Open Letter to Dr. Neander

[Eric Hunt]

Dear Dr. Neander,

I skimmed through your article located here:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2010/01/irene-zisblatt-diamond-girl-fact-or.html

1) Something that needs to be brought to your attention is that Irene Weisberg Zisblatt isn't the only one of the five main stars of Steven Spielberg's The Last Days to claim to have escaped from inside a gas chamber seconds before being gassed.



Alice Lok Cahana, abstract Holocaust artist, claims the following :

"Alice Lok Cahana, whose story was recounted by Laurence Rees in his book entitled "Auschwitz, a New History" was 15 years old when she was registered in the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp; months later she was sent to the gas chamber in Krema V and told that she would be given new clothes after taking a shower. Alice was inside the gas chamber in Krema V when the revolt by the Sonderkommando unit in Krema IV began on October 7, 1944. This was the occasion when the Sonderkommando blew up the Krema IV gas chamber building with dynamite that had been sneaked into Birkenau by some of the women prisoners who worked in factories outside the camp. Because of all the commotion, the women in the Krema V gas chamber were released unharmed."

(Alice Lok Cahana also claims her aunt is in one of the most famous pictures of Jews allegedly stoically walking to the gas chamber.)

Incredibly neither Cahana or Zisblatt's gas chamber escapes are documented in the final cut of The Last Days, although apparently at least Zisblatt's made up gas chamber escape was originally recorded, according to the supplementary book to the film which includes her actual lines of dialog.

2) I notice that you don't specifically mention anything about Zisblatt's many alleged siblings. Have you seen the part in her original Shoah Foundation testimony, in which she claims one of her brothers dies of scarlet fever well before deportation, in their own home village? Yet in her book, she claims that her entire family perished in gas chambers. I wonder how many of her siblings even existed, or if they're like "Sabka", which you would agree is a fictional character? I would also like information about her parents' fate.

3) Skimming through your article, (which unfortunately is mostly damage control mixed with denial which surpasses the research I was able to complete with limited funds and no access to documents such as the hilarious diamond-free stool sample Walzer had in his possession) I notice that you pretty much claim that Zisblatt was never tattooed. Will you definitively say that Zisblatt never had a tattoo, since Zisblatt refuses to show us where she says Mengele removed her tattoo?

4) When is Kenneth Walzer going to have ABC run an expose on Zisblatt as they did Rosenblatt? 'Cause I just read that Zisblatt is still making the rounds, recently making an appearance at Syracuse University (you can access her absurd Shoah testimony there or go upstairs and read "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, which is on the shelf and defaced).

Unfortunately, Dr. Neander, I don't have the resources that Jewish Holocaust Scholars do. Will you look into Lok-Cahana's story, or simply join the revisionists and just call her gas chamber escape another stupid Zisblattian lie? When did Cahana first tell this story? When did her abstract Holocaust art business start picking up? Why does she seem to be the one most "acting" in the film, with long dramatic pauses? Dr. Neander, when are you going to come to the conclusion that Zisblatt, Cahana, etc., are just actors in Spielberg's second fictional Holocaust drama? There are other liars in the film I will expose soon enough, I'm just helping you catch up to us.

By the way Dr. Neander, in helping you join the elite few in coming to the conclusion that The Last Days was practically scripted fiction, (shot with 35 mm cameras which necessitates calling "action" and "cut") I will inform you that I believe the diamond prop Zisblatt holds in her hands was specifically created for Spielberg's The Last Days. I believe I have the name of exactly who made it, and was hired to craft it as a prop for this film. I believe the story of Zisblatt eating feces covered diamonds was created specifically for Spielberg's film, and the prop of the tear dropped shape diamond pendant was created for the unforgettable visual effect (cue violins and clarinets) that even Pulitzer prize winning film reviewers fell for.

I hope to share solid proof of this shortly.

In closing, Dr. Neander, I'd like to answer the hypothetical question you pose at the beginning of your article -

"Teaching falsehood, even with the best intentions, is always dangerous and counterproductive. Human beings have an inborn tendency to think. What if the kids, who were deeply impressed by Mrs. Zisblatt's story, some day reach for a scholarly book about the Holocaust or a memoir vetted by experts and find out that things could not have happened as told by her? "

You just described exactly what happened to me, Dr. Neander, regarding Wiesel's Night (which in your very same article, you also pretty much say is quasi-fictional, yet at least somewhat believable in comparison to Zisblatt's Grimm Fairy Tales). And yes, teaching Jewish myths to children is incredibly dangerous. Like you said, one day they might figure out they've been lied to all their lives after looking into things for themselves.

[jnovitz]

(Alice Lok Cahana also claims her aunt is in one of the most famous pictures of Jews allegedly stoically walking to the gas chamber.)

The picture she refers to is from the Hungarian deportation album, which are believed to be of a single transport on the 26 May.

the collection was originally published in 1947 or 1948 as "The Jews of Slovakia", when it was rereleased in the 80s it was retitled "The Jews of Hungary" (It also appears in Rudolf Vrba's autobiography hard edition as "the Jews of Poland"). Given that there were only a few places that could claim to be both Slovakia and Hungary, the powers that be decided the transport was from a ghetto that had been part of Slovakia before WW2 was handed over to Hungary and after WW2 was returned back to Slovakia.

The relevance of this is that Ms Cahana's family was supposed to be from Buergenland, IIRC, so its difficult to understand how her Aunt could have ended up in an obscure ghetto on the Slovakian border

[Eric Hunt]

Yes, you make incredible points about Cahana's alleged aunt.

Also Dr. Neander, in The Last Days, Renee Firestone claims to discover proof that her sister was "experimented" on, yet the German doctor sitting next to her implies that they are routine check ups. Show us these documents.

I'd also like scans of the stool sample evidence, etc., Walzer is withholding from us non believers.

[Balsamo]

Dear mister Hunt,

I your point is to prove that there are witnesses that keep on telling bullshit, you don't need Dr Neander to confirm it, as we all know there are plenty of them.
Could you explain more clearly what you are expecting from him ?

[joachim neander]

Dear Mr. Hunt,

thank you for reading and commenting my analysis of Mrs. Zisblatt's book.
You pose a lot of questions, and I will try to reply to them as well as I can.

My primary interest is not "debunking" survivors' tales. My focus of interest is the reception history of the Holocaust, and particularly the legends around the - real or alleged - use of parts of the victims' bodies for commercial purposes. The best known and most widespread are the "Jewish soap" and "Jewish lampshades" legends. Research about the latter brought me to Mrs. Zisblatt. When reading her book, I thought it would be worth while to dig a little bit deeper, and so the article you mentioned originated. I am well aware that the story she tells (or the various versions of it) contains still more contradictions and implausibilities. Some of them you already mentioned, but there are still more. I leave it, however, to someone who wants to make it the focus of his/her research to write a monograph about them. For example, I've read different hypotheses trying to explain why Mrs. Zisblatt has used the "diamond" icon in her story. I do not know which of them is the right one - maybe there was more than one motif from her side.

I'm seeing a fundamental difference between Mrs. Zisblatt and, let us say, "Lauren Stratford." The latter has never been in Europe, not to mention in a Nazi camp. Mrs. Zisblatt, however, was deported as a young girl from Hungary to Auschwitz, stayed there for a couple of months, was transferred to a sub-camp of Gross Rosen and made, with a short interruption in March 1945, an odyssey of more than three months on foot and under horrible conditions, until she was liberated shortly before VE day by U.S. troops. Thereafter she had to stay for months in hospital to recover. All this is documented, and I would ask all Revisionists to accept this as facts. I would also ask Revisionists to agree that this experience was a horrible one. All the euphemisms about life at Auschwitz and other concentration camps and about the evacuation transports, by all participants - also the guarding SS personnel - rightfully called "death marches," that one can read on some Revisionist Web sites, are nothing but mocking those who went through these hells. Simple human decency should forbid such a behavior. This has nothing to do with "believing" or "not believing in the Holocaust."

Now all those who survived horrible things have a tendency to exaggerate their suffering as well as their heroism that made them survive, and all are convinced that they tell nothing but the truth. Every professional historian who has worked with memoirs of those who were affected by World War II - soldiers at the front, civilians in bombed cities or under German or Russian occupation, POWs, refugees, expellees, deportees, camp and ghetto inmates, etc. - knows this and carefully gauges the reports, testimonies, and memoirs, cross-checks them as far as possible with documents, sifts the wheat from the chaff, and tries to get a coherent narrative from all of it. So AFAIK no mainstream Holocaust historian has taken Elie Wiesel's Night at face value, irrespective of what its author says, and irrespective of the author's honors. This holds the more for Mrs. Zisblatt's memoirs and many other, equally problematic survivor accounts. The logical fallacy trap into which Holocaust Revisionists are prone to fall is to conclude from diverging testimonies to an event that the event did not occur at all. The same reasoning would lead to deny that the Battle of Alamo did happen, or the Peloponnesian War.

A problem, of course, arises when people such as Mrs. Zisblatt talk to high school or college students. These young people receive a distorted picture of the events, and I am afraid that the majority of teachers in the U.S. are not qualified enough to set the record straight. But those kids who are not interested in the matter will forget it soon, as they will forget most of the things they had to learn at school, and the few who are interested will find out later. I cannot prove it, by I feel Revisionists overestimate the efficiency of teaching in the classroom. I've been a teacher for 29 years, and I've learned to be very modest in my expectations regarding the results of my teaching.

Re. Mrs. Zisblatt's alleged tattoo: As I tried to make it clear in my analysis of her book, I am convinced that she was never tattooed with a prisoner number. No known "transit Jew" was tattooed. I also expressed serious doubts regarding her being experimented on by Dr. Mengele. But it is impossible to prove that she was not experimented on. I can only conclude from all that is known about her and about Mengele and his "scientific work" at Auschwitz that she must not have been of any interest to him. So it is highly improbable that she was experimented on. But my research about concentration camps has taught me, too, that in the camps "nothing was impossible." So I leave it open to the reader of her book and of my analysis what s/he concludes in this case.

You also ask for scans of documents. Well, this is a delicate matter. The documents in archives, as a rule, are under some sort of copyright. When I get copies from German archives, I must always sign a declaration that I will not give the copy (or a copy of it) to anyone other. Well, among scholars we do not always keep to this rule, and there is some private exchange of copies of documents. But you'll never go public with them, unless you got the prior written consent of the archive, e.g. for a scholarly publication. If you are interested in the SS Hygiene Institute lists, you can ask the Auschwitz archives for a copy - you'll find the file number in my article. What you'll do with it afterward, is not my business.

Sincerely yours,
J. Neander.

[Hannover]

Mr. Neander said:

I'm seeing a fundamental difference between Mrs. Zisblatt and, let us say, "Lauren Stratford." The latter has never been in Europe, not to mention in a Nazi camp. Mrs. Zisblatt, however, was deported as a young girl from Hungary to Auschwitz, stayed there for a couple of months, was transferred to a sub-camp of Gross Rosen and made, with a short interruption in March 1945, an odyssey of more than three months on foot and under horrible conditions, until she was liberated shortly before VE day by U.S. troops. Thereafter she had to stay for months in hospital to recover. All this is documented, and I would ask all Revisionists to accept this as facts. I would also ask Revisionists to agree that this experience was a horrible one. All the euphemisms about life at Auschwitz and other concentration camps and about the evacuation transports, by all participants - also the guarding SS personnel - rightfully called "death marches," that one can read on some Revisionist Web sites, are nothing but mocking those who went through these hells. Simple human decency should forbid such a behavior. This has nothing to do with "believing" or "not believing in the Holocaust."

Nonsense. Here we have yet another Jew, from a seemingly endless list, who was sent to a 'death camp' and was not put to death. And, the notion of 'death marches' has been debunked by those who were given a choice to go with the retreating SS or await the communists, most went with the SS, Neander ignores those inconvenient facts and the threads here which make that clear.

"Simple human decency" demands that inflammatory lies like the absurd 'gas chambers & 6M' be fought, that the murder of innocents in show trial procedures be rectified. Notice Neander's imposition of the authoritarian 'forbid'. That's right, only scrutiny of the so called 'holocaust' is forbidden, while other aspects of history are, and should be, constantly revised as information comes forward.

Every professional historian who has worked with memoirs of those who were affected by World War II - soldiers at the front, civilians in bombed cities or under German or Russian occupation, POWs, refugees, expellees, deportees, camp and ghetto inmates, etc. - knows this and carefully gauges the reports, testimonies, and memoirs, cross-checks them as far as possible with documents, sifts the wheat from the chaff, and tries to get a coherent narrative from all of it.

More nonsense. We've seen 'historians' like Raoul Hilberg demolished in court and exposed as an incredible liar. As this forum has shown, as Revisionist publications have shown, the same can be said of any of the so called 'holocaust historians', aka: shysters. These liars are simply hatemongering Jewish Supremacists wrapped in 'historian' clothing. Not to mention the profit involved.

The logical fallacy trap into which Holocaust Revisionists are prone to fall is to conclude from diverging testimonies to an event that the event did not occur at all. The same reasoning would lead to deny that the Battle of Alamo did happen, or the Peloponnesian War.

A blatant, manipulative, strawman argument. No one, but no one claims that Jews were not were encouraged to leave Axis countries, or had their possessions taken, or sent to labor camps. Plus, the histories written on the Battle of the Alamo or the Peloponnesian War do not make laughable and scientifically impossible claims like the so called 'holocaust'.

A problem, of course, arises when people such as Mrs. Zisblatt talk to high school or college students. These young people receive a distorted picture of the events ...

No, the real problem is when any of these liars are paraded in front of impressionable students and told to believe ... or else. A student of German extraction is forced to swallow lie after hateful lie ... as are those of who falsely chastised for 'letting it happen'.

I also expressed serious doubts regarding her being experimented on by Dr. Mengele. But it is impossible to prove that she was not experimented on. I can only conclude from all that is known about her and about Mengele and his "scientific work" at Auschwitz that she must not have been of any interest to him. So it is highly improbable that she was experimented on. But my research about concentration camps has taught me, too, that in the camps "nothing was impossible."

Talk about lack of logic. The rules of jurisprudence place the onus upon the accuser to present proof, not for the accused to show that he is innocent. It's rather like saying, you cannot prove that you didn't beat your wife, so off to jail you go. In fact, Neander, you cannot prove the laughable accusations made about Mengele. Not to mention your fantasy 'gas chambers' or the alleged mass graves which he cannot show.

You also ask for scans of documents. Well, this is a delicate matter. The documents in archives, as a rule, are under some sort of copyright. When I get copies from German archives, I must always sign a declaration that I will not give the copy (or a copy of it) to anyone other. Well, among scholars we do not always keep to this rule, and there is some private exchange of copies of documents. But you'll never go public with them, unless you got the prior written consent of the archive, e.g. for a scholarly publication. If you are interested in the SS Hygiene Institute lists, you can ask the Auschwitz archives for a copy - you'll find the file number in my article.

Now here's a dodge for you. The full transcripts of the post Nuremberg show trials are not available to read, the Arolsen archives are available to 'approved users only' and now, supposedly, there's copyright restrictions on other documents, on & on. It's all so convenient.

This is too easy.

- Hannover

[Eric Hunt]

Dear Dr. Neander,

Thank you for your thoughtful and civil response.

Like the previous poster mentioned, I can't get access to any of the documents you can because I would use such access to prove people such as Zisblatt to be complete frauds and liars. I've tried getting access to these archives.

You seem to imply that Zisblatt is under some sort of delusional, PTSD state of mind. All that one needs to do is watch Zisblatt's eyes dart left and right as she tells her stories, also her body language, particularly in The Last Days, such as leaning into the camera, touching her face, etc., all known as the body language of those telling a lie.

Like I wrote, I have some evidence which points to the diamond prop in particular and the story being created for this "documentary."

You still choose to ignore the fact that much of Spielberg's The Last Days is in itself a hoax. Let's be honest here, soap and lampshades may be your area of expertise, but it's a very small part of your article on Zisblatt. You seem to want to get off of the path you started on, by claiming that all you truly are intrigued about are soap and lampshades (long debunked, not truly an issue anymore).

The path you started on will lead you to coming to the conclusion that practically every Jew featured in The Last Days tells incredible lies on camera, they're paid actors in a Steven Spielberg production.

Spielberg's scatological Holocaust obsession is what is a true mental illness. From the Jewish children up to their necks in feces in Schindler's List to Cahana and Zisblatt's feces-laden fairy tales in The Last Days, this is outrageous, vile stuff being forced down children's throats much like religion.

As both intelligent Holocaust believers and deniers now know, Zisblatt is a fraud and a liar.

Please comment on Alice Lok Cahana's clearly fictional gas chamber escape story. Please don't ignore this fair request.

I'd also still want to see Renee Firestone's "experimentation" proof. Or, as you said, you can access it and tell us all about it, which is apparently allowed.

I understand why you don't want to do all of the work for the anti-semitic "deniers", yet your article is by definition "revisionist."

You're really not done with your research on Zisblatt. Again I will say that you don't mention her family practically at all. I know in my research into her family, I couldn't find much of anything about any of her alleged siblings. In your article, you mention that Zisblatt relies on several "Holocaust stereotypes." What about the stereotype of being the lone survivor out of an entire gassed family? I'm telling you that her entire family did not die in Nazi camps, and I'm wondering what evidence you have on the matter or if you would simply agree, because I've been right all along?

You also bring up "Lauren Stratford" for no good reason, when I repeatedly brought up the more fitting example of Herman Rosenblatt. Both Zisblatt and Rosenblatt were in concentration camps and made up impossible Holocaust memoirs to -

1) make themselves into heroes
2) benefit Zionism
3) further demoralize German / European people
4) make themselves wealthy

When is Zisblatt going to be exposed on national news? Her tales are far, far more evil than Rosenblatt's relatively harmless story about a girl throwing an apple to him over a fence.

Like the previous poster stated, you're "dodging" the rather sickening conclusion that the most famous "Holocaust survivors", especially those featured in Spielberg's Last Days are full of crap, not diamonds.

Thank you for your response, Dr. Neander, and participating in the "open debate on the Holocaust."

[joachim neander]

Dear Mr. Hunt,
you are asking:

Please comment on Alice Lok Cahana's clearly fictional gas chamber escape story. Please don't ignore this fair request.
I'd also still want to see Renee Firestone's "experimentation" proof. Or, as you said, you can access it and tell us all about it, which is apparently allowed.

You also asked me what I think about how many members of Mrs. Zisblatt's family survived. I see that you are interested in the stories these women told, and that you have reason to doubt that all did happen as told by the ladies.
But please accept that I cannot give you an answer to these questions.

I'm sure Mr. Hannover will call this "dodging" - but my day hasn't got more than 24 hours, I've got a lot of interesting things to do, and I'm not willing (at least at the time being) to invest time and money (e.g. for travel to archives and paying for copies) in an in-depth study of the above mentioned testimonies. I'm on nobody's payroll, neither Jewish nor Revisionist, and it is the privilege of a retiree (after 40 years of hard working) to decide what he will do, and what not.

With regard to Mengele experiments: I do not know a single camp document that directly says what he did, when, and with whom. On the other hand there are extant documents that show that Mengele did "research work" and that his work was financed by a state-run institution (not the SS, the Wehrmacht, or a pharmaceutical company) - that means, he did something with living human beings, inmates of Auschwitz. When he left Auschwitz, he took all documents relating to his work with him, as every researcher would have done. These documents are lost, such as many documents from wartime. It is futile to speculate how, when, why, and where. So all we know about what he did we have only from witness testimonies, and as I already mentioned, they must be examined critically. We here have the old problem: from the fact that we do not know with 100 per cent of exactitude what kind of experiments Mengele made and on whom, we cannot conclude that he did not make experiments on human beings at all.

"Mengele" - deliberately here put into quotation marks - has become an icon of the Holocaust. Small wonder that there are numerous survivors who tell that they were personally selected by him, even at times when he was not (or not yet) at Auschwitz. What is more, even a workaholic SS doctor could not have been at the ramp for 24 (or more) hours a day. The same holds with the experiments. I am very cautious when I read or hear that XYZ was experimented on by Mengele. It could have been, it could not have been in this special case. Because we don't have documents, an individual case can hardly be decided.

The lists from the SS Hygiene Institute you are mentioning have nothing to do with Mengele. They refer to screenings of prisoners' feces for disease-causing agents transmitted through feces. Such screenings were made routinely, e.g., with all prisoners that were employed in food handling, and with all those who would leave the camp within the next 2-3 days. The same was done in all concentration camps, not only at Auschwitz. In the case of Mrs. Zisblatt the list on which here name appears, however, is irrefutable proof that she, indeed, was at Auschwitz, and also that she was a "transit Jew" (this follows from the block she was in and which is mentioned on the list).

Sincerely yours,
J. Neander.

[Carto's Cutlass Supreme]

I think Joachim Neander has been very cordial and considerate in his answers. Quite admirable.

He wrote

The lists from the SS Hygiene Institute you are mentioning have nothing to do with Mengele. They refer to screenings of prisoners' feces for disease-causing agents transmitted through feces. Such screenings were made routinely, e.g., with all prisoners that were employed in food handling,

What's amazing about this is that until recently Professor Kenneth Waltzer took this to be document proof that Zisblatt was experimented on by Mengele.

After Neander and Hunt's research, Waltzer (I'm fairly sure) re-edited his Amazon entry but kept the title the same "True Memoir, not Hoax, but "Off."

http://www.amazon.com/Fifth-Diamond-Ire ... ewpoints=1

[Strong Coffee]

I would also like to tip my hat to Dr Neander for his input.

I want to make two points relevant to this discussion.

First, survivors -- that is, the survivors who write books or give lectures, because I have known several Jewish and non-Jewish survivors who are nothing like Ms Zisblatt -- are very suggestible. Because Mengele is a known person, everyone was selected by him. When Eichmann was arrested in 1960, books written about that time insisted that Eichmann was present at an alleged massacre in Minsk (he wasn't), and when there was a flap about Kurt Waldheim in 1986, there were articles claiming that Waldheim was standing next to Eichmann. And so forth.

Second, Dr Neander is correct that because many witnesses claim that X happened, it doesn't mean that X did happen, but it ALSO doesn't mean that X (or something like it) didn't happen. This applies to experiments, and much other Holocaust lore or claims or whatever you want to call them.

[Thesaint]

With regard to Mengele experiments: I do not know a single camp document that directly says what he did, when, and with whom. On the other hand there are extant documents that show that Mengele did "research work" and that his work was financed by a state-run institution (not the SS, the Wehrmacht, or a pharmaceutical company) - that means, he did something with living human beings, inmates of Auschwitz. When he left Auschwitz, he took all documents relating to his work with him, as every researcher would have done. These documents are lost, such as many documents from wartime. It is futile to speculate how, when, why, and where. So all we know about what he did we have only from witness testimonies,


The lists from the SS Hygiene Institute you are mentioning have nothing to do with Mengele. They refer to screenings of prisoners' feces for disease-causing agents transmitted through feces. Such screenings were made routinely, e.g., with all prisoners that were employed in food handling, and with all those who would leave the camp within the next 2-3 days. The same was done in all concentration camps, not only at Auschwitz.

Sincerely yours,
J. Neander.

With regard to Mengele experiments: I do not know a single camp document that directly says what he did, when, and with whom. On the other hand there are extant documents that show that Mengele did "research work" and that his work was financed by a state-run institution (not the SS, the Wehrmacht, or a pharmaceutical company) - that means, he did something with living human beings, inmates of Auschwitz. When he left Auschwitz, he took all documents relating to his work with him, as every researcher would have done. These documents are lost, such as many documents from wartime. It is futile to speculate how, when, why, and where. So all we know about what he did we have only from witness testimonies,

Ho,ho,ho!

I`ve not looked into the Mengele Mystery yet.I was expecting at least SOME(lol) paperwork recording his alleged Satan experiments.But no,all we`ve got is,yes you guessed it folks,the word of some crook that he/she`s really a "diamond geezer/ess".

The lists from the SS Hygiene Institute you are mentioning have nothing to do with Mengele. They refer to screenings of prisoners' feces for disease-causing agents transmitted through feces. Such screenings were made routinely, e.g., with all prisoners that were employed in food handling, and with all those who would leave the camp within the next 2-3 days. The same was done in all concentration camps, not only at Auschwitz.

All the camps?

Sounds like a very sensible health policy for the inmates,but I thought the Nazis were breathlessly shovelling them all into ze ovenz?

I've been a teacher for 29 years, and I've learned to be very modest in my expectations regarding the results of my teaching.

My history teacher deserves (minimum)multiple custard pies to the face for the bill of goods she tried to offload on me.
Let`s hope your ex-students are more forgiving of your holohoaxing,or it could be a lively retirement.

[joachim neander]

@ thesaint:
Sorry, Sir - I never taught history or alike: maths and physics.

[Eric Hunt]

Dr. Neander, Did you provide document numbers and the associated archive for the other documents I don't have?

[Friedrich Paul Berg]

Perhaps Joachim Neander can save the day for the hatemongers. Perhaps with his direct access to the archives at Auschwitz, he can find some proof that Elie Wiesel really did work at Monowitz in 1944, and that he really was at Auschwitz. A photographic file record perhaps? No doubt, the fiendish SS and Nazis kept the most meticulous records of everyone who entered and worked at such a strategic facility as Monowitz. How else could they possibly have dealt with those grieving Jewish workers who had recently had their dearest family members gassed to death, or tortured, or experimented upon, or whatever other unspeakable horrors? How else could they possibly have dealt with Polish terrorists and others who simply did not appreciate the heroic struggle Germany was waging against communism and anarchy.

On the other hand, perhaps the Elie Wiesel tale will simply flutter in the wind until it falls helpless into the toilet--where it belongs with so many other Jewish lies and scams

Friedrich Paul Berg
Learn everything at www.nazigassings.com
Nazi Gassings Never Happened! Niemand wurde vergast!

[skeptical]

I agree that Mr. "Neander" adds to the level of debate on this forum. I wish more people had access to the various repositories of information. Whatever justification there is for limiting access to these sources of information must be wearing quite thin in this day and age.