Irving v. Lipstadt

Appeal

Holocaust Denial on Trial, Statement of Mark David Bateman: Electronic Edition, by Mark David Bateman

Table of Contents
<< MQ >>

N. Gas Tight Doors

  • Rudolf pages 283-305
  • Van Pelt pages 140-150
  • Judgment J7,60, 7.68, 7,121, 7.122, 13.84.
  • Libson paragraphs 53-55
  • Bateman paragraphs 81-84
There is nothing new in this section, which is clearly based on material published in 1998 (page 285 Rudolf).
Rudolf alleges that there were no "truly" gas-tight doors at Auschwitz-Birkenau, based on all photographs, descriptions and documents available (page 303). But this flies in the face of the evidence, accepted by Irving/Rudolf, that there were gas chambers used for delousing: and, as Van Pelt points out at pages 140-141, wooden, felt-sealed doors were used as gas-tight doors for delousing (where the concentration is high). There are further questions left unanswered by Rudolf (see pages 447-148). For example, why, if morgue I of crematorium II was a delousing room, is there no Prussian blue to be found on its wails? And if the doors (being merely made of wood and sealed with felt) were not "truly" gas-tight, how could they have served for air-raid shelters?
 
One startling example of Rudolf's misquotation of source documentation can be seen at page 302 of his witness statement: Rudolf claims that Pressac had stated that a gas-tight door can only be intended for a gas chamber; in fact, Pressac said no such thing -- all that he did was to include that statement as a proposition in the context of demonstrating logical flaws in an argument (see van Pelt pages 148-150).
<< MQ >>