Gas Vans – forgeries galore!
Part II: Wetzel to Lohse
This article was originally created within the CODOH Revisionist Forum. It addresses a German wartime document dated October 25, 1941 mentioning “Gassing Devices”. For an online reproduction of this document see, for instance, http://www.holocaust-history.org/19411025-wetzel-no365/
Replies to the Simon Wiesenthal Center
Moving on to Mr. Breitbart's next contention, namely the reference to an alleged communication sent by Hinrich Lohse to Higher SS and Police leader Friedrich Jackeln, informing him that it was the “Fuehrer's wish” that the Jews of Riga be liquidated: Here again we are confronted with a brief statement which is prima facie patently absurd. Does Mr. Breitbart himself believe, or expect intelligent people to believe that the Jews of Riga were liquidated simply because someone told someone else that it was the “Fuehrer's wish”, and that this “wish” be carried out by Jackeln like the genie from Aladdin's lamp? There is a storm of controversy among historians concerning these alleged communications sent to and from Hinrich Lohse.
Lohse himself escaped prosecution by the Allies after the second world war, a fact which is suspicious in itself. He was prosecuted by the German government decades later for “participating in an undemocratic regime”. Alfred Rosenberg, one of the major defendants at Nuremberg and Lohse's nominal superior, consistently rejected documents without verifiable signatures, or “documents” which were purported to be facsimiles. The Lohse “documents” have a curious history: In 1945, a Jewish-American Sergeant attached to the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division claimed to have found these documents among Alfred Rosenberg's files. The Sergeant's name was Szajko Frydman. These “documents” are unique in that they were “processed” at the Yiddish Scientific Institute (In New York City!), before they were sent on to Nuremberg, Germany. Mr. Frydman also has the distinction of serving as a staff member at the Yivo Institute both BEFORE and AFTER his service in the U.S. Army. There are a number of facts I find to be extremely disturbing when broaching the question of authenticity regarding these documents. In the first place, they are facsimiles and do not bear the signature of the author. Only a large, printed “L” is scribbled at the bottom of the page. A second concern is what Alfred Rosenberg himself had to say about the Lohse “document” at Nuremberg. When asked by Prosecutor Dodd whether the “L” at the bottom of the page was Lohse's signature, Rosenberg replied, “That could hardly be Lohse. I do not know Lohse's initial…It could also be Leibrandt.” One thing is certain – whether this document is authentic or not, it certainly does not prove that it was the policy of the German government to exterminate the Jewish race in Europe.
Perhaps Alfred Rosenberg correctly assessed the actual situation when he stated:
“As time went by I received much information regarding instances of violence committed in the East. Upon investigating, it was found very often that these reports did not conform with the facts…I might perhaps give the following general answer about the many files and reports from my office: In the course of 12 years of my Party office and 3 years in the Eastern Ministry, many reports, memoranda, carbon copies from all sorts of divisions were delivered to my office…As far as these documents are concerned…without heading, without signature, and without any other details – which I never received personally, but which I assume was probably delivered by police circles to my office. Thus, with the best of intentions, I cannot state my position as to the contents of this document.” (All quotes taken from International Military Tribunal Proceedings, Volume XI)
Greg Raven Responds
What the anti-revisionists don't tell you about this document
This document is NOT a letter
The document cited above is in fact NOT a letter, but a draft of a letter, one that shows no evidence that it was sent.
This document is NOT signed
This draft bears Wetzel's initials only.
This document is rarely cited by knowledgeable anti-revisionists
The reason this document is not used more often in the fight against revisionists is that most anti-revisionists now avoid using it, even among themselves. This is obvious in the fact that there would be no split between the “Intentionalists” and the “Functionalists” if NO-365 were a valid document, for NO-365 would have been proof of the “Intentionalists” position.
Brack denied participation
Brack himself denied all the relevant portions of the letter that concern him, as seen in the transcript of his questioning at the NMT [Green Series, Volume 1, pages 888-889, as found in the NWCT CD-ROM, copyright Aristarchus Knowledge Industries 1995.]:
Q. I want to put to you NO-997, which is Prosecution Exhibit 506 for identification, your Honors. This is a draft of a letter from the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories to the Reich Commissioner for the East:
“Solution of the Jewish Problem. Reference: Your report of 10/4/1941, concerning the solution of the Jewish problem.
“I have no objection against your suggestion for the solution of the Jewish problem. Attached please find a memorandum concerning the conversation between my expert consultant, Amtsterichtsrat Dr. Wetzel, Oberdienstleiter Brack of the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, and Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, expert consultant to the Reich Security Main Office. Please note the details of the matter from this memo. Will you please take the necessary steps at the Reich Security Main Office and with Oberdienstleiter Brack from the Chancellery of the Fuehrer via your Higher SS and Police Leader. Please keep me informed.
[Handwritten] “F. d. H. M., [For the Minister]
“2d Copy, (a) Reich Security Main office, (b) Chancellery of the Fuehrer Attention: Oberdienstleiter Brack, Copy of (1), including enclosure for information.”
Did you receive a copy of this letter?
A [Brack]. May I first ask you what the date of this letter is?
Q. Only 1941 is mentioned here. But that is the date I told you. Did you receive a copy of this letter, Herr Brack?
A. I did not receive a copy of it nor did I even see a copy of that letter, nor do I know this Amtsgerichtsrat Wetzel.
Q. Did you have a conference with Eichmann on this problem, on the solution of the Jewish question?
A. I already said I cannot even remember the name Eichmann, nor can I remember the name Wetzel.
Q. Do you know anything about the matters discussed at this conference concerning the solution of the Jewish problem?
A. No. I know nothing.
Q. You have no idea. You never made any suggestions as to what kind of treatment or what kind of gas chambers should be used for the solution of the Jewish problem? You never did that?
A. I can remember nothing in this connection.
Q. You were questioned by the Tribunal last Friday as to whether plans were made for the construction of the gas chambers in the euthanasia stations or whether an engineer or specialist was ordered to assist the directors of the stations in setting up such gas chambers, were you not?
Q. You were not able to give any information to the Tribunal on that fact, were you?
A. No. I said I didn't concern myself with these matters.
Q. Is the name Kallmeyer, K-a-l-l-m-e-y-e-r, familiar to you?
A. Yes. But I can't remember in which connection.
Q. His wife executed an affidavit for you here. (Brack 39, Brack Ex. 23.) Do you remember him now?
A. Yes. Yes, I remember him now.
Q. Was Kallmeyer the engineer, or was he a chemist, who made these plans for gas chambers and assisted the directors in euthanasia stations in setting up these gas chambers?
A. No. Kallmeyer had to check that the gas chambers were operating properly, but I don't believe he made any plans for that purpose.
Q. Kallmeyer was the man who supervised these gas chambers, was he not?
A. I believe so, yes, but not for long, only for a short time.
Q. All right. And does the name Kallmeyer refresh your memory as to eventual plans you made together with Eichmann about the solution of the Jewish problem, Herr Brack?
Q. I want to put to you Document NO-365, which will be Prosecution Exhibit 507 for identification, your Honors. This is a draft from the Reich Ministry for the Occupied Territories dated Berlin, 10/2/1941.
“Referent AGR. Dr. Wetzel “Re: Solution of the Jewish Question
“1. To the Reich Commissioner for the East
“Re: Your Report of 10/4/1941 Concerning Solution of the Jewish question
“Referring to my letter of 10/18/1941, you are informed that Oberdienstleiter Brack of the Chancellery of the Fuehrer has declared himself ready to collaborate in the manufacture of the necessary shelters, as well as the gassing apparatus. At the present time the apparatus in question are not on hand in the Reich in sufficient number they will first have to be manufactured. Since in Brack's opinion the manufacture of the apparatus in the Reich will cause more difficulty than if manufactured on the spot, Brack deems it most expedient to send his people direct to Riga, especially his chemist Dr. Kallmeyer, who will have everything further done there. Oberdienstleiter Brack points out that the process in question is not without danger, so that special protective measures are necessary. Under these circumstances I beg you to turn to Oberdienstleiter Brack, in the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, through your Higher SS and Police Leader and to request the dispatch of the chemist Dr. Kallmeyer as well as of further aides. I draw attention to the fact that Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, the referent for Jewish questions in the RSHA, is in agreement with this process. On information from Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, camps for Jews to be set up in Riga and Minsk to which Jews from the old Reich territory may possibly be sent. At the present time, Jews being deported from the old Reich are to be sent to Litzmannstadt, [Lodz] but also to other camps, to be later used as labor in the East so far as they are able to work.
“As affairs now stand, there are no objections against doing away with those Jews who are unable to work with the Brack remedy. In this way occurrences would no longer be possible such as those il which, according to a report presently before me, took place at the shooting of Jews in Vilna and which, considering that the shootings were public, were hardly excusable.
Those able to work, on the other hand, will be transported to the East for labor service. It is self-understood that among the Jews capable of work, men and women are to be kept separate. “I beg you to advise me regarding your further steps.”
Herr Brack, are you still going to maintain what you said here in direct examination, namely, that you tried to protect the Jews and to save the Jews from their terrible fate and that you were never a champion of the extermination program?
A. I should even like to maintain that misuse, terrible misuse, was made of my name. I see from this letter and from the date of this letter that all these negotiations were carried out at a time when I was familiar away from Berlin, when I was on sick leave. If I have the possibility I hope I shall be able to bring witnesses who will testify to that effect. I must frankly admit that at this period something was going on which entirely contradicted my opinion, but this could only have been done under misuse of my name and my agency. I was not willing to participate in these things.
Adolf Eichmann denied participation
Adolf Eichmann also denied discussing gas chambers with Wetzel. According to Raul Hilberg (The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, page 875, 24n):
“In Jerusalem, Eichmann declared that he had not discussed gas chambers with Wetzel. Eichmann trial transcript, June 23, 1961, sess. 78, p. R1; July 17, 1961, sess. 98, p. Bb1.”
Wetzer was never punished
Wetzel was never punished for his alleged role in this matter. According to Ingrid Weckert, who wrote an eleven-page study of this document in June 1990, Wetzel had no trouble after the war with the Allies and worked for the UN in Cuba. In 1961, he was indicted by a German magistrate in Hannover. Wetzel was not asked any questions about the “Vergasungsapparate” mentioned in the letter, and to this day we have no idea what this means. The prosecutor was satisfied with Wetzel's answers, and decided there would be no trial.
No gassings in Riga
No one now claims there were gassings in Riga.
Conclusion
When given the choice of all the documents said to support claims of homicidal gassing by the Third Reich, Brian Harmon chose this one. Therefore, we must conclude that this document represents Harmon's best documentary evidence of the existence of homicidal Nazi gas chambers. The reader is invited to judge for himself: if this is the “best evidence,” how weak must be the rest of the so-called evidence?
Please remember that we are constantly told that the Holocaust is the best-documented event in history, yet supporters of the Holocaust extermination stories are forced to rely on documents such as NO-365 that are essentially worthless. Rather than hunt up further worthless documents, it would be far better for the anti-revisionists to meet Robert Faurisson's challenge:
“Show me or draw me a Nazi gas chamber.”
The reason they have not done so, of course, is because they cannot: no such gas chamber exists.
Author
Bibliographic information about this document: n/a
Other contributors to this document: n/a
Editor’s comments: n/a