Some questions about destruction of crematorium and Sobibor.

[Apokiliptik]

Hello all thanks for having me! If my questions have already been discussed, please forgive the redundancy.

I'm curious about a few things and I'd like to get some feedback from you guys. At the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp complex all but one of the crematoria facilities were destroyed, I believe. The Red Army's arrival was imminent and the Germans put together a labor detail and secured some ordinance and destroyed the buildings. Supporters of the Revisionist viewpoint claim that the crematoria and the buildings they were in were simply morgues and ovens for dealing with bodies of dead prisoners. The prisoners had died of typhus, hunger and other unfortunate circumstances. But if that's all the crematoriums were then why did the Germans destroy them? There's nothing sinister or criminal about crematoriums and morgues. If they were worried about how many people died, then why didn't they show the same anxiety in Germany proper at Bergen Belsen, Dachau, Buchenwald, etc.

In the Sobibor concentration camp the prisoners rose up and killed the SS guards and took off across a mine field. They knew there was a mine field because others had died. A number of them were killed in it. They were so terrified of that camp and remaining in it that running across a live mine field seemed preferable to them than staying. After this the SS obliterated the camp. The planted 4 year old pines to cover up it's existence. This was seen by a witness named Jan. If all it was was a work camp, then why were the prisoners so terrified and why did the Germans go to such elaborate lengths to erase it. It wasn't found until the 1990's.

Any insight you guys could provide would be appreciated. Thanks.

[hermod]

Hello all thanks for having me! If my questions have already been discussed, please forgive the redundancy.

I'm curious about a few things and I'd like to get some feedback from you guys. At the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp complex all but one of the crematoria facilities were destroyed, I believe. The Red Army's arrival was imminent and the Germans put together a labor detail and secured some ordinance and destroyed the buildings. Supporters of the Revisionist viewpoint claim that the crematoria and the buildings they were in were simply morgues and ovens for dealing with bodies of dead prisoners. The prisoners had died of typhus, hunger and other unfortunate circumstances. But if that's all the crematoriums were then why did the Germans destroy them? There's nothing sinister or criminal about crematoriums and morgues. If they were worried about how many people died, then why didn't they show the same anxiety in Germany proper at Bergen Belsen, Dachau, Buchenwald, etc.

Hello Apokiliptik. And Welcome.

In fact, when the retreating Nazis surprisingly (in an exterminationist view) destroyed the Auschwitz crematories, they destroyed everything but the alleged gas chambers. They only damaged those rooms. Different revisionists investigated the ruins of the Auschwitz 'gas chambers'.

After the capture of Majdanek by the Red Army, the Soviet and Western propagandists focused their atrocity propaganda on pictures of crematory ovens, charred corpses, pile of ashes, etc. So when the Nazis destroyed the Auschwitz crematoria, they destroyed food for enemy propaganda, not evidence of any crime.


Majdanek crematory atrocity propaganda running at full speed in America

Why the Germans Destroyed the Crematoria but left the "Gas Chambers" Intact

By Andrew Allen

A common argument in support of Exterminationism is that the Germans "destroyed the 'gas chambers'" as they retreated from the Auschwitz/Birkenau complex in January of 1945. However, a review of German destruction of the "evidence" at Auschwitz/Birkenau shows that, first of all, the Germans left a mass of documentary evidence untouched; including the complete record of the construction and operation of the so-called gas chambers.

The names, ranks, time cards and duties of the persons building the chambers, along with signed blueprints, signed change-work orders and even photographs of the individual SS personnel working on the site were left by the Germans. From this mass of paper we know who did what when. This clear, detailed and complete documentary record could have been destroyed with a match. It wasn't.

It is also clear that the destruction focused on crematorium and ovens, not on the rooms which are claimed to have been gas chambers. At Auschwitz/Birkenau all crematorium facilities were dismantled prior to Soviet liberation but not the actual "gas chambers" themselves. The Main Camp gas chamber rooms at Krema I and Block 11 were 100% intact on January 27,1945, the date Soviets occupied the Camp.

The two most important gas chambers of the entire Holocaust Myth are Leichenkeller 1 of Krema II and Leichenkeller 1 of Krema III. Leichenkeller 1 of Krema II was/is almost entirely complete, with its floor and walls untouched. The roof consisting of two layers of waterproofing and a thick concrete slab roof have partially fallen into the room below. About 35% of the room is still easily accessible. Leichenkeller 1 of Krema III was also left in a highly "inspectable" state, but with its roof completely dropped.

On the other hand, the crematoria sections of Krema II and III have been demolished down to the floor of the second level. All traces of crematorium have been removed except for the rail tracks. Even the chimneys have been reduced to scattered bricks.

It is worth noting that the explosions which brought down the crematoria structures and damaged the alleged gas chambers occurred just hours before the Germans abandoned Birkenau, again highlighting the hasty nature of the German's departure. Why leave a clear paper trail and much of the actual gas chambers themselves but remove all traces of crematoria? It doesn't make sense from an Exterminationist view. What's the Revisionist view?

The Germans were not destroying evidence of gas chambers but were destroying evidence of crematoria. Why?

Majdanek or, to be precise, the propaganda use that the Majdanek crematoria "ovens" were put to by the Soviets after their capture July 24, 1944. Majdanek Camp was captured complete, without any dismantling of its facilities. Martin Gilbert writes in his compendium of Holocaust myths, fairy tales and occasional truths The Holocaust:

"Also on July 24, Soviet forces entered Majdanek. War correspondents from all the Allied armies gazed in horror at gas-chambers, crematoria, and the charred remains of human beings. Photographs of these remains were published throughout the Allied world." (p. 711)

The Soviets and Allies, then, made major propaganda use of the crematorium ovens or "gas ovens" as they were sometimes called then. What is most likely to have happened next was that an order went out "from Berlin" in late September or October saying in effect: "Avoid leaving evidence of crematorium." At Auschwitz Main Camp, Krema I already had its ovens and chimney removed in 1943 so the building was ignored. Block 11 was never a crematoria and was ignored. The mass of paperwork and plans was simply overlooked. At Birkenau, Kremas IV and V were not in use and were the first to be dismantled in October 1944.

As an aside, an order to dismantle the crematorium may be the basis of the persistent camp rumors of "an order to end the killing," which was allegedly issued at this time. No order to "end the killing" has been found despite a good deal of searching. Perhaps an "order to demolish" will be.

The retreating Germans did destroy "evidence" as they left Auschwitz/Birkenau but it was the crematoria related evidence which had provided powerful fodder for Soviet propaganda. The actual pattern destruction; i.e. what was destroyed and what was ignored and left, fully supports the Revisionist thesis.

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcgvdest.html

Google "Majdanek". Most of the pictures you'll find even today are "crematory pictures".

"That’s the “hacked-off hands”* again – pure enemy propaganda!"
- Adolf Hitler, when Press Chief Otto Dietrich showed him an English newspaper reporting a claim by Moscow that 1,500,000 people had been liquidated in a concentration camp at Majdanek, which the Red Army had just overrun, during a war conference.

http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blog ... -camp.html

(* British anti-German WW1 atrocity propaganda)

In the Sobibor concentration camp the prisoners rose up and killed the SS guards and took off across a mine field. They knew there was a mine field because others had died. A number of them were killed in it. They were so terrified of that camp and remaining in it that running across a live mine field seemed preferable to them than staying. After this the SS obliterated the camp. The planted 4 year old pines to cover up it's existence. This was seen by a witness named Jan. If all it was was a work camp, then why were the prisoners so terrified and why did the Germans go to such elaborate lengths to erase it. It wasn't found until the 1990's.

So every risky escape or riot in history proves there was a death factory at that place?

"They planted 4 year old pines to cover up it's existence."...In 1944, Vasily Grossman, the author of the Soviet Black Book with Ilya Ehrenburg, claimed the Nazis had planted wheat, not pines, before leaving the camp (http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blog ... rs-to.html). He also claimed there were over 30 of those alleged "death factories" (killing by means of carbon monoxide and electric current) in Eastern Poland & Silesia and the Nazis had dismantled the Sobibor "death factory" before rebuilding it at Chelm.

Soviet propaganda was amazing. The Soviet propagandists had nothing to show (after the Nazi propagandists had exposed their crimes at Katyn and Vinnitsa), so they claimed that proved the Nazis had destroyed all traces of their crimes. People just believed them without questioning, not realizing there was also another possible explanation, the most logical one - i.e. there was nothing to show because no criminal activities had taken place there.

Anyway pines and lupines in a forest. Waw. What a great proof!

[Apokiliptik]

First, I want to make a correction. Sobibor wasn't discovered in the 90's. I'm sorry that's one hell of a blunder. My mistake.

In your response to me you said that they didn't destroy the "Gas chambers"/"Morgues". That's just not an accurate description of Auschwitz-Birkenau. Only one facility of the 5 remained standing. Facility 2 was flattened and there is photographic evidence of that. I know 3 was destroyed but I had trouble finding images of it. There were two houses used as gas chambers, if that happened, early in the camps history that were later flattened by the SS. Now my numbers may be off here so please be patient but I think it was 4 that was burned down in a revolt by Sondercommando. Then 5 was destroyed by SS. The one left standing called 1 was used for a number of things other than mass execution, assuming it was used for that. It was used as a morgue and as an air raid shelter. It's use as a gas chamber, if it was used that way, was for about one year between 41 and 42. I'm not sure there would have been much evidence of it being a "Gas chamber" after such a short time. That's just my opinion. Finally, why would Soviets use crematoriums and morgues as propaganda? That's not how they did mass executions. They used a machine gun or rifles. How would it even occur to them to speculate that someone would gas people. How would the Germans have thought of it. How would it even occur to them that they could be accused of such a thing. That's a pretty extreme thing. Did it just pop into there heads "Oh man! the Red army is coming, we'd better raze those crematoriums and morgues or their propaganda people might concoct an elaborate story about how we gassed millions of Jews with cans of Zyklon B and burned their bodies." That's a little far fetched. One would have to be psychotically paranoid.

Where I come from we usually go with the simplest explanation to an event. The SS has been accused of committing crimes such as murder by means gassing people in side of buildings and then burning their bodies. When the camps were investigated it was discovered that the SS deliberately destroyed the very buildings these events were said to take place in. They have engaged in this same behavior with three other camps. Witnesses accuse them of the same behavior at those camps. The simplest explanation is that they destroyed evidence to cover up the crimes they were accused of. The explanation given by the author of the article you shared involves an elaborate, unclear, undefined, and really inexplicable conspiracy theory. The only reason to believe what the author of that article has to say over my explanation is because you so strongly prefer to believe the article that you are willing to ignore the strength of my arguments in order to protect your viewpoint.

Something that the article said confused me. I had heard that there was not evidence that Jewish people had been gassed and yet it sounded like he was saying that considerable documentation was discovered at Auschwitz of exactly that. I'm confused.

You didn't talk about the issues concerning the Sobibor revolt or it's destruction. The same covering up of the camps existence by the SS happened at Treblinka and Belzec. The SS actually moved a Ukrainian farmer on the site of both Treblinka and Belzec to keep the locals from snooping the grounds.

[Dolma]

Apokiliptik

I'm confused.

Yes Apokiliptik, I can see that. You're trying to answer too many questions at once. Why don't you slow down and concentrate on just one camp and just one issue at a time?

Apokiliptik

You didn't talk about... Sobibor

I'm sure that's because you asked too many questions about too many topics at the same time. I have been reading up about Sobibor lately - maybe I can help you with your confusion?

Apokiliptik

In the Sobibor concentration camp... the SS obliterated the camp

"Obliterated" the camp?

o·blit·er·ate

1. to destroy utterly so that nothing remains
2. to erase or obscure something completely, leaving no trace

Well now Apokiliptik, I can see why you're so confused. You have fallen for one of the biggest lies about the fraudulently alleged "jewish holocaust of WW II." I'll get back to this point later.


Apokiliptik

Where I come from we usually go with the simplest explanation to an event.

I agree Apokiliptik, that's a good way to look at things. So let's start at the begining here - at the point of your confusion. Let me start by asking you a couple of questions so as to gauge your knowledge and understanding of the so-called "Sobibor holocaust."

# 1 - Is it true or false that, at - Sobibor - huge pits were filled with bodies, emptied, then refilled with human remains?

# 2 - Is it true or false that, at - Sobibor - there are extant graves which currently contain actual / verifiable human remains?

[Moderator]

Apokiliptik:
Your OP topic and your responses are all over the place, please read our basic guidelines.
M1

[Hannover]

Apokiliptik, you said:

Supporters of the Revisionist viewpoint claim that the crematoria and the buildings they were in were simply morgues and ovens for dealing with bodies of dead prisoners. The prisoners had died of typhus, hunger and other unfortunate circumstances. But if that's all the crematoriums were then why did the Germans destroy them? There's nothing sinister or criminal about crematoriums and morgues. If they were worried about how many people died, then why didn't they show the same anxiety in Germany proper at Bergen Belsen, Dachau, Buchenwald, etc.

If hiding something was the intent then why were other alleged 'gas chambers' not destroyed, as in Majdanek? Please read: Forty-Six Important Unanswered Questions Regarding the Nazi Gas Chambers
By David Cole
http://codoh.com/library/document/987

- The underside of an alleged gas chamber at Auschwitz/Birkenau has no holes for the placement of Zyklon-B that are alleged to have been there. There is no indication that the alleged 'holes' were filled in. If the intent was to hide something then why leave this alleged 'gas chamber' roof so intact?


you said:

In the Sobibor concentration camp the prisoners rose up and killed the SS guards and took off across a mine field. They knew there was a mine field because others had died. A number of them were killed in it. They were so terrified of that camp and remaining in it that running across a live mine field seemed preferable to them than staying. After this the SS obliterated the camp. The planted 4 year old pines to cover up it's existence. This was seen by a witness named Jan. If all it was was a work camp, then why were the prisoners so terrified and why did the Germans go to such elaborate lengths to erase it. It wasn't found until the 1990's.

"Witness" Jan who? Did he testify in court? If so, do you have his verbatim testimony with cross examination to review? Simply making claims and proving the claims are rather different.

You said:

In your response to me you said that they didn't destroy the "Gas chambers"/"Morgues". That's just not an accurate description of Auschwitz-Birkenau. Only one facility of the 5 remained standing. Facility 2 was flattened and there is photographic evidence of that. I know 3 was destroyed but I had trouble finding images of it. There were two houses used as gas chambers, if that happened, early in the camps history that were later flattened by the SS. Now my numbers may be off here so please be patient but I think it was 4 that was burned down in a revolt by Sondercommando. Then 5 was destroyed by SS. The one left standing called 1 was used for a number of things other than mass execution, assuming it was used for that. It was used as a morgue and as an air raid shelter. It's use as a gas chamber, if it was used that way, was for about one year between 41 and 42. I'm not sure there would have been much evidence of it being a "Gas chamber" after such a short time. That's just my opinion. Finally, why would Soviets use crematoriums and morgues as propaganda? That's not how they did mass executions. They used a machine gun or rifles. How would it even occur to them to speculate that someone would gas people. How would the Germans have thought of it. How would it even occur to them that they could be accused of such a thing. That's a pretty extreme thing. Did it just pop into there heads "Oh man! the Red army is coming, we'd better raze those crematoriums and morgues or their propaganda people might concoct an elaborate story about how we gassed millions of Jews with cans of Zyklon B and burned their bodies." That's a little far fetched. One would have to be psychotically paranoid.

Where I come from we usually go with the simplest explanation to an event. The SS has been accused of committing crimes such as murder by means gassing people in side of buildings and then burning their bodies. When the camps were investigated it was discovered that the SS deliberately destroyed the very buildings these events were said to take place in. They have engaged in this same behavior with three other camps. Witnesses accuse them of the same behavior at those camps. The simplest explanation is that they destroyed evidence to cover up the crimes they were accused of. The explanation given by the author of the article you shared involves an elaborate, unclear, undefined, and really inexplicable conspiracy theory. The only reason to believe what the author of that article has to say over my explanation is because you so strongly prefer to believe the article that you are willing to ignore the strength of my arguments in order to protect your viewpoint.

Something that the article said confused me. I had heard that there was not evidence that Jewish people had been gassed and yet it sounded like he was saying that considerable documentation was discovered at Auschwitz of exactly that. I'm confused.

You didn't talk about the issues concerning the Sobibor revolt or it's destruction. The same covering up of the camps existence by the SS happened at Treblinka and Belzec. The SS actually moved a Ukrainian farmer on the site of both Treblinka and Belzec to keep the locals from snooping the grounds.

- You have zero proof for your 'houses made into gas chambers'. That issue has been debunked repeatedly at this forum and elsewhere. You're obviously new to Revisionism and not at all familiar with our research.

- Please start a separate thread and tell us how you believe the 'gas chambers' actually worked. In fact, start a separate thread on any of your views related to the 'holocaust' storyline as your original post, as noted, touches on many, too many points.

- As far "Where I come from we usually go with the simplest explanation to an event." goes, then please show us human remains as alleged, please show us a single, verifiable excavation which displays huge numbers of confirmed Jewish corpses in situ. That would be one of the "simplest" approaches.

- Please, in a new thread, show us the "documentation" which you claim proves 'gassings' at Auschwitz. Real German documents, not someone's alleged 'translations' of alleged German documents. IOW, show us real documents to review.

- Speaking of Treblinka, please show us the enormous pit/s that is/are claimed to have held ca. 800,000 Jews. Please show us the human remains. Please tell us how the Jews were supposedly murdered, with proof of course.

- Why are there so many statements made by Jews, so many articles by Jews, along with British intercepts of German messages indicating that Jews were simply moved into eastern Europe (just as German leadership stated) and in so many, many cases, Jews were sent elsewhere after entering alleged "death camps" such as Auschwitz, Treblinka, etc.?

- Why did most Jews choose to retreat from Auschwitz with the Germans rather than stay behind and await the arrival of the communist Soviets?

- Why would the German leave behind so many alive Jews at Auschwitz? Wouldn't the Germans be afraid of them talking? ... if the storyline was true. And if the 'planned extermination of Jews' storyline was true, why didn't the Germans simply kill all the Jews before the Germans retreated from Auschwitz, or any of the alleged "extermination camps"?

Again, you go off into many tangents in this thread which makes for a cluttered, difficult to follow, discussion. In the future, please separate your topics into separate threads. I suggest you use our search function here or go to the CODOH main site to familiarize yourself with Revisionist research and debate. Revisionists here are quite familiar with the position/s you wish to defend.

Welcome to the best 'holocaust' storyline discussion forum there is, period. Where all 'holocaust' storyline views are allowed and presented; name calling & personal attacks against active registrants are not permitted here. Where, for once, a level playing field is made available and the goal posts are not moved during debate.

The tide is turning.

- Hannover

[Apokiliptik]

Apokiliptik:
Your OP topic and your responses are all over the place, please read our basic guidelines.
M1

I apologize, that wasn't my intent. I put all the camps in my OP and then added some because they all suffered the same fate. They were all destroyed. Not to complain but my OP was on target I think, it's the response I got that got me bouncing around a bit. If I didn't respond I'd be accused of avoiding an argument.

[Moderator]

Apokiliptik:
I have PM'd you about this. Thanks, M1

[Dolma]

Apokiliptik

...they all suffered the same fate. They were all destroyed... my OP was on target I think.

Apokiliptik, I asked you about your claim that Sobibor was "obliterated," but rather than answer my questions, you come back with "they were all destroyed" and "my OP was on target I think."

If you were "on target," then why don't you defend your claims? Why are you afraid to answer my questions?

Apokiliptik

If I didn't respond I'd be accused of avoiding an argument.

So what's you're excuse for not responding to my questions?

And I don't want to argue with you Apokiliptik, I'd like to have a debate - if you dare.

[borjastick]

Here's my two 'penneth for what it's worth.

Talking to Apokilitik like he's the enemy or some naughty schoolboy doesn't do it for me and probably isn't that enticing for him either. We should show some respect here and give the chap the benefit of the doubt. He's a beginner by the look of it and even if he does have a mainstream viewpoint so what? He's welcome to come here and learn and discuss, after all isn't that what the Forum is for?

I do think the OP was rather wide in its approach and as such I am going to comment only on the Auschwitz points.

The general point is why would the Germans destroy some of the camp infrastructure but not the so called gas chambers thus leaving behind incriminating evidence? Evidence that the Russians could and did use in their prosecution of the death camp accusations subsequently. My take is quite simple. I don't believe the Germans in the days or weeks before their departure did destroy all that they are blamed for doing. I would therefore doubt that they actually blew up the morgue buildings. If the Russians wanted to frame the Germans all they had to do was blow up the camp and then claim the morgues were the gas chambers. They would have had plenty of those stay at home inmates to add fuel to the rumour mill and fan the flames of mass gassings and mass shootings.

There are several versions of the dates the Germans actually left the camp, indeed I read somewhere they left and then sent a team of soldiers back to destroy some items etc. However there was also a claim that after the Germans left the Russians sent a recon team into the camp before leaving and returning en masse on Jan 27. Even the dates are doubted in some circles, with the 27th doubted. I believe the date of the 23rd jan is also presented. These two dates could be critical in the process of manufacturing evidence and blowing up buildings by the Russians, if they wanted to fix the evidence to heap more accusations on the Germans.

I have no doubt the remaining prisoners would have been only to ready and willing to report evil doings including 'selections', 'gas chambers', and of course the use of multiple crematory facilities to burn all the thousands of victims' bodies. Though of course no inmate could ever have known the real figures. I also believe the so called 'kapos' and remaining sonderkommando members would have stayed at the camp, they surely would not have wanted to return west with the Germans. As such these guys would have been exaggerating and making the most of what they said the Germans did.

The reality is that we know the propaganda machines were in overdrive what with the US psyche warfare team doing their stuff at Buchenwald etc and the news reporters piling on the agony of assumption of 'death camps' when in fact the deaths were mainly caused by typhus and never by gassing.

At the end of the day one always needs to use the basics of common sense, logic and backed up with science and evidence. The so called gas chambers at auschwitz, weren't logical, have little or no evidence to back the claims and the science of HCN residue isn't there.

There, that wasn't too aggressive or argumentative was it?

[hermod]

In your response to me you said that they didn't destroy the "Gas chambers"/"Morgues". That's just not an accurate description of Auschwitz-Birkenau. Only one facility of the 5 remained standing. Facility 2 was flattened and there is photographic evidence of that. I know 3 was destroyed but I had trouble finding images of it. There were two houses used as gas chambers, if that happened, early in the camps history that were later flattened by the SS. Now my numbers may be off here so please be patient but I think it was 4 that was burned down in a revolt by Sondercommando. Then 5 was destroyed by SS. The one left standing called 1 was used for a number of things other than mass execution, assuming it was used for that. It was used as a morgue and as an air raid shelter. It's use as a gas chamber, if it was used that way, was for about one year between 41 and 42. I'm not sure there would have been much evidence of it being a "Gas chamber" after such a short time. That's just my opinion.

You misunderstood me. I didn't say the Nazis didn't destroy the Auschwitz-Birkenau crematory buildings before leaving. I said the only rooms which were partly damaged in those destroyed crematory buildings were the alleged 'gas chambers', the half-underground morgues. I wasn't talking about Krema I (and its "reconstructed" 'gas chamber' for tourists), the Krema destroyed by inmates[size=85] (Krema IV or V - I don't remember which one) and the alleged "little farms". I was talking about Krema II and III. Surprising the Nazis failed to destroy the 'gas chambers' (Leichenkeller - morgues) of Krema II and III if they were really trying to erase any evidence of their crimes in those rooms as the Holocaust narrative claim. They destroyed Krema II and III to the ground, but they left ruins to investigate precisely where they were supposed to want to leave nothing.

Finally, why would Soviets use crematoriums and morgues as propaganda? That's not how they did mass executions. They used a machine gun or rifles. How would it even occur to them to speculate that someone would gas people. How would the Germans have thought of it. How would it even occur to them that they could be accused of such a thing. That's a pretty extreme thing. Did it just pop into there heads "Oh man! the Red army is coming, we'd better raze those crematoriums and morgues or their propaganda people might concoct an elaborate story about how we gassed millions of Jews with cans of Zyklon B and burned their bodies." That's a little far fetched. One would have to be psychotically paranoid.

You patently know nothing about WW2 wartime propaganda. The Allied propagandists claimed the Nazis had gas chambers long before the end of WW2. From 1941 the Soviet propagandists claimed the Nazis had big "death factories" where they were killing people en masse with steam, electric current, air pumped out, carbon monoxide from engine exhaust, lyme and all kind of things. From mid 1944, after the Red army captured the Majdanek concentration camp, the Allied propagandists used visual atrocity propaganda with shocking pictures taken at Majdanek around the crematories, pictures of crematory ovens, piles of ashes and charred corpses. The Nazis knew what was claimed by the Allied propagandists and they knew those shocking pictures were used to spread horror stories about them. So, in late 1944, when the Soviets were approaching Auschwitz, they destroyed the crematory buildings they had there. Their strategy was pretty efficient and the Soviets found no material for their visual atrocity propaganda at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Far fetched and psychotically paranoid? Not really. That was nothing new. The gassing hoax was British atrocity propaganda recycled from WW1 (1916)...

The WW1 gas chambers in British atrocity propaganda - a few examples:
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article ... suffocated
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article ... atrocities
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article ... suffocated
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article ... atrocities
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article ... suffocated
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article ... suffocated
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article ... atrocities
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article ... suffocated
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article ... atrocities

Where I come from we usually go with the simplest explanation to an event. The SS has been accused of committing crimes such as murder by means gassing people in side of buildings and then burning their bodies. When the camps were investigated it was discovered that the SS deliberately destroyed the very buildings these events were said to take place in. They have engaged in this same behavior with three other camps. Witnesses accuse them of the same behavior at those camps. The simplest explanation is that they destroyed evidence to cover up the crimes they were accused of. The explanation given by the author of the article you shared involves an elaborate, unclear, undefined, and really inexplicable conspiracy theory. The only reason to believe what the author of that article has to say over my explanation is because you so strongly prefer to believe the article that you are willing to ignore the strength of my arguments in order to protect your viewpoint.

You're free to believe in whatever you want to.

Had the Germans not destroyed the Birkenau crematories, the Soviet propagandists would have accused them of having built and destroyed all kind of murder facilities anyway. In fact that's what they did. When the Soviets captured Auschwitz-Birkenau, the Soviet propagandists first 'reported' that the Nazis had built, used and then "destroyed the traces of the electric conveyor belt, on which hundreds of people were simultaneously electrocuted, their bodies falling onto the slow moving conveyor belt which carried them to the top of the blast furnace where they fell in, were completely burned, their bones converted to meal in the rolling mills, and then sent to the surrounding fields". The Soviets also claimed that: "In retreat were taken the special transportable apparatuses for killing children." They also first mislocated the Auschwitz alleged homicidal gas chambers because they first claimed "The stationary gas chambers in the eastern part of the camp were restructured, even little turrets and other architectural embellishments were added so that they would look like innocent garages" while the Auschwitz-Birkenau 'gas chambers' are now said to be in the central (Auschwitz I) and western (Auschwitz II or Birkenau) parts of that camp, not in the eastern part (Auschwitz III or Monowitz). All this was in the organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the Pravda, on February 2, 1945 (6 days after Auschwitz was captured by the Red Army) - http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Pravda020245.html. As you can see, had the Nazis not destroyed their Birkenau crematory buildings, we would now be said the Auschwitz 'gas chambers' were other rooms restructured to look like like innocent garages or something like that anyway.

You didn't talk about the issues concerning the Sobibor revolt or it's destruction. The same covering up of the camps existence by the SS happened at Treblinka and Belzec. The SS actually moved a Ukrainian farmer on the site of both Treblinka and Belzec to keep the locals from snooping the grounds.

I talked about the Sobibor revolt. What about its destruction? Never heard anything about something called "scorched earth" Policy (i.e. the destruction of anything that can be used by your enemies before leaving)?

Correction: The Soviet propagandists, renown liars, claimed "The SS actually moved a Ukrainian farmer on the site of both Treblinka and Belzec to keep the locals from snooping the grounds". That makes a huge difference. What were the names of those Ukrainian farmers? Were they brought at Nuremberg or any other so-called "war crime trials" to testify about what they had seen and about the job the Nazis had allegedly given to them? Is there any real evidence that story existed somewhere else than in the brains of Soviet propagandists and the gullible people who took the risk of believing them.

[hermod]

The explanation given by the author of the article you shared involves an elaborate, unclear, undefined, and really inexplicable conspiracy theory. The only reason to believe what the author of that article has to say over my explanation is because you so strongly prefer to believe the article that you are willing to ignore the strength of my arguments in order to protect your viewpoint.

Can you explain to me where you see a conspiracy theory in the Nazis destroying their crematory buildings, but not their alleged gas chambers (only partly damaged when Krema II and III were destroyed), because the Allies had been using pictures of crematory ovens and cremated human remains taken at Majdanek for propaganda purposes during the previous months? How was the destruction of food for enemy atrocity propaganda "inexplicable conspiracy theory"?

If the Nazis tried to destroy their 'gas chambers' and hide all the traces of their crimes as you claim, how do you explain the 'gas chambers' of Krema II and III were left so little damaged that the exterminationist expert Robert Van Pelt was able to examine those rooms decades after WW2 and finally conclude the alleged "Zyklon introduction holes" were nowhere to be seen today? According to Van Pelt's conspiracy theory, those holes existed but were erased by the Nazis (slab restored) before they destroyed Krema II and III (ahem). But whatever. The point is Van Pelt and others were able to examine those 'gas chambers', so proving they were not destroyed as you seem to believe.

“Today, these four small holes that connected the wire-mesh columns and the chimneys cannot be observed in the ruined remains of the concrete slab. Yet does this mean they were never there? We know that after the cessation of the gassings in the fall of 1944 all the gassing equipment was removed, which implies both the wire-mesh columns and the chimneys. What would have remained would have been the four narrow holes and the slab. While there is no certainty in this particular matter, it would have been logical to attach at the location where the columns had been some formwork at the bottom of the gas chamber ceiling, and pour some concrete in the hole and thus restore the slab. ” – Source: Robert Van Pelt, expert report, page 518; also Irving-Lipstadt trial transcript, Day 9, January 25, page 187.]

[Alan1]

Hi,
I'm very new to this forum and to revisionism. I hope it's ok to post in this thread, because I have a similar question a in the first post, and some more, but I'll start with one.
My first question is:
Why were so many camp buildings destroyed by the nazi's if they had nothing to hide? Those buildings weren't really suitable for post-war propaganda, their destruction only worked against the nazi's, the destroyed crematoria in Auschwitz are now considered to have been gassing chambers. Same with Sobibor. Am I forgetting any?

Fyi: I am only looking for the truth, and I haven't made up my mind yet, but am leaning towards revisionism.

Thanks

[Dresden]

Hello, Alan1, and welcome to the Forum!

Alan1 said:

"Why were so many camp buildings destroyed by the nazi's if they had nothing to hide? Those buildings weren't really suitable for post-war propaganda, their destruction only worked against the nazi's, the destroyed crematoria in Auschwitz are now considered to have been gassing chambers. Same with Sobibor. Am I forgetting any?"

Maybe this video by Vincent Reynouard is a good place to start; I'm sure there's a lot more information on this Forum that others will lead you to:

[Alan1]

Another question based on logic reasoning, not on proof, hopefully this one will be let through.

Why would Hitler send the jews to palesina as the final solution, if the grand mufti of Jerusalem protested against jewish immigration plans of the UN after the war, he and Hitler were friends, so why would Hitler betray his friend with this?