Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old June 10th, 2008 #41
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

slamin2:

Quote:
"How/why do you conclude that there would be 50,000 shells and shell casings at Treblinka?"
I'm glad you brought that up slamin, what I meant to be saying is - AT LEAST 50,000. The "How/why" would be from Yitzhak Arad who claimed "tens of thousands" were shot there and Samuel Rajzman's testimony at the Nuremberg Show Trial:

MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: And tell us, please, how did the Germans behave while killing their victims in Treblinka?

RAJZMAN: If you mean the actual executions, every German guard had his special job. I shall cite only one example. We had a ScharFuehrer Menz, whose special job was to guard the so-called "Lazarett." In this "Lazarett" all weak women and little children were exterminated who had not the strength to go themselves to the gas chambers.

MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: Perhaps, Witness, you can describe this "Lazarett" to the Tribunal?

SAMUEL RAJZMAN: This was part of a square which was closed in with a wooden fence. All women, aged persons, and sick children were driven there...

If all the weak women and children, the aged persons and the sick and weak from the transports were taken to and shot in the lazarett, then actually there would have to be more than 50,000. Probably much more. I guess I have just been using 50,000 as a conservative estimate.

So again, thanks for reminding me of my much too low estimate and I will try to remember from here on to use AT LEAST when I mention the figure of the 50,000 jews allegedly shot in the Treblinka Lazarett.

But of course that is not all. If you read the "eyewittness testimony," jews were allegedly being shot all the time every day all over the camp for any and every reason. The "eyewitness testimony" is full of tall tales of jewish workers being shot - dozens of them every single day, at all locations in the camp, most for the most minor of infractions.

So yeah, 50,000 would be considered a very conservitive estimate.
 
Old June 10th, 2008 #42
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Well don't I feel like an idiot. Now that I look, I see that I did use the phrase AT LEAST 50,000. But if you will notice Slamin2, I also quote Arad and use the phrase - "tens of thousands." In fact, now that I think about it, "tens of thousands" is the phrase that I use most often when talking about the alleged bullets and shell casings that could be found at Treblinka - IF the big-lie were true.

But of course, it is all a moot point, as you will soon see.
 
Old June 10th, 2008 #43
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Final Summation

The alleged photographic documentation of the "physical evidence" for the alleged mass murder of 870,000 jews at Treblinka, as presented by Roberto Muehlenkamp in her “debate” with Greg Gerdes:


# 1 - The "huge mass graves -

A – Aerial photo (Roberta claims the alleged graves are in the “receiving area” of the camp):

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...r1944_edit.jpg

B – Ground photo (Roberta claims the alleged grave is “exactly” in the “death camp” area):

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg


# 2 - Corpses / bones / cremated remains / miscellaneous photos:

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5811_1_web.jpg

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_2.jpg

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/photos.html

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/lasttracks.html


# 3 – Teeth:

Roberta was unable to provide any physical evidence / photographic proof what-so-ever that so much as a single tooth was ever found at Treblinka.


# 4 - Bullets & Shell casings:

Roberta was unable to provide any physical evidence / photographic proof what-so-ever that so much as a single bullet or shell casing was ever found at Treblinka.


# 5 – The “bullet catcher:”

Roberta was unable to provide any physical evidence / photographic proof what-so-ever for the alleged “bullet catcher” she claims was employed at Treblinka.


# 6 - Photos of the camp itself taken from the outside:

Roberta was unable to provide any photographs what-so-ever of the camp itself taken from outside of the camp.
 
Old June 11th, 2008 #44
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta, as far as your nonsensical accusations that I've been "quote mining,"
Why nonsensical, Gerdes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
you seem to forget that you see a Nazi conspiracy in every post
I take this "just look at yourself" - response as another admission that you’ve been quote-mining, thanks. And what Nazi conspiracy are you talking about? Unlike you, I don’t believe in conspiracy theories. And all I see in every one of your posts is a lying and not too bright loser desperately trying to push through his imbecile Jew-hating and Nazi-loving articles of faith.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
and your insane ramblings go on and on and on and on and on.
Funny, that’s what I think every time I read Gerdes’ repetitive baloney.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
For the sake of saving space in my own posts, I can only pick out the highlights of your crazy drivel.
A lame excuse for persistently leaving out the Polish site investigation reports and all of the documentary and eyewitness evidence I have presented and idiotically pretending that photographs are all that matters. Also a lame excuse for leaving out important parts of my arguments, those that you cannot handle. Try something more convincing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Could you imagine how much time and space would be taken up if I copied verbatim all your mentally ill / retarded blather?
The only mentally ill/retarded blather here is yours, and what’s the problem with space? Besides, your "recaps" are perfectly superfluous to whoever has been following the discussion, and also boring. If you instead addressed the evidence you keep ignoring and tried to answer the questions you keep running away from, that would make this discussion more interesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
The recaps that I do are done just to help people cut through all that nonsensical BS you vomit up in every single one of your posts.
The only one who vomits BS here is Gerdes, and if you think people need your mendacious "recaps" to follow the discussion, you’re assuming that their reading capabilities and memory are as lousy as yours. Is that the reason for your "recaps", or are you trying to obfuscate the evidence you don’t dare address and avoid answering the questions you have been repeatedly asked? Methinks it’s the latter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
It's called clarification stupid.
Stupid is what you must think our readers are in order not to notice that your "recaps" are meant to pull the wool over their ears and let them see only what you want them to see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
And regardless, it's a moot point now isn't it? So why are you still bitching about it? Just to bitch?
It’s not a moot point, but a matter of Gerdes finally addressing his opponent’s evidence instead of ignoring most of it and boring anyone who’s got half a brain with his mendacious "recaps".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Ok Roberta, you have mentioned the photos of the alleged gas chamber and the excavators. But if you will look closely at this link you have provided:

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/photos.html

Those photos are included in that collection. That collection of photos also includes this alleged mass grave photo:

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...grave_edit.jpg

So I will delete it from my next recap.
I think I’ve made it clear already where you can stick your idiotic "recaps", Gerdes. Are you that slow on the uptake?

Ah, and it’s always amusing to see how afraid you are even of the little evidence you dare to address at all, to the point of calling into question its authenticity with your "alleged" BS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Again Roberta, all the alleged photographic "proof" of the physical evidence you have presented is either included singularly or is included somewhere in the two links with the collection of photos - excavators, gas chambers and the one "mass grave."

Correct?
Don’t know and don’t give a fuck. Instead of making a fool of yourself with recap after recap of only the photographic evidence I have provided (which I stated to be no more than a means of illustration and visualization of what becomes apparent from other evidence), I suggest you do one of the following:

a) Provide what I have asked you to provide about a dozen times throughout our discussion, an acceptable justification for your sole focus of photographic documentation of physical evidence and your ignoring not only written documentation of such evidence, but also all documentary and eyewitnesses evidence I have presented;

b) If you cannot provide such explanation, include into the record of evidence under discussion not only photographs, but also written descriptions of the physical evidence as well as the documentary and eyewitness evidence I have referred to.

Which of them shall it be, Gerdes? Alternative a) or alternative b)?

Or will it again the cowardly way out you have chosen so far, that of focusing on photographic documentation alone without so much as trying to provide a reason for this highly unscientific focus on just one type of record of just one category of evidence?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Ok Roberta, I think we’re done here. I have given you more than enough opportunities to present the physical evidence for the Treblinka holocaust.
No, Gerdes, we are not done here until you have at least done the following:

1. Regarding the photo under http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/photos.html that is captioned

«MASS GRAVE
If Treblinka, the boards were added to the bodies in course of a test burning. Usually the victims were buried in mass graves, later cremated on roasts.

Photo: Bundesarchiv No. 183-F0918-0201-011»

, answer the question what, if not a corner of one mass grave where the bodies have been covered with boards and what looks like tarpaulin sheets, you think this photograph shows.

2. Regarding the excavator photos shown under http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/excavators2.html , answer the question what you think those excavators would have been doing in what you claim was a "transit camp".

3. Regarding the marked-up air photo shown under http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...r1944_edit.jpg , answer the question what, if not mass graves in a section of the camp where eyewitnesses described mass graves – namely what that would be compatible with your "transit camp" theory – the ground scarring shapes I pointed out are supposed to have been.

4. Regarding the ground photos shown under the following links:

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/lasttracks.html

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_3.jpg

, answer the question what, if not parts of the former Treblinka extermination camp and especially the burial area described in the Polish site investigation reports of 13 November and 29 December 1945 quoted in my article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure … under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...treblinka.html, these photos are supposed to show.

5. Regarding the above-mentioned site investigation reports, answer the question why, i.e. on the basis of what rules or standards of evidence you can show us, you don’t include these written descriptions of the physical evidence on site in the record of physical evidence to the Treblinka mass killings.

6. Regarding the documentary and eyewitness evidence listed in my Topix post # 482 under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T...H7P8C/p23#c482 , answer the question why, i.e. on the basis of what rules or standards of evidence you can show us, you don’t include this documentary and eyewitness evidence in the record of evidence to the Treblinka mass killings.

7. Regarding your claim that Treblinka was a "transit camp", answer the question where the about 750,000 people deported to Treblinka in 1942/43 are supposed to have been "transited" to from there, and show evidence regarding their transportation to such places and their accommodation there. As the Germans would have had no reason to destroy the records of an innocuous resettlement operation, there should be plenty such evidence around.

Just seven questions for you to answer, Mr. Gerdes. When you have reasonably answered these questions, I’ll agree to our moving on.

>After my final summation, we can move on to the next phase of our "debate."

Only if your "final summation" contains reasonable, evidence-backed answers to the above seven questions, Gerdes. Otherwise your "moving on" will be nothing better than cowardly running away from evidence, arguments and questions you cannot address.
 
Old June 11th, 2008 #45
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Brutus:
Quote:
"I'd perfer to just sit back and watch Greg Gerdes carve you up some more."

Thank you Brutus, but I think what I'm doing to Roberta is more like what a Boa Constrictor does to a goat. Can't you just sense the pressure Roberta is feeling right now? The panic and desperation in her posts is palpable as she senses what kind of a mess she's gotten herself into and she realizes what a huge mistake it was to challenge me on this subject.

BTW folks, if you think the asskicking I'm giving Roberta on the subject of Treblinka is brutal, you should see what I've done to her on the subjects of Chelmno and Sobibor. I will start threads on those subjects here soon.
Poor Gerdes either has serious delusions of adequacy or hopes that his hollow bragging will cover up the fact that he’s the one getting his ass kicked and being shown up as a lying monomaniacal moron. I hope for Gerdes’ "White" buddies that they are not so stupid as to be taken in by Gerdes’ hollow bragging.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Oh, before we go on folks, I really do have to point out something that proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, just how mentally retarded / ill Roberta is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes

# 2 - Bullets & Shell casings (at least 50,000 each):

Roberta has provided no physical evidence / photographic proof what-so-ever that so much as a single bullet or shell casing has been found at Treblinka.
Roberta:
Quote:
"As if that were a big deal. I have explained why no bullet or shell casing need have been found at Treblinka"
Ok now folks, lets take a look at how Roberta "explained" why no bullets or shell casings "need have been found" at Treblinka. From the topix site:
… where the discussion is now well over 30 pages long, without that leading Gerdes to show the elementary courtesy of providing the number and link of the posts he will refer to. He probably wants to make it difficult for people to check behind what I expect to be another of his mendacious quote-mining exercises. Let’s see:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"Gerdes howling about "tens of thousands of bullets and shell casings" obviously presumes that these objects, easy to identify and pick up after each shooting, were just left lying around by his SS-heroes."

Q - Oh that's a good one Roberta. That's going into the archives. Please do explain why the SS picked up their brass and please do explain how they picked up their spent bullets.

A - "The spent cartridges they could just pick off the ground."

Q - Please explain how they recovered the bullets that passed through the bodies they shot and please explain how they recovered the bullets that stayed within the bodies they shot?

A - "Ever heard of bullet-catchers and sand bags, smart-ass?"
Gerdes conveniently left out the following part of my Topix post # 550 under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T...H7P8C/p27#c550 :

Quote:
And assuming they had no bullet-catchers or sand bags at the "Lazarett", where the killing was done by shooting, the bullets would have landed in the trash inside the pit that the bodies fell into, and been burned together with the bodies and the trash at regular intervals. Lead melts easily, I'm told.
Or is there any other reason for your having left out that part, Gerdes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Q - So Roberta, can you prove that so much as a single bullet or spent cartridge / >shell casing was ever so much as seen at Treblinka?

A - "That depends on what you mean by "prove", asshole."
Gerdes conveniently left out what follows in my Topix post # 602 under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T...7P8C/p29#c602:

Quote:
If you mean evidence to the shootings at the "Lazarett", no problem. The shooters themselves seem to have been quite frank about these shootings at the first Treblinka trial in Düsseldorf, 1964/65, and their depositions were confirmed and complemented by several eyewitnesses independently of each other, who testified before the court. Thus there is no room for reasonable doubt that these shootings took place. And proof of the shootings at the "Lazarett" logically means proof of every single bullet or spent cartridge these shootings involved.

If, on the other hand, you mean a photograph showing a given bullet or spent cartridge, I don’t have such a photograph. But I’m looking forward to bigmouthed asshole Gerdes trying to explain why on earth one should have to provide a photograph of any given bullet or spent cartridge to prove the shootings at the "Lazarett". Or what such photograph would even contribute to proving those shootings.

Get a brain, Gerdes.
Or is there any other reason for your having left out that part, Gerdes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Q - So you're trying to say that the detection of 50,000 bullets and 50,000 shell casings in one pit couldn't be located with forensic / archeological methods?

A - "No, I’m asking you to explain why there should be that many bullets and shell casings in the area... considering that the bullets are likely to have been reduced to molten lead while the cartridges are likely to have been salvaged by your SS heroes. When you have done that, we can chat about "forensic / archeological methods" to find what cartridges are left and identify the molten bullet lead in the soil of Treblinka."
I’ll highlight the parts of the above-quoted paragraph from my Topix post # 611 under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T...H7P8C/p30#c611 that Gerdes left out:

Quote:
No, I’m asking you to explain why there should be that many bullets and shell casings in the area, even if the number of 50,000 shot at the "Lazarett" (which comes from eyewitness Rajzman, IIRC) is not too high, considering that the bullets are likely to have been reduced to molten lead while the cartridges are likely to have been salvaged by your SS heroes. When you have done that, we can chat about "forensic / archeological methods" to find what cartridges are left and identify the molten bullet lead in the soil of Treblinka.
Why did you leave out the highlighted part, Gerdes?

And where did you provide the requested explanation?

Nowhere? Poor show. You must have manure instead of brains to go bragging to your "White" buddies with such clear demonstration of your lack of arguments and dishonest debating tactics. Or do you think they have manure instead of brains inside their skulls?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Q - Can you show us just one shell casing Roberta? How about just one bullet? Just one Roberta. One.

A - "No, I can’t “show” you any specific bullet or shell casing. And you can’t explain what the hell it is supposed to matter that I can’t show you any specific bullet or shell casing, which means that you can stick your idiotic “just one” babbling you-know-where."
That’s from the same post, and Gerdes having failed to provide the mentioned explanation to this day proves that I was just right. But then, that’s nothing new – Gerdes has never been able to demonstrate the necessity and relevance as proof of any particular exhibit he’s been yelling for.

What part of the word "relevance" is too hard for you to understand, Gerdes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
So Roberta, before we go on, can you show us a photo of the German "bullet-catchers" that were employed at Treblinka?
After you have provided a reason compatible with the evidence to the Treblinka killings why such a photograph should necessarily have been taken, assuming that they had bullet-catchers at the "Lazarett", I might give it a try.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
A moron’s hysterical laughter is no such reason, needless to say.
 
Old June 11th, 2008 #46
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Final Summation

The alleged photographic documentation of the "physical evidence" for the alleged murder of 870,000 jews at Treblinka, as presented by Roberto Muehlenkamp in her “debate” with Greg Gerdes:


# 1 - The "huge mass graves -

A – Aerial photo (Roberta claims the alleged graves are in the “receiving area” of the camp):

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...r1944_edit.jpg

B – Ground photo (Roberta claims the alleged grave is “exactly” in the “death camp” area):

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg



# 2 - Corpses / bones / cremated remains / miscellaneous photos:

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5811_1_web.jpg

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_2.jpg

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/photos.html

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/lasttracks.html


# 3 – Teeth:

Roberta was unable to provide any physical evidence / photographic proof what-so-ever that so much as a single tooth was ever found at Treblinka.


# 4 - Bullets & Shell casings:

Roberta was unable to provide any physical evidence / photographic proof what-so-ever that so much as a single bullet or shell casing was ever found at Treblinka.


# 5 - Photos of the camp itself taken from the outside:

Roberta was unable to provide any photographs what-so-ever of the alleged camp itself taken from outside of the camp. Not a single photo of this alleged monstrous death factory that allegedly operated for well over a year.

* * * * *

But of course, we all know that just because Roberta has entered something into evidence, that doesn't make it evidence. So we are now in the next phase of our "debate."

Roberta, prove that the following photos were taken in / at Treblinka:

1 -

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg

2 -

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5811_1_web.jpg

3 -

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

4 -

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_2.jpg


Proof Roberta.

Proof.
 
Old June 11th, 2008 #47
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

OK Roberta, moving on.

Roberta, prove that the following photos were taken in / at Treblinka:


http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/excavators2.html


http://holocaust-info.dk/treblinka/i...mass_grave.htm


And prove that there are "huge mass graves" under the areas that you have drawn on this photo:


http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...r1944_edit.jpg


Proof Roberta.

Proof.
 
Old June 12th, 2008 #48
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Final Summation

The alleged photographic documentation of the "physical evidence" for the alleged murder of 870,000 jews at Treblinka, as presented by Roberto Muehlenkamp in her “debate” with Greg Gerdes:
Another of your idiotic "recaps", moreover limited to photographic documentation and ignoring the site investigation reports as well as the documentary and eyewitness evidence, Gerdes?

Either your "White" buddies are as dumb and short of memory as you are, or they know your list by heart already and yawn every time you repeat it.

Can’t you be less of a bore, Gerdes?

How about answering the seven questions I asked you in my last post:

Quote:
1. Regarding the photo under http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/photos.html that is captioned

«MASS GRAVE
If Treblinka, the boards were added to the bodies in course of a test burning. Usually the victims were buried in mass graves, later cremated on roasts.

Photo: Bundesarchiv No. 183-F0918-0201-011»

, answer the question what, if not a corner of one mass grave where the bodies have been covered with boards and what looks like tarpaulin sheets, you think this photograph shows.

2. Regarding the excavator photos shown under http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/excavators2.html , answer the question what you think those excavators would have been doing in what you claim was a "transit camp".

3. Regarding the marked-up air photo shown under http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...r1944_edit.jpg , answer the question what, if not mass graves in a section of the camp where eyewitnesses described mass graves – namely what that would be compatible with your "transit camp" theory – the ground scarring shapes I pointed out are supposed to have been.

4. Regarding the ground photos shown under the following links:

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/lasttracks.html

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_3.jpg

, answer the question what, if not parts of the former Treblinka extermination camp and especially the burial area described in the Polish site investigation reports of 13 November and 29 December 1945 quoted in my article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure … under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...treblinka.html, these photos are supposed to show.

5. Regarding the above-mentioned site investigation reports, answer the question why, i.e. on the basis of what rules or standards of evidence you can show us, you don’t include these written descriptions of the physical evidence on site in the record of physical evidence to the Treblinka mass killings.

6. Regarding the documentary and eyewitness evidence listed in my Topix post # 482 under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T...H7P8C/p23#c482 , answer the question why, i.e. on the basis of what rules or standards of evidence you can show us, you don’t include this documentary and eyewitness evidence in the record of evidence to the Treblinka mass killings.

7. Regarding your claim that Treblinka was a "transit camp", answer the question where the about 750,000 people deported to Treblinka in 1942/43 are supposed to have been "transited" to from there, and show evidence regarding their transportation to such places and their accommodation there. As the Germans would have had no reason to destroy the records of an innocuous resettlement operation, there should be plenty such evidence around.

Just seven questions for you to answer, Mr. Gerdes. When you have reasonably answered these questions, I’ll agree to our moving on.
Don’t keep running away, Mr. Chicken-shit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
# 1 - The "huge mass graves -

A – Aerial photo (Roberta claims the alleged graves are in the “receiving area” of the camp):

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...r1944_edit.jpg

B – Ground photo (Roberta claims the alleged grave is “exactly” in the “death camp” area):

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg

# 2 - Corpses / bones / cremated remains / miscellaneous photos:

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5811_1_web.jpg

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_2.jpg

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/photos.html

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/lasttracks.html

# 3 – Teeth:

Roberta was unable to provide any physical evidence / photographic proof what-so-ever that so much as a single tooth was ever found at Treblinka.
And why is that supposed to be a big deal, Gerdes?

Can you name a good reason, compatible with the evidentiary record of Treblinka, why I should necessarily have photographic documentation of teeth on the Treblinka site at my disposal?

No, you cannot.

Can you explain why Grossman’s eyewitness testimony and the Polish militia report I quoted are not sufficient evidence that teeth were lying around on the Treblinka site and were picked up by robbery diggers, which would be the only reason to ask for further evidence, photographic or other?

No, you cannot.

Can you even explain what any evidence to the presence of teeth on the Treblinka site is supposed to matter for the purpose of proving what happened at Treblinka, especially considering the physical, documentary and eyewitness evidence I have shown?

No, you cannot.

So do yourself a favor, Gerdes: drop the silly babbling about teeth. That’s well-meaning advice. If, of course, you insist in making a bloody fool of yourself, I have no objection to that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
# 4 - Bullets & Shell casings:

Roberta was unable to provide any physical evidence / photographic proof what-so-ever that so much as a single bullet or shell casing was ever found at Treblinka.
So fucking what, Gerdes? There’s no reason compatible with the evidentiary record of Treblinka why even a single bullet or shell casing need to have been identified. The casings are likely to have been salvaged by the SS after each shooting (the Germans had a war going on and may not have wanted to waste the brass, you know), and identifying molten bullet lead among the mess found after the war on the Treblinka site is not exactly a piece of cake. On the other hand, conclusive eyewitness testimony provided at trials before West German courts, also by the shooters themselves, leaves no room for reasonable doubt about the existence of the "Lazarett" and the shootings that took place there. So it’s completely irrelevant whether or not bullets or shell casings were identified on site. Better get used to the idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
# 5 - Photos of the camp itself taken from the outside:

Roberta was unable to provide any photographs what-so-ever of the alleged camp itself taken from outside of the camp. Not a single photo of this alleged monstrous death factory that allegedly operated for well over a year.
Another false dilemma, Gerdes. There’s no reason compatible with the evidentiary record of Treblinka why any photograph of Treblinka taken from the outside should be in existence let alone at my disposal, and the only reason for your yelling for such photos is that you are sure they don’t exist (otherwise you’d keep your trap shut).

Ah, and every time you make a fuss about what photographs I "was not able" to show (big fucking deal), I’ll remind you of my unanswered questions regarding the photographs I did show:

1. Regarding the photo under http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/photos.html that is captioned

«MASS GRAVE
If Treblinka, the boards were added to the bodies in course of a test burning. Usually the victims were buried in mass graves, later cremated on roasts.

Photo: Bundesarchiv No. 183-F0918-0201-011»

, answer the question what, if not a corner of one mass grave where the bodies have been covered with boards and what looks like tarpaulin sheets, you think this photograph shows.

2. Regarding the excavator photos shown under http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/excavators2.html , answer the question what you think those excavators would have been doing in what you claim was a "transit camp".

3. Regarding the marked-up air photo shown under http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...r1944_edit.jpg , answer the question what, if not mass graves in a section of the camp where eyewitnesses described mass graves – namely what that would be compatible with your "transit camp" theory – the ground scarring shapes I pointed out are supposed to have been.

4. Regarding the ground photos shown under the following links:

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/lasttracks.html

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_3.jpg

, answer the question what, if not parts of the former Treblinka extermination camp and especially the burial area described in the Polish site investigation reports of 13 November and 29 December 1945 quoted in my article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure … under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...treblinka.html, these photos are supposed to show.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
But of course, we all know that just because Roberta has entered something into evidence, that doesn't make it evidence. So we are now in the next phase of our "debate."

Roberta, prove that the following photos were taken in / at Treblinka:

1 -

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg

2 -

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5811_1_web.jpg

3 -

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

4 -

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_2.jpg


Proof Roberta.

Proof.
Why, Gerdes, are you so scared of a couple of photographs that you now resort to calling their authenticity into question and trying to shift the burden of proof?

The photographs are linked to Treblinka by the sources I took them from, the accuracy of which you can provide no good reason to doubt. And they also happen to show things that correspond to what becomes apparent from site investigation reports and other descriptions of what the Treblinka site looked like when investigated by Polish criminal justice authorities. These descriptions include the following:

• The site investigation reports of 13 November and 29 December 1945, quoted in my article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure … http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...treblinka.html , repeatedly quoted from in this discussion and just as often unreasonably ignored by Gerdes.

• The description of the site, quoted from in the Polish newspaper article translated under http://rodohforum.yuku.com/reply/925...ml#reply-92506 , by a member of another delegation from Warsaw which apparently also investigated the Treblinka area, Karol Ogrodowczyk:

Quote:
"The fields are dug up and rummaged through, the pits are about 10 meters deep, bones are lying around and objects of all kinds, shoes, spoons, forks, chandeliers, hair of wigs worn by Jewesses. In the air hangs the stench of decomposing corpses. … The foul smell so numbed me and my colleagues that we vomited and felt an unusual rasping in the throat. (...) Under every tree seekers of gold and gems have dug holes (...) Between the trees cavort local peasants, eager to find treasures. When we ask them 'What are you doing here?' they give no answer."
• The description of the site in Rachel Auerbach’s In the Fields of Treblinka, quoted under http://rodohforum.yuku.com/reply/955...l#reply-95594:

Quote:
The Sandy Soil Yields Up Its Secret. Our car came to a stop. We got out: this was where the camp area began. According to our measurements, it is 15 hectares. A well-paved road runs parallel to the railroad tracks for about 1½ kilometers and then comes to a dead end. Another road branches out from it and comes to an end even sooner. The surface of both roads contains a weird mixture of coals and ashes from the pyres where the corpses of the inmates were cremated. The second road leads in the same direction as the "Road to Heaven," of which no trace is now left. Just a bit of the concrete foundations of a horses' stable - this is all that is left today of the camp buildings, the barbed wire fences, the barracks, the watchtowers, the gas chambers. Some of the buildings were burned down during the uprising, and the rest were carried off by human scavengers from neighboring villages after the arrival of the Red Army.

While the Germans were still here, the whole area had been plowed up and sown with lupine grass. And the lupine grass really grew and covered the whole surface with a green mask. It looked as if all the traces of crime had been wiped away. But since then, during the past year, the human jackals and hyenas have been coming to the burial ground and here is the picture that we saw:

Here and there, like patches of grass near the seashore, half* covered by the shifting sands, there were still little clumps of with*ered lupine. Not one level place in the whole area. Everything had been torn up and dug up, little hills and holes. And upon them, beneath them, and among them, all sorts of objects. Aluminum kettles and pans, enameled tin pots-blackened, dented, full of holes. Combs with teeth broken off, half-rotted soles from ladies' summer sandals, broken mirrors, leather billfolds. All this is near the station platform where the camp's first barbed wire fences had been.

We began our tour at the place where the transports had been unloaded, and we continued on the road which the Jews who were brought here had followed. What we saw here was the remnants of the Treblinka "Werterfassung." -Remnants of the huge piles of Jewish property which had been packed up and sent away, inciner*ated, cleared off, and yet still could not be completely cleared away. It was not possible to clear away every trace of what the hundreds

Page 71

of thousands of people who had passed through there had experienced. Here was the physical evidence; here were the corpora delicti.

Perhaps someone might wonder what sort of people they were who left such plentiful evidence of their truncated lives, to what nation they belonged. Well, look about you and you will see it for yourself:

Twisted Sabbath candlesticks-enough for whole collections. A scrap from a prayer shawl. just dug out of the ground, lying white and fresh, complete with a blue Star of David, is an elegant Warsaw armband (from the corner of Karmelicka and Leszno-the latest fashion in the ghetto). A whole pile of ladies' marriage wigs.

These must be unburned, stray remnants from some store.

The hair shorn off the living women had been turned into indus*trial raw materials, but it seems that the ritual wigs of the old, pious Jewish women had been set aside for better uses. Perhaps they could be sold, by way of a friendly "neutral" country, to Jews in America, for a good price, along with the Torah scrolls and Tal*mudic folios which had been carefully accumulated for this pur*pose, packed in cases and hidden away?

But the physical evidence was not limited to objects. As we moved further into the grounds, we walked over a field which was sown with human bones.

The bombs had uncovered the contents of the desecrated soil. Leg bones, ribs, pieces of spine, skulls big and small, short, and long, round and flat.

Skulls! ...

If only we could get an ethnologist to come here!

He could have made the most accurate anthropological meas*urements relating to the racial features of the Jewish people.

Or perhaps what was needed here would be a philosopher; a thinker, a Prince Hamlet of Denmark to stand up and deliver a gravedigger's speech, to look upon those skulls and speak directly to them.

"Anybody have a bag? Is there a bag around here? Let's take a bagful of bones with us!"

In a minute, a pile of bones had been scraped together. But there was no bag around and so we couldn't take any of the bones.

But then how much could one bag have held? What with all the cremations, we could have taken out whole carloads from there. If bones can be classed as relics, then Treblinka held relics sufficient to supply the entire Jewish people.

Page 72

This Is My Child's Foot! The further we went, the heavier the air became with the smell of death. We had already passed through the famous "grove," the sparse pine trees through which the "Road to Heaven" had run. We were now standing where the gas cham*bers had been, the huge mass graves and the pyres. In some places, the smell of death was still mingled with the odor of fire. Indeed, here and there we could see little piles of white ashes along with blackened bones, heaps of soot. All this had been buried several meters deep in the soil, mixed with sand and covered with more sand, but the explosions had brought it to the surface again. In one place the simultaneous explosion of several bombs had created a huge crater. Deep down in the hole, some outlines could be dimly seen through the fog.

"Those aren't just bones," says the district attorney. "There are still pieces of half-rotted corpses lying there, bunches of intestines."

By now the district attorney and the judge knew every nook and cranny here. They had been conducting their investigation for some time. They had examined both Jewish and non-Jewish wit*nesses, taken measurements and carried out minor excavations.

The Treblinka veterans were running back and forth, pointing things out, arguing with one another. They made mistakes and then began to remember the places again. They wanted to do something, to make some extravagant gestures, that would at least reflect their emotions, bound up as they were with this place. They wanted to gather bones. They leaped into ditches, reached their bare hands into rotted masses of corpses to show they were not repelled.

They did the right thing. Now we were just like the Muslim sectarians who carried their dead along in their caravans to Mecca, considering it their sacred duty to bear the smell of death with patience and love as they went along the road. That was how we felt in these fields, where there lay the last remains of our martyrs.

"Look there, at the edge of that hole," said the judge, "these are bones from a child's leg!" One of the Treblinka survivors rushed over. "Be careful!" said another. "There's still some flesh hanging from that leg!" But the one who had taken it was wrapping it up into a newspaper with much the same reverence as a pious Jew wrapping up an etrog [the citron fruit which is used in the Feast of Tabernacles and must remain unblemished]. He wrapped it with the skirt of his coat, then put it into his breast pocket and hugged it to his breast.
So while all associated evidence indicates that the photographs in question were not only taken at Treblinka, but also convey just a feeble idea of what the place looked like when examined by examining judge Lukaszkiewicz and state attorney Maciejewski, by Karol Ogrodowczyk and by Rachel Auerbach, there are no indications known that the photos show anything other than parts of the Treblinka site in 1945.

Therefore, it is not me who has to prove that these photographs were actually taken at Treblinka. It is Gerdes who has to prove that, contrary to what my sources say and all associated evidence indicates, the photos were not actually taken at Treblinka.

I could do without the photos, as Gerdes well knows. They are just illustrations of what becomes apparent from other, more telling evidence, and my case stands with or without them. But if Gerdes is so afraid of them that he calls into question their authenticity, he should try substantiating his panicky "doubts".

Not that it matters and just for the purpose of amusement, as Gerdes opens his mouth so big yelling for "proof":

What exactly would you accept as proof that the photographs were taken at Treblinka, Mr. Gerdes?

Let’s hear so we may laugh.

Really, Gerdes, it's becoming increasingly obvious how desperately out of arguments you are. Thanks for again showing it so clearly.
 
Old June 12th, 2008 #49
psychologicalshock
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046
Default

Quote:
Can you even explain what any evidence to the presence of teeth on the Treblinka site is supposed to matter for the purpose of proving what happened at Treblinka, especially considering the physical,
The only physical evidence found was by a Soviet and Polish investigation, the Soviet one was an obvious lie whereas the Polish one was a more intricate lie but still identifiable. Such as digging up graves at 7.5 meters when the machinery was incapable of doing so. Generally the conclusion was wrong anyways - the conclusion was that there are no mass graves and at most 50,000 people died on site. In all only 120 remains were found, the claim that the ashes were human has never been proven neither has it been proven that the soil has even been disturbed.

Quote:
documentary
If you mean Arad's train records then they are obvious lies that most simply avoid and use "estimates" instead. As for a photograph of bones on the top soil, that isn't surprising considering the site was bombed heavily (Likely to remove evidence of it not being a death camp) thus unearthing bodies. The identification of the bones never took place.
Quote:
and eyewitness evidence I have shown?
You have to be joking, eye witnesses? The ones who talked about suffocating in a cattle car and being shot in the shoulder by a kar-98 but having their clothes stop the bullet? The ones who claimed there was a water well in the middle of 800,000+ rotting corpses? The ones who claimed that there was a fence covered in dry pinewood surrounding the perimeter of the camp? The ones whose gas chamber designs were downright atrocious and used Diesel?

So even given that the Polish investigation wasn't a fraud there is no proof that a death camp existed except according to witnesses. The gas chambers themselves have never been found (What a surprise) so you're just jumping to conclusions.

Quote:
So fucking what, Gerdes? There’s no reason compatible with the evidentiary record of Treblinka why even a single bullet or shell casing need to have been identified. The casings are likely to have been salvaged by the SS after each shooting (the Germans had a war going on and may not have wanted to waste the brass, you know), and identifying molten bullet lead among the mess found after the war on the Treblinka site is not exactly a piece of cake. On the other hand, conclusive eyewitness testimony provided at trials before West German courts, also by the shooters themselves, leaves no room for reasonable doubt about the existence of the "Lazarett" and the shootings that took place there. So it’s completely irrelevant whether or not bullets or shell casings were identified on site. Better get used to the idea.
If they were concerned about resources they wouldn't be wasting precious disinfectant and rare gasoline to kill Jews and hide it. As for brass shells , can you even cite one example of German soldiers collecting shells after a battle to recycle them? I can't remember that happening ever. That and the bullet (9x19 Parabellum) had an iron core so a metal detector would likely be able to pick it up. The fact that the Polaks didn't get that idea is quite surprising.

Last edited by psychologicalshock; June 12th, 2008 at 02:09 PM.
 
Old June 12th, 2008 #50
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Roberta:

"So while all associated evidence indicates that the photographs in question were not only taken at Treblinka, but... there are no indications known that the photos show anything other than parts of the Treblinka site in 1945. Therefore, it is not me who has to prove that these photographs were actually taken at Treblinka. It is Gerdes who has to prove that... the photos were not actually taken at Treblinka."

Then you will have no trouble at all proving that those 7 photos in posts # 46 & 47 were taken at / in Treblinka and the alleged graves you claim to have located on the aerial photo are in fact graves.

Roberta:

"There are no indications known that the photos show anything other than parts of the Treblinka site in 1945."

The excavator photos were supposedly taken in 42 or 43, correct? What proof do you have they were taken in the alleged Treblinka death camp and not, as common sense would suggest, at the sand / gravel quarry .6 miles from Treblinka II? And while you're at it, prove that the building in those excavator photos actually contains homicidal gas chambers.

Roberta:

"I could do without the photos"

Yes Roberta, you will be doing without those 7 photos if you can't prove that they were taken at / in Treblinka.

And BTW folks, Roberta is singing the same "I can do without the photos" nonsense in our "debates" about Belzec, Chelmno and Sobibor also. She is getting very very desperate as the noose tightens and she senses what is happening to her.

Roberta:

"Not that it matters... what exactly would you accept as proof that the photographs were taken at Treblinka, Mr. Gerdes?"

The name of the photographer, the date the photos, the alleged location in the camp that they were taken and all the other photos taken by the photographer in Treblinka / on that day. That is just a start. When you can do that, we will get into the analysis of the photos.

BTW Roberta, tell us how you first became aware of this photo here:

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_2.jpg

Proof Roberta.

Proof.
 
Old June 12th, 2008 #51
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

BTW psychologicalshock, the 50,000 figure you cite is for Treblinka I, not II, and in all, 440 bodies were found. That's my understanding / opinion of the research anyway.

Roberta:

"So it’s completely irrelevant whether or not bullets or shell casings were identified on site. Better get used to the idea. "

"Better get used to the idea!" LOL!

Oh my, she is getting desperate isn't she?

Yes folks, we just have to "get used to the idea" that the Germans committed the perfect crime while allegedly murdering 870,000 jews! Isn't that a wonderful way out of the dilemma for Roberta? Hey Roberta, why don't you just close your eyes, click your heals 3 times and you will find yourself in the wonderful land of Oz and out of this terrible mess you've gotten yourself into. Wouldn’t it be great to be in Roberta’s fantasy world folks? Whenever you find yourself in a pickle, just tell others to “get used to the idea” that reality is what ever it is you want / need it to be at the moment.

“No officer, I wasn’t speeding. Your radar gun is broken – “get used to the idea.”

“No your honor, I didn’t rape her. No means yes in my world – “get used to the idea.”

“No, I don’t have to pay for that tank of gas. I don’t use money in my world – “get used to the idea.”

“No, I don’t have to prove that those photos were actually taken at / in Treblinka. If I say they were, then they were – “get used to the idea.”

Yes folks, we just need to "get used to the idea" of a physical impossibility so Roberta can "do without the photos" and physical evidence and fall back to her "eyewitnesses" and their Alice in Wonderland impossible tall tales.

But then again, "getting used to the idea" shouldn't be too hard. After all, we've had to "get used to the idea" that 6 million jews magically disappeared during WWII, so “getting used to the idea” that tens of thousands of bullets and shell casing magically disappeared shouldn't be so hard, should it? LOL!

BTW Roberta, how are you coming along with finding a photo of the "bullet catchers" the Germans used in Treblinka?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
 
Old June 12th, 2008 #52
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Just a point of clarification:

I'm not saying 50,000 died in Treblinka I, I'm just saying that that is what was claimed by Zdzisław Łukaszkiewicz in his report of December 29, 1945:

"In this camp [Treblinka I] approximately 50,000 Poles and Jews were killed."

(USSR-344. GARF, 7445-2-126.)

Anyway, Roberta, how you coming along with verifying that those photos you presented as "evidence" for the Treblinka holohoax were really taken in / at Treblinka?

And don't forget that we're still waiting for a photo of the "bullet catcher!"
 
Old June 13th, 2008 #53
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Wow, looks like someone realized that Gerdes is not doing well and decided to help him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Can you even explain what any evidence to the presence of teeth on the Treblinka site is supposed to matter for the purpose of proving what happened at Treblinka, especially considering the physical,

The only physical evidence found was by a Soviet and Polish investigation, the Soviet one was an obvious lie
How so?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
whereas the Polish one was a more intricate lie but still identifiable.
Looking forward to your "identification", then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Such as digging up graves at 7.5 meters when the machinery was incapable of doing so.
Why would they have been unable to dig pits this deep with their Menck excavators? Excavators like those were what was available in civil construction throughout the world at the time, and I figure that a tall building – especially a sky-scraper – needs a rather deep foundation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Generally the conclusion was wrong anyways - the conclusion was that there are no mass graves and at most 50,000 people died on site.
Sure you aren’t mixing up conclusions regarding the Treblinka I labor camp with conclusions regarding the Treblinka II extermination camp?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
In all only 120 remains were found, the claim that the ashes were human has never been proven neither has it been proven that the soil has even been disturbed.
If you say so, I guess you’ll be able to explain why, by what rules or standards of evidence other than your own, the quoted site investigation reports (one of which mentions a forensic examination determining that the ashes found were human ashes), the other quoted descriptions of the site by investigators/observers and the Polish documents mentioned under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...treblinka.html that refer to the robbery digging, are not proof that ashes and other partial remains covered the soil of the former Treblinka II "death camp" sector over an area of ca. 20,000 square meters and that robbery diggers were having a ball there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
documentary

If you mean Arad's train records then they are obvious lies that most simply avoid and use "estimates" instead.
How do you know that those train records are "obvious lies", and who is supposed to "avoid" them?

But you get points for at least trying to address the documentary evidence, something your friend Gerdes never dared to do. Maybe you can answer the question I asked Gerdes about the documents quoted in my posts nos. 295 to 300 of our Topix discussion. You find these posts under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T...T8PL8H7P8C/p15 .

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
As for a photograph of bones on the top soil, that isn't surprising considering the site was bombed heavily (Likely to remove evidence of it not being a death camp) thus unearthing bodies.
Who is supposed to have bombed it, and what evidence is there that such bombing too place? Whoever is supposed to have bombed the place "to remove evidence of it not being a death camp" must have been dumb as a door, for what he achieved instead was to bring to the surface death camp evidence (ashes, bones, skulls) that the SS had carefully hidden underground and planted vegetation on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
The identification of the bones never took place.
What exactly is that supposed to mean?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
and eyewitness evidence I have shown?

You have to be joking, eye witnesses? The ones who talked about suffocating in a cattle car and being shot in the shoulder by a kar-98 but having their clothes stop the bullet? The ones who claimed there was a water well in the middle of 800,000+ rotting corpses? The ones who claimed that there was a fence covered in dry pinewood surrounding the perimeter of the camp? The ones whose gas chamber designs were downright atrocious and used Diesel?
What are you trying to tell us, that no part of an eyewitness account can be used if the eyewitness got one or the other detail wrong? If criminal investigators went by that reasoning, they’d probably never find an eyewitness testimony they can use to solve a case, for what eyewitness ever gets every detail right?

As to the examples you have provided:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
The ones who talked about suffocating in a cattle car and being shot in the shoulder by a kar-98 but having their clothes stop the bullet?
I take you’re referring to Wiernik, the only eyewitness I know who mentioned such an occurrence – except the bullet was not from an infantry carbine but from a pistol, which jammed after the shot. This is discussed in my article Historiography as seen by an ignorant charlatan … under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...norant_03.html .

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
The ones who claimed there was a water well in the middle of 800,000+ rotting corpses?
What’s the deal supposed to be? Read the article Well. Well? Well! under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...well-well.html .

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
The ones who claimed that there was a fence covered in dry pinewood surrounding the perimeter of the camp?
The problem with the fence being that it would have easily caught fire, you mean? Except that the dry pinewood was regularly replaced by fresh pinewood in order to keep up the camouflage function of the camp's interior and exterior fences. See the discussion of this issue in my article «B» as in «Bullshit» under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...llshit_20.html .

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
The ones whose gas chamber designs were downright atrocious and used Diesel?
I don’t see what’s supposed to have been "atrocious" about the gas chamber design that can be reconstructed based on various eyewitness testimonies. It rather looks quite simple and effective to me. And if some eyewitnesses got details wrong there, big deal – any eyewitness other than the gas chamber’s operators could have been mistaken about one or the other part of what he occasionally and briefly saw. The same goes for the "Diesel" thing – eyewitnesses who spoke of diesel may just have mixed up the gasoline gassing engine with some diesel engine used for other purposes in the camp. The folks at other camps who operated the engines or were otherwise familiar with them all mentioned gasoline engines, as pointed out under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...rrelevant.html , and there’s no reason why gasoline exhaust should not have been used in Treblinka as well.

On the other hand, even if the individual eyewitnesses you referred to had been wholly unreliable, this would tell us nothing at all about the reliability of any other eyewitnesses. Ever eyewitness is a separate individual, and the reliability of every eyewitness must be individually assessed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
So even given that the Polish investigation wasn't a fraud
I don’t remember you having demonstrated any fraudulence in the Polish investigation. Did I miss something?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
there is no proof that a death camp existed except according to witnesses.
… including members of the camp’s former SS-staff testifying before West German courts, and also according to document showing that hundreds of thousands of people were taken to a place from which only a handful are known to have emerged alive, and from where such a stench of corpses emanated in October 1942 that the Wehrmacht local commander of a town 20 kilometers away complained about it. I don’t see what is wrong with eyewitness and documentary evidence as proof of a crime or other historical event. Aren't mass crimes and other historical events usually proven also if not mainly or solely on the basis of these categories of evidence? Can you show us one large-scale massacre that was reconstructed solely or mainly on the basis of physical evidence?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
The gas chambers themselves have never been found (What a surprise) so you're just jumping to conclusions.
What conclusions exactly am I supposed to be "jumping" to? If the foundations of the gas chamber building were not found, this means that either the Poles looked for them in the wrong place of they had been removed by the SS, who had plenty of time to do so. And the admission in the Polish site investigation report of 13.11.1945 that the foundations of the gas chamber building had not been found is another argument (besides the matching by evidence, unknown to the investigators, of their findings on site) against the idea that there was any manipulation involved in the investigation. If the report had been "cooked", why didn’t it's authors just make up their having identified the foundations of the gas chamber building?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
So fucking what, Gerdes? There’s no reason compatible with the evidentiary record of Treblinka why even a single bullet or shell casing need to have been identified. The casings are likely to have been salvaged by the SS after each shooting (the Germans had a war going on and may not have wanted to waste the brass, you know), and identifying molten bullet lead among the mess found after the war on the Treblinka site is not exactly a piece of cake. On the other hand, conclusive eyewitness testimony provided at trials before West German courts, also by the shooters themselves, leaves no room for reasonable doubt about the existence of the "Lazarett" and the shootings that took place there. So it’s completely irrelevant whether or not bullets or shell casings were identified on site. Better get used to the idea.

If they were concerned about resources they wouldn't be wasting precious disinfectant and rare gasoline to kill Jews and hide it.
What, you consider something as vital to the benefit of mankind and the contemporary German war effort as getting rid of those subversive and parasitical Jews a waste of resources? I’m surprised!

Of course the Germans were concerned about salvaging resources. Why else would they have bothered to collect and keep account of all objects they took away from the Jews before killing them? You may view records of the plunder under http://www.death-camps.org/reinhard/arloot.htm .

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
As for brass shells, can you even cite one example of German soldiers collecting shells after a battle to recycle them? I can't remember that happening ever.
Neither can I, but this wasn’t battle. This was bumping off helpless human beings one by one with a shot in the neck at a segregated place, the killers having all the time and leisure in the world to pick up what cartridges were lying around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
That and the bullet (9x19 Parabellum) had an iron core so a metal detector would likely be able to pick it up. The fact that the Polaks didn't get that idea is quite surprising.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Polish investigators had been short of such hardware shortly after the end of the war, actually. Besides, there was much metallic mess lying around on the Treblinka site, and I doubt a metal detector would have been able to tell the difference. Last but not least, how do you know what bullets were used for the shooting?

Anyway, thanks for bringing some new arguments into the discussion, which Mr. Gerdes’ repetitive "recaps" and "just one" demands have made rather boring.

Cute girl in your avatar, by the way.
 
Old June 13th, 2008 #54
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"So while all associated evidence indicates that the photographs in question were not only taken at Treblinka, but... there are no indications known that the photos show anything other than parts of the Treblinka site in 1945. Therefore, it is not me who has to prove that these photographs were actually taken at Treblinka. It is Gerdes who has to prove that... the photos were not actually taken at Treblinka."

Then you will have no trouble at all proving that those 7 photos in posts # 46 & 47 were taken at / in Treblinka and the alleged graves you claim to have located on the aerial photo are in fact graves.
That's not even a nice try, Gerdes. All evidence associated to these ground photographs points to their having been taken at Treblinka while none points to another conclusion, so it can reasonably be considered proven that the photographs were taken at Treblinka. But I'm being generous and just pointing out that the burden of proof lies with who claims that the photographs are not what all associated evidence as well as their identification in the sources providing them show them to have been, which is you.

As to the aerial photo, it's also not my job to prove that these ground-scarring shapes are what they look like and what eyewitness testimonies suggest they were, i.e. mass graves. It is for who makes a claim at odds with these shapes' aspect and the evidence associated to this photograph – i.e. Gerdes, who claims that these shapes are something other than mass graves – to tell us what else they might be. If you can provide a plausible alternative explanation, namely one that is compatible with your "transit camp" theory, the ball may be in my court again. Until then, it is in yours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"There are no indications known that the photos show anything other than parts of the Treblinka site in 1945."

The excavator photos were supposedly taken in 42 or 43, correct? What proof do you have they were taken in the alleged Treblinka death camp and not, as common sense would suggest, at the sand / gravel quarry .6 miles from Treblinka II?
Gerdes and common sense, what a joke! Actually common sense suggests that the deputy commandant of Treblinka II extermination camp would photograph things inside Treblinka II extermination camp and not a labor camp that he had nothing to do with. Besides, the excavator location on some of the ground photographs can be matched with the September 1944 air photograph of Treblinka II extermination camp:

Quote:
The photograph in Figure 36 was subjected to the same sort of measurements and graphical analysis described above in the section about the living camp. Measurements were made to determine the angular separation to all of the features of interest, and these were then
plotted on an overlay so that their positions could be established on the aerial photography. The camera's exposure station and the frame's coverage were established this way, as well as achieving the best fit of features in the ground picture to the aerial image (see Appendix A ). The results of this analysis are shown in Figure 38. In the figure, the angular coverage of Franz's camera is shown, and the elements in that picture are drawn in the relative positions determined from the measurements. The camera was computed to have been about 80 meters [262 feet] from the gate, and about 10 meters [32 feet] from the excavator.
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...thcampp4.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...Figure38.shtml

Quote:
If photography were available showing these features in their entirety, it would have been possible to measure the volume of the actual burial pits. As it is, the embankments as shown in Figure 42 are an educated guess. In Figure 43, the height of these piles can be judged. The Excavator is the Menck Mb2, which was 4 meters high. The earth works behind it is at least that high.
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...thcampp7.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...Figure42.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...Figure43.shtml

Quote:
Another Kurt Franz photograph also contains images of probable ash heaps. This picture and an enlargement of it are shown in Figure D-2.

These piles are visible in three other snap shots taken by Franz. In all of them one can see the same sort of heaps. All the photos show members of the Jewish work force. Three of them can be seen at the right edge of the photograph. One is standing, two appear to be bent over. Theirs is the task of sieving for bones and of crushing the remnants. In another picture taken at the same position as the one above, but at a slightly different time is in Figure D-3. Here, the image of a driver and a horse is enlarged in the inset. This picture is of interest because it indicates that the method of transporting the ashes from the pits to the sites, where they were sieved, was some sort of cart or sled. This would make sense because a horse drawn conveyance would be much more efficient than transport by wheel barrow.

A mass grave can be seen close up in Figure D-1. It is evicent in the picture that the horizons caused by the layering of different colored soils. These horizons can also be seen in other Kurt Franz pictures and they serve to reveal grave pits at a greater distance. They can be seen in figures D4 and D5. An enlargement of the area in which layering can be seen may be found in Figure D-5. The white arrows in D4 point to a deep excavation. The two pictures in the figure compose an inadvertent stereo pair. Viewing the image in this mode permits one to see the small region common to the two images in relief. A nearly vertical wall rises in the v-shaped area framed by the soil being excavated. Layering can also be seen. Figure D5 is an enlargement and the entire extent of an excavation can be seen. In this image the layering is not really visible, although the rim of the excavation is easy to see. It turns out that the grave appearing in these last two figures is the same one.

All the locations and taking directions of the Kurt Franz snapshots were identified. This proved possible because of the tree line and fencing which was captured in all the pictures. For example in Figure D4, the black arrow indicates an easily recognized pine tree. This feature And the other nearby trees were used to align and position the individual frames to each other. In addition, the posts for the security fence line just in front of the tree line were visible in many of the pictures. These afforded a scaling measure, so that the cameras distance to the tree line could be roughly calculated. The results are shown in Figures D6 Through D8.
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Treblinka/appendixd/
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...FigureD1.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...FigureD2.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...FigureD3.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...FigureD4.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...FigureD5.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...FigureD6.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...FigureD7.shtml
http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...FigureD8.shtml

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
And while you're at it, prove that the building in those excavator photos actually contains homicidal gas chambers.
Poor Gerdes, reduced to throwing around haphazard "prove" demands in his desperate urge to avoid addressing my questions and most of the evidence I have provided.

Proof that this is the gas chamber building can be provided by comparing the features visible on the photograph with features described by eyewitnesses, as was done by Alex Bay (see his assessment of Figures 36 and 37 under http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...thcampp4.shtml ). But before I start quoting eyewitness testimonies describing the gas chamber building, I’d like to know what Gerdes would accept as proof that the building shown under http://www.holocaust-history.org/Tre...Figure37.shtml is the gas chamber building.

What would be proof for you, and what rules and standards of evidence you can show us is your criterion based on, Mr. Gerdes?

This question will from now on be asked every time Gerdes yells for "proof" of this-and-that.
 
Old June 13th, 2008 #55
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"I could do without the photos"

Yes Roberta, you will be doing without those 7 photos if you can't prove that they were taken at / in Treblinka.
I would have no problem with that, but the burden of proof that these photos are not what all associated evidence shows them to be, i.e. postwar photographs of the Treblinka site, lies with bigmouth Gerdes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
And BTW folks, Roberta is singing the same "I can do without the photos" nonsense in our "debates" about Belzec, Chelmno and Sobibor also.
… where, despite several requests that he do so, Gerdes has never even tried to explain why photos should be seen as a necessary and indispensable documentation of the physical evidence, and what rules or standards of evidence he can show us stipulate such necessity. The best the poor fellow can do is to lamely call my position "nonsense", go figure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
She is getting very very desperate as the noose tightens and she senses what is happening to her.
Again projecting your own situation onto your opponent, Gerdes?

Or are you trying to convince your "White" buddies that you’re winning this, hoping they will be dumb enough to fall for your hollow bragging?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"Not that it matters... what exactly would you accept as proof that the photographs were taken at Treblinka, Mr. Gerdes?"

The name of the photographer, the date the photos, the alleged location in the camp that they were taken and all the other photos taken by the photographer in Treblinka / on that day. That is just a start.
That’s quite a lot, especially when coming from who carries the burden of proof that the photographs do not show what according to all associated evidence they do. Does the spoilt little brat also want me to buy him an ice-cream on top of all he yells for?

The name of the photographer can be provided. On pages 82/83 of their Treblinka book, Mattogno & Graf write the following (emphasis mine):

Quote:
After the conclusion of the previously described investigations, the Treblinka matter was allowed to rest for more than a year. But the preparations for the Nuremberg Trial awakened the interest of the Jewish Central Historical Commission as well as of the Polish State Prosecutor’s office for that camp. On November 6, 1945, the latter carried out an inspection trip to Treblinka, in which participated: Rachel Auerbach and Józef Kermisz as representatives of the said Jewish Commission, Judge Zdzislaw Lukaszkiewicz, State Prosecutor J. Maciejewski, land surveyor K. Trautsolt, the witnesses Samuel Rajzman, Tanhum Grinberg, Szimon Friedman, and M. Mittelberg – all members of the Association of Former Treblinka Inmates – J. Slebczak, President of the district council of Siedlce, Major Jucharek from the neighboring village of Wólka Okrąglik, and finally photographer Jakob Byk.
Of the six post-liberation Treblinka photos shown in my RODOH thread Mass Graves and Dead Bodies under http://rodohforum.yuku.com/topic/596...ad-Bodies.html :

1. Skeletal remains at the site of the Treblinka extermination camp.
http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5807_1_web.jpg

2. Skeletal remains at the site of the Treblinka extermination camp.
http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg

3. Human skeletal remains in the Treblinka camp.

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5810_1_web.jpg

4. Heaps of ashes on the grounds of the Treblinka camp.
http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5809_1_web.jpg

5. One of the enormous pits in the Treblinka camp into which the victims' corpses (and later, ashes) were thrown.
http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg

6. A heap of ashes in the Treblinka camp.
http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5814_1_web.jpg

, photographs 2 and 4 show the name of the photographer: "J. Byck, Warszawa", who is obviously identical with the "Jacob Byk" mentioned by Mattogno & Graf. This means that the photographs were taken during the site inspection/investigation carried out between 6 November and 13 November 1945. Photographer Byk/Byck seems to have been part of the investigation team headed by Examining Judge Zdzislaw Lukaszkiewicz, and all above photographs are from the same collection (Ghetto Fighters Museum), so it seems reasonable to assume that photographs 1, 3, 5 and 6 were taken by Mr. Byk/Byck as well.

The exact date of the photographs I don’t know, but it must have been between 6 November and 13 November 1945.

The collection of photographs under http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/lasttracks.html includes two photos:

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp40.jpg

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp39.jpg

that show exactly the same as the above numbers 4 and 6 and were thus obviously taken by the same photographer, with the same camera and at the same time.

Of the other photos under http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/lasttracks.html , these three:

7. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp41.jpg

8. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp43.jpg

9. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp42.jpg

look to my like they were taken with the same camera, so I would attribute them to Mr. Byk/Byck and the period between 6 and 13 November 1945 as well.

This photograph:

10. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp35.jpg

may also be from the same source, but it is equally possible that it was taken during the Soviet investigation preceding the Polish one.

This photograph:

11. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp44.jpg

is obviously from the Soviet investigation, as captioned.

The remaining photographs

12. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp46.jpg

13. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp47.jpg

14. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp48.jpg

15. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp49.jpg

16. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp50.jpg

17. http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/pic/bigp51.jpg

look like they have been taken with a camera other than that of Mr. Byk/Byck. As the investigators in the last photo look like civilians rather than Red Army soldiers, however, it is possible that these photos are related to a Polish site inspection/investigation other than the one headed by judge Lukaszkiewicz, maybe the inspection/investigation involving Mr. Karol Ogrodowczyk from Warsaw that is mentioned in the Polish newspaper article translated into English under http://rodohforum.yuku.com/topic/588...Treblinka.html . This photo of skulls on the Treblinka site:

18. http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_3.jpg

, which is included in that newspaper article, may be related to the Ogrodowczyk inspection/investigation as well.

On the other hand, this photo:

19. http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_2.jpg

shows the result of a Polish militia action against robbery diggers and must have been part of the corresponding militia report. In my translation of the Polish newspaper article about the "Gold Rush in Treblinka", this photo is addressed in some detail:

Quote:
In one of the huts in Wólka we got to see a unique photo of this action - perhaps the only one that survived. No one had so far published it. A scene in the open field: soldiers armed with machine pistols are standing around a group of villagers. The women with headscarves and long skirts, as if on harvest. Only there are spades instead of sickles in their hands. The men with berets and jackets, with spades. Piled up in front of them are skulls and limb bones. No consternation is to be seen on the faces. Those arrested know that they have nothing to fear.

We figure how many inhabitants of Wólka, Grądy and Prostyń may recognize their parents and grandparents on this photo. We read the report about the roundup, which the head of the unit from Ostrowa presented to his superiors: "With the grave robbers we found golden rings, crowns and porcelain teeth with gold and silver inlays."

In the archives there is no indication that anyone was put on trial for pilfering graves. The show-off action was completed, photos of those arrested were made, a report was sent out, the military returned to its barracks, the grave robbers - to Treblinka. The intensive rummaging doesn't stop for the next 15 years.

"The people have learned the difference between almonds and diamonds," says the house owner whom we show the photo. For a long time he studies the faces on the photograph. He doesn't want to reveal who he recognized, but he admits: "These are no anonymous people". Several times he repeats that, were we to mention his name in the "Gazeta", the neighbors would set fire to his house.
As to the "alleged" (why so scared, Mr. Gerdes?) location in the camp where these photographs were taken, the likeliest choice is the area described as follows in Lukaszkiewicz’ report of 29.12.1945, quoted in my article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure … under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...treblinka.html :

Quote:
In the northwestern section of the area, the surface is covered for about 2 hectares by a mixture of ashes and sand. In this mixture, one finds countless human bones, often still covered with tissue remains, which are in a condition of decomposition. During the inspection, which I made with the assistance of an expert in forensic medicine, it was determined that the ashes are without any doubt of human origin (remains of cremated human bones). The examination of human skulls could discover no trace of« wounding. At a distance of some 100 m, there is now an unpleasant odor of burning and decay.
However, Mr. Gerdes is free to point out another location described in this report or the one of 13.11.1945 that better fits what can be seen on the photographs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
When you can do that, we will get into the analysis of the photos.
Such “analysis” should start by pointing out indications that, contrary to what is shown by all associated evidence and what can be established about the photographs’ author, date and place (see above), these photos show another place and other objects than those they obviously show. Maybe Mr. Gerdes can point out some Montana ridge or Peoria building in the background. Good luck, Mr. Gerdes!
 
Old June 13th, 2008 #56
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
BTW Roberta, tell us how you first became aware of this photo here:

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_2.jpg
See my previous post, prick. Did you not read the Polish article about the Gold Rush in Treblinka yet, or did you read it with thick tomato slices covering your eyes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Proof Roberta.

Proof.
What would be proof for you, and what rules and standards of evidence you can show us is your criterion based on, Mr. Gerdes?

This question will be asked every time you repeat you senile yelling for "proof", so better start thinking of an answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
BTW psychologicalshock, the 50,000 figure you cite is for Treblinka I, not II, and in all, 440 bodies were found. That's my understanding / opinion of the research anyway.
So Gerdes thinks the "Lazarett" was located in Treblinka I labor camp and not in Treblinka II extermination camp?

He should do something about his ignorance, then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"So it’s completely irrelevant whether or not bullets or shell casings were identified on site. Better get used to the idea. "

"Better get used to the idea!" LOL!

Oh my, she is getting desperate isn't she?
No, desperation is all with the quote-mining, straw-man-toting liar who cannot explain why on earth it should be relevant whether or not bullets or shell casings were identified on site. The complete statement in post # 48 reads as follows:

Quote:
So fucking what, Gerdes? There’s no reason compatible with the evidentiary record of Treblinka why even a single bullet or shell casing need to have been identified. The casings are likely to have been salvaged by the SS after each shooting (the Germans had a war going on and may not have wanted to waste the brass, you know), and identifying molten bullet lead among the mess found after the war on the Treblinka site is not exactly a piece of cake. On the other hand, conclusive eyewitness testimony provided at trials before West German courts, also by the shooters themselves, leaves no room for reasonable doubt about the existence of the "Lazarett" and the shootings that took place there. So it’s completely irrelevant whether or not bullets or shell casings were identified on site. Better get used to the idea.
Is there anything you can show to be wrong with my reasoning, Gerdes? No, there isn’t, so do yourself the favor of keeping your hollow howling to yourself (that’s well meaning advice).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Yes folks, we just have to "get used to the idea" that the Germans committed the perfect crime while allegedly murdering 870,000 jews!
A rather obvious and silly straw-man after all the physical exhibits you have been shown, don’t you think so, Gerdes? Try to rein in your mendacity, for your "White" buddies may not be as dumb as you expect them to be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Isn't that a wonderful way out of the dilemma for Roberta? Hey Roberta, why don't you just close your eyes, click your heals 3 times and you will find yourself in the wonderful land of Oz and out of this terrible mess you've gotten yourself into. Wouldn’t it be great to be in Roberta’s fantasy world folks? Whenever you find yourself in a pickle, just tell others to “get used to the idea” that reality is what ever it is you want / need it to be at the moment.

“No officer, I wasn’t speeding. Your radar gun is broken – “get used to the idea.”

“No your honor, I didn’t rape her. No means yes in my world – “get used to the idea.”

“No, I don’t have to pay for that tank of gas. I don’t use money in my world – “get used to the idea.”

“No, I don’t have to prove that those photos were actually taken at / in Treblinka. If I say they were, then they were – “get used to the idea.”
Blah, blah, blah. None of your idiotic "parallels" has got anything to do with my arguments. If this hysterical fish-wife-bitching the best you can do by way of explaining how identifying bullets or shell cases would be relevant to proving the mass murder at Treblinka, with all the documentary, eyewitness and physical evidence I have shown and despite your inability to address but a small part of that evidence let alone provide even a shred of evidence that would support your "transit camp" scenario? If so, poor show, and poor Gerdes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Yes folks, we just need to "get used to the idea" of a physical impossibility so Roberta can "do without the photos" and physical evidence and fall back to her "eyewitnesses" and their Alice in Wonderland impossible tall tales.
What "physical impossibility" exactly are you babbling about, Gerdes? I don’t remember your having so far demonstrated any physical impossibility. Please show me what I’m supposed to have missed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
But then again, "getting used to the idea" shouldn't be too hard. After all, we've had to "get used to the idea" that 6 million jews magically disappeared during WWII, so “getting used to the idea” that tens of thousands of bullets and shell casing magically disappeared shouldn't be so hard, should it? LOL!
More hollow blah, blah, blah. Picking up shell cases for salvaging at the "Lazarett" was a piece of cake. Identifying molten bullets among the metallic mess lying in the subsoil of Treblinka along with the human remains, on the other hand, was everything other than that. And as to the 5 to 6 million Jews who disappeared from Europe during World War II and are not known to have shown up anywhere else, maybe you can give us your theory as to what happened to them. Are they supposed to have been abducted by flying saucers, or what is your explanation for their disappearance?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
BTW Roberta, how are you coming along with finding a photo of the "bullet catchers" the Germans used in Treblinka?
I haven't even tried. Any good reason you can give us why I should, and why such a photo – assuming they had sand-sacks or other bullet-catching devices at the "Lazarett" – should necessarily exist?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
A hysterical fool’s hysterical laughter is no reason, Gerdes. You’ll have to do better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Just a point of clarification:

I'm not saying 50,000 died in Treblinka I, I'm just saying that that is what was claimed by Zdzisław Łukaszkiewicz in his report of December 29, 1945:

"In this camp [Treblinka I] approximately 50,000 Poles and Jews were killed."

(USSR-344. GARF, 7445-2-126.)
So the "Lazarett" is supposed to have been in Treblinka I labor camp? Better re-read Mattogno & Graf’s Treblinka book (from where, I presume, you took your reference to document USSR-344).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Anyway, Roberta, how you coming along with verifying that those photos you presented as "evidence" for the Treblinka holohoax were really taken in / at Treblinka?
Fine, thanks, but the question is another, given that all associated evidence points to these being post-liberation Treblinka photos: what indication can Gerdes show us that these photos are not what their whole evidentiary context shows them to be?

Let’s hear, Gerdes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
And don't forget that we're still waiting for a photo of the "bullet catcher!"
Is there any reason why anyone should give a flying fuck about what you are "waiting" for, Mr. Gerdes?

I can think of none.
 
Old June 13th, 2008 #57
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Fist off Roberta, as anyone with half a brain could tell, I'm not saying there was an alleged "lazarett" pit in Treblinka I. Your reading of that just shows your ignorance / stupidity / insanity / desperation etc.

Now back to my questions from posts # 46 & 47 & 50.

OK, let's do this again and make it so simple that maybe even a retard like Roberta can understand it:

Roberta, for the following photos, give us the name of the photographer, the date the photo was taken and the location in the camp that they were allegedly taken in. That is just a start. When you can do that, we will get into the analysis of the photos.

#1 -

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5813_1_web.jpg

#2 -

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5811_1_web.jpg


#3 -

http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh_mul...5808_1_web.jpg


#4 -

http://www.death-camps.org/treblinka/excavators2.html

#5 -

http://holocaust-info.dk/treblinka/i...mass_grave.htm


As per your drawings of "mass graves" on the Sept. 1944 aerial photo:

Roberta:

"As to the aerial photo, it's also not my job to prove that these ground-scarring shapes are what they look like and what eyewitness testimonies suggest they were, i.e. mass graves."

Since you obviously can't prove that there are actually 'huge mass graves" under those shapes that you've outlined Roberta, then that photo is being stricken.

However, this photo will be added into evidence (for the time being).

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_3.jpg

Now Roberta, same as above, for the following photos, give us the name of the photographer, the date the photo(s) were taken and the location in the camp that they were allegedly taken in. That is just a start. When you can do that, we will get into the analysis of the photos.

1 -

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_2.jpg

2 -


http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...GoldRush_3.jpg


BTW Roberta, tell us how you first became aware of those last two photos.

This is real simple Roberta. Just give the information that has been asked, nothing more, nothing less. But please feel free to expound on the last question I asked you.
 
Old June 13th, 2008 #58
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Roberta:

"Actually common sense suggests that the deputy commandant of Treblinka II extermination camp would photograph things inside Treblinka II extermination camp and not a labor camp that he had nothing to do with."

The sand / gravel quarry was not "in" the labor camp Treblinka I. But now that you mention it Roberta, If common sense suggests that the deputy commandant of Treblinka II would photograph things inside Treblinka II, then would you please present into evidence all the photos that "common sense" tells us that he would have taken?

You know, like the piles of the alleged hundreds and hundreds of thousands of bodies?

How about just one photo of just one dead body?

Just one Roberta.

One.
 
Old June 13th, 2008 #59
psychologicalshock
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp View Post
Wow, looks like someone realized that Gerdes is not doing well and decided to help him.
No it's simply because all of this has been already done before and there is no need to waste time on it.


Quote:
How so?
http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php...9&postcount=75
Discussed here.





Quote:
Why would they have been unable to dig pits this deep with their Menck excavators? Excavators like those were what was available in civil construction throughout the world at the time, and I figure that a tall building – especially a sky-scraper – needs a rather deep foundation.
This isn't true, even modern excavators of its class cannot do 7.5 meters even though they have double the horsepower.
http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php...&postcount=103
http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php...&postcount=112

Quote:
Sure you aren’t mixing up conclusions regarding the Treblinka I labor camp with conclusions regarding the Treblinka II extermination camp?
No because of a simple conclusion - Treblinka II was bombed. The Polack found uncovered bones and bodies. Treblinka II was bombed, thus the Polack was investigating Treblinka II and concluded that 50,000 died there.

Quote:
How do you know that those train records are "obvious lies", and who is supposed to "avoid" them?
Quote:
Actually, Y. Arad - without admitting this - relies upon, more than anything else, the Atlas of the Holocaust by British-Jewish historian Martin Gilbert, first published in London in 1982. This work contains an abundance of numerical data about the deportation of Jews but maintains a total silence regarding the sources. As far as Poland - and, in particular, the deportations to Treblinka - is concerned, the figures of Gilbert are for the most part the product of fantasy: he has done nothing more than assign numbers snatched out of thin air to the individual locations from which real and contrived transports departed; numbers whose total sum came to the figure determined beforehand, of 840,000![256] Even a fleeting glance at the tables shows this incontrovertibly. For example, on table 168 there are approximately sixty locations of the Białystok district, from which transports are supposed to have departed for Treblinka on November 2, 1942. To this endless column of mostly unknown small country towns Gilbert allots extremely exact numbers of deportations.[257] If there had really been precise figures for these small towns, they would naturally have been cited first and foremost by the Polish researchers and historians; but, as we have seen, the latter had to confine themselves to hypothetical enumerations of trains and cars.
Quote:
But you get points for at least trying to address the documentary evidence, something your friend Gerdes never dared to do. Maybe you can answer the question I asked Gerdes about the documents quoted in my posts nos. 295 to 300 of our Topix discussion. You find these posts under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T...T8PL8H7P8C/p15 .
Ill look at it.


Quote:
Who is supposed to have bombed it, and what evidence is there that such bombing too place? Whoever is supposed to have bombed the place "to remove evidence of it not being a death camp" must have been dumb as a door, for what he achieved instead was to bring to the surface death camp evidence (ashes, bones, skulls) that the SS had carefully hidden underground and planted vegetation on.
Uhm no, it was bombed after the Soviet Union advanced on it and took it, the only remaining buildings were not later found by the Polak.


Quote:
What exactly is that supposed to mean?
Exactly what you read - it's not clear how many of the remains are even Jewish.


Quote:
What are you trying to tell us, that no part of an eyewitness account can be used if the eyewitness got one or the other detail wrong? If criminal investigators went by that reasoning, they’d probably never find an eyewitness testimony they can use to solve a case, for what eyewitness ever gets every detail right?
No I am saying that the eye witness testimony is for most of the Holocaust false.





Quote:
I take you’re referring to Wiernik, the only eyewitness I know who mentioned such an occurrence – except the bullet was not from an infantry carbine but from a pistol, which jammed after the shot. This is discussed in my article Historiography as seen by an ignorant charlatan … under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...norant_03.html .
This is what a 7.62x25 mm bullet will do to a helmet


If it's true that Wiernik was shot from 50 meters then the soldier would have plenty of time to fix the jam.
If someone had shot Wiernik with a gun he would have been wounded.

Anyways, you're right that I somewhat picked out bad examples

Quote:
What evidence of any kind is there for the existence of Treblinka, Sobibor, or Belzec? Yitzhak Arad testifies that there is only survivor testimony. But when we read that survivor testimony for ourselves, we find that it lacks credibility. To restrict our attention to the most prominent and most relied-upon Treblinka survivor - Jankiel Wiernik- and to a very few of the particulars of his story that lack credibility, we might mention the following: Wiernik stated that while escaping from Treblinka, he was shot in the shoulder by a pursuing guard who was just behind him, and that the bullet penetrated all his clothing, but stopped at his skin "leaving only a scratch." Wiernik stated that he saw a naked Jewish girl leap over a three-meter high barbed wire fence, then wrench the rifle out of the hands of a pursuing guard, and then shoot two other guards before she was overpowered. Wiernik stated that when gassing victims were buried without being given a chance to cool off first, "when the graves were opened on a scorchingly hot day, steam belched forth from them as if from a boiler." Wiernik stated that "the Germans threw some burning object into one of the opened graves just to see what would happen. Clouds of black smoke began to pour out at once and the fire thus started glimmered all day long." Wiernik stated that arms and legs would fall off bodies being dragged from gas chambers to burial pits if the dragging was delayed by a few days. Wiernik stated that whenever an airplane was heard overhead, the thousands of victims being piled up for cremation were concealed from view by covering them with foliage. Unfortunately for the Treblinka story, removing Wiernik from the list of credible survivors leaves no one of comparable stature to take his place.
Better ones.

Quote:
What’s the deal supposed to be? Read the article Well. Well? Well! under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...well-well.html .
Simple disproof of this - no has ever found chlorine in the soil and thus this is speculation and again jumping to conclusions. If chlorine is not found then the water well was contaminated. It's doubtful there will be any chlorine found because if there was any there it would have been found a long time ago. (It would probably leak into the Bug River)


Quote:
The problem with the fence being that it would have easily caught fire, you mean? Except that the dry pinewood was regularly replaced by fresh pinewood in order to keep up the camouflage function of the camp's interior and exterior fences. See the discussion of this issue in my article «B» as in «Bullshit» under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...llshit_20.html .
You can change the branches all you like but its a long known fact that pines burn extremely well. Look at the experiment
http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.co...es/25_mov.html

The branch isn't even dried out yet.

Even fresh branches burn great





Quote:
I don’t see what’s supposed to have been "atrocious" about the gas chamber design that can be reconstructed based on various eyewitness testimonies. It rather looks quite simple and effective to me. And if some eyewitnesses got details wrong there, big deal – any eyewitness other than the gas chamber’s operators could have been mistaken about one or the other part of what he occasionally and briefly saw.
Short hallway where a guard had to always line up against the wall just to let people through. Why not just have double doors and no hallway? Obvious.

Quote:
The same goes for the "Diesel" thing – eyewitnesses who spoke of diesel may just have mixed up the gasoline gassing engine with some diesel engine used for other purposes in the camp. The folks at other camps who operated the engines or were otherwise familiar with them all mentioned gasoline engines, as pointed out under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...rrelevant.html , and there’s no reason why gasoline exhaust should not have been used in Treblinka as well.
Theories, theories, theories mean absolutely nothing. There have been stories of air being pumped out of the room, water vapor death, Diesel and now gas?


… including members of the camp’s former SS-staff testifying before West German courts, and also according to document showing that hundreds of thousands of people were taken to a place from which only a handful are known to have emerged alive, and from where such a stench of corpses emanated in October 1942 that the Wehrmacht local commander of a town 20 kilometers away complained about it. I don’t see what is wrong with eyewitness and documentary evidence as proof of a crime or other historical event. Aren't mass crimes and other historical events usually proven also if not mainly or solely on the basis of these categories of evidence? Can you show us one large-scale massacre that was reconstructed solely or mainly on the basis of physical evidence?

Quote:

What conclusions exactly am I supposed to be "jumping" to? If the foundations of the gas chamber building were not found, this means that either the Poles looked for them in the wrong place of they had been removed by the SS, who had plenty of time to do so. And the admission in the Polish site investigation report of 13.11.1945 that the foundations of the gas chamber building had not been found is another argument (besides the matching by evidence, unknown to the investigators, of their findings on site) against the idea that there was any manipulation involved in the investigation. If the report had been "cooked", why didn’t it's authors just make up their having identified the foundations of the gas chamber building?
The soil would still suggest the disturbance of having a solid structure there.

Quote:
What, you consider something as vital to the benefit of mankind and the contemporary German war effort as getting rid of those subversive and parasitical Jews a waste of resources? I’m surprised!
Germany valued gasoline, to them gasoline was extremely precious as they always had a shortage of it.

Quote:
Of course the Germans were concerned about salvaging resources. Why else would they have bothered to collect and keep account of all objects they took away from the Jews before killing them? You may view records of the plunder under http://www.death-camps.org/reinhard/arloot.htm .



Neither can I, but this wasn’t battle. This was bumping off helpless human beings one by one with a shot in the neck at a segregated place, the killers having all the time and leisure in the world to pick up what cartridges were lying around.
If they were truly concerned they would be picking cartridges up in their own encampment/trench after the battle was done. The amount of bullets being fired on the front was enormous. Treblinka's 50,000 cartridges wouldn't last any significant amount of time when machine guns are spitting out 1300 bullets a minute.


Quote:
I wouldn’t be surprised if Polish investigators had been short of such hardware shortly after the end of the war, actually.
Metal detectors were an extremely ubiquitous piece of equipment in the Soviet Army and given that this investigation was done in conjunction with the soviets it's doubtable that would have been difficult.
Quote:
Besides, there was much metallic mess lying around on the Treblinka site, and I doubt a metal detector would have been able to tell the difference. Last but not least, how do you know what bullets were used for the shooting?
They could have just found all these metallic objects and identified them. I know that the bullets were iron core because Germany only used that type of bullet during the war because it saved them money.

Quote:
Anyway, thanks for bringing some new arguments into the discussion, which Mr. Gerdes’ repetitive "recaps" and "just one" demands have made rather boring.
It's a rather good argument that I have not seen a single Jew answer.

Quote:

Cute girl in your avatar, by the way.
Thank ya.

My issue isn't to white wash Germany (Because I don't do that) but I have never seen the methodology recorded of what the Germans did and as you admitted eye witness accounts are faulty. Judging the techniques by modern equipment (Such as what was done with the excavator) seems unreasonable. Until I see a forensic investigation of better quality I will not be convinced.

Last edited by psychologicalshock; June 14th, 2008 at 03:08 AM.
 
Old June 14th, 2008 #60
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp
Wow, looks like someone realized that Gerdes is not doing well and decided to help him.
No it's simply because all of this has been already done before and there is no need to waste time on it.
Then why are you "wasting time" on it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
I’m not impressed by what I’ve seen "here", especially your feeble attempts to discredit eyewitness testimony based on errors about measurements and other details (which eyewitnesses could well have observed or recollected mistakenly without this meaning that they lied) and with rather funny arguments (for instance, while drinking urine may dehydrate the body, do you expect someone dying of thirst to know that or care about that if he should know?), and your claim that "this individual found no mass graves and by WITNESS TESTIMONY concluded that they were now ashes" ("mass graves" in this context obviously means "pits full of stinking dead bodies", and you ignored the previously highlighted statement "as is to be concluded from the witness testimonies examined so far and from the results of the works carried out at the site", not to mention the description of abundant human remains found during the "works carried out at the site" earlier in the report). When I’m done here with Gerdes, I guess I’ll have some fun on that thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Why would they have been unable to dig pits this deep with their Menck excavators? Excavators like those were what was available in civil construction throughout the world at the time, and I figure that a tall building – especially a sky-scraper – needs a rather deep foundation.
This isn't true, even modern excavators of its class cannot do 7.5 meters even though they have double the horsepower.
http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php...&postcount=103
http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php...&postcount=112
Interesting, but what does horsepower have to do with how deep an excavator can dig? Horsepower influences the speed at which an excavator can dig and how much soil it can remove within a given time but not the depth it can reach, if you ask me. I also don’t see a point in comparing crawler excavators with cable-operated excavators, and your problem with the boom length is also difficult to understand. The fact is that cable-operated excavators like those shown in Kurt Franz's photographs were what construction had in the 1940s, so if they were not able to dig pit 7.5 meters deep and as long and wide as the pits at Treblinka are reported to have been, one wonders how they managed to dig the foundations of several-story building or even sky-scrapers at that time. Can you explain this?

On the German site http://www.bagger-und-bahnen.de/baumaschinen.htm , as site for excavator fans, you find the following information about cable-operated excavators (my translation):

Quote:
At the end of the 19th Century cable-operated excavators introduced an essential phase of the mechanization of construction sites. Their period of glory was only ended with the development of hydraulics in construction machines, through which machines with a higher performance and easier to operate became possible. Cable-operated excavators retained niches in which they stand their ground to this day: excavating sand and gravel, depth foundations and drillings as well as large-scale demolition measures, and since some time ago also dynamic depth sealing.
As you can see, cable-operated excavators are still in use today and seem to be especially suitable for excavating sand (as in Treblinka) and for doing work deep underground. As to how deep one can dig these days with a cable-operated excavator, just look at the Sennebogen product line under http://www.crane-division.com/hp456/Seilbagger.htm . The Sennebogen 630 D cable-operated excavator, presented under http://www.crane-division.com/hp515/630-HD.htm , is currently digging a well 37 meters deep in Münsing/Ammerland near the Starnberger See, according to a press release under http://sennebogen-press.com/hp3013/S...Brunnenbau.htm .

[quote=ps]Quote:
Sure you aren’t mixing up conclusions regarding the Treblinka I labor camp with conclusions regarding the Treblinka II extermination camp?
No because of a simple conclusion - Treblinka II was bombed. The Polack found uncovered bones and bodies. Treblinka II was bombed, thus the Polack was investigating Treblinka II and concluded that 50,000 died there.[quote]

Let’s look at what Mattogno & Graf wrote in their Treblinka book, page 89:

Quote:
On the other hand, Łukaszkiewicz had carelessly written in his report of December 29, 1945, that213 "in this camp [Treblinka I] approximately 50,000 Poles and Jews were killed."
The figure 50,000 clearly refers to the Treblinka I labor camp, not the Treblinka II extermination camp. As to whether Treblinka II was bombed and why explosives were set off on its soil, see below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
How do you know that those train records are "obvious lies", and who is supposed to "avoid" them?
Quote:
Actually, Y. Arad - without admitting this - relies upon, more than anything else, the Atlas of the Holocaust by British-Jewish historian Martin Gilbert, first published in London in 1982. This work contains an abundance of numerical data about the deportation of Jews but maintains a total silence regarding the sources. As far as Poland - and, in particular, the deportations to Treblinka - is concerned, the figures of Gilbert are for the most part the product of fantasy: he has done nothing more than assign numbers snatched out of thin air to the individual locations from which real and contrived transports departed; numbers whose total sum came to the figure determined beforehand, of 840,000![256] Even a fleeting glance at the tables shows this incontrovertibly. For example, on table 168 there are approximately sixty locations of the Białystok district, from which transports are supposed to have departed for Treblinka on November 2, 1942. To this endless column of mostly unknown small country towns Gilbert allots extremely exact numbers of deportations.[257] If there had really been precise figures for these small towns, they would naturally have been cited first and foremost by the Polish researchers and historians; but, as we have seen, the latter had to confine themselves to hypothetical enumerations of trains and cars.
How about providing the source of these sweeping claims? The figures given by Arad, see under http://holocaust-info.dk/treblinka/t...portations.htm , are not "extremely exact" figures, but obviously estimates, and there are no figures for every small location in the Bialystok district, so the inference that Arad used Gilbert without "admitting" to his source is bullshit. Arad is very specific about the sources he used, see under http://holocaust-info.dk/statistics/info.htm :

Quote:
The Deportation of the Jews from the General Government, Bialystok General District, and Ostland

The exact number of Jews who were deported to the Operation Reinhard death camps is difficult to determine because of the prevailing conditions at the time and the method employed by the Nazi extermination machine in expelling the victims to BeIzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka. The number of Jews who lived in the towns and townships of Poland before the war is known from the population census carried out there in 1931. Some demographic changes took place during the years 1931-1939, but these did not basically alter the number of Jews living there on the eve of the German occupation.
Substantial demographic changes did occur during the war, during the years 1939-1942, until the onset of the deportations to the death camps. In these years, tens of thousands of Jews escaped from one place to seek refuge in another. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were expelled and resettled, sent to labor camps, or concentrated in larger ghettos. Thousands of Jews were murdered in shooting Aktionen in the vicinity of their homes-before, during, and after the deportations to the death camps. Thus, on the eve of the expulsions, there were many small localities in which Jews no longer lived and other localities in which the number of Jews was much higher than before the war.
The deportation method, as carried out by the German authorities in the General Government, was en masse, without lists of names or even exact numbers. Usually ghettos were totally liquidated, and only the killing capacity of the camps and the volume of the trains dictated the number of people who were deported. In places where some Jews were temporarily left behind, the Germans counted the few who remained, while all the others were pushed into the trains.
Documents of the German railway authorities, which were found after the war, provided some data on the number of trains and freight cars. If we take into account that each fully packed freight car carried 100-150 people, we can arrive at an approximate indication of the number of Jews in each transport.
Another source of information was the census of the ghetto inhabitants carried out by the Judenrats in some of these places. A census of this type was usually undertaken by order of the German authorities for purposes of forced-labor requests or in preparation for the deportations. Sometimes the Judenrats also took a census for their own purposes, for example, for food rationing or housing problems.
Documents containing these data and sometimes even the number of Jews who were deported, as collected by the Judenrat, were found after the war. Sometimes they were mentioned in diaries written by ghetto inmates and left behind.
Numerous memoirs written by survivors, as well as the memorial books (Yizkor books), contain important data about the deportations, including, dates and the number of deported. Testimonies by survivors, statements by local people who witnessed the deportations, and evidence given by members of the German administration at the war-crimes trials serve as significant sources of information.
Together, all these documents and sources enable us to arrive at an estimation that comes very close to the actual figures and dates of the deportations to the Operation Reinhard death camps.

An extremely valuable research study undertaken to establish the timetable and number of deported Jews from the General Government and to which death camp they were sent was carried out by Tatiana Berenstein and published in Poland in the Biuletyn Zydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego (Bulletin of the Jewish Historical Institute), Warsaw, No. 3/1952, No. 21/1957, No. 3/1959, No. 59/1966, No. 61/1967. Another source is the "Luach Hashoa (Holocaust Calendar) of Polish Jewry" prepared by Rabbi Israel Schepansky and published by "Or Harnizrach," New York, 1974. A most important and more up-to-date source is the Pinkas Hakehillot (Encyclopedia of Jewish Communities), Poland, Vol. 11, Eastern Galicia, and Vol. III, Western Galicia, published by Yad Vashem, Jerusalem, in 1980 and 1984. The following tables of the deportations are based on all the aforementioned primary sources and research studies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
But you get points for at least trying to address the documentary evidence, something your friend Gerdes never dared to do. Maybe you can answer the question I asked Gerdes about the documents quoted in my posts nos. 295 to 300 of our Topix discussion. You find these posts under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T...T8PL8H7P8C/p15 .

Ill look at it.
Looking forward to your reply, then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Who is supposed to have bombed it, and what evidence is there that such bombing too place? Whoever is supposed to have bombed the place "to remove evidence of it not being a death camp" must have been dumb as a door, for what he achieved instead was to bring to the surface death camp evidence (ashes, bones, skulls) that the SS had carefully hidden underground and planted vegetation on.
Uhm no, it was bombed after the Soviet Union advanced on it and took it, the only remaining buildings were not later found by the Polak.
Some bombs or shells may have landed in the Treblinka area during fighting between Soviet and German forces in 1944, but the craters mentioned in the Polish site investigation reports seem to be mainly the work of robbery diggers. From my blog article Gold Rush in Treblinka under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...treblinka.html (quotes inside the quote are pointed out in the following by italics):

Quote:
Shameful pilfering of the Treblinka mass graves – what Auerbach appropriately described as the behavior of “jackals and hyenas in human shape” – was not restricted to Polish civilians, however. Soviet troops also took part in it:

In the autumn of 1944 Ukrainian and Russian guards appeared again, but this time in Stalin's service. With their arrival the peasant digging became an enterprise. From Ceranów airport, 10 km away, the Soviets brought along mines and blind bombs. The explosive charge was lowered into a mass grave, a Soviet fellow detonated it, and the Jewish corpses flew through the air.

When three years later representatives of the Main Commission for Investigation of Nazi Crimes showed up, the disgraceful hustle and bustle was in full swing. Commission member Rachela Auerbach noted: "With spades and other tools pilferers and marauders dig, search, rummage ... they carry unexploded artillery shells and bombs here - jackals and hyenas in human shape. They drill holes into the blood-drenched earth mixed with the ashes of burned Jews ..."

Bearing censorship in mind, Auerbach of course couldn't say that the Soviets organized and supervised the shameful activity. She didn't make clear who the "marauders" were.


The vivid image of Jewish corpses flying through the air is somewhat inaccurate insofar as most of what flew through the air when explosives were detonated in the Treblinka mass graves must have been the ashes and bone fragments to which the greater part of the victims’ corpses had been reduced by incineration. On the other hand, the above-quoted passage confirms an assumption I stated in my article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure … , when I wrote the following:

One also wonders why Mattogno didn’t consider the much likelier possibility that these bomb craters resulted from the activity of robbery diggers, who may, for instance, have obtained such devices from a corrupt Soviet commander’s stock or even included members of Soviet artillery or engineer units who themselves took part in the "Treblinka gold rush", equipped with the necessary hardware to make big holes and thus facilitate the search for valuables presumed to have been left behind by the victims of Treblinka.

A certain reluctance to mention the involvement of Soviet troops in the Treblinka “gold rush” seems to be present to this day, for whatever reason. At least this suspicion is raised by the explanation given by camp museum director Kopówka to the Gazeta Wyborcza journalists for the slots in the ground presently found in the Treblinka area:

"When we went around the memorial we found slots in the area," we say when bidding farewell to the director. "Judging by the trees growing inside them they must be several dozen years old. Are these pits from the diggings?" - "No ... those are from artillery shells. In 1944 the front line was here for some weeks."

Alex Bay’s research about military operations around Treblinka in 1944 doesn’t point to there having necessarily been any fighting in the Treblinka area, and the Luftwaffe air photo of September 1944, included in Bay’s Reconstruction of Treblinka, does not show the presence of craters made by artillery shells and bombs that would correspond to Kopówka’s claim. Explosions producing such craters must therefore have occurred after the September 1944 photograph.

Martyna Rusiniak, whose book about The extermination camp Treblinka II in collective memory is mentioned in the Gazeta Wyborcza article as due to appear the following month, disagrees with Kopówka in that she attributes a part of the pits in the Treblinka woods to the “hyenas”, especially to their “loud” excavations involving the use of explosives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
What exactly is that supposed to mean?
Exactly what you read - it's not clear how many of the remains are even Jewish.
Not from physical examination, maybe – but what evidence is there that any of the hundreds of thousands deported to Treblinka, apart from a couple of thousand Gypsies, were not Jewish?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
What are you trying to tell us, that no part of an eyewitness account can be used if the eyewitness got one or the other detail wrong? If criminal investigators went by that reasoning, they’d probably never find an eyewitness testimony they can use to solve a case, for what eyewitness ever gets every detail right?
No I am saying that the eye witness testimony is for most of the Holocaust false.
I take note of this baseless assertion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
I take you’re referring to Wiernik, the only eyewitness I know who mentioned such an occurrence – except the bullet was not from an infantry carbine but from a pistol, which jammed after the shot. This is discussed in my article Historiography as seen by an ignorant charlatan … under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...norant_03.html .

This is what a 7.62x25 mm bullet will do to a helmet
Interesting. At what range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
If it's true that Wiernik was shot from 50 meters then the soldier would have plenty of time to fix the jam.
How long, assuming a badly trained Ukrainian guard knew how to fix the jam?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
If someone had shot Wiernik with a gun he would have been wounded.
Would he? From my article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...norant_03.html :

Quote:
The original Polish text of the passage in question is the following:
Kula mnie nie zraniła o, dziwo! Przebiła wszystko na mnie i odbiła się o łopatkę, pozostawiając znak.
This was translated as follows by our Polish reader Roman Werpachowski:
The bullet did not hurt me - very strange! It pierced everything on me and reflected from my shoulder blade, leaving a mark.
A bullet ricocheting from a shoulder blade is something different from a bullet "stopping" at the shoulder, and it has also happened on at least one other occasion, the one referred to here.
"Here" = http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/publi...1/001163-1.htm

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Anyways, you're right that I somewhat picked out bad examples
Quote:
What evidence of any kind is there for the existence of Treblinka, Sobibor, or Belzec? Yitzhak Arad testifies that there is only survivor testimony. But when we read that survivor testimony for ourselves, we find that it lacks credibility. To restrict our attention to the most prominent and most relied-upon Treblinka survivor - Jankiel Wiernik- and to a very few of the particulars of his story that lack credibility, we might mention the following: Wiernik stated that while escaping from Treblinka, he was shot in the shoulder by a pursuing guard who was just behind him, and that the bullet penetrated all his clothing, but stopped at his skin "leaving only a scratch." Wiernik stated that he saw a naked Jewish girl leap over a three-meter high barbed wire fence, then wrench the rifle out of the hands of a pursuing guard, and then shoot two other guards before she was overpowered. Wiernik stated that when gassing victims were buried without being given a chance to cool off first, "when the graves were opened on a scorchingly hot day, steam belched forth from them as if from a boiler." Wiernik stated that "the Germans threw some burning object into one of the opened graves just to see what would happen. Clouds of black smoke began to pour out at once and the fire thus started glimmered all day long." Wiernik stated that arms and legs would fall off bodies being dragged from gas chambers to burial pits if the dragging was delayed by a few days. Wiernik stated that whenever an airplane was heard overhead, the thousands of victims being piled up for cremation were concealed from view by covering them with foliage. Unfortunately for the Treblinka story, removing Wiernik from the list of credible survivors leaves no one of comparable stature to take his place.
Better ones.
I’d say the "better ones" have been dealt with in my article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...norant_03.html , where I also pointed out parts of Wiernik’s testimony that are matched by evidence independent thereof and the reliability of which is thus confirmed. But feel free to point out any of the "better ones" that you think I did not address and would require revising my assessment. I agree that one should not take everything that Wiernik wrote at face value, but dismissing his entire testimony on account of one or the other inaccuracy, or even one or the other implausibility, is like throwing out the baby with the bath water.

The author of the above quote comes across as somewhat ignorant in what concerns the body of eyewitness testimony to the Treblinka mass killings, by the way. If he had read Arad’s book, where the author also quotes or refers to depositions by perpetrators on trial before West German courts as well as documentary evidence, he might not have written this nonsense about Arad having stated that "there is only survivor testimony". It also isn't doesn't show proper research to make a fuss about what one historian is supposed to have stated when there are also other historians, like Prof. Browning with his report on the documentary and eyewitness evidence to the implementation of the "Final Solution" including the camps of Aktion Reinhard(t), see under http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.co...ense/browning/ .

Browning identified five categories of eyewitness testimony:
- German visitors of the camps
- Germans who were stationed at Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka
- Ukrainian guards
- Poles in the villages around these camps
- Jewish survivors

He also mentions documentary evidence to what was going on at these camps, such as the following:

Quote:
Moreover, the fate of the Bialystok Jews in the fall of 1942 was clearly stated in Himmler's report to Hitler of December 31, 1942. The Jews of Bialystok were among the 363,211 "Jews executed." The fate of the Jews sent to Treblinka is also reflected in a report noted in the October 10, 1942, entry to the War Diary of the Oberquartiermeister of the military commander in Poland.
OK Ostrow reports that the Jews in Treblinka are not adequately buried and as a result an unbearable smell of cadavers pollutes the air.118
Ostrow, it should be noted, was some 20 kilometers from Treblinka.
This makes someone who claims that the only evidence "of any kind" that there is "for the existence of Treblinka, Sobibor, or Belzec" consists of "survivor testimony" look like an incompetent bungler at best, don’t you think so?

Please provide that incompetent bungler’s name and the link to his writing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
What’s the deal supposed to be? Read the article Well. Well? Well! under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...well-well.html .

Simple disproof of this - no has ever found chlorine in the soil and thus this is speculation and again jumping to conclusions. If chlorine is not found then the water well was contaminated. It's doubtful there will be any chlorine found because if there was any there it would have been found a long time ago. (It would probably leak into the Bug River)
Assuming chlorine is the only relevant factor – there are also other factors mentioned in the article, IIRC – how do you know that none was "found"? Assuming chlorine remained in place after the bodies were exhumed and burned (what makes you think it did?), who is known to have searched for traces of chlorine in the soil of Treblinka? Assuming the chlorine necessarily leaked into the Bug river (you seem to consider this a mere probability), would this necessarily have been reported? And would such reports necessarily have become known outside the adjacent Polish villages and towns, from which, as the Polish newspaper article about the Gold Rush in Treblinka that I translated shows, little is known outside and even inside Poland to these days? I don’t think so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
The problem with the fence being that it would have easily caught fire, you mean? Except that the dry pinewood was regularly replaced by fresh pinewood in order to keep up the camouflage function of the camp's interior and exterior fences. See the discussion of this issue in my article «B» as in «Bullshit» under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...llshit_20.html .

You can change the branches all you like but its a long known fact that pines burn extremely well. Look at the experiment
http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.co...es/25_mov.html

The branch isn't even dried out yet.

Even fresh branches burn great
If so, someone should sue the webmaster of http://acreage.unl.edu/News/News/Xmastree.htm for dangerous misinformation:

Quote:
Freshness is key in preventing fire hazards. A natural Christmas tree with moisture in its branches and needles is no more flammable than a fresh flower. A well-cared for Christmas tree can stay fresh and green for months. However, a neglected tree can dry out, drop needles and become a potential fire hazard in as little as a week. At least starting out, locally grown Christmas trees are much fresher than those cut and shipped from western and northern states, often months in advance of Christmas.
Also consider the other arguments against a high fence-fire risk in my article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...llshit_20.html .

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
I don’t see what’s supposed to have been "atrocious" about the gas chamber design that can be reconstructed based on various eyewitness testimonies. It rather looks quite simple and effective to me. And if some eyewitnesses got details wrong there, big deal – any eyewitness other than the gas chamber’s operators could have been mistaken about one or the other part of what he occasionally and briefly saw.
Short hallway where a guard had to always line up against the wall just to let people through. Why not just have double doors and no hallway? Obvious.
This is discussed in my article It’s hard to believe … under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...elieve_12.html , where I explain why the arrangement you propose would have been the "atrocious" one. Excerpt:

Quote:
If, as the above sources show, it was advantageous to the SS to have more and smaller gas chambers in the AR camps’ gas chamber buildings rather than fewer and larger ones, then the logical arrangement of the former was the one that the evidence shows to have been applied, i.e. a corridor with the gas chambers on either side. An arrangement without a corridor and interconnecting partitions would have required the same number of doors and made for a more cumbersome and difficult to control process of filling the gas chambers with people. Bud’s objection to this arrangement is that guards positioned by the gas chamber doors in the corridor arrangement would have had to make room for the incoming victims. This objection is pointless, however, not only because the corridor was wide enough (see the already mentioned CAD reconstruction of the Treblinka gas chambers) but also and especially because there was no reason to post guards by the gas chamber doors, which were locked as soon as the victims had been urged and chased into the gas chambers. There is also no evidence, to my knowledge, of guards having been posted by the gas chamber doors. From the perspective of the victims’ psychology, which as we have seen was an important consideration, the corridor arrangement was also arguably more favorable to the intended impression of a bath house than an arrangement without a corridor and with interconnecting partitions would have been.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
The same goes for the "Diesel" thing – eyewitnesses who spoke of diesel may just have mixed up the gasoline gassing engine with some diesel engine used for other purposes in the camp. The folks at other camps who operated the engines or were otherwise familiar with them all mentioned gasoline engines, as pointed out under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...rrelevant.html , and there’s no reason why gasoline exhaust should not have been used in Treblinka as well.
Theories, theories, theories mean absolutely nothing.
Hardly an argument if these "theories" are based on the depositions of the folks who operated the gassing engines or were otherwise familiar with them. They must have known what they were talking about, don’t you think so?
Casual witnesses who only got close to the gas chamber building on occasion if at all, on the other hand, may have been mistaken about a lot of details.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
There have been stories of air being pumped out of the room, water vapor death, Diesel and now gas?
There are also two Treblinka eyewitnesses who mention a gasoline engine, Ivan Shevchenko and Oskar Strawczynski, see under http://rodohforum.yuku.com/topic/246...l-Gassing.html . And they are the only ones who probably got it right, judging by the testimonies of eyewitnesses "in the know" from Belzec, Sobibor, Chelmno and the Einsatzgruppen operations, who mention gasoline engines. Witnesses who spoke about air pumped out, vapor or diesel simply misunderstood what they casually saw or were told about, or indulged in speculations about the mechanism and devices involved. Big deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
… including members of the camp’s former SS-staff testifying before West German courts, and also according to document showing that hundreds of thousands of people were taken to a place from which only a handful are known to have emerged alive, and from where such a stench of corpses emanated in October 1942 that the Wehrmacht local commander of a town 20 kilometers away complained about it. I don’t see what is wrong with eyewitness and documentary evidence as proof of a crime or other historical event. Aren't mass crimes and other historical events usually proven also if not mainly or solely on the basis of these categories of evidence? Can you show us one large-scale massacre that was reconstructed solely or mainly on the basis of physical evidence?
Quote:

What conclusions exactly am I supposed to be "jumping" to? If the foundations of the gas chamber building were not found, this means that either the Poles looked for them in the wrong place of they had been removed by the SS, who had plenty of time to do so. And the admission in the Polish site investigation report of 13.11.1945 that the foundations of the gas chamber building had not been found is another argument (besides the matching by evidence, unknown to the investigators, of their findings on site) against the idea that there was any manipulation involved in the investigation. If the report had been "cooked", why didn’t it's authors just make up their having identified the foundations of the gas chamber building?
The soil would still suggest the disturbance of having a solid structure there.
The likeliest explanation then being that the Poles dug for the foundations at the wrong place, assuming the "disturbance of having a solid structure there" could necessarily have been made out after all the soil-churning that this area had been through during and after the dismantlement of the camp.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
What, you consider something as vital to the benefit of mankind and the contemporary German war effort as getting rid of those subversive and parasitical Jews a waste of resources? I’m surprised!
Germany valued gasoline, to them gasoline was extremely precious as they always had a shortage of it.
That may have been so, but getting rid of the Jews was also an extremely important project, on a par with or even considered an essential part of the war effort. So why not allocate important resources to such an important project?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Of course the Germans were concerned about salvaging resources. Why else would they have bothered to collect and keep account of all objects they took away from the Jews before killing them? You may view records of the plunder under http://www.death-camps.org/reinhard/arloot.htm .

Neither can I, but this wasn’t battle. This was bumping off helpless human beings one by one with a shot in the neck at a segregated place, the killers having all the time and leisure in the world to pick up what cartridges were lying around.
If they were truly concerned they would be picking cartridges up in their own encampment/trench after the battle was done. The cartridges being spent on the front was enormous. Treblinka's 50,000 cartridges wouldn't last any significant amount of time when machine guns are spitting out 1300 bullets a minute.
That may be so, but the troops at the front don't seem to have had the salvaging mania that characterized the operation of Himmler’s concentration and extermination camps, where even spectacles and undergarments were salvaged. Besides, there was no reason for the SS to leave murder evidence like cartridges lying around when it could be easily collected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
I wouldn’t be surprised if Polish investigators had been short of such hardware shortly after the end of the war, actually.
Metal detectors were an extremely ubiquitous piece of equipment in the Soviet Army and given that this investigation was done in conjunction with the soviets it's doubtable that would have been difficult.
The Polish investigation in November 1945 was conducted in conjunction with the Soviets? I didn’t know that. How do you know?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Besides, there was much metallic mess lying around on the Treblinka site, and I doubt a metal detector would have been able to tell the difference. Last but not least, how do you know what bullets were used for the shooting?
They could have just found all these metallic objects and identified them.
Yeah, they could have picked up every single metallic object found and identified it, piece by piece. They obviously didn’t consider the effort worth the expectable results. Why should they have, after they had reasonably concluded that the key to reconstructing the Treblinka mass murder was documentary and eyewitness evidence rather than what physical evidence the killers had left behind?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
I know that the bullets were iron core because Germany only used that type of bullet during the war because it saved them money.
Source?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Anyway, thanks for bringing some new arguments into the discussion, which Mr. Gerdes’ repetitive "recaps" and "just one" demands have made rather boring.
It's a rather good argument that I have not seen a single Jew answer.
Assuming you’re not just trying to be nice to your buddy, maybe you can do what Gerdes has been repeatedly requested to do but not even attempted: explain the relevance of Gerdes' "just one this-and-that" demands to proving the mass murder at Treblinka considering the documentary, eyewitness and physical evidence that is known, all of which points to an extermination camp while there is not a shred of evidence that would support the "transit camp" theory. What reasons are there to doubt the accuracy of this evidence, and why would one have to identify "just one" whatever in order to "prove" or help "prove" what can be and has been proven by the evidence that has been examined by historians and criminal investigators?

I’m looking forward to your demonstration that Gerdes’ "just one" stuff is not just a cheap publicity trick for suckers. Gerdes doesn’t seem able to provide that demonstration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:

Cute girl in your avatar, by the way.
Thank ya.

My issue isn't to white wash Germany (Because I don't do that) but I have never seen the methodology recorded of what the Germans did and as you admitted eye witness accounts are faulty.
I’m not admitting anything, just pointing out something that any trial judge is familiar with: eyewitnesses may be mistaken about many details, even fantasize or lie about one or the other detail, but rarely if ever does this mean that the eyewitnesses are wrong about the essence of the event they describe or made up all of their account. And if several eyewitnesses from several categories describe essentially the same thing independently of each other, at different times and places and before different entities, there is no room for reasonable doubt that the eyewitness testimonies are essentially correct, how ever many discrepancies or errors in certain details they may contain. This applies especially when, as in the case of Treblinka, what becomes apparent from the body of eyewitness testimony is also what the documentary evidence, demographic data and the physical evidence point to, and there's not a single indication that the place was anything other than what becomes apparent from all this evidence, an extermination camp.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Judging the techniques by modern equipment (Such as what was done with the excavator) seems unreasonable.
Well, that seems to be exactly what you are doing when arguing about the possible pit depth on hand of data about modern crawler excavators, instead of looking at data about cable-operated excavators for this purpose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Until I see a forensic investigation of better quality I will not be convinced
The issue is not what you are personally "convinced" of and what it would take to "convince" you; that’s your problem alone. The issue is whether and how you can explain away the body of documentary, eyewitness and physical evidence, all of which converges towards the conclusion that Treblinka was an extermination camp where hundred of thousands of people were murdered, and provide a plausible and evidence-backed alternative explanation for this evidence and for what happened to the deportees.

Anyway, please keep up the discussion. Talking to you is far more interesting than talking to Gerdes, the repetitive bore (whose latest posts I will address later, just so as not to offend the poor fellow by ignoring them).
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:50 AM.
Page generated in 0.45163 seconds.