Definition of mass grave

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).
Post Reply
User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 27677
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Definition of mass grave

Post by Nessie » Thu Feb 26, 2015 6:09 pm

The definition of mass grave is important to determining whether or not TII, Sobibor, Belzec, Majdanek and Birkenau were death camps. Denier/revisionists like to claim that there are no mass graves and so the camps were not death camps as hundreds of thousands are not buried there.

A dictionary definition of mass grave from Collins; a grave in which a large number of corpses has been buried ⇒ "a mass grave of the great cholera epidemic of 1832", "a war crimes investigator at a mass grave". That would also cover communal grave. The dictionary definition has two reasons why many people would be buried together, disease and murder. This where the term mass grave needs further clarification.

A grave containing many remains where people had died from disease, or a ship had sunk and many drowned, or an earth quake killed many people is not the same as where a mass murder had taken place. The former will be marked, often the names are known and they can be memorialised and visited by relatives. Relatives would have been informed of the deaths or that loved ones were missing presumed dead due to the specific event that killed them. There is no hiding their presence and their remains have been treated with dignity and respect. The latter has none of that.

http://www.academia.edu/1276944/Mass_gr ... erminology

"The contents of the mass grave are characterized by an unorganized or chaotic placement of the bodies as a result of them having been thrown or knocked down in the grave. This underlines the lack of respect and compassion for the dead by the people responsible for the killings, which again underlines the nature of mass graves: a place synonymous with war crimes and the like to store away the bodies of what those responsible only see as vermin or pests. Not human beings."

The author of that definition proposes as few as three people can constitute a mass grave. Other definitions have gone down to just two bodies (Mant and the UN) or up to half a dozen (Skinner).

http://am.uis.no/getfile.php/Arkeologis ... raves2.pdf (Page 15)

The number is less important than how the bodies have been buried and why. The lack of respect, the desire to hide the remains, keep specific knowledge of the site limited and criminal intent during ethnic cleansing or war are more important than the number killed. That more intelligent definition means there is no doubt the AR sites are the sites of mass graves. The cover up, limited knowledge, the criminal intent, ethnic cleansing and lack of respect for the remains and any surviving relatives.

Denier/revisionists want mass graves that are pits full of bodies that can be exhumed, such as found at Katyn, Bosnia, El Salvador, Cambodia and Rwanda. The way many of the remains were disposed of at the death camps as evidenced by the ash and small pieces of bone at the sites means a count is no longer possible. That is then use to claim no mass graves. The problem denier/revisionists ignore are the other elements to the intelligent definition of mass grave.

The remains that were unearthed in the grave yard near TI by the Staffs Uni team lead by C S-C are correctly identified as being a mass grave, not by the number of remains found which was small, but met the UN number, but by the other elements that define a mass grave. They were hidden, there was no respect for the remains, the site was not marked and relatives were not informed of the deaths.

To deny the death camps are the sites of mass graves means ignoring the other elements to what makes a mass grave.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

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.

Werd
Posts: 9250
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Definition of mass grave

Post by Werd » Thu Feb 26, 2015 9:47 pm

The definition of mass grave is important to determining whether or not TII, Sobibor, Belzec, Majdanek and Birkenau were death camps.
Unless you can provide PHYSICAL EVIDENCE of the remains of 900,000 Jews in Treblinka, then no one is under any obligation to believe you. CSC is clearly an amateur and is out of her league.
viewtopic.php?p=57870#p57870

User avatar
theblackrabbitofinlé
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 3:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Definition of mass grave

Post by theblackrabbitofinlé » Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:26 pm

Nessie wrote:The remains that were unearthed in the grave yard near TI by the Staffs Uni team lead by C S-C are correctly identified as being a mass grave, not by the number of remains found which was small, but met the UN number, but by the other elements that define a mass grave. They were hidden, there was no respect for the remains, the site was not marked and relatives were not informed of the deaths.


Where did you find the evidence that the "mass grave" (sic) "discovered" by CSC in the Treblinka cemetery did not contain the remains of some of the c.112 victims reinterred by Judge Zdzisław Łukaszewicz's team in August 1946, after they discovered 41 desecrated graves at the site?

You did not find this evidence in the writings of CSC, as she is yet to publicly acknowledge that Łukaszewicz's team worked in the cemtery; thereby failing to comply with the Standard and Guidance for Forensic Archaeologists:
Either prior to or upon arrival at the scene the forensic archaeologist should be involved in a briefing with the investigators, Crime Scene Examiners (CSE) and other specialists. Information required by the forensic archaeologist will include background information pertinent to the case and crime scene. Please refer to section 4.1 (this document). Relevant information may include an estimated deposition date for the remains, the site’s use prior to the estimated deposition date and the use of the site between this date and the present.
http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/def ... eology.pdf
We just wish to point out to the court that is not a signed sworn statement of Dr. Bender but merely a translation of an alleged or purported statement of Dr. Bender, the original of which, like many other things, is not to be found today.
- Defence counsel, Dachau trial, 7 August 1947

Werd
Posts: 9250
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Definition of mass grave

Post by Werd » Fri Feb 27, 2015 10:27 pm

Has she not disclosed this fact about prior excavation simply because she has not fully published her results and she will disclose this when the work is fully finished? Or is that something she should have done immediatly, but did not? Thereby proving my point? :D

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 27677
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Definition of mass grave

Post by Nessie » Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:56 am

Werd wrote:
The definition of mass grave is important to determining whether or not TII, Sobibor, Belzec, Majdanek and Birkenau were death camps.
Unless you can provide PHYSICAL EVIDENCE of the remains of 900,000 Jews in Treblinka, then no one is under any obligation to believe you. CSC is clearly an amateur and is out of her league.
viewtopic.php?p=57870#p57870
You know that trying to separate 900,000 remains that are mainly ash and crushed bone from the sand and soil at the site is an impossible task. That is why you are only interested in the numbers and ignore the other factors that make for a mass grave, which is the unintelligent way.

Staffs Uni is not an amateur organisation that is out of its league. The dig is not C S-C on her own. Denier/revisionists are amateurs who are out of their league.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

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.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 27677
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Definition of mass grave

Post by Nessie » Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:00 am

theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:
Nessie wrote:The remains that were unearthed in the grave yard near TI by the Staffs Uni team lead by C S-C are correctly identified as being a mass grave, not by the number of remains found which was small, but met the UN number, but by the other elements that define a mass grave. They were hidden, there was no respect for the remains, the site was not marked and relatives were not informed of the deaths.


Where did you find the evidence that the "mass grave" (sic) "discovered" by CSC in the Treblinka cemetery did not contain the remains of some of the c.112 victims reinterred by Judge Zdzisław Łukaszewicz's team in August 1946, after they discovered 41 desecrated graves at the site?

You did not find this evidence in the writings of CSC, as she is yet to publicly acknowledge that Łukaszewicz's team worked in the cemtery; thereby failing to comply with the Standard and Guidance for Forensic Archaeologists:
Either prior to or upon arrival at the scene the forensic archaeologist should be involved in a briefing with the investigators, Crime Scene Examiners (CSE) and other specialists. Information required by the forensic archaeologist will include background information pertinent to the case and crime scene. Please refer to section 4.1 (this document). Relevant information may include an estimated deposition date for the remains, the site’s use prior to the estimated deposition date and the use of the site between this date and the present.
http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/def ... eology.pdf
Jumping the gun. A form of poisoning the well by accusing Staffs Uni of failing to comply when you do not know the full details.

Red herring as the debate is about defining a mass grave and as shown there are a number at Treblinka and Birkenau and indeed TII, Sobibor and Belzec are themselves mass grave sites.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

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.

User avatar
theblackrabbitofinlé
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 3:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Definition of mass grave

Post by theblackrabbitofinlé » Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:44 am

Nessie wrote:Jumping the gun. A form of poisoning the well by accusing Staffs Uni of failing to comply when you do not know the full details.

Red herring as the debate is about defining a mass grave and as shown there are a number at Treblinka and Birkenau and indeed TII, Sobibor and Belzec are themselves mass grave sites.
As usual, the best you can do, is make spurious claims about fallacies having been committed.

It's gotten really old Nessie.
We just wish to point out to the court that is not a signed sworn statement of Dr. Bender but merely a translation of an alleged or purported statement of Dr. Bender, the original of which, like many other things, is not to be found today.
- Defence counsel, Dachau trial, 7 August 1947

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 27677
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Definition of mass grave

Post by Nessie » Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:50 am

theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:
Nessie wrote:Jumping the gun. A form of poisoning the well by accusing Staffs Uni of failing to comply when you do not know the full details.

Red herring as the debate is about defining a mass grave and as shown there are a number at Treblinka and Birkenau and indeed TII, Sobibor and Belzec are themselves mass grave sites.
As usual, the best you can do, is make spurious claims about fallacies having been committed.

It's gotten really old Nessie.
Denier/revisionist use of fallacies is what has "gotten really old". You could stop using them. If you don't expect to be called out on them.

As per the definitions linked to in the OP, is TII a mass grave site? Yes or no.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

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.

User avatar
theblackrabbitofinlé
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 3:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Definition of mass grave

Post by theblackrabbitofinlé » Sat Feb 28, 2015 1:10 pm

There are no fallacies within my posts on this thread, but even if we suppose for argument's sake that they do contain fallacies:

You're continued hand-waving off the issues raised because they appear within posts that contain [alleged] fallacies, is itself a fallacy:
your logical fallacy is

the fallacy fallacy

You presumed that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, that the claim itself must be wrong.

It is entirely possible to make a claim that is false yet argue with logical coherency for that claim, just as is possible to make a claim that is true and justify it with various fallacies and poor arguments.

Once again, the question you previously dodged:
Where did you find the evidence that the "mass grave" (sic) "discovered" by CSC in the Treblinka cemetery did not contain the remains of some of the c.112 victims reinterred by Judge Zdzisław Łukaszewicz's team in August 1946, after they discovered 41 desecrated graves at the site?
We just wish to point out to the court that is not a signed sworn statement of Dr. Bender but merely a translation of an alleged or purported statement of Dr. Bender, the original of which, like many other things, is not to be found today.
- Defence counsel, Dachau trial, 7 August 1947

Werd
Posts: 9250
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Definition of mass grave

Post by Werd » Sat Feb 28, 2015 2:14 pm

Jumping the gun. A form of poisoning the well by accusing Staffs Uni of failing to comply when you do not know the full details.
Let's flip this around. You don't know the full details either. So why are you acting like they are doing the best possible job, when they clearly are not as pop even pointed out?
viewtopic.php?p=57870#p57870
And again, they seem to be forgetting that key step.
https://www.rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic. ... 269#p58269

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 10 guests