AUSCHWITZ LIES - Holocaust Handbooks

376 GERMAR RUDOLF, CARLO MATTOGNO · AUSCHWITZ LIES
one take such stupidity to be a “proof”? The authors just did not know what to
base themselves on to “demonstrate” the existence of the fourth alleged Zyklon
B opening!
4.7. Robert Jan van Pelt’s Hypothesis
In his brief for the Irving-Lipstadt trial, van Pelt has retained as “logical”
that the alleged openings for Zyklon b in morgue 1 of crematorium II had
been refilled by the SS before they blew up the ceiling of this room. 43
The authors hold this hypothesis to be unfounded and support their opinion
with these arguments:
“It has been further hypothesized that the difficulty of locating the four
holes may have reflected their having been filled in before the destruction
of the chamber. This does not seem likely for Crematoriums II and III. The
original roof consisted of three layers: a thick stone aggregate concrete
slab underneath; a thinner, finer sand-aggregate concrete mixture above;
and waterproofing bituminous tar paper in the middle. It is unlikely that
the SS would have thought it necessary to duplicate this work, or that they
could have done so in four places without leaving a trace. There are considerable
areas of the original ceiling visible from under the slab but these
show no signs of tampering. In Crematorium I the holes were filled when
the structure was converted to a bomb shelter for the SS (date unknown).”
(p. 73)
Let me stress right away that, on account of a kind of understandable reticence,
Keren, McCarthy, and Mazal did not want to come out and say that the
author of such nonsense was none other than their greatest expert on Auschwitz,
Robert Jan van Pelt!
Much more important, though, is the fact that the arguments used by the
authors are exactly those I had used in chapter 2 of this present paper, including
the reference to the ceiling of the alleged gas chamber in crematorium I, 44
which presents clearly apparent traces of four round openings that have been
filled in, but which have nothing to do with the alleged openings for the introduction
of Zyklon B. 45 A case in point? Whichever way it is, the authors have
recognized the full validity of my argumentation.
43
R.J. van Pelt, Pelt Report, expert report introduced in the trial of David John Cawdell Irving
vs. (1) Penguin Books Limited, (2) Deborah E. Lipstadt, Queen’s Bench Division, Royal
Courts of Justice, Strand, London, ref. 1996 I. No. 113., p. 295; The Case for Auschwitz, op.
cit. (note 38), p. 406.
44
See chapter 2.7.7. on p. 313 in this volume.
45
See chapter 3 of the present article.