Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

This board is open for all subject matters. Post information and discussion materials about open-debate and censorship on other boards (including this one) here. Memory Hole 2 is a RODOH subforum for alternate perspectives.
Locked
Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:45 am
Contact:

Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:21 pm

I was hoping that CODOH moderation was now in the hands of someone less cowardly and with more brains inside his skull than [name] "Hannover" [name], but obviously that is not so, judging by the number of disapproved posts and the imbecilic reasons given for such disapproval. Unlike in the moderated section of this forum, the disapproved post is also not reproduced, so I'm left to guessing which posts have been disapproved. This thread will reproduce all posts that made [name] get cold feet.
Last edited by Depth Check on Wed Mar 21, 2018 9:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:45 am
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:32 pm

Thread: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11223
CODOH moderator wrote:"Industry's Roberto Muehlenkamp claims these faked 'photos' are proof of 'holocaust'"

Reason: The reported message is off topic. the challenge is to present photos that show 'holocaust' victims, no dodging.
That must be following post:
Roberto wrote:
Hannover wrote:The Industry now claims that ca. 2,000,000 Jews were shot by the Einsatzgruppen into huge pits, so, anyone, please show us the excavated enormous mass graves that are claimed to exist, their locations are allegedly known.
Is that:
100 graves of 20,000?
200 graves of 10,000?
400 graves of 5,000?
500 graves of 4,000?
1000 graves of 2000?
2000 graves of 1000?
The alternatives proposed are hardly realistic as the mass graves varied greatly in size and contents.

As to the request itself, I can show photos or film stills of quite a few excavated mass graves and/or corpses extracted from mass graves, but I cannot show photos of the excavated mass graves in which the victims were buried, for the following reasons:
a) not all of these mass graves have been identified,
b) of the mass graves that have been identified, not all were excavated,
c) those that were excavated were mostly excavated by the Soviets (of whose documentation only some parts are available in translation, while most are kept in archives in the original Russian language), and
d) where the Soviets performed excavations they didn't always exhume all corpses (they did so in mass graves containing no more than a few thousand corpses, but not in larger mass graves, whose contents they usually estimated on hand of the grave's measurements and an assumed concentration of corpses per cubic meter).

This means that, while the sites of a great many mass graves are known (not the least through the post-Soviet efforts of NGO's like Yahad in Unum, see their map under http://yahadmap.org/#map/), the number of people killed in mobile killing operations by the Einsatzgruppen and other German units in the occupied territories of the USSR cannot be established by counting the number of corpses in mass graves.

Information about how the number of victims of mobile killing operations was established by historians (not by any "Industry") will be provided upon request, as it would make this post too long.

For now I will just submit the following, to illustrate how unrealistic Hannover's request to be "shown" the mass graves is:
a) The proportion of Jewish victims of Nazi crimes whose burial places are known is larger than the proportion of i) German soldiers killed during World War II, ii) German civilians killed during World War II by Allied bombing and iii) German civilians who were murdered or otherwise perished during flight and expulsion at the end of World War II and after the war, whose burial places are known.
b) The photographic documentation showing Germans who perished in the aforementioned events is smaller, as concerns i) the number of photographs, ii) the absolute number of dead shown on photographs, and c) the proportion of the number of dead according to the lowest estimates that are shown on photographs.

I hereby propose the following bilateral challenge:

1. I provide all information regarding burial places of and photos captioned as showing Jewish or non-Jewish victims of Nazi crimes that I can find;
2. Hannover provides all information regarding burial places of and photos captioned as showing Germans who perished in the abovementioned events that he can find.

Then we'll compare the number of identified burial places, the number of people buried in such places, the number of photographs and the number of dead people shown in such photographs.

Do you accept this challenge, Hannover? If not, then why not?
Hannover wrote:And BTW, here's yet another faked photo from The Roberto Collection.

Image
'Shot dead nude women' with no bullet holes, no blood, and 'shooters' who are not in German uniforms.
Hannover has not yet addressed the questions I asked him in my answer to his OP, so why is he now talking about another supposedly faked photo?

As concerns this photo, "no blood" is hardly an argument as the resolution of the photo is too poor to establish whether there is blood on the victims or not. Moreover the victims are likely to have been shot in the head or neck as they were lying on the ground, meaning that their blood would have flown into the soil below them. As to whether the shooters have German uniforms or not, I don't think this can be established on hand of the photograph. And it would also be irrelevant as the shooters may have been local auxiliaries acting under German orders.
Hannover wrote:And we're told that it was all 'Top Secret', but then we're supposed to believe guys just went around and snapped pictures willy nilly. That dog don't hunt.
That "dog", namely the fact that German executors and bystanders often took photos against orders not to do so, is actually borne out by evidence, including at least one complaint that German servicemen were taking photographs of mass executions, at least one order that they refrain from doing so, and at least one case in which an executor was held accountable not for the killings he had carried out but for having taken photographs of such killings.
Hannover wrote:This photo used to be at the Wikipedia page on 'Babi Yar', it has been removed.
Which is correct as the photo was not taken at Babi Yar. It shows the execution of Jews from the Mizocz ghetto, see under http://digitalassets.ushmm.org/photoarc ... rch=MIZOCZ.
Hannover wrote:Stauffenberg & Co. never claimed anything like an extermination program as one of their motives for their attempted coup.
Stauffenberg only saw service in Africa, IIRC. So he wouldn't know much about Nazi crimes. As to other participants in the conspiracy, they even included people who had ordered or performed mass killings in Eastern Europe, and who would therefore hardly invoke such mass killings as a motive. But that's another story.
This was followed by the following PS:
PS regarding the bilateral challenge:

I shall post only such photos captioned as showing victims of Nazi crimes, Jewish or non-Jewish, in Eastern Europe, because photos of corpses in concentration camps liberated by the Western Allies, like Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen, are monotonously numerous and also well-known. The only exception to this rule is photos of dead Soviet prisoners of war, which will be shown regardless of where they died.

The purpose of this challenge is to demonstrate that the number of victims of mass crimes and other human catastrophes of enormous proportions cannot be deducted from the number and contents of excavated or otherwise known burial places, let alone from the number of photographs showing victims of such catastrophes or the number of such victims shown on photographs.


Note that, although I expressly announced that I would post as many photos as I could find and what photos I would post, the moderator ridiculously accuses me of "dodging". My challenge that "Hannover" in turn should post photos of events he professes no "doubt" about (whose victims were Germans) must have scared him.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

SFinesilver
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by SFinesilver » Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:41 pm

RM:
Note that, although I expressly announced that I would post as many photos as I could find...
Also note that you cravenly refused to post this photo:

Image

Which shows the largest, in terms of both grave volume and quantity of remains, of the four so-called “huge mass graves” - ever - located / proven to exist at Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor or Treblinka II.
D - Has it been alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, Germany used "resettlement to the east" as a euphemism for transiting jews to the so-called "top secret" - PURE EXTERMINATION CAMPS - Yes. - or - No. - ?? - Nessie's answer: Yes.

E - Has it been alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the so-called "pure extermination camps" were - THE END OF THE LINE - for virtually everyone transited to those camps - Yes. - or - No. - ?? - Nessie's answer: Yes.

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; during WW II, Germany actually transited jews to labor camps / ghettos - that were located east of the Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka II camps - ?? - Nessie's answer: True.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2078&start=210#p65945

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:45 am
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:47 pm

Thread: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11226
"Roberto Muehlnkamp's excuse for the lack of human remains at Auschwitz blows up in his face."

Reason: The reported message does not fit into any other category, please use the further information field. dup post still no hydrokop report.
This is particularly funny. I had previously posted a slightly different version of the post reproduced below, in which I argued that Hannover should prove the "fraudulence" of information about a prospection at Auschwitz by a company named Hydrokop in 1965, instead of demanding that I produce the Hydrokop report. The moderator thereupon sent me the following message under https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11230:
Roberto:

You have been challenged to actually produce a 'Hydrokop' report which you claim proves excavations of massive human remains at Auschwitz.

You are are certainly entitled to claim that such reports exist at this forum, but per our guidelines which you agreed to, when challenged you must then produce what you have claimed. Simple, really.

There is no dodging at this forum.

Our basic guidelines set us apart from less rigorous, less serious forums.

I have saved the post in which you attempted to ignore that challenge.

Reminder, our basic guidelines are here:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=358

Thanks, M1
Which I complied with, modifying my post so as to state that I would procure the requested report:
Roberto wrote:
Hannover wrote:As expected, Roberto has dodged the statements by Nyiszli which debunk every thing he says Auschwitz.
ex:
Roberto said:
The figure I accept is slightly below one million.
Yet his very own Nyiszli said 6,000,000 were killed at Auschwitz.
Overblown estimate by a witness, irrelevant. Witnesses rarely get such figures right.
Hannover wrote:Roberto said:
I remember there's a drawing by Olère showing the wooden logs used to crush the remains. But weren't we talking about what was done with the remains after crushing?
So the Germans organized a 'log bone crushing' parties everyday to make dust out of dead countless Jews? Seriously?
No such sights on the aerial photos.
Laughable, to say the least.
"Dust" is a straw-man, and please explain why crushing teams (assuming they worked outdoors and not inside the crematoria) would necessarily be visible on air photos.
Hannover wrote:And this is the same liar Olere that Roberto cited also who drew this:
Image
Which depicts an impossible 'flaming crematorium, hell on earth' scene, as I stated previously.
Never seen in the aerial photos.
And so? Either flames came out of the chimney only sometimes and were thus not visible on air photographs, or this drawing of Olère's is mistaken as concerns that detail. Neither would mean that his drawing of the bone crushers is inaccurate.
Hannover wrote:Roberto said:
Anyway, whatever it was that Nyiszli got wrong, it doesn't change the fact that his testimony concurs with that of Höss as concerns the disposal of cremation remains into the Vistula. The possibility that one knew about the other's testimony can be safely ruled out, so here we have two independent testimonies mentioning a method to get rid of cremation remains that wouldn't leave many such remains on site. This renders Hannover's comments about the "ash pond" irrelevant bar eyewitness testimonies mentioning such pond.
Only with the 'holocaust' scam does debunking a major part it count as being irrelevant. :lol:
That wasn't exactly an argument, rather a dodging of my argument. An "ash pond" for which there is no primary source is hardly a major part of anything.
Hannover wrote:"Independent" not.
There was no problem in getting Hoess to say whatever the 'Allies wanted, torture works like a charm. Off topic to this thread, but see here for demolition of the Hoess's' forced 'testimony':

'How to explain Rudolf Höss' Nuremberg testimony'
forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10182
We're not talking about Höss' Nuremberg testimony here. We're talking about what he told his Polish interrogators. They obviously didn't exert any pressure on him, as he more or less told them where they could stick their four million figure.
Hannover wrote:Roberto dodges again:
What "contradictions"? The sources referred to by Hannover are secondary sources at best. Nyiszli and Hoess are primary sources, so what they said counts for more than what is claimed by any secondary source. If there were eyewitnesses who mentioned an "ash pond" as the main destination of cremation remains, we could talk about contradictions.
IOW, the official Auschwitz Theme Park citation I gave just doesn't count, the actual photos just don't count, the NY Times just doesn't count, so called "Auschwitz survivors" just don't count .... to Roberto that is. :lol:
Only the religious fail to see what is right before their eyes.
Again no argument, just some irrelevant haggling about what are at best secondary sources. Get me a primary source that mentions an "ash pond" as the main place of cremation disposal, then we can talk about contradictions. The NYT article may have referred to the area where Hydrokop performed its drillings, by the way.
Hannover wrote:Here's another challenge to Roberto.
Another? What challenges have there been so far?

Never mind.
Hannover wrote:He said:
Regarding cremation remains found in the former camp's soil, my source is Piper, as above, note 39 on page 179:
"In 1965, Hydrokop, a chemical mining enterprise based in Krakow, was commissioned by the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum to carry out geological tests at Birkenau aimed at determining the locations of incineration pits and pyres. Specialists of Hydrokop bored 303 holes up to 3 m deep. Traces of human ashes, bones, and hair turned up in 42 sites. Documentation of all the holes and the diagrams of their distribution are preserved in the Conservation Department of the Museum."
No surprise here, Roberto is citing another fraud.
At the 'Hydrokop' website:
http://www.laborgeo.krakow.pl/eng/about.html
There is no mention of this 'Hydrokop Report'. It would be a big deal IF it true.
I see no reason why the current Hydrokop should mention a prospection done more than 50 years ago by a predecessor company on their website. It wouldn't count as a reference for any prospective future work. Where I live public tenders require references no older than 5 years.

If I were you I would invoke a better reason: the Hydrokop page states that "Our roots go back to Hydrokop Experimental Station established in 1967."

Was this an "experimental station" of a company called Hydrokop? Or did a company called Hydrokop only come into being in 1967, in which case it couldn't have performed prospections in 1965? This is a question worth clarifying.
Hannover wrote:The 'Hydrokop Report' is a fraud. If it had any merit at all we would be seeing it, not merely hearing about it. If it had any merit we would find it readily available.
Has anyone gone to the Conservation Department of the Museum, asked for the report and been told that it doesn't exist? Until that has been done, claims of fraudulence have no basis.
Hannover wrote:So Roberto, produce your claimed Auschwitz 'Hydrokop Report'.
No dodging.
I don't think I have the burden of disproving a claim of fraudulence, the burden of proof is rather the other way round. However, the issue is interesting enough to deserve closer examination, which nobody seems to have done so far. So I'll do the following:

1. Write to Hydrokop requesting further information about the company history, namely about whether there was a chemical mining enterprise called Hydrokop in 1965;
2. Write to the Auschwitz Museum requesting a copy of the 1965 Hydrokop report.

Of course this will take some time, especially no. 2. The museum is a public entity, and public entities tend to be sluggish. However, upon receiving a response from both aforementioned entities I shall post it here.

Meanwhile, don't forget my challenge to you: find a primary source (which in this case would be an eyewitness testimony) that mentions disposal of cremation remains into a pond as opposed to into the Vistula, or at least that cremation remains were discharged both into the Vistula and into one or more ponds.
The moderator's stated reason for disapproving the post quoted about suggests that he idiotically expects me to produce the mentioned Hydrokop report on the fly. Additionally my challenge to Hannover (= the moderator) to show me a primary source mentioning disposal of cremation remains into one or more ash ponds must have given him cold feet.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

SFinesilver
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by SFinesilver » Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:51 pm

LOL!

Is roberto is supbmitting drawings as "proof"?

:lol:
D - Has it been alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, Germany used "resettlement to the east" as a euphemism for transiting jews to the so-called "top secret" - PURE EXTERMINATION CAMPS - Yes. - or - No. - ?? - Nessie's answer: Yes.

E - Has it been alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the so-called "pure extermination camps" were - THE END OF THE LINE - for virtually everyone transited to those camps - Yes. - or - No. - ?? - Nessie's answer: Yes.

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; during WW II, Germany actually transited jews to labor camps / ghettos - that were located east of the Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka II camps - ?? - Nessie's answer: True.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2078&start=210#p65945

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:45 am
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:00 pm

Thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11219 :
CODOH moderator wrote:"What real, actual mass grave excavations look like."

Reason: The reported message is off topic. laughable dodge again more unrelated photos post saved.
Note the "laughable", one of Hannover's trademark expressions (and not one that a moderator, who is supposed to be impartial, should use). The disapproved post is obviously this one:
Roberto wrote:
Hannover wrote:When discussing the 'holocaust' storyline we must remember we're talking about a bizarre narrative which claims that an alleged '6M Jews & 5M others' ... 11,000,000 were murder by the 'Nazis'.
Actually the narrative is no more and no less bizarre than the narrative of any mass crime or other major human catastrophe that is supported by a solid historical record. And the narrative is not "6M Jews & 5M others". It is between 5 and 6 million Jews (probably closer to the former than to the latter) and at least 5 million other victims of crimes committed during World War II by Nazi Germany and/or its European allies (mainly Soviet prisoners of war, civilian victims of the Siege of Leningrad and civilians killed in reprisals or massacres connected with anti-partisan operations or other repressive actions in occupied territories, to a lesser extent Gypsies, disabled people and members of other minority groups). For details see the blog articles under the following links:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ctims.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... er-of.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... er-of.html

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2011/01/27 ... was-worse/

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... thods.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... to_28.html
Hannover wrote:The fact remains that there is not a single verifiable, excavated enormous mass grave with contents actually SHOWN, not just claimed.
This is not a correct statement as will be shown below, and even if it were that would be irrelevant. The historical reconstruction of mass crimes and other large-scale human catastrophes, be it the aforementioned crimes of Nazi Germany and/or its European allies, the crimes committed by Stalin’s regime mainly against Soviet citizens, the area bombing of German cities during World War II or the flight and expulsion of ethnic Germans during and after World War II, is not done by opening mass graves, exhuming the victims and counting them. In many cases this is not possible for various reasons, including without limitation the one that the mass grave sites are not even known. The historical reconstruction of events like those mentioned before thus relies chiefly if not exclusively on documentary and demographic evidence and on eyewitness testimonies.

For instance, the German Federal Archives, as mentioned in the essay translated under http://holocaustcontroversies.yuku.com/ ... t1871.html, established about 3,300 crime sites in the area east of the Oder and Neisse at which German civilians had been murdered by Red Army soldiers. For 2,620 of these sites it was possible to establish a number of about 24,500 persons who had met a violent death either at their places of home or during flight. For the remaining about 700 crime sites deaths could be recorded, but their number could not be exactly established. None of these crime sites was established by excavating mass graves and counting their contents. Nor was there any documentary evidence in which these crimes are mentioned. The German Federal Archives thus relied exclusively on eyewitness testimonies for the reconstruction of these crimes.

It is also not realistic to demand that excavated mass graves be "shown" (presumably through photographs) in a manner that would allow the viewer to quantify their contents, especially when it comes to orders of magnitude in the hundreds of thousands or millions. This because, due to the obvious limitations of the camera eye and the wide dispersion of sites at which violent deaths occurred, no photograph and no number of photographs can show all or even a substantial part of the number of victims in such orders of magnitude. An example unrelated to mass crimes may help to bring home this point: if one were to collect all photographs showing German soldiers killed in battle during World War II, the number of dead shown on these photographs would add up to several thousand at most. Yet it is known and generally accepted that between 4 and 5 million German soldiers lost their lives during World War II.

Accordingly neither criminal justice authorities nor historians will demand to be "shown" the contents of all mass graves related to the crime or historical event under investigation. What is more, there are no rules or standards of evidence in criminal investigation or historical research that would demand photographic evidence of mass killings at all. A legitimate court in the US or the German Federal Republic wouldn't dismiss a case for mass murder on grounds of the related mass graves not being "shown", however that is supposed to be done. It will base its conclusions on all evidence that is at its disposal, be it eyewitness, documentary or physical evidence.

For instance, the Nuremberg Military Tribunal at the Einsatzgruppen Trial, whose proceedings were conducted according to US rules of evidence, based its conclusions on German documents found to be authentic, eyewitness testimonies and depositions of accused perpetrators, without a single mass grave being "shown" to the court. So did courts of the German Federal Republic, a constitutional state applying defendant-friendly procedural laws. Occasionally the evidence provided to or procured by the latter included Soviet investigation reports illustrated with photographs, but these were not a must.

Evidence of mass graves is usually introduced at a trial through reports from expert witnesses and testimonies of such expert witnesses before the court, who are then subjected to cross-examination. Such expert witnesses may show the court photographs they took at mass grave sites to impress the court and render cross-examining defense attorneys less secure, but it is nowhere stated that they must show such photographs to the court. More about this below.

That said, the number of mass graves related to Nazi crimes in Eastern Europe that have been identified by criminal investigators and/or archaeologists and/or NGOs like Yahad in Unum (http://yahadmap.org/#map/) is likely to largely exceed the number of mass graves related to any other of the mass crimes/catastrophes mentioned above. And the photographic evidence showing victims of Nazi crimes is probably far more abundant than the photographic evidence showing victims of other mass crimes, including without limitation those mentioned before. I could post dozens of photographs from the Yad Vashem photo archives (http://collections1.yadvashem.org/searc ... ENG&rsvr=7) and the archives of the Ghetto Fighters House (http://www.gfh.org.il/eng/?CategoryID=87) that are captioned as showing Jewish or non-Jewish victims of Nazi crimes. However, I will for now limit myself to showing stills from Soviet footage regarding some of the Nazi massacres in the occupied territories of the USSR. The stills are from the Soviet documentary "The Atrocities committed by German Fascists in the USSR", which was shown at the Nuremberg Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal on 19 February 1946.

Kerch (Crimea), 1941
Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Drobitski Yar (Kharkov), 1941/42

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Taganrog, 1941

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Ternopol area, 1942

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Now, this is Soviet footage, which, considering the Soviets’ attempt to blame their own mass killing at Katyn on the Germans, should be checked against evidence independent of the Soviets. Insofar as Soviet evidence and evidence independent of the Soviets match, Soviet reports can be accepted as accurate. Insofar as there is a contradiction between Soviet evidence and evidence independent of the Soviets (as in the case of Katyn), Soviet reports must be dismissed as inaccurate. Where there is neither contradicting nor confirming evidence independent of the Soviets, special care in making conclusions based on Soviet evidence is recommended.

In the cases mentioned above, the Soviet evidence is essentially consistent with evidence independent of the Soviets, namely German documents and/or depositions of eyewitnesses and perpetrators before criminal justice authorities of the German Federal Republic. This essential consistency is demonstrated in the blog articles linked to below, which contain references to German documents and excerpts from accounts by historians that are based on depositions made before West German criminal justice authorities.

Regarding Kerch and Drobitski Yar (Kharkov):
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... cists.html
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... i-yar.html
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... found.html

Regarding Taganrog and the Ternopol area:
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... cists.html
Note that, although my arguments and the evidence I showed clearly address two claims made by Hannover, the moderator lamely squeals "off-topic" and "dodge". How I am supposed to be "off topic" and what exactly I'm supposed to be "dodging" the moderator is not able to explain, of course, as both are just a coward's pretexts to get rid of arguments and evidence he feels unable to address.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

SFinesilver
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by SFinesilver » Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:10 pm

RM:
Note that, although I expressly announced that I would post as many photos as I could find...
Also note that you cravenly refused to post this photo:

Image

Which shows the largest, in terms of both grave volume and quantity of remains, of the four so-called “huge mass graves” - ever - located / proven to exist at Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor or Treblinka II.


Roberto, do you have the courage, integrity and character to post the above photo on the codoh forum, and explain what the photo is?
D - Has it been alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, Germany used "resettlement to the east" as a euphemism for transiting jews to the so-called "top secret" - PURE EXTERMINATION CAMPS - Yes. - or - No. - ?? - Nessie's answer: Yes.

E - Has it been alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the so-called "pure extermination camps" were - THE END OF THE LINE - for virtually everyone transited to those camps - Yes. - or - No. - ?? - Nessie's answer: Yes.

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; during WW II, Germany actually transited jews to labor camps / ghettos - that were located east of the Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka II camps - ?? - Nessie's answer: True.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2078&start=210#p65945

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:45 am
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:25 pm

Same thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11219:
CODOH Moderator wrote:"What real, actual mass grave excavations look like."

Reason: The reported message is off topic. more unrelated photos = dodging.
That must be the following post:
Roberto wrote:
Hannover wrote:To my point, here's what real excavations of real mass graves look like, what a real forensic study looks like:
'Amtliches Material zum Massenmord von Katyn'
The German excavations of massive Soviet atrocities in Poland.
http://codoh.com/media/files/documents/ ... atyn_v.pdf
Katyn forest was the scene of the murder of thousands of Poles by the Soviet Union. It was falsely accepted into the Nuremberg records that it was the Germans who were responsible for this slaughter. There were 'documents', 'eyewitnesses, 'confessions', executions of Germans; all of which allegedly attested to German guilt. This "proof" presented by the communist Soviets was accepted by The Allies.
However, a detailed, thorough, and verifiable forensic examination (see link) of the site had been done by the Germans during the war and clearly established Soviet guilt; but no, the Germans were said to be the guilty ones.
In 1989 the communist Soviet government finally admitted responsibility.
It should be noted that this detailed, verifiable forensic study by the Germans was the only such study done by the belligerents of WWII.
The Allies never conducted and showed the results any such study of Auschwitz or the other alleged mass murder sites where massive numbers of human remains are alleged to still exist.
At the German excavation at Katyn corpses were shown 'in situ', corpses were exhumed, tagged, identified, the method of execution was clearly shown and proven.
The German study was thoroughly photographed and documented. Observers from Axis, Allied, and neutral countries were in attendance.
Any mass grave in which numerous corpses or cremation remains are found is real, and any forensic study is a real one. What can be said of the German Katyn investigation is that it that is was a model for others as concerns the amount of evidence collected, the thoroughness of the examination and the presence of impartial observers.

This does not mean, however, that a Katyn-style investigation is required to prove mass murder beyond a reasonable doubt. If that were so, then the overwhelming majority of Soviet crimes, regarding which no excavation or site examination at all was conducted, would have to be considered unproven. Stalin’s proven killing record would thus drop from about nine million (1 million executions, 5 million victims of man-made famines, 3 million victims of Gulag labor camps and special colonies) to the about 4,100 victims of the Katyn massacre plus the about 9,400 victims of the Vinnitsa massacre, which was investigated with similar thoroughness as the Katyn massacre (see under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinnytsia_massacre).

Is Hannover claiming that Stalin's regime has been proven to have killed no more than 13,500 people?
Hannover wrote: Imagine in a legit court law making a claim that enormous & known mass graves exist which prove the guilt of a charged party.
Anyone making such a claim would be required to show excavations of the alleged sites, or the court would order the excavations be performed under the watchful eye of forensic scientists. There would be immense documentation, verifiable photos, and witnesses.
I don’t think that a court would require photos of mass grave excavations, for the reasons explained above. Forensic archaeologist Richard Wright, who is famous for his investigation of Nazi killing sites at Serniki and Ustinovka in Ukraine and subsequent investigation of the Srebenica massacre and other atrocities in the Bosnian War, wrote the following in his article "Where are the Bodies? In the Ground" (The Public Historian, Vol. 32, No. 1: 96-107), which includes a detailed description and photos of his Serniki and Ustinovka investigations (emphases added):
Because bodies are such powerful historical and legal evidence, the defenders of alleged perpetrators have added interrogation of investigators’ research and recovery processes to their cross-examination. That attempt at distraction should not surprise. For example, David Bright of the University of New South Wales,9 and news media have pointed out the effects of evidence such as gruesome photos on courts.10 In the case of atrocity investigations, forensic archaeologists present to the courts detailed logs and maps of what is found, with interpretations. Official reports, which include photos, are disclosed to the defense. In accord with Bright’s findings, usually the defense does not want the judges to see the gruesome pictures. So the reports are unchallenged by defense counsel. The defense prefers to argue the line of “you prove that our client was seen pulling the trigger.” That has happened in most cases that I have worked on.
Yet the Srebrenica defense teams also devised a strategy to question whether, because of our supposed preconceptions, our archaeological investigation missed identifying military clothing, and whether the number of bodies in the ground was less than we estimated.11 I have vivid memories of a grueling cross-examination in The Hague in February 2007. On and on went the questions about the possibility of my being mistaken in my observations and conclusions. I insisted that I had not seen an item of military clothing on the 2000–3000 bodies my team had exhumed. I insisted that I was not mistaken in words, words from both myself and the defense team of barristers. In his right of reply the prosecuting barrister said nothing; he simply put up two photos on the court’s screen.
They were the photos from my official report of a man in civilian clothes, who had broken the ligature fixing his hands behind his back, slipped his blindfold down, and grasped a shrub at the moment of death. The prosecuting barrister asked me a single question. Were these photos the sort of evidence that led me to my conclusions. I said yes. The prosecuting barrister said he had no more questions for me. I think that the photos of a body cut through the verbiage of the courtroom, effectively arresting the defense efforts to reinterpret the evidence. Verdicts are awaited as I am writing this.
The above shows us two things. One is that, when evidence of mass graves is introduced at a criminal trial, this is done through reports from and depositions in court by expert witnesses such as Richard Wright, who are then subjected to cross-examination. The other is that, while photographs may be impressive evidence used by the prosecution to weaken the defense’s case, the court does not demand that photographs be produced, let alone that photographs show all the victims of the massacre in question. In the proceedings described by Wright in the above quote, the photograph of a single victim of the Srebrenica massacre was sufficient to persuade the court of the expert witness’s credibility and demolish the defense’s attempts to discredit the witness.
Note that the moderator babbles about "unrelated photos" although this message contains no photos at all. He must have been so upset by my post that he got confused.

Also note that the accusation of "dodging" is completely baseless.

I comment Hannover's remarks about the German Katyn investigation, agree with him about the thoroughness of that investigation, then argue that if Katyn standards were applied to all Soviet crimes Stalin's regime would have only 13,500 proven deaths on its hands. No dodging anywhere, but the realization that he shot himself in the foot with his Katyn eulogy must have been too much for Hannover to bear.

Then I address Hannover's claim about what a "legit" quote would require, refuting it on hand of a quote from an article by forensic anthropologist Richard Wright. Also no dodging whatsoever, but Hannover obviously didn't like yet another demonstration that he knows about as much about judicial proceedings and requirements as a pig does about Sunday.

No further notifications from the moderator so far. The post quoted above was followed by another post addressed to borjastick, which is worded much like a friendly chat and reads as follows:
Roberto wrote:
borjastick wrote:serbian mass graves.jpg

This is how mass graves could well be excavated.
This is how mass graves have been excavated at many places by Soviet investigation commissions during World War II, and more recently by Belarusian students (see the blog article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... lesie.html), by Richard Wright at Serniki and Ustinovka in Ukraine (see previous post on this thread; I’m sure Hannover will link to some ridiculous haggling and conspiracy theories about expert witness Wright’s inconvenient finds, which features a photo from Wright’s article shown below),

Image

and by Father Patrick Desbois at Busk (see the excerpt from The Holocaust by Bullets under http://holocaustcontroversies.yuku.com/busk-t1799.html, my blog article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ois-5.html, the documentary film under https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP2OubL ... 9&index=27, 3:18 to 4:33, and the stills below).

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

The Serniki mass grave is shown in its entirety. The people killed in the Busk mass graves are not all shown in the above film stills. But then, neither does on see all victims in the mass grave shown in the photo you posted. Or are those supposed to be all people who lay in that mass grave?
borjastick wrote:But of course this only happens when jews are not involved. In this case the horrific crimes of the Serbians against the Islamics and others they hated for centuries were exposed because truth was important and lies and deception were not.
Restrictions to proper investigation by forensic archaeologists are unfortunately imposed by Orthodox Jews (I have nothing against secular Jews like Yoram Haimi, but those religious black-coats I can’t stand, like I can’t stand any religious fanatics). Richard Wright apparently managed to circumvent these restrictions at Serniki and Ustinovka (perhaps because his excavations were done before any black-coats could interfere), but Desbois’ team was restricted to uncovering the first layer of corpses, taking care not to move any bones as they so did. This makes me long for good old Soviet times in a way. The Soviets didn’t give a damn about Jewish religious beliefs when they excavated mass graves containing people killed by the Nazis. They even tried to conceal the fact that most Soviet civilians killed out of hand by the Nazis were Jews. In the subtitled film stills I posted above, no mention is made of the victims’ Jewish ethnicity.
borjastick wrote:Of course in many such claimed graves from the holocaust we wouldn't be looking for decomposed bodies but tons of cremains. Still available for forensics.
Difficult to quantify as cremation remains are mixed with soil, but worth a try. Unfortunately the black-coats won’t allow it. From my Skype conversations with Yoram Haimi I gathered that he’s as unhappy about these restrictions as I am.
I can understand Hannover's dilemma here. On the one hand he can find no justification to disapprove this post. On the other hand the post refers to a "previous post" that has been disapproved, so approving this one would make the retention of the previous post obvious to readers. Maybe Hannover is also uncomfortable with my statement that I don't like Orthodox Jews, which goes against his "Industry" and "Zionist" fantasies. So what us Hannover going to do now? Stay tuned!

By the way, Hannover was not attentive enough when he approved my post under https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 219#p84303, which he apparently considered safe enough. For that post refers to "the aforementioned Soviet footage", which is the footage shown in the retained post reproduced under viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2978#p109546. Nowhere before in the approved post is that footage mentioned, so the attentive reader will see that at least one previous post has been disapproved. Oops!
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:45 am
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:49 pm

To end the day, I just sent the following message to "M1" (aka "Hannover") on the thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11230:
Roberto wrote:
Moderator wrote:Roberto:

You have been challenged to actually produce a 'Hydrokop' report which you claim proves excavations of massive human remains at Auschwitz.

You are are certainly entitled to claim that such reports exist at this forum, but per our guidelines which you agreed to, when challenged you must then produce what you have claimed. Simple, really.

There is no dodging at this forum.

Our basic guidelines set us apart from less rigorous, less serious forums.

I have saved the post in which you attempted to ignore that challenge.

Reminder, our basic guidelines are here:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=358

Thanks, M1
I tried to comply with the request by stating that I would try to obtain the Hydrokop report from the Auschwitz Museum, but the disapproval of my related posts suggests that I was expected to produce that report on the fly, which is ridiculous. My challenge that Hannover provide a primary source claiming cremation remains disposal in ash ponds seems to be have been another reason why the modified post was disapproved.

Your moderation practices, Mr. "M1" (or shall I say "Hannover"?) are as ridiculous as your demands. And their are being duly documented on the RODOH forum:

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2978&p=109552#p109540

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2978&p=109552#p109541

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2978&p=109552#p109543

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2978&p=109552#p109543

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2978&p=109552#p109543

Screenshots of all posts submitted have been taken, in case you should feel like claiming that I made didn't post the disapproved messages or posted them with a different content than that reproduced under the above links.
Meanwhile, there's another post of mine on the thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11226 that hasn't been approved or disapproved by has neither seen the light of day yet:
Roberto wrote:
Hannover wrote:Roberto is grossly 'uninformed'.

Image

Number of Alleged Dead in Auschwitz:
9,000,000 Cited by the French documentary, Night and Fog, which has been shown to millions of school students worldwide.

8,000,000 The French War Crime Research Office, Doc. 31, 1945.

7,000,000 Also cited by the French War Crime Research Office.

6,000,000 Cited in the book “Auschwitz Doctor” by Miklos Nyiszli. It has since been proven that this book is a fraud and the "doctor" was never even at Auschwitz, even though the book is often cited by historians.
Nyiszli is cited by Roberto earlier in this thread as giving credible 'holocaust' testimony.

5,000,000 to 5,500,000 Cited in 1945 at the trial of Auschwitz commander Rudolf Hoess, based on his “confession” which was written in English, a language he never spoke.

5,000,000 Cited on April 20, 1978 by the French daily, Le Monde. Also cited on January 23, 1995 by the German daily Die Welt. By September 1, 1989, Le Monde reduced the figure to 1,433,000.

4,500,000 In 1945 this figure was cited by another witness at the aforementioned Hoess trial.

4,000,000 Cited by a Soviet document of May 6, 1945 and officially acknowledged by the Nuremberg War Crimes trial. This figure was also reported in The New York Times on April 18, 1945, although 50 years later on January 26, 1995 (see below), The New York Times and The Washington Post slashed the figure to 1,500,000 citing new findings by the Auschwitz Museum officials. In fact, the figure of 4,000,000 was later repudiated by the Auschwitz museum officials in 1990 (see below) but the figure of 1,500,000 victims was not formally announced by Polish President Lech Walesa until five years after the Auschwitz historians had first announced their discovery.

3,500,000 Cited in the 1991 edition of the Dictionary of the French Language and by Claude Lanzmann in 1980 in his introduction to Filip Muller's book, “Three Years in an Auschwitz Gas Chamber.”

3,000,000 Cited in a forced confession by Rudolf Hoess, the Auschwitz commander who said this was the number of those who had died at Auschwitz prior to Dec. 1, 1943. Later cited in the June 7, 1993 issue of Heritage, the most widely read Jewish newspaper in California, even though three years previously the authorities at the Auschwitz museum had scaled down the figure to a minimum of 1,100,000 and a maximum of 1,500,000. (see below).

2,500,000 Cited by a famous "witness to the Holocaust," Rudolf Vrba, when he testified on July 16, 1981 for the Israeli government's war crimes trial of former SS official Adolf Eichmann.

2,000,000 Cited by no less than three famous Holocaust historians, including Leon Poliakov (1951) writing in “Harvest of Hate”; Georges Wellers, writing in 1973 in “The Yellow Star at the Time of Vichy”; and Lucy Dawidowicz, writing in 1975 in “The War Against the Jews.”

2,000,000 to 4,000,000 Cited by Israeli historian Yehuda Bauer in 1982 in his book, “A History of the Holocaust.” However, by 1989 Bauer revised his figures and determined that the actual number was lower: 1,600,000.

1,600,000 This is a 1989 revision by Israeli historian Yehuda Bauer of his earlier figure in 1982 of 2,000,000 to 4,000,000, Bauer cited this new figure on September 22, 1989 in The Jerusalem Post, at which time he wrote' 'The larger figures have been dismissed for years, except that it hasn't reached the public yet."

1,500,000 In 1995 this was the “official" number of Auschwitz deaths announced by Polish President Lech Walesa as determined by the historians at the Auschwitz museum. This number was inscribed on the monument at the Auschwitz camp at that time, thereby "replacing" the earlier 4,000,000 figure that had been formally repudiated (and withdrawn from the monument) five years earlier in 1990. At that time, on July 17, 1990 The Washington Times reprinted a brief article from The London Daily Telegraph citing the "new" figure of 1,500,000 that had been determined by the authorities at the Auschwitz museum. This new figure was reported two years later in a UPI report published in the New York Post on March 26, 1992. On January 26, 1995 both The Washington Post and The New York Times cited this 1,500,000 figure as the new "official" figure (citing the Auschwitz Museum authorities).

1,471,595 This is a 1983 figure cited by historian Georges Wellers who (as noted previously) had determined, writing in 1973, that some 2,000,000 had died. In his later calculation, Wellers decided that of the 1,471,595 who had died at Auschwitz, 1,352,980 were Jews.

1,433,000 This figure was cited on September 1, 1989 by the French daily, Le Monde, which earlier, on April 20, 1978, had cited the figure at 4,000,000.

1,250,000 In 1985, historian Raul Hilberg arrived at this figure in his book, “The Destruction of the European Jews.” According to Hilberg, of those dead, some 1,000,000 were Jews.

1,100,000 to 1,500,000 Sources for this estimate are historians Yisrael Gutman and Michael Berenbaum (later of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum) in their 1984 book, “Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp”; also Dr. Franciszek Piper, the curator of the Auschwitz Museum, writing a chapter in that book. This estimate was later also cited by Walter Reich, former director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, writing in The Washington Post on September 8, 1998. The upper figure of 1,500,000 thus remains the "official" figure as now inscribed at Auschwitz, with the earlier figure of 4,000,000 having been removed from the memorial at the site of the former concentration camp.

1,000,000 Jean-Claude Pressac, writing in his 1989 book “Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers.” This is interesting since he wrote his book to repudiate so-called "Holocaust deniers" who were called that precisely because they had questioned the numbers of those who had died at Auschwitz.

900,000 Reported on August 3, 1990 11, by Aufbau, a Jewish newspaper in New York.

800,000 to 900,000 Reported by Gerald Reitlinger in his 1953 book, “The Final Solution.” This figure is notable, considering the fact that it reduces the Auschwitz death total from the 4,000,000 figure that was widely in vogue in 1953.

775,000 to 800,000 Jean-Claude Pressac's revised figure, put forth in his 1993 book, “The Crematoria of Auschwitz: The Mass Murder's Machinery”, scaling down the figure from Pressac's 1989 claim of 1,000,000 dead. At this juncture, Pressac said that of the new number, 630,000 were Jews.

630,000 to 710,000 In 1994 Pressac scaled his figure down somewhat further; this is the figure cited in the German language translation of Pressac's 1993 book originally published in French. Again, this is substantially less than Pressac's 1989 figure of 1,000,000.

73,137 This figure was reported in The New York Times on March 3, 1991 and was based entirely on the wartime German concentration camp records that had been captured by the Soviets and just recently released. According to this figure, of those dead, 38,031 were Jews. These records state that the total of all persons who died in the ENTIRE German prison camp system from 1935 to 1945 were 403,713. To repeat: a total of 403,713 persons of all races and religions was officially recorded to have died (of all causes. typhus, old age, measles, etc.-and execution) in the entire prison camp system over a 10 year period. Of those 403,713 a total of 73,137 died at Auschwitz. Of those 73,137 who died at Auschwitz, 38,031 were Jews.

And of course Frijhof Meyers alleged 500,000.
much more at:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7281

- Hannover

The 'holocaust' narrative doesn't hold up to scientific & rational scrutiny so the usual enemies of free speech call for more censorship of the internet.
So various sources made various claims regarding the death toll of Auschwitz-Birkenau?

Apples-and-oranges comparisons aside (a figure including only registered inmates cannot be compared to a figure also including deportees killed on arrival), this list is pretty irrelevant. Mass killing at Auschwitz-Birkenau is hardly the only event in history regarding which wildly exaggerated claims have been made at one or the other time. Estimates of deaths caused by Stalin's regime ran in the tens of millions during the Cold War, and were reduced to about 9 million once the Soviet Union ceased to exist and former Soviet records became available to historians. The Dresden bombing on 13-15 February 1945 was (and still is) variously claimed to have killed over one hundred thousand or even several hundreds of thousands of people, yet historians who assessed all related evidence arrived at a death toll of up to 25,000 (which is in line with the figures stated in initial reports by the city's administration). And so on.

Moreover no detailed research based on transportation records was made before Franciszek's Piper's study, whose results, as rendered in the Van Pelt Report under https://www.hdot.org/vanpelt/#, were the following:

Jewish deportees
France_69,000
The Netherlands_60,000
Greece_55,000
Bohemia and Moravia_46,000
Slovakia_27,000
Belgium_25,000
Italy_7,500
Norway_700
Subtotal_290,200
Hungary_438,000
Subtotal_728,200
Poland_300,000
Germany_23,000
Yugoslavia _0,000
Subtotal_1,061,200
Jews transferred from other concentration camps_34,000
Total_1,095,200
Jews registered as prisoners_-205,000
Hungarian "Durchgangsjuden"_-25,000
Jews killed upon arrival_865,200
Registered Jews who died in the camp_100,000
Total number of Jews who died at Auschwitz-Birkenau_965,200

Non-Jews who died at AB
Poles_74,000
Romani_21,000
Soviet POWs_15,000
Other registered inmates_12,000
Subtotal non-Jews who died at AB_122,000

Total number of deaths at AB_1,087,200

The only correction that must be made regarding Piper's figures concerns the number of a) arrivals from Hungary and b) "Durchgangsjuden" from Hungary, pursuant to Christian Gerlach and Götz Aly's study Das letzte Kapitel. As mentioned under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ed-in.html, the number of Hungarian Jews considered able to work and accordingly registered as inmates or transferred to other camps was about 104,000. Additionally 15,000 of the 437,402 Jews deported from Hungary did not arrive at AB but were sent to Strasshof. So the number of Jews who were killed upon arrival or perished as inmates must be corrected as follows:

Jewish deportees
France_69,000
The Netherlands_60,000
Greece_55,000
Bohemia and Moravia _46,000
Slovakia_27,000
Belgium_25,000
Italy_7,500
Norway_700
Subtotal_290,200
Hungary_423,000 (instead of 438,000)
Subtotal_713,200
Poland_300,000
Germany_23,000
Yugoslavia_10,000
Subtotal_1,046,200
Jews transferred from other concentration camps_34,000
Total_1,080,200
Jews registered as prisoners or sent to other camps_-309,000 (instead of - 230,000)
Jews killed upon arrival_771,200
Registered Jews who died in the camp_100,000
Total number of Jews who died at Auschwitz-Birkenau_871,200

Non-Jews who died at AB
Poles_74,000
Romani_21,000
Soviet POWs_15,000
Other registered inmates_12,000
Subtotal non-Jews who died at AB_122,000

Total number of deaths at AB_993,200

And that's about it. Are there any "Durchgangsjuden" other than those mentioned above that "Revisionists" can account for? If so, how many are there, and what's the evidence?

Pressac's lower figure is not to be taken seriously for the reasons explained by Van Pelt. Fritjof Meyer's lower figure can also not be taken seriously, for the reasons explained in the articles whose links are accessible under http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... jof-meyer/. The current status of historical research on the number of AB's victims, broken down and borne out by solid evidence and reasoning, is about 1 million, slightly less than that. Which, incidentally, is not far from the figure that was claimed by camp commandant Rudolf Höss as far back as 1946. Yeah, figures much higher and somewhat lower have been claimed. So what?
My guess is that "Hannover" will squeal "dodging" because I explained why his silly list is irrelevant.
Denial of generally known historical facts should not be punishable. For those who maintain, for instance, that Germany did not take part in World War I or that Adenauer fought at Issus in 333, their own stupidity is punishment enough. The same should apply to the denial of the horrors and crimes of the recent German past.
~ A German jurist by the name of Baumann in the German juridical magazine NJW, quoted in: Bailer-Galanda/Benz/Neugebauer (ed.), Die Auschwitzleugner, Berlin 1996, page 261 (my translation).

SFinesilver
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by SFinesilver » Tue Jul 11, 2017 6:00 pm

roberto:
My guess is that "Hannover" will squeal "dodging" because I explained why his silly list is irrelevant.
Which is a craven way of admitting that you are dodging.

:lol:
D - Has it been alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, Germany used "resettlement to the east" as a euphemism for transiting jews to the so-called "top secret" - PURE EXTERMINATION CAMPS - Yes. - or - No. - ?? - Nessie's answer: Yes.

E - Has it been alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the so-called "pure extermination camps" were - THE END OF THE LINE - for virtually everyone transited to those camps - Yes. - or - No. - ?? - Nessie's answer: Yes.

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; during WW II, Germany actually transited jews to labor camps / ghettos - that were located east of the Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka II camps - ?? - Nessie's answer: True.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2078&start=210#p65945

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest