From Lectures on the Holocaust by Germar Rudolf
3.4.2. Mass Murder Scenes R: There are basically two ways of getting a picture of what happened in Auschwitz. You can either go to original sources and read and analyze the thousands of documents and statements by witnesses, or else you can reach for a book published by the institution that claims to be the ultimate authority on the subject. That is the Polish State Museum at Auschwitz. Needless to say, almost everyone chooses the latter method. Who has the time and resources for the former? For this reason, I would like to briefly summarize the literature published by the Auschwitz State Museum. I would like to briefly describe the museum’s official history of Auschwitz and its presentation of the alleged extermination process. It goes like this: In the summer of 1941, Camp Commandant Höß receives oral orders to get the camp ready to exterminate Jews. Early in September 1941, in the cellar of a building in the main camp, there is an experimental gassing of several hundred Soviet POWs using the cyanide based pesticide Zyklon B In the following weeks the morgue of the crematory in the main camp is converted into a homicidal gas chamber.
The conversion consists of knocking holes in the concrete roof so that Zyklon B can be dumped into the room below. This gas chamber begins operation around the end of 1941 and is in use until early 1943 (see the plans of this crematory in Ill. 71, p. 252). The “selection” of victims is performed next to the railroad tracks in front of the main camp. Those prisoners who are able to work are accepted in the camp, while those unable to work are sent directly to “gas chambers.” The bodies of the victims are then cremated in the room next to the gas chamber, which originally contained two double-muffle crematory ovens (later there were three.) In the first half of 1942, two old farmhouses outside the Birkenau camp are converted to gas chambers. These are called “Bunker 1” and “Bunker 2” or sometimes “Red House” and “White House.” These continue in operation until the beginning of 1943. With the deportation of the Hungarian Jews in May 1944, one of these farmhouses (Bunker 2) is reactivated as a homicidal facility.
The victims of these Bunkers are cremated over wood fires in trenches that are several meters deep. Melted human fat is retrieved with large ladles and used as fuel for the fires. In the summer of 1942 planning begins for four new crematories in Birkenau, built as two pairs with mirror like symmetry. Two of these have underground morgues, one of which is used as an undressing room and the other as a gas chamber. In addition each has an oven room equipped with five triple-muffle ovens, making a total of 15 muffles (see crematories II and III, Ill. 62f., p. 242). The other two crematories (no. IV and V474) both have a mortuary above ground and an oven room with an eight-muffle oven, as well as three smaller rooms used as “gas chambers.” These crematories go into operation one after the other between March and June 1943. Crematories IV and V quickly fall out of operation because of defective construction. Crematory IV is never repaired, Crematory V very late in the war. The ovens of Crematories II and III remain in operation, with interruptions, until the end of 1944. In the underground gas chambers of Crematories II and III, just as in the crematory in the main camp, Zyklon B is dumped through openings, which were chiseled through the reinforced concrete roof after construction was completed. The gas chambers of Crematories IV and V, which are above ground, have small hatches in the walls through which the pesticide is introduced. The only gas chambers provided with ventilation are those in Crematories I, II, and III. Thus the poison gas cannot be forced out of the gas chambers in Crematories IV or V or the two farm houses.
One has to rely solely on the natural ventilation through opened doors and hatches. L: I beg your pardon? R: One moment please. Let me first finish my overview. Until May 1944, victim selection takes place at the railroad tracks of the main camp, but after that on the new ramp built at Birkenau. Those selected for gassing are told that for hygienic reasons they have to shower and have their clothes deloused. The victims disrobe, partly in special buildings or rooms and partly in the open. Sometimes they are given soap and towels. Then they are directed into the gas chambers, some of which are equipped with phony shower heads in order to trick the victims. After the doors are sealed, pesticide is thrown into the chamber in quantities sufficient to kill insects. A few minutes later, everybody is dead. After about a quarter hour the doors are opened and the so-called Sonderkommandos (prisoner special unit) begin the task of removing the corpses from the gas chamber. Sometimes they wear gas masks, sometimes they don’t. They harvest hair from the corpses and extract gold teeth. Then they drag the corpses to the crematory ovens or incineration trenches. The ovens are stuffed chock full of bodies, up to eight in a single muffle. Flames and thick black smoke shoot out of the crematory chimneys and huge incineration trenches. The entire area is blanketed in smoke and the hellish stench of burning flesh. At least 10,000 Jews are murdered every day between May and September 1944. Most of the resulting corpses are burned in open trenches. L: How many victims are supposed to have been crammed in these alleged gas chambers at a time? R: The witnesses do not agree on this. For the underground morgues no. 1 of the crematories II and III, which had a surface area of roughly 210 m² (2,260 sq ft), at least 1,000 victims are said to have been executed at a time. Other witnesses speak of 2,000 or even up to 3,000 victims. L: That is between ½ and 1½ persons on every square foot. How can you get up to three people to stand on two square feet? They must have squeezed themselves together quite extremely? R: That is quite a logistic problem, indeed. Just imagine the following scene: 1,000 people of both sexes plus children enter the undressing room with a surface area of 390 m2 (4,200 ft2). Each one would therefore have an area of only 60 cm × 60 cm (2×2 ft) on which to undress. Experience shows that people do not pack themselves tightly to the very edge of an enclosed area, unless, of course, they are quite willing to do so, like when they enter a bus and need to fill it tightly, so that other passengers can still get in. L: Not even that works most of the times. People simply won’t scoot over to make room for others unless they are informed of what they need to do and then are also willing to comply. And that is particularly true if they are told to undress completely in front of hundreds of strangers of both sexes. That would never work. R: Correct. Actually, in order to get people to enter through just one door in a long, stretched out room and to fill it tightly to the last place, the procedure must be rehearsed. Once inside the naked people walk over into alleged gas chamber, the same problem occurs again. Here the victims must press themselves even more tightly together, since that room was even smaller. The first people entering the room must proceed to the very end of this 100 ft long room in a disciplined manner and line up against the wall.
The next lot will form the line directly in front, and so on, until the entire chamber is full. Even if choreographed perfectly, this would still take at least half an hour. L: So how did they get these 1,000 naked people to pack themselves tightly together, touching other completely naked strangers? R: I do not know, but it would have required the drill and discipline that you can instill only in soldiers after weeks of exercising, provided they are dressed. I don’t know if that would still work if you had those soldiers line up naked, particularly if there are female soldiers present as well. L: Well, that is ridiculous. After all, under such circumstances, the alleged claim by the SS that their victims are going to have a shower in that room would convince nobody. How do you take a shower when your neighbors step on your feet and you can hardly turn around, not to mention bend down to wash yourself?
R: You have revealed this absurdity quite well. So even before going into technical and documentary details, you can already see that the claims made about those alleged homicidal gassings are fishy already on pure logistical grounds. In closing this brief overview of the alleged murder scenarios, it should also be mentioned that the first report about the alleged murder methods used in Auschwitz as reported by Boris Polevoy, a Soviet propagandist writing for the Soviet newspaper Pravda, differed quite distinctly from what was suggested otherwise: “Last year, when the Red Army revealed to the world the terrible and abominable secrets of Majdanek, the Germans in Auschwitz began to wipe out the traces of their crimes. They leveled the mounds of the so-called ‘old’ graves in the eastern part of the camp, tore up and destroyed the traces of the electric conveyor belt, on which hundreds of people were simultaneously electrocuted, their bodies falling onto the slow moving conveyor belt which carried them to the top of the blast furnace where they fell in, were completely burned, their bones converted to meal in the rolling mills, and then sent to the surrounding fields.” R: The story about the conveyor belt electrocution with subsequent incineration in blast furnaces was, of course, nothing but Soviet atrocity propaganda with no foundation in reality. It quickly ended up in the trash bins of history and was replaced with something more “credible,” which had been claimed since 1942: gas chambers. Just how credible these gas chamber allegations are will be investigated in the next chapters of the book….
Holocaust Handbooks, Volume 15: Germar Rudolf: Lectures on the Holocaust — Controversial Issues Cross Examined
From Dissecting the Holocaust by Germar Rudolf
“From the moment of the first cross-examination, a tremor of panic began to creep its way amid the ranks of the prosecution. Every evening and throughout most of the night, I would prepare the questions to ask. In the morning, I would turn over these questions, accompanied by the necessary documents, to lawyer Doug Christie who, for his part and with the aid of his female collaborator, conducted the essentially legal aspects of the effort. During the cross-examinations, I maintained a position close to the lawyer’s podium and unremittingly furnished, on yellow notepads, supplementary and improvisational questions according to the experts’ and witnesses’ responses. The expert cited by the prosecution was Dr. Raul Hilberg, author of The Destruction of European Jews. Day after day, he was subjected to such humiliation that, when solicited in 1988 by a new prosecutor for a new trial against Ernst Zündel, Prof. Hilberg refused to return to give witness; he explained the motive for his refusal in a confidential letter wherein he acknowledged his fear of having to once again confront the questions of Douglas Christie. From the cross-examination of Dr. Raul Hilberg, it was definitively brought out that no one possessed any proof for the existence either of an order, a plan, an instruction, or a budget for the presumed physical extermination of the Jews. Furthermore, no one possessed either an expertise of the murder weapon (whether gas chamber or gas van), or an autopsy report establishing the murder of a detainee by poison gas. However, in the absence of evidence regarding the weapon and victim, did there exist witnesses of the crime? A testimony must always be verified. The usual first means of proceeding to this verification is to confront the assertions of the witness with the results of investigations or expert opinion regarding the material nature of the crime. In the case at hand, there were neither investigations, nor expertise relative to the alleged Auschwitz gas chambers. Here is what made any cross-examination difficult. Yet, this difficulty should not serve as an excuse, and one might even say that a cross-examination becomes ever more indispensable because, without it, there no longer remains any way of knowing whether the witness is telling the truth or not.”
Holocaust Handbooks, Volume 1: Germar Rudolf: Dissecting the Holocaust — The Growing Critique of ‘Truth’ and ‘Memory’