Inside the Auschwitz 'gas chambers'
By Fred A. Leuchter, Jr.
Introduction
1988 was a very informative and likewise disturbing year. I was
appalled to learn that much of what I was taught in school about
twentieth-century history and World War II was a myth, if not a lie.
I was first amazed; then annoyed; then aware: the myth of the
Holocaust was dead.
Like all American children born during and after World War II, I was
taught about the genocide perpetrated by the Nazis on the Jews. By
the time I had reached college, I had no reason to disbelieve any of
my education, except that I had some problems swallowing the numbers
of decen-dents, said to total better than six million persons. But
there it stopped. I believed in the Nazi genocide. I had no reason to
disbelieve.
Some twenty-four years later, a very believing engineer sat at his
desk working one snowy January afternoon in 1988, when the telephone
rang. This very believing engineer was about to receive a very
shocking history lesson, one which would cause him to question that
fifty-year-old Holocaust lie and the application of that lie to
generations of children. "Hello, this is Robert Faurisson" -- and
that very believing engineer would believe no more.
Background
I have for the past nine years worked with most, if not all of the
states in the United States having capital punishment. I design and
manufacture execution equipment of all types, including electrocution
systems, lethal injection equipment, gallows and gas-chamber
hardware.
I have consulted for, or supplied equipment to, most of the
applicable states and the federal government.
Because of my association with the states in this capacity, I was
recommended to the Zuendel defense as a consultant on gas chambers by
Warden Bill Armontrout of the Missouri State Penitentiary.
After answering my telephone on that cold January afternoon, I met
with Dr. Robert Faurisson twice in Boston and, as a result of these
meetings, I was summoned to Toronto to meet with Ernst Zuendel,
attorney Douglas Christie and the rest of Zuendel's very able
staff.
Dr. Robert Faurisson had postulated thirteen years ago that a
gas-chamber specialist should be sought who could evaluate the
alleged gas chambers in Poland and report on their efficacy for
execution purposes.
Valentine's Day weekend found myself and Carolyn, my wife of two
weeks, in Toronto. Two days of lengthy meetings followed, during
which I was shown photos of the alleged German gas chambers in
Poland, German documents and Allied aerial photographs. My
examination of this material led me to question whether these alleged
gas chambers were, in fact, execution facilities. I was asked if I
would go to Poland and undertake a physical inspection and forensic
analysis resulting in a written evaluation of these alleged execution
gas chambers, some at places I had never even heard of.
After due consideration, I agreed and made plans to leave for Poland,
awaiting a time of minimal snow covering. I also stated that although
the photos and documents seemed to support the view that these places
were, indeed, not execution facilities, I would reserve final
judgement until after my examination and, if I determined that these
facilities were, in fact, or could have been, execution gas chambers,
I would state this in my report. The final report was to be utilized
as evidence in Ernst Zuendel's defense in his pending criminal trial
at Toronto, and I had to be prepared to testify under oath.
Preparations for the trip required me to take sample bags,
documentation journals and tools. Because we were in a Communist
country I would have to be careful with the tools. Very few tourists
carry hammers, chisels, star drills and tape measures while
travelling. I hid them in the lining of my valise and hoped for the
best. Further, I had maps of Poland, Czechoslovakia and Austria, in
the event that we might have to make a hasty and unscheduled exit.
And finally, the gifts with which we bribed the museum people to
supply us with copies of documents from the Museum Archives.
Our staff
I was fortunate to have a competent and dependable party of
professionals: my wife Carolyn, my general assistant; Mr. Howard
Miller, draftsman; Mr. Juergen Neumann, cinematographer; Mr. Tijudar
Rudolf, interpreter. All knew that, if caught, the Polish government
would take a dim view of our activities and purpose, let alone my
removal of forensic samples from national shrines and monuments.
And the two ex officio members of our party, Mr. Ernst Zuendel and
Dr. Robert Faurisson, who for obvious reasons could not accompany us
in person, but who nevertheless were with us every step of the way in
spirit.
The trip
On February 25, 1988, we left for Poland. Neumann and Rudolf, the
Canadian contingent, joined me and the remainder of our team in
Frankfurt.
We arrived at Cracow in the late afternoon and spent our first night
at the Hotel Orbis. We consumed the first of our three decent meals
while in Poland. The following day we drove to Auschwitz. We arrived
at the Auschwitz Hotel and were greeted by the smell of sulphur
napthal disinfectant, a smell I had not encountered for many years.
The hotel is apparently the old officers' quarters for the camp. We
ate lunch at the Hotel dining room, a cafeteria style facility. This
was our first unidentifiable meal, starch soup and sundries.
We made a reconnaissance tour of the camp, lasting into the dim light
of the Polish afternoon and several snow squalls, a common
occurrence. We ate no supper, in that we found no place to eat in
Auschwitz after sundown our first evening.
Auschwitz and Birkenau
The following day we began our work in the alleged gas chamber at
the Auschwitz facility. Unfortunately, we were unable to accomplish
much due to constant interruptions by both official and unofficial
Sunday tours. Carolyn stood guard at one entrance and Tijudar at the
other, advising myself, Jurgen and Howard of their arrival. It was
too dangerous to take forensic samples and tape, so we left for
Birkenau about noon.
At Birkenau we began a four-hour walk into the damp Polish cold and
through snow squalls so dense we could not see each other at a
distance of a few feet. Unfortunately, we did not expect to spend
that much time walking through the camp and, since vehicles are not
permitted within the camp, we left Carolyn behind in the car. Since
we forgot to leave her the keys, she nearly froze in the cold Polish
afternoon. We visited the barracks, Krematorien II, III, IV and V,
the sauna and the alleged burning pits. We took samples, documented
our activities on video tape and in still photos, and made scale
drawings of these facilities, carefully documenting the removal
locations of all the forensic samples. We had to break into the sauna
building, since it was locked.
At Krema II, I descended into the depths of the alleged gas chamber,
a wet, dank subter-ranean place not visited by man in almost fifty
years, since the building had been reduced to rubble, probably by a
German military demolition team. Fortunately, there were fewer guards
and less pedestrian traffic, making working conditions considerably
better than they had been earlier, at Auschwitz.
Having been instructed by our empty stomachs of the evening before,
we found and ate at the restaurant at the bus station, the only
legitimate restaurant in Auschwitz. We returned to the Auschwitz
Hotel for the night.
The following day, Monday, we again began our work at Auschwitz, the
Sunday tours having subsided. We were able to get our samples, tapes
and documentation. We had, by this time, obtained blueprints of the
alleged gas-chamber facility and were able to follow the structural
changes back to the dates in question. We also verified the existence
of the floor drain for the periods of alleged gas chamber usage. Upon
completion at Auschwitz, we drove again to Birkenau to take our
control sample at delousing facility 1. Unfortunately, the building
was locked and again we had to break and enter in order to access the
delousing chamber. Again we ate at the bus station, and retired early
to the Auschwitz Hotel.
Tuesday morning, while awaiting Tijudar's unsuccessful attempt to
obtain a can of Zyklon B, Jurgen and I made video tapes of locations
within the camp. We moved from the Auschwitz Hotel to a hostel
nearby, obtaining newly vacated rooms. We ate at the bus station and
retired early.
On Wednesday morning we ate a very enjoyable breakfast of ham, cheese
and bread (our second decent meal in Poland) and began our trip to
Lublin to see Majdanek. After one final look in at Auschwitz, we set
off by car for Majdanek.
Lublin (Majdanek)
Several hours later, we arrived at Majdanek, and visited the
museum, the reconstructed alleged gas chamber and crematory. We
finally arrived at disinfection 1 and 2 and examined the facilities.
It was extremely difficult to work, in that a guard made rounds every
ten or fifteen minutes. The alleged gas chambers were blocked by
gates and not accessible for a detailed inspection by the general
public. It was necessary for me to trespass beyond these gates in
forbidden areas. Again Carolyn and Tijudar stood watch while I made
measurements and did a detailed examination in these areas. Once we
were caught short: I was forced to hurdle the gate, and was still in
the air and in mid-jump when the guard entered. Fortunately, he was
more interested in Jurgen and his camera to see me before I touched
ground.
Return
The camp closed in early afternoon and the guard rather nastily
told us to leave. By three o'clock we were en route to Warsaw, a trip
which would take five hours through rain and snow. Our hotel
reservation had been fouled up but fortunately, with the help of an
embassy attache, we were able to secure rooms at another hotel.
We had our third edible meal in Poland that evening and went to bed
in preparation for our trip home on Thursday. The following morning
we had breakfast and proceeded to the airport for our return
trip.
We boarded the Polish airlines plane after clearing customs -- my
suitcase containing twenty pounds of the forbidden samples,
fortunately none of which were found. I did not breathe easy until we
cleared the passport checkpoint at Frankfurt. Our team split at
Frankfurt, for the return trips to the United States and Canada,
respectively. After our return [on March 3], I delivered the
forensic samples to the test laboratory in Massachusetts. Upon
receipt of the test results, I prepared my report, combining my
knowledge of gas execution facilities and procedures with the
research I had completed at crematories and with retort
manu-facturers in the United States. With the results of my research
I believe you are all familiar.
Upon completion of my report I testified at Toronto -- but that is
another story, for another time.
The findings
- 1. Gas chambers
- The results published in the Leuchter Report are
the important thing. Categorically, none of the facilities
examined at Auschwitz, Birkenau or Lublin could have supported, or
in fact did support, multiple executions utilizing hydrogen
cyanide, carbon monoxide or any other allegedly or factually
lethal gas. Based upon very generous maximum usage rates for all
the alleged gas chambers, totalling 1,693 persons per week, and
assuming these facilities could support gas executions, it would
have required sixty-eight (68) years to execute the alleged number
of six millions of persons. This must mean the Third Reich was in
existence for some seventy-five (75) years. Promoting these
facilities as being capable of effecting mass, multiple or even
singular executions is both ludicrous and insulting to every
individual on this planet. Further, those who do promote this
mistruth are negligent and irresponsible for not investigating
these facilities earlier and ascertaining the truth before
indoctrinating the world with what may have become the greatest
propaganda ploy in history.
- 2. Crematories
- Of equal importance are Exterminationist errors relating to
the crematories. If these crematories, operated at a theoretical
rate of maximum output per day, without any down time and at a
constant pace (an impossible situation), and we accept the figure
of at least six millions executed, the Third Reich lasted for at
least forty-two (42) years, since it would take thirty-five (35)
years at an impossible minimum to cremate these six millions of
souls.
- No one by any stretch of the imagination would allege (or even
believe) that the Third Reich ever lasted for seventy-five (75) or
even forty-two (42) years, yet they would have us believe that six
millions of souls were executed with equipment which could not
possibly have functioned, in less than one-seventh of the absolute
minimum time it could possibly have taken.
- 3. Forensics
- Forensic samples were taken from the visited sites. A control
sample was removed from delous-ing facility 1 at Birkenau. It was
postulated that because of the high iron content of the building
materials at these camps the presence of hydrogen cyanide gas
would result in a ferric-ferro-cyanide compound being formed, as
evidenced by the Prus-sian blue staining on the walls in the
delousing facilities.
- A detailed analysis of the thirty-two samples taken at the
Auschwitz-Birkenau complexes showed 1,050 mg/kg of cyanide and
6,170 mg/kg of iron. Higher iron results were found at all of the
alleged gas chambers but no significant cyanide traces. This would
be impossible if these sites were exposed to hydrogen cyanide gas,
because the alleged gas chambers supposedly were exposed to much
greater quantities of gas than the delousing facility. Thus,
chemical analysis supports the fact that these facilities were
never utilized as gas execution facilities.
- 4. Construction
- Construction of these facilities shows that they were never
used as gas chambers. None of these facilities were sealed or
gasketed. No provision was ever made to prevent condensation of
gas on the walls, floor or ceiling. No provision ever existed to
exhaust the air-gas mixture from these buildings. No provision
ever existed to introduce or distribute the gas throughout the
chamber. No explosion-proof lighting existed and no attempt was
ever made to prevent gas from entering the crematories, even
though the gas is highly explosive. No attempt was made to protect
operating personnel from exposure to the gas or to protect other
non-participating persons from exposure. Specifically, at
Auschwitz, a floor drain in the alleged gas chamber was connected
directly to the camp's storm drain system. At Majdanek a depressed
walkway around the alleged gas chambers would have collected gas
seepage and resulted in a death trap for camp personnel. No
exhaust stacks ever existed. Hydrogen cyanide gas is an extremely
dangerous and lethal gas and nowhere were there any provisions to
effect any amount of safe handling. The chambers were too small to
accommodate more than a small fraction of the alleged numbers.
Plain and simple, these facilities could not have operated as
execution gas chambers.
- 5. Conclusion
- After a thorough examination of the alleged execution
facilities in Poland and their associated crematories, the only
conclusion that can be arrived at by a rational, responsible
person is the absurdity of the notion that any of these facilities
were ever capable of, or were utilized as, execution gas
chambers.
-
-
FRED A. LEUCHTER, Jr., is America's leading specialist on
the design and fabrication of homicidal gas chambers and other
equipment used in execution of convicted criminals. His expertise has
been acknowledged by state governments and in periodicals such as
The Atlantic (Feb. 1990), The New York
Times (Oct. 13, 1990) and The New York Times Book
Review (Nov. 22, 1992), as well as on the "Phil Donahue Show"
(where he appeared as a guest). After receiving his Bachelor's degree
from Boston University in 1964, he did postgraduate work at the
Harvard Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. Leuchter holds patents
for numerous highly sophisticated technical devices, including
sextants, surveying instruments and optical encoding equipment.
In spite of intense pressure to repudiate his findings, Leuchter
defiantly stands by his 1988 investigation of the alleged
extermination gas chambers. As a result, powerful special interest
groups have made him the target of a vicious campaign of slander, and
have succeeded in all but destroying his career.
This paper was first presented at the IHR's Ninth Revisionist
Conference, (1989), and was published in the Summer 1989 issue of
The Journal of Historical Review.
A sumptuously illustrated edition of the sensational Leuchter
Report, with a hard-hitting foreword by British historian
David Irving and an introduction by French professor Robert
Faurisson, is available from the IHR.
Back to our page on
Revisionism
