The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/b/ball.john/fires-blanks-02


Path: news.voyager.net!chi-news.cic.net!news.inc.net!newspump.sol.net!newsfeeds.sol.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!ais.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: dvdthomas@aol.com (DvdThomas)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: John Ball's Smoking Gun Fires Blanks, Shoots Laura's Feet
Date: 21 Apr 1997 17:26:34 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 214
Message-ID: <19970421172500.NAA27122@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com


Laura Finsten wrote:

>Mr. Ball, the "smoking gun" which supposedly proves that World War II
>aerial photography of Auschwitz-Birkenau has been tampered with is a
>dud.
> (Snip)
>My suggested interpretation of the August 25, 1944 aerial photograph has
>nothing to do with your "$100,000 challenge", because I agree that there
>are "marks" on the photo.

Those contradictions are at the beginning and the end of her post,
respectively.  I'll go through a few more contradictions, misassumptions
and unsupported assertions/implications.

>Mr. Ball, the "smoking gun" which supposedly proves that World War II
>aerial photography of Auschwitz-Birkenau has been tampered with is a
>dud.  You claim that a series of peculiar markings on an aerial
>photograph from August 25, 1944 are a fabrication and imply that in the
>1979 CIA report, Brugioni and Poirier interpreted these as prisoners
>standing in formation.
>
>I draw your attention to the following points:
>
>First, none of the illustrations in the CIA report label any feature on
>any aerial photograph as "Groups of prisoners...standing formation", or
>anything similar.  Any reader can check this by referring directly to
>the CIA report.  Indeed, this reference is made only in the text of the
>report (on p.8), albeit with reference to the August 25, 1944
>photography.  Therefore, the "conclusion" that the marks you have
>highlighted both on your website and in your book as allegedly
>representing prisoners in formation is yours and yours alone.

The entire point of this being that since the writers of the CIA report
did not draw a line pointing out which marks were supposed to be
prisoners, then the line that Ball drew to the retouched portion of the
photo was a mistaken conclusion.  I take it that the sneer quotes are
intended to represent the word mistaken, as it's patently obvious that
Ball did make the conclusion.  Laura addresses the matter of why she
thinks that Ball's conclusion was not shared by the CIA in the second half
of her post, which will be addressed last.  First, some incidentals from
her post.

Laura suggests that the marks are...
>some glaringly obvious flaws on the negative.

and....
>because I agree that there are "marks" on the photo.

and then states, without explanation of any kind....
>There is obviously a flaw on the negative.  I
>wouldn't agree with you about how they got there, though.

The gist of the preceding seems to be that 'I agree but I do not agree.' 
Well, please make up my mind Ms. Finsten!  There is not "a flaw" there are
many, and they clearly are not normal scratches, dirt or smudges.

Now for the other foot.

>Second, I draw your attention to a portion of the August 25, 1944
>photograph which is reproduced as Photo 4 in Chapter 5.4 (page 42) of
>your own book.  There are four barracks depicted below (west of) the one
>affected by your so-called "smoking gun".  Between these buildings are
>four smaller oblong markings, in a regular pattern and all oriented
>perpendicular to the long axes of the buildings.  I admit that they do
>not show up really well in the reproduction in your book, but they are
>much more apparent on the unenlarged negatives, as I'm sure you know.
>
>These markings are not included in the segment of the August 25, 1944
>photograph published in the CIA report.  And I have noted with some
>interest that you have cropped this portion of the photograph from your
>website photo of this date, although it does appear in your book.  You
>consider yourself to be an "airphoto expert", Mr. Ball.  Please tell me,
>then:  Do you not think it far more likely that an expert in the
>interpretation of aerial photography for intelligence purposes would
>interpret these latter markings, rather than what are some glaringly
>obvious flaws on the negative, as "Groups of prisoners...standing
>formation"?  If you don't think that the markings I have drawn your
>attention to here represent formations of prisoners, what _do_ you think
>they are, Mr. Ball?

If one turns back a page from the photo referenced above and looks at
Photo 4 in Chapter 5.4 (page 41) there is a picture of the identical area
taken on September 13, 1944, 19 days later.  The identical markings are
still there in exactly the same alignment, precisely perpendicular to the
buildings, precisely spaced from each, and now that they are much clearer,
you can see fainter extensions between them.  Not only that, but the
September photo is not truncated on the right as was the August photo, and
there are four more of these markings on the ground, with the same precise
alignment.  I, and apparently the CIA guys, would doubt that (a) the
people stood there for 19 days, and (b) that even a crack military group
could align all those formations with that degree of precision, and that
they therefore are some fixed feature on the ground.  Indeed there is near
irrefutable support for this conclusion right at the reader's fingertips.

Turn the book back another page to Photo 1 in Chapter 5.4 (page 39) and
you see a picture of the entire southern 1/3 of Birkenau, the area in
question, in very clear detail.  It was taken on May 31, 1944.  On the
facing page, 38, there is a line drawing made of this section with legends
for the various features.

On this picture you will note that not only are the 4 markings Ms. Finsten
refers to still there, they have much company.  There are 32 more of them,
each precisely aligned in front of a barracks building, extending without
break down the entire street, which ends in an area labeled on the diagram
as "gardens."  Not only that, but two streets up (to the west, contrary to
Ms. Finsten's bearings) and four streets down (to the east) identical
markings are seen in front of each barracks building, for a total of a
hundred or more.  After noting the marks clearly visible in these rows on
the May photo, turn the page back again and look at the September photo
once more.  Note that in this autumn picture taken in a cold climate, the
marks between the first two rows of barracks have faded or disappeared,
while those under discussion between the third and fourth rows are still
visible but not quite as solid as they looked in the May photo.  This
would suggest some sort of vegetation, but, like Laura, I'm not an aerial
photo expert.  However, even a rank amateur needs only five minutes or so
to conclude that these are not people, and therefore the attributions of
the CIA report text obviously referred to the doctored portions of the
picture.

For any who'd like to see these details themselves, go to:

http://www.codoh.com/found/fndaerial.html

Be warned that it's a large file, as I was reminded when my system crashed
because of low memory when I attempted to open the document while working
in AOL and a couple of other programs.  That's one reason you're tempted
to exclude irrelevant details like the bands Ms. Finsten referred to as
being "cropped" from Mr. Ball's Web presentation.  The pictures are huge,
and it's a struggle to find the balance between retaining important
details and making them so large that no one will wait to open them, or
have memory in their machines to handle them.  The site pictures are not
as clear as the book, which, as Ms. Finsten and Mr. Ball both note is not
as clear as the originals.  But there's quite enough clarity to see
clearly what is going on, and that's all you need really.

The CODOH site includes a blowup of the barracks at very high
magnification, with the August and September photos side by side.  I note
that the bands show in August, but the September photo was cropped just a
little higher, eliminating those features in it.  This will be corrected
shortly, in order to avoid the appearance of cropping something that
supports your own thesis.

Ms. Finsten's original post is given below, in full.

Regards,
David Thomas

cc:  John Ball (who has better things to do with his time than I :-)

Subject: John Ball's "Smoking Gun" Fires Blanks
From: Laura Finsten 
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 20:41:50 -0400
Message-ID: <335AB7CD.1AB6@mcmaster.ca>

Mr. Ball, the "smoking gun" which supposedly proves that World War II
aerial photography of Auschwitz-Birkenau has been tampered with is a
dud.  You claim that a series of peculiar markings on an aerial
photograph from August 25, 1944 are a fabrication and imply that in the
1979 CIA report, Brugioni and Poirier interpreted these as prisoners
standing in formation.

I draw your attention to the following points:

First, none of the illustrations in the CIA report label any feature on
any aerial photograph as "Groups of prisoners...standing formation", or
anything similar.  Any reader can check this by referring directly to
the CIA report.  Indeed, this reference is made only in the text of the
report (on p.8), albeit with reference to the August 25, 1944
photography.  Therefore, the "conclusion" that the marks you have
highlighted both on your website and in your book as allegedly
representing prisoners in formation is yours and yours alone.  If I am
incorrect about this and you have seen a publication which actually does
label those peculiar markings this way, I trust you will provide me with
a complete reference.  I will interpret silence as acknowledgement that
you are unable to dispute this, since it is irrelevant to your $100,000
challenge.

Second, I draw your attention to a portion of the August 25, 1944
photograph which is reproduced as Photo 4 in Chapter 5.4 (page 42) of
your own book.  There are four barracks depicted below (west of) the one
affected by your so-called "smoking gun".  Between these buildings are
four smaller oblong markings, in a regular pattern and all oriented
perpendicular to the long axes of the buildings.  I admit that they do
not show up really well in the reproduction in your book, but they are
much more apparent on the unenlarged negatives, as I'm sure you know.

These markings are not included in the segment of the August 25, 1944
photograph published in the CIA report.  And I have noted with some
interest that you have cropped this portion of the photograph from your
website photo of this date, although it does appear in your book.  You
consider yourself to be an "airphoto expert", Mr. Ball.  Please tell me,
then:  Do you not think it far more likely that an expert in the
interpretation of aerial photography for intelligence purposes would
interpret these latter markings, rather than what are some glaringly
obvious flaws on the negative, as "Groups of prisoners...standing
formation"?  If you don't think that the markings I have drawn your
attention to here represent formations of prisoners, what _do_ you think
they are, Mr. Ball?

My suggested interpretation of the August 25, 1944 aerial photograph has
nothing to do with your "$100,000 challenge", because I agree that there
are "marks" on the photo.  There is obviously a flaw on the negative.  I
wouldn't agree with you about how they got there, though.  And clearly I
disagree with your disingenuous and highly misleading interpretation of
the "significance" these marks have had in the interpretation of World
War II aerial photography depicting Birkenau.  Since there is no money
at stake here, I eagerly await your response.

-- 

"If I can't dance.....I don't want to be part of your revolution."
          Emma Goldman

Please do not send emailed copies of Usenet or other public forum posts to this address.  Thank you for your consideration.--David Thomas 1/16/97







Path: news.voyager.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsxfer.nether.net!stdio!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!newsfeed.nacamar.de!news1.best.com!nntp2.ba.best.com!rbi148.rbi.com!user
From: mvanalst@rbi.com (Mark Van Alstine)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: John Ball's Smoking Gun Fires Blanks, Shoots Laura's Feet
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 01:49:15 -0700
Organization: rbi software systems
Lines: 137
Message-ID: 
References: <19970421172500.NAA27122@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rbi147.rbi.com
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.0.5b5

In article <19970421172500.NAA27122@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
dvdthomas@aol.com (DvdThomas) wrote:

> Laura Finsten wrote:

[snip]

> >Second, I draw your attention to a portion of the August 25, 1944
> >photograph which is reproduced as Photo 4 in Chapter 5.4 (page 42) of
> >your own book.  There are four barracks depicted below (west of) the one
> >affected by your so-called "smoking gun".  Between these buildings are
> >four smaller oblong markings, in a regular pattern and all oriented
> >perpendicular to the long axes of the buildings.  I admit that they do
> >not show up really well in the reproduction in your book, but they are
> >much more apparent on the unenlarged negatives, as I'm sure you know.
> >
> >These markings are not included in the segment of the August 25, 1944
> >photograph published in the CIA report.  And I have noted with some
> >interest that you have cropped this portion of the photograph from your
> >website photo of this date, although it does appear in your book.  You
> >consider yourself to be an "airphoto expert", Mr. Ball.  Please tell me,
> >then:  Do you not think it far more likely that an expert in the
> >interpretation of aerial photography for intelligence purposes would
> >interpret these latter markings, rather than what are some glaringly
> >obvious flaws on the negative, as "Groups of prisoners...standing
> >formation"?  If you don't think that the markings I have drawn your
> >attention to here represent formations of prisoners, what _do_ you think
> >they are, Mr. Ball?
> 
> If one turns back a page from the photo referenced above and looks at
> Photo 4 in Chapter 5.4 (page 41) there is a picture of the identical area
> taken on September 13, 1944, 19 days later.  The identical markings are
> still there in exactly the same alignment, precisely perpendicular to the
> buildings, precisely spaced from each, and now that they are much clearer,
> you can see fainter extensions between them.  

One can only wonder if Mr. Thomas has had his eyesight checked recently! I
am holding _Air Photo Evidence_ before me, opened to pages 40-41, and can
see no such "identical markings" on the photo of September 13 photo (p.41)
as can be seen in the August 25 photo (p.40). In fact, on page 42 there
are enlargements of just the two buildings (latrines or wash barracks [cf.
Czech, _Auschwitz Chronicle_, p.5]) in question. Again, the August 25
photo evidence these markings while the September 13 photo does not. 

Furthermore, flipping back to pages 40-41, these mysterious markings that
_Ball_ has identified as "groups of prisoners standing formation" are at
the extreme right (north) edge of the August 25 photo -as can be seen on
page 40. The same buildings in the September 13 photo (page 41), however,
are _not_ at the extreme right (north) edge  of the photo -as can bee seen
by the presence of a barrack to its immedite right (north) _not_ visible
in the August 25 photo. 

> Not only that, but the September photo is not truncated on the right as was 
> the August photo, and there are four more of these markings on the ground, 
> with the same precise alignment....

It appears that Mr. Thomas is looking at something _other_ than the
"groups of prisoners standing formation" as identified by Ball! The
"markings" Ball has "identified" on the August 25 photo is in regard to
the second western most latrine/wash barrack second from the top of the
photo (i.e. in Camp BIIe).  The four "marks" Mr. Thomas appears to be
talking about lies between the third and fourth western most latrines/wash
barracks (i.e. in Camp BIId). They are also visible on the September 13
photo, with the addition of four more "marks" to the barracks immediately
to the north of the latrines/wash barracks in Camp BIId. 

What might these four/eight marks be? 

The answer arguably lies in photo 24 on page 63 of _Auschwitz: a history
in photographs_. This photo, according to the caption (p.64) is of: "The
Men's camp of BIId in Auschwitz II-Birkenau. (Photo taken by the SS, 1943
or 1944." In the photo, clearly visible, are large flat-topped recangular
mounds (of dirt?) a few feet high between the end of each barrack and the
"street" that runs through BIId. These mounds are seen in front of each
barrack for the entire length of BIId. 

> I, and apparently the CIA guys, would doubt that (a) the
> people stood there for 19 days, and (b) that even a crack military group
> could align all those formations with that degree of precision, and that
> they therefore are some fixed feature on the ground.  Indeed there is near
> irrefutable support for this conclusion right at the reader's fingertips.
> 
> Turn the book back another page to Photo 1 in Chapter 5.4 (page 39) and
> you see a picture of the entire southern 1/3 of Birkenau, the area in
> question, in very clear detail.  It was taken on May 31, 1944.  On the
> facing page, 38, there is a line drawing made of this section with legends
> for the various features.
> 
> On this picture you will note that not only are the 4 markings Ms. Finsten
> refers to still there, they have much company.  There are 32 more of them,
> each precisely aligned in front of a barracks building, extending without
> break down the entire street, which ends in an area labeled on the diagram
> as "gardens."  Not only that, but two streets up (to the west, contrary to
> Ms. Finsten's bearings) and four streets down (to the east) identical
> markings are seen in front of each barracks building, for a total of a
> hundred or more.  After noting the marks clearly visible in these rows on
> the May photo, turn the page back again and look at the September photo
> once more.  Note that in this autumn picture taken in a cold climate, the
> marks between the first two rows of barracks have faded or disappeared,
> while those under discussion between the third and fourth rows are still
> visible but not quite as solid as they looked in the May photo.  This
> would suggest some sort of vegetation, but, like Laura, I'm not an aerial
> photo expert.  However, even a rank amateur needs only five minutes or so
> to conclude that these are not people, and therefore the attributions of
> the CIA report text obviously referred to the doctored portions of the
> picture.

Bravo, Mr. Thomas! Such sleuthing! Too bad you have been referring to
"marks" different than Ball and Ms. Finsten have! Oops. Ready! Fire! Aim!

Now, Mr. Thomas, would you care to offer commentary of the _other_
"marks?" The "marks" that Ball "identifies" _specfically_ on page 40 of
_Air Photo Evidence_  as "groups of prisoners standing formation?" The
marks that are immediately next to the latrine/wash barrack of Camp BIIe? 

Or will Mr. Thomas reload and try for both _his_ feet again? 

[snip] 

For those interested in Mr. Thomas's Holocaust denial, specious drivel, 
and  dubious exercise of "free debate," please peruse DejaNews and visit 
the Nizkor Project at:

http://www.dejanews.com/
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?people/t/thomas.david

Mark 

posted/e-mailed to Ms. Finsten.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes 
not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties--but
right through every human heart--and all human hearts." 

-- Alexander Solzhenitsyn, "The Gulag Archipelago"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------







Path: news.voyager.net!chi-news.cic.net!news.inc.net!news.visi.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!audrey02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: dvdthomas@aol.com (DvdThomas)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: John Ball's Smoking Gun Fires Blanks, Shoots Laura's Feet
Date: 22 Apr 1997 18:21:09 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <19970422181900.OAA24696@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com

Small hint to Mark Van Alstine--check out the meaning of "perpendicular,"
and read the post again.

Your blank didn't even go off, my man. ;-)

David T.

Please do not send emailed copies of Usenet or other public forum posts to this address.  Thank you for your consideration.--David Thomas 1/16/97







Path: news.voyager.net!aanews.merit.net!news.cic.net!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!news1.best.com!nntp2.ba.best.com!rbi141.rbi.com!user
From: mvanalst@rbi.com (Mark Van Alstine)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: John Ball's Smoking Gun Fires Blanks, Shoots Laura's Feet
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 04:27:39 -0700
Organization: rbi software systems
Lines: 113
Message-ID: 
References:  <19970422181900.OAA24696@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rbi141.rbi.com
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.0.5b5

In article <19970422181900.OAA24696@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
dvdthomas@aol.com (DvdThomas) wrote:

> Small hint to Mark Van Alstine--check out the meaning of "perpendicular,"
> and read the post again.
> 
> Your blank didn't even go off, my man. ;-)

Perhaps a diagram or two will help demonstrate the speciousness of Mr.
Thomas's claims?

========================================================
Diagram 1. Buildings in Camp BIIe.
========================================================

   +-----------+------+--- Latrines/washrooms of BIIe
   |           |      |
   |           |      |           |
+----+      +----+--+--+          | <-- Edge of negative
|    |      |    |--|  |          |
|    |      |    |  |  |      XX  |
|    |      |    |  |  |      XX  |
|    |      |    |  |  |          |
|    |      |    |  |  |XX XX     |     North -->
|    |      |    |  |  |XX XX X   | 
|    |      |    |  +--+      X   | 
|    |      |    |      XX XX X   |
+----+      +----+      XX XX     |
                                  |
                        XX XX XX  |
                        XX XX XX  |
                                  |

X = "marks" on photo Ball calls 
    "groups of prisoners standing
     formation"  

Cf. Ball, _Air Photo Evidence_, pp. 40,42;
    Czech, Auschwitz Chronicle_, p.5.

========================================================


========================================================
Diagram 2. Buildings in Camp BIId.
========================================================

   +-----------+--------- Latrines/washrooms of BIId
   |           |      
   |           |          |       
+----+------+----+        | <-- Edge of negative
|    |------|    |        |     
|    |      |    |        |     
|    |      |    |        |     
|    |      |    |        |     
|    |      |    |        |      North -->   
|    |      |    |        | 
|    |      |    |        | 
|    |      |    |        |
+----+      +----+        |
                          |
XXXXXX      XXXXXX        |   X = Flattened mounds shown in
                          |   photo 24 of _Auschwitz: a
                          |   history in photographs_. 
XXXXXX      XXXXXX        |     
                          |
+----+      +----+        | 
|    |      |    |        |     
|    |      |    |        |     
|    |      |    |        |     
|    |      |    |        |     
|    |      |    |        |         
|    |      |    |        | 
|    |      |    |        | 
|    |      |    |        |
+----+      +----+        |
   |           |          |
   |           |      
   +-----------+--------- Latrines/washrooms of BIId



Cf. Ball, _Air Photo Evidence_, pp. 40;  
    Czech, Auschwitz Chronicle_, p.5;
    Sweibocka, _Auschwitz: a history in photographs_, pp. 63, 64.

========================================================

Now, would Mr. Thomas care to venture an opinion as to which of the sets
of "X's" in Diagrams 1 and 2 are perpendicular to the latrines/washrooms?
The ones identified by Ball as "groups of prisoners standing formation"
(Diag.1) or the ones that are shown to be flattened mounds in photo 24
(Diag.2)? 


Furthermore, given that Ms. Finsten was talking about the "mark" identifed
(only) by Ball as "groups of prisoners standing formation" near the
latrines of BIIe (Diag.1) in the August 25 photo are _not_ found in the
September 13 photo; and that Mr. Thomas is talking about the flattened
mounds along the _strasse_ between the buildings of BIIe, I would suggest
it is Mr. Thomas who is (predictably) off the mark here.

Typical denier: Ready! Fire! Aim! 

Mark

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes 
not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties--but
right through every human heart--and all human hearts." 

-- Alexander Solzhenitsyn, "The Gulag Archipelago"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.