Black Rabbit of Inle' says these photos prove the 'gassing of Jews' / but ....

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Black Rabbit of Inle' says these photos prove the 'gassing of Jews' / but ....

Postby Werd » 3 years 3 months ago (Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:23 am)

Hermod, BROI asked me, and he would ask you, what about the South African photos then that were taken by South African pilots and have the roof of the morgue look exactly the same as the photos in the UK and the USA with those spots? I mentioned this in an earlier post and gave a link back to those SA photos. That does need to be dealt with.

As I have said SOME photos are clear evidence of forgery. OTHERS are not. BROI has attacked Mattogno's essay NO HOLES NO GAS CHAMBERS, an article which Germar Rudolf wrote an introduction for called THE ELUSIVE HOLES OF DEATH. I will be going through that post of his soon and giving my comments. Stay tuned.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9972
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Black Rabbit of Inle' says these photos prove the 'gassing of Jews' / but ....

Postby Hannover » 3 years 3 months ago (Tue Oct 25, 2016 2:08 am)

Werd wrote:Hermod, BROI asked me, and he would ask you, what about the South African photos then that were taken by South African pilots and have the roof of the morgue look exactly the same as the photos in the UK and the USA with those spots? I mentioned this in an earlier post and gave a link back to those SA photos. That does need to be dealt with.

They have been dealt with, please re-read my posts in this thread.

Again:
The photos at different times cannot look the same.
It's clearly impossible if one understands the details of the absurd claims.

As I said previously, the excuse for the elongated markings that have been drawn in (that BTW, as shown, do not conform to the alleged shapes of the 'holes / little chimneys' nor the shadows they would have given off) is that these elongated blobby markings are supposedly from the footprints of SS men walking on the roof dropping Zyklon-B into the alleged 'little chimneys'.
Of course they would have been seen by the endless numbers of Jews who were allegedly lined up by the 'gas chambers' door awaiting their turn. See my previous post about the absurdity of the entire gassing scenario.

And as I also said, the elongated 'SS footprints' would have necessarily changed in different photos, due to the different times of the photos, if the story was a real.
The SS men would have made different footprints each time they jumped on top of the 'gas chambers' and allegedly dropped in the Zyklon-B.
The bogus claim is that the gassings were practically non-stop at the time of the photos. Different photo flights would have captured different footprint markings if the fraud was factual.

Also see the previously posted photos of the rooftops of the alleged 'gas chambers' where there are clearly no 'holes / little chimneys' although there should have been if the lies were not lies.

Then there is yet again our impossible 'Jews marching on rooftops'. :lol:
And the train that was added in, but is off the added in track which never existed. :lol:

You're chasing your tail on this, Werd.

- Hannover

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 denies free speech and 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.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3421
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Black Rabbit of Inle' says these photos prove the 'gassing of Jews' / but ....

Postby Hektor » 3 years 3 months ago (Tue Oct 25, 2016 7:48 am)

Werd wrote:Hermod, BROI asked me, and he would ask you, what about the South African photos then that were taken by South African pilots and have the roof of the morgue look exactly the same as the photos in the UK and the USA with those spots? I mentioned this in an earlier post and gave a link back to those SA photos. That does need to be dealt with.

As I have said SOME photos are clear evidence of forgery. OTHERS are not. BROI has attacked Mattogno's essay NO HOLES NO GAS CHAMBERS, an article which Germar Rudolf wrote an introduction for called THE ELUSIVE HOLES OF DEATH. I will be going through that post of his soon and giving my comments. Stay tuned.

Were the negatives in the same or in separate archives before they were published?

If someone would be able to forge in one archive, it would be a bit more difficult to repeat the exercise for three. But then, there is obviously a very large interest in the story - and the holes argument was known at the time of the photos publication.

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Black Rabbit of Inle' says these photos prove the 'gassing of Jews' / but ....

Postby hermod » 3 years 3 months ago (Tue Oct 25, 2016 10:14 am)

Werd wrote:Hermod, BROI asked me, and he would ask you, what about the South African photos then that were taken by South African pilots and have the roof of the morgue look exactly the same as the photos in the UK and the USA with those spots? I mentioned this in an earlier post and gave a link back to those SA photos. That does need to be dealt with.

As I have said SOME photos are clear evidence of forgery. OTHERS are not. BROI has attacked Mattogno's essay NO HOLES NO GAS CHAMBERS, an article which Germar Rudolf wrote an introduction for called THE ELUSIVE HOLES OF DEATH. I will be going through that post of his soon and giving my comments. Stay tuned.


As I said in my previous comment, IMO, those pics were forged by British or South African counterfeiters prior to their release, and Brugioni's famous pics were merely used as a template for that job. The manufacture and release of aerial photos different from Brugioni's pics would have been nonsensical and counterproductive. In other words, that would have been some kind of 'Holes never located twice at the same place, no Holocaust.' An epic blunder for sure!! The best way to strengthen the [alleged] probative value of the Auschwitz aerial pics, was/is the release of additional pics 'confirming' (i.e. concurring with) Brugioni's well-known ones.

There are concurring political interests in the preservation of the Holohoax in South Africa and Britain too. Not only a US concern. In short, I see connected politically-motivated forgeries in several countries and cross pollination for mutual profits where BROI only sees unconnected & untouched material and convergence of evidence.
"But, however the world pretends to divide itself, there are ony two divisions in the world to-day - human beings and Germans. – Rudyard Kipling, The Morning Post (London), June 22, 1915

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Black Rabbit of Inle' says these photos prove the 'gassing of Jews' / but ....

Postby Werd » 3 years 3 months ago (Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:59 am)

Blackrabbit's most recent reply to me with my comments interspersed.

Once again, we must let Blackrabbit speak from weeks back.
a load more aerial photos of Auschwitz were effectively re-discovered in Britain 2011 when the British collection of war-time aerial photos were transferred to an open archive [NCAP, Edinburgh]. They hadn't been exactly hidden until then, but they were off-limits to the general public and only researchers with permission could look at them.

What's significant is that they include the original copies of some of those published by the CIA's Dino Brugioni in 1979. John Ball and Germar Rudolf claim that it was the CIA who doctored them, but there's no way the CIA could have gotten hold of the originals in Britain and doctored them as well.

Furthermore, we know from the British archives that when the camp was photographed on 25.08.44 by a SAAF Mosquito, there were two cameras taking pictures. Yet only a copy of the film from one of the cameras has ever been found in the US archives.

I seem to remember that there are about 11 different photos that clearly show the LKs available just on the internet, but there is probably even more available, especially at the NCAP because with the photos of the SAAF reconnaissance flights of 31 May, 26 June, and 23 August, 1944, only photos from one camera are available on the NCAP website. It's very likely there were two cameras on the planes that flew these sorties, especially the flight of 23 August, because it was the same plane [Mosquito MM 366] that was flown on the sortie over Auschwitz on the 25 August, which, as I said, had two cameras.

[...]

Here's the crucial photos from the 25.08.44, illustrated with a plane to show how they were taken.

The photos on the right were virtually unknown until c.2011, so the CIA could not have doctored them as John Ball claims the ones on the left are [or at least the copies in the US archive; all the photoss shown here are all from the UK archive]:

http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/3fd08164c54d112855efceb11b5f157c.jpg

So in the UK archives we have American photos and South African photos. Original copies of US photos in the UK archives. So they were photos from American negatives. And the American photos in America are the same as the American photos in the UK. Meaning more than one photo was reproduced from the American negative. Hannover and others may say the negative could have been doctored. Then BROI casts doubt since South African photos and therefore South African negatives bear the SAME MARKS on the roof of Morgue 1. To BROI, this is clear evidence of non forgery and no conspiracy theory such as hermod's is good enough.
IMO, those pics were forged by British or South African counterfeiters prior to their release, and Brugioni's famous pics were merely used as a template for that job.

BROI will ask. How and where. I would as well. Jumping around a bit now to stay on the issue of the photos:
I've already proven to you that South African photo is not doctored by posting the copies from the British archive and images from the plane's other camera that the Americans didn't have:

Image

And of course once again, here on codoh is the set of those South African photographs.
The eight photos posted here [codoh link for for relevant photos] were taken by South African planes, not American ones. But, as you should really already know, Birkenau was photographed many times by American, South African and German planes during 1944-1945. There were a multitude of different photos kept in different locations that someone would have had to have known about and then doctored them all.

BROI one more time.
Whatever those things are they're present on the photos taken by the plane's other camera.

Then he challenges revisionists to do the following:
to explain how the CIA [who John Ball claimed drew the fiddling Jews on the roof] managed to draw the same roof fliddlers onto the original copy and on to the pictures from the plane's other camera that Brugioni and Poirier [and Ball] didn't even know existed, hidden away as the were in the UK.

Image

So did the conspiracy involve forging a bunch of photos the same perfectly every time as BROI thinks revisionists should believe? Or was just the American negative forged? But then do revisionists have to claim that the South African negatives were forged too and in precisely the same perfect way back in the 40's? Does BROI think he has caught revisionists in a bear trap now?
There are two similar but far larger marks on the other side of the barrack immediately north.

These things are clearly not groups of people; I've said before that they might be tarpaulin but I ultimately don't know what they are for certain. None of the marks were in the photos taken two days earlier.

Image

Hence, Ball may have jumped the gun with the forgery claim of Jews drawn in to the point they were overlapping onto the roof of a free standing building. Perhaps BROI will say these photos are of better resolution and therefore Ball's claims of drawn in Jews is based on a lousy photograph with too poor quality to make such a claim.
https://s11.postimg.org/5j76ctplv/big_ball.jpg

Now, let's talk about Reynouard and then Mattogno:


Sure, I'll explain it to you. In his c.2014 video he used an image from their 2004 study, found online here.

Here's Kladderadatsch's English translation from 17:24 until 19:00 of VR's video. In red is the text that accompanies the image you've posted above.

Now, one might that I didn't look very hard, or that I only pretended to look. Why not? But I note one thing: the "discovery" of the famous introduction holes in the roof of Morgue 1* of Crematorium 2 at Birkenau by Keren, McCarthy and Mazal was announced in the spring of 2004 in the British journal Holocaust and Genocide Studies.

The revised edition of the official book on Auschwitz published by the authorities of the Auschwitz Museum dates from 2007, or fully three years later. Its authors thus had available the time necessary to validate the results of the three researchers. Yet in the imposing bibliography which extends over more than three pages, the study by Keren, McCarthy and Mazal is not cited, their names do not appear even once. After all, outside the crematorium, the camp authorities have left up the same diagram they've used for years, a diagram which shows the four holes placed along the central roof beam.

In short, the camp authorities disdainfully ignore the study by Keren, McCarthy and Mazal, a study which should, however, be of capital importance for it would refute the main "shock" argument" of the "deniers."

This deliberate will to ignore would appear incomprehensible, unless — unless the authorities at the camp know that the conclusion of Keren, McCarthy and Mazal are worthless, and unless they know that a serious archaeological study would ruin the Soviet propaganda.


It was ignored only because it was wrong according to Reynouard. Could be true, but it's not a definite slam dunk argument on his behalf. BROI continues...
Werd wrote:Are you saying he only figured it out after he got back from Poland and made his video? That he did not look hard enough to find the holes? Okay, just your opinion.

He doesn't address the holes claimed by Keren at al. to be the introduction holes, and effectively admits that when he points out that they placed them in different locations to where the museum sign claimed they were.

How does pointing out that the Keren et al. placement of holes being contrary to what the Auschwitz museum claimed constitute an admission Reynouard did not look in the exact places Keren et al. claimed the former holes were? You are not exactly being clear. Did Reynouard go to the camp, make his video, return with the footage and ONLY THEN figure out where Keren et al. placed the holes and put THAT diagram in his video? Only to fool viewers into thinking that he knew at the time of filming where Keren et al claimed the holes were? Because if he did not even KNOW where to look for Keren's claims, then his examination of the inside of the roof was a FAILURE! You can't refute Keren et al. if you don't attack their claims directly.
You'll can find many very long and very boring threads in which people contest the holes Keren et al. claimed, but you can't herald VR's video as *evidence* against their findings because he doesn't address those holes at all! He merely mentions their study in passing and claims that because it was ignored by the AB museum in a 2007 book they must therefore think it's wrong [instead of them just not knowing about it].

You do seem to be saying what I think you are. Reynouard did not even know what Keren's claims were for the locations of the holes in the roof at the time he made the video and he completely missed them. And then when he came back with his footage, he inserted a diagram from Keren et al to give the impression he did examine the precise spots Keren et al said the holes were located - when he in fact did not. Or he did know and didn't care and didn't want to find them. This does seem to be your claim.
mattogno has suggested other reasons in 2.3 of The Elusive Holes of Death/No Holes No Gas Chambers in the [PAPERBACK] book AUSCHWITZ LIES that would not point to forgery and still suggest something innocent.

It's actually 3.3 in the online version. It regards two aerial photos.
The first is that these patches are not shadows. At the second (1988) trial of Zündel, Kenneth R. Wilson, an expert in photogrammetry and aerial triangulation, testified – according to Barbara Kulaszka’s report – that in the aerial photograph of May 31, 1944, “the patches on top of the morgue at crematorium II were flat and had no elevation.” As for the photograph of August 25, 1944, “he determined that the patches were not shadows but did not have any elevation.”[37]

In the second place, as other authors have since pointed out,[38] in the photograph of August 25, 1944, the patches on the roof of morgue 1 of crematorium II have lengths of 3-4 meters, and those on the roof of morgue 1 of crematorium III have a minimum area of three square meters. Moreover, all the patches have their axis oriented in a north-south direction, whereas the axis of the chimney’s shadow is aligned in a north-east/south-west direction. Finally, let me add that in the aerial photograph of May 31, 1944, there appears a single dark patch at the western edge of the roof of morgue 1 of crematorium II.[39]
Crematorium II of Birkenau, May 31, 1944

Since the above patches were not shadows, what then were they? Kenneth R. Wilson advanced the hypothesis that they were “discolorations on the surface of the roof.”[40] John C. Ball claimed that these are not discolorations of the roof but of the negative, that is, marks that had been put onto the negative by a forger.[41]

There are, however, less radical explanations. For example, the marks may have been by some kind of flat vegetation on the roof, because the morgues were covered with earth to keep them cool. However, this does not explain why these marks are visible on some photos but not on others.

Another explanation could be that the soil covering the morgues had to be removed temporarily for reparation purposes. The roofs of morgue 1 of crematoria II and III were made of reinforced concrete 18 cm thick,[42] insulated from rainwater by a layer of bitumen which was protected from atmospheric agents by a thin layer of cement. It is conceivable that this thin layer of concrete had been damaged, resulting in leaks,[43] which could have led the Central Construction Office to have the soil removed in order to perform the reparations necessary. But it seems more likely that such a soil removal would have been done in large areas, but not in areas merely 3 m long and 1 m wide. There is also no documentary evidence for such reparation works.

A final possibility is that the morgues were not at all covered with earth at the time these photos were made, and that the marks indicate areas were the upper concrete layer had been damaged and the lower layer of black bitumen emerged, creating the patches which are seen on the aerial photographs.

http://codoh.com/library/document/1750

BROI:
I responded to Mattogno's analysis of two [!] aerial photos in my last post. So why have you completely ignored that and just appealed to the same Mattogno article claiming it proves that there could be other explanations for objects in the photos?

Let's go back:
theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:G. Rudolf wrote "The Elusive Holes of Death"; Mattogno wrote "No Holes, No Gas Chamber(s)".

Mattogno mentions just two aerial photos in said article:

1 photo taken 31.05.44 --- As far as I know, the photos taken on that day, must have been taken from a camera that wasn't zoomed in enough [or whatever the photographic term is] to capture anything so small; it was taking pictures of a very large area. Unlike, say the photos of August 23, and 25, etc.

1 photo taken 25.08.44. --- We now have 5 photos that show either K1 and/or K2 taken on 25.08.44

Mattogno wrote:Kenneth R. Wilson, an expert in photogrammetry and aerial triangulation, testified [at the 2nd Zuendel trial] - according to Barbara Kulaszka's report - that in the aerial [...] photograph of 25 August 1944, "he determined that the patches were not shadows but did not have any elevation."

I'm no expert in photogrammetry and aerial triangulation but I do know that you can't photogrammetise or aerial triangulate with a single photo.

If Wilson had the opportunity to view the photos taken from both the plane's cameras with one of these bits of kit, he might think differently.

The curator at the museum where I took the photo below told me that it's for studying two different photos of the same area at the same time—one eye on each. Because the photos were taken at different angles, they allow the experts to perceive 3D in 2D photos.

I couldn't get the hang of it in the 30 secs I tried.

Image

1 photo taken 31.05.44. Cryptome version. Mattogno essay.

1 photo taken 25.08.44. An August photograph. Mattogno's statement:
In the second place, as other authors have since pointed out,[38] in the photograph of August 25, 1944, the patches on the roof of morgue 1 of crematorium II have lengths of 3-4 meters, and those on the roof of morgue 1 of crematorium III have a minimum area of three square meters. Moreover, all the patches have their axis oriented in a north-south direction, whereas the axis of the chimney’s shadow is aligned in a north-east/south-west direction.


[38]Ernst Gauss, Vorlesungen über Zeitgeschichte. Strittige Fragen im Kreuzverhör, Grabert Verlag, Tübingen 1993, pp. 104-107; Jean-Marie Boisdefeu, La controverse sur l’extermination des Juifs par les Allemands, Vrij Historisch Onderzoek, Antwerp 1996, vol. I, pp. 162-165.

Observe:
http://www.vho.org/GB/c/GR/RudolfOnVanPelt.html
Ill. 1 : Detail enlargement of RG 373 Can F 5367, exp. 3185, Aug. 25, 1944, crematoria II and III.

Image

Image

Ill. 2: (top) Schematic drawing of air photo in Ill. 1. One can easily see that the patches on the Morgues I cannot be input hatches: too large, irregular, alignment incorrect for shadows.

Turpitz
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 12:57 pm

Re: Black Rabbit of Inle' says these photos prove the 'gassing of Jews' / but ....

Postby Turpitz » 3 years 3 months ago (Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:37 pm)

I am disappointed at the total disregard for continuity in these aerial cartoons. Even though the supposed morgues where supposed to be mirror constructions, it is plainly obvious that the morgues are a completely different size and shape between the Krema buildings. The ridiculous floor plans, though scant in detail, clearly show the larger of the morgues coming off the gable of the krema's gable end within the confines of the returns. In the aerial cartoon it is plainly way off centre.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: HMSendeavour and 5 guests