Message from @Kwasy
Discord ID: 486910546919161870
Aynat claims that Pressac’s claim that 1000-1500 were gassed at a time contradicts the German numbers. Aynat seems confused here; Rudolf Höss’s number of 3000 is for both gas chambers, and Tauber’s numbers refer to incineration, not gassing (Pressac also says that these numbers are impossible.) Pressac notes that some of Dr. Nyiszli’s figures are very wrong, so it’s reasonable to figure that he’s including Nyiszli’s clear error of 3000 people in one gas chamber here. Aynat also wasn’t reading Bendel's account very well either, since his numbers, like Tauber’s, refer to incineration capacity, not gassing. Pressac’s analysis of these numbers, which are wrong, reveals where his number of 1000-1500 comes from; “1440 for Krematorium II according to a letter of 28th June 1943 signed by Jährling. A purely calculated Figure, the practical “throughput” being closer to 1000.” So Pressac’s numbers aren’t “mere suppositions.” It’s amazing how many mistakes Aynat can make in one short paragraph.
Aynat’s “opinion” that the gas chambers could not be thoroughly ventilated after only 20-30 minutes are clearly wrong in the face of witness testimony. The ventilation system did work. Höss says that “Crematories [II and III] both had underground undressing rooms and underground gas chambers in which the air could be completely ventilated,” and “The door was opened a half an hour after the gas was thrown in and the ventilation system was turned on.” As well, in Auschwitz: A History, Steinbacher writes that for Crematoria II and III, unlike Crematoria IV and V, there was a ventilation system that “sucked out the poison gas.”
It makes sense for the ventilation system to seem like that of a mortuary, and even for it to function best for a mortuary. Aynat claims that ventilation would be highly improbable because of several factors, including the fact that the ventilation system was designed for a morgue rather than a homicidal gas chamber. Pressac agrees with him; here’s what he has to say on the matter:
“Its use as a gas chamber really required the reverse situation, with fresh air coming in near the floor and warm air saturated with hydrocyanic gas being drawn out near the ceiling. But the SS and Prüfer chose to maintain the original “morgue” ventilation system in the gas chamber, hoping that it would be efficient enough. The famous ten gas detectors, ordered through Topf, were used to check this point, and probably also to cheek the gas-tightness of the door sealing. It would appear that by the evening it was established that the ventilation was almost satisfactory, and that 20 to 30 minutes appeared sufficient to bring the HCN concentration down to a reasonable level so that the door could be opened and the future (corpse) “extraction commando” could start its work in reasonable safety. In the author’s opinion, it was still necessary to make some adjustments and modifications before the optimal result was achieved.” (224)
So the SS were aware that the gas chambers could be more optimized for homicidal purposes, but decided it was good enough as is. In the end, they were right, though Pressac thinks they could have done better. Remember that we’re dealing with fallible people here, not robots.
Aynat also makes a mistake in comparing the two hours of ventilation it took before reentering the delousing chambers and the 30 minutes it took before reentering the homicidal gas chambers. There is a completely different level of safety, a different dosage of Zyklon (insects are much harder to gas than humans,) a different intent, etc.
For once, Aynat’s hypothesis is correct. The Germans did, in fact, design Leichenkeller 1 as a mortuary, and “constructed it and used it as for just that purpose.” But the mortuary was then converted into a homicidal gas chamber, and used for that purpose.
Most of Aynat’s early criticisms of Kremas IV and V are logistical, calling out the poor design of the buildings. As stated before, these were fallible humans, not robots. Just because the design was imperfect does not mean that they were not used as homicidal gas chambers. The poor design is a known historical reality, and Pressac addresses it in his book here; https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/pressac/technique-and-operation/pressac0386.shtml. Aynat seems to think he’s providing groundbreaking proof that these weren’t homicidal gas chambers, but in reality everything he’s saying is well known and has been addressed already
Now this is interesting
^
lmao, as if it discredits what he says. Look up Verwoerd then
it discredits what he says because it is a youtube comment
By that logic anything said on Discord is discredited as well
@LaCraig can I get News Reporter to post German news stories in <#356271865876185088>
Because nobody else seems to be doing that, it's just US and British news
It is because a majority of our userbase is in either the US or England
Ok
I think we should make a rule that makes being a Jewish zionist a bannable offense
Do it with muslims in that case.
there's a suggestions chat
@TradChad if this account gets banned soon can I get news reporter on my second account?
Sure
whoever the spy is, he has access to <#486385308951379968>
oh wait everyone has access to <#486385308951379968> but not everyone can talk here
I would but not rn
I would but it's pointless as we will just be agreeing on each other the whole time and nobody's gonna get redpilled in a conversation like this]
now if you were a zionist cuck like usa1932, I would have a conversation about it in the hopes of redpilling that nerd
you wouldn't get very far considering I've already heard all the arguments and know why I disagree with them but you're welcome to try
and again I'm not a Zionist
that's something a Zionist would say
I bet you have a star of David on your wall
I have a star of David badge on my chest
Holy shit we have a whole essay up there
there's two, pebble's is just shorter
<:FeelsLELMan:356316501105442817>
don't mean to derail the convo but i hope Nike's stock crashes and they are forced to retract that reprehensible Kaepernick ad.
```-Should the US government make an effort in some way to allow smaller political parties have more influence over policy rather than only the two main ones decide all decisions?```
theocratic one party state
```-Should State's Rights be more expanded, restricted, or done away with entirely?```
done away with entirely
```-With all of the issues that the US faces, can the two-party constitutional republic system solve them?```
no
```-Would an alternative to capitalism be feasible/better for the US?```
yes, marxist-leninism
```-In your opinion, what form of government/leadership/system would you like to see used in the US and why? If you wouldn't want change, why?```
councilist marxist-leninism centralizing in an autocephalous theocratic system
```-Should the US government make an effort in some way to allow smaller political parties have more influence over policy rather than only the two main ones decide all decisions?```
Two party system has been a constant in this country's history. Party systems give way to other two party systems, that's the trend in the US. Federalists/Democratic-Republicans becomes Whigs/Democrats becomes Republicans/Democrats. I don't see any way to change this, so it's wiser to control any possible negative effects than eliminate the cause.
```-Should State's Rights be more expanded, restricted, or done away with entirely?```
The federal government has supremacy over the states for a reason. We tried giving the states extremely extensive freedom, it failed big time. States were tariffing each other, refusing to give the federal government money, etc. under the Articles of Confederation. The Constitution is the product of a failed government, that's why it works so well. They had experience fucking it up. States should be given back their power to appoint senators, and popular election of senators should be abolished.
```-With all of the issues that the US faces, can the two-party constitutional republic system solve them?```
Yes.
```-Would an alternative to capitalism be feasible/better for the US?```
Capitalism should be regulated, but no.
```-In your opinion, what form of government/leadership/system would you like to see used in the US and why? If you wouldn't want change, why?```
Popular election of senators should be abolished. Other than that, the current system, because it has accomplished its goal of protecting our inalienable rights and protecting the country from an "interested and overbearing majority" for over 200 years.
america is in a predicament
@Thule-Gesellschaft [☩] this is what you wanted
what're you talking about
@Fred the Fish America is going through growing pains to become a more beautiful natural order oriented nation which rejects its satanic roots.