Holocast: Gas Chambers: David Cole

[Resolver]

What do you guys make of David Cole's 46 Unanswered Questions about the Holocaust?

I can't post links to outside site yet, but you can find these q's thru google or here (if you replace the * with a '.' ):

codoh * com/gcgv/gc46-origi.html

These do not seem like minor questions and I haven't been able to find refutations to most of them.

I have discussed these questions somewhat at the following forum, already, but still have questions about where to find certain forensic evidence, etc:

conspiracyscience * com/forums/topic/holocaust-deniersrevisionists

 

[SpitfireIX]

What do you guys make of David Cole's 46 Unanswered Questions about the Holocaust?

I can't post links to outside site yet, but you can find these q's thru google or here (if you replace the * with a '.' ):

codoh * com/gcgv/gc46-origi.html

These do not seem like minor questions and I haven't been able to find refutations to most of them.

I have discussed these questions somewhat at the following forum, already, but still have questions about where to find certain forensic evidence, etc:

conspiracyscience * com/forums/topic/holocaust-deniersrevisionists

The short version: utter garbage. General refutation of most or all of them: the evidence that the Holocaust actually occurred as is generally believed is overwhelming.

 

[Resolver]

How about the long answer?

 

[SpitfireIX]

Here's a specific refutation of "Question" number 3:

(3) It has been suggested that the amount of Zyklon B needed to kill people, even cumulative millions of people, would not leave traces as strong as the amount needed to kill lice in the delousing chambers. But when we factor in the Zyklon B traces still existing in the camp barracks and offices, we see that infrequent gassings will still leave SOME traces. Thus, we have the traces in the camp offices and barracks, which reveal what levels of traces would remain, fifty years after the fact, in rooms which were gassed infrequently. . . .

And those "infrequent" gassings were at concentrations 50 times higher than the concentration required to kill humans, and for much longer durations. (see here) I would hope that even people with no knowledge of chemistry can see the fatal flaw in this argument.

Then we have the delousing chambers, which reveal what levels of traces would remain, fifty years after the fact, in rooms which were gassed frequently.

Again, no allowance for the 50 times higher concentration, and the *much* longer time period required to kill lice.

Can it not be expected that the levels of traces in the homicidal gas chambers, while perhaps not being as high as those in the delousing rooms, would AT LEAST be substantially higher than the traces in the buildings which were only fumigated infrequently? Yet the traces in Kremas 1, 2 and 3 are not markedly higher than the office and barracks traces.

No. Yet again, the "infrequent" fumigation occurred at much higher concentrations, and for far longer duration, than that required to kill people. Further, the offices and barracks samples may have come from different materials than the samples from the extermination chambers, which could cause the levels to vary.

Does this not suggest that the traces which DO exist in Kremas 1, 2 and 3 come from the same fumigation routine that all the other buildings went through?

Affirmed consequent. It suggests no such thing.

Fail.

 

[TSR]

How about the long answer?

.
Long answer: quote one of his arguments you feel has merit, and we will explain why it does not.
.

 

[Resolver]

I'll point out the ones that are the hardest for me to refute to my Jewish Holocaust denying 'friends' (I'm Jewish, Israeli, and some of my family died in the Holocaust, BTW)...

In the meantime, can you try to refute all of them?

 

[TSR]

I'll point out the ones that are the hardest for me to refute to my Jewish Holocaust denying 'friends' (I'm Jewish, Israeli, and some of my family died in the Holocaust, BTW)...

In the meantime, can you try to refute all of them?

.
I can not only try, but succeed.

But I'm not discussing this with him, so feel no need. I *am* discussing it with you, and so will instead wait for you to decide the specific topic.
.

 

[drkitten]

In the meantime, can you try to refute all of them?

No.

Why should we do your legwork for you?

The website nizkor.org (especially here) has some good material on some of the more often cited aspects of Holocaust denial. That's probably a good source if you want to start looking at a well-regarded source with very good standards for documentation (unlike Cole's drivel).

But if you're not willing to do the research, why should we do it for you?

 

[Resolver]

No, I have been doing a lot of research, its just that I wanted other opinions. I figured my request for you guys to refute them all might not be the best way to go, but I threw it out there just in case anyone wants to provide a comprehensive refutation of David Cole's work. Perhaps I will put something like that together.

Except for the argument about Zyklon levels, I've not been satisfied with the answers I've come up with to strongly refute many of Cole's other questions.

Cole also made this video in Auschwitz, although some of it is somewhat misleading, he presents some of his tougher questions there:

YouTube: David Cole in Auschwitz

(or replace the ' * ' with a '.' below):

youtube * com/watch?v=iXKHw0EZrqM

This one, an interview on Donahue, is made by obvious anti-Semites, but the parts where you hear Jewish David Cole talking are not, IMO:

YouTube: David Cole Donahue part 2

(or replace the ' * ' with a '.' below):

youtube * com/watch?v=uH10Xf2D0jg&feature=PlayList&p=9BB9087C2F277070&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=7

Cole comes on at 7:14

I feel like I'll just be summarizing Cole's questions in saying I don't have answers to many of them, but I'll at least categorize them and give it a try.

Anyhow, to start, although about 50 times less Zyklon is necessary to kill humans than is necessary to kill lice, it would be nice to be able to point to deniers to what they might accept (good luck) as independent studies that show the levels in both the sanitation and the genocidal chambers to see the 50 x difference.

I've read on Nizkor.org a refutation that there were significant traces found on the ventilator blowers of the homicidal chambers, but I can't find the primary documents for that find. It would be good to have that.

The exact levels of Zyklon to expect is difficult to determine since the Kremas in Auschwitz were bombed and thus aired out.

This brings Cole to his next set of questions. Auschwitz Krema I, according to Dr. Franciszek Piper, Senior Curator of the Auschwitz State Museum, was first a gas chamber, then a bomb shelter, and then turned back into a gas chamber by the Soviets, who put the Zyklon dropping holes into the roof (but did not add an air-tight door). The Soviets, Cole suggests, had an interest in using the site for propaganda mostly on how Hitler killed many Poles. The Soviets, he shows, started off claiming 4 million died in Auschwitz and then revised that figure to 1.5 million IIRC, he asserts and backs with some evidence. How would the Soviets recreate it accurately if they found it as a bomb shelter, he asks. Supposedly the Nazi's left evidence of the holes' positions. He addresses this again, later.

The other Kremas 2, 3, 4 and 5 were blown up by Jewish rebellion to stop gassings (Krema 4) and by Nazis in attempt to hide evidence (2,3,5).

Which brings Cole to questions about Krema 2. Cole brings up a lot of questions about the holes not being in a straight line as they are supposed to be, and Jean-Claude Pressac's explanation that the roof shifted doesn't seem to explain this. Cole also argues that the holes in the arial photos are way too big.

He questions why the Nazis tried to cover evidence of 2 of the holes, but not the other 2 holes when they were going to blow up the roof anyhow, and not cover up the holes of Krema 1 completely. One can imagine many scenarios to answer these questions though.

Cole poses some more difficult questions about the Mauthausen, Dachou, and Stutthof gas chambers. Chamber doors opening inwards (where dead prisoners would be lined up and blocking the door from opening); chambers without locks on the doors; windows without the stated necessary hemispherical grids to prevent from being knocked out; drains where Zyklon could be pushed down (that Dr Piper supposedly never noticed before). There are more puzzling questions, but these are some of the better ones.

Piper also says that one of the Auschwitz concentration camps was moved so as to hide the homicidal operation from prisoners, but Cole then asks why the gas chambers were maintained in line of sight from the prisoner bunkers separated by only a fence.

As a general counter, I like to point out that deniers / revisionists should look at all the evidence that DOES support the gas chambers.

They tend to dismiss the testimonies of Nazi's after the war as pressured concessions. It would be good to have the videos of the Nuremberg trials to show them, but I can't find these, at least not on the net. Same goes for European census data such as the Poland 1931 census that helps prove that 6 million were killed. The wiki on that points to a Polish document, but it doesn't have arabic numerals for any numbers. Maybe it says the numbers in Polish, but I'm not sure.

The deniers also try to explain away the testimony of so many people that claim they saw the gas chambers in operation and they have their silly arguments against that too, saying that war-time propaganda of the winning side, along with trauma from the war and the camps, suggest they might be wrong about what they remember seeing. The deniers point to testimonies of people seeing smoke from burning bodies, and the deniers claim this can't be because the crematoriums burn too hot to make this kind of smoke. I think this is BS. Just because normal crematoriums work a certain way, doesn't mean mass-scale, low-energy consumption ones made to kill millions work this way. But I don't know that much about cremation.

Deniers question the enormous amounts of wood and fuel that would be necessary to burn corpses outside as was sometimes done. I've read Nazi testimony that states these were burned "By means of a special process which Wirth had invented, they were burned in the open air without the use of fuel." While I'm not really sure how this can be done, I think it is not the best fake answer that the Holocaust proponents could come up with if they were forcing the Nazi to make fake claims for the trials, etc.

(replace the ' * ' with a '.' below):

nizkor * org/hweb/imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-20/tgmwc-20-197-10.shtml

Ok, seems like I covered a lot of the issues I've been having in arguing with deniers (often Jewish one), that I want to convert back away from the side of the Storm Troopers, if possible.

LMK if I should add the Cole question number to my general summary. I left these out because the way my summary is structured spans several questions at once at times.

I think, after perhaps a first round of discussion, I might list every question and try to refute it 1 by 1.

I appreciate anyone taking a good look at any of this stuff.

 

[Resolver]

The question to which I refer and/or would like second opinions about include:

7-14, 15-22, 43-45. There are others about the other camps, though some of them are similar.

Some, like 45, ask why sewers were in the gas chambers, down which victims could just toss the Zyklon pellets. Perhaps the ventilation systems were setup in a way that would make this difficult, or many victims simply didn't think about tossing the pellets down (probably not even realizing what they are at first, or that the pellets can kill, since Zyklon was also used for fumigation and cleansing), but even this more answerable question raises some doubt with deniers.

Please help me address all of these things.

Thanks!

 

[TSR]

.
Don't do yourtube, sorry
.

Anyhow, to start, although about 50 times less Zyklon is necessary to kill humans than is necessary to kill lice, it would be nice to be able to point to deniers to what they might accept (good luck) as independent studies that show the levels in both the sanitation and the genocidal chambers to see the 50 x difference.

.
Ay, there's the rub. You see, such a study was done by the Institute of Forensic Research, in Krakow.

Deniers dismiss this or lie about their results,
.

I've read on Nizkor.org a refutation that there were significant traces found on the ventilator blowers of the homicidal chambers, but I can't find the primary documents for that find. It would be good to have that.

.
You must not have looked very hard, since a simply word search on the article which mentions this specifically states

... Hydrocyanic compounds were found on the ventilation grills of the gas chambers in Krematoria II and III (the chemical analysis was carried out by Dr. Jan Robel of the Cracow Forensic Institute in December 1945, and was part of the evidence in the trial of Auschwitz commander Höss).

.

The Soviets, he shows, started off claiming 4 million died in Auschwitz and then revised that figure to 1.5 million

.
No, the Soviets did no such thing. The later figure was calculated by the Polish curator of the Auschwitz Museum, based on a much more reliable methodology than the previous figure which assumed the Krema all ran at full capacity all the time.
.

IIRC, he asserts and backs with some evidence. How would the Soviets recreate it accurately if they found it as a bomb shelter,

.
The original blueprints exist.
.

he asks. Supposedly the Nazi's left evidence of the holes' positions. He addresses this again, later.

The other Kremas 2, 3, 4 and 5 were blown up by Jewish rebellion to stop gassings (Krema 4) and by Nazis in attempt to hide evidence (2,3,5).

.
No, only Krema IV was destroyed at that time.
.

 

[Resolver]

Thanks, this helps a lot.

.

.
Ay, there's the rub. You see, such a study was done by the Institute of Forensic Research, in Krakow.

Deniers dismiss this or lie about their results,

Ya, what do they except, just anyone to be allowed to come do a sample study on it?

They try to paint a picture that since it is not acceptable in serious and established academic circles to question key elements of the Holocaust, and in some countries even illegal, that the illegality of collecting further samples to verify these already existing results means there are either no results or they are fraudulent.

.

.
You must not have looked very hard, since a simply word search on the article which mentions this specifically states

Ahh, I see the results of the studies. Thanks.

.

.
No, the Soviets did no such thing. The later figure was calculated by the Polish curator of the Auschwitz Museum, based on a much more reliable methodology than the previous figure which assumed the Krema all ran at full capacity all the time.
.

I was going on memory from the Cole video on who then presented 1.5 million, perhaps attributing this to the Polish and not the Soviets. Anyhow, I think one misleading thing he does is talk about the Soviets 4 million in a way that some might think is the Jewish estimate upon which, different subject, the 6 million number is based. But the 6 million number is based on Nazi documents, confessions, and census data, AFAIK.

.
The original blueprints exist.
.

But these don't seem to match what is there now. Was the roof also broken into pieces, which might explain this, and the initial response of the roof being "shifted" was simply not the correct or full response?

.
No, only Krema IV was destroyed at that time.
.

I did not mean to say that crematorium 4 was destroyed at the same time as the others. I don't think Cole uses such a time connection in his arguments.

How about the other Cole questions I refer to?

I think the samples report you pointed me to takes a lot of steam out of them ( and out of that lying POS David Irving that says the report was leaked to him and shows no significant levels ), but still would be nice to have the other Cole questions refuted.

 

[Resolver]

I hesitate to even post the following bullsh*t but I want to refute this guy telling me this:

"6 million Jews were not systematically exterminated.
6 million Jews didn't die.
There was no Nazi plan to systematically exterminate Jews.

>> I am already calling him out on this based on European census data

[David Irving] believes that somewhere in the neighborhood of 60-70,000 people were purposely and systematically killed based on eye witness testimony and documents available in the Russian archives, among other places, using the actual death records he's studied which are huge volumes)

>> I've already found David Irving's claim on the post-Leuchter report to be a lie. I'm not sure how to refute the other parts of his lies, above.

Many people died as the result of Allied bombing which interrupted food and medical supply lines.

>> I don't know, how many? Where can I find out?

The concentration camps were inappropriately named.
They were work camps providing labor to the German war machine, to companies like Ford that manufactured war vehicles.

>> Doesn't mean people didn't die for extermination too. Don't know about Ford, somewhat irrelevant. Ford was a known anti-Semite AFAIK.

The imprisoned Jews had money, bought jam, muffins and other things in a canteen and were rewarded with visits to a brothel and the use of a pool for performance.

>> Not sure all of this is true. Some question of Nazis after the war discuss extermination as well as brothers. This motivational tactic doesn't prove there were exterminations of the less productive prisoners.

The imprisoned Jews sent letters to loved ones and those letters are preserved.

>> I read that the Nazi's made prisoners send out fake letters to family back home to make them think everything is ok. How many of these letters are there? Where can I read them?

Bodies, towards the end of the war in the last 12 months piled up faster then they could be disposed of as the result of rampant disease and were piled into ditches and burned to prevent the spread of Typhus.

>> Not sure how many died of Typhus? Where can I find out?

The Russian archives of ALL death certificates indicate few people actually died during the war as a result of being interned in the camps.

>> Not sure about this. Where can I see these numbers? Are they legit?

These are facts. They can't be refuted.

>> Usually his facts are questionable, to say the least.

What I am saying is that both the Zionists and the Allies have every reason to distort the perceptions of people, the Allies to prevent inquiry and the Jews to sustain a false picture of persecution.

>> Not sure how to respond to this.

The deception is unsettling to anyone with a brain.

>> His perception is unsettling to anyone with a brain.

"

 

[TSR]

[David Irving] believes that somewhere in the neighborhood of 60-70,000 people were purposely and systematically killed based on eye witness testimony and documents available in the Russian archives, among other places, using the actual death records he's studied which are huge volumes)

>> I've already found David Irving's claim on the post-Leuchter report to be a lie. I'm not sure how to refute the other parts of his lies, above.

.
The records he's been proven in court to have lied about?
.

Many people died as the result of Allied bombing which interrupted food and medical supply lines.

>> I don't know, how many? Where can I find out?

.
And yet, the SS and surrounding citizens didn't seem to have any problems obtaining food and medical supplies...
.

The concentration camps were inappropriately named.
They were work camps providing labor to the German war machine, to companies like Ford that manufactured war vehicles.

>> Doesn't mean people didn't die for extermination too. Don't know about Ford, somewhat irrelevant. Ford was a known anti-Semite AFAIK.

.
There were indeed work camps -- just what did those workers individually do to be sentenced to work in them?

But there were also extermination camps, existing for no other purpose than mass murder.
.

The imprisoned Jews had money, bought jam, muffins and other things in a canteen and were rewarded with visits to a brothel and the use of a pool for performance.

>> Not sure all of this is true. Some question of Nazis after the war discuss extermination as well as brothers. This motivational tactic doesn't prove there were exterminations of the less productive prisoners.

.
There is no documentation whatever that suggests that Jewish inmates of the extermination camps had access to any such amenities.
.

The imprisoned Jews sent letters to loved ones and those letters are preserved.

>> I read that the Nazi's made prisoners send out fake letters to family back home to make them think everything is ok. How many of these letters are there? Where can I read them?

.
*Some* Jews did. The cvast majority did not.
.

Bodies, towards the end of the war in the last 12 months piled up faster then they could be disposed of as the result of rampant disease and were piled into ditches and burned to prevent the spread of Typhus.

>> Not sure how many died of Typhus? Where can I find out?

.
Well, according to the Death Books, a very small percentage died of disease.

But even if this is true: who was it who rounded up all those people and caused them to be where they would die in such numbers? What specifically had each individual done to deserve such difference?
.

The Russian archives of ALL death certificates indicate few people actually died during the war as a result of being interned in the camps.

>> Not sure about this. Where can I see these numbers? Are they legit?

.
Of course, this of necessity excludes those for whom no death certificates were issued. And once again: how many inmates do those books document dying of disease?
.

What I am saying is that both the Zionists and the Allies have every reason to distort the perceptions of people, the Allies to prevent inquiry and the Jews to sustain a false picture of persecution.

>> Not sure how to respond to this.

.
And the Nazis themselves, not one of whom ever disputed that the Holocaust occurred as generally understood?
.

 

[Resolver]

>> The records he's been proven in court to have lied about?

I was not referring to a court decision, but his statements about the post-Leuchter report as I've heard them in his videos (in which he says something along the lines of 'no significant traces were found') seem to be in contradiction to that report.

>> And the Nazis themselves, not one of whom ever disputed that the Holocaust occurred as generally understood?

I'm sure the deniers would try to say they were forced out somehow. Not sure if/how that can be disproved, which is convenient for some deniers.

How about the other David Cole questions to which I referred?

 

[Saggy]

They try to paint a picture that since it is not acceptable in serious and established academic circles to question key elements of the Holocaust, and in some countries even illegal, that the illegality of collecting further samples to verify these already existing results means there are either no results or they are fraudulent.

It is not necessary to collect any more samples. It was not necessary to collect samples in the first place. The hoax 'gas chamber' in Krema 1 has an unsealed wooden office door with a large plate glass window, for crying out loud. The claim that it was a 'gas chamber' is preposterous. The hoax 'gas chamber' at Majdanek has a large unbarred glass window. The claim that it was a 'gas chamber' is absurd to any but a complete fool or a Zionist.

For an introduction to the fundamentals of the holocaust hoax, documented with photographs, visit ...

www.holohoax101.com

 

[Resolver]

.
There is no documentation whatever that suggests that Jewish inmates of the extermination camps had access to any such amenities.
.

Not only that, there IS documentation that shows that Jews, specifically, were NOT allowed to use these facilities, such as the brothels. It is clear to me that any remotely racist policy would not allow 'lower races' to have 'higher race' women and share them with men of 'higher races'.

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/camps/gusen/gu10101x.htm

"KZ Gusen Brothel
In June 1941, when Himmler visited the KZ Mauthausen and the KZ Gusen camp he gave order to establish a brothel for certain groups of privileged inmates inside both concentration camps. So, the KZ Gusen brothel building that still exists as a private house today went into operation with 8 to 10 German prostitutes from KZ Ravensbrueck in autumn 1942.
In fact this brothel was limited to privileged German, Austrian, Polish or Spanish inmate-officials (Kapos) and several privileged inmates of the armament-prodction commands."

I am not sure of the source of this assertion though. Do you know if it comes from Nazi testimony?

 

[MaGZ]

I'll point out the ones that are the hardest for me to refute to my Jewish Holocaust denying 'friends' (I'm Jewish, Israeli, and some of my family died in the Holocaust, BTW)...

In the meantime, can you try to refute all of them?

Tell us more about your Jewish Holocaust denying 'friends'.

Are these friends who are Jewish and deny the Holocaust or are they friends who deny a Jewish Holocaust?

 

[Resolver]

Let's start small in regards to Cole's questions:

What are the best explainations to Qs:

Auschwitz: 44, 45 (drains where prisoners could dump zyklon)

Dachau: 19, 20, (drains, water pipes. perhaps this particular room wasn't a gas chamber?)

Majdanek : 27,28,33,34 (doors opening inwards, no locks, backwards peephole mounting)

Sttuthof: 39 (drains), 43 (showing rooms that are perhaps not widely believed to be homicidal)

There are other questions about the Auschwitz gas chambers being in plain site whereas Auschwitz curator says Krema 1 was moved because of this reason, and questions about the holes in the roofs and why the Nazi's didn't blow up certain chambers, etc.

I just chose the above listed questions, though, because they deal less with what might have been going on in Nazi's heads and more with the usability of these rooms as homicidal in regards to e.g. the drains, the windows, etc.

In regards to the drains, windows, etc:

I'd think each 'batch' of Jews, in the commotion in the room, would probably not notice or think to find and throw some pellets down a drain that curators that worked in the museums for years sometimes did not notice, especially if they didn't know exactly what to expect.

 

[Resolver]

..