PDA

View Full Version : The Tragic Death of a Night Porter



Hermie
2nd August 2010, 07:44 AM
This really is a tragedy.
A terrible injustice once again that shows us what we are allowing our lives to become.

http://piotrbein.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/the-tragic-death-of-a-night-porter/

IN MEMORIAM

By JP Bellinger

On June 11, 2010, a badly decomposed body was discovered wedged in between the seat of a parked vehicle in a shopping center located in Karolinka, Opole, in Poland. The cadaver was decomposed beyond recognition, and DNA tests turned out to be inconclusive in establishing the identity of the victim. However, papers and documents discovered inside the vehicle led police to conclude that the deceased individual was Dariusz Ratajczak, a professor of history who formerly taught at the University of Opole. He was 48 years old at the time of his death. Family members confirmed the fact that the decedent was indeed Dariusz Ratajczak. After being questioned, a number of witnesses told the police that the car had only recently been parked there. In fact, just prior to his demise, Ratajczak had been planning a business trip to Holland, where he had been hired to work as a translator.

In fact, Dariusz Ratajczak’s troubles began with the publication of his booklet, “Dangerous Topics,” in March, 1999. The treatise was self-published and limited to only 320 copies, but gave credence to the old maxim that the ‘pen is mightier than the sword. Ratajczak’s essay provoked a firestorm of criticism among his contemporaries. In the month following the book’s publication, a rather surprised Ratajczak was summoned to the editorial offices of the Gazeta Wyborcza, a leading Polish newspaper, where he was sneeringly told, “We’ll trample you into the ground for the little book, and the little sub-chapter on the Holocaust.”

True to their word, the editor of the newspaper proceeded to do just that. The Gazeta Wyborcza instituted a smear campaign of harassment and intimidation calculated to ruin the man’s life and livelihood – and it succeeded beyond their wildest expectations. Ratajczak was charged under Poland’s ‘Holocaust denial’ law, which had been passed by the legislature as a result of pressure from the Jewish lobby. Even though the court eventually dismissed the charges against him, the smears, lies and libels emanating from the media continued to dog him with the fanatical persistence of an Inspecteur Javert. Instigated by the media assault, others joined the chorus to expel Ratajczak from his teaching position.

The director of the Auschwitz Museum referred to him as a “Nazi,” and the spokesman for the Israeli embassy in Poland, Michael Sobelman, publicly expressed his “surprise” that “such a man works at a Polish university.” Unsurprisingly, the Simon Wiesenthal Center joined in the chorus, accusing Ratajczak of being an ‘anti-Semite,’ to which the Professor responded rather phlegmatically:

At present, the charge of anti-Semitism has become a sort of exceptionally brutal weapon, which the “Establishment” uses ruthlessly against independent thinking men (for the greater fun of it, also against Jews, such as Dr. Israel Shahak.) Write, in accordance with truth, about the almost racist character of the state of Israel, and you will be an anti-Semite. Point to Simon Wiesenthal, his errors of the past, or rub Mr. Adam Michnik his Gazeta Wyborcza up the wrong way, and you will be an anti-Semite. Write a few words of truth about all those Wiesels, Kosinskis, or a few anti-Polish Australian liars of Jewish extraction, and you will be an anti-Semite, of course… And so on, on, on. Sheer paranoia, or – and here we are going back to the source – an important element of political correctness.

Perplexed by the ferocity and persistence of the attacks launched against him, Ratajczak commented–

“What hurts me most is that I found myself in a group of historians who have been muzzled. After all, please see: from 45 years to now the number of Jews murdered in Auschwitz-Birkenau has dropped from six million to less than one million. It’s official data. Indeed, even if they had killed one man, that would be a tragedy. But how is it that some historians may legitimately question the numbers of the Holocaust, and others can not? How is it that some people can reduce the six million to less than a million and nothing bad is happening to them? How is it that some people are not allowed to examine this subject and even be wrong, while other historians are allowed all this?” [1]

Expelled from his teaching position at the University of Opole on charges of ‘denying the Holocaust,’ he was compelled to seek work as a menial laborer. Prior to dismissing him, Ratajczak suffered the indignity of being ordered by his superiors at the University to submit to psychiatric treatment for presuming to question any aspect of the holocaust. A colleague advised him that the only option available to him would be to move out of Opole and change his identity. The slander campaign became so unbearable that it alienated his spouse and destroyed his marriage, and the once celebrated professor was reduced to penury and destitution. Wherever he applied for work, prospective employers would receive telephone calls from ‘yellow’ journalists informing them that the applicant was a ‘holocaust denier,’ and that hiring him would be ‘bad for business.’ The hint alone sufficed to induce employers to subtly drop his application into the nearest wastebasket.

In the weeks preceding his death, Dariusz Ratajczak turned into a phantom of his former self, abandoned and shunned by family, friends, and former colleagues alike. The disturbing news of Ratajczak’s death shocked traditionalist and patriotic organizations in Poland, whose spokespersons lambasted Ratajczak’s detractors as people having the blood of an innocent man on their heads.

For them, Professor Ratajczak’s death prompts a serious moral dilemma: Is questioning the holocaust, or holocaust ‘denial’ of more intrinsic worth than the life of any human being?

In a moral sense, what possesses greater intrinsic value? Maintaining the mainstream version of the Holocaust at any cost, or the life of a single human being whose only offence was to engage in historical research in a quest for the truth? Disturbingly, there are those who would stop at nothing to silence any and all independent inquiries into the historical event known to historians as the Holocaust, a fact best illustrated by the response of those who supported the willful and malicious persecution of a man for exercising his God given right of intellectual freedom. Unfazed by the news of his death, Ratajczak’s detractors gloated over his demise, intractable in their cynical hatred for the man. One critic mockingly commented that he ‘lived off his wife and could not find a better job than a waiter and a night porter. He lied, and had mental health problems, and led a miserable life and had a miserable death.” As if lying, personal misfortune and mental health problems warrant a miserable death for anyone!

Moreover, the obvious point was deliberately overlooked: The man was once gainfully employed, and highly respected, and his ‘mental problems’ did not exist until the usual merchants of sleaze and smear sunk their hooks into him, but by resorting to this process of vilification, the victim is dehumanized and condemned, and the assassins are cheered and comforted.

The reader may catch a glimpse of Professor Ratajczak’s profound insights and spontaneous genius, as revealed during the course of an interview where he proffered an assessment of “politically correct” establishment historians:

It is they who, deliberately, convert history into a handmaid of current political interests of equally morally and intellectually cheap ruling elites. Finally, it is they who decide which fact or historical figure to make prominent, and about which to keep silent to the death. Of course, they do it from the angle of current political usefulness….

Everywhere half-truths, lies, propaganda. But it is not at all madness, but a method leading to the destruction of historical consciousness, to the cutting off from the truly Polish historical heritage, without which the nation cannot exist. A nation is, after all, past, present, and future generations. If we break the first element of the triad, the whole starts making no sense. And that is where the “creativity” of the politically correct correctors of history is leading.

If there is an uninvestigated historical fact, I investigate it, whether somebody likes it, or not. If there is a problem which requires at least reporting about, or expounding, I report about and expound it. Regardless of whether they accuse me, for instance, of breaking the law. Because of this, I am an easy target for attacks. Such is the lot of a man not caring about censorship (the communist one before, and the politically correct one today). Good God, I didn’t become a historian to write between lines. A historian has one basic role to perform. It is to reach the truth. In essence, truth is a historian’s only friend. A historian ought to know that truth has no hues; truth is always clear, and one.

Professor Ratajczak’s death was ruled a ‘suicide,’ but skeptical people, perhaps bearing in mind the recent arrest of a Mossad assassin operating in Poland, are asking how a person in an advanced staged of composition was able to drive to a public parking lot and park a car?

In the preface to his prescient treatise, “Dangerous Topics” Professor Ratajczak opined:

“Writing about Polish – Jewish relations is a risky activity. Especially for the Pole, who believes that these relations should be presented on the basis of truth. It’s easy then – paradoxically – to be exposed to charges of extreme nationalism, xenophobia and Anti-Semitism. The consequences are often sad: a social boycott (everyone has those friends they deserve), racial and publishing blacklisting. In the end-occupational death.”

Unfortunately, and certainly unforeseen by Professor Ratajczak, ‘occupational death’ transformed into physical extinction.

Prior to his unforgiveable transgression, Professor Ratajczak was feted as one of Poland’s most brilliant historians, and highly regarded by his students. He leaves behind a wife and two orphaned children. His funeral was held in secret, without notifying the public, and the results of a mandated autopsy are said to be forthcoming.

What may be said as his epitaph? Dariusz Ratajczak shall most likely be remembered as the victim of a cruel, relentless fate at the hands of cruel, relentless people who used his book, “Dangerous Themes, to drive the nail into his coffin. On the day Dariusz Ratajczak died, free speech in Poland died with him.

[1] Bibula pismo niezalezne, http://macgregor.salon24.pl/195441,dr-dariusz-Ratajczak jczak-nie-zyje

…………………à ¢â‚¬Â¦Ã¢â‚¬Â¦.

See also an interview with Dr. Ratajczak by Z. Koreywo with notes by Mark Matyszewski. Click on “Dariusz Ratajczak” on the left margin of the main page of papurec.org to get to Part 1 of the interview, then on table of contents in upper right to read Parts 2 and 3.

keehah
2nd August 2010, 08:54 AM
While not knowing the details, it sounds familiar.

Established liars will kill for their lies, the sheep will follow orders if they are comfortable with lies.

As an all too common example, ook what happened to the first doctor who provided data showing medical personal wash hands between patients. He was fired too and attacked by the MSM of the time:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

Semmelweis postulated the theory of washing with "chlorinated lime solutions" in 1847 while working in Vienna General Hospital's First Obstetrical Clinic, where doctors' wards had three times the mortality of midwives' wards. He published a book of his findings in childbed fever in Etiology, Concept and Prophylaxis of Childbed Fever.

Despite various publications of results where hand-washing reduced mortality to below 1%, Semmelweis's practice earned widespread acceptance only years after his death, when Louis Pasteur confirmed the germ theory. In 1865, a nervous breakdown (or possibly Alzheimer's) landed him in an asylum, where Semmelweis died of injuries, at age 47.

In 1856, Semmelweis's assistant Josef Fleischer reported the successful results of handwashings at St. Rochus and Pest maternity institutions in the Viennese Medical Weekly (Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift). The editor remarked sarcastically that it was time people stopped being misled about the theory of chlorine washings.

In 1858 Semmelweis finally published his own account of his work in an essay entitled, "The Etiology of Childbed Fever". Two years later he published a second essay, "The Difference in Opinion between Myself and the English Physicians regarding Childbed Fever". In 1861, Semmelweis finally published his main work Die Ätiologie, der Begriff und die Prophylaxis des Kindbettfiebers (German for The Etiology, Concept and Prophylaxis of Childbed Fever).

In his 1861 book, Semmelweis lamented the slow adoption of his ideas: "Most medical lecture halls continue to resound with lectures on epidemic childbed fever and with discourses against my theories. […] The medical literature for the last twelve years continues to swell with reports of puerperal epidemics, and in 1854 in Vienna, the birthplace of my theory, 400 maternity patients died from childbed fever. In published medical works my teachings are either ignored or attacked. The medical faculty at Würzburg awarded a prize to a monograph written in 1859 in which my teachings were rejected".

In Berlin, the professor of obstetrics, Joseph Hermann Schmidt, approved of obstetrical students having ready access to morgues in which they could spend time while waiting for the labor process.

In a textbook, Carl Braun, Semmelweis's successor as assistant in the first clinic, identified 30 causes of childbed fever; only the 28th of these was cadaverous infection. Other causes included conception and pregnancy, uremia, pressure exerted on adjacent organs by the shrinking uterus, emotional traumata, mistakes in diet, chilling, and atmospheric epidemic influences. The impact of Braun's views are clearly visible in the rising mortality rates in the 1850s.

Ede Flórián Birly, Semmelweis's predecessor as Professor of Obstetrics at the University of Pest, never accepted Semmelweis's teachings; he continued to believe that puerperal fever was due to uncleanliness of the bowel.

August Breisky, an obstetrician in Prague, rejected Semmelweis's book as "naive" and he referred to it as "the Koran of puerperal theology". Breisky objected that Semmelweis had not proved that puerperal fever and pyemia are identical, and he insisted that other factors beyond decaying organic matter certainly had to be included in the etiology of the disease.

Carl Edvard Marius Levy, head of the Copenhagen maternity hospital and an outspoken critic of Semmelweis's ideas, had reservations concerning the unspecific nature of cadaverous particles and that the supposed quantities were unreasonably small. "If Dr. Semmelweis had limited his opinion regarding infections from corpses to puerperal corpses, I would have been less disposed to denial than I am. […] And, with due respect for the cleanliness of the Viennese students, it seems improbable that enough infective matter or vapor could be secluded around the fingernails to kill a patient."180–181 In fact, Robert Koch later used precisely this fact to prove that various infecting materials contained living organisms which could reproduce in the human body, i.e. since the poison could be neither chemical nor physical in operation, it must be biological.

At a conference of German physicians and natural scientists, most of the speakers rejected his doctrine, including the celebrated Rudolf Virchow, who was a scientist of the highest authority of his time. Virchow’s great authority in medical circles contributed potently to the lack of recognition of the Semmelweis doctrine for a long time.

It has been contended that Semmelweis could have had an even greater impact if he had managed to communicate his findings more effectively and avoid antagonising the medical establishment, even given the opposition from entrenched viewpoints.

Breakdown, death and oblivion

Beginning from 1861 Semmelweis suffered from various nervous complaints. He suffered from severe depression and became excessively absentminded. Paintings from 1857 to 1864 show a progression of aging. He turned every conversation to the topic of childbed fever.

After a number of unfavorable foreign reviews of his 1861 book, Semmelweis lashed out against his critics in series of Open Letters. They were addressed to various prominent European obstetricians, including Späth, Scanzoni, Siebold, and to "all obstetricians". They were full of bitterness, desperation, and fury and were "highly polemical and superlatively offensive" at times denouncing his critics as irresponsible murderers or ignoramuses. He also called upon Siebold to arrange a meeting of German obstetricians somewhere in Germany to provide a forum for discussions on puerperal fever where he would stay "until all have been converted to his theory." The attacks undermined his professional credibility.

In mid-1865, his public behaviour became irritating and embarrassing to his associates. He also began to drink immoderately; he spent progressively more time away from his family, sometimes in the company of a prostitute; and his wife noticed changes in his sexual behavior. On July 13, 1865 the Semmelweis family visited friends, and during the visit Semmelweis's behavior seemed particularly inappropriate.

It is impossible to appraise the nature of Semmelweis's disorder. It may have been Alzheimer's disease, a form of senile dementia, which is associated with rapid aging. It may have been third stage of syphilis, a then-common disease of obstetricians who examined thousands of women at gratis institutions. Or it may have been emotional exhaustion from overwork and stress.

In 1865 János Balassa wrote a document referring Semmelweis to a mental institution. On July 30 Ferdinand von Hebra lured him, under the pretense of visiting one of Hebra's "new Institutes", to a Viennese insane asylum located in Lazarettgasse (Landes-Irren-Anstalt in der Lazarettgasse). Semmelweis surmised what was happening and tried to leave. He was severely beaten by several guards, secured in a straitjacket and confined to a darkened cell. Apart from the straitjacket, treatments at the mental institution included dousing with cold water and administering castor oil, a laxative. He died after two weeks, on August 13, 1865, aged 47, from a gangrenous wound, possibly caused by the beating. The autopsy revealed extensive internal injuries, the cause of death pyemia—blood poisoning.

Such histories are all to common.

Book
2nd August 2010, 09:10 AM
In fact, Dariusz Ratajczak’s troubles began with the publication of his booklet, “Dangerous Topics,” in March, 1999. The treatise was self-published and limited to only 320 copies, but gave credence to the old maxim that the ‘pen is mightier than the sword. Ratajczak’s essay provoked a firestorm of criticism among his contemporaries. In the month following the book’s publication, a rather surprised Ratajczak was summoned to the editorial offices of the Gazeta Wyborcza, a leading Polish newspaper, where he was sneeringly told, “We’ll trample you into the ground for the little book, and the little sub-chapter on the Holocaust.”

Dariusz Ratajczak’s little booklet of Truth should be published on the internet so that he may live on:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial

:redfc

keehah
2nd August 2010, 09:22 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dariusz_Ratajczak

According to Ruth E. Gruber report, Dariusz Ratajczak, in his book Tematy Niebezpieczne ("Dangerous Themes"), appears to agree with Holocaust deniers who claim that for technical reasons it was not possible to kill millions of people in the Nazi gas chambers, that Zyklon B gas was used only for disinfecting, that there was no Nazi plan for the systematic murder of Jews and that most Holocaust scholars "are adherents of a religion of the Holocaust". Rajtaczak would defend himself claiming that he only reproduced the Holocaust deniers claims to illustrate their point of view but did not endorse them. Ratajczak's book triggered widespread public criticism and drew protests from numerous sources, including the director of the museum at the former Auschwitz death camp, senator Wladyslaw Bartoszewski Polish mainstream academic community and bishop of Lublin.

The University of Opole suspended Dariusz Ratajczak from his teachings in 1999. In the same year he was brought to local court, as denying the existence of the Holocaust is a criminal offence in Poland. In December 1999 a court in Opole found Ratajczak guilty of breaching the Institute of National Remembrance law that outlawed the denial of crimes against humanity committed by Nazi or by communist regimes in Poland, but that his crime had caused "negligible harm to society". The reason for the low sentence was that Ratajczak's self-published book had only 230 copies and that in the second edition and public appearances he criticized the Holocaust denial.

The verdict was criticized by some, like former victims of Nazi crimes, as too lenient. Two mainstream liberal Polish newspapers like Gazeta Wyborcza and Rzeczpospolita criticized the verdict in support of Ratajczaks' freedom of speech. For Ratajczak support spoke and one of the leaders of League of Polish Families party Ryszard Bender, who during Radio Maria broadcast, denied the fact that Auschwitz was a death camp, which caused another scandal in Poland.

At the end Dariusz Ratajczak was fired from University of Opole in 2000 and banned from teaching at universities for three years. During this time he worked as storeman.[citation needed] In 2000 he became the European Associate for Adelaide Institute, Australia. Ratajczak remained defiant and denied all charges, appealing for an outright acquittal; his critics also appealed demanded a harsher sentence, including a prison term. Eventually after a series of appeals the verdict was upheld and the case dismissed in 2002.

A scandal surrounding a Ratajczak’s book whose publication represents what some described as the first serious case of Holocaust denial in the Poland (although there have been others).

Ratajczak revised the book in 2005, attributing the claims regarding Zyklon B to historical revisionists.

In 2000 he became the European Associate of the Revisionists at Adelaide Institute, Australia.

Dariusz Ratajczak was found dead in a car parked near the shopping centre in Opole on June 11, 2010. The body was in the car for nearly two weeks. The cause of death remains uncertain.

mamboni
2nd August 2010, 09:46 AM
That anyone could believe that the Nazi's would choose Zyklon-B as the means of systematically killing millions of people over the span of a few years is ludicrous: it is hard to imagine a less effective agent vis-a-vis speed of action and lethality.

Hermie
2nd August 2010, 11:42 AM
That anyone could believe that the Nazi's would choose Zyklon-B as the means of systematically killing millions of people over the span of a few years is ludicrous: it is hard to imagine a less effective agent vis-a-vis speed of action and lethality.


Also, the claims of "Death Vans" using diesel engines to exterminate people is highly dubious.

But that man was hounded and his life destroyed because he dared to ask what is the truth.

From http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcpatwill.html

"... Even under maximum load, a Diesel's exhaust contains less than 0.4% carbon monoxide. By contrast, all gasoline engines easily produce 7% CO--and, with some adjustment of the idle mixture adjustment screw on the carburetor, as much as 12%. Diesels, by contrast, have no carburetors to begin with; no adjustments are possible.

From the vague anecdotal descriptions of the Diesel murder process in the Holocaust literature, there is no reason to believe that anything more than a crude, simple arrangement was involved. The Diesel engine was supposedly located outside of the gas chamber building either on a stand or in a tank or truck--take your pick-- with the exhaust directed into the gas chambers. Those arrangements would have meant that the engine would have been operating at idle or, at worst, fast idle. Under such non-load conditions, any Diesel ever built would produce less than 600 ppm of CO--that is less than 1/10th of 1% carbon monoxide. That would be barely enough CO to give someone a headache after half-an-hour of continuous exposure -- but, nothing worse than that. ..."

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcpatwill.html

mamboni
2nd August 2010, 11:47 AM
That anyone could believe that the Nazi's would choose Zyklon-B as the means of systematically killing millions of people over the span of a few years is ludicrous: it is hard to imagine a less effective agent vis-a-vis speed of action and lethality.


Also, the claims of "Death Vans" using diesel engines to exterminate people is highly dubious.

But that man was hounded and his life destroyed because he dared to ask what is the truth.

From http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcpatwill.html

"... Even under maximum load, a Diesel's exhaust contains less than 0.4% carbon monoxide. By contrast, all gasoline engines easily produce 7% CO--and, with some adjustment of the idle mixture adjustment screw on the carburetor, as much as 12%. Diesels, by contrast, have no carburetors to begin with; no adjustments are possible.

From the vague anecdotal descriptions of the Diesel murder process in the Holocaust literature, there is no reason to believe that anything more than a crude, simple arrangement was involved. The Diesel engine was supposedly located outside of the gas chamber building either on a stand or in a tank or truck--take your pick-- with the exhaust directed into the gas chambers. Those arrangements would have meant that the engine would have been operating at idle or, at worst, fast idle. Under such non-load conditions, any Diesel ever built would produce less than 600 ppm of CO--that is less than 1/10th of 1% carbon monoxide. That would be barely enough CO to give someone a headache after half-an-hour of continuous exposure -- but, nothing worse than that. ..."

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcpatwill.html


Right! Diesel combustion happens to produce almost no Carbon monoxide. And rest assured the Germans, inventors and dominant developers of the internal combustion engine, were well aware of this. Suggesting that the Nazi's used diesel exhaust to kill people is the height of absurd. The more one looks at the details of the Holocaust tale, the more one realizes that it is a complete hoax and totally unsupported by real world facts.