Scrapbookpages Blog

August 16, 2014

British students on HET trip learn how to emote at Auschwitz

Filed under: Holocaust — Tags: , — furtherglory @ 11:25 am

According to a news story which you can read here, “The Holocaust Educational Trust sends about 2,000 post-16 [British] students to Auschwitz-Birkenau a year.”

The “educator for the day,” for the students, was Tom Jackson, according to the article.

This quote from the article is about what Tom Jackson told the students:

The reconstructed gas chamber at Auschwitz 1 has a cold feel to it, a cold that seeps into your bones, as if your body knows the evil took place there.

It sits just a few hundred yards from the electric fence and beyond that a house.

Camp Commander Rudolf Höss lived there with his wife and children – he was the man who oversaw the extension of Auschwitz to Birkeneau and to develop an extermination camp, following orders.

But, as Tom told us these facts and told us that he would have received no punishment if he had not built the gas chamber, I cannot help but feel sick and the faces of the pupils around me reflect that sentiment.

[Jackson] added: “He was a family man, he had a heart, I’m not excusing what he did, but think about these things, too.”

Tom Jackson was referring to the house in the main Auschwitz camp, where the Commandant lived with his wife and children; his house was very close to the gas chamber.  Yet, Jackson told the students that Hoess would “have received no punishment if he had not built a gas chamber.”

The gas chamber in the main camp was inside the crematorium building, in what was obviously a morgue; Hoess did not order the construction, nor the reconstruction, of this building. In the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp, there were four gas chambers which were built while Hoess was the Commandant.

House where Rudolf Hoess and his family lived at the main Auschwitz camp

House where Rudolf Hoess and his family lived at the main Auschwitz camp is very close to the gas chamber

This quote is also from the news article, cited above:

Even after death, [the Jews] were stripped further of their identity.

Once killed in the gas chamber, their heads were shaved before their bodies were incinerated to hide the evidence.

For many women, their hair is their pride, and for it to be shaved after death seemed almost as barbaric as the gassing itself.

Surely, the hair was not shaved from the heads of the victims AFTER they were dead. According to Holocaust lore, there were 900 people crowed into the gas chamber at a time.  After the gassing, their bodies were piled up to the ceiling, and covered with bodily fluids that were eliminated as the victims died.   Jewish helpers, called Kapos, had to go inside the gas chamber and drag the bodies to the cremation ovens, which were next door to the gas chamber.

This quote is also from the news article:

While we stood in a place where so much death and destruction took place, a man rode by on his bike.

Tom told us this was normal, that people often walked through the camp on their way home or to work – it seemed cold and cruel but they did not ask the Germans to move in and build a concentration camp, he reminded us.

The gas chambers have gone, destroyed by the Nazis to try and hide what they did, just weeks before the Red Army arrived, but the steps remain, a small reminder of the horrors that took place right by the giant memorial where Rabbi Andrew Shaw gave a moving memorial.

Rabbi Shaw’s grandfather was a victim of the Holocaust and his grandmother a survivor.

His grandfather never knew his child or his grandchildren, he did not even know his wife was pregnant.

In the above quote, it is not clear to me whether Tom was talking about the main Auschwitz camp, or the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp. I doubt that “people often walked through the [main] camp on their way to work.” The main camp was in a suburb of the town of Auschwitz, and there was a wall around it.

However, local people could have walked through the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp, which was a mile wide and a mile and a half long.  Seven villages had been torn down to build the camp.  The displaced villagers might have walked through the camp.

One thing that most tourists don’t realize is that the International Monument at Auschwitz-Birkenau is built on top of a road that used to continue on to the outside of the camp. There were people, coming from outside the camp, and people going outside the camp, while the “death camp” was in operation.

The article about the HET trip starts off by mentioning the Great Synagogue, which was burned down on the night of Novemeber 9, 1939.  What is not mentioned is that this was the night of Kristallnacht, when Synagogues were burned all over Germany.

The HET tours seem to impress upon the students that the Polish town of Oswiecim was a Jewish town, which the Germans took away from the Jews and turned into a German town named Auschwitz.  It was the other way around.



  1. I find your texts more than a little odd. I’m not referring to the above one in particular, just mentioning the general feeling.

    On the one hand, it seems to me that you no longer believe in the extermination attempt, the homicidal gas chambers or the fantasy figure of 6 million Jewish dead, i.e. you no longer believe in the “Holocaust” myth. On the other hand, you usually mention these alleged features of the myth without using the word “alleged”, making it sound as if, facts or no facts, you have never ceased to believe.

    Perharps a little more straightforwardness would be in order.

    Comment by Robert Takashima — August 17, 2014 @ 9:09 pm

    • You seem to be new here, so it is understandable that you are confused by my methods. I pioneered a new concept, starting back in 1997, when I first put up a website. I try to tell both sides of a story. This is unknown — with regard to the Holocaust, where a person typically writes only about his or her side of the story, either as a True Believer or as a Holocaust denier.

      I started my blog on Feb. 5, 2010 and I have written 1,258 posts. My posts have been read 2,483,164 times and there have been 10,452 comments.

      I don’t think that I would have generated this much interest with “a little more straightforwardness.” There is method in my madness, which you will understand if you continue to read my blog, or if you read more of my 1,258 old posts.

      Basically, my blog is written “tongue in cheek.” [look it up on Wikipedia]

      Comment by furtherglory — August 18, 2014 @ 9:24 am

      • Furtherglory,

        You say you try “to tell both sides of a story”. Then you speak of “True Believers and Holocaust deniers”, not of true believers and skeptics.

        Precisely my point. If you don’t get it, please think of, say, “true believers in the historical Christ” and “historical Christ deniers” (instead of “skeptics”). Would that sound like an impartial referee?

        I understand there may be method in a madness. I also understand there may be method in sanity. Not only that, but the later will become patent to sane people much faster and with better results, so why choose the former?

        And yes, I understand the meaning of “tongue in cheek.” Actually I indulge in it all the time.



        Yes, I know about the practices you mention in “more than a few (otherwise civilized) countries.” Anyway not yet in the USA, though, of course, more hidden and not-so-hidden strings get pulled whenever possible: the Zundel case comes to mind.

        Comment by Robert Takashima — August 22, 2014 @ 11:06 pm

        • As far as I know, there are no laws, in any country, against Holocaust skepticism. There are only laws against “Holocaust denial.”

          When history is protected by laws, this makes me suspicious that the history that is protected, is a lie. In recent years, many fiction books about the Holocaust have been published. This is the new way of telling the Holocaust lie without being accused of lying.

          Since you are new to my blog, you might like to read this blog post that I wrote years ago:

          In the post cited above, I have tried to make the point that Holocaust denial laws are stupid and unfair.

          My blog post at
          might also be of interest to you.

          Comment by furtherglory — August 23, 2014 @ 7:56 am

          • furtherglory wrote: ” As far as I know, there are no laws, in any country, against Holocaust skepticism. There are only laws against “Holocaust denial.” ”

            You’re not forced to use the term “Holocaust denial” in spite of that. That term was invented by Deborah Lipstadt to demonize, belittle and ridicule Holocaust revisionists and their works. The Mainstream Mass Media then turned Lipstadt’s insult into an official term by using it systematically when they talked about Holocaust revisionists.

            Isn’t it very ironic that a Jewess who has never produced anything about the “Holocaust” (her only ‘research’ topic is Holocaust revisionists, not the “Holocaust” itself) could decide that Holocaust revisionists are not researchers but only deniers? Men and women who worked very hard for decades and were persecuted very harshly for that are suddenly mere deniers because Missis Zero Contribution Talmudic Hatred Lipstadt decided so…

            I suppose that you don’t use the word “heretics” only because the Church used to call Christ skeptics that way in the past. So you don’t have to use Lipstadt’s “Holocaust denier” if you don’t want to…

            Comment by hermie — August 27, 2014 @ 12:42 pm

            • I read one of Lipstadt’s books and then wrote a blog about what I consider to be mistakes that she made. My blog post is at

              David Irving should not have sued Lipstadt. Neither of them are Holocaust experts, but of the two, David Irving knows much more than Lipstadt.

              Comment by furtherglory — August 28, 2014 @ 7:35 am

              • I agree with you, FG. Irving shouldn’t have sued Lipstadt. And when he did that, he shouldn’t have refused any help from prominent revisionists who were experts on the “Hoiocaust”, as he did, while he wasn’t an expert on that topic at all. Lipstadt hired and brought exterminationist experts who tore Irving into pieces, as easily predictable. Irving talking about the “Holocaust” with exterminationist experts was like throwing a baseball player in a football match. Irving was so arrogant that he even refused to be defended by a lawyer.

                Concerning the article you’ve linked, I agree with you on the airtight doors with a peephole. Many WW2 civilian air raid shelters had airtight doors too, in Germany and in England.

                And I think I can help with the Topf thing. Topf und Sohne made crematory ovens, as you wrote in your article, but also morgues, what is perfectly logical. Morgues and crematory ovens are, of course, complementary facilities. So Topf und Sohne built the morgues of the Birkenau crematoria. But as the Allies and the Soviets turned the Birkenau morgues into mammoth homicidal gas chambers for propaganda purposes, it’s said that Topf und Sohne built homicidal gas chambers at Birkenau. That would have been utterly stupid to task Topf und Sohne with the conception and the construction of unprecedented chemical slaughter houses like the Birkenau “gas chambers”, when the German coorporation Degesch was employing world-renowed experts in delousing gas chambers and poison gases (including the co-inventor of Zyklon B Bruno Tesch) at that time. Doing such a thing was like if you tasked a plumber with repairing your car. Total nonsense. This only fact should cast doubt on the entire gassing claim to anybody with a half brain. The Germans were master organizers but they allegedly didn’t think about the experts on delousing gas chambers & poison gases which they had when they supposedly considered the gassing of millions of Jews in unprecedented mammoth gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Can you believe this?!?

                Interestingly, when Dr. Bruno Tesch was sued after WW2 (for delivering Zyklon B to concentration camps, not for building homicidal gas chambers), he correctly pointed out that if humans had ever been packed into any space as tightly as in the ‘testimonies’, they would promptly have suffocated, making the use of poison gas quite superfluous. No need to add that the Allied ‘prosecutors’ quickly moved to something else. Hard to sell the idiotic Holocaust gas chambers to an expert like Tesch…

                Comment by hermie — August 28, 2014 @ 3:22 pm

                • You wrote: “he shouldn’t have refused any help from prominent revisionists who were experts on the “Hoiocaust”,.”

                  Did Irving refuse the help of Germar Rudolf, or did Germar refuse to help him? In my humble opinion, Irving should have had Germar sitting beside him, ready to point out the mistakes made at the trial — and there WERE mistakes made.

                  Comment by furtherglory — August 29, 2014 @ 7:28 am

                • From what I remember, Irving refused the help of any Holocaust revisionist. Holocaust revisionists love trials (in countries where debates on the “Holocaust” are allowed) because trials give them opportunities to bypass the academic “we won’t debate with you, evil deniers” and expose some of the most outrageous “Holocaust” lies, witnesses and experts. The Zündel trials provided great examples of this. Had Irving requested the help of Holocaust revisionists, I’m pretty sure that most (if not all) of them would have come with joy.

                  I agree with you. Irving should have been helped by German Rudolf. I’d even say that he should have been helped by a team of Holocaust revisionists with experts on the different aspects of the “Holocaust”.

                  Comment by hermie — August 29, 2014 @ 6:33 pm

    • without using the word “alleged”

      One hint: there are fairly frequent mentions of the fact that gainsaying the existence and purpose of the gas chambers can get you arrested and put in prison in more than a few (otherwise civilized) countries.

      Comment by eah — August 20, 2014 @ 1:32 pm

  2. Waw! Now some educators-guides willingly call the Auschwitz ‘gas chamber’ a “reconstructed gas chamber at Auschwitz 1”!!

    Do they hope that people will forget that tour guides and historians told people “Of course, the gas chambers were real. The Nazis left one at Auschwitz. It can still be seen in its original state today.” during decades? They are right to do so. Most people will probably forget very quickly that the word “reconstructed” was in fact a major concession to revisionist historians… 😉

    About the Auschwitz State 3 (mistakenly called “reconstructed”) ‘gas chamber’:

    [quote] It was in 1975 that R. Faurisson succeeded in having a man in charge at the Auschwitz State Museum, Jan Machalek, admit that this so-called “gas chamber” was not “genuine” (in German: echt) but “reconstructed” (in German: rekonstruiert). Consequently, Faurisson asked: “Reconstructed according to the original plan?” and Machalek replied “yes”. Therefore, coming back to Auschwitz in 1976, Faurisson asked Tadeusz Iwaszko, Director of the archives, whether Machalek had been right or not in saying that the so-called “gas chamber” was “reconstructed according to an original plan”. And Iwaszko replied “Yes”.

    So Faurisson asked to have access to this plan and, generally speaking, to plans and documents related to the Auschwitz and Birkenau crematories. Iwaszko, reluctantly, handed over to Faurisson, who had presented himself as someone teaching in the Sorbonne (which was true), some volumes, mostly in Polish, of the Rudolf Höss judicial inquiry and trial. Those volumes contained tiny photos. Very quickly Faurisson found some 30 interesting photos. Among them were photos of two different plans of the Auschwitz-I crematory today supposed to have contained a homicidal “gas chamber”. It was easy to see what that room had in fact been:

    State 1 – From 1940 to 1943, a Leichenhalle (a cold storage room for bodies, with a washroom, etc.);

    State 2 – From June 1944 to January 1945, a Luftschützbunker für SS-Revier mit einem Operationsraum (an air-raid shelter for the SS-hospital with an operating room).

    The Leichenhalle was a dead-end room: there was no door on the S/E side.

    The Luftschützbunker was a room with an opening on the S/E side: a typical anteroom with two doors and, inside, there were typical partition walls in zig-zag as in any air-raid shelter.

    Therefore, if the Poles had “reconstructed” anything, it would have been either state 1 or state 2. In fact, they invented a state 3 (a mixture of state 1 and state 2) and they baptized it Gaskammer(gas chamber). They destroyed the partition walls and they kept the anteroom with the two doors. It was absolutely necessary for the lie’s sake to make tourists believe that the “victims” entered the “gas chamber” by this anteroom – recently, D. Cole has told me that the people who run the Auschwitz Museum have changed the story but this is of no importance here – instead of from the room with the ovens. There lies the fraud: the Poles havedestroyed the partition walls of state 1 and kept the anteroom of state 2! [end quote]


    Comment by hermie — August 16, 2014 @ 8:56 pm

  3. Once killed in the gas chamber, their heads were shaved before their bodies were incinerated to hide the evidence.

    That’s a new one. The corpses must’ve been oozing cyanide, yet they shaved the heads. Was there a Sonderkommando of head shavers?

    Comment by eah — August 16, 2014 @ 12:33 pm

    • The heads were not shaved BEFORE the victims went into the gas chamber because this would have tipped them off that something was amiss and that they were not going into a shower room: you don’t shave the hair off your head before taking a shower.

      The news story says that “their heads were shaved before their bodies were incinerated to hide the evidence.” It should say “Their heads were shaved, before the bodies were burned, because the hair was valuable to the Nazis. Then their bodies were incinerated to hide the evidence of gassing.”

      Actually, the bodies were incinerated because there was no place to bury the bodies in the very small Auschwitz main camp. Besides that, these were bodies of people who had died of disease.

      Comment by furtherglory — August 16, 2014 @ 1:15 pm

      • Furtherglory wrote: “The heads were not shaved BEFORE the victims went into the gas chamber because this would have tipped them off that something was amiss”

        You said the opposite in your article, FG. You wrote: “Surely, the hair was not shaved from the heads of the victims AFTER they were dead.”


        Furtherglory wrote: “because this would have tipped them off that something was amiss and that they were not going into a shower room: you don’t shave the hair off your head before taking a shower.”

        Of course, your head is shaved before taking a shower when there are lethal typhus epidemics raging where you are. First, your hair is shaved. Then you take a shower to get rid of the last lice on your head and body, while your clothes are deloused (gas, steam or hot air). And finally you get clean clothes (stripped uniform) before entering the camp proper (or a quarantine area if necessary) through a “clean path” (i.e. a separate path from that by which you came).

        Comment by hermie — August 16, 2014 @ 8:32 pm

  4. Kirstallnacht was November 9, 1938.

    Comment by Jett Rucker — August 16, 2014 @ 12:11 pm

    • Thanks for catching that error. I looked up the date and copied it from another website. I should have known that the date was wrong.

      Comment by furtherglory — August 16, 2014 @ 12:32 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: