Mattogno and the Gypsies

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

Mattogno and the Gypsies

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon May 05, 2003 9:19 pm)

This is a new article by C. Mattogno which came ou only recently in the German VffG magazine:

The “Gassing” of the Gypsies in Auschwitz on August 2, 1944
By Carlo Mattogno

1. Danuta Czech’s Historic Reconstruction
According to the official history 2,897 Gypsies, who were quartered in the so called “Gypsy Family Camp” within the camp BIIe, were gassed in Birkenau on August 2, 1944.
The most thorough reconstruction of this alleged mass murder is furnished by Danuta Czech in her Kalendarium. She argues as follows:

1,518 inmates were in the camp on July 30, 1944. This number grew on August 1 to 2,815. Danuta Czech comments:
»This number is probably the total number of all men and women.«
On August 2, 1944 the number of residents of the camp BIIe rose again, to 2,885 inmates, but the total number of Gypsies (including those of the camps BIIa, BIId and BIIf) is 2,898 persons, »probably men and women«.

Danuta Czech continues with her historical reconstruction as follows:

»An empty train stands ready at the train platform in Birkenau in the afternoon. 1,408 gypsies, men and women, who were selected from the camp BIIe and the blocks 10 and 11 of the main camp were brought over from the camp Auschwitz. They shall stay alive and are therefore transferred to other concentration camps. The departing Gypsies said good bye through the fence from those staying behind in the camp BIIe. The train leaves the platform in Birkenau at about 19 o’clock. There are 918 men in the train, among them 105 boys of the age between nine and 14 years, and 490 women. The destination of the train is the concentration camp Buchenwald. On the 3rd and 4th of August the 1,408 Gypsies, men and women, are still included in the work deployment lists of the camp Auschwitz II, with the comment, that they are located in a different camp. They will be removed from the camp list only after receiving the confirmation about their admission in the camp Buchenwald. […]
After the evening roll-call the camp Auschwitz II is ordered closed-down and the Gypsy-family camp BIIe is blocked off. The camp BIIe as well as a few further barracks, where gypsies are still located, are surrounded by armed SS-men. Trucks are driven into the camp, with which 2,897 defenseless women, men and children are transported into the gas chambers in the crematorium.«


It has already to be indicated, that the number of the alleged gassed contains a big calculation error: If there was a total of 2,898 gypsies, and 1,408 were transferred, it is impossible that 2,897 were “gassed”! The number of “gassed” is rather (2,898 – 1,408 =) 1,490.

2. The Documents

Besides this error in her calculation D. Czech’s reconstruction is based on indisputable facts, which are from a series of reports about the »Arbeitseinsatz« (work deployment) in the men’s camp of Auschwitz II (Birkenau).

On July 30, 1944 the »Zigeunerstärke« (number of Gypsies) was 1,518 persons.5 On August 1 (the report of July 31 is not preserved) the number was 2,815 persons,6 on August 2 it was 2,885.7 On August 3 the title »Zigeunerlagerstärke« (number of gypsies in the camp) does not appear anymore, and 1,408 gypsies are covered in connection with the camp BIIe under the Section »Überstellung Zig.« (transfer Gypsies).8
Apparently on August 3 did (2,884 – 1,408 =) 1,477 Gypsies disappear from the camp. What happened to them?

But before we answer this question, we have to ask another not less important question: Did D. Czech correctly interpret the relevant documents?

3. The Interpretation of the Documents

By the end of July and the beginning of August 1944 the men’s camp of Auschwitz II (Birkenau) consisted of the following camps: BIa, BIIa, BIId, BIIf, BIIg. They also appear under these designations in the relevant reports about the »Arbeitseinsatz« (work deployment).

In the camp BIIe were both Gypsy men and women housed, therefore also the designation »Zigeuner-Familienlager« (Gypsy family camp). But by organization the men belong to the men’s camp and the women to the women’s camp, and therefore the camp BIIe is never mentioned in the series of reports about »Arbeitseinsatz« (work deployment) before August 3. The male inmates of this camp are covered under a special section with the title »Zigeunerlagerstärke« (number of the Gypsy camp).

As we have seen, did the number of the Gypsy camp rise from 1,518 on August 1, 1944, to 2,815 persons. From where did these (2,815 – 1,518 =) 1,297 new prisoners come from? D. Czech assumes, that they were all Gypsies, but why should women be registered as inmates of the men’s camp? This hypothesis does not make much sense and appears quite unfounded.

As was already shown by Gerald Reitlinger, the Gypsy women of the women section of the camp BIIe were transferred to Ravensbrück on August 1, 1944.9

The sources which were listed for this by the British-Jewish historian confirm indeed, that the transport, which left Auschwitz on August 1, 1944 arrived in Ravensbrück on August 3, and he explains:

»The transport that arrived from Auschwitz on August 3, 1944 consisted exclusively of the surviving Gypsy women of the camp Birkenau.«

D. Czech’s allegation, that 918 Gypsy men and 490 Gypsy women were transferred to Buchenwald, is wrong, because actually 918 male Gypsies, but no female Gypsies were sent to that camp. The only documentary source quoted by D. Czech in this connection is a letter of the “SS-Standortarzt” (local SS-doctor) of the Waffen-SS Weimar of August 5, 1944 about the subject »Zigeunertransport v. 3. 8. 44 von K.L. Auschwitz« (Gypsy transport on August 3, 1944 from camp Auschwitz), in which are the 918 Gypsies mentioned; of these 105 belonged to the age group born from 1930 to 1935 (they were therefore 9 to 14 years old), and two were older than 65.11 Besides it is not clear, how these children and old people could have survived the “gas chambers” …

Also the «Verzeichnis der Neuzugänge ab 1. July 1944« (list of new admissions since July 1, 1944) of the camp Buchenwald mentions for August 3 a single transport, the one with 918 »Zigeunern vom K.L. Auschwitz« (Gypsies from camp Auschwitz).

Finally a report by the Dutch Red Cross confirms the arrival of a single Gypsy-transport in Buchenwald on August 3, 1944. These Gypsies were assigned the inmate numbers 74084 to 74998, which corresponds to 915 persons and which furnishes further proof, that these prisoners are from the Birkenau Gypsy camp and that the female Gypsies were not sent to Buchenwald, but to Ravensbrück.13 Since only this one transport with 918 Gypsies arrived in Buchenwald, it is clear that a further transport with additional 490 Gypsies must have departed to another camp.

There remains of course the fact, that the number of Gypsies from July 30 to August 1 increased quickly from 1,518 to 2,815. After we established that the newly arrived prisoners were not Gypsies, it has to be clarified, who they were.

The documents make it possible for us to answer this question unambiguously.
On July 30, 1944 a transport with 1,298 Jews arrived in Birkenau from Radom, who were incorporated in the camp and assigned the prisoner numbers A-18647 to A-19944. However the report about the »Arbeitseinsatz« (work deployment) of August 1 has absolutely no indication about them, neither under »Zugang« (Admission) (which does no appear at all), nor under »Zugangsquarantäne« (quarantine for admissions), under which only 968 inmates in the camp BIIa are registered. (The latter are part of the 1,318 inmates, who show up in the report of July 30). The 1,298 Jewish new arrivals are also not mentioned in the report of August 2, which is listing 965 inmates, who were held in the camp BIIa in »Zugangsquarantäne« (Quarantine for Admission) (from the day before were under the section »Zugang« (Admission) two »Neugeborene« (newly born) registered).

In the report of August 3 is for the first time the camp BIIe mentioned, where under the section »Zugangaquarantäne Häftl.«(Quarantine for admissions, prisoners) 1,415 inmates as well as another 547 under »Zugang« (Admission) are listed. Under this section are also included 16 prisoners of the camp BIa as well as 1,797 prisoners of the camp BIIa.

The quarantine list, which was prepared by the inmate Otto Wolken, allows us to reconstruct the composition of the inmates in »Zugangsquarantäne« (Quarantine for admission) of the camp BIIa.
The 1,797 on August 3 registered prisoners include the following:
- 1,614 from Blyzyn (July 31), registration numbers: B-110 to B-2902.
- 129 from Kaunas (August 1), registration numbers:B-2274 to B-2902.
- 54 of a mixed transport (July 31), registration numbers: 190656 to 190707 as well as A-199945 to A-19946.

The 547 inmates listed under »Zugänge« (admissions) in the camp BIIe were Jews from Radom, who on August 2 were admitted to the camp with the numbers B-2903 to B-3449. Therefore the »Quarantäne-Liste« (quarantine list) confirms, that the 1,298 Jews mentioned were not assigned to the quarantine camp BIIa. If they were with certainty registered in Birkenau, however neither listed under »Zugang« (admission) nor under »Zugangsquarantäne« (admission quarantine), then what happened to them?

The conclusion is unavoidable: they were quartered in the camp BIIe, where the number increased accordingly to (1,518 + 1,298 =) 2,816. The difference of one person can be explained, that the number of Gypsies for July 31 is unknown, but without a doubt dropped off from 1,518 to 1,517.

Therefore on August 1, 1944 of the 2,815 inmates 1,517 were Gypsies and 1,298 were Jews from Radom.
On August 2 was the number of the camp BIIe 2,885 persons. A total of 13 Gypsies were housed in other camps: one in BIIa, five in BIId and seven in BIIf. On August 3 only a single Gypsy was in the camp BIIe.

Also on August 3 disappears the section »Zigeunerlagerstärke« (Gypsy camp number) from the series of reports about »Arbeitseinsatz« (work deployment), and for the first time appears there the camp BIIe, where under »Zugang« (admission) those 547 inmates are listed, who we already determined who they were; furthermore are there listed under »Zugangsquarantäne« (admission quarantine) 1,415 prisoners, who neither came from outside the camp nor from the quarantine camp BIIa. It is therefore obvious, that these were already located in the camp BIIe and belong to the 2,885 inmates already mentioned before.

On August 3 was further mention of 1,408 Gypsies, that they are in »Überstellung« (in transfer): they also are part of these prisoners. Finally are additionally 72 prisoners listed in camp BIIe under »Beschäftigte« (employed).

When we add up these numbers, we note, that on August 3 (1,415 + 1,408 + 72 =) 2,895 prisoners were formally in the camp BIIe, of these were 1,408 (the ones transferred) actually there only on paper.17 On August 2 there were still 2,885, however twelve of the thirteen Gypsies, who were stationed in other camps, were again accepted in the camp BIIe, so that the camp number on August 3 should actually have been 2,897 inmates. Presumably were two inmates of the camp BIIe transferred or died, because on August 3 there were 2,8895 inmates.

To sum it all up it can be said, that the story of the gassing of the Gypsy camp lacks any historic base.

(the end :D )

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

Re: Mattogno and the Gypsies

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 6 years ago (Tue May 06, 2003 11:22 am)

Sailor wrote:This is a new article by C. Mattogno which came ou only recently in the German VffG magazine:

The “Gassing” of the Gypsies in Auschwitz on August 2, 1944
By Carlo Mattogno


Thank you for the article. Although we shall need some time to properly digest it, Mr. Mattogno's case does seem on first sight to be quite compelling.

We suggest this is just the kind of material that Mr. Irving should have had up his sleeve at the Penguin-Lipstadt trial. To be confronted with something like this on the witness stand would have been very unpleasant for Professor van Pelt to deal with. Unfortunately, it appears that Mr. Irving chose to rely on Mr. Crowell and not Mr. Mattogno as his adviser on the subject of Auschwitz.

Germania
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 4:48 am

Re: Mattogno and the Gypsies

Postby Germania » 1 decade 6 years ago (Tue May 06, 2003 1:25 pm)

Hebden wrote:Thank you for the article. Although we shall need some time to properly digest it, Mr. Mattogno's case does seem on first sight to be quite compelling.


da ya think?

where does mattogno know there werent three thousand children and old gipsis in the gipsi camp beside those transfered?

another one: [irony]i am no good in bio, are the babies of gipsi already nine years when they are born?[/irony] get the point...?

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

Re: Mattogno and the Gypsies

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 6 years ago (Tue May 06, 2003 5:12 pm)

Germania wrote:where does mattogno know there werent three thousand children and old gipsis in the gipsi camp beside those transfered?


Your idea seems to be that there were about 4,300 Gypsies in Birkenau at the end of July 1944, and not 1,500. But would you agree with Mr. Mattogno that the rise in the numbers recorded in sector BIIe at the beginning of August are most likely due to the influx of Polish Jews from the Radom ghetto?

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

Re: Mattogno and the Gypsies

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 6 years ago (Tue May 06, 2003 5:16 pm)

Sailor wrote:This is a new article by C. Mattogno which came ou only recently in the German VffG magazine:

The “Gassing” of the Gypsies in Auschwitz on August 2, 1944
By Carlo Mattogno


The original article should be available here but there is a fault with the link:

http://www.vho.org/what/

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

Re: Mattogno and the Gypsies

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 6 years ago (Wed May 07, 2003 9:24 am)

Hebden wrote:
The original article should be available here but there is a fault with the link:

http://www.vho.org/what/


The original title is not yet on the VHO site. Rudolf is quite good at putting articles on the internet in about four weeks or so after they were published in his magazine. I had access earlier to it from the translator data base.

I would have liked to have some of the quoted documents photocopied with the article, also a layout of the camp, as Mr. Hebden has kindly shown on the picture-thread, would have been helpful.

The article is a little difficult to digest, similar to Mattogno's Hungarian piece, with all those numbers.

If anyone has some comments abou the English, don't be shy, let me know so that I can send it back to the boss-man.

:D

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

Re: Mattogno and the Gypsies

Postby Hebden » 1 decade 6 years ago (Wed May 07, 2003 10:23 am)

Sailor wrote:
Hebden wrote:
The original article should be available here but there is a fault with the link:

http://www.vho.org/what/


The fault has been corrected:

http://vho.org/VffG/2003/1/Mattogno28f.html

Perhaps Mr. Rudolf is amongst our audience.

Germania
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 4:48 am

Re: Mattogno and the Gypsies

Postby Germania » 1 decade 6 years ago (Wed May 07, 2003 11:51 am)

Sailor wrote: I had access earlier to it from the translator data base.


menno...i also want access to the translator data base!!! where i have to sign...? ;) :D

I would have liked to have some of the quoted documents photocopied with the article, also a layout of the camp, as Mr. Hebden has kindly shown on the picture-thread, would have been helpful.

i also. some documents are posted in nizkor however.

If anyone has some comments abou the English, don't be shy, let me know so that I can send it back to the boss-man.


i have to made a constructive critic on the german...what the hell is "figurieren"??? the german word is "erscheinen als"...please - whoever - write german!

this is a friendly advice, using foreign words in german text is first a shame to the beautiful german language and second only faking intelectual capacity...

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9898
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 6 years ago (Wed May 07, 2003 12:48 pm)

Perhaps we should comment about your numerous English spelling errors, as in "intelectual". :wink:
I do agree, German is a fantastic language deserving of respect.

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

Germania
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 4:48 am

Postby Germania » 1 decade 6 years ago (Wed May 07, 2003 1:12 pm)

hebden, you did repeat what i said, which is fine and always a excellent contribution ;) , but you didnt reply to the point, dont you think...?

the problem is the follows:

if as mattogno says only "The male inmates of this camp are covered under a special section with the title »Zigeunerlagerstärke«", then what do we know at all about the total strength of section b ii e in the period in question? and if we dont know the total strength of the gipsis section,there is space in history for those who were allegedly "gassed".

so in conclusion,if mattogno wants to show by documentry evidence that the mass killing "of the Gypsy camp lacks any historic base" then he must - i repeat: - he must show there were no gipsis in the camp other than those transfered and other than those who stayed after the liquidation of the familiy camp.

refuting danuta is nice and i ll bake him a cake, but i tell you, he lost the breath on the last meters...hebden.
-----
there will be a schoolary debate between belivers and revisionists elsewhere. go to:

The Scholars Debate!

or search google for

RODO.H (without dot!)
Last edited by Germania on Sat Dec 27, 2003 8:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9898
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 6 years ago (Wed May 07, 2003 4:16 pm)

Germania, you have it backwards again. It is you who must show that the Gypsies were murdered. Can you?

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

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3362
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Mattogno and the Gypsies

Postby Hektor » 5 years 3 months ago (Wed Jul 23, 2014 5:01 pm)

Hebden wrote:...
Thank you for the article. Although we shall need some time to properly digest it, Mr. Mattogno's case does seem on first sight to be quite compelling.

We suggest this is just the kind of material that Mr. Irving should have had up his sleeve at the Penguin-Lipstadt trial. To be confronted with something like this on the witness stand would have been very unpleasant for Professor van Pelt to deal with. Unfortunately, it appears that Mr. Irving chose to rely on Mr. Crowell and not Mr. Mattogno as his adviser on the subject of Auschwitz.

Is the text on gypsies by Mr. Mattogno also available in other languages?


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Lamprecht, MSN [Bot] and 2 guests