The Warden wrote:...
We can classify the accounts of former SS personell into four groups,
(1) those does who denied that any mass killing took place,
(2) those who said there didn't know about the mass killings,
(3) those who acknowledge that mass killings took place and
(4) those who describe mass killings or mass killing sites in detail.
If we only focus on those who could have been in the position to know something, then I estimate from my reading that the distribution looks like this, the majority of testimonies fall in group (3), then (4) and (2) and the smallest is (1).
The group (3) consists of two sub-categories, (a) those who really didn't much details, and (b) those who know much details but avoided to reveal. In my previous post I provided explanation for the existence of group (3b). Note that my explanation consists of four points and not of one as you suggest.
Group (4) witnesses are for instance people like Höss, Broad, Morgan, Gerstein, Fuchs, Böck, Erber.
Now the interesting thing with this distribution is that you it is pretty much what you would expect if the mass killings were true, and pretty much the exact opposite of what we would expect if there were not true.
If there were no mass killings, we would expect most testimonies in group (1) rejecting that any mass killing did took place, then group (2), then with large distant group (3) and finally very small or even empty group (4). ....
No you don't. If mass gassings took place you'd expect a close to complete wall of silence from the core people with circumstantial witnesses en mass, if you take the setting of the camp as generally expected. Actually you'd expect some completely different setting and not the dilettantishly silly one given to us by the Holocaust promotion scene. You also fail to mention that these testimonies are just a selection from any possible ones. These are the once selected for mentioning and publishing. In fact the biggest group of people is those that only hear later about this.
If the mass gassing Holocaust claim is a hoax created and driven by political interest groups and war propagandist, you'd expect a situation exactly as the given one. Lot's of people that didn't know anything which would be your group (2) and the vast majority of those connected to the camp at any time. Given the circumstances of threat of illegal arrest, assassination and having lost the war, you'd expect only a few outright disputes being made. In fact those that do not dispute, seem to be bullied over by the big lie technique that has been employed to push the hoax. Of course one would have to expect some figures in (3) and (4) as well. What group (4) utters is even so patently silly riddled with hogwash it is even amazing for a constructed hoax. You'd also expect group (4) to be pressured and tortured to give their testimony. When different people utter the same nonsense over and over again, that's not a sign of converging evidence, but indicates that people have been coached in some way.