Yuku free message boards

Just like I expected, Jonni Hannover Hargis sings the same old song in his post of Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:08 pm:

Quote:

---

This would be the same 'Roberto' that has been thoroughly sliced & diced at this forum.

His loopy positions and tactics are merely a case of the irrational arguing the impossible. See more on 'Roberto' here:

'R. Muehlenkamp: 'gas chambers' were hosed down, so no cyanide'
http://forum.codoh.info/viewtopic.php?t=3706

'Roberto Muehlenkamp debunked on 3.5kg of coke cremations'
http://forum.codoh.info/viewtopic.php?t=420

'Roberto Muehlenkamp: no fuel required for Auschwitz ovens'
http://forum.codoh.info/viewtopic.php?t=3703

'Roberto Muehlenkamp shredded on 'gassings' & cyanide'
http://forum.codoh.info/viewtopic.php?t=224'

Also search this forum for 'Muehlenkamp' and 'Cortagravatas' (aka 'Roberto') for more.

-        Hannover

---

Boy, what a predictable clown!

Needless to say, all the slicing and dicing Hargis babbles about has been duly sliced and diced in posts written or referred to on the present thread, which readers are invited and encouraged to check out.

And even at least one fellow Revisionist has not only realized how mendacious Hargis victory dances are, but also shown the decency of openly saying so.

In my post # 9115, I kindly asked Mr. Fab ian E schen ("Sailor") to whine some more about me on the Cesspit.

Believe it or not, the poor fellow was infantile enough to comply and lie a bit as he went along. Here is his post of Mon Jul 09, 2007 5:14 pm on this thread:

Quote:

---

I still dont know what Arad meant with "killing operation" in Treblinka.

Was he talking about gassing with diesel exhaust? In the meantime I checked for his book with our local library. They don't have a copy, but it will be sent from Vacaville within a week.

Roberto is very pissed with me now for posting this on this forum. But the man obviously did not know when he quoted Arad what Arad meant with "killing operations".

Now all hoaxers on that forum are angry with me for asking. Jesus Christ!

---

Of course Fab knows very well himself that Arad is referring to mass killing mainly by gassing with engine exhaust, as described in some detail in his book on hand of eyewitness testimonies.

And Fab knows just as well that the fossilized imbecility he displayed with his silly asking didnt anger anyone, but is taken as a source of contemptful amusement and yet another demonstration of the deplorable contents of a Revisionist mind. The only anger must have been Fab's own at having failed to derail the thread in question into another pointless "diesel" discussion.

However, his fellow true believers seem to take Fabs babbling seriously. In his post of Mon Jul 09, 2007 5:25 pm , Hannover Hargis echoes Sailor as follows:

Quote:

---

They can only be angry with themselves. Afterall, they believe in the impossible and are made to look foolish when they try to defend the undefendable. What a position to be in. What a bunch of schmucks they are.

---

Bold words from someone who never managed to argue any impossibility in the historical record of Nazi homicidal gassings against uncensored opposition. And if opponents of Revisionism are a bunch of schmucks, what is one to call someone who doesnt dare to face those schmucks in open, uncensored debate but prefers to throw manure from the safety of his warm and cozy Fhrerbunker, where he can control the outcome of any discussion by deleting or retaining inconvenient posts and banning inconvenient posters? I leave the answer to our readers.

Next in line is another bigmouthed coward, Mr. Haldan aka "k0nsl" aka Jonathan Andersson. In his post of Mon Jul 09, 2007 7:58 pm, he writes the trash that is transcribed hereafter, with my comments in between:

Quote:

---

The question I ask myself; Sailor, is Roberto is even taking the time to read the material from the author which he quotes?

---

Just come over here and find out, @sshole.

Quote:

---

It is one thing to quote a bunch of gobblygook and it is another to actually read it.

---

Its one thing to call sources inconvenient to ones faith a bunch of gobblygook and quite another to produce evidence and arguments that might refute such sources, the latter being something in which "Revisionist" clowns cut a particularly sorry figure. As I cant reply to Mr. Andersson on the Cesspit, I hope he hasnt completely lost his balls and will show up here at RODOH for a nice discussion about the particular bunch of gobblygook in question. Whoever of our posters has an account on CODOH is hereby requested to forward my invitation to this gentleman.

Last but not least, Hannover takes a look in the mirror and utters the following self-projecting "wisdom", in his post of Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:53 pm:

Quote:

---

That is the robotic behavior of those who claim to believe in the 'holocaust'. They simply spew sentences without thinking about what they are saying. And that is what makes 'holocaust' Revisionism superior in every way.

---

Spew sentences without thinking about what they are saying thats Hannover Hargis and other apostles of the Revisionist faith in a nutshell. Hannovers faith doesnt seem to extend to the proclaimed superiority of Revisionism however, judging by how open debate scares him shitless.

Next amusing utterance:

Quote:

---

Revisionists take what is given about the storyline and demolish it with science, rational thought, and logic.

---

Science, rational thought and logic are three things that Hannover wouldnt recognize even if they bit him in his fat behind. Spewing sentences without thinking about what they are saying, like I wrote before.

The ensuing exercise in self-projection:

Quote:

---

Judeo-supremacists rely on a desire to dominate, faith, superstition, religion, and a cult-like obedience to stories which are laughable and utterly impossible.

---

also describes the essence of Hargis conspiracist paranoia, which could be expressed in the following Strmer cartoon:



Poor Jonni.

In his post of Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:08 pm, my old friend Haldan, aka "k0nsl" aka Jonathan Andersson, committed the imprudence of mentioning my name.

While I usually let the Cesspit lunatics spout their boring nonsense as they please, when they mention me in their babblings I take a closer look at the same, and thats what Im going to do now regarding Mr. Anderssons post.

Andersson starts out as follows:

Quote:

---

Hannover wrote:
This is absolutely embarrassing.
from:
http://www.jewishgen.org/ForgottenCamps/Camps/TreblinkaEng.html

This is supposed to be a mass grave that held 900,000 Jews at Treblinka.

It sure is. I tried to ask Nick Terry, Roberto and I believe even Andrew E. Mathis about this strange "mass grave". I said, all I see is wooden planks and some form of sheet material - "where are the bodies, where are the human remains and how could so many corpses fit in such a small grave?" No reasonable response from neither of those self-proclaimed Holocaust Experts. None.

---

I dont remember where on the RODOH forum Andersson asked those silly questions, and it would be too much of an effort to roam through old threads trying to find the one he may have been referring to, if existing. (Dishonest Revisionist that he is, Andersson of course doesnt give his readers the opportunity to check his claims by providing a link or a thread title. Not that anybody on the Cesspit, where the name RODOH cannot even be spelled out, would be likely to check, of course.) But if the bugger asked such questions, the likely answer was that

a) the photograph shows but one small section of one out of several mass graves in which the bodies at Treblinka were buried, and allows for no estimate about the size of the grave it shows let alone that of any other grave; and

b) if the bodies are mostly not visible (there are arguably three at the top that can be made out), this is because they are covered by wooden planks and what looks like tarpaulin sheets, which may have been related to an effort on the part of the camp staff to stretch the capacity of the mass graves by top down burning (see also the comment on this site).

If this answer was not reasonable enough for Mr. Andersson, thats because his criterion of reasonability is a rather peculiar one that he shares with most if not all fellow Revisionists: whatever fits his preconceived notions is necessarily reasonable, and what does not fit those notions can never be.

After this instructive introduction, Mr. Andersson turns to downright lying when he writes the following:

Quote:

---

I have that discussion saved somewhere and will look it through sometime. Very embarrassing! However, all three of the gentlemen stuck by the insane claim that its a mass grave which held 900,000 Jews.

---

Thats about as thick a straw-man as I have ever seen. Neither Nick, nor Andrew, nor I maintain that the number of victims of Treblinka was necessarily as high as 900,000 (the documentary evidence rather points to an order of magnitude of 750,000 to 800,000, and the very site that Andersson's brother-in-spirit Jonni "Hannover" Hargis started out making a fuss about states that "Jews from the Polish Districts of Warsaw, Radom, Bialystok and Lublin as well as others from Theresienstadt concentration camp, Macedonia and the Reich comprised he nearly 750,000 people who would die in the gas chambers of Treblinka between July 1942 and April 1943"), and neither of us has claimed that the bodies of the victims, insofar as they were not incinerated right after the killing during the later stages of Treblinkas operation, were buried in one single mass grave. My take on the number, size and capacity of the mass graves at Treblinka is explained in my articles Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure and Videos, a must see!, among others.

The next straw-man dished up by Andersson is just as mendacious:

Quote:

---

A mass grave of wooden planks and sheets spread here and there is evidence enough for those gentlemen that the Germans did away with 900,000 Jews - yet can not explain why there are no human remains.

---

Actually the bigmouth would have a hard time finding a statement where either Nick, Andrew or I ever invoked this photograph, which like all photographs can but illustrate a small fraction of the events in question and constitutes no more than one out of many elements of evidence, as evidence enough for the mass murder committed at Treblinka. I actually dont remember having addressed that photograph except in the context of Revisionist ramblings about it, like in my RODOH posts # 8582 and # 8588. Evidence to the mass killings at Treblinka consists of the depositions of numerous eyewitnesses, including and especially former members of the SS staff testifying or on trial for their crimes before West German courts, of documentary evidence that allows for reconstructing the deportations to Treblinka and shows the place to have been a final destination for deportees taken there, a place where people were taken in order to be destroyed and a place from which an unbearable stench of corpses emanated and befouled the air, of the physical evidence discussed in my above-mentioned articles and of demographic evidence showing that none but a few dozen escapees from among the hundreds of thousands of deportees were ever seen or heard of again after entering Treblinka. As to the claimed absence of human remains, Andersson should start doing something about his ignorance by reading this article of mine, which is based on sources quoted by his Revisionist guru Carlo Mattogno.

The continuation of Anderssons straw-man:

Quote:

---

Actually, I find it all a bit hilarious; a tiny picture, some wooden planks and a bit of yarn here and there, and you've got a "mass grave" of Jews.

---

is just plain infantile and yet another indication that he cannot understand that context is the name of the game: the picture in question is only known to show a part of a Treblinka mass grave because it is part of an album of photos taken by Treblinkas second-in-command Kurt Franz, who in turn described the mass killing and body disposal procedure at Treblinka at his trial before a West German court (in which he was sentenced to lifetime imprisonment), and whose description is corroborated by those of other eyewitnesses and further evidence independent of him. Without this context, the photograph in question would be completely meaningless, and even within that context it is just one out of many exhibits, which provides no meaningful information except in connection with other exhibits.

Then Andersson opens his mouth real wide:

Quote:

---

In the meantime, there are a endless list of real mass graves where the victims are German, Polish, Latvian and other Europeans, everywhere - easily identified as such!

---

I would love to see the fellow trying to show but a few examples out of the endless list he babbles about. As I pointed out in this article, only a fraction of the mass graves containing victims of Stalins purges or penal camps, of crimes committed by Soviet soldiers against German civilians in 1944/45 or of postwar expulsion atrocities against ethnic Germans in Poland, Czechoslovakia and other countries, have so far been found. On the other hand, the former occupied territories of the Soviet Union are full of Nazi-made mass graves investigated by Soviet state commissions, whose findings are largely corroborated by evidence independent of the Soviets, as in the examples mentioned in Nicks article Mass Graves in the Polesie and in my article Neither the Soviets nor the Poles have found any mass graves with even only a few thousand bodies . Hundreds of such mass graves have lately been located again in the course of the Yahad in Unum project.

Finally comes the icing on the cake of Anderssonian manure:

Quote:

---

But here we are looking at a microscopical picture of a small hole with some wooden planks in it, and that is evidence of murder by the Germans, of 900,000 thousand Jews - almost a million people.

---

No, Mr. Andersson. Its just a photo showing a small fraction of one of the several mass graves in which, as becomes apparent from a multitude of eyewitness, documentary, physical and demographic evidence, hundreds of thousands of people murdered at Treblinka were buried before they were disinterred and incinerated in order to reduce the amount of incriminating evidence. Its but one of the many pieces that make up the puzzle of evidence to the Treblinka mass killings nothing more, and nothing less.

Andersson ends his sermon as follows:

Quote:

---

Picture that.

Impossible.

---

Yeah, just picture the inane trash that folks like Andersson are capable of uttering in all seriousness. I would consider it impossible that such nuts as Andersson are in existence, were it not for the clear evidence that they actually do exist.

Our many-named troll from New Zealand, now posting under the handle of "Sophie", mouthed off about me as "jnovitz" on the CODOH Cesspit, in his post of Sat Sep 08, 2007 2:59 pm hereafter quoted:

Quote:

---

You will find that the Germans are supposed to have erected a another wall in front of the existing wall for their firing squad (and a drawing to that effect is in the War Refugees Board report). And that the memorial is a claimed reconstruction.

However your point carries weight at Sachsenhausen where the so called execution trench is totally unbullet scarred and can be seen by photographs to have been unaltered since June 1945.

Nonetheless, according to one of the world's leading ballistic and body decomposition experts, Professor Roberto Muhlenkampf (and in this regard I would recommend his paper "Decomposing Jewish Bodies as Incendiary Devices: A solution to the Peak Oil crisis") this is due to two factors.

1. The SS executioneers were excellent shots and never once missed.
2. The calibre and penetration of the munition used was such that despite firing from short range all bullets remained lodged in soft tissue and never emerged to scar the wooden wall behind.

Such as the power and elegance of forensic science in the hands of a consumate professional.

His paper on the "The boxing day Tsunami and why it shows that wells in close proximity to 800 000 rotting bodies and enormous quantities of soluble lime will remain uncontaiminated" is another masterpiece of erudite wit and learning

---

My comments to this gibberish are the following:

jnovitz aka Sophie aka

Quote:

---

Nonetheless, according to one of the world's leading ballistic and body decomposition experts, Professor Roberto Muhlenkampf (and in this regard I would recommend his paper "Decomposing Jewish Bodies as Incendiary Devices: A solution to the Peak Oil crisis") this is due to two factors.

---

First of all, the poor fellow should learn to spell my name right. What is his name, by the way? Is he still too chicken-@#%$ to reveal it?

Second, what the mendacious straw-man builder is referring to is this section of my article Carlo Mattogno on Belzec Archaeological Research, where of course decomposing human bodies are not presented as "incendiary devices". What I argue is that dehydration due to decomposition and/or flammable substances that come into being during the decomposition process, depending on the state of decomposition, made it easier to ignite the dead bodies removed from the graves at Belzec and Treblinka extermination camps, leading to less additional fuel being required to burn those corpses than was necessary to burn "fresh" corpses.

Our self-appointed genius has on several occasions vainly tried to refute this argument on the present forum, but he is welcome to try again.

"jnovitz" aka "Sophie" aka

Quote:

---

1. The SS executioneers were excellent shots and never once missed.
2. The calibre and penetration of the munition used was such that despite firing from short range all bullets remained lodged in soft tissue and never emerged to scar the wooden wall behind.

---

In a previous discussion on this forum, the bigmouth who wrote the above lines claimed that there are no bullet marks in a bullet-catcher on exhibition at a former execution site of Sachsenhausen concentration camp, where inmates or prisoners of war were killed by shooting. My argument was that, accuracy of the fellows claim provided and assuming that the bullet-catcher presently shown to visitors of the memorial site is the one that was in place when the camp was in operation, this could be due to the shooting being done in such a way that the muzzle of a small-caliber weapon was held against the victims neck, the bullet thus either remaining in the tissue (it would go through the bone matter of the neck before getting there) or no longer having enough force to make a dent in the bullet catcher when it got there. Never did I claim that the SS executioners were "excellent shots", but of course it is impossible to miss when you hold the guns muzzle against the victims neck.

"jnovitz" aka "Sophie" aka

Quote:

---

His paper on the "The boxing day Tsunami and why it shows that wells in close proximity to 800 000 rotting bodies and enormous quantities of soluble lime will remain uncontaiminated" is another masterpiece of erudite wit and learning.

---

Here the poor creature is referring to this commentary of clip 2 of the "One Third of the Holocaust" video, which I co-authored with Andrew Mathis and Sergey Romanov. Readers of this commentary will find that what is argued therein is that there were several factors, including the use of quicklime, which may have reduced the possibility or severity of water contamination by the buried corpses in the Treblinka "death camp" sector, and that on the other hand water contamination wouldnt mean all inmates of that sector simply dropping dead upon ingesting water, but rather lead to the kind of health problems due to contaminated drinking water that are currently witnessed in countries like India.

If "Sophie" thinks he can show these arguments to be wrong, he is welcome to fire away.

And if "Sophie" should ever again mention my name or in any way refer to me on the Cesspit, I trust he will also have the courage to finally tell me who he is and where I may find him.

PS

Unlike "Sophie", Im not a scumbag who talks about people behind their backs, so on this thread I called the fellows attention to the present post.

In his post of Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:07 pm, a certain Atigun wrote the following:

Quote:

---

From what I've seen, the Believers are dilettantes who are long on emotionalism and obfuscation and very short on facts and logic. I post very little on this forum because I, too, am at best a dilettante. I am very much aware that the level of expertise at CODOH is out of my league. I have neither the time nor the inclination to make an in depth study of the history of the so-called holocaust. I do, however, appreciate and am grateful for the efforts of others to dispel the myth. If I were a Believer, though, I too would be scrambling to make an exit from this forum by whatever means necessary, preferably by being banned so that I would have an excuse not to return and could furthermore claim 'censorship'. For a Believer, staying away from the CODOH forum is merely sensible. Nobody likes to be humiliated.

---

Either the poor soul hasn't realized that what gets people banned on the Cesspit are posts that get the level of expertise he thinks so much of into argumentative trouble, or then hes just another lying scumbag.

But he has unwillingly provided an explanation why so few of his experts (including, of course, grand dragon Jonnie Hannover Hargis himself) engage in debate outside the online Fhrerbunker:

Quote:

---

Nobody likes to be humiliated.

---

In his post Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:25 am, my old friend Jonathan Andersson (posting as Haldan) thinks he is being smart:

Quote:

---

Irving: 'train track that ends means something happened'

I have heard this same absurd reasoning from the likes of Nick Terry, Roberto Muehlenkamp and other 'holocaust' enforcers without any valid or even logic explanation.

Many examples spring to my mind. One of personal experience, as a matter of coincidence; I went to Poland not long ago, a one way ticket, thus leaving only the trace of myself flying there. This must mean, in the mind of those who are forced by ideology and agenda to uphold the incredible lie of the 'holocaust', that all those who visit Poland by booking a one-way ticket to Poland are divided into two groups - healthy and those who are not healthy and capable of doing manual labor - then those who are not capable of working are killed in some illogical manner.

I am of course a survivor.

---

Regarding the first paragraph ("I have heard ..."): I don't remember having made an argument in the sense of 'train track that ends means something happened', though I consider it significant that all known train time tables, transport records and other documents regarding transports to Treblinka point to no destination beyond Treblinka.

Regarding the second paragraph ("Many examples ..."): what this simple-minded @sshole obviously fails to take into consideration is that the transportation of about 750,000 people beyond Treblinka by administrative entities of the German occupiers would have left behind not only a paper trail at least as big as that by which transports to Treblinka can be and have been reconstructed (like there is documentation about much smaller transports of German and Austrian Jews to Minsk and Riga in the occupied Soviet territories in 1941/42), but also documentation about what was done with the deportees at their supposed places of destination in the Russian East (like there is documentation about what happened to the much fewer deportees to the ghettoes of Minsk and Riga), hundreds of eyewitnesses from among people on the German side involved in these transportations and subsequent resettlements, and thousands upon thousands of eyewitnesses from among the surviving deportees themselves, not to mention Soviet and Polish records about their later repatriation to their places of origin. And that historical research and criminal investigation have in over sixty years found much evidence to the mass killing at Treblinka extermination camp, but no evidence to any but a few dozen survivors of that place.

Some posts on the Cesspit are just hilarious, like when "Mr. Nobody", in his post of Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:12 pm, brings the following gem:

Quote:

---

Wahrheit wrote:
Bennahmias

Quote:
Once the gas chamber had been cleared, it must be hosed free of all traces of blood and excrement-but mainly blood-and then it must be whitewashed with a quickdrying paint. This step is crucial and it is done each time the gas chamber is emptied, for the dying have scratched and gouged the walls in their death throes. The walls are embedded with blood and bits of flesh, and none of the next transport must suspect that he is walking into anything other than a shower. This takes two or three hours.
p.46, Holocaust Odyssey of Daniel Bennahmias, Sonderkommando

What camp was this alleged to have occurred at?
so a minimum of 2 to 3 hours between gassings......
Isn't this a major plot hole?
In a 24 hour day you are now only seeing a maximum of between 8 & 12 gassings, what is the order of reduction for gassing in this camp now, by half or two thirds?

---

Someone tell the fellow that one or two gassing cycles per day were the norm in each of Birkenau crematoria I(II) and II(III) (the gassing itself didn't last very long, but removing the bodies from the gas chambers, cutting their hair, pulling out their gold teeth, moving them up to the incineration floor and incinerating them there took a lot of time), and that this is perfectly compatible with the historical record of the number of people gassed at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

But when it comes to imbecility, nothing beats Jonni "Hannover" Hargis' good old claim that

Quote:

---

The use of real science, logic, and rational thought demolish the impossible 'holocaust' lies.

---

as again repeated in his post of Sun Oct 28, 2007 12:15 am.

In his post of Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:18 pm, the bigmouthed newcomer "Wahrheit", apparently eager to gain his fellow true believers applause, has undertaken to respond to my posts # 9520 and # 9526 on this thread.

What is more, he has done so with a link to this thread, which means that Cesspit posters and readers can now look through the telescope and especially browse through the instructive contents of the RODOH forums "Memory Hole".

Lets hope that Jonni "Hannover" Hargis doesnt get cold feet and deletes the link to RODOH from "Wahrheit"s post.

Now I'll look at that the fellow has got to offer.

W.

Quote:

---

It's recently been drawn to my attention that witless believer Roberto Muehlenkamp has attempted a refutation of my "Prussian Blues Just Won't Wash" on another forum. http://p102.ezboard.com/frodohforumfrm18.showMessageRange?topicID=161.topic&start=51&stop=55

---

"Witless believer" the poor self-important and self-projecting soul must be pissed as hell.

W.

Quote:

---

What follows is a response to those points.

---

To which I will respond point by point, and as "Wahrheit" and his fellow true believers will be reading this thread, my response will also include questions and requests for substantiation of claims made that I expect "Wahrheit" to respond to.

W.

Quote:

---

Roberto wrote:
Quote:
In this time aspect, homicidal gassings, which lasted half an hour at most before the gas was ventilated out, differed from fumigations, be it in the Auschwitz-Birkenau fumigation chambers or in the rooms mentioned by Dr. Bachmann, where the HCN can be assumed to have been in contact with the walls for hours.

Cyanide can also be assumed to have remains in contact with the gas-chamber walls for hours.

---

Why so, and how much cyanide?

W.

Quote:

---

Not to mention that the walls also had a much higher "sponge factor" than the delousing chamber's walls, and would much more readily absorb the cyanide through it's porpous materials.

---

Please show evidence to how the homicidal gas chamber walls differed from the delousing chambers walls, and quantify the alleged higher absorption capacity resulting from this supposed difference.

W.

Quote:

---

Cyanide would easily cling to the moist walls that were to be found inside morgue's cellar.

---

Can you demonstrate that this would be so, considering the expectable levels of moisture inside the morgue?

Besides, the problem is whether cyanide would it cling to the moist walls in sufficient quantities to provide for a concentration of CN- ions on the moist walls sufficiently high to allow for the formation of Prussian Blue.

W.

Quote:

---

As Degesch itself stated in it's "Zyklon for pest control" pamphlet:

Quote:
"Hydrocyanic acid dissolves very readily in water. Compared with liquid hydrocyanic acid, the gas is chemically very indifferent, and even in highly concentrated form under prolonged exposure it does not show a tendency to react with other substances."
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/l/leuchter-fred/ihr-v12n4-footnotes.html

---

If I understand this quote correctly, it means that gaseous hydrocyanic acid has to turn into liquid hydrocyanic acid before any reaction that might lead to the formation of Prussian Blue can occur. So what would matter here is how fast, and in what quantities, gaseous hydrocyanic acid could turn into liquid hydrocyanic acid within the time during which a high amount of gas was available for this purpose, i.e. the time of between the introduction of the gas in the chamber and (at the latest) the end of the ventilation process.

W.

Quote:

---

And if the walls were only washed AFTER the bodies had been removed, as Tauber and Bennahmias suggest, then that gives at least 9 hours for the cyanide to form into the walls prior to the washings, which would have done little to remove such residues as we shall see below.

---

What matters is not so much when the walls were washed but the level of humidity inside the chamber, which would affect the walls independently of whether they were washed directly. A high level of humidity inside the chamber would always be present. Before each gassing the gas chambers floors and walls would be moist from the washing following the previous gassing, and after a gassing the bodies would be cleaned by hosing them with water, as described by Nyiszli, before they were pried apart. According to other testimonies I have read, water was also shed on the floor to facilitate the dragging of the bodies in the chamber. In other words, during periods of major gassing operations the homicidal gas chambers would constantly have a level of moisture that I expect to have been much higher than that of basements or churches that are not in contact with water so often and so intensively.

W.

Quote:

---

Roberto wrote:
Quote:
Besides their increased humidity due to the humid environment caused by the hosing of floors and piles of bodies, the walls would also to some extent have been sprayed with water during the latter, as "Wahrheit" himself mentions elsewhere in his text.

But what's crucial is how much of the cyanide residues were directly hosed off the walls and/or ceiling.

---

No, what is crucial is what concentrations of cyanide residues could form on the moist walls while high amounts of gas were available inside the gas chamber, which was for a relatively short period of time.

W.

Quote:

---

As I will explain below, the simple addition of water into the room (and the supposed humidity caused from it) is insignificant.

---

As the formation of Prussian Blue is dependent on a high concentration of CN- ions, any factors reducing that concentration such as, in this case, the shortness of the time during which high amounts of gas were inside the chamber and the increased humidity as compared to a level favoring formation of Prussian Blue in much longer fumigation operations is significant. But I will wait for my opponents "explanation".

W.

Quote:

---

Since none of the sources point to a total hosing of the gas chamber walls, we believe it is safe to assume significant amounts of the walls remained unsprayed, and therefore, laden with cyanide content.

---

Assuming there was no total hosing of the gas chamber walls, the question would still be what amounts of cyanide clung to the walls and whether these would provide for sufficiently high concentrations of CN- ions, considering the dilution potential of the high ambient humidity, to allow for the formation of Prussian Blue. The question here is: how much? For the formation of Prussian Blue requires a lot.

W.

Quote:

---

Roberto wrote:
Quote:
The problem is reaching that state, and on the way there too little time and too much humidity to reach equilibrium concentration, as well as another factor mentioned by Green the influence of high amounts of CO2 exhaled by the victims on the ambient pH, to which Prussian Blue formation is very sensitive are likely to have been major hindrances that kept Prussian Blue from forming in the Birkenau gas chambers.

There is a question of just how much CO2 would be released by the alleged victims in the timeframe of several minutes that we are looking at. I believe the CO2 issue needs further study, as both I think Green himself points out, and as can be seen by the several observations and notes on the issue by Rudolf.

Rudolf's discussion of the CO2 issue can be seen on p.53 of his and Mattogno's "Auschwitz Lies" http://vho.org/dl/ENG/al.pdf

---

Compare with the discussion on pages 38 ff and 52 ff of Dr. Greens expert report.

W.

Quote:

---

Roberto wrote:
Quote:
In the latter, the Prussian Blue reaction had half an hour at most to take place before the gas was ventilated out, followed by the hosing of the bodies that would add to the already high humidity from previous washings.

As Rudolf has demonstrated, the cyanide was likely to remain in the room for much longer than just 30 minutes, even with ventilation taking place;

---

If Rudolf is right about this, the question is still: how much? See above.

W.

Quote:

---

yet, instead of turning this into a cut-and-paste argument of the two experts of each respective side, we will take a different path.

As I noted in my original post, Bennahmias concured with other inmates that the gas chamber was split, on a 1/3--2/3rds basis. While I have been unable to find which section had the ventilation capacity, I think it's safe to assume that the larger section did.

---

Why not both?

In his article Chemistry is not the Science, Dr. Green points out the logical assumptions related to this splitting not absence of ventilation in one part, but reduction of ventilation times in the part that was used in each case:

Quote:

---

It should also be pointed out that, halfway through their period of use, the size of these gas chambers was cut in half: [43]

Leichenkeller I proved in the end to be too large for a gas chamber. At the end of 1943, in order to "regularize" the operation of crematoria II and III, the camp administration divided their gas chambers in two, allowing no more than 100 sq m for the killing of 1,000 new arrivals (unfit for work) in 24 hours.

If one makes the logical assumption that the intake and exhaust vents were also blocked off in the unused portion of the gas chambers, this modification doubled the ventilation rate of the remaining portion. However, we will continue to use the figures from 1943; if a gassing from 1944 is referenced, ventilation times would be cut in half.

---

W.

Quote:

---

I would be interested in any evidence that Muehlenkamp or anyone else could offer here. I could find nothing in the Holocaust literature on it.

---

"Wahrheit"s assumptions seem to be based on an incorrect understanding of how the ventilation worked. Dr. Greens above considerations suggest that the ventilation system consisted of intake and exhaust vents throughout the walls of the gas chamber, meaning that if these vents were blocked in the unused part of the chamber, the ventilation rate in the used part would increase accordingly.

W.

Quote:

---

Anyway, in the smaller portion of Krema II, Bennahmias describes that smaller transports were exterminated there in the usual fashion, but that the clean-up process did not begin for many days later.

---

A precise quote would be appreciated, as it seems highly unlikely that dead bodies were allowed to lie in a gas chamber for days after the gassing.

W.

Quote:

---

With no ventilation instruments,

---

A mistaken assumption, see above.

W.

Quote:

---

and no wall-washings, with more time than the delousing walls had to formate, how can Muehlenkamp still explain the missing Prussian Blue stains on at least 1/3 of the Krema II gas chamber?

---

Even if, as seems unlikely, smaller transports were left lying in the chamber for days after a gassing (what the heck for?), the likeliness of Prussian Blue formation would still depend on the amount of moisture resulting from prior gassings and the victims themselves plus the CO2 exhaled by those victims vs. the amount of gas neither absorbed by the victims nor ventilated out (I hope for W. he doesnt want to tell us that the gas was also left inside the chamber for days on end) and the frequency with which this procedure was adopted (we dont know how many fumigation gassings were required to produce the blue staining in parts of the fumigation chambers). I will address this again when "Wahrheit" has provided a comprehensive quote from Bennahmias account supporting his claim about that witnesss statements.

W.

Quote:

---

Roberto wrote:
Quote:
The second aspect, which Dr. Green considers to have been the more important one, is that due to constant hosing down/washing of the gas chambers the humidity therein was too high for a sufficiently high concentration of CN- ions (necessary for the formation of Prussian Blue, according to Alich et al) to come into being, especially during the relatively short time of a homicidal gassing. It stands to reason that a room which is regularly hosed down or washed, independently of whether the hosing/washing applies to the floor, the dead bodies inside or the walls, will have a much higher degree of humidity than a church or a basement.

Unfortunately for Muehlenkamp, while it may stand to reason for a believer that the alleged sprayings inside the gas chamber would cause a "mugh higher degree of humidity" in the morgue, it does not stand from the evidence.

---

So, will our friend now argue that a regularly hosed-down basement will be less humid than a church or a basement where no such hosing is done?

W.

Quote:

---

In fact, there is also the likelihood that the sprayings may have actually slightly lowered the humidity inside the room, as many modern dishwashers add cold water to it's process in order to loer it's washing chambers humidity.

---

I figure that adding cold water may reduce the humidity of a washing chamber insofar as that humidity is caused by the presence of a lot of hot water, which is hardly surprising. I wonder, however, if our genius can demonstrate that his humid church or basement would become less humid if regularly washed with cold water.

W.

Quote:

---

Unless Muehlenkamp can evidence show otherwise, we will assume here that the water being sprayed into the gas chambers was unheated, as I believe would be the most likely scenario. The temperature of the water entering the gas chamber would be the determining factor in just how much humidity and moisture would be added to the rooms atmosphere.

Hot water causes a much larger amount of water vapor to be added to the air than cold water does. This reality can easily be observed in one's one bathroom in a mini-experiment. Run a shower only using cold water for some time (10-15 minutes), and then take a paper towel and wipe the walls of the bathroom, as well as the shower walls. For the most part, the entire bathroom remains dry, including the shower walls, except the portions were the spouted water actually sprayed. When running a warm-hot shower for the same amount of time, the same examination of the walls and shower will reveal moisture nealy everywhere, and in significant quantities.

---

Of course cold water contributes less to increasing a rooms humidity than cold water, but an experiment more interesting than W.s shower-room suggestion would be to regularly wash a church or basement with cold water (all of it, and not just a corner relatively corresponding to the size of the shower-place in W.s bathroom) and measuring the impact that this has on the ambient humidity.

W.

Quote:

---

So the question becomes, how much humidity/moisture could the cold water the Sonderkommando were spraying really add to the gas chamber? For that, let us scratch the surface a bit on the water vapor/pressure relationship.

Plot of Water Vapor Pressure in Torr versus degrees Celsius

---

Interesting graph. Where does it come from, and what is it based on?

W.

Quote:

---

It is unlikely for the Sonderkommando's water to be anything above 10 deg Celsius. Green and McCarthy have noted that the gas chambers were likely in the range of 15-20 deg, and since the water temperature was almost certainly lower than room temperature, I consider this a reasonable maximum temperature for the water.

---

Where did Green and McCarthy write that the gas chambers were likely in the range of 15-20 degrees centigrade? In Chemistry is not the Science, Dr. Green writes the following (emphasis is mine):

Quote:

---

Irmscher did his studies at temperatures ranging from -18C and 15C. The gas chambers are likely to have been much warmer than the warmest temperature he studied.

---

In Appendix I to Leuchter, Rudolf and the Iron Blues, Dr. Green writes the following (emphasis is mine):

Quote:

---

The temperatures in the gas chambers were most likely between 20 and 40 C, but even if they got down to 10 C, and even if the higher concentrations reported were used, the equilibrium concentration of HCN is on the order of 0.1-0.2 M. In other words, these are the maximum concentrations that could be achieved. More likely, the concentration was limited by kinetics and never reached equilibrium.

---

And Taubers description of a gas chamber following a gassing suggests a temperature like in a sauna:

It was very hot in the gas chamber and so suffocating as to be unbearable.

This means that W. will have to increase his reasonable maximum temperature for the water. One might also expect the temperature difference between the colder water and the hotter ambient temperature to produce steam, which is what I presume accounts for higher moisture when you run a hot shower in a colder bathroom.

W.

Quote:

---

In a room with moderate humidity, 10 deg Celsius water is likely to have a vapor pressure of 1.23 Kilopascals.

---

No idea if thats correct, but Ill accept it from any objective source that W. can provide.

W.

Quote:

---

In real terms, this is an addition of around 1% of a room's atmospheric moisture content.

---

Same as above. It would especially be interesting to learn what amount of water W. considered in his calculations.

W.

Quote:

---

As the gas chambers, underground basements as they were, and packed with humans, were likely to have a very high relative humidity (likely ~95%), the addition of a measley 1% atmospheric moisture content would be insignificant.

---

The addition of a measley 1 % atmospheric moisture content is W.s claim, which he will have to substantiate. Meanwhile, I note that he mentioned a relative humidity that must have been much higher than what can be expected in Dr. Bachmanns churches and basements, none of which ever had sweating human beings packed like sardines into them. In other words, W. has unwittingly provided another reason why Dr. Bachmanns churches and basements are no indication that Prussian Blue need have formed in the homicidal gas chambers of Birkenau.

W.

Quote:

---

Yet in the gas chamber's extremely humid conditions, as noted by me above and also Muehlenkamp in his response, it is a wonder how much water would really be added to the vapor content of the room. Highly humid conditions inhibits the evaporation of water from other sources, much like the body's sweat cannot evaporate in highly humid conditions.

---

W. seems to be concerned with how much humidity the washing after cleanup would have added to the room, whereas my point is the high humidity that would constantly have been present in the homicidal gas chambers during periods of major gassing operations, due to hosing/washing before and after each cleanup (prying the bodies apart and taking them out of the chamber) plus the concentration of human bodies inside them. Filip Mller, as quoted here, noted that the concrete floors in the gas chamber as well as in the changing room were normally damp.

W.

Quote:

---

How would water prevent the cyanide build-up anyway?

---

By keeping a sufficiently high concentration of CN- ions from coming into being. On the one hand, as demonstrated by Dr. Green, the concentration of aqueous HCN that could have formed during the period of a gassing was relatively low. On the other hand, that concentration would (even assuming correctness of W.s claims) have higher humidity to contend with for a sufficiently high concentration of CN- ions than was present in a delousing chamber or in Dr. Bachmanns churches and basements.

W.

Quote:

---

In the laundry of his own postings that Muehlenkamp refers to in the response, Muehlenkamp becomes aware (thanks to a member of CODOH) that US execution gas chambers use ammonia to remove the remaining cyanide residues from it's gas chambers.

---

W. is kindly requested to identify the posting from my laundry that he is referring to.

W.

Quote:

---

If water was so effective, why not simply use that instead?

---

I have no idea why ammonia are used to remove cyanide residues from US execution gas chambers, if they are. But what W. has to demonstrate is that this is done in order to prevent Prussian Blue from forming, and that Prussian Blue would form if it were not done. Good luck!

W.

Quote:

---

So we've seen that the believers desperate attempt to wash those Prussian Blues away has failed once again.

---

No, what we have seen again is a Revisionist true believers failure to demonstrate as is his encumbrance that Prussian Blue must have formed due to homicidal gassings in the gas chambers of Birkenau.

Big words from Mr. "Wahrheit" in his post of Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:34 pm:

Quote:

---

Thank you Hannover and grenadier.

Since Muehlenkamp has posted another response to my work (http://p102.ezboard.com/frodohforumfrm18.showMessageRange?topicID=161.topic&start=51&stop=57), it seems I am not quite finished with this subject, and will get back to it in a few days. A large part of his response merely deals with clarifying some of my points.

---

The fellow doesnt seem inclined to accept my invitation to discuss on RODOH, however.

There goes the hope I expressed at the end of my previous post