P. Winter Debunks Suchomel's Fake "Confession" & C. Lanzmann

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9915
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

P. Winter Debunks Suchomel's Fake "Confession" & C. Lanzmann

Postby Hannover » 4 years 11 months ago (Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:54 pm)

Another nice piece of work by author Peter Winter* which exposes yet another "confession" fraud.
Lying 'holocaust' shyster Claude Lanzmann and his discredited film 'Shoah' take it on the chin.
Comments welcomed.

More on Suchomel at this forum, just search Suchomel

* Winter's latest book discussed here: New book: "The Six Million: Fact or Fiction?"

- Hannover

http://peterwinterwriting.blogspot.com/ scroll down
The Suchomel “Confession” in Claude Lanzmann’s “Shoah” Movie

It is often claimed that a “confession” by a former SS man, Franz Suchomel, made in the 1985 documentary film Shoah (directed by the French Jewish producer Claude Lanzmann) “proves the existence of the Treblinka gas chambers.

There are two aspects to the Suchomel “confession” which bring it into question, namely the technical aspects of Lanzmann’s film, and secondly, the factual details of the “confession”.

(a) Technical aspects: Firstly, Suchomel is quoted in the film as asking Lanzmann not to use his name or attribute anything he says to him. Lanzman told the New York Times (October 20, 1985, page H-17) that the interview was secretly filmed with a single camera hidden in a canvas held by a female assistant.

This, Lanzman explained, was the reason why the Suchomel interview is of poor black and white blurred quality—as opposed to the rest of the movie, which is all in sharp, clear color. In actual fact, the clip showing the “confession” is not even original film, but was filmed off a TV screen, as can be seen by the characteristic horizontal lines and flicker of the filmed interview (caused by a difference in the scanning frequency between the TV and the camera making the film).

It is highly suspicious that Lanzmann would record such a supposedly important interview by filming it off a TV screen when he would have the original film material to hand. The only potential explanation for this would be that tampering is far less easy to detect in a “poor quality” film than raw original material. In this regard, a viewer of the film will also notice that while the image quality of Suchomel is extremely poor, the sound quality is perfect, something which is out of step with the overall production.

It is strange that the “interview” with Suchomel is the only part of the entire nine-and-a-half hour Shoah film which is blurred, indistinct, and so fuzzy that it is nearly impossible to even positively identify the person being interviewed.

Most importantly however, the interview with Suchomel was clearly done with more than one camera—directly contradicting Lanzmann’s claims in the New York Times. A stationary, hidden camera in a bag would only show one angle of a “secret” interview—but instead, as can be seen from the screenshots below, there are at least four different camera angles, each taken at differing focal lengths and perspectives—something that would be impossible with just one “hidden camera.”

In one scene, the camera shows Suchomel actually standing next to a display board allegedly showing the Treblinka camp layout, and holding a pointer stick picking out different locations in lecture style—an arrangement which is obviously highly unlikely for an interview which was supposedly not filmed.

There are other physical anomalies in the “confession”: although the viewer is expected to believe that Suchomel was not aware of the “hidden” camera in the bag, more than once he turns his head and looks directly into the camera.

However, when he adopts his (standing up) lecturer mode, and taps on the set-up board with the Treblinka map, the camera moves in to only a few inches away from the board, and clearly shows his pointer stick. It is far-fetched to believe that anyone holding a “hidden camera in a bag” could hold it so close to the board under such circumstances without being obvious.

The Suchomel “confession” in Claude Lanzmann’s Shoah film: made with at least four different camera angles, and not just the “one hidden camera in a bag” as claimed by the film producer.

Note also the distinctive distortion and horizontal stripe caused by filming off a TV screen. In fact, the curvature of the screen can be seen in the top left hand side of the first image.


Image
Camera angle 1: Set up behind Lanzmann (left) and Suchomel (right).

Image
Camera angle 2: Suchomel standing up, lecture-style, holding a pointer next to a handily-set up board with a supposed map of Treblinka—a highly unlikely arrangement for an interview that was not even supposed to be filmed.

Image
Camera angle 3: Suchomel and the “lecture board” –supposedly not to be filmed.

Image
Camera angle 4: The camera moves to a few inches away from the “lecture board” and the tip of Suchomel’s pointer. It is impossible, as Lanzmann claimed, for one camera, hidden in a bag, to have produced all of these camera angles.

(b) Secondly, it is clear from Suchomel’s own words in the film—presuming that the film is genuine (and as the facts outlined above show, there is good reason to doubt that)—that there are serious errors in his memory and his recounting.

Firstly, it should be borne in mind that Suchomel had been arrested and tried during the 1965 Treblinka Trial at Dusseldorf. At that trial, he confessed to being in charge of or organizing the tailor shop at Treblinka. In line with the common defense tactic used by the accused of not denying the “mass murder” program—which is illegal under German law anyway, and would have therefore only landed him in even further trouble—Suchomel only claimed that he had had nothing to do with it.

In a superb example of how this defense tactic worked, Suchomel was only sentenced to six years in jail—and released just over two years later, in December 1967. This by itself was a sure indication that there was indeed no direct evidence linking him to any “gas chambers” or “mass murder program” at Sobibor.

In the Lanzmann “confession”, Suchomel is quoted as specifically saying that he only saw the “gas chambers” at Sobidor once during the entire time (August 1942 until late October 1943) that he was there. His account, as contained in the Lanzmann confession, is typically vague, and follows precisely the already completely discredited—and as outlined above, physically impossible Holocaust Storytellers’ version of mass gassings in minutes, bodies falling “like potatoes” and then mass cremations in a tiny area of space, with no provision for fuel—or even a single crematorium!

It is clear from this narrative alone, that even if Lanzmann did not tamper with the fuzzy film “interview”, all that Suchomel said was the typical “do-not-deny-it-happened-but-just-deny-that-I-was-involved” type confession which was the only way to avoid being caught up in further legal trouble in post-war Germany.

Finally, it is of great significance that Suchomel died in 1979—that is, six years before the film was released, and thus never saw his “confession,” and was never able to deny or refute anything which Lanzmann had attributed to him.
The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of Truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Atigun
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 493
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:13 am

Re: P. Winter Debunks Suchomel's Fake "Confession" & C. Lanz

Postby Atigun » 4 years 11 months ago (Tue Dec 16, 2014 6:05 pm)

There seems to be no end to these dubious confessions. Here's a portion of the confession by Unterscharfuhrer Karl Schluch of Belzec.

"I can describe the whole process, which I saw and witnessed personally…The Jews inside the gas chambers were densely packed. This is the reason that the corpses were not lying on the floor but were mixed up in disorder in all directions, some of them kneeling, according to the amount of space they had. The corpses were besmirched with mud and urine or with spit. On the corpses I could partially see that lips and also nose tips had a bluish discoloration."

As has been made abundantly clear by Mr. Berg and by extensive discussion here on CODOH, the bluish discoloration by carbon monoxide poisoning, especially of the lips, is utter nonsense. Yet we are told by the hoaxers that such testimony and confessions are proof that the holocaust actually occurred.

User avatar
Jurgen
Member
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 6:17 am

Re: P. Winter Debunks Suchomel's Fake "Confession" & C. Lanz

Postby Jurgen » 4 years 11 months ago (Sat Dec 20, 2014 5:20 am)

What I do not really understand, is why did they make they dubious confessions in the first place? Were they all tortured?
"The Holocaust narrative actually breaks down on a discrete, factual level, and is only tenable when it is presented as some vague or nebulous larger than life metahistorical event" Mulegino1

User avatar
Kingfisher
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1673
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: P. Winter Debunks Suchomel's Fake "Confession" & C. Lanz

Postby Kingfisher » 4 years 11 months ago (Sat Dec 20, 2014 6:32 am)

Jurgen wrote:What I do not really understand, is why did they make they dubious confessions in the first place? Were they all tortured?

As far as I understand, it is not widely alleged that they were tortured as we generally understand the term, but anyone held in captivity is very susceptible to pressure from the captors. Control of access access to food, water, toilet and sleep and control of temperature and noise for example.

The events of which they are accused are considered "common knowledge" subject to "judicial notice" and therefore cannot be challenged in the courts. The route to avoiding death or imprisonment for life was to say these things happened but to downplay or deny your role in them. Plea bargaining against confessions. Indeed, the sentences passed seem in general to be very light when set against the gravity of the offences for which they were convicted or the hysteria surrounding the pursuit of guards today. Given the option of four years if you cooperate or life if you don't, which would you go for?

There have been several threads on this forum recently on false confessions and how easily they are obtained. They were supported by academic studies.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2533
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: P. Winter Debunks Suchomel's Fake "Confession" & C. Lanz

Postby borjastick » 4 years 11 months ago (Sat Dec 20, 2014 11:24 am)

Jurgen wrote:What I do not really understand, is why did they make they dubious confessions in the first place? Were they all tortured?


The irony is that lower ranking officers and soldiers, who were on trial at Nuremberg and who were more likely to have had a hands on relationship with the holocaust deaths, were given hefty prison terms but as I understand it not one convicted prisoner was in prison past 1955. I will check this in several books.

They were not all tortured but were threatened with all sorts including threats made against their families. It is my belief that the powers that be knew that the claims of gas chambers and millions of dead jews were suspect. They all wanted to do the job and go home thus sentences were handed down knowing they would not be completed. Those on trial were told to plead guilty, go through the motions and serve a shortish sentence. I believe that the authorities wanted the situation cleaned up and allow Europe to move on.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2533
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: P. Winter Debunks Suchomel's Fake "Confession" & C. Lanzmann

Postby borjastick » 2 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:07 am)

The whole Suchomel part of the film is very odd indeed. What did he think he was doing talking to Lanzmann in a semi studio like set-up? If you look at the way they are sitting it is just like a normal chat show layout with the interviewer at about a 25-30 degree angle to his subject. It is clear that this whole thing should be disregarded as having any proof or factual substance but I do wonder what Suchomel was doing there in the first place.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3386
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: P. Winter Debunks Suchomel's Fake "Confession" & C. Lanzmann

Postby Hektor » 2 years 1 month ago (Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:58 am)

borjastick wrote:The whole Suchomel part of the film is very odd indeed. What did he think he was doing talking to Lanzmann in a semi studio like set-up? If you look at the way they are sitting it is just like a normal chat show layout with the interviewer at about a 25-30 degree angle to his subject. It is clear that this whole thing should be disregarded as having any proof or factual substance but I do wonder what Suchomel was doing there in the first place.

Indeed. You wonder about Suchomel's motivation?

Lanzmann interviewed Franz Suchomel, who was with the SS at Treblinka, in secret in April 1976. This was the first interview Lanzmann filmed with the newly developed hidden camera known as the Paluche, and he paid Suchomel 500 DM. In the outtakes, Suchomel provides further details about the treatment of Jews at the camp, as well as a more ambivalent memory of his experiences than is apparent in the released "SHOAH".
https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn1004727


There is not only several cameras being used. At least one of them, is also moving.

So it has already the appearance of a bad con-scam.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests