Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Visfor
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:54 am

Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby Visfor » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:26 am)

Hi, I have a question about the Eye Witness Accounts who say that they Nazi's killed their children immediately as policy.

The problem of confabulation is a big one of course. However it is very difficult to confabulate a child's death don't you think?

So my question is...Is the the eye witness testimony on this matter consistent or are their in fact quite a number of children who have survived the camps as well as parents who have children who were still alive after being in the camps?

Are those inconsistencies the exception. Or are they the norm?

The only thing I see mentioned is that Anne Frank was still alive after leaving a labor camp. However I think that is probably one of the weakest arguments that I have come across in revisionism because I think the policy was based on whether children could work or not and Anne Frank was probably at an age where she was capable of labor.

(As an aside I can recall that the first time I heard a "holocaust survivor" speak she said that as a child that she escaped being gassed because she walked through an unlocked door that happened to be inside the gas chamber. This unbelievability of this account combined with the fact that she survived is consistent with the idea that the killing of children was not policy)

Atigun
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:13 am

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby Atigun » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 5:35 am)

When it comes to the 'unbelievability' of holocaust stories, the surface has only been scratched. One of my favorites is of German soldiers using infants for target practice by throwing them into the air and shooting them with their service rifles. I suppose that this could be classified as 'holocaust skeet'.

At any rate, let's consider that a newborn infant usually weighs between 6 and 8 pounds so we can assume that the infants being used for targets would weigh in the 10 to 15 pound range minimum. As an experiment, fill a bag with 10 lbs. of sand, tie a ten inch section of rope to the bag and now see how high you can throw it. Try it with a 15lb. bag and so on.
Now lets consider that the German service rifle shot the 8mm Mauser cartridge, still considered a high powered round 65 years later. Recoil is in the 20 to 25 foot pounds of energy range. Now try throwing a 15 pound weight high enough into the air that you have time to shoulder a nine pound high powered rifle, aim and hit a small airborne target all before the baby falls back to earth.

Such tall tales would be laughable if indeed they weren't in fact actual viscious lies told in support of even more viscious accusations. Its disheartening that ordinary people have been snookered into believing the holocaust lie on the basis of just such trash.

User avatar
ClaudiaRothenbach
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:16 pm

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby ClaudiaRothenbach » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 6:20 am)

Wilkomierski :bounce: and Eli the Weasel :bootyshake: are two more examples beside Anne Frank.
"Everything has already been said, but not yet by everyone." - Karl Valentin

Visfor
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:54 am

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby Visfor » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 6:27 am)

What were Wiesel and Wilkomierski's age at the time of the alleged holocaust? And did they flee the camps before the alleged policy of child murder was put in place?

trevor
Member
Member
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby trevor » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:53 am)

Auschwitz museum states on their website:

"Slightly more than 23.5 thousand children and young people were registered in the camp, out of the total of 400 thousand registered prisoners."
http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/h/index.php? ... &Itemid=21

According to the extermination story, the registered prisoners were not gassed. After arrival there was a selection. Most were selected to be sent to gas chambers. The rest were registered and given a tattoo.

" Franciszek Piper, head of the Historical Research Department and author of the book How Many People Died in Auschwitz, estimates that slightly over 900,000 people were exterminated immediately after arrival, without being registered"


The fact that 23 000 children were REGISTERED in Auschwitz certainly doesn't support the extermination story. These children were too small to work.

They claim that about 1 300 000 people were transported to Auschwitz. If 900 000 were gassed upon arrival, It means that about 70% of arrived people ended up in gas chambers. Only 300 the most physically capable were selected out of each 1000. Why would they select 23 000 children if that was true???

Liberated children in Auschwitz:
http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/index.php? ... 1&Itemid=3
http://www.ushmm.org/lcmedia/photo/wlc/ ... /70262.jpg
http://www.ushmm.org/lcmedia/photo/wlc/ ... /71671.jpg

And how come that these old women were not gassed?
Liberated inmates in Auschwitz:
http://digitalassets.ushmm.org/photoarc ... 50&index=1
http://digitalassets.ushmm.org/photoarc ... 0B&index=1

( sorry about my English, I am not a native speaker)

Inquisitive
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 288
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 11:02 am

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby Inquisitive » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 10:21 am)

Visfor, let me help you with that sentence:

This unbelievability of this account combined with the fact that she survived is consistent with the idea that the killing of children was not policy)


should read:
The unbelievability of these accounts combined with the fact that they survived is consistent with the idea that the killing of Jews was not policy.

If the policy was to exterminate, there would not be survivors in such great numbers. They supposedly had them rounded up where no one could see them yet they survived. Sounds more like fertility chambers. 2 million go in, 3 million SURVIVE!

Visfor
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:54 am

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby Visfor » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 11:22 am)


If the policy was to exterminate, there would not be survivors in such great numbers. They supposedly had them rounded up where no one could see them yet they survived. Sounds more like fertility chambers. 2 million go in, 3 million SURVIVE!


You make a fair point and not one which I have enough background to comment on. For the purposes of the this inquiry I am only attempting to draw the most minimal conclusion that will directly relate to the issue of mass murder of children during the alleged holocaust.

ovd1965
Member
Member
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:55 am

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby ovd1965 » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:01 pm)

I have often some problems to believe things , that are contrary to common knowlegde of several living circumstances or against "healthy mind".

Very often we have stories , that during arrival / selection on ramp the nazi monsters throw babies on to wagons, fences or trees.
using their bayonets , knives , sabers against little children and babies.
"throwing" a baby in to two pieces etc.

1.) The ordinary soldier/private or lower rank has ONE uniform , changed in time based on a plan (laundry).
Everyone who served the army will NOT understand that someone would (voluntary) soil the clothing by messing around
blood and brain.

2.) Doing such things during the arrival / "selection" on the ramp would initiate a panic or resistance (or both).
Watch the famous "ramp" pics , you see a few (!) soldiers with pistols or K98 (a 5 bullit repeating rifle !) among (!) thousends of prisoners; even suggesting a machine pistol like MP40 would not improve the situation (32 shots , only automatic modus)

3.) there is no doubt , that we have a lot of rules and laws forbidding contacts and atrocities by SS men , even if we accept
that there are a lot of "bad guys" among them , such cruel events will not happen as an common doing all days

4.) the point 3.) is not only verified by files and historians , you can read it also in the memoirs of several prisoners in
nazi camps. it is also obvisiously , that most atrocities came from the KAPOs.

5.) finding stories that the soldiers used sabers or special big knives is ridiculous , because of the very rigorous rules for
clothing and equipment.Especially thinking how "practical" a saber is for camp watch duty.

6.) sarcasm : obvisiously Dr. Mengele worked 7 days/week 24 hr/day , 400 days/ year on ramp , laboratory, crema ,blocks
etc.

Visfor
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:54 am

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby Visfor » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 3:44 pm)

"Slightly more than 23.5 thousand children and young people were registered in the camp, out of the total of 400 thousand registered prisoners."
http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/h/index.php? ... &Itemid=21

According to the extermination story, the registered prisoners were not gassed. After arrival there was a selection. Most were selected to be sent to gas chambers. The rest were registered and given a tattoo.


This could mean a number of things in relation to revisionism and the "official" story of the holocaust with regard to the alleged mass murder of children.

1. That it was never claimed that children were killed as a matter of policy since 23.5 thousand children were registered and that this fact has been freely available to holocaust historian and the public from the very start.
2. That it was in fact claimed that children were murdered as a matter of policy despite these records because it was believed that the children registered were capable of doing some form of labor. (Think of sweat shop labor in these days around the world where children have been put to work)
3.That it was in fact claimed that Jewish children were killed as a matter of policy but not other children from other backgrounds.
4.That the holocaust witness testimony established that children were killed right away as a matter of policy but that this finding from Auschwitz contradicts that testimony.
5. And finally it may be that it simply is not true that it was ever claimed by "official" sources that all children incapable of work were murdered.

The fact that 23 000 children were REGISTERED in Auschwitz certainly doesn't support the extermination story. These children were too small to work.


I disagree. The children I saw in the photographs looked capable of some form of work. (Some of the smaller ones I admit don't look work appropriate)

trevor
Member
Member
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby trevor » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Dec 29, 2010 6:51 pm)

Visfor wrote:
"Slightly more than 23.5 thousand children and young people were registered in the camp, out of the total of 400 thousand registered prisoners."
http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/h/index.php? ... &Itemid=21


The children I saw in the photographs looked capable of some form of work. (Some of the smaller ones I admit don't look work appropriate)


OK I repeat:
They claim that about 1 300 000 people were transported to Auschwitz and 900 000 of them were gassed upon arrival. It means that about 70% of arrived people ended up in gas chambers. Only 300 the most physically capable were selected for work out of each 1000. Why would they select 23 000 children if that was true???

Some of the children from the photos were certainly capable of some sort of work but a small ,weak girl like Anne Frank and other 23 000 children were hardly the most physically strong and capable individuals concerning the fact that only 300 out of each 1000 were selected for work.

Visfor
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:54 am

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby Visfor » 9 years 9 months ago (Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:38 am)


OK I repeat:
They claim that about 1 300 000 people were transported to Auschwitz and 900 000 of them were gassed upon arrival. It means that about 70% of arrived people ended up in gas chambers. Only 300 the most physically capable were selected for work out of each 1000. Why would they select 23 000 children if that was true???


I am not sure if your thesis is correct. If 23,000 children were remaining at the camp then it would seem like there are a number of possibilities that can be made about the claim that only the most capable of people were selected for work.

1. It is a generally known thing that the alleged holocaust was kept as a secret to the inmates. If all the children were killed then it would be known right away that something was happening to them. (That they were murdered or that they went to different camps) So in order to ensure the moral and stability of the workers this knowledge was kept from them and children were kept alive.
2. Perhaps its not true that work capability was the only criteria for not gassing inmates. There are many "orthodox" historians who claim that the holocaust did not take place in a fully planned matter but rather as a response to circumstances. It would therefor make sense that the evidence contradicts the idea of a more planned extermination.


However this brings up another consideration.

If all the incapable children were killed at arrival then that would be a fact known to all the prisoners and it would therefor not be a secret.

Either of several things follows from that consideration.

1. The claim that members of the camp weren't aware of a systematic killing happening is simply not true.
2. The members of the camp were aware that there were no incapable children but they were given a plausible
explanation for their non appearance at the camp. The parents of such children were told that their children were moved to another camp, for example. (this would have to be verified by the witness testimony of course)
3. The parents of the children who were killed were also killed so that there was no appearance of missing children to the living inmates. ( I don't think this is generally considered the case)

Since "orthodox" history would generally exclude "1" and "3" unless "2" was validated by the witness test that would a huge contradiction in the "official" story.

(However perhaps I am incorrect about claim "1" and it is establish by the witnesses that they were aware of a systematic system of murder of children just not a holocaust in general)

trevor
Member
Member
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby trevor » 9 years 9 months ago (Thu Dec 30, 2010 7:58 am)

"At the same time the SS doctors chose from amongst those who had arrived only a small number of young Jews fit for work, and the rest were sent directly from the unloading platform to the gas-chambers, where they were all suffocated by gas. So the first victims of murders were the sick, old, pregnant women, women with infants and children."

Source: German Crimes in Poland. Volume 1. Central Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland. Warsaw, 1946
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gcpol9.htm


BTW This Central Commission for investigation relied mainly on "eye witnesses" and their fairy tales or at least utterly exaggerated statements. You will see when you read the whole report.
The link above has only several pages from the Report and they picked only certain paragraphs from the selected pages. You would have to find the whole Report.

User avatar
Zulu
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 9:44 am

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby Zulu » 9 years 9 months ago (Thu Dec 30, 2010 10:20 am)

Robert Faurisson at the Zundel trial of Toronto (1988)

Said Faurisson: "I would like to make a remark about children of tender years were invariably exterminated. This is...simply false. We have many proof that children even were born in Auschwitz..." (30-8364) As proof, Faurisson produced the book Anthology, published by the International Committee of Auschwitz in Poland in 1969 and read his translation of an extract from a report by a midwife in Auschwitz [Vol. II, Pt. 2, p. 159 to 169 of the French edition]:

I worked under these conditions for two years day and night without somebody to replace me...The women gave childbirth on the heating pipes. I delivered in this manner more than 3,000 babies. In spite of the dreadful dirtiness, the vermin and the rats, in spite of the infectious diseases and other horrors beyond description, extraordinary things occurred there which are unbelievable but true. One day, the camp doctor asked me to submit a report to him concerning the infections attracted by the pregnant women, the mortality against mothers and infants, sucklings. I reported to him that I had not one single case of death either with the mothers or newborn babies. The camp doctor looked at me with incredulous eyes and informed me that even in the best maternal wards in Germany, they could not boast of such results. His eyes were full of rage and hatred. Why indeed had there been no mortality at all? Perhaps because the organisms were destroyed to such an extent that they constituted a sterilized, a barren substance for the microbes.

The Kalendarium der Ereignisse im Konzentrationslager Auschwitz-Birkenau [Calendar of Auschwitz] published by the Auschwitz Museum (10), indicated that children born in the camp were listed and given numbers. These children were Jews and gypsies. There was an association in the United States called the Candles Association for the twins of Auschwitz. In 1982, there were about 108 members. There were also medical studies on what the Auschwitz Museum called the children of Auschwitz, meaning both children born in the camp and people who were children when they came to the camp. (30-8366, 8367)

On page 31 of Anthology there were results of psychiatric examinations of persons born or interned as children in Nazi concentration camps. On page 48 the book stated:

The most advanced symptoms were observed with the children who had spent more than two or even three years at Auschwitz.

Faurisson pointed out that on the end pages of Six Million Did Die was a photograph of children at Auschwitz who had not been killed: "...it's a rather well known photograph because it's from a film taken by the Soviet[s] and the Poles at...the liberation of Auschwitz on the 27th of January, 1945. And we see those children getting out of the camp and there we are. It's [a contradiction] with[in] the content of the book itself. Of course, it's terrible to keep children in a concentration camp. Why would you put children in a concentration camp?...In my opinion, it's because the German did, as so many people on earth, when they decided to put, for instance, the Jews in...concentration camps, they put the parents and also the children and we have children which are very well known today who were in those camps and especially in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau. We know, for instance, that at the end of the war in Buchenwald, there is a book about those children, something like 1,000 Jewish children were in Buchenwald coming from Auschwitz." (30-8367, 8368)


and more...
http://www.vho.org/aaargh/engl/FaurisArch/RF880413.html

Visfor
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:54 am

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby Visfor » 9 years 9 months ago (Thu Dec 30, 2010 11:12 am)

I reported to him that I had not one single case of death either with the mothers or newborn babies. The camp doctor looked at me with incredulous eyes and informed me that even in the best maternal wards in Germany, they could not boast of such results. His eyes were full of rage and hatred. Why indeed had there been no mortality at all? Perhaps because the organisms were destroyed to such an extent that they constituted a sterilized, a barren substance for the microbes.


No mortality of the new born babies? I am incredulous myself and I think that casts doubt on the credibility of this person. It however is not "incredible" since the infant mortality rate of new born babies in the US is 1 in a thousand according to a graph on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_mortality

Several question.

1. Were the babies Jewish?
2. Were they removed from the parents but given plausible explanations for there whereabouts?

Again how could babies be killed without people knowing about that? Or did they know just not the full blown holocaust?

What is the basis of the statement that children were killed if we have documents like this?

Could this be a straw man argument invented by revisionists?

trevor
Member
Member
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Question about Eye Witness Accounts

Postby trevor » 9 years 9 months ago (Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:44 pm)

Rudolf Hoess confession:
"We had two SS doctors on duty at Auschwitz to examine the incoming transports of prisoners. The prisoners would be marched by one of the doctors who would make spot decisions as they walked by. Those who were fit for work were sent into the camp. Others were sent immediately to the extermination plants. Children of tender years were invariably exterminated since by reason of their youth they were unable to work"
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... stest.html

Auschwitz museum:
"Slightly more than 23.5 thousand children and young people were registered in the camp, out of the total of 400 thousand registered prisoners."
http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/h/index.php? ... &Itemid=21


4) According to the “Holocaust” story, from spring 1942 at Auschwitz all Jews unable to work were gassed upon arrival without previous registration. If this assertion were true, no names of old Jews or Jewish children would figure in the Sterbebücher of Auschwitz. But a study of these documents, which were published in printed form in 1995,[9] reveals that many old Jews and Jewish children were registered at Auschwitz:

– 2 Jews over 90 years of age;

– 73 Jews from 80 to 90 years of age;

– 482 Jews from 70 to 80 years of age;

– 2,083 Jews from 60 to 70 years of age;

– 2,584 Jews from 0 to 10 years of age.[10]

http://juergen-graf.vho.org/articles/hu ... tml#_ftn10


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 10 guests