Sobibor - Holocaust Propaganda And Reality - Unity of Nobility ...

392 J. GRAF, T. KUES, C. MATTOGNO, SOBIBÓR
We cannot answer these questions in an unequivocal manner, as
there is no documentary evidence describing the conditions in the Sobibór
camp. Witness testimony is totally unreliable; the witnesses have,
without exception, lied with respect to the main point of the charges –
the alleged mass killing of Jews (by means of a “black fluid,” “chlorine,”
or engine exhaust gases) – and we thus have no reason to believe
their statements on the subject of any sadistic behavior of the camp personnel.
On the other hand, there are accounts whose veracity can hardly be
disputed. Leon Feldhendler, who was interned at Sobibór from early
1943 until the uprising on 14 October of the same year, 1138 describes the
living conditions of the Jewish artisans in the following words: 1139
“In camp I, Jewish tradesmen worked for the Germans – joiners,
tailors, cobblers. They had their own barracks for sleeping in. There
were 30 Germans and 180 Ukrainians. The tradesmen were living
very nicely, in their workshops, they had comfortable quarters. […]
Their daily rations consisted of half a kilogram of bread, soup,
horsemeat, groats (from the transports) twice a week. […] Work:
from 6.a.m. through 12 noon, an hour for lunch and then again work
until 5 p.m. […] Time off between 5 and 10 p.m., at their discretion.”
It is a bit difficult to believe that the Jewish inmate Feldhendler
would in any way have embellished conditions at Sobibór in order to
white-wash the National Socialist system.
In view of these considerations we decide as follows: The camp personnel
is to be acquitted of the main point of the indictment – the systematic
murder of Jews – for manifest innocence, as well as of the secondary
point – of willful ill-treatment of detainees – for lack of evidence.
We assume that euthanasia was practiced at Sobibór on a number of
detainees (the feeble-minded or those having contagious diseases). In
that case the SS men concerned would be guilty. Any alleged difficulties
in providing sufficient food for the bulk of the population could be
regarded as mitigating circumstances, but not as a justification. On the
other hand, if euthanasia of the feeble-minded is presently considered in
Western countries as “Nazi barbarism,” we wish to call this a blatant
and repulsive hypocrisy in view of the fact that these same countries al-
1138 J. Schelvis, op. cit. (note 71), p. 234.
1139 N. Blumental (ed.), op. cit. (note 22), p. 204.