Hans Aumeier

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Peptic

Hans Aumeier

Postby Peptic » 1 decade 6 years ago (Sat Nov 30, 2002 7:09 pm)

Seen on David Irving's website:

Website Note: We shall shortly (by the end of 2002) post the entire 150 page British Army Intelligence dossier on Aumeier, erstwhile commandant of Auschwitz, in text and pdf form. This was the file which (like the Hoess interrogations) Pelt never bothered to read when writing his famous history of Auschwitz. [Check this link.]


http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Aumeier/index.html

Aumeier's testimony is particularly interesting because it does not square with the officially approved history of the camp. Most of the posted material is in German but see:

(b) Extermination of the Jews in Gas Chambers

Auschwitz earned its notorious reputation as "Vernichtungs-lager Auschwitz" from Nov 42 onwards. In that month the gassing of some 50-80 prisoners took place very secretly. It was done in the mortuary which was attached to the crematorium. The organisers of this were the commandant, the camp doctor and Ustuf Grabner. Some medical orderlies wore also present. Aumeier knew nothing this extermination and was only taken into the confidence of the Camp comd the next day. That day the camp doctor, Grabner, Hessler, Schwarz and Aumeier were summoned to the commandant office when the comd told then under the strictest secrecy that a he had received an order, from the RFSS via the RSHA in BERLIN that all Jewish prisoners who were infirm, sick or incapable of work were to be gassed in order to prevent further spreading of diseases. The commandant mentioned that the previous night the first exterminations had been carried out and that it was found that the improvised gas chamber did nothing like meet the needs so that in the erection of the new crematoria in Birkenau gas chambers will have to be built as permanent fixtures. The whole affair was "Geheime Reichssache" and they were warned that any indiscretion on the subject or careless talk would on the orders of Himmler be punished by death. On the strength of this they had to sign a statement that they were warned and instructed to that effect and this document was kept under lock and key in the office of the comd. Any additional members that joined the gang later were likewise put into the picture and warned by Ustuf Grabner and their documents were under his supervision. Aumeier states that the general reaction at the briefing was that of shock at such drastic measures but that they were nevertheless very excited. In the ensuing days three or four more exterminations took place in the Stammlager but the means were really inadequate for their ambitious designs. It was usually done in the late evening hours.

In the mortuary there were 2 or 3 ventilation shafts. Through these cyclone gas was poured by the medical orderlies who were protected by gas masks. The initiated members were not allowed to approach the spectacle for self protection, in case any gas might leak out of the chamber.

The victims arrived with their transports and were received into the camp by the members of the political Abteilung who sought out their prey. All those for extermination were segregated and told to undress for disinfection and de-lousing. They were then marched of to the gas chamber under the pretext of having a bath and the doors were securely locked behind them. The medical orderlies then poured in the lethal gas and the guards(selected by Aumeier) marched off. Aumeier was told that the death struggle only lasted about one minute. It must be noted that the prisoners never had the slightest idea of their dreadful fate. The children were mostly with their parents and the babies were invariably carried by their mothers.

On the following day the gas chamber was opened and ventilated, and this was also an opportunity for sightseeing by the specially selected sadists. Aumeier states that oven this cold-blooded extermination was too much for their refined senses, so that they had to retire to their casino where they indulged in the consumption of alcohol.

c. Further gas chambers in Birkenau

As has been mentioned before, in order to comply with the demands for extermination further Gas chambers were erected in Birkenau near the place where the mass graves were. For this purpose, they converted two empty houses which were fitted out in accordance with the results of former experiences. This work was done by Bauleitung. One house had two, the other one four gas chambers. The two houses were later known as "Bunker I" and "Bunker II". Each chamber was designed to cater for 150 victims. The first exterminations there took place early in Jan 43. By this time Sonderkommando had been set up of highly reliable -men under Ustf Grabner, who was directly responsible to the Camp comd. The exterminations as such were the commitment of Ustuf Hessler. The scene of the crime was separated by a series of notices marked: "Sicherungsbereich. Zutritt strengstens verboten. Der Lagerkommandant". When gassings were in progress a chain of sentries was put up around the whole area. To minimise any publicity only eight men were used. In Birkenau any child under eleven years was automatically murdered by these means. Sicherungsführer (Security offrs) of the guards during Aumeier's time were Hastuf Schwarz, Hastuf Hofmann, Ostuf Schwarzhuber, Ostuf Sell, Ostuf Müller, Ustuf Grabner, Ustuf Jostinger, Ustuf Hessler, Ostuf Pfütze, Haschaf Palli and Aumeier.

The day on which the chambers were ventilated (i.e. the day after the gassing took place) the medical orderlies under the direction of the camp dentist started an organised mutilation of the corpses, i.e. the removal of all gold teeth, and in the case of women the hair was cut off. Whether any skin was removed for the manufacture of lampshades as happened in other camps, is unknown to Aumeier.

After the mutilation had ceased a Häftlingskommando consisting of hulky, well-fed and strong Jewish prisoners came in under Hessler and removed the corpses to the crematorium. These prisoners were guarded by the Sonderkommando and were kept completely isolated from all other prisoners. In some cases the bodies were burnt. in the pits which were previously used when the order to bury all bodies was carried out.

In Apr 43 the new crematorium in Birkenau was ready and consisted of eight ovens. By this time the ingenuity of the Sonderkommando had reached its peak in that below the crematorium the gas chambers were situated and were large enough to cope with 800 prisoners at one time. In front of the gas chamber were the undressing rooms. To save time the "Bunker" was fitted out with a proper airing and ventilating mechanism so that one could enter the chamber already after some five or six hours. The bodies were placed on a lift and taken to the floor above and slid straight into the oven for immediate burning. All valuables belonging to the victims were sent to BERLIN (ss W. u. V.H.A.). Likewise were the teeth and hair. Clothes, in so far as they were of use to the prison , were retained and partially issued to the prisoners.

May 43 saw the opening of another crematorium where exterminations were carried out alternatively. The actual gas chamber was a little smaller and could only hold 500 victims. Yet a third crematorium was under construction when Aumeier left and was similar in every respect to Crematorium II. It had only five ovens.


http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Aumeier/100845.html

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 6 years ago (Sat Nov 30, 2002 7:46 pm)

Aumeier is absurd & contradictory to other stories and cannot be substantiated by forensic science. In fact he is easily disposed with.
Samuel Crowel has this to say:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Aumeier/Crowell280199.html.....there are still grave problems with his account, the most notable being that it contradicts the current standard story in almost every particular. For example, Aumeier times the first gassing in the late Fall of 1942, and involving sick Jews in the morgue of Crematorium #1. The current narrative represents a combination of narratives that describe one (or two) gassings of mostly Russian POW's at the beginning of September, 1941. There are other details that don't seem to make sense.
However, in lieu of a more detailed exposition, I would make the following observation: my study suggests to me that interrogations were made on the basis of existing reports concerning the concentration camps, including Auschwitz. By July, 1945, there would have existed four narratives that could have formed the basis of Aumeier's interrogation (and yes, there are contradictions among them):




My hypothesis is that a detailed analysis of Aumeier's deposition will show that most if not all of its "gassing elements" can ultimately be traced back to one or another of these other narratives. I have found this to be a consistent pattern elsewhere.
The greatest problem I have with Aumeier's narrative, as with most gassing narratives, is that it is not supported by a single unambiguous reference in the documentary record. Another, even more serious problem has to do with chronology of the gassing claim in his recounting. If, as Aumeier insists, Himmler ordered that gassing begin in the Fall of 1942, that would have been several months after the British media -- including the BBC -- had begun accusing the Germans of carrying out such gassings. We then would have the odd situation where the Germans would be adopting a manner of killing undesirables that was first suggested to them by British propagandists, and moreover under the severest cloak of secrecy and double-talk. I find that very difficult to believe; in fact, I cannot believe it. -- Samuel Crowell.


And Irving upon being asked:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Aumeier/index.html
Reader comments:
From the rough translation I got from Altavista it seems that Kurt Aumeier was talking about gassings at Auschwitz. Is this correct?
Mr Irving replies:
I have to be cautious in my reply, until I have finished posting this Aumeier material. I am unhappy about this material for several reasons. It is very similar to the Höss material. But in both cases we are confronted with the obstacle: if all this was going on, why is there no hint of it in the secret cipher messages being sent by Höss and Liebehenschel from Auschwitz to Berlin, which we British intercepted? There are hundreds of them, and I have read them.
On the one hand, actual cipher messages: hard evidence; on the other, confessions obtained by duress, soft evidence which no British court would accept. But historians apply different criteria sometimes. As said, a difficult conundrum.--David Irving
So Aumeier is just another so called 'eyewitness', who when scrutinized simply falls apart.

Hannover

Peptic

Postby Peptic » 1 decade 6 years ago (Sun Dec 01, 2002 3:51 pm)

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Aumeier/Crowell280199.html.....there are still grave problems with his account, the most notable being that it contradicts the current standard story in almost every particular. For example, Aumeier times the first gassing in the late Fall of 1942, and involving sick Jews in the morgue of Crematorium #1. The current narrative represents a combination of narratives that describe one (or two) gassings of mostly Russian POW's at the beginning of September, 1941. There are other details that don't seem to make sense.
However, in lieu of a more detailed exposition, I would make the following observation: my study suggests to me that interrogations were made on the basis of existing reports concerning the concentration camps, including Auschwitz. By July, 1945, there would have existed four narratives that could have formed the basis of Aumeier's interrogation (and yes, there are contradictions among them):




My hypothesis is that a detailed analysis of Aumeier's deposition will show that most if not all of its "gassing elements" can ultimately be traced back to one or another of these other narratives. I have found this to be a consistent pattern elsewhere.[...]
Samuel Crowell.


Frankly, I don't see much congruence in Aumeier's reported testimony with any of Crowell's suggested sources. On the contrary, Aumeier's account seems to both reflect and suggest a possible alternative history of the camp, one in which gassings certainly occurred though on a limited scale and over a shorter time period. Aumeier dates the start of the gassings from late 1942, their impetus being not the implementation of the Final Solution but rather "that all Jewish prisoners who were infirm, sick or incapable of work were to be gassed in order to prevent further spreading of diseases." One doubts whether Aumeier will find much favour with either revisionists or exterminationists.

Peptic

Postby Peptic » 1 decade 6 years ago (Sun Dec 01, 2002 4:36 pm)

I take the liberty of reproducing the following message which I have forwarded to Mr. Irving on the subject of Mr. Aumeier:


Dear Mr. Irving,

We are indebted to you for posting the important material from the British dossier on Hans Aumeier. Some of the biographical information he apparently gave his interrogators is at odds with information available in Danuta Czech's Auschwitz Chronicle. Aumeier said he was transferred to Auschwitz in June 1942 and that he left for Riga in June 1943. But Czech records his appoinment to Auschwitz as January 1942 and his departure for Latvia as taking place in August 1943.

It's interesting that Aumeier talks of only 3, and not 4, crematoria having being built in Birkenau during the winter of 1942/3, with the third one still not having been completed by the time he left. The fourth and last crematorium to be finished (Krema III) was completed by June 1943.

Aumeier also stated he had no children. Czech reproduces a May 1943 Labour Deployment list which records Aumeier as having one child aged 11 years old. Of course, one can understand why Aumeier might have wanted to keep the existence of such a child (if still alive) a secret from his captors.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 6 years ago (Sun Dec 01, 2002 6:33 pm)

Aumeier, who was an adjutant of Hoess not only contradicts Hoess, but contradicts Kramer...also at Auschwitz.
It would seem your very own information not only shoots down the ever changing story, but also fails to provide any substantiation for Aumeier's alleged account.
Not to mention any forensic physical evidence for gassings, which I noticed you have failed to address in a separate thread, as I challenged you to do.

- Hannover

Peptic

Postby Peptic » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon Dec 02, 2002 8:48 am)

Peptic wrote:I take the liberty of reproducing the following message which I have forwarded to Mr. Irving on the subject of Mr. Aumeier:


Dear Mr. Irving,

We are indebted to you for posting the important material from the British dossier on Hans Aumeier. Some of the biographical information he apparently gave his interrogators is at odds with information available in Danuta Czech's Auschwitz Chronicle. Aumeier said he was transferred to Auschwitz in June 1942 and that he left for Riga in June 1943. But Czech records his appoinment to Auschwitz as January 1942 and his departure for Latvia as taking place in August 1943.

[...]

Aumeier also stated he had no children. Czech reproduces a May 1943 Labour Deployment list which records Aumeier as having one child aged 11 years old. Of course, one can understand why Aumeier might have wanted to keep the existence of such a child (if still alive) a secret from his captors.


Irving has now reproduced a later, January 1946 British document which contains information relevant to the matters at hand.

Aumeier's service in concentration camps is now said to have been: -

15 Jan 34
- Apr 36
DACHAU

1 May 39
- 15 Feb 42
FLOSSENBÜRG

16 Feb 42
- 1 May 43
AUSCHWITZ

1 May 43
- 20 Aug 44
VAIVARA

1 Nov 44
- 15 Jan 45
KAUFERING (near LANDSBERG)

15 Feb 45
- 7 May 45
MYSEN (Norway)


http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Aumeier/280146.html

There is still an apparent discrepancy between this version and Czech's. Czech has for January 19 1942: "SS Captain Hans Aumeier, transferred from Flossenburg C.C., assumes the post of First Camp Commander in Auschwitz." In the opposite direction goes Karl Fritzsch, the man he is replacing and responsible, according to Hoess, for having organised the first gassing at Auschwitz.

On August 18 1943 SS Captain Schwarz is said to have taken over as First Protective Custody Commander for Auschwitz from Aumeier who has been transferred to Riga as Commandant. According to the British, Aumeier is leaving Riga at this time, not arriving, and being transferred to Kaufering, a camp in Bavaria in Germany. Curious.

His claim "that during his period at AUSCHWITZ between 15,000 and 18,000 people were done to death in the gas chambers" is in comparison with the standard history about 10 times too low and with the Soviet version about 100 times. It's hard to credit here Crowell's argument that Aumeier's account was being prompted and shaped by his interrogators.

It is now known to the British that he has a child - a girl aged 14.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon Dec 02, 2002 10:36 am)

What Crowell said:
.....my study suggests to me that interrogations were made on the basis of existing reports concerning the concentration camps, including Auschwitz. By July, 1945, there would have existed four narratives that could have formed the basis of Aumeier's interrogation ***(and yes, there are contradictions among them)***


And what Aumeier actually said is patently absurd and unsubstantiated by any forensic physical evidence. I ask Peptic: Do you believe Aumeier's story? If so, why? Please do not dodge this question.

- Hannover

Peptic

Postby Peptic » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon Dec 02, 2002 11:38 am)

Hannover wrote:And what Aumeier actually said is patently absurd and unsubstantiated by any forensic physical evidence. I ask Peptic: Do you believe Aumeier's story? If so, why? Please do not dodge this question.

- Hannover


Put it this way, I don't not believe him. I don't know why you characterise what Aumeier said as "patently absurd". On the contrary, one can see a certain attractiveness to revisionists in this account. It dispenses with the need to view the gassings in the context of a systematic extermination policy. It accounts for most if not all the Pressacian criminal traces which revisionists have struggled to explain away. It makes redundant the objections based on cremation capacity limitations. One could see a David Irving or a Michael Mills quite at home with it.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon Dec 02, 2002 1:14 pm)

He is absurd because there is no evidence to sustain his points, and you have failed to give it; even though challenged to do so....repeatedly. Why is that?

Give us specific examples of how he conforms to Pressac's so called "criminal traces".

- vH

Peptic

Postby Peptic » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon Dec 02, 2002 4:45 pm)

Hannover wrote:He is absurd because there is no evidence to sustain his points, and you have failed to give it; even though challenged to do so....repeatedly. Why is that?

Give us specific examples of how he conforms to Pressac's so called "criminal traces".


Pressac's criminal traces supposedly testify to the fact that gas chambers were incorporated into the construction of the new crematoria in Birkenau over the winter of 1942/3. Aumeier''s testimony generally accords with that. The timing may be a little out, of course.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon Dec 02, 2002 6:01 pm)

It accounts for ***most if not all*** the Pressacian criminal traces....


I'm waiting for these, please give them.
- vH

User avatar
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon Dec 02, 2002 10:15 pm)

At Irving's site about Aumeier is a list of prisoners in Akershus, who are labelled by Irving henchmen of Aumeier in Auschwitz and other camps, and their statements about him and Auschwitz (in German, text files):

Eduard Schmid, Ernst Moritz, Kurt Heinrich, Joseph Rummel, Josef Remmele, Ludwig Blatterspiel, Karl Heimann.

So I checked out “henchman” Herrn Eduard Schmid, who had this to say about his “henchman” boss Aumeier:

[…]Ich, persönlich, als Angehoriger der Truppe, nicht als Schutzhaftlagers kam mit Letztgenanntem sowohl dienstlich als auch außerdienstlich nie in direkte Berührung, weshalb meine über Aumeier zu machenden, nachstehenden Angaben, sich auf dort kursierende Gerüchte stützen.
Im Großen und Ganzen ist über ihn zu sagen, daß er während seiner Auschwitzer Zeit sich weder bei den Häftlingen noch bei der Truppe besonderer Beliebtheit erfreute. Vielleicht mag dabei auch der damalige Kommandant Sturmbannführer Höß mit seiner rücksichtslosen Härte -- diese hauptsächlich der Truppe gegenüber zum Ausdruck bringend -- beeinflussend auf A. gewirkt haben.
Doch dessenungeachtet soll Au. mit Ausdrücken, den Häftlingen gegenüber, nicht gespart haben haben. So wurde u.a. der Ausspruch „Mistbiene" (weiblichen Häftlingen gegenüber geäußert) zu einem geflügelten dort von ihm. Wegen dieses Ausspruchs wurde A. sogar von Himmler, anlässlich seines Besuches im Jahre 1942 von diesem zurechtgewiesen.
Während seines Auschwitzer Aufenthaltes vom Herbst 1941 bis zum Frühjahr 1943 habe ich ihn nur weniger Male überhaupt persönlich gesehen, weshalb ich mir ein Urteil über ihn auch persönlicher Art kaum erlauben kann.[…]


My translation:
[…]I personally, as a member of the troop and not of the camp, came with the latter (Aumeier) neither officially nor privately in direct contact. Therefore my following statements about Aumeier are based on circulating rumors.
By and large one can say about him, that he was not especially popular with the inmates nor with the troops during his time in Auschwitz. Maybe the then commander Sturmbannführer Höß with his inconsiderate harshness – which he especially expressed against the troops – could have influenced Aumeier.
Nevertheless Aumeier did not hold back towards inmates with expressions. For instance the word “Mistbiene” (shit bee) was frequently used by him against female inmates. Because of this expression Aumeier was rebuked even by Himmler during his visit in the year 1942.
During his (Aumeiers) stay in Auschwitz from the fall 1941 to the spring 1943 I only saw him peronally only a few times, therefore I cannot form a personal judgment about him[…].

I simply don't understand from where Irving gets the idea of "henchman".

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3357
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Hans Aumeier

Postby Hektor » 5 years 4 months ago (Sat Jul 05, 2014 5:15 pm)

Didn't Hans Aumeier at first deny any knowledge about "homicidal gassings"? David Irving has papers that show this:
Im Sta[m]lager I bestand ein Krematorium bestehend aus 2 Öfen. Dort wurden die Leichen verbrannt. Das Krematorium unterstand dem Leiter der politischen Abteilung und dem Lagerarzt. Meiner Zeit waren in Birkenau 2 oder 3 Krematorium [sic. Krematorien] in Bau. Von Gaska[m]ern ist mir nichts bekannt, auch wurde zu meiner Zeit kein Häftling vergast. Als ich versetzt wurde, waren ungefähr 54 000 Häftlinge in Auschwitz und Birkenau, darunter waren auch ci. [sic. ca] 15 000 Frauen und Kinder. Häftlinge welche erkrankten, wurden dem Krankenbau überstellt welcher ausschliehslich dem Lagerarzt unterstand.
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Aumeier/MS2_290645.html
I think we got another Nazi that denied the Holocaust.

Reviso
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:21 pm

Re: Hans Aumeier

Postby Reviso » 5 years 4 months ago (Sun Jul 06, 2014 8:38 am)

There is another topic about Aumeier :
nathan @ Aumeier repudiated confessions?
R.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 1 guest