International Tracing Service blocks access to vital records

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: 9804
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

International Tracing Service blocks access to vital records

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 6 years ago (Thu Jan 09, 2003 10:55 pm)

Here is some background on the International Tracing Service (ITS) at Arolsen:

This organisation, dependent of the International Red Cross until 1978, maintained a "historical section" open to researchers and published statistics of the deaths in the camps. As soon as it appeared that the research and statistics could confirm the Revisionist thesis, the "historical section" was dissolved, the access to researchers forbidden, the publication of statistics prohibited, the annual report of activities became secret (except for a minute part, devoid of all interest) and ten governments, including Israel, established a strict control.

The ITS possesses information of incalculable richness on the individual fate of the victims of National-Socialism and, in particular, of the former concentration camp inmates. It would be certainly possible to establish there the real number of Jews who died during the war. Unfortunately the works of the ITS are under tight supervision by the governments it depends on : since 1978, in order to block all Revisionist research, the ITS shut its doors to historians and researchers, except those bearing a special authorization provided by one of the ten governments.

From now on it is forbidden for the ITS to establish, as it had done so far, statistical evaluations of the number of deaths in the different camps. The annual reports are not to be communicated to the public except for the first third part, which presents no interest for the researcher.

C. Biedermann, director of the ITS, testified during the second Zundel trial (1988), confirming thus a piece of news that had filtered in 1964 during the Frankfurt trials : at the liberation of Auschwitz, the Soviets and the Poles had confiscated the deathrolls of that group of camps (38 or 39 volumes, of which 36 or 37 conserved in Moscow, two or three others at the Auschwitz museum, [and] of which the ITS received copies). Until 1991, neither the Soviets nor the Poles, nor the ITS authorised the consultation of these volumes and C. Biedermann even refused to reveal the number of deaths registered in the two or three volumes kept at the ITS. (...)

At the 1988 'false news' trial of Ernst Zundel in Toronto, Canada, Charles Biederman, Director of the (Red Cross) International Tracing Service at Arolsen, testified to the following:
The ITS had four mandates: (1) the assembling; (2) classification; (3) administration; and (4) evaluation of documents of former civilian persecutees of the National Socialist regime for the purpose of enabling these people to obtain pension benefits. (11-2496, 2499) The documents were centralized in one main data file, containing about 44 million pieces of information regarding about 14 million former persecutees. (10-2406; 12-2708).
Mr. Biederman went on to explain who had access to the documents:

Access to the documents was limited by the Bonn Agreements of 1955 to former persecutees and their legal successors on the grounds that the documents were all person-related and therefore ***not open to the public.*** (11-2497, 2498). The wording used in the Bonn Agreement was that the archives were "only to be evaluated in the interests of the former persecutees themselves or their successors." (12-2676). The only exception to this rule, as provided for under the agreements, was that representatives of any of the ten Allied governments of the supervisory body had the right to inspect the documents. (11-2497) Any application by one of the ten governments for access was reviewed by the Director of the ITS; if the Director felt it was not justified, he could submit the application to the International Commission for the final decision.


Here is what Director Biederman had to say about the Red Cross's knowledge of alleged gas chambers during the war:
The ICRC had official camp records of executions in the camps by hanging or shooting. These documents were not marked secret. It was suggested to Biedermann that if exterminations were going on of unregistered inmates in the camps the ICRC had many contacts in Europe to find out about it. Biedermann replied that they had always tried to do so but had never received any confirmations at the time. He agreed there was never any indication by the Red Cross from all its reports that gas chambers were being used during the war. (12-2624, 2625)


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

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 (Fri Jan 10, 2003 2:39 pm)

Hannover wrote: From now on it is forbidden for the ITS to establish, as it had done so far, statistical evaluations of the number of deaths in the different camps. The annual reports are not to be communicated to the public except for the first third part, which presents no interest for the researcher.

These are not the only documents to which Revisionist’s access is “verboten”.

Others include: Daily “Stärkebücher”, books that were kept daily about how many inmates were in the Auschwitz camp, new arrivals, transfers, deaths, sick etc. Others are the morgue book, sick book, bunker book etc. And I think the socalled “Arbeitskommando Berichte” (work reports) (except the one with the 900 Heizers).
All of these are with the Auschwitz museum in Poland I was told.

I wonder what the exterminationists are afraid of. They always tell me that the Holocaust story has been thoroughly researched and investigated, tons of evidence, an open and shut case!

Something is rotten in the State of Denmark it seems to me. :D

fge

Hebden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:17 am
Location: Here and there, mostly there

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 6 years ago (Fri Jan 10, 2003 6:38 pm)

Sailor wrote:Others include: Daily “Stärkebücher”, books that were kept daily about how many inmates were in the Auschwitz camp, new arrivals, transfers, deaths, sick etc. Others are the morgue book, sick book, bunker book etc. And I think the socalled “Arbeitskommando Berichte” (work reports) (except the one with the 900 Heizers).
All of these are with the Auschwitz museum in Poland I was told.


We are not sure how complete these records are (see Ms. Czech's list of extant documents on page xi of her Chronicle) but there are two areas in particular that we are interested in.

The first relates to the Bunkerbuch:

Finally, the historical absurdity of the first gassing in Block 11 is indirectly confirmed by three researchers of the Auschwitz Museum, in their long study devoted to the register of the Bunker of Block 11, which appeared in Number one of the Hefte von Auschwitz (1959). This register, the Bunkerbuch, contains the names of all of the inmates imprisoned in the Bunker between January 9,1941 and February 1, 1944. It is clear that if the first gassing had actually happened, the register should have preserved some trace of it. Now, these three scholars limit themselves to a fleeting two-line allusion to the alleged gassing (p.10), and, while publishing fifty-one pages from the Bunkerbuch, on pages 46-68, they in fact refrain from reproducing the page regarding the records of the beginning of September. This fact demonstrates that that page -- requested in vain from the Auschwitz Museum by this writer -- either contains no trace of the first gassing, or even contains elements that contradict it, such as, for instance, records of admissions of inmates to the Bunker between September 3 and September 7, that is, between the beginning of the gassing and the end of the ventilation of the Bunker.


http://ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p193_Mattogno.html

The second concerns the diary of Dr. Johann Paul Kremer, which records 14 special actions he attended whilst at Auschwitz. Two of these actions are of especial interest because they involve registered prisoners. If special treatment equated to death by gassing, one would contend that this circumstance would be reflected in the relevant Death Books, which are also held by the ASM:

September 5, 1942: At noon was present at a special action in the women's camp (Moslems) - the most horrible of all horrors. Hschf. Thilo, military surgeon, was right when he said to me today that we are located here in the anus mundi [anus of the world].(...)

October 7, 1942: Present at the 9th special action (new arrivals and women Moslems). (...)

In the book KL Auschwitz as Seen by The SS Dr. Kremer's 1947 Cracow interrogation is quoted regarding the September 5th entry: 'The action of gassing emaciated women from the women's camp was particularly unpleasant. Such individuals were generally called Muselmanner [Moslems]. I remember taking part in the gassing of such women in daylight. I am unable to state how numerous that group was.' Interesting because the editors of this book note the number of women as being 'about 800' but do not give a source. Did they invent it or have they relied on camp records in their possession?

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 (Fri Jan 10, 2003 10:28 pm)

Hebden wrote: In the book KL Auschwitz as Seen by The SS Dr. Kremer's 1947 Cracow interrogation is quoted regarding the September 5th entry: 'The action of gassing emaciated women from the women's camp was particularly unpleasant. Such individuals were generally called Muselmanner [Moslems]. I remember taking part in the gassing of such women in daylight. I am unable to state how numerous that group was.'


Professor Kremer recants:
After ten years in jail in Poland and after his return to Münster in 1957, Kremer began to protest against the treatment that he had undergone at the hands of the Polish courts and (using here the words used by the Polish Communists themselves in the Anthologie):
“[by his protests and by his request to regain his chair as a professor, Kremer attracted the attention] of certain circles and of certain persons who made him appear once more before the Courts (p.239).”
Kremer, as a matter of fact, had complained that in Poland "only hatred was entitled to give its opinion" (p.240). Better than that, we learn, thanks to that Communist publication, that after his return to Münster Kremer retracted his confessions. In the pious Communist jargon:
“[Kremer] disputed the explanations that he had furnished during the investigation in Cracow and which had been read to him [at the Münster tribunal] (p.242).”
The most degrading fact for the judges of the Münster tribunal was the complacency with which they had heard the explanations furnished by Jan Sehn, who had come from Cracow (Sehn was the judge who sentenced Dr.Kremer in Poland in 1947 first to death, than prison to life and then let him go after 10 years).. You must read the Communist account of that session. It ought to be quoted in its entirety. In Cracow in 1947, Kremer had not had any choice. It had been necessary for him to confess. The most astonishing thing is what Jan Sehn himself ended up saying before the German judges. As far as he was concerned, from the start Kremer did not have the right to plead not guilty. Jan Sehn said, with a marvelous lack of awareness of what he was saying:
“A declaration of innocence would have been incompatible with what the accused had written [in his private diary] (p.246).”

In other words, the Communist Jan Sehn had decided that Kremer's private diary was written in a sort of coded language to which he, Jan Sehn, possessed the key. Prisoner Kremer could only bow before the authority and the hate of examining magistrate Jan Sehn.

His Polish and German tormentors profited from him to the very end. Kremer was used like a puppet. He came to the Frankfurt Trial to make a forced appearance there.

Listen to his final declaration at the Münster trial in 1960:

“If according to human criteria I have done something evil, I can only ask you to take into consideration my age and my tragic fate. I have no knowledge of any offense in the juridical and penal sense. I entrust to the Supreme Judge of everyone the task of resolving a dilemma that is not simple for human understanding (p.258).”

Professor Kremer, in the final account, was less skillful and prudent than his fellow professor, Wilhelm Pfannenstiel, in the Gerstein case. Pfannenstiel, the father of five children, was able to save a good career for himself thanks to his extremely vague confessions.

(Quoted from Faurisson)

:D


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests