9/11-investigator explains the Holocaust

[little grey rabbit]

.
And given the nature of your rhetoric here and elsewhere, I have no reason to think that your summary accurately reflects Dr Neander's opinions, and Matthew's links reinforce the idea that you may be being completely accurate.

Given neither you or Matthew understood the link he posted that is kind of funny.

I repeat Dr Neander does not believe that Spanner made soap for experimental purposes, rather he believes soap is an automatic side product of the type of method used in skeletal preparation (I repeat he is wrong here)

"Es handelte sich um das ehemalige Mazeratorium, in dem unter der Leitung des international renommierten Anatomen Professor Rudolf Spanner Skelettpräparate hergestellt worden waren. Ein beim Präparieren anfallendes, seifenähnliches Nebenprodukt wurde offensichtlich im letzten Kriegsjahr vom Institutspersonal gesammelt und institutsintern zu Reinigungszwecken verwendet. In der Begeisterung, hier endlich den lange vergeblich gesuchten „Beweis“ für die seit Jahren im Lande umlaufenden Gerüchte gefunden zu haben, die Deutschen hätten Seife aus den Leichen ihrer Opfer hergestellt, [49] ließen sich die Untersuchungskommissionen nicht nur zu bedenklichen Überinterpretationen der vorgefundenen Fakten hinreißen, sondern aller Wahrscheinlichkeit nach auch dazu, „der Wahrheit ein wenig nachzuhelfen

I suggest you put in seifenaehnliches Nebenprodukt into your favorite online translator to see what it means.

There is no need for me to waste my time to find our online discussion because there is no Stolywho report in the public domain to dispute.

Until Prof. Stolywho is prepared to release his report, its evidentiary value is worthless.

 

[TSR]

There is no need for me to waste my time to find our online discussion because there is no Stolywho report in the public domain to dispute.

.
So, since there is "nothing to dispute" there was no reason for Dr. Neander to have opined upon it.

So why did you lie that he had?
.

 

[little grey rabbit]

.
I understood it well enough to think your "pig fat" claim is a lie.

Do feel free to *prove* me wrong.

Or continue as you are and I will continue to point out that nothing you say can be taken at face value.
.

You can think, or more accurately pretend to think, I am lying if you like. It does not change what Dr Neander said. The article in the language you can't read appeared a long time before this discussion and possibly before the alleged testing took place. I honestly don't care if you disbelieve me and every time you tell me you disbelieve me, I will simply ask for Prof. Stolywho's report.

There is no need for me to marshall the arguments as to the possible technical difficulties in positively identifying a particular mammal from lipid profiles alone, because Prof. Stolywho's report either does not exist or is not publicly available.

Until the report is in the public domain its evidentiary value is nil.

 

[TSR]

Until the report is in the public domain its evidentiary value is nil.

.
Good thing that it's not the only evidence about human soap, then, innit?

Not to mention that as macabre as it is, it is simply a minor footnote to the historicity of the Holocaust as a whole.

But *do* keep making claims you refuse to support. It really helps your cause.
.

 

[little grey rabbit]

So Prof. Stolywho's report is not and probably never will be in the public domain.

Next.
It was claimed that Prof Stolywho did his analysis on two samples, one of which was sourced from the ICJ archives in the Hague.

Can you supply an archival source reference for a holding of Soviet Soap in their archives? We need a certified chain of custody for the soap allegedly tested.

 

[TSR]

We need a certified chain of custody for the soap allegedly tested.

.
If you think it is so important, then by all means contact them for the certified copy.

It will still remain a minor footnote, with no impact on the historicity of the Holocaust itself.
.

 

[little grey rabbit]

I don't want a certified copy. All I want is to know the archival reference number for the Soviet Soap in the ICJ in the Hague.

I want a reference number that I can check that the Hague actually hold Soviet Soap to test.

 

[TSR]

I want a reference number that I can check that the Hague actually hold Soviet Soap to test.

.
Then by all means, you should go to the Hague and find that number.
.

 

[Matthew Ellard]

His claim is that there was soap produced, but soap is made in every anatomical lab that uses to alkali maceration in skeleton preparation.

That's not what he says and he would be wrong if he did. It was a separate process to make the soap. Read the witness statements again

Quote William Neely
"A machine for the manufacture of soap was completed some time in March or April 1944. The British prisoners of war had constructed the building in which it was housed in June 1942. The machine itself was installed by a civilian firm from Danzig by the name of AJRD

Quote John Henry Witten / International Military Tribunal / USSR document 264
"Corpses which had not been discected to any great extent had the tissue removed from the stomach, forearm and legs. Owing to the preservative mixture in which they had been stored the tissue came away from the bones very easily. The tissue was put into a boiler about the size of a kitchen table. After boiling the tissue was poured into white trays........The students told me that it was being used to make soap and that a chemical had to be added....."

Given I said nothing like that, I wonder if you are posting here drunk? Can you give me an archival reference number for the Soviet Soap in the ICJ archives today?

No, you are implying a conspiracy where, by magic, the Warsaw Agricultural University and the ICJ have swapped the original Nuremberg evidence for some fake soap containing human fat. That's because you are clutching at straws. You are most welcome to contact the ICJ and ask them this yourself (what the exact archival reference number is) and then ring Warsaw University and ask them if their freight consignment slip matches this number. Let us know how you go in your investigation I know you are really going to do this rather than just blab on like a holocaust denier would.

 

[Matthew Ellard]

So Prof. Stolywho's report is not and probably never will be in the public domain.

Next.
It was claimed that Prof Stolywho did his analysis on two samples, one of which was sourced from the ICJ archives in the Hague.

Can you supply an archival source reference for a holding of Soviet Soap in their archives? We need a certified chain of custody for the soap allegedly tested.

Investigators tracked down some of the soap produced by Spanner. Samples had been used as evidence of Nazi war crimes between November 1945 and October 1946, during the Nuremberg trials. A jar containing the soap is stored, along with the rest of the Nuremberg trial documentation, in the archive of the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=55&Itemid=8

And why are we doing this for Warsaw Agricultural University? Do you think the university is lying? Do you think retired members of the NKVD have been taking the Nuremberg soap out, like a library book, and swapping it for other samples?

Well now is the time for you to put up or shut up. You go do your investigation and let us know when you find evidence of tampering. You will be famous! Holocaust Deniers will love you! We will all bow to you! Prove you are not some whinging holocaust denier clutching at straws by introducing new conspiracies. You will do this? Yes?

 

[Matthew Ellard]

I don't want a certified copy. All I want is to know the archival reference number for the Soviet Soap in the ICJ in the Hague.

I want a reference number that I can check that the Hague actually hold Soviet Soap to test.

You are confused. It is not "Soviet soap". It is soap made in Danzig. The Soviets captured Danzig, interviewed people, collected evidence and supplied the NMT. For example, Mr Witten is not a "Soviet" witness. He is a "witness" who is a English citizen.

 

[little grey rabbit]

Investigators tracked down some of the soap produced by Spanner. Samples had been used as evidence of Nazi war crimes between November 1945 and October 1946, during the Nuremberg trials. A jar containing the soap is stored, along with the rest of the Nuremberg trial documentation, in the archive of the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=55&Itemid=8

And why are we doing this for Warsaw Agricultural University? Do you think the university is lying? Do you think retired members of the NKVD have been taking the Nuremberg soap out, like a library book, and swapping it for other samples?

I don't believe the university is lying as I understand it the IPN (Institute of Polish National Memory) supplied the soap to Prof. Stolywho, who did the testing and has published neither report or methodology.

I am simply asking for the report and the methodology in order to check the claim and see that the lipid profile could not be that of another mammal.

I would also like archival reference number for the holding of Soap (Soviet or otherwise) in ICJ in the Hague. Simple emails to the archivist at the ICJ, asking if they do indeed have such a holding are not returned (note: a make no skeptical remark or anything else.)

Matthew Ellard, I expect you are not really aware of how the Nuremberg War Crime Tribunal document handling system worked. The victorious powers supplied the tribunal with documents they thought relevant, which had typed certified copies made of them and sometimes photostats, and then the original document was returned to the power or authority that supplied it. Outside the court documents and affidavits directly associated with the trial they keep few originals.

In any case if you can supply an archival reference for the soap, I would be delighted.

 

[little grey rabbit]

That's not what he says and he would be wrong if he did. It was a separate process to make the soap. Read the witness statements again

That is indeed exactly what he said, how else would you translate "anfallendes seifenaehnliches Nebenprodukt"?

I have no more interest in your witness statements than I have in Ilya Ehrenberg's statement
"In another section of the Belzec camp was an enormous soap factory. The Germans picked out the fattest people, murdered them, and boiled them down for soap."

 

[Matthew Ellard]

That is indeed exactly what he said, how else would you translate "anfallendes seifenaehnliches Nebenprodukt"?

"Secondary (from a process) byproduct"

The human tissue is removed from skeletons and then added to a second soap machine, to which caustic soda is added per Dr Spammer's receipe to make soap.

I have no more interest in your witness statements than I have in Ilya Ehrenberg's statement

They are not my witness statements. The statments belong to the english soldiers and polish persons who made the statements. At no point in and trial in 1946, 1948 and 1949 has anyone questioned these statements including Dr Spanner. What is your exact problem with these witness statements?
1) Are you saying that are lies? fabrications?
2) Why did Dr Spanner not dispute them?

 

[little grey rabbit]

"Secondary (from a process) byproduct"

The human tissue is removed from skeletons and then added to a second soap machine, to which caustic soda is added per Dr Spammer's receipe to make soap.

"incidental, similiar to soap side product" would be the literal meaning. You may think there was a "second soap machine" and caustic soda was added, but that is not Dr Neander's position. His position was that that if you macerated a human body in an alkaline solution, the lipid and alkali would automatically form soap together. Complete nonsense, but that's Dr Neander's view.

They are not my witness statements. The statments belong to the english soldiers and polish persons who made the statements. At no point in and trial in 1946, 1948 and 1949 has anyone questioned these statements including Dr Spanner. What is your exact problem with these witness statements?
1) Are you saying that are lies? fabrications?
2) Why did Dr Spanner not dispute them?

You can get any kind of affidavit you like during war time. I have seen sworn affidavits saying Jews were feed into concrete mixers to make roading material.

Dr Spanner did dispute them, vigorously.

 

[little grey rabbit]

Here is another testimony for you: a German soldier confessing he is using Jewish Soap.

'in place of a label....was pasted an inscription in neat Gothic letters "Jewish soap"'

Helmut's memory is exceptionally poor. He remembers only those things that were personally useful or painful to him. Instinctively, like a dog, he can visualize only those places where he pigged out, got drunk, and raped, and also those places where he slaughtered many people.... But, for example, it is very difficult to remember the name of the place in Poland from which he brought his 'piece of Jewish soap'....Helmut is asked where he got his soap. Helmut asnswers coldly. 'Over there.' 'From a soap factory?' 'Of course.' One really wants Helmut to talk more precisely about the process that takes place there in the 'factory' where bodies of dead Jews are brought and converted into soap. But Helmut has little knowledge of these processes. They hold no interest for him. He is simply interested in getting his hands on one of the first pieces of that Jewish soap, so he can send it, as a curiosity, to his Ilse for her birthday and, as he would admit to himself, give her pleasure"

January 1943, Soviet journalist David Bergelson.

There are hundreds of testimonies of a large scale Soap manufacturing industry. They are all rubbish.

 

[Matthew Ellard]

I don't believe the university is lying as I understand it the IPN (Institute of Polish National Memory) supplied the soap to Prof. Stolywho, who did the testing and has published neither report or methodology.

Why do you think the the IPN physically supplied the soap to Stolywho? Link me to the website where you gained that bit of information.

I would also like archival reference number for the holding of Soap (Soviet or otherwise) in ICJ in the Hague. Simple emails to the archivist at the ICJ, asking if they do indeed have such a holding are not returned (note: a make no skeptical remark or anything else.)

And what information have you found? What has your investigation determined? Have you contacted the ICJ? Have you been able to debunk this yet? We are all satisfied here. You are the one with the conspiracy theory. How is your research going? Any luck yet?

Matthew Ellard, I expect you are not really aware of how the Nuremberg War Crime Tribunal document handling system worked.

I am aware actually. It's actually you with the problem. For example in another post you say don't think Witten's, Mazur's or Nealy's witness statements, submitted as evidence at the NMT are "real" but you can't say why.

The victorious powers supplied the tribunal with documents they thought relevant, which had typed certified copies made of them and sometimes photostats, and then the original document was returned to the power or authority that supplied it.

Is this a photostat of a certified copy?
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/stutthof/soap-photos/ussr-393.jpg

The NMT evidence included photos, air recon, nazi supplied documents, live witnesses, personal statements, artifact & physical evidence, subpoened eye witnesses, the defendant's own words as rebutalls. Spanner was not a "photocopy" in his 1948 and 1949 trial and he did not dispute any of the evidence. What is your problem now?

In any case if you can supply an archival reference for the soap, I would be delighted.

I'm unsure what your conspiracy theory is about the evidence anymore. However, do your research and let us know when you find any discrepancy as you believe exists. http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/Contact

 

[BaaBaa]

As sharp as Hitler's analysis was, it still needs to be modified a little for today's political environment and for holocaust debate.

Stundied.

 

[little grey rabbit]

Why do you think the the IPN physically supplied the soap to Stolywho? Link me to the website where you gained that bit of information.

I didnt get it from a website

And what information have you found? What has your investigation determined? Have you contacted the ICJ? Have you been able to debunk this yet? We are all satisfied here. You are the one with the conspiracy theory. How is your research going? Any luck yet?

Absolutely nothing. The ICJ are unable or unwilling to confirm whether they have a holding of Soviet Soap and after repeated attempts there seems little point in sending another unanswered email.

I would be grateful if you could contact them and see if they will supply the archival reference number to you

I am aware actually. It's actually you with the problem. For example in another post you say don't think Witten's, Mazur's or Nealy's witness statements, submitted as evidence at the NMT are "real" but you can't say why.

Plenty of worthless affidavits were presented to the the war crimes tribunal. This is another couple.

 

[little grey rabbit]

The NMT evidence included photos, air recon, nazi supplied documents, live witnesses, personal statements, artifact & physical evidence, subpoened eye witnesses, the defendant's own words as rebutalls. Spanner was not a "photocopy" in his 1948 and 1949 trial and he did not dispute any of the evidence. What is your problem now?

I was not aware of Prof. Spanner having a trial. Could you supply more details of this event please?