Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

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: 9198
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby Hannover » 4 months 1 week ago (Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:12 am)

Here's a good opportunity for Industry spokespersons & CODOH Forum registrants Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis, and those that claim to believe in the alleged 'gassings' at Auschwitz / Birkenau to explain to our readers exactly how it all was allegedly accomplished.

Please be specific.

- How were alleged victims supposedly brought into the alleged gas chambers?

- How was Zyklon-B supposedly deposited into the alleged gas chambers, and by who?

- What was the alleged duration of these alleged gassings?

- How many were supposedly gassed per day?

- How many per batch are alleged?

- How were the alleged corpses removed to the crematorium?

- How was the next batch supposedly kept unaware of what had supposedly just happened to the previous batch?

- Knowing the alleged murder weapon ZYKLON-B takes hours to completely outgas, how was the Zyklon-B removed / vented from the alleged gas chambers in a way that the alleged waiting next batch was unaware?

- How did those supposedly waiting their turn outside manage to ignore the excess corpses that were supposedly stacked outside awaiting cremation?

- Why don't the very real aerial photos of time show the claimed gassings in progress?

More questions to come.

Hannover

- U.S. Congressional Representative, Lawrence H. Smith of Wisconsin said:
" The Nuremberg Trials are so repugnant to the Anglo-Saxon principles of justice that we must forever be ashamed of that page in our history."
Congressional Record, appendix, v.95, sec.14, 6/15/49


If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

avatar
roberto
Member
Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 4:49 pm

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby roberto » 4 months 1 week ago (Tue Jul 11, 2017 8:51 am)

Hannover wrote:Here's a good opportunity for Industry spokespersons & CODOH Forum registrants Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis and those that claim to believe in the alleged 'gassings' at Auschwitz / Birkenau to explain to our readers exactly how it all was allegedly accomplished.

Please be specific.

- How were alleged victims supposedly brought into the alleged gas chambers?


On foot or on trucks from the trains that brought them to the camp, or from other sections of the camp if they were inmates.

Hannover wrote:- How was Zyklon-B supposedly deposited into the alleged gas chambers, and by who?


Through openings on the side of the gas chambers in the Birkenau "bunkers" and in Birkenau crematoria III(IV) and IV(V), through holes in the roof in the main camp's crematorium and in Birkenau crematoria I(II) and II(III).

Hannover wrote:- What was the alleged duration of these alleged gassings?


Unknown, as the recollections of witnesses regarding the duration of a gassing process vary. This is nothing unusual as the duration of an event is something that witnesses rarely get right according to judicial experience. It should also be taken into account that the duration of a gassing process until the victims were dead need not have been equal to the time until the victims stopped screaming, which is what eyewitnesses would recall. At that point the victims or many of them may still have been in the state of unconsciousness that precedes death in hydrogen cyanide poisoning.

Hannover wrote:- How many were supposedly gassed per day?


That depended on the number of arriving deportees on a given day, which varied throughout the camp's operation. Besides, inmates considered irrecoverably ill were also gassed on occasion.

Hannover wrote:- How many per batch are alleged?


That depended on which gas chamber was used and the extent to which such gas chamber was filled, which was not always the same. There are various estimates as to the maximum capacity of gas chambers. Camp commandant Rudolf Höss, in the notes attached to his autobiography that are quoted under http://holocaustcontroversies.yuku.com/the-final-solution-of-the-jewish-question-in-ausch-t1898.html, recalled that the gas chambers of Birkenau crematoria I(II) and II(III) could hold up to 3,000 people, but that this number was never reached as the individual transports were not that strong.

Hannover wrote:- How were the alleged corpses removed to the crematorium?


To the extent that corpses were cremated in cremation ovens, the corpses were dragged there from the gas chambers. In the underground gas chambers the corpses were taken from the gas chamber to the cremation hall by means of a lift, then dragged from the lift to the cremation ovens.

Hannover wrote:- How was the next batch supposedly kept unaware of what had supposedly just happened to the previous batch?


The logical way to accomplish this would be removing the corpses from a previous gassing before the next contingent was taken into the gas chambers. As long as the strength of transports arriving on a given day did not exceed the capacity of the gas chambers (which was probably the case most of the time), this would be no problem.

Hannover wrote:- Knowing the alleged murder weapon ZYKLON-B takes hours to completely outgas, how was the Zyklon-B removed / vented from the alleged gas chambers in a way that the alleged waiting next batch was unaware?


Zyklon B was removed by forced ventilation in the underground gas chambers. In the above-ground gas chambers, the gas would exit when the doors were opened, rather quickly so if the gas chambers were constructed so that an air current could run through them. The next batch would usually arrive only on the next day and thus not notice anything. At peak times the gas chambers of all available crematoria plus the reactivated "bunkers" would be used. Cases where a next contingent was waiting in sight of the crematorium or in the undressing room while the gas and corpses from a previous contingent were removed would thus be a rarity, if they ever occurred. Even if the number of arrivals on a given day exceeded the capacity of all gas chambers, the deportees awaiting their turn could be kept overnight in a special section of the camp.

Hannover wrote:- How did those supposedly waiting their turn outside manage to ignore the excess corpses that were supposedly stacked outside awaiting cremation?


As mentioned before, those awaiting their turn need not have entered or even have come close to a crematorium before corpses from a previous contingent had been removed from the gas chamber.

Hannover wrote:- Why don't the very real aerial photos of time show the claimed gassings in progress?


Air photos cannot show what happens inside of buildings, so the most that one can expect to see of a gassing process on air photos are lines of people moving towards a crematorium. Regarding what can be seen on air and ground photographs see the articles of the section "The Air and Ground Photos of Auschwitz in 1944", whose links are accessible via the link http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.pt/p/auschwitz.html.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2046
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby borjastick » 4 months 1 week ago (Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:02 pm)

Roberto shows clearly why debating with him and his ilk is a waste of time. For people to be apparently well educated and of a decent IQ and then display zero critical thinking renders this whole escapade a waste of time. Anyone with a modicum of intellectual process and clear rational thought, and Roberto claims to not be a Zionist or supporter of jews, couldn't possibly accept the holocaust story as claimed. It's simply not possible. Therefore we are once again trying to push water uphill.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9198
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby Hannover » 4 months 1 week ago (Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:36 pm)

Roberto in response to my questions said:
1. On foot or on trucks from the trains that brought them to the camp, or from other sections of the camp if they were inmates.

2. Through openings on the side of the gas chambers in the Birkenau "bunkers" and in Birkenau crematoria III(IV) and IV(V), through holes in the roof in the main camp's crematorium and in Birkenau crematoria I(II) and II(III).

3. Unknown, as the recollections of witnesses regarding the duration of a gassing process vary. This is nothing unusual as the duration of an event is something that witnesses rarely get right according to judicial experience. It should also be taken into account that the duration of a gassing process until the victims were dead need not have been equal to the time until the victims stopped screaming, which is what eyewitnesses would recall. At that point the victims or many of them may still have been in the state of unconsciousness that precedes death in hydrogen cyanide poisoning.

4. That depended on the number of arriving deportees on a given day, which varied throughout the camp's operation. Besides, inmates considered irrecoverably ill were also gassed on occasion.

5. That depended on which gas chamber was used and the extent to which such gas chamber was filled, which was not always the same. There are various estimates as to the maximum capacity of gas chambers. Camp commandant Rudolf Höss, in the notes attached to his autobiography that are quoted under http://holocaustcontroversies.yuku.com/the-final-solution-of-the-jewish-question-in-ausch-t1898.html, recalled that the gas chambers of Birkenau crematoria I(II) and II(III) could hold up to 3,000 people, but that this number was never reached as the individual transports were not that strong.

6. To the extent that corpses were cremated in cremation ovens, the corpses were dragged there from the gas chambers. In the underground gas chambers the corpses were taken from the gas chamber to the cremation hall by means of a lift, then dragged from the lift to the cremation ovens.

7. The logical way to accomplish this would be removing the corpses from a previous gassing before the next contingent was taken into the gas chambers. As long as the strength of transports arriving on a given day did not exceed the capacity of the gas chambers (which was probably the case most of the time), this would be no problem.

8. Zyklon B was removed by forced ventilation in the underground gas chambers. In the above-ground gas chambers, the gas would exit when the doors were opened, rather quickly so if the gas chambers were constructed so that an air current could run through them. The next batch would usually arrive only on the next day and thus not notice anything. At peak times the gas chambers of all available crematoria plus the reactivated "bunkers" would be used. Cases where a next contingent was waiting in sight of the crematorium or in the undressing room while the gas and corpses from a previous contingent were removed would thus be a rarity, if they ever occurred. Even if the number of arrivals on a given day exceeded the capacity of all gas chambers, the deportees awaiting their turn could be kept overnight in a special section of the camp.

9. As mentioned before, those awaiting their turn need not have entered or even have come close to a crematorium before corpses from a previous contingent had been removed from the gas chamber.

10. Air photos cannot show what happens inside of buildings, so the most that one can expect to see of a gassing process on air photos are lines of people moving towards a crematorium.

1. The aerial photos show no such thing. Of course other inmates would have seen them supposedly go in alive and not come out or according to Roberto, come out dead. Some 'secret' operation that would have been.

2, Indeed the storyline says an SS man stood on top of the crematorium / 'gas chambers' roof and dropped the alleged Zyklon-B into the alleged 'gas chambers'. Of course that would have been in front of the alleged next batch of Jews, thereby seen by them and the camp in general. Some 'secret surprise' that would have been. :

3. Yep, the current narrative says about half an hour, but Roberto denies there is an actual narrative. Roberto simply dodges what the story he's tying to defend actually claims.
Problem is that there are 'witnesses' that claim a few minutes, utterly impossible, as is the current laughable narrative.
And how would so called 'witnesses' have known when the alleged 'screaming' stopped? If they knew then those allegedly waiting outside would have known.

4. Roberto's own previously cited Nyiszli said 20,000 a day. Laughable impossibility
He has no proof that others were "gassed on occasion".

5. Roberto continues to cite the forced 'confessions' & horrific torture of commandant Hoess and the laughable things that Hoess said during his 'interrogations', again, Robert is in denial of the well known torture of Hoess.
In fact he has ignored my citations to that torture.
see: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10182
Roberto is in denial of the current narrative is that up to 2000 were 'gassed ' per batch. yet he tries to defend the current narrative. Funny stuff.

6. Oh my. Supposedly up to 2000 corpses, a few at a time, were placed on ONE 4 ft. X 9 ft. hand drawn elevator and hoisted above to the typhus abatement crematorium. This would have taken hours / days to accomplish and simply blows away the alleged batch times & rates.
Roberto still ignores the claims that copses were allegedly piled up outside, not seen in the aerial photos

7. Again Roberto ignores the fact that the storyline says that corpses were piled up outside for everyone to see.

8. The ventilation method would have been impossible because the vents in the crematorum alleged to be 'gas chambers' were at the bottom of the crematorium, they would have been blocked by the alleged masses of corpses.
Here we go:
Image
What the 'gas chambers' supposedly looked like upon completion of the alleged 'gassings'.
Try 'venting' that from below.

Roberto tries to deflect from the current storyline which says that an SS man on the roof lifted still out-gassing cyanide containers from inside the alleged gas chambers .... thereby releasing the gas which would have been a massive danger to those allegedly waiting, and people at the site in general. Some surprise operations those would have been.

9. Roberto continues to change the very narrative that he tries to defend.
As state, the storyline says (in order to meet the time lengths claimed) that the next batch was waiting outside while the alleged 'gassing' operations were underway.
Roberto forgot that he claims that Jews actually heard those inside 'screaming', meaning they were in very close approximation.

10. The usual false strawman argument from Roberto.
No one says the aerials can show what occurs inside a structure, but they do not show anything that is alleged. The alleged occurrences would necessarily have been visible, IF they had actually happened.
We do not see actual corpses as alleged, we do not see lines of people as alleged, we do not see flaming chimneys as alleged; but we do see obvious amateur hour tampering with the photos, one even has 'marching Jews' drawn in on a rooftop.
see here:
Image
and:
'Critique of Claims Made by Robert Jan Van Pelt'
http://www.vho.org/GB/c/GR/RudolfOnVanPelt.html
and:
'Altered Aerial Photos and the Shadows of Doom'
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3249
and:
Air Photo Evidence
https://archive.org/details/AirPhotoEvidenceAuschwitz

I also refer our readers to this CODOH Forum link for further debunking of Roberto and those like him:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11143&p=83723&hilit=hannover+asmarques#p83723

Cheers, Hannover

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”.
Arthur Schopenhauer
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9198
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby Hannover » 4 months 1 week ago (Wed Jul 12, 2017 10:36 pm)

Well then, that was easy.

There's even more in this highly recommended thread:
'Cyanide Chemistry at Auschwitz'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4111

- Hannover

Science, rational thought, & logic simply demolish the profitable 'holocaust' storyline.
And that's why there are Thought Crime Laws that imprison those who engage in free speech about it.

Truth is hate to those that hate the truth.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

avatar
Mortimer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 2:27 am

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby Mortimer » 4 months 1 week ago (Thu Jul 13, 2017 1:04 pm)

Roberto - As you believe that gassings occurred at Auschwitz can you give a brief explanation as to why you don't consider the Rudolf Report to be credible ?
https://shop.codoh.com/book/55/55
Anti revisionists who have critiqued the Leuchter Report often point out that Fred Leuchter was not a registered engineer. If this is a problem then what is wrong with The Luftl Report ? Walter Luftl was a registered engineer, expert court witness and president of the Austrian engineer's association -
http://codoh.com/library/document/2383/

avatar
Breker
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 636
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: Europa

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby Breker » 4 months 1 week ago (Thu Jul 13, 2017 1:41 pm)

Mortimer wrote:Roberto - As you believe that gassings occurred at Auschwitz can you give a brief explanation as to why you don't consider the Rudolf Report to be credible ?
https://shop.codoh.com/book/55/55
Anti revisionists who have critiqued the Leuchter Report often point out that Fred Leuchter was not a registered engineer. If this is a problem then what is wrong with The Luftl Report ? Walter Luftl was a registered engineer, expert court witness and president of the Austrian engineer's association -
http://codoh.com/library/document/2383/

And "Holocaust Historian" Raul Hilberg had no degree in history.
B.
Revisionists are just the messengers, the impossibility of the "Holocaust" narrative is the message.

avatar
roberto
Member
Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 4:49 pm

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby roberto » 4 months 1 week ago (Sat Jul 15, 2017 10:18 am)

Mortimer wrote:Roberto - As you believe that gassings occurred at Auschwitz can you give a brief explanation as to why you don't consider the Rudolf Report to be credible ?
https://shop.codoh.com/book/55/55


First of all, I don't believe. I accept what becomes apparent from conclusive evidence.

Second, if you want to know why the Rudolf Report is worthless in a nutshell, the reason is that he didn't provide the proof incumbent upon him that, considering all that is known about gassings of human beings in Birkenau crematoria as opposed to disinfestation gassings, Prussian Blue would necessarily have formed on the walls of the homicidal gas chambers.

As concerns the details, there was a long discussion about this issue in 2007 between me and a former Revisionist who posted here as "Wahrheit". I'm currently reproducing this discussion on another forum. If you are interested in reading this discussion, feel free to send me a PM.

Mortimer wrote:Anti revisionists who have critiqued the Leuchter Report often point out that Fred Leuchter was not a registered engineer. If this is a problem then what is wrong with The Luftl Report ? Walter Luftl was a registered engineer, expert court witness and president of the Austrian engineer's association -
http://codoh.com/library/document/2383/


That's great, but did he provide the proof that Rudolf failed to provide (see above)? That would be new to me, but I'm always open to learning something new.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9198
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby Hannover » 4 months 1 week ago (Sat Jul 15, 2017 11:09 am)

No dodging Roberto, tell us why you don't accept the Rudolf Report, which is here:
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/

Recall that you previously said that cyanide was washed off the alleged 'gas chamber' walls after every alleged 'gassing'. Oops.
see:
'Roberto Muehlenkamp: 'gas chambers' were hosed down, so no cyanide'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3706

You have also ignored the question about Luftl put to you. Please address it.
Mortimer wrote:
Anti revisionists who have critiqued the Leuchter Report often point out that Fred Leuchter was not a registered engineer. If this is a problem then what is wrong with The Luftl Report ? Walter Luftl was a registered engineer, expert court witness and president of the Austrian engineer's association - http://codoh.com/library/document/2383/

- Hannover

Imagine in a real / legit court of law where someone claims that millions of people were murdered and dumped into mass graves, but then could not produce the claimed mass graves and the alleged contents. They would be laughed out of that court.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

avatar
Mortimer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 2:27 am

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby Mortimer » 4 months 6 days ago (Mon Jul 17, 2017 11:44 pm)

Mortimer wrote:Anti revisionists who have critiqued the Leuchter Report often point out that Fred Leuchter was not a registered engineer. If this is a problem then what is wrong with The Luftl Report ? Walter Luftl was a registered engineer, expert court witness and president of the Austrian engineer's association -
http://codoh.com/library/document/2383/


That's great, but did he provide the proof that Rudolf failed to provide (see above)? That would be new to me, but I'm always open to learning something new.

Roberto: You have had time to read The Luftl Report so I was wondering what you make of it ? Do you consider it to have any value at all in discussing the subject of gassings ? Walter Luftl is not as well known as Fred Leuchter or Germar Rudolf. He had legal trouble with the anti revisionist law in Austria but the prosecution decided to drop the case -
http://codoh.com/library/document/928/

avatar
roberto
Member
Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 4:49 pm

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby roberto » 4 months 6 days ago (Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:04 pm)

Mortimer wrote:
Mortimer wrote:Anti revisionists who have critiqued the Leuchter Report often point out that Fred Leuchter was not a registered engineer. If this is a problem then what is wrong with The Luftl Report ? Walter Luftl was a registered engineer, expert court witness and president of the Austrian engineer's association -
http://codoh.com/library/document/2383/


That's great, but did he provide the proof that Rudolf failed to provide (see above)? That would be new to me, but I'm always open to learning something new.

Roberto: You have had time to read The Luftl Report so I was wondering what you make of it ? Do you consider it to have any value at all in discussing the subject of gassings ? Walter Luftl is not as well known as Fred Leuchter or Germar Rudolf. He had legal trouble with the anti revisionist law in Austria but the prosecution decided to drop the case -
http://codoh.com/library/document/928/


Short answer to your question what I make of the Lüftl Report: not much.

However, we can discuss sections 9.1 to 9.9 of Rademacher's article, which are the ones rendering Lüftl's arguments. I will submit my comments in several posts, following the order of these sections, with some time in between posts for you and whoever else might be interested to respond to my comments. Hopefully starting tomorrow.

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1464
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby Moderator » 4 months 6 days ago (Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:43 pm)

Roberto:

You are being challenged on specifics of The Luftl Report, not an article about it.

And where is your response to the challenges put to you about The Rudolf Report?
M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

avatar
roberto
Member
Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 4:49 pm

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby roberto » 4 months 6 days ago (Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:03 pm)

Moderator wrote:Roberto:

You are being challenged on specifics of The Luftl Report, not an article about it.


An article about Lüftl and his report, which renders Lüftl's arguments, was what Mortimer linked to
(http://codoh.com/library/document/2383/), If you want a discussion of the Lüftl Report proper, please provide a link to that report,

Moderator wrote:And where is your response to the challenges to you about The Rudolf Report?
M1


Short response to the question why I consider the Rudolf Report worthless has been provided: Rudolf does not prove that, considering all circumstances related to homicidal gassing that become apparent from the evidence, Prussian Blue would necessarily have formed in the homicidal gas chambers,

Long response to the same question: coming up asap.

Meanwhile, you may contribute to the discussion by quoting those parts of the Rudolf Report where in your opinion Rudolf proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Prussian Blue would necessarily have formed in the homicidal gas chambers.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9198
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Challenge to Roberto Muehlenkamp, Andrew Mathis & Believers on alleged Auschwitz / Birkenau 'gassings'

Postby Hannover » 4 months 5 days ago (Wed Jul 19, 2017 2:34 am)

roberto wrote:
Moderator wrote:Roberto:

You are being challenged on specifics of The Luftl Report, not an article about it.


An article about Lüftl and his report, which renders Lüftl's arguments, was what Mortimer linked to
(http://codoh.com/library/document/2383/), If you want a discussion of the Lüftl Report proper, please provide a link to that report,

Moderator wrote:And where is your response to the challenges to you about The Rudolf Report?
M1


Short response to the question why I consider the Rudolf Report worthless has been provided: Rudolf does not prove that, considering all circumstances related to homicidal gassing that become apparent from the evidence, Prussian Blue would necessarily have formed in the homicidal gas chambers,

Long response to the same question: coming up asap.

Meanwhile, you may contribute to the discussion by quoting those parts of the Rudolf Report where in your opinion Rudolf proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Prussian Blue would necessarily have formed in the homicidal gas chambers.


Roberto, earlier in this thread you said you knew about The Luftl Report:
you said:
Short answer to your question what I make of the Lüftl Report: not much.

Now you insist that a link for what you previously claimed knowledge of be provided. Quite weak and another dodge.

However, here is The Luftl Report:
http://vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres6/Luftleng.pdf

You try to ignore The Luftl Report by saying you will discuss an article about it, rather than the actual Report.
Yet Mortimer and myself initially asked for your specific reasons for rejecting The Luftl Report.
Quit stalling, tell us specifically why you reject it. No dodging.

On The Rudolf Report, you said:
Rudolf does not prove that, considering all circumstances related to homicidal gassing that become apparent from the evidence, Prussian Blue would necessarily have formed in the homicidal gas chambers,
Really? That's laughable.
You were asked for specifics and that's your back pedaling answer.
again:
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/

As I mentioned earlier in this thread and you dodged, you previously said that cyanide was washed off the alleged 'gas chamber' walls after every alleged 'gassing'.
see:
'Roberto Muehlenkamp: 'gas chambers' were hosed down, so no cyanide'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3706

You're stumbling over your own words.
Now quit stalling. To repeat, tell us specifically how you came to that 'conclusion' about The Rudolf Report. No dodging.

- Hannover

“we’ve often fantasized about drawing up an indictment against Adolf Hitler himself. And to put into that indictment the major charge: the Final Solution of the Jewish question in Europe, the physical annihilation of Jewry. And then it dawned upon us, what would we do? We didn’t have the evidence.”

"holocaust historian" Raul Hilberg, from https://youtu.be/2q51wqEE1fM
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 19 guests