Arthur R. Butz – The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century

Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century
An Alternative Interpretation
The Topf letter of 2 March 1943 is strange, and for a while I suspected its authenticity.
However, I have found an interpretation, which may be correct, and the
main purpose of this article is to propose it. After I have done that, I shall return to
the question of the relevance of this problem to the “extermination” allegations.
“HCN” is of course a compound of hydrogen, carbon, and nitrogen and may
be generated whenever materials containing these elements are burned. For example,
the fuel used for the crematorium ovens was coke, and it is well known that
HCN gas is a possible by-product in the process of making coke from coal. However,
there is apparently no danger of HCN release when coke, of whatever grade,
is burned as a fuel; otherwise it would not be in such common use. HCN gas
could not have been thus generated in the crematorium.
A remaining possibility is that HCN release was possible in the waste incinerator,
which shared the chimney with the cremation ovens. Many materials may release
HCN when burned. Among these are many fabrics, a highly relevant observation,
because the waste incinerator was most likely used to incinerate used
camp fabrics (e.g. inmate uniforms and bed linen and mattresses). For example,
silk and wool can release HCN when burned, a fact that has been known since the
Thirties.
As shown in Fig. 34, the chimney of Crematorium II was divided into three
ducts. Six furnaces used this chimney, namely the waste incinerator and the five
cremation furnaces (each with three muffles). The waste incinerator was on the
opposite side of the chimney in relation to the cremation furnaces. These six furnaces
used the three ducts on the basis of two per duct; thus, the waste incinerator
shared one of the three ducts with one of the cremation furnaces (the flues leading
from the furnaces to the chimney were underground). 660 The waste incinerator
was also supplied by Topf, 661 and it could have been Prüfer’s responsibility to
take into account any HCN danger arising from it. Also, a gas detector differing
from that used in the Zyklon delousing operations would seem fitting; perhaps a
detector generating an audible alarm was desired.
While a concern for HCN release in combustion is routine today, it would
have been novel in 1943, a fact that could explain the novelty for Prüfer, of the
desire for an HCN detector. Another thing that could account for this novelty is
that the waste incinerator design was itself novel. I have no expertise in the field,
but I would think intuitively that a waste incinerator design sharing a chimney
with other equipment, at which people are working, is dangerous.
The question of the quantities of HCN released in the burning of materials is
complicated and depends on “the chemical nature of the material, temperature,
660
661
436
Pressac (1989), pp. 284-287 (drawings of 23 Jan. 1942, on which Fig. 2 is based); pp. 306-312
(drawings of 19 March 1943, showing the same duct arrangement as in earlier drawings). Pressac
(1989), p. 288 also reproduces a profile drawing for this arrangement; this profile drawing is also
reproduced by Danuta Czech, Auschwitz Chronicle 1939-1945, Henry Holt, NY, 1990, p. 193.
The “Ofen” is a cremation oven; if the reader uses a magnifying glass and squints hard, the badly
lettered word “Müllverbrennungsofen” (waste incinerator) can be seen.
Pressac (1989), p. 217.