Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Mondial]

And what do holocaust deniers have to say about polish hero Jan Karski?

He was writing reports on Holocaust as early as 1942.

"In 1942 Karski reported to the Polish, British and U.S. governments on the situation in Poland, especially the destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto and the Holocaust of the Jews. He had also carried from Poland a microfilm with further information from the Underground Movement on the extermination of European Jews in German occupied Poland. The Polish Foreign Minister, Count Edward Raczynski, provided the Allies on this basis with one of the earliest and most accurate accounts of the Holocaust. A note by Foreign Minister Edward Raczynski entitled The mass extermination of Jews in German occupied Poland, addressed to the Governments of the United Nations on 10 December 1942, would be published later along with other documents in a widely distributed leaflet"

Why would he lie about it?

The claims of "Jan Karski" are not believable www.cwporter.com/karski.htm www.ihr.org/jhr/v07/v07p504_Okeefe.html

 

[Mondial]

Elie Wiesel would have to be the most famous of holocaust survivors from around the world. But not only is he a windbag he is also a pathological liar. www.eliewieseltattoo.com www.ihr.org/leaflets/wiesel.shtml Needless to say he fully supports the draconian and totalitarian laws which are used to imprison holocaust deniers as they prevent him from being asked embarassing questions.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Well, that's good news. Perhaps you can provide the name of a single person who worked there who ever said it was a transit camp. Or a survivor of that transit camp.

Take your time. We'll wait.

And some of the locations to which deportees were shipped and testimony to such.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Elie Wiesel would have to be the most famous of holocaust survivors from around the world. But not only is he a windbag he is also a pathological liar. www.eliewieseltattoo.com www.ihr.org/leaflets/wiesel.shtml Needless to say he fully supports the draconian and totalitarian laws which are used to imprison holocaust deniers as they prevent him from being asked embarassing questions.

Please explain the relevance of your opinion of one person, Wiesel, to the research and work published by Pressac, van Pelt, the USHMM, and others--or even to the accounts of survivors like members of the SK or Langbein, etc.

 

[Wroclaw]

The claims of "Jan Karski" are not believable www.cwporter.com/karski.htm www.ihr.org/jhr/v07/v07p504_Okeefe.html

Thanks for clearing that up!

 

[cesarz]

The claims of "Jan Karski" are not believable www.cwporter.com/karski.htm www.ihr.org/jhr/v07/v07p504_Okeefe.html

You sir convinced me! And Witold Pilecki also was laying and as a thank you for his role in this MASSIVE hoax soviets murdered him

It all makes sense

 

[Wroclaw]

You sir convinced me! And Witold Pilecki also was laying and as a thank you for his role in this MASSIVE hoax soviets murdered him

It all makes sense

Now yer getting it!

 

[Wroclaw]

I'm trying to think of a good analogy for this, but I'm having some difficulty. I''ll give this a shot:

Let's suppose there was a rest stop somewhere on a long stretch of a highway out in the middle of nowhere. People would stop here to refuel their automobiles, purchase refreshments, and use the restroom before they moved on. The rest stop was active for a few years, but due to its location, received little business, and therefore was forced to close down. Everything that made this rest stop possible (e.g., all buildings, the highway) were completely removed. The rest stop has been closed down now for 66 years, while its former operators are all deceased. All documents pertaining to transactions with customers have been lost. How could we go about tracking down the patrons that visited this rest stop?

Also, there is an urban legend in this town that the patrons to this rest stop would be murdered and never seen again...

The fundamental problem with your analogy is that there were transit camps, and yet people can remember being in them and have reported same. Westerbork would be the best example. So why do we have so many people who can testify to Westerbork being a transit camp and ZERO who can say the same thing for Treblinka?

 

[Wroclaw]

As far as where the survivors wound up, one can only guess. It's not as if they were required to report where they wound up. The goal was to have them out of German occupied territories, not to make sure they had a soft landing somewhere. Most probably wound up in gulags

And yet we have hundreds, perhaps thousands, of GULAG survivors, and none of them are saying they went "through" Treblinka.

but the most reasonable answer to me is emigration to Israel and the U.S.

The largest influx of immigrants from Soviet-held territory to Israel has taken place in the last twenty years. That would put the oldest survivors at the age of around seventy when they got to Israel, which is not out of the realm of possibility (i.e., for a person to live to be seventy). Yet none of the former Soviet Jews entering Israel have said they went "through" Treblinka.

Same thing with the U.S., except they would have been even younger when they came here. By the way, the number of Jews who came here after WWII is relatively small.

One thing about survivors: They always show up to cash their benefit checks, or they wouldn't be "survivors".

This seems to me to be an excellent point: If you had someone who survived "Transit Camp" Treblinka, then wouldn't they be saying that when they filed for their compensation? And yet no one did.

It's not like they turned around and headed back where they weren't wanted. They went as far away as possible from the threat, if possible. That's simple human nature... to survive.

Sure, but, again (not to repeat myself) why aren't any of these people wherever they ended up saying they went "through" Treblinka?

 

[000063]

There are no pictures of the gas chamber in operation. Of corpses piled against a door. Of a Nazi pouring gas through the roof or ashes being dumped into rivers.

How many people have "photos" of their own conception and birth? Very little. Therefore, those people don't exist.

 

[Wroclaw]

And yet we have hundreds, perhaps thousands, of GULAG survivors, and none of them are saying they went "through" Treblinka.

But if we believe the amounts of prisoners that went through Treblinka, "hundreds, perhaps thousands" isn't very many survivors at all. Now, I'm sure the first reaction is to say they never made it to the gulags, but it's also possible, they made it there and the rest didn't survive.

Sure, it's possible; it just isn't likely. Again, think Westerbork. And again, think of all the people who DID make it out of the GULAG.

Facts not in evidence.

History isn't a court trial.

The largest influx of immigrants from Soviet-held territory to Israel has taken place in the last twenty years. That would put the oldest survivors at the age of around seventy when they got to Israel, which is not out of the realm of possibility (i.e., for a person to live to be seventy). Yet none of the former Soviet Jews entering Israel have said they went "through" Treblinka.

What's to gain from claiming Treblinka survival when they can simply claim the blanket term "Holocaust survivor"?

You should be aware that you have to prove that you were actually in a camp in order to get compensation, at least from Germany.

If anything, the more people who do claim to survive Treblinka will make the idea that it was an extermination camp less plausible.
More survivors, less dead, correct?

That's correct. And yet you have very few claiming survival at Treblinka, particularly if they were deported there outside of a specific time-frame before the revolt there. Even fewer from Sobibor. Two guys from Belzec (no revolt there).

And let's not forget that the Holocaust industry doesn't need more "survivors" telling their stories. They can't get them straight as it is.

That's off-topic for this thread.

Same thing with the U.S., except they would have been even younger when they came here. By the way, the number of Jews who came here after WWII is relatively small.

I don't discuss claims which must be made on demographics and population statistics. They are far too inaccurate for reasons discussed previously in this forum.

Arguing the numbers is pure conjecture.

I disagree. The U.S., at least keeps very good immigration records, and Israel does as well — at least since independence. (Obviously, when immigration there was illegal, fewer records were kept.)

This seems to me to be an excellent point: If you had someone who survived "Transit Camp" Treblinka, then wouldn't they be saying that when they filed for their compensation? And yet no one did.

Since I have to answer any question posed to me or leave the thread...

I'm not going to ask that a dodging rule be inforced. That's now how I play.

I believe I addressed this above.

Yes, you did.

Sure, but, again (not to repeat myself) why aren't any of these people wherever they ended up saying they went "through" Treblinka?

And again...

There's simply no reason to clog up the Holocaust story drains any more than they already seem to be.

I just don't think that's good enough to explain nearly a million people.

 

[Wroclaw]

Why in the hell would someone who makes cash from the "storyline" say that Treblinka was a transit camp? It goes against their interests. It's hard to believe, but as stupid as the statements by self-promoting "survivors" are, they do seem to know where their bread is buttered.
And then why would there be 'eyewitnesses' if Treblinka was supposedly a "pure extermination camp"? Makes no sense.

This is something the revisionist movement has never been able to explain: If it would have been more profitable for _________ (fill in the blank with 'the Jews,' 'the Zionists,' 'the hoaxsters,' etc.) to exaggerate the number of survivors, rather than the number killed, then why didn't they?

Just perusing this site I found some real screamers on Treblinka.

... there are enough indications to assume that it was a transition camp. I mentioned, amongst others, some transportation documents (not deportation lists!), which showing destinations from Treblinka to various other camps. This - and other indications such as survivors who said they arrived in other camps via Treblinka - convinces me that Treblinka as a camp existed and indeed was a transit camp.

Well, then, here's a challenge: Treblinka II (let's be clear, we're talking about Treblinka II) opened in July 1942. Deportations from Warsaw to Treblinka began almost immediately. It was the largest Jewish community in Poland. So please identify a single person who meets the following criteria:

(1) They were deported from Warsaw to Treblinka II in the summer of 1942.
(2) They then were sent somewhere else from Treblinka II.
(3) They were not a work Jew at Treblinka II.
(4) They had already been sent elsewhere by the time of the revolt.
(5) They were not on the Sonderkommando.

Should be no problem, right?

 

[Wroclaw]

Oh yes, this one.

Well, then, here's a challenge: Treblinka II (let's be clear, we're talking about Treblinka II) opened in July 1942. Deportations from Warsaw to Treblinka began almost immediately. It was the largest Jewish community in Poland. So please identify a single person who meets the following criteria:
(1) They were deported from Warsaw to Treblinka II in the summer of 1942.
(2) They then were sent somewhere else from Treblinka II.
(3) They were not a work Jew at Treblinka II.
(4) They had already been sent elsewhere by the time of the revolt.
(5) They were not on the Sonderkommando.

Should be no problem, right?

Highly illogical. These are questions that Pizzaman should be answering. He's the one who claims they were all murdered. The onus is upon the accuser according legal principles, according the most basic rules of logic.

No, stop right there. I see what you're trying to do and I call foul.

This thread began with an allegation that the AR camps were transit camps. I'm asking for proof in the form of ONE SINGLE JEW who meets the above five criteria. The criteria are to assure that the Jew in question went during a period when the accepted history says that Jews were being gassed on arrival and were not deferred due to working or to being on the SK.

Pizzaman, please give us proof that these Jews were murdered.

Revisionists are the messengers, the absurd and impossible 'holocaust' storyline is the message.

- Hannover

You are trying to highjack this thread. Please post your question in another thread and I will absolutely, 100% respond on that thread. But this thread's OP is on the topic of a transit camp, not on extermination.

Don't do what you're trying to do. Your credibility relies on your not doing it.

 

[Clayton Moore]

No, stop right there. I see what you're trying to do and I call foul.

This thread began with an allegation that the AR camps were transit camps. I'm asking for proof in the form of ONE SINGLE JEW who meets the above five criteria. The criteria are to assure that the Jew in question went during a period when the accepted history says that Jews were being gassed on arrival and were not deferred due to working or to being on the SK.



You are trying to highjack this thread. Please post your question in another thread and I will absolutely, 100% respond on that thread. But this thread's OP is on the topic of a transit camp, not on extermination.

Don't do what you're trying to do. Your credibility relies on your not doing it.

Who is Hannover and where are the posts you're quoting?
Is Hannover an imaginary friend?

 

[LemmyCaution]

Who is Hannover and where are the posts you're quoting?
Is Hannover an imaginary friend?

Hey Clayton, can you meet Wroclaw's challenge? And how many eyewitness accounts--victim, perpetrator, observer--can you produce to support the idea that Treblinka was a transit camp?

 

[Clayton Moore]

Hey Clayton, can you meet Wroclaw's challenge? And how many eyewitness accounts--victim, perpetrator, observer--can you produce to support the idea that Treblinka was a transit camp?

What does that have to do with my post?


Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
Who is Hannover and where are the posts you're quoting?
Is Hannover an imaginary friend?

 

[Bluespaceoddity]

LemmyCaution's:Hey Clayton, can you meet Wroclaw's challenge? And how many eyewitness accounts--victim, perpetrator, observer--can you produce to support the idea that Treblinka was a transit camp?

Could have something to with this claim:

Treblinka was No Extermination Camp - Just Transit Station

Take your time.

 

[abaddon]

What does that have to do with my post?


Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
Who is Hannover and where are the posts you're quoting?
Is Hannover an imaginary friend?

You are being asked to show a human who transited. That is your claim. Show some human who moved on to some other place, and guards don't count

Is that easy for you?

There I did it with only one word above five letters. Oh and "guards".

Still don't think he will get it though.

 

[Wroclaw]

Sure, it's possible; it just isn't likely. Again, think Westerbork. And again, think of all the people who DID make it out of the GULAG.

In order to have "survivors" of a gulag, surely you must think others perished or they wouldn't be "surviving anything.
I hardly think it's farfetched to consider the prisoners from Treblinka may have simply died in the gulags.
Other than the "survivors", of course.

Of course. Except the things that all the survivors have in common from Treblinka are: (1) They say it was an extermination camp, not a transit camp; and (2) None them went to the GULAG.

History isn't a court trial.

No, most history isn't questioned.

That's sort of my point.

However, the victors felt it was necessary to supply fake tattooed skin, human skin lampshades, and shrunken skulls to convince courts of German guilt.

They didn't do those things to convince people of guilt. They did them because they believed they were true. Without them, they still would have won convictions, as the Frankfurt trials, which had none of those things, amply proved.

I don't ever remember hearing the victors say "history isn't a court trial".

That's because, as I already noted, they were establishing guilt for individual people of individual crimes.

I think you'd be more accurate saying "Holocaust history isn't a court trial because it wouldn't stand up to modern day scrutiny using simple mathematics and science".

You should be aware that you have to prove that you were actually in a camp in order to get compensation, at least from Germany.

And what is considered proof other than a Jewish name and a year of birth within reasonable time frames?

See Dr. Neander's post on this thread.

Most Jewish prisoners changed their names after the war, especially after emigrating to Israel.

In fact, most DIDN'T change their names, except, as you note, the ones who went to Israel.

I don't suppose you have a copy of the form which they use as proof showing a history of name changes?

I don't see what relevance name changes have.

Face it, all you have to do is show up with a name and a number.
You make it sound as if Germany would ever challenge a claim at this point.

Yes, I do believe they would challenge a claim if there were on proof. Otherwise, they'd go broke. Common sense.

That's correct. And yet you have very few claiming survival at Treblinka, particularly if they were deported there outside of a specific time-frame before the revolt there. Even fewer from Sobibor. Two guys from Belzec (no revolt there).

I'm repeating, but I feel it's necessary.
There is simply no reason for details in survivor claims.
When you fly on an airline, they know what destination you land at, but they don't ask what hotel you're staying in, or even if you'll be traveling by other means from there to a completely different area.

Again, see Dr. Neander's post.

And let's not forget that the Holocaust industry doesn't need more "survivors" telling their stories. They can't get them straight as it is.

That's off-topic for this thread.

Actually, it's spot on as to the reasoning why no details are necessary during these claimed money distribution interviews.[/quote]

Sorry, but you haven't proved that, and in fact, Dr. Neander proved you wrong.

The more details survivors pour into the fire, the more they get burned.

Make up your mind: Are the stories ridiculous or did they hedge on details?

The Holocaust Industry wants generalizations and blanket claims to keep things easy to maintain.

Again, you'll need to prove that.

Look back at any detailed witness testimonies (like the ones in the video I linked to above), and it's the vein of the Holocaust Industry's mistakes.

You mean "bane." Also, I don't find the testimonies in that video unreliable, but that's off topic here.

Witnesses embellish and suffer from false memories. That's not a compliment to the storyline.

No, it isn't, but at least if people had been through a transit camp, they'd probably say so.

I disagree. The U.S., at least keeps very good immigration records, and Israel does as well — at least since independence. (Obviously, when immigration there was illegal, fewer records were kept.)

Oh please.
Let's take a look at the Census Bureau's own words...

The Census Bureau conducted censuses of religious bodies at 10-year intervals from 1906 through 1936. The results were published with statistics on topics such as the number of members in congregations, number of church edifices, seating capacity, value and debt on church property, and so forth. The census publications varied with the first two having volumes of reports and the 1926 and 1936 censuses releasing a Summary report and a second volume made up of individual reports on the denominations listed in the census. See our detailed listing of reports from past censuses (1790 on).

Your mistake here is thinking that the Census Bureau keeps the same records as INS.

They don't.

There also was a survey of religious affiliation done as part of the Current Population Survey in 1957 with the results published in a report entitled, "Religion Report by the Civilian Population of the United States, March 1957." The Census of Religious Bodies began as a few questions on the Social Statistics form of the 1850 census. When the Bureau became permanent in 1902, it became possible to separate some data collection from the decennial census. The Census of Religious Bodies was a stand-alone census taken every 10 years between 1906 and 1936. Data were collected in 1946 but the funding for tabulation was not forthcoming. The entire census was eliminated in the mid 1950's. Copies of the report are in the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (http://www.nara.gov).

See above. It's a matter of immigration records.

The U.S. Census Bureau does not collect data on religious affiliation in its demographic surveys or decennial census. Public Law 94-521 prohibits us from asking a question on religious affiliation on a mandatory basis; in some person or household surveys, however, the U.S. Census Bureau may collect information about religious practices, on a voluntary basis. Therefore, the U.S. Census Bureau is not the source for information on religion, nor is the Census Bureau the source for information on religious affiliation.
https://ask.census.gov/app/answers/...sion/L3RpbWUvMTMwOTU1NTg2NS9zaWQvYUFpRFpWeGs=

The U.S. Census didn't ask who was a Jew during or after the war in the years above.

Irrelevant.

So tell me...

How do you know how many Jews went to the U.S. either during or after the war, Pizzaman?

Nearly zero during the war. The doors were closed.

After the war, we know for immigration records.

I still won't discuss the population statistics conducted by Israel.
After all, the nation wouldn't be there if they didn't show millions missing.
I have a thread here somewhere about population statistics and demographics.
Please feel free to post in it.

Please provide a link.

I just don't think that's good enough to explain nearly a million people.

The burden of revisionists is to simply show the prisoners (or bodies) aren't where they are claimed to be.

But when you allege a transit camp, you've got to prove one.

They could be on the moon for all I care.
The fact that they're not in Treblinka is all that's needed to make the original claim false.

Different topic.

And I noticed you didn't comment on my sarcasm of claiming they're in mass graves in the Soviet territories.
I even offered to put memorials on top of the claimed sites.

I didn't notice.

I suspect you realized how ridiculous the Holocaust story is when faced with your own logic and techniques.

Not really, no.

 

[LemmyCaution]

LemmyCaution's:Hey Clayton, can you meet Wroclaw's challenge? And how many eyewitness accounts--victim, perpetrator, observer--can you produce to support the idea that Treblinka was a transit camp?

Could have something to with this claim:


Take your time.

Yup. And what it had to do with his post about Wroclaw's imaginary friend was urging him not to faff about with distractions (it's pretty easy to figure out Wroclaw's posts) but get down to business for once. Unlike Berg, I am not holding my breath.