Deceit & Misrepresentation The Meaning of "Special Treatment" In March 1994,
Dan Gannon
responded
[1]
to a series of ten questions which had been posted to the Usenet
computer network over a period spanning nearly two years.
In his response to questions which asked about the description of
Zyklon-B
as material for the "resettlement" and "special
treatment" of Jews, and about the meaning of the terms
"special treatment" and "special action,"
Mr. Gannon
invoked the tired arguments of Holocaust denial.
We replied by asking Mr. Gannon if he meant to claim that the code
words "special treatment," "resettlement," and so on
were never used to camoflage Nazi intentions of mass murder.
Further, we asked that he examine the evidence which we present here,
and refute it on a point-by-point basis.
We think it's clear that Mr. Gannon did make this claim, as
evidenced by the following statement:
"Special treatment" ("Sonderbehandlung") was
not a "code word" and did not automatically mean
"killing". It meant a whole range of things...
[2]
Mr. Gannon then cited two or three examples from various Holocaust
deniers, who have catalogued obscure cases in which the code words meant
something very different than what they normally did.
With this tactic, we believe Mr. Gannon sought to confuse his
audience, instead of addressing the issue. Special cases are
irrelevant, and have no impact on the chief meaning of these code words,
which we will document here.
Mr. Gannon was asked to address cases which employed "special
treatment" and other euphemisms with reference to the Nazi
extermination effort.
These cases were enumerated as follows:
Here, we will deal specifically with the code word
Sonderbehandlung, literally "special treatment" or
"special handling." This is probably encountered most often.
Other code words include:
In his response, Mr. Gannon offered Kaltenbrunner's comments about
French diplomats as his reponse to the "special treatment" of
European Jews -- the mind boggles at this logical leap. He expected
readers to swallow Faurisson's assertion that the Nazis' "special
treatment" was to help keep the Jews alive. This is,
obviously, contrary to fact. The Nazis used Jews and other as
slave laborers, literally working them to death:
Starvation was a permanent guest at Auschwitz. The diet fed to I.G.
Auschwitz inmates, which included the famous "Buna Soup" - a
nutritional aid not available to other prisoners - resulted in an
average weight loss for each individual of about six and a half to nine
pounds a week.
At the end of a month, the change in the prisoner's appearance was
marked; at the end of two months, the inmates were not recognizable
except as caricatures formed of skin, bones, and practically no flesh;
after three months, they were either dead or so unfit for work that they
were marked for release to the gas chambers at Birkenau. Two physicians
who studied the effect of the I.G. diet on the inmates noticed that
"the normally nourished prisoner at Buna could make up the
deficiency by his own body for a period of three months....
The prisoners were condemned to burn up their own body weight while
working and, providing no infections occurred, finally died of
exhaustion."
[3]
Was this Mr. Gannon's idea of behavior aimed at "keeping the Jews
alive?"
Gannon's sources for this nonsense were
Robert Faurisson's
essay "Response to a Paper Historian" and
Carlos Porter's
book
Not Guilty at Nuremberg
-- they quote the same section of the Nuremberg Trial transcript in
invoking Kaltenbrunner. The only other "proof" that Gannon
indirectly quotes, apart from Kaltenbrunner's testimony, is Faurisson's
assertion that Sonderbehandlung sometimes meant
"transportation," but Faurisson does not give proof -- only a
footnote to a previous Faurisson essay.
[
Index |
Next ]
Home ·
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Search
Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.
The Techniques of Holocaust Denial
Part 1 of 3
Writers: Jamie McCarthy
and Ken McVay
and, of course,