operation Reinhard Death Camps (Indiana University Press, 1987), p.101.
21.Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, p. 31.
22.Schelvis, p. 102.
23.Ibid, p.104.
24.Online: www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/trial/de ... ning/545.0 See “Eyewitness Testimony concerning Gassing at Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka: Fifth Category.”
25.Novitch, p.12.
26.Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, vol. 2, p. 100.
27.Ibid, p.24, 26.
28.Ibid, p. 26.
29.Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, p.31.
30.Ibid., p. 123.
31.Arad, “Sobibor,” Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, p.
32.Schelvis, p. 104.
33.Ibid, p.102.
34.Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, p. 31.
35.Schelvis, p.114n17.
36.Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, vol.2, pp.100-101.
37.Gitta Sereny, Into that Darkness: An Examination of Conscience (Vintage Books, 1983), p. 109.
38.Schelvis, p.33.
39.Ibid, p.100.
40.Ibid, p. 114n17.
41.Ibid, p.101.
42.Thomas Kues, “The Alleged First Gas Chamber Building at Sobibor.” Online: http://www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrtkfsgc.html
43.Thomas Kues, “Sobibor Strangeness—A small compendium.” Online: http://www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrtksobstr.html
44.Kues, “The Alleged First Gas Chamber Building at Sobibor.”
45.Gilead, et al.
46.Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, vol.2, pp.100-101.
47.Schelvis, p.101.
48.Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, p.31.
49.Novitch, p. 147.
50.Schelvis, p. 68.
51.Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, p. 123.
52.Schelvis, p.68.
53.Novitch, p. 152.
54.Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, pp. 32, 123-124.
55.Novitch, p. 155.
56.Gilead, et al.
57.Hilberg, p. 229.
58.Tenenbaum, p. 285.
59.See map in Sereny, p.94.
60.Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, pp. 34-35.
61.Gilead, et al.
62.Novitch, p.78.
63.Schelvis, p.112.
64.Blatt, p.232.
65.See Mattogno, p. 10.
66.Sereny, p.115.
67.Arad, “Sobibor,” Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, vol. 4, pp. 1373-1378.
68.Schelvis, p.112.
69.Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, p.171.
70.Ibid, p.172.
71.See Mark Weber and Andrew Allen, “Treblinka,” The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1992, pp. 133-158. Online: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p133_Allen.html. Mark Weber, “Jewish Soap,” The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1991, pp. 217-227. Online: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v11/v11p217_Weber.html.
72.Thomas Dalton, Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides (Theses & Dissertations Press, 2009), p. 122.
73.See Judge Matia’s Ruling, p.27.
74.Schelvis, p.28.
75.Ibid, p.38.
76.Ibid, p.112.
77.Ibid, p.34.
78.Novitch, p.130.
79.Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, vol. 2, p. 103.
80.Tenenbaum, p.285.
81.Sereny, pp. 114-115.
82.Schelvis, Plate 28.
83.See the “News and Reports” section of http://www.undersobibor.org/
84.Hilberg, p. 338. See also the 2003 edition (3rd edition) of The Destruction of the European Jews (Yale University Press, 3 volumes), p. 1320.
85.Schelvis, back cover. On page 1, he says that approximately 170,000 were gassed at Sobibor.
86.Christopher R. Browning, “Implementation of the Final Solution.” Footnote 151. Online: http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/e ... ning/545.0
87.Novitch, p.156.
88.Ernst Klee, Willi Dreßen, Volker Reiß, The Good Old Days: the Holocaust as Seen by Its Perpetrators and Bystanders (Free Press, 1991), p. 232.
89.“Demjanjuk vows to fight death camp charges,” The Local: Germany’s News in English, 12 May 2009. Online: http://www.thelocal.de/national/20090512-19237.html
90.Gerald Reitlinger, The Final Solution: The Attempt to Exterminate the Jews of Europe: 1939-1945 (Jason Aronson, Inc, 1987), p.337.
91.Blatt.
92.Ibid, p.103.
93.Ibid.
94.Gilead, et al.
95.Blatt, p232n7.
96.Ibid, p231n2.
97.Ibid, p.101.
98.Ibid, p230n2.
99.Arad, p. 33.
100.Schelvis, p.2.
101.Quoted in Reitlinger, p.480.
102.Richard Breitman, The Architect of Genocide: Himmler and the Final Solution (Alfred A. Knopf, 1991), p. 6.
103.Gilead, et al.
104.Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (Houghton Mifflin Company, 2006), p.101.
105.Ibid, p.308.
106.Quoted in Germar Rudolf, The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz (Theses & Dissertations Press, 2003), p. 325. Online: http://vho.org/GB/Books/trr/index.html
107.Ibid, p.326.
108.Wilhelm Stäglich, The Auschwitz Myth: A Judge Looks at the Evidence (Institute for Historical Review, 1986), p. 224.
109.Christopher R. Browining, with contributions by Jürgen Matthäus, The Origins of of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942 (University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, Nebraska. Yad Vashem, Jerusalem, 2004), p. 543n163.
110.Christopher R. Browning, Collected Memories: Holocaust History and Postwar Testimony (The University of Wisconsin Press, 2003), pp. 3-4, 8-9.
111.Ian Kershaw, Hitler, the Germans, and the Final Solution (Yale University Press, 2008), p. 258.
112.Schelvis, p. 246.
113.Sereny, pp.22-23.
114.See Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., Robert Faurisson, Germar Rudolf, The Leuchter Reports: Critical Edition (Theses & Dissertations Press, 2005), p. 19. Online: http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/tlr/
115. 115. Online: www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/trial/de ... ning/545.0 See “Eyewitness Testimony concerning Gassing at Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka: Fifth Category.”
116. See Paul Grubach, “Convergence of Evidence: Reflections on the Irving-Lipstadt Affair.” Online: http://www.codoh.com/revisionist/tr09irving.html
117.See Mark Weber and Andrew Allen, “Treblinka,” The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1992, pp. 133-158. Online: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p133_Allen.html. Mark Weber, “Jewish Soap,” The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1991, pp. 217-227. Online: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v11/v11p217_Weber.html.
118.J.C.A. Gaskin, Hume’s Philosophy of Religion (Barnes & Noble Books, 1978), p. 113.
119.Novitch, p. 131.
120.See Judge Matia’s Ruling, p. 4, passim.
121.Yoram Sheftel, Defending Ivan the Terrible: The Conspiracy to Convict John Demjanjuk (Regnery Publishing, Inc, 1996), passim.
122.Yahoo News! Canada, By the Canadian Press, “Judge rejects Jewish groups bid to oust former SS guard,” 19 June 2009. Online: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/0906 ... itizenship
123.Judge Matia’s Ruling, p. 97.
124.An Eye for an Eye: The Untold Story of Jewish Revenge Against Germans in 1945 (Basic Books, 1993), p.150.
125.See Cleveland Jewish News, March 21, 1986, p.16.
126.Quoted in Sheftel, p.402.
127.Jeffrey Herf, Divided Memory: The Nazi Past in the Two Germanys (Harvard University Press, 1997), pp. 337-338.
128.See Leuchter, Jr., Faurisson, Rudolf, p.19.

Copyrighted 2009, by Paul Grubach

All rights reserved.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:51 pm)

http://johndenugent.com/blog/2009/08/28 ... -deportee/

Henrik Holappa on John Demjanjuk, fellow deportee; Paul Grubach on Sobibor, and what Demjanjuk SHOULD say

Henrik Holappa, after his horrifying arrest, 87 days in solitary confinement in NY State, and deportation to Europe, has not slackened in his activities or his demands for justice. HH spent years, starting at age 14, writing our political prisoners, and now he has courageously written the Ukrainian government, urging it to stand up for its compatriot, John Demjanjuk.

Image

Henrik was abducted by “Homeland Security” from here in Pennsylvania – three squad cars, coming with leg and chest chains — after he applied for political asylum. It is illegal in Finland to protest negroes gang-raping white girls; it “incites racial hatred.” Henrik, then 22, spent 87 days in solitary confinement in the supposed “Land of the Free” — and the federal prison gave him a lasting intestinal ailment — deliberately? It was their responsiblity to feed him properly, and not make him sick as well as chain him and throw him in a dungeon full of Third Worlders, 150 unnecessary miles from his friends for nearly three hellish months with no books to read, no TV or anything to do but read letters or write them inside his concrete cell. Thank you, Barack Hussein Obama.

Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin once said that the Poles and Ukrainians were far more antisemitic than the German ever were. There must be a reason for this. Ukrainians know that Jews murdered millions of their people in the Stalinist Holodomor; should they not now defend their countryman against this same tribe of defamers and liars that slaughtered them by the millions in the 1920s and 1930s?

But we know the answer. The psychopaths control Ukraine and almost every other government on earth, and they have been clustering in politics for thousands of years, betraying the people. Too bad that God sees it, and men as well.

John de Nugent

=========Here is now Henrik Holappa’s letter to the Ukrainian embassy in Finland, and then Paul Grubach’s recent article on the bogus Jewish case.

* * *


Appeal for Demjanjuk’s release

John ”Ivan“ Demjanjuk, a Ukrainian-born senior citizen was deported from the State of Ohio in the United States of America on May 11 to the Federal Republic of Germany where he was captured and is being charged for alleged war crimes that he also allegedly committed during the Second World War.


Demjanjuk is suspected of being an SS guard in several concentration camps, such as Sobibor during World War Two, and thus it is claimed that Demjanjuk is responsible of the deaths of 30,000 Jews. Because of these claims Demjanjuk was once called ”Ivan the Terrible,” a claim the Israeli Supreme Court itself dropped in 1993.


There are no proofs, documents or any reliable witnesses for Demjanjuk’s guilt in the alleged crimes. In 1981 John Demjanjuk was deported from the United States to Israel by the demand of the Israeli government. Demjanjuk was sentenced to death, but his sentence was overturned, because of the lack of proof. According to the Israeli secret service it was more likely that Demjanjuk’s identity was mixed to another person.


Demjanjuk served in the Second World War in the Red Army and he was captured by the Germans and spent the rest of the war as a prisoner of war. After the war Demjankuk lived in Germany and later moved to the USA where he lived and honorable, appreciated and productive life anbd raised three children.


I wish to emphasize that there are no proofs of Demjanjuk’s guilt of the alleged crime.

Demjanjuk’s deportation to Germany from the United States was illegal, and the State of Germany does not have any legal right to try an Ukrainian citizen for alleged crimes against Jews in Poland. It must also be expected that Demjanjuk will not have a fair trial in Germany since he has already been convicted by the German media as a ”war criminal” (although now they have switched to new accusations and no longer call him ”Ivan the Terrible”).


Therefore I am asking the representatives of the Government of Ukraine to get involved and to stop the injustice and unhumanity that is being practiced by the Government of Germany. Germany is clearly violating Demjanjuk’s human rights by keeping him behind the bars in a notorious prison in Munich. Demjanjuk should be released immediately because of his respectable age of 89 and his current health condition. The State of Ukraine and the representatives of the government should demand that Germany release Demjanjuk immediately.


I also suggest that the diplomats of the government of Ukraine and its representatives in the embassies consider refusing to meet with the representatives of the Federal Republic of Germany and also consider a diplomatic boycott of German diplomats. I wish to further suggest to the Ukrainian government that it recommend to the citizens of Ukraine that they boycott German merchandise and avoid travel to Germany for as long as John Demjanjuk stays a captive in Germany.

Respectfully,


Henrik Holappa, in Oulu, Finland,

August 20, 2009


==================

The latest on Henrik is the rumor being spread around Pa. that Henrik was arrested for murder! Unbelievable!!

But it’s not either; after all, these Jewish psychopaths lie all day long.

Just check out Wikipedia’s article on Demjanjuk. It shows that the Jews keep switching the accusations against him and keep changing their claims of which camps he supposedly was a guard in. When even the ISRAELI SUPREME COURT frees him, they then re-indict him so they can try him in YET ANOTHER COUNTRY!

And in Germany of all places, which certainly has no jurisdiction over a Ukrainian citizen and Polish Jews!

This psychopathic Jewish mendacity reminds me of how Ingrid Rimland related (I think in her video of her husband’s heroic life) that Ernst just had his breath taken away by the blatancy of the lies the Toronto Jews told against him once he was under a Canadian judge’s gag order and was impeded in defending himself.

But then it is normal for psychopaths to lie. To tell lies that defame and harm, because they want to hurt their enemies, but also because they just enjoy harming ,and they revel in lying. The Jews are truly not a people, but an international crime family, of whom Bernie Madoff and the rabbi organ traffickers are just the tip of an obscene iceberg .

Truly, ours is a battle of light against darkness, of truth against falsehood, of good against the stench of evil and horror.

I wish John Demjanjuk had the guts to challenge and defy the Holohoax, especially now that he has nothing whatsoever left to lose, but I judge from his previous defense strategy and from his simple peasant face that this individual, a diesel mechanic when he worked for Ford, is just not a man with any leadership in him, or special heroic instincts. But in lacking these he is completely doomed and will be forgotten in a German dungeon, after conceding the Holocaust as the Jews wish — and claiming only that he was no part thereof.

At least a Zundel goes down swinging, like a man! He goes to prison for something! A Henrik Holappa also never gives up or gives in.

I wish someone could get to Demjanjuk’s defense team so the man has the final satisfaction, like Horst Mahler, especially in his final statement, of really telling the Jews off in public, saying their Holocaust sob story is a manipulative crock – and calling them the human devils they are.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 1 year ago (Tue Sep 22, 2009 1:38 am)

I think it's pretty obvious that Paul Grubach's massive article, in conjunction with nafcash, the thirty treblinka questions and the evidence proving Demjanjuk's innocence that Trafficant and A. Neumaier gave to the world, have all put Muehlenkamp, Rodoh and the rest of the holocaust industry into a very tight corner.

Reinhard
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Reinhard » 1 decade 1 year ago (Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:50 am)

For our German speaking readers:

Free download of the interesting book by Dieter Lehner Du sollst nicht falsch Zeugnis geben debunking the fake KGB-made "SS-Dienstausweis" (SS servicecard) of Demjanjuk:

http://www.4shared.com/file/112877499/f4186811/Lehner_Zeugnis_Du_sollst_nicht_falsch_Zeugnis_geben_-_gross.html
And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed, if all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became truth. »Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.«
Orwell 1984

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 1 year ago (Wed Sep 23, 2009 2:01 pm)

drew

I think it's pretty obvious that Paul Grubach's massive article, in conjunction with nafcash, the thirty treblinka questions and the evidence proving Demjanjuk's innocence that Trafficant and A. Neumaier gave to the world, have all put Muehlenkamp, Rodoh and the rest of the holocaust industry into a very tight corner.



Yes, very very tight. But that got me thinking, is Muehlenkamp going to be called as an expert wittness by the prosecution? Look what Muehlenkamp claims he's done / doing / about to do:


Muehlenkamp on his Sobibor research:

Evidence meeting the challenge requirements is expected to come along with the results of archaeological work currently being done on site. All I have to do is watch. And just to make it clear once more, I intend to publish proof meeting the requirements in SKEPTIC magazine and submit such proof to NAFCASH as soon as I have it in my hands, independently of what my chances are of ever actually seeing any reward money. I for my part am waiting for current archaeological work on site. I’ll try to obtain information about the provenance of this exhibit and include in the article I intend to publish in SKEPTIC magazine after gaining access to the results of current archaeological excavations. Kola seems to have made enough of his results available for them to know what he found to plan further archaeological work at Sobibor. Work seems to be under way to identify the outlines of the Sobibor mass graves precisely enough for implementation of the following project. It has also further improved my chances to gain access to the detailed findings. I can imagine members of the Sobibor Archaeology Project or the "Friends of Sobibor Remembrance" association getting angry enough to publish evidence meeting the NAFCASH challenge requirements independently of whether or not they can realistically expect payment of the reward amount. I can't tell you a specific or even approximate date. Insofar as answering your questions, they will be answered in an article that I shall try to get published in SKEPTIC magazine as soon as I have all the information together and authorization to make it public. When the results of the current archaeological investigations are published in a scientific magazine, they will include much more than just the evidence necessary to meet the NAFCASH challenge requirements. And I will see to it that Mr. Gerdes gets a free copy of the scientific magazine in which this evidence shall be published. As long as it takes for my archaeological work to be completed and duly remunerated, for the results to be evaluated and for an article that meets the requirements of a scientific magazine to be written. I didn’t exactly tell him that the results of my research would be available the day after tomorrow – on the contrary, I made it very clear that my research depended on the progress of archaeological work currently being done by the Sobibor Archaeology Project on site. That archaeological work takes time. If you want further details you’ll have to wait for the results of ongoing archaeological research by the SAP. Archaeologists work according to their own schedules. What I’m waiting for, you ask? I’m waiting for time and means to go to Sobibor, obtain permission to disturb the ash heap and enlist the services of an expert to analyze the human remains and certify that they are in fact human remains. I’m waiting for what comes of an assessment of the mass graves’ contents by the SAP. That’s correct; the SAP's work is still under way. And as time goes by, archaeology will provide further information about it. Boy, one can sense how carpet-biting mad Gerdes is at my having accepted the challenge. You will hear from me again on this subject when you find an issue of SKEPTIC magazine with an article about my research findings in your mailbox. I’m doing my research independently of how big a chance there is that meeting the challenge requirements will get me any money. If I don’t get paid for submitting proof that objectively meets the challenge requirements, that’s fine. I have already made clear that the reward money would be nice to have but is not the main motivation for my research. What made me decide to accept your challenge was a big mistake you made in one of your posts, one that considerably improved my chances of having access to the very evidence that is required to meet the challenge requirements. If you don’t want to accept my suggestions, that’s just fine with me. It won’t dissuade me from trying to obtain, publish and present to NAFCASH the required proof, for as you well know the money issue is secondary to me. As you well know, I’m not trying to change anything to my liking. What I’m showing the world is that I’m willing to play by the standards of the NAFCASH challenge. And just to make it clear once more, I intend to publish proof meeting the requirements in SKEPTIC magazine and submit such proof to NAFCASH as soon as I have it in my hands, independently of what my chances are of ever actually seeing any reward money. If I meet the challenge requirements but cannot obtain payment, that’s fine. I accepted this challenge. I can show one tenth of one per cent in the soil at Sobibor and Treblinka and am also able to locate at least four of the Sobibor mass graves.


So being called as an expert witness at the trial must be why he's waiting to submit his research findings to "skeptic" magazine, right?

What other reason could there be?

Is there anyone else in the world that has been making such boasts during the last two years as Muehlenkamp has?

Not that I'm aware of.

If you were on the prosecution team, wouldn't you have this self-proclaimed expert take the stand and "show" the 1/10 of 1% in at least four of Sobibor's mass graves?

And what about Arad? And Hami? And Kola? Wouldn't those four "experts" testimonies be enough to insure a conviction for Demjanjuk?

I'm sure that after the trial we will see the results of "his" archaeologial work in "skeptic" magazine.

We know he will because he told us this himself:

And just to make it clear once more, I intend to publish proof meeting the requirements in SKEPTIC magazine and submit such proof to NAFCASH as soon as I have it in my hands, independently of what my chances are of ever actually seeing any reward money.


Yeah, we know robert, as soon as the trial is over, right?


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests