From ceacaa@aol.com Sat Aug 3 07:03:16 PDT 1996 Article: 54978 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 1 Aug 1996 20:11:55 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 70 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4trh4b$fat@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <4tqqs7$6nn@newsbf02.news.aol.com> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Mark Van Alstine made the following post relevant to the size of the alleged "little chimneys" claimed to have been on the roof of Leichenkeller 1, Crema II. Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... From: mvanalst@rbi.com (Mark Van Alstine) Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 12:37:38 -0700 Message-ID:[snip] >Given that the holes in the roof >were about 70 cm x 70 cm; the fixed part of the Zyklon B >introduction columns extended through the >ceiling and about 40 cm above the concrete roof; that the introduction columns were likely surrounded by bricking >and/or concrete since they have >been described as "little chimneys" and >"short concrete pipes" (probably >similar to the reconstruction of the Zyklon B >vents found at Krema I) For readers of this thread, these "little chimneys" were a necessary attribute of the claimed vent holes in the roof of the Leichenkeller. These "vent holes", in turn, are needed to support claims that Zyclon was poured into a primative wire and tube contraption called a "porous pillar". The "porous pillar", in turn, allegedly held an "inner porous pillar" which in turn, it has been speculated, held a little cone devise which was needed to disperse and retrieve the used Zyclon. Belief in this Rube Goldberg device of little chimneys, porous pillars, little cones, wires, tubes and vent holes is NECESSARY to sustain faith in the the story that Leichenkeller 1 "probably killed more people ...than both the atomic bombs dropped on Japan did. And for a fraction of the cost." as one Exterminationist Pundit oddly put it. The roof of the so-called "gas chamber" still exists and can be inspected. People who have the good sense and the time, simply go to the scene of the crime and examine the alleged "murder weapon." Of course, there are no holes in the roof that were "vent holes", no signs of "little chimneys", no bolt holes are fittings for "porous pillars". It is actually quite simple. However, a photograph of Leichenkeller 1 taken in late January early/ February of shows three boxes on the roof. This discussion arose because of Exterminationist claims that these three boxes were "proof" that there were holes UNDER the boxes. Back to VanAlstine's posting. If the "little chimneys ever existed, must have fit around the porous pillars, that is, the chimney must have been approximately 40 cm. tall and 70 cm. wide plus the width of two courses of bricks. Roughly 40 cm. tall and 90 cm. wide. A review of the picture shows that the demensions of the "boxes" are just the opposite of what they would be if they were "chimneys". They are, quoting Jamie, two to four times as high as wide. Hey, Mark, do you think the Germans built the chimneys on their side? CEACAA From ceacaa@aol.com Sat Aug 3 07:03:17 PDT 1996 Article: 55133 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news1.io.org!winternet.com!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.cais.net!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 2 Aug 1996 01:02:47 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 60 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4ts25n$mul@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <4trh4b$fat@newsbf02.news.aol.com> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Mark Van Alstine never responded to the question of what he thought of Jamie McCarthy's post of Jul 20, 1996 >Mr. Allen, these items photographed on the roof of L.1 > are skinny. At a rough approximation, the left two items >are twice as tall as they are >wide. The right items is fainter and blurrier, >and looks about four >times as tall as wide, but it's difficult >to say for sure. Mark Van Alstine made the following post relevant to the size of the alleged "little chimneys" claimed to have been on the roof of Leichenkeller 1, Crema II. Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... From: mvanalst@rbi.com (Mark Van Alstine) Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 12:37:38 -0700 Message-ID: [snip] >Given that the holes in the roof >were about 70 cm x 70 cm; the fixed part of the Zyklon B >introduction columns extended through the >ceiling and about 40 cm above the concrete roof; that the introduction columns were likely surrounded by bricking >and/or concrete since they have >been described as "little chimneys" and >"short concrete pipes" (probably >similar to the reconstruction of the Zyklon B >vents found at Krema I) Therefore, the "little chimneys" , if they ever existed, must have fit around the porous pillars, that is, the chimney must have been approximately 40 cm. tall and 70 cm. wide plus the width of two courses of bricks. Roughly 40 cm. tall and 90 cm. wide. If 1) Mark is right and the "little chimneys were 90 cm.wide and 2) Jamie is right and the objects in the picture are 2 to 4 times as tall as wide: 3. can the objects in the picture really be the "little chimenys"? Mark, if you are still having problems with the metric system, may be Mr Erlich can help you. ____________________________________________________ "Gradually, over months on the Internet, it was disclosed to me that the line separating Science (Revisionism) and Dogmatisim (Exterminationism) passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties--but right through every human mind--and all human minds." --David Cole-- From ceacaa@aol.com Sun Aug 4 07:46:25 PDT 1996 Article: 55205 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 3 Aug 1996 17:58:31 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 83 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4u0i27$b2e@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <4tsgrr$krr@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com After several months of discussion it is time to recapitulate the progress of this thread. This thread has focused on the epicenter of the Holocaust story, the so-called gas chamber of Crema II at Birkenau, Leichenkeller 1. To a remarkable degree we have been able to stay on track with our discussion. The standard Holocaust story has hundreds of thousands of persons being murdered in Leichenkeller 1. Because this room is so important to the claims of Exterminationists I visited the site and examined the "murder weapon". The comments that I made in November 1995 regarding the condition of the "gaschamber" have uniformily been shown to be correct. 1). The room still exists and can be inspected. The floor, the walls and most of the roof still exist. Although the roof has collapsed into the room below approximately 35% of the roof is elevated above the floor and can be inspected from below. It is possible to enter the room and examine the ceiling of the room. 2). There are no signs in the roof of any holes which could have been "vent holes". 3). There are no signs of attachment of the so-called "porous pillars" which are a necessary part of the claims of Exterminationists. 4) That the Leichenkeller was built in January 1943 WITHOUT vent holes. One Exterminationist, John Morris, tried to explain this problem away by claiming the Germans "forgot" to put the vent holes in. 5) Destruction of the Cremas. It was shown that the German destruction of the "evidence" occurred as a hasty response to the Soviet propaganda use of the crematorium at Majdanek. The German destruction focused on crematorium, NOT on so-called "gas chambers". The Auschwitz/Birkenau crematorium were all dismantled while "gas chambers" at the main camp and Crema II and III were generally left standing. The extemporaneous nature of the German destruction of evidence is shown by the masses of documentary evidence concerning the construction of the so-called gas chambers which were left. These included the names of the persons building the structures and even photographs of the individual SS personel working on the site. 6) That a photograph of Leichkeller 1 taken in late January/ early February 1943 which is widely cited by Exterminationists as "proof" that Leichenkeller 1 was a gas chamber probably has nothing to do with "porous pillars" or "little chimneys", the mechanism of mass murder. It is more likely the photograp is a picture of constuction supplies. The point of this thread is not the Sisyphean task of trying to educate obdurate folks of the Nizcor/Hoaxter group. It is pretty clear from the comments of Morris, Keren, McFee and others that they do NOT know much about the the physical condition of Leichenkeller 1. The point is to show that a mass of powerful physical evidence exists in a field in Poland which should be preserved, catalogued and examined. The events of the Holocaust are well worthy of serious study. Unfortunately, the events are obfuscated by a great deal of inaccurate information and obscured by strong emotions. In the spirt of Ibn Rochd this thread calls for rationalism over faith and for analysis of history based on firm empirical data. CEACAA From ceacaa@aol.com Fri Aug 9 17:39:19 PDT 1996 Article: 56133 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 9 Aug 1996 01:24:09 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 27 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4uei1p$blq@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Aug 8, 1996 Jamie McCarthy wrote: >> Ehrlich606 is too scared to reply, but they look like >shade on the >> side of square little chimneys. But then I was able to >>view the >> original this weekend. :-) [snip] >There is a rectangle >to the right of the shadowed areas which is >slightly but recognizably >lighter than the Krema wall behind it. >I would also very much like to hear how Ceacaa >explains this. I have been out of the discussion for several days. The discussion is about the shape of the objects on the roof of Leichenkeller 1 in the picture?? I would agree with M. VanAlstine if he says that the boxes are rectangular. This is pretty evident if one looks at photograph 17 on pg. 340 of Pressac. The shadows indicate that the picture was taken in early morning, for a Polish January/February on a mildly windy day. From ceacaa@aol.com Sun Aug 11 07:34:32 PDT 1996 Article: 56469 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 9 Aug 1996 20:32:39 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 40 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4uglb7$rkp@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <4ufhbh$cmc@newsbf02.news.aol.com> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Ehrlich606 wrote on 9 Aug 1996 >Yes, Jamie's detective work, along with looking at the >overall picture which captures the brightness values better, >convinces me that the tar >paper thesis will not stand. I do not think that Mr. Ehrlich should abandon the idea that the crates contained roofing material. Similar crates appear in other photographs of the construction of Cremas II and III, particularly in conjuction with the "finishing " of concrete floors. The photograph of discussion was taken during the construction period when roofing would have been going on. The photograph was also taken to "document" the construction process. None of these points is overwhelming but they do provide a convergence of evidence. It is my recollection that the Leichenkeller was roofed with an asphalt-like coating. Whatever the roofing material was, it is quite likely that it arrived in crates. Remember that there were two layers of roof over the original slab. Proof of what these boxes were is probably in the construction records at Auschwitz. If Bituminous felt came in 3 x 4 crates then we have an important piece of the puzzle. In discussions it is usually much easier to poke holes in someone else's hypothosis than create an airtight argument of one's own. However, the claims that these boxes were "little chimneys" is far less likely than the possiblity that they had something to do with construction. Quite simply, the boxes are the wrong number, the wrong place, the wrong size, the wrong shape, probably the wrong time in the construction schedule to be "little chimneys". Plus, there ain't no holes there! Here is a question for Jamie. Why did the Germans bother to convert Leichenkeller 1 into a homicidal gas chamber at all? From ceacaa@aol.com Mon Aug 19 16:03:39 PDT 1996 Article: 57931 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hunter.premier.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 17 Aug 1996 09:52:09 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 29 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4v4iq9$j2f@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <4ujjj5$4qbk@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Gord McFee wrote on11 Aug 1996 (Ceacaa) wrote: :>> The shadows indicate that the picture was taken :>> in early morning, for a Polish January/February :>> on a mildly windy day. :>Hmmm. Curiouser and curiouser.... I'd very _much_ like for you, Mr. Allen, :>to explain- in detail -how you "determined" the the date from the shadow :>angle. I'm sure it will be "interesting." >I suspect that Mr. Allen was being a tad sarcastic, Mark. I am sorry to see that the Nizcor/Hoaxter group has such a hard time with science. The date of the photograph was given by Pressac as Jan/Feb. This is generally confirmed by the snow on the ground. The length and direction of the shadows allows a good estimate of the time the photograph was taken. -- Gord McFee I'll write no line before its time From ceacaa@aol.com Mon Aug 19 16:03:40 PDT 1996 Article: 58192 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.nap.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 19 Aug 1996 01:23:38 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 93 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4v8toq$hcr@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Mark Van Alstine wrote on 10 Aug 1996 CEACAA wrote > None of these points is overwhelming but they do \ >provide a convergence of evidence. >Indeed. Convergence of the evidence that three >of the "little chimneys" >are completed and the fourth yet to be built. Indeed NOT. Your wild speculation that the "little chimneys" were built one at a time shows a profound ignorance of normal construction processes. Further, there is no sign of any fourth being built, no sign of any preparations for the fourth such as hole being chipped in the roof, bricks or morter. The photograph would have had to have been taken just as the third "Lt. Chim." was completed but before any work was started on the fourth. Thus, your claim that three of the "little chimneys" are completed and a fourth "yet to be built" requires both an unusually method of job proceedure as well as a miraculous timing of the photograph. >> It is my recollection that the Leichenkeller was roofed >> with an asphalt-like coating. >Your recollection is faulty, Mr. Allen. The roof to the >L.Kellers were of concrete that _contained_ a layer >of bituminous felt damp-proofing. Mark, you are a contentious goofball. Go look up a definition of asphalt. American Heritage def. is as follows: A brownish-black solid or semisolid mixture of BITUMENS obtained from native deposits or as a petroleum byproduct, used in paving, roofing, and waterproofing. (emphasis added) You are so eager to argue that you make a fool out of yourself. >> Whatever the roofing material was, it is quite likely >>that it arrived in crates. >That is irrelevent, Mr. Allen, as the roofs were >completed weeks before the photo was taken. It is highly relevant. And, as show above, you are wrong about the dates of completion of the roofs. > Remember that there were two layers of roof over the original slab. >That is not in accordance with the construction >drawings, Mr. Allen. the >Huta drawing 109/13A, for instance, clearly shows >that the roof consisted of just two layer, which sandwiched the >damp-proofing between them. (Ibid. >p.323.) Mark, you poor simpleton, go make yourself a baloney sandwich (no insult intended). Wonderbread, baloney, wonderbread. Take a bite. As you sit and masticate, look at the sandwich. Are there three layers in the sandwich or two with one layer between them? > Proof of what these boxes were is probably in the > construction records at Auschwitz. If Bituminous felt > came in 3 x 4 crates then we have an important piece of > the puzzle. This information and much more would be found if Revisionists had funds to carry on review of primary source material. >Such baloney, Mr. Allen. Such a blind eye you turn >to the plethora of evidence to the contrary! Such intellectual >dishonesty. Tsk tsk. Actually, it was you who presented the photograph as powerful evidence of there being holes in the roof of Leichenkeller 1, Crema II. That had all the impact of Comet Kahoutek. Now, you site a "plethora of evidence" to support a position which has no inherent strenght of itself, ie. the picture of three boxes shows that there were four holes in the roof of Leichenkeller 1. You've equivicated, paltered, and avoided reconciling your earlier pronouncment about the size of the "little chimneys" with the size and shape of the boxes in the picture. Or have you forgotten your claim that the "lt. Chim.s" were 70 cm x 70 cm and extended about 40 cm above the concrete roof????? From ceacaa@aol.com Mon Aug 19 16:03:41 PDT 1996 Article: 58220 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!news.cais.net!mr.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 19 Aug 1996 01:21:44 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 48 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4v8tl8$hb2@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Mark Van Alstine wrote10 Aug 1996 >And where may these photgraphs be found, Mr. Allen? >Please cite them. Pressac, Technique pg. 332 photo 1, possibly photo 2 ibid, pg. 338 photo 338. >> The photograph of discussion was taken during the construction >> period when roofing would have been going on. >The roofing to _what_, Mr. Allen? The L.Kellers? >Not quite. [snip]. The roof of the L.Kellers had >been _completed_ before the end of January. The >photo in question was probably taken between >February 9 and 11. Your assumption that the roofs were completed before the end of January is wrong. They clearly were NOT. The water proofing layer of the roof was _above_ the rebar enforced slab. If you refer to Pressac pg. 338. Photo 14 dated 1/25 or 26/43 you will see that on that the picture shows a first or second pour of the slab which contained the rebar. Dispite your interpretation of Pressac's note, this pour was done well before the waterproof layer was put on, let alone the final concrete cap. >> The photograph was also taken to "document" the >>construction process. >Indeed. It shows Krema II nearly completed and Krema III >under construction. Indeed NOT. The window frames are not even all in. The earth not piled against the sides of the Leichenkeller. Actual completion of Crema II was almost two months away, despite priority rush construction. Your interpretation would have the Germans "documenting" the homocidal nature of the Leichenkeller. This does not make sense in light of the fact that that you also claim that the Crema project was "top secret". The Revisionist view is that the the picture was taken by the construction firm to document the progress of their work. As part of the scene the photographer had a train engine puffing away in the foreground and the three boxes of roofing material laid out (ready to apply) in the background. CEACAA From ceacaa@aol.com Tue Aug 20 22:43:14 PDT 1996 Article: 58580 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.serv.net!news.cstone.net!newshost.cyberramp.net!news4.agis.net!agis!ns2.mainstreet.net!news.jersey.net!homer.alpha.net!daily-planet.execpc.com!newspump.sol.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 20 Aug 1996 00:39:04 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 15 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4vbfh8$jm0@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Mark Van Alstine wrote on 10 Aug 1996 re. CEACAA's question >> Here is a question for Jamie. Why did the Germans >> bother to convert Leichenkeller 1 into a homicidal >> gas chamber at all? >Why, to kill people, of course. Hundreds of thousands of people. Gee, Mark, can't Jamie speak for his littleself? Anyway, didn't you (Mark) write something about "cold Silesian winters". Care to state the Exterminationist position with more exactitude? Let's see how rational the Hoaxter position is regarding the conversion of Leichenkeller 1 into a gaschamber 'round about January 25, 1943. From ceacaa@aol.com Wed Aug 21 07:07:10 PDT 1996 Article: 58649 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!caen!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 21 Aug 1996 00:40:14 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 23 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4ve3ve$n4d@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Mark Van Alstine wrote on 19 Aug 1996 > Chuck Ferree writes: > >> I can believe what I'm reading here. Two grown men, >>neither one >> experts on the subject matter, looking at old beat up >>aerial photos, >> and trying to have a coherant conversation >> about what did or didn't >> happen at Auschwitz. Hair-splitting by >>both sides, and bluffing too. >> What a waste of potential. >> Besides it's boring as hell. >> Chuck >Then don't read it Chuck. >Mark I have to agree with Mark. In fact, I would go much farther: What happened at Auschwitz/Birkenau is of great significance with or without a policy of mass murder. From ceacaa@aol.com Wed Aug 21 16:05:37 PDT 1996 Article: 58781 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!laslo.netnet.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 21 Aug 1996 00:08:08 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 38 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4ve238$mao@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <4vbfnb$jof@newsbf02.news.aol.com> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com (Daniel Keren wrote on19 Aug 1996 >Mark Van Alstine writes: # And then, please explain why it would have been _necessary_ to # "chip" all four holes at the same time beforehand-thus exposing # the interior of the .Keller to the elements while the "little # chimneys" were being constructed -instead of cutting the holes # as each "little chimney" was built. Try covering the hole with a board, Mark. >Mark, Mr. Allen's hypothesis is so stupid that I must assume >he consulted "leading revisionist scholar", Bradley Smith, >on these matters. Don't forget that Smith was a construction >worker before he became a "leading revisionist scholar". [snip Keren garbage. also note the vile anti-Working class attitude for someone who gibbers so much about NAZIs. ] Stupid? That there are boxes of construction material in a picture of a construction site? Anyway, I worked as a construction laborer(even _more_ menial that Mr. Bradley Smith). Smith was in construction too. We both know that the Hoaxter story of building the "little chimneys" is contrary to normal methods of construction. To paraphrase one of Gibbering Dan Keren's earlier pompous stupidities: "The Revisionist position will be judged by my construction laborer peers." ---- >For a summary of the "revisionist" position, look at what >Nazi propagandist and "revisionist", Kurt Stele, wrote: [snip] Gibbering Dan, you're a stupid goofball and as confused as to what the Revisionist position is (capital R, please) as you are about the present condition of Leichenkeller 1. Aren't you embarassed to post such a constant stream of misinformation? From ceacaa@aol.com Thu Aug 22 06:45:13 PDT 1996 Article: 58876 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!chi-news.cic.net!news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!news2.acs.oakland.edu!jobone!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!izzy.net!news.goodnet.com!nntp.wwwi.com!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news1.best.com!sdd.hp.com!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 20 Aug 1996 00:42:19 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 43 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4vbfnb$jof@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <4v8toq$hcr@newsbf02.news.aol.com> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Daniel Keren wrote on10 Aug 1996 Ehrlich606) writes: # Finally, we have the fact that no holes exist either in these # locations or the center line in the still existing (though # broken) roof of the Krema. >What is your evidence for this? Pressac's book contains >a photograph of a rather neat, square hole in the Krema's >roof. Danny (ain't no roof there) Keren pops back with more misinformation. Pressac has a picture of a manhole which is not even on the roof. Ehrlich606 is absolutely correct: Keren is absolutely wrong. Keren, go crawl back under your rock. # Nor is there any trace of the masonry for the # *little chimneys*. >I thought they were simply put around the openings; that >would be good enough, with the earth around making >for support. The sealing itself was done by the wiremesh >device. I don't see any necessity for masonry to hold >the little chimneys in place. "that would be good enough" for what? What was the purpose of the "little chimneys if they were not attached to the roof and did not provide a seal? Further, it is unlikely that there was earth on the roof of the Leichenkeller to support the "lt. chim." >Re the size, you're probably overestimating the height >by a large factor. I think it's best to compare the height >of the chimneys to the height of the Krema's wall, for >instance; this gives a more realistic estimate. What is your estimate of the height of the boxes in the photograph? Lies written in ink can never disguise facts written in concrete. From ceacaa@aol.com Fri Aug 23 15:10:58 PDT 1996 Article: 59182 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!chi-news.cic.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!psinntp!psinntp!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 23 Aug 1996 16:07:36 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 27 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4vl328$8hj@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Daniel Keren wrote 21 Aug 1996 ## For a summary of the "revisionist" position, look at what ## Nazi propagandist and "revisionist", Kurt Stele, wrote: # Gibbering Dan, you're a stupid goofball and as confused as # to what the Revisionist position is (capital R, please) >So why did you delete what Kurt Stele wrote? The same reason I snip most of what you write, ie. I snip irrelevant garbage. # as you are about the present condition of Leichenkeller 1. >I am not confused one bit. Now, you'll lie again and >claim that I wrote that the roof is not there, won't you? Must have been your evil twin. But let's clear the record: do you think the roof of Leichenkeller 1 Crema II "is there" and, if so how much? >BTW, where does this "Ceacaa" come from? Is it in tribute >to Seka? Seka? The movie star/dancer? CEACAA From ceacaa@aol.com Tue Aug 27 07:31:39 PDT 1996 Article: 60291 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!news.corp.sgi.com!walter.cray.com!timbuk.cray.com!news4.mr.net!mr.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 27 Aug 1996 00:56:56 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 113 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4vtv6o$nvg@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <3219a3e2.1583809@news.inetport.com> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 12:06:50 GMT Message-ID: <3219a3e2.1583809@news.inetport.com> ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote: >Mark Van Alstine wrote on 10 Aug 1996 #Convergence of the evidence that three #>>of the "little chimneys" #>>are completed and the fourth yet to be built. >> Indeed NOT. Your wild speculation that the >> "little chimneys" were built one at a time >> shows a profound ignorance of normal construction >> processes. >And this is based on what source? What source >discusses the "normal construction process" for >the Germans at this camp? Normal as in today's world. >> Further, there is no sign of any fourth being > > built, no sign of any preparations for the fourth > such as hole being chipped in the roof, bricks or > morter. >Was there a fourth? SHM (Standard Holocaust Mythology) has there being four vent holes in the roof of Leichenkeller 1 Crema II. This thread has been discussing if and where these holes were supposed to be. >Was there reason to document it for future >holocaust deneirs to pick at? >> The photograph would have had to have been taken >> just as the third "Lt. Chim." was completed but before >> any work was started on the fourth. >Who says so? What source is this? >>Thus, your claim that three of the "little >> chimneys" are completed and a fourth "yet to be built" >> requires both an unusually method of job proceedure >> as well as a miraculous timing of the photograph. >Prove it. Cite your sources. Mark always cites his. Gosh, do we have another contentious Hoaxter here? I am not citing a "source", I am drawing a conclusion based on Mark's claims of what the photograph shows. #>>> It is my recollection that the Leichenkeller was roofed #>>> with an asphalt-like coating. > >>>Your recollection is faulty, Mr. Allen. The roof to the >>>L.Kellers were of concrete that _contained_ a layer >>>of bituminous felt damp-proofing. > >> Mark, you are a contentious goofball. >There we go! Now we are on the road to >proper denier argument. Proper Revisionist argument? Mark said, "It's not asphalt, it's bituminous ..." or " > Go look up > a definition of asphalt. American Heritage def. > is as follows: > A brownish-black solid or semisolid mixture of > BITUMENS obtained from native deposits or as > a petroleum byproduct, used in paving, roofing, > and waterproofing. (emphasis added) >So? You rude point being? That I am right, of course. >>You are so eager to argue that you make a fool out of >>yourself. > >Don't break your style now. VanAlstine tells me, "It's not asphalt it's bitumen or "It's not three layers on the roof: It's two with one layer in between". You let all that stupidity slide and get on my case for calling VanAlstine to task for his excessivly tendacious manner. You're as big a hypocrite as VanAlstine is a simpleton. #>> Remember that there were two layers of roof #>>over the original slab. > >>That is not in accordance with the construction >>drawings, Mr. Allen. the >>Huta drawing 109/13A, for instance, clearly shows >>that the roof consisted of just two layer, which sandwiched the >>damp-proofing between them. (Ibid. >>p.323.) > Mark, you poor simpleton, go make yourself a baloney > sandwich (no insult intended). Wonderbread, baloney, > wonderbread. Take a bite. As you sit and masticate, > look at the sandwich. Are there three layers in the > sandwich or two with one layer between them? #>> Actually, it was you who presented the photograph as #>>"powerful evidence" of there being holes in the roof >>of Leichenkeller 1, Crema II. That had all the impact >>of Comet Kahoutek. From ceacaa@aol.com Tue Aug 27 20:57:42 PDT 1996 Article: 60390 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!netaxs.com!news.dra.com!news.mid.net!mr.net!chi-news.cic.net!newspump.sol.net!spool.mu.edu!agate!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 27 Aug 1996 01:07:55 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 31 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4vtvrb$occ@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Jamie McCarthy wrote on 20 Aug 1996 > >> Here is a question for Jamie. Why did the Germans > >> bother to convert Leichenkeller 1 into a homicidal > >> gas chamber at all? [snip] >With the context removed, I can't tell what the >point of the question was. The point of the question was that the conversion of Leichenkeller 1 Crema II (or III) made no sense according to SHM (standard Holocaust Mythology) if done in late January 1943. SHM on the subject is that the the Germans had to give up using Bunker 1 because the cold Silesian winter kept the Zyclon from working. >Obviously, if Pressac's thesis is correct and the room >was converted from a morgue to a homicidal gas >chamber (rather than having >been designed that way), it was done because they >wanted a homicidal gas >chamber. I.e., they wanted to kill lots of people. They had one already, the "Bunker" again SHM. Either the "Bunker" story is wrong or the SHM of the reason for the conversion is wrong. From ceacaa@aol.com Tue Aug 27 20:57:43 PDT 1996 Article: 60410 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.serv.net!news.cstone.net!news1.slip.net!news.zeitgeist.net!imci5!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 27 Aug 1996 01:08:42 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 29 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <4vtvsq$odt@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <3219a3e2.1583809@news.inetport.com> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Curtis wrote on 20 Aug 1996 1 >They were not exactly perfect in their secrecy. (re. the alleged mass gassings at Crema II and III) No, they were not. In fact, the construction and operation of the so-called "gaschambers" is remarkably well documented. The names and function of the SS individuals who worked on the project were all carefully preserved by the Germans themselves. Doesn't make much sense, does it? >>The Revisionist view is that the the picture >>was taken by the construction firm to document the >>progress of their work. As part of the scene the >>photographer had a train engine puffing away in the >>foreground and the three boxes of roofing material >>laid out (ready to apply) in the background. >And again I see no substantiation for your claim. >Nothing new, >just more begging of the issue after you have >been proven incorrect. Substantiation that the picture shows a construction scene? LOOK AT THE PICTURE. From ceacaa@aol.com Wed Aug 28 16:17:31 PDT 1996 Article: 60648 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!gatech!mcsun!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!psinntp!psinntp!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 28 Aug 1996 17:06:27 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 19 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <502ccj$g1v@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <322362f4.96409828@news.zilker.net> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com To: Mike Curtis I have missed the point of most of your posting of 8/27. However, rather than discuss personalities or styles of discussion, I suggest that we get back to the point of this thread, ie. the present condition of Leichenkeller 1 of Crema II at Birkenau/Auschwitz and what can be learned from it. The starting point of the discussion was that most (90%) of the orginal slab roof exists. Would you agree with this? I am asking you in your capcity as a Nizcor expert. CEACAA My "source" for this assertion is the fact that I have visited the site and inspected the Leichenkeller. From ceacaa@aol.com Sat Aug 31 10:04:20 PDT 1996 Article: 61166 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 30 Aug 1996 22:47:50 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 32 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <50894m$i9d@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <322362f4.96409828@news.zilker.net> Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Subj: RE: Date: Thu, Aug 29, 1996 8:47 AM EDT From: mike@aimetering.com X-From: mike@aimetering.com (Mike Curtis) To: ceacaa@aol.com (ceacaa) < >most (90%) of the orginal slab roof exists. >>Would you agree with this? I am asking you >>in your capcity as a Nizcor expert.>> >Define exists along with intact. There seems >to be much rubble. >Maybe most of the roof is still there in >various forms. You might have a >quarter of it _intact_. Maybe. By "exists" and "intact" I mean as something that is coherent. An anology is a jigsaw puzzle that has been dropped on the floor. It is in pieces but one can still disern the picture. From personal observation I know that the 90% of the roof is in a "coherent" state. This makes sense since the roof was only dropped into the room below and is in (approximately) 20 pieces. What is your source that only 25% of the roof is "intact"? And how can we resolve the question? From ceacaa@aol.com Sat Aug 31 13:42:23 PDT 1996 Article: 61274 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!news.ironhorse.com!news.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!ames!agate!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 31 Aug 1996 10:35:06 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 29 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <509iiq$ps@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Jamie McCarthy wrote on 27 Aug 1996 ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote: >> The point of the question was that the conversion of >> Leichenkeller 1 Crema II (or III) made no sense >>according >> to SHM (standard Holocaust Mythology) if done >>in late >> January 1943. >Then it was a rhetorical question, wasn't it? No it wasn't. [snip] >Please explain (1) what the word "conversion" >refers to in the above >sentence and (2) why you think it makes no >sense at that time. Thanks. Conversion from a Leichenkeller (morgue) to a homocidal gaschamber. Leichenkeller 1 was designed and built (dixit Pressac) as a non-homocidal morgue. Why spend the time and money to convert it to a gas chamber when the Germans were already allegedly operating the "Bunker" with a capacity of 2,000 persons? CEACAA From ceacaa@aol.com Sat Aug 31 13:42:24 PDT 1996 Article: 61295 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 31 Aug 1996 10:23:57 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 53 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <509htt$g2@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Mark Van Alstine wrote on28 Aug 1996 >> The starting point of the discussion was that >> most (90%) of the orginal slab roof exists. >> Would you agree with this? I am asking you >> in your capcity as a Nizcor expert. >Irregardless, Mr. Allen, based on the photos of L.Keller 1 in >_Technique_ >it is self-evident that nowhere 90% of a roof for L.Keller 1 exists. >roof n. 1 the outside top covering of a building >There are, however, some broken concrete slabs and >much rubble and debris at the floor of L.Keller 1. About >all one can say with certainty is that >perhaps a fourth to a third of the roof at >the end furthest from the ruins >of the Krema shell is only _partially_ collapsed. >This is the part of the >"roof" where Pressac climbed underneath >and took photos. Is this the same Mark VanAlstine who wrote contentiously: The roof didn't have three layers but "consisted of just two layer [sic], which sandwiched the >damp-proofing between them."? Or said that the roof didn't have ashphalt on it but bitumens? After those whoppers, we had hoped that you would have the decency to maintain a little embarassed silence. Anyway, the whole roof is about in the same intact condition as the 35% that Pressac crawled under and took a picture of. The complete roof is there. It wasn't blown up but was dropped into the room below. You know that a large percentage of the roof is in reasonable condition. Why would the rest of the slab not be in the same condition? You even admit that you cannot be certain about the remaining 70% of the roof, yet you get on my case for saying that it is a coherent set of pieces. Anyway, how can we resolve the question? What would it take to convince Mark VanAlstine that the roof "is there" and how do we marshall the evidence? From ceacaa@aol.com Sat Aug 31 20:44:33 PDT 1996 Article: 61380 of alt.revisionism Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars... Date: 31 Aug 1996 23:01:25 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 24 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <50aua5$f1i@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Jamie McCarthy WROTE ON, 31 Aug 1996 ceacaa@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote: > Conversion from a Leichenkeller (morgue) to > a homocidal gaschamber. Leichenkeller 1 was > designed and built (dixit Pressac) as a non-homocidal > morgue. Designed that way? Or built that way? Or both? Please be explicit, and back up your assertions with quotations from Pressac. Thank you. DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF PRESSAC TECHNIQUE? > Why spend the time and money to convert it to a > gas chamber when the Germans were already allegedly > operating the "Bunker" with a capacity of > 2,000 persons? Perhaps you can answer this question for me. Please document the capacity of the earlier homicidal gas chambers in the camp. Also, what was the rated capacity of the ovens in Krema II through V, and what was the rated capacity of the earlier ovens in the camp?
Home ·
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Search
Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.