Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
OK, now you say there was never a camp at Sobibor, despite the references to a camp in documents, the aerial photos of cleared land, the recent photos of Sobibor and all the witnesses who say they lived and worked at the camp.
There was a camp at Sobibor, the Reichsführer himself said that this would change from a transit to a konzentrationslager.
There are clearly photos of buildings and guards. The photos of Niemann show a dearth of buildings in what is supposed to be camp 1 in the diagram. It is clear that the shape of V in the aerial photo is not in the diagram; it is clear that the cleared land had changed little in all of the aerial shots. The cleared land in later photos is for munitions storage.
In 1941 the above aerial photo was taken which is supposed to depict lager 2 and 3; this has not changed significantly in the 42/43 photos or the 44 photo which you claim is evidence of razing.
This photo of 44 shows intact but derelict buildings.
SUPPORT RODOH! Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!
OK, now you say there was never a camp at Sobibor, despite the references to a camp in documents, the aerial photos of cleared land, the recent photos of Sobibor and all the witnesses who say they lived and worked at the camp.
There was a camp at Sobibor, the Reichsführer himself said that this would change from a transit to a konzentrationslager.
There are clearly photos of buildings and guards. The photos of Niemann show a dearth of buildings in what is supposed to be camp 1 in the diagram. It is clear that the shape of V in the aerial photo is not in the diagram; it is clear that the cleared land had changed little in all of the aerial shots. The cleared land in later photos is for munitions storage.
In 1941 the above aerial photo was taken which is supposed to depict lager 2 and 3; this has not changed significantly in the 42/43 photos or the 44 photo which you claim is evidence of razing.
This photo of 44 shows intact but derelict buildings.
That photo shows original buildings there before the camp had been fully constructed, next to where it was constructed. The open area is where the fences and buildings were built that are seen in the recently found Sobibor camp photos.
Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.
That photo shows original buildings there before the camp had been fully constructed, next to where it was constructed. The open area is where the fences and buildings were built that are seen in the recently found Sobibor camp photos.
This was a functioning forestry camp; the Kommandantur or foresters lodge is clearly seen; I would suggest you concentrate on the aerial photo for which there is little change.
That photo shows original buildings there before the camp had been fully constructed, next to where it was constructed. The open area is where the fences and buildings were built that are seen in the recently found Sobibor camp photos.
This was a functioning forestry camp; the Kommandantur or foresters lodge is clearly seen; I would suggest you concentrate on the aerial photo for which there is little change.
The aerial photos look nothing like the Niemann photos, in particular, the aerial photos do not show any fences. You dodged my point about documents and witnesses describing a camp in 1942-3.
Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.
The aerial photos look nothing like the Niemann photos, in particular, the aerial photos do not show any fences. You dodged my point about documents and witnesses describing a camp in 1942-3.
Perhaps the witnesses etc were describing a small part of this complex; the one with the pre existing buildings. Obviously if the larger complex is taken into account these witnesses are clearly talking about something else, perhaps Czerwony bor?
