Mad Dogs and Polish Murders

Majdanek=Nottingham Journal - Wednesday 30 August 1944
Nottingham Journal
 – Wednesday 30 August 1944

It was worse than we thought. The Nazis had specially trained dogs to rip apart men women and children. The bodies fed into the crematorium produced the electricity to murder more people and the waterworks were designed to drown people. I’m surmising that the gas used was the slow release Zyklon B.

Text reads:

Murders in Poland
Discovery of Special Nazi Factory Majdanek (Poland). Tuesday••I
I have seen today a concentration camp here covering an area of 15 miles, which resembles a huge factory, with chimneys, shops, roads, electricity, waterworks and barracks,’’ says the Exchange Telegraph Co. correspondent.
“It was factory—a factory of death, its shops were gas chambers, the chimneys belonged to the crematorium where corpses were burned, and the power was used for murdering by electricity and the water for drowning.
“Along the roads men, women and children were driven and beaten to death, while 200 dogs were trsined to participate In mass murder by tearing the victims to pieces.

 

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Mad Dogs and Polish Murders

      1. Yes, I have read an Eye for an Eye several years ago (written by John Sack I recall). Gruesome Harvest I have not read but looked at the synopsis on Amazon for it. Official history is propaganda, so we have to look to other sources.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I think the remarkable thing about Gruesome Harvest was it was written so soon after the war and that the author could see through much of the propaganda of the time and try to draw people’s attention to the crimes being committed.

        Like

  1. Still using newspaper articles, I see. Nice to see you graduating to books…..even if the books look pretty shady.

    Like

    1. Yes, it appears that yesterday’s fish n chip paper is today’s inconvenient news. As for the books yes, I must admit that Auschwitz by Laurence Rees was pretty shady and I don’t hold out much hope for Five Chimneys either.

      Like

      1. “Yes, it appears that yesterday’s fish n chip paper is today’s inconvenient news.”

        I just find it amusing that you believe so whole-heartedly that these newspaper articles actually prove anything.

        “As for the books yes, I must admit that Auschwitz by Laurence Rees was pretty shady and I don’t hold out much hope for Five Chimneys either.”

        No, I was talking about the books like “Gruesome Harvest,” not actual history.

        I still think you would benefit from Skeptics. Why not join us? Are you concerned that the whole “newspaper thing” wouldn’t hold up under scrutiny?

        Like

      2. Haha that’s half the point, the newspaper stories are ridiculous but became what people believe. No offence but I don’t believe you are really skeptics as correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t skeptisim meant to question everything, even the official versions of events?

        Like

      3. “Haha that’s half the point, the newspaper stories are ridiculous but became what people believe.”

        If you don’t know anything about it how can you make that comment? What is that you think people “believe?”

        “No offence but I don’t believe you are really skeptics as correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t skeptisim meant to question everything, even the official versions of events?”

        Skepticism means many things. However, gaining knowledge is an important part of being a Skeptic. I’ve spent years on this, others have spent much longer. I’ve studied Holocaust denial, it’s roots, it’s meanings and memes. Someone once told me something that I will never forget, he said that Holocaust denial only attacks the symbols of the Holocaust, the chimneys, Anne Frank’s Diary, the gas chambers. It can’t touch the underlying foundation.

        You remind me of many deniers I meet on-line. You only have the thinnest patina, the faintest brushing of the knowledge of what happened and why it happened. You use newspaper articles the way others use memes. I admit you have a surprising ability to dig up old, musty newspaper articles.

        But, that’s the point. These obscure articles do not flesh out what we know, they only show us what people thought happened. I noticed many of your articles date from 1945 and 1946. While fascinating to read, they predate the gathering of documents, site investigations, the questioning of witnesses, victims, perpetrators, etc.

        For some reason you think these articles set up this “conspiracy” (though I don’t really understand why). These are glimpses that predate any real investigations so there are flaws. These are understandable. But, newspaper articles aren’t necessarily historical documents, they only provide us glimpses. To truly understand the how and the why requires a healthy mixture of what I described above.

        Like

      4. “Skepticism means many things. However, gaining knowledge is an important part of being a Skeptic. I’ve spent years on this, others have spent much longer. I’ve studied Holocaust denial, it’s roots, it’s meanings and memes. Someone once told me something that I will never forget, he said that Holocaust denial only attacks the symbols of the Holocaust, the chimneys, Anne Frank’s Diary, the gas chambers. It can’t touch the underlying foundation.”
        I’m sorry but “skeptisicism means many things” is a bit of a cop out, here is just a quick copy +paste from wikipedia which I know is an unreliabable source but I would veer towards this form of skeptisiscm .
        “A scientific (or empirical) skeptic is one who questions beliefs on the basis of scientific understanding. Most scientists, being scientific skeptics, test the reliability of certain kinds of claims by subjecting them to a systematic investigation using some type of the scientific method.[16] As a result, a number of claims are considered “pseudoscience” if they are found to improperly apply or ignore the fundamental aspects of the scientific method. Scientific skepticism may discard beliefs pertaining to purported phenomena not subject to reliable observation and thus not systematic or testable empirically.”
        Also
        Someone once told me something that I will never forget, he said that Holocaust denial only attacks the symbols of the Holocaust, the chimneys, Anne Frank’s Diary, the gas chambers. It can’t touch the underlying foundation.”
        These aren’t just symbols of the holocaust, these are the lifeblood of the holocaust story. Please please please provide proof that 700 people could be gassed using a type of slow release Hydrocyanic acid encompassed in gypsum formula in 20 minutes then for slave labourers to dispose of the bodies in less than a day?

        Like

      5. “I’m sorry but “skeptisicism means many things” is a bit of a cop out, here is just a quick copy +paste from wikipedia which I know is an unreliabable source but I would veer towards this form of skeptisiscm .
        “A scientific (or empirical) skeptic is one who questions beliefs on the basis of scientific understanding. Most scientists, being scientific skeptics, test the reliability of certain kinds of claims by subjecting them to a systematic investigation using some type of the scientific method.[16] As a result, a number of claims are considered “pseudoscience” if they are found to improperly apply or ignore the fundamental aspects of the scientific method. Scientific skepticism may discard beliefs pertaining to purported phenomena not subject to reliable observation and thus not systematic or testable empirically.”

        Is that word salad supposed to mean something to me?
        So, should I be skeptical that WW II happened? Or, WW I? The Civil War?

        Look, as I’ve said, I’ve studied denial along with real history. I also studied the time period and what was going on while this extermination was on-going. I understand the conditions in Poland and the USSR at that time, do you?

        “Also
        Someone once told me something that I will never forget, he said that Holocaust denial only attacks the symbols of the Holocaust, the chimneys, Anne Frank’s Diary, the gas chambers. It can’t touch the underlying foundation.”

        “These aren’t just symbols of the holocaust, these are the lifeblood of the holocaust story. ”

        😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
        Uh, no. Probably around 1/2 of the dead never saw the inside of a gas chamber and only about 1/6th of the Jewish victims died in Birkenau. The Action Reinhard Camps and Chelmno didn’t have crematorium.
        See, this is where your ignorance trips you up.

        “Please please please provide proof that 700 people could be gassed using a type of slow release Hydrocyanic acid encompassed in gypsum formula in 20 minutes then for slave labourers to dispose of the bodies in less than a day?”

        Are you saying ZB wasn’t deadly? Or that gas chambers aren’t dangerous? Or that you couldn’t cremate 700 bodies in a day?

        Release rates of ZB vary according to temperature but the rooms heated quickly because they were enclosed and filled to capacity. By enclosing that many people in the room you can also add oxygen displacement as a risk factor. So, you have cyanide and rapidly lowering amounts of oxygen in a room. The victims start to panic, rushing to the doors and trampling one another, adding yet another risk factor.

        Here are some papers:
        https://web.archive.org/web/20150306062109/http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/

        https://web.archive.org/web/20150118053324/http://www.holocaust-history.org:80/auschwitz/chemistry/blue/

        https://web.archive.org/web/20150123073900/http://www.holocaust-history.org:80/auschwitz/chemistry/not-the-science/

        While concentrations as low as 150 PPM will kill, the SS exposed the victims to much higher doses with no possibility of medical assistance.

        So, read the papers, I’m not a chemist. I trust those that are.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s