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
Greg Gerdes
Posts: 861
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Greg Gerdes » Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:29 pm

Roberto:
A number of graves or partial graves have been identified by CS-C
Roberto, are you willing to bet - $1,000.00 - that it can be proven - with the same standard of proof applied in U.S. criminal courts - that; A number of graves or partial graves have been identified by CS-C - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:01 pm

This just in. It should have been posted after reproductions of earlier posts that disappeared in moderator "Hannover"'s memory hole, but it's too interesting to wait.

CODOH moderator "Hannover", one of the dumbest dumb-asses in "Revisionist" cloud-cuckoo-land, thought he could score points with fellow "Revisionists" by opening a thread under https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11277, with the bigmouthed title "Roberto Muehlenkamp challenged on his claim of 'crime site investigations' for Belzec & Treblinka" (that's just one out of several "Muehlenkamp" threads that "Hannover" has opened over the last days, by the way - I must be figuring prominently in his nightmares).

The thread's OP is as bigmouthed as the title:
Hannover wrote:CWhite has posted at this forum what Roberto Muehlenkamp has claimed elsewhere.
Roberto has said:
Mass graves at Belzec and Treblinka were partially excavated after the war, and crime site investigation reports described cremation remains and other remains on site corresponding to a very large number of dead human beings, but such reports don't fulfill the "conclusively documented methodology" requirement.
Well then, Roberto is hereby challenged to present the full original text of the actual 'reports' and the full original text to the 'investigations' supposedly mentioned in the alleged reports.

I say Roberto and his 'holocau$t' Industry are bluffing. I say there are no such documents to show. I say it's just another 'holocaust' fraud.

Consider what a big deal this would be for those who profit from the 'holocaust' storyline, IF Roberto's claims matched the facts

Will Roberto dodge yet another challenge? I'm betting yes.

He cannot produce what he and those like him allege, simple as that.

See other recent bluffs & dodges by Roberto here:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11240
As "Hannover" has more manure than brains inside his skull, and as he apparently also isn't familiar with "Revisionist" scripture, he questioned the existence of documents that have been transcribed and translated by no one less than Carlo Mattogno, the world's foremost "Revisionist" researcher, who didn't call the existence of these documents into question. For "Hannover"'s claims imply that Mattogno relied on copies, transcriptions or translations of documents that don't exist in the original.

I wonder what Mattogno will say if he gets to know that "Hannover" called his credibility as a researcher into question. Well, maybe he will, as he seems to be a regular reader of the Holocaust Controversies blog site (http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.pt/), where "Hannover"'s OP and my reply thereto will be reproduced asap.

Meanwhile, my reply to "Hannover"'s above-quoted OP is reproduced below. It will of course not see the light of day, as "Hannover" will yell "dodging" because I could not produce the original investigation reports regarding Belzec on the fly, even though I provided archival references for their German translations available in the BAL and a link to those translations available in the Dutch Archives, and expressly undertook to inquire for the original Polish documents at the IPN in Warsaw, i.e. I responded to his "challenge" to the best of my ability at the moment.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if "Hannover" got into big "Revisionist" trouble for questioning Mattogno's credibility. Maybe his boss Germar Rudolf will also get to know about this, as he also seems to peruse the Holocaust Controversies blog site on occasion.

Reproduction of first reply to "Hannover"'s OP on the CODOH thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11277
Roberto wrote:
Hannover wrote:CWhite has posted at this forum what Roberto Muehlenkamp has claimed elsewhere.
Roberto has said:
Mass graves at Belzec and Treblinka were partially excavated after the war, and crime site investigation reports described cremation remains and other remains on site corresponding to a very large number of dead human beings, but such reports don't fulfill the "conclusively documented methodology" requirement.
Well then, Roberto is hereby challenged to present the full original text of the actual 'reports' and the full original text to the 'investigations' supposedly mentioned in the alleged reports.

I say Roberto and his 'holocau$t' Industry are bluffing. I say there are no such documents to show. I say it's just another 'holocaust' fraud.
Bluffing is not one of my habits, and I have noting to do with any "Industry"
Hannover wrote:Consider what a big deal this would be for those who profit from the 'holocaust' storyline, IF Roberto's claims matched the facts
There may be some organizations who profit from the historical record of the Holocaust (those that Normal Finkelstein called the "Holocaust Industry"), but they don't have much if anything to do and care little if anything about historical research. That is the work of scholarly professional historians, and of hobby historians like myself who do research in their spare time (and with their own limited resources) because they are interested in history.
Hannover wrote:Will Roberto dodge yet another challenge? I'm betting yes.

He cannot produce what he and those like him allege, simple as that.
I don't dodge challenges. I may not be able to respond to them immediately as concerns the Belzec set of documents (which I'll have to obtain from the archives mentioned below), but I do so as soon as possible. As concerns the Treblinka set of documents, I can respond immediately because I have color copies of original crime site investigation reports and related photographs (the photos are black and white, but the background is colored) at my disposal.

Now to the crime site investigation/excavation reports

Belzec

There is an excavation report dated 12.10.1945, signed by District Examining Judge Czeslaw Godziszewski and District Attorney Leon Witkowski. There is also a report on the postmortem examination dated 13.10.1945, signed by District Medical Officer (coroner) Dr. Mieczyslaw Pietraszkiewicz and District Examining Judge Cz. Godziszewski, followed by an expert opinion from the aforementioned Dr. Mieczyslaw Pietraszkiewicz.

Certified translations into German of these reports from Polish, based on certified copies of the original Polish texts, are available in the section of the German Federal Archives in Ludwigsburg (Bundesarchiv Ludwigsburg, BAL for short), respectively under the signatures BAL B162/208 AR-Z 252/59, Bd. VI, f. 1121-22 and BAL B162/208 AR-Z 252/59, Bd. VI, f. 1123-24. These translations can be viewed on the page https://www.archieven.nl/nl/zoeken?miad ... lle=Belzec of the Dutch Archives, file 8, respectively pp. 127-128 and 130-132 of the PDF file.

English translations of these documents from the aforementioned German translations (except for the District Medical Officer's expert opinion, which I translated somewhere else) can be found on pp. 79-81 of Carlo Mattogno, Belzec in Propaganda, Testimonies, Archeological Research, and History. Thus the claim that these documents do not exist means calling into question the scholarship of Carlo Mattogno, who I understand is the world's foremost Revisionist researcher, as it implies that Mattogno relied on copies, transcriptions or translations of documents that don't exist in the original.

The aforementioned documents were part of the evidence used at the trial against Josef Oberhauser et al, before the Landgericht München (Munich Court of Assizes), the judgment of which was issued on 21.01.1965 and confirmed by the German Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH for short) on 14.12.1965. The judgment is published in Justiz und NS-Verbrechen Band XX. A summary of the judgment can be found on the webpage http://www1.jur.uva.nl/junsv/brd/Tatortengfr.htm, Case Nr. 585. The judgment's complete text can be obtained from Ex Post Facto Productions for a fee of 25 Euros (http://www1.jur.uva.nl/junsv/bestellen.htm). I have the text of the judgment and the BGH's confirmation and can provide a translation upon request.

The certified copies of the original excavation/postmortem reports in Polish are probably in the BAL files. I shall inquire for them there. The originals must be in the archives of the Instytut Pamięci Narodowej (IPN for short) in Warsaw, Poland. I shall inquire for them there.

---

Treblinka

I have a copy of the file IPN GK 196/69, which contains color copies of the protocols pertaining to the investigation conducted by Judge Łukaszkiewicz and State Attorney Maciejewski. The site investigation reports, along with illustrating photographs, are on fl. 96-104 of the file. Color copies are provided below.

The first of the copied protocols (fl. 96-97) seems to contain (I don't speak Polish and therefore have to rely on machine translations) information about human remains on site that is also included in Nuremberg document USSR-344, translation see Carlo Mattogno, Treblinka - Extermination Camp or Transit Camp, p. 87, and in the report about the Treblinka extermination camp published by the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, Warsaw, 1946 (https://www.phdn.org/archives/www.ess.u ... ltreb1.htm).

The second protocol after the photographs (fl. 103-104) is obviously the one whose translation can be found in Mattogno, Treblinka, pp. 84-86. Mattogno obviously didn't have access to the documents archived the IPN, for his source is a reproduction of the document in Stanisław Wojtczak, “Karny obóz pracy Treblinka I i osrodek zagłady Treblinka II,” in: Biuletyn Głównej Komisji Badania Zbrodni Hitlerowskich w Polsce, Warsaw 1975, XXVI, pp. 117-185 (here pp. 183-85 (Mattogno, Treblinka, note 61 on p. 32 and note 207 on p. 84. Again, the claim that these documents do not exist means calling into question the scholarship of Carlo Mattogno, who I understand is the world's foremost Revisionist researcher, as it implies that Mattogno relied on copies, transcriptions or translations of documents that don't exist in the original.

So here are the aforementioned documents (in Polish language, of course) as they are kept in the file IPN GK 196/69.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
Hannover wrote:See other recent bluffs & dodges by Roberto here:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11240
No actual bluffs and dodges there, just far-fetched claims of bluffing and dodging.
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).

Greg Gerdes
Posts: 861
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Greg Gerdes » Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:33 pm

CWhite:
"Assuming that it is possible" to "separate the cremation remains from the soil they are mixed with"?

:lol:

On "that other site" we find this gem:

The proven liar Roberto:
And this gentleman seems to have collected a lot of teeth and/or bone fragments on the Treblinka site, presumably prior to the building of the memorial.

Image

Oh what a tangled web we weave - huh Roberto?
Roberto:
Where's the "lie" supposed to be? This gentleman obviously went searching for and collecting teeth and/or bone fragments at Treblinka
Roberto, are you willing to bet - $1,000.00 - that it can be proven - with the same standard of proof applied in U.S. criminal courts - that; the alleged "teeth and/or bone fragments" shown in the photo above were collected from within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Greg Gerdes
Posts: 861
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Greg Gerdes » Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:53 pm

CWhite:
Roberto, how many total discernable / measurable extant mass graves within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp have actually been proven - beyond reasonable doubt - by legitimate archaeologists / forensic investigators - to actually exist?
Robero's answer: None.
:lol:

Poor confused Roberto, he just can't seem to get his lies straight.

I think he's losing it - AGAIN!

Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Sat Jul 29, 2017 2:38 am

So how did CODOH moderator "Hannover" react to my post on the thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11277, reproduced under viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2978&start=170#p111148 ?

Well, as that post had already been reproduced and his fuck-up had already been pointed out on RODOH, he couldn't just drop it into the memory hole, especially as I had announced that I would reproduce the post on HC and a "Revisionist" of note slandered in "Hannover"'s OP (as well as "Hannover"'s boss) might see it there.

So he had no choice but to approve it (https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 277#p84711) and try to put a bright face on the mess he had made for himself, by producing the following showpiece of idiocy (https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 277#p84728):
Hannover wrote:Trap set, bait taken, Roberto caught.

Seriously Roberto, this is your best shot?

These communist 'photos' are a joke.

- Zero proof they are from Treblinka.

- A few laughable bones brought from who knows where, thrown on the ground, photographed & voila ... communist 'evidence'.

- Allegedly 900,000 were murdered at Treblinka and what do we see? .... a few communist, laughably placed bones. :lol:


Image

Image

Image

Image
First sentence: putting on a bright face by feebly claiming he had lured me into a "trap". Poor soul.

Second sentence: shifting the goalposts. I didn't say anything about the scans Treblinka crime site investigation reports posted being my "best shot". They were just posted to disprove "Hannover"'s allegation (which meant questioning the scholarship of Carlo Mattongo) that said investigation reports, reproduced in translation by Mattogno, did not exist in the original.

Third sentence: a hollow and baseless claim of "communist" manipulation

Fourth sentence: arguably the most idiotic of all. Proof of the photo's location and context (in an archive file pertaining to criminal investigations of Treblinka, with numbers corresponding to the sequence of that file, with the last caption reading that they were taken at the instructions of the examining judge who directed the investigation, and matching descriptions of the site's aspect in the related reports and in other evidence regarding the aspect of the Treblinka site) are the best proof that can be demanded and provided (especially on the internet) that the photos were taken where they were captioned to have been taken, namely in or (as concerns two photos obviously showing the surroundings, one of them showing the railway leading to the camp) by the former Treblinka II extermination camp. Claiming "zero proof" in the face of such evidence is feeble squealing, and the demand that the photos itself show where they were taken (rare are the photos that comply with that, and as concerns a devastated landscape such is impossible) is idiotic. I have made my case, no the burden of disproving it lies with Hannover. As simply as that.

Fifth sentence: an unsubstantiated claim of manipulation, for which Hannover bears the burden of proof.

Sixth sentence: again shifting the goalposts, distracting from the subject of the thread (which was to prove the existence of certain original documents), and opening "Hannover"'s standard escape hatch to end any discussion: "show me so-and-so-many corpses, and if you cannot leave the thread. Baseless claim for manipulation repeated. Nervous giggling. Pathetic.

I responded with the post reproduced below, which, yes you have guessed right, was "disapproved", and it was "disapproved" with, you again guessed right, "Hannover"'s standard "show me the copses or leave" escape hatch pretext (which would be idiotic even if the corpses had not been wholly or mostly reduced to cremation remains and the herculean task of exhuming them all and laying them out God knows where had been accomplished, but that's another story). The "disapproval" notification reads exactly as I expected it to, except for the added idiocy of "Hannover"'s trying again to shift the burden of proof, which made for an extra laugh:
Post disapproved: "Roberto Muehlenkamp challenged on his claim of 'crime site investigations' for Belzec & Treblinka"

Reason: The reported message does not fit into any other category, please use the further information field. prove they are from where you say they are, no dodging show the 900,000 alleged corpses, no dodging.

Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:11 pm

The "no dodging" no-brainer twice in the same sentence, suggesting that "Hannover" was in a state of hysteria when hitting his keyboard.

Before I forget it: "Hannover" as moderator is babbling as follows:

"When challenged to produce text for original documents, your posting text that is not the original & not the actual documents as requested does not suffice here."

What could he be meaning by that?

As concerns Belzec he would be right - I haven't yet got the original reports in Polish from the IPN, but the existence of translation into German in a German criminal investigation file is at least a strong indication that they exist.

As concerns Treblinka that's pure BS. What could I possibly provide that is more original than color copies of the original reports in Polish language?

Anyway, here's my reproduction of the reply to Hannover censored on the thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11277.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
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 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:08 pm

Next in line on the thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11277, some of Gerdes' "CWhite" manure, "disapproved" with the following pretext:
Post disapproved: "Roberto Muehlenkamp challenged on
his claim of 'crime site investigations' for Belzec &
Treblinka"
Reason: The reported message does not fit into any other
category, please use the further information field. you
being "confident" in what you cannot prove does not cut
it, no dodging.
Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:12 pm
Laughably inappropriate as my statement about being confident that something I maintain can be proven refers to the acceptance of a bet proposed by Gerdes, after which he is requested to procure a US legal eagle to arbiter the bet. The evidence proving what I supposedly "cannot prove" (the occurrence of postwar crime site investigations at Belzec and Treblinka, regarding which I have provided color copies of the original reports or links to German translations of the original reports in criminal procedures), has already been available, now it's a matter of a qualified and impartial person deciding on the merits of it, namely on whether it would persuade a US court that such postwar crime site investigations were I fact carried out.

Reproduction of censored post on the thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11277

Roberto wrote:
CWhite wrote:And this as well:
Roberto:



Greg Gerdes

Roberto has yet to muster the courage to answer the simple question.
I wouldn't use the word "courage" if I was the fellow who (among other less-than courageous-behavior) ran away from our appointment at Sobibór on 15.10.2008 (i.e. Greg Gerdes).

As to the bet:
Roberto, are you willing to bet - $1,000.00 - that it can be proven - with the same standard of proof applied in U.S. criminal courts - that; mass graves at Belzec and Treblinka II were partially excavated after the war - Yes. - or - No. - ??
My answer is yes, for the following reasons:

1. I am confident that a US court, confronted with the original reports for Treblinka as they are in the IPN file, or even with the translations into German contained in the Oberhauser file as concerns Belzec, and considering that the authors of these reports are no longer available to testify before the court as expert witnesses or at least as lay witnesses in the sense of Rule 701 or Rule 702 of the US Federal Rules of Evidence (because they are long dead), would apply one or more of the hearsay rule provided for in Rule 803, Rule 804, or Rule 807.

2. I am also confident that a US court would consider these reports reliable because
a) they were made by persons who are supposed to provide reliable reports and generally do so (examining judges, prosecutors, district medical officers/coroners),
b) there is no indication that the reports contain false information or were in any way manipulated (on the contrary, the honesty of the authors of the Treblinka report is borne out by their having openly admitted to not having found the mass grave of the "Lazarett" and the foundations of the gas chamber building, two "smoking guns" they would doubtlessly have wanted to discover), and
c) the contents of the reports are borne out by all that is known about the sites investigated from other evidence.

As Gerdes is the proponent of this bet, and as he is a US citizen with better access than I have to a legal opinion from a US judge or a US lawyer familiar with the rules and standards of evidence applied by US courts, Gerdes is hereby requested to provide the legal opinion of such person either

a) confirming that the reports in question, due translation into the English language provided, would be accepted as evidence by a US court at a criminal trial and as proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the investigation/survey results contained therein were accurately rendered and that the photographs captioned as pertaining to the investigations in question actually pertain to said investigations, or

b) state that and why he or she considers this not to be so.

If the result should be a), I expect Gerdes to transfer US$ 1,000 to my bank account, in addition to the US$ 1,000 he owes me for having provided a name of a person (Nathan Nathans) murdered at Sobibór and solid evidence proving that said person was murdered at said place.

If the result should be b), Gerdes' claim will be set off against mine, and we will be quits.

OK, go ahead.
CWhite wrote:Gee, I wonder why? is it for the same reason that he did the same here:
Roberto:
A number of graves or partial graves have been identified by CS-C
Greg Gerdes:
Roberto, are you willing to bet - $1,000.00 - that it can be proven - with the same standard of proof applied in U.S. criminal courts - that; A number of graves or partial graves have been identified by CS-C - Yes. - or - No. - ??
So Roberto is not willing to put his money where his mouth is - who would've thunk it?
"Here" means on the "other site", where I'm ignoring Gerdes until he has complied with certain stated and reasonable requests of mine. And as to my statement he is quoting, it is obviously being quoted out of context, for I distinctly remember having stated that CS-C's claims about what she found cannot be considered proof that she so did until she has submitted a comprehensive report about her investigation and its results with contents at least matching those of reports provided by archaeologists regarding the mass graves at Belzec, Sobibór and Chelmno.

In fact, my statement quoted out of context by Gerdes reads as follows:

Question:
CWhite wrote:Roberto:
The mass graves occupied just about 22 % of that sector’s area, see above.
Roberto, how many total discernable / measurable extant mass graves within the boundaries of the Treblinka II camp have actually been proven - beyond reasonable doubt - by legitimate archaeologists / forensic investigators - to actually exist?
Answer (emphasis added).
Roberto wrote:None. A number of graves or partial graves have been identified by CS-C, but she still has to submit a comprehensive report such as exist for B, S and C.
The contents of my statement have thus been completely distorted and misrepresented by quoting it out of context.

And even after CS-C has made available such report to the scholarly community and/or to the public, it is not certain that a US court would be satisfied with the report alone unless one of the aforementioned exceptions from the hearsay rule applies (one might think of Rule 807, for example). This because CS-C is a living person available to testify before the court as an expert witness, and the defense in a hypothetical mass murder case related to Treblinka would probably demand such direct testimony.

The above means that, as long as CS-C has not submitted the aforementioned report, accepting the bet proposed (which, as has been demonstrated above, is not related to any assertion I made) would mean losing such bet.
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 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:17 pm

Next post on the thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11277 is from "Hannover" himself, as he addresses legal matters (something he knows as much about as a pig does about Sunday). Reply is "disapproved" with the by now familiar and boring escape hatch excuse (linked to an off-topic escape hatch remark "Hannover" made at the end of his post to open himself that escape hatch, and as absurd as ever):
Post disapproved: "Roberto Muehlenkamp challenged on
his claim of 'crime site investigations' for Belzec &
Treblinka"
Reason: The reported message does not fit into any other
category, please use the further information field. your
dodging of requested physical evidence for your own
claim of 1,300,000 dead Jews, is well, dodging also see
'notes to Roberto'.
Fri Jul 28, 2017 6:27 pm
Reproduction of censored post on the thread https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11277

Roberto wrote:
Hannover wrote:Roberto said of Belzec:
The aforementioned documents were part of the evidence used at the trial against Josef Oberhauser et al, before the Landgericht München (Munich Court of Assizes), the judgment of which was issued on 21.01.1965 and confirmed by the German Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH for short) on 14.12.1965. The judgment is published in Justiz und NS-Verbrechen Band XX. A summary of the judgment can be found on the webpage http://www1.jur.uva.nl/junsv/brd/Tatortengfr.htm, Case Nr. 585. The judgment's complete text can be obtained from Ex Post Facto Productions for a fee of 25 Euros (http://www1.jur.uva.nl/junsv/bestellen.htm). I have the text of the judgment and the BGH's confirmation and can provide a translation upon request.
Yet we will not see the verbatim text of these Show Trials. Only an empty claim of text to the "judgement". Why?
First of the "Show Trials" thing. Do you even know what a show trial is? I don't think so. And neither can you provide any evidence that any of the defendant-friendly procedural laws that apply in the German Federal Republic were violated to the defendant Oberhauser' disadvantage at the Belzec trial. Defendant Oberhauser's attorneys so alleged, the Supreme Court assessed the allegations and found that they were unfounded. And the lenient sentence that Oberhauser got (4 years and 6 months for accessoriness to the murder of about 300,000 people) also doesn't exactly suggest a show trial. The judges accepted in dubio pro reo Oberhauser's claim that he had only followed orders and done nothing beyond what orders required him to do, and that he had asked his superior Wirth to be transferred to a post other than Belzec. Some "show trial" that was.

As to the "verbatim text", I presume you mean the transcript of the procedures. Under German law such transcript usually only records the procedural act (e.g. "witness so-and-so was interrogated", "witness so-and-so was cross examined by defense attorney so and so", etc.) Only where the judge considers a defendant's or a witness's statement to be of particular importance does he order such statements to be recorded. This happened at the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial (in which the proceedings were entirely recorded on audiotape and a collection containing the most relevant statements made by defendants, prosecutors, judges or jurors, witnesses and defense attorneys were later made available to the public on CDs by the Fritz Bauer Institute. It also happened at the 1st Treblinka trial in Düsseldorf and at the Sobibór trial before the Hagen Court of Assizes, We know this because historians quote from or refer to statements made by defendants or witnesses at the main proceedings. I wouldn't be surprised if this had happened at the Belzec trial as well. A look at the transcript of the procedures kept in the Bundesarchiv Ludwigsburg would tell us more.

As to the «claim of text to the "judgement"», there's nothing "empty" about it. The complete text can be obtained for a small fee from the University of Amsterdam, which is the editor of the Justiz und NS Verbrechen collection. I have the judgment's text at my disposal and can post it if you want. I'm sure you will understand it because you are fluent in German (after all this years of defending Nazi Germany I suppose you at least took the trouble of learning the language). Or am I wrong?

But wait, in this case I won't even have to do that. For the judgment's text is available online under http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-hist ... teil.shtml. Happy reading!

As to why the transcript of the trial procedures is not available online: because transcripts of criminal procedures (except for the transcripts of, say, the Nuremberg Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, and of some very prominent trials in the US considered to merit permanent preservation) aren't usually available online. As simple as that. In Germany decisions of the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeal, rarely such of lower level courts, are published in publications meant for lawyers and law students, also accessible on juridical databases. In Portugal you get to see Supreme Court decisions and little else. As to the UK, see under http://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/ ... anscripts/. And in the US it's like this:
Many courts provide access to their records electronically, allowing you to access certain records via the internet from the comfort of your own home or office. However, electronic access to court records is inconsistent throughout the United States and some courts do not provide online access to records, and some maintain only basic information about a particular court case such as the case name, case number, and type of court.
http://www.wikihow.com/Access-Court-Rec ... tronically
Hannover wrote:We cannot see the verbatim cross examination text, IF there was even a cross examination.
There is reason to assume that there was not, as German criminal procedure law provides for it and the defendant's attorney(s) (who even appealed against the judgment) would hardly have missed the change. And from other NS-crimes trials, in which cross examinations were recorded by order of the court, by individual judges or jurors, we know that these cross-examinations tended to be quite hostile. One witness at the Sobibór trial, in an interview with the sentenced defendant, recalled what his cross-examination had been like:
I asked him outright why he agreed to speak to me. He said he wanted to apologize to me in person. He couldn't do it in the courtroom. "I don't blame you or other witnesses," he said. "And I must honestly say I was sorry for you and all those witnesses... After all those years to have to think back on all those memories and be pressured... they were pressuring and squeezing you in the court...".
This was putting it mildly. The method of the defense was primarily to discredit the testimony of the witnesses by asking them idiotic questions. In my case for example, "How tall was the tree near the barrack?" or " Was the club with which Frenzel beat your father round or not? How many centimeters?" A stranger in the courtroom would immediately have thought I was the defendant and not the victim.
(From Thomas Blatt's interview with Karl Frenzel, online transcription under http://sobibor.net/confrontation.htm, emphasis added).
Hannover wrote:Why?
Because the public doesn't usually get to see the procedure transcript or the judgment of any criminal trial, be it an NS-crimes trial, a trial of drug dealers or a plain murder trial of someone who murdered his lover's husband etc. Or can you show me where such transcripts/judgments are publicly available.
Hannover wrote:And indeed, Show Trials in a country where scrutiny of the 'holocaust' storyline is now banned.
Regarding the "show trials" nonsense, see above. And as to "scrutiny" of the generally accepted historical record (read: attempts to rewrite history in support of hateful ideologies, thus hate speech), the fact that such is currently "banned" in Germany (which I don't think is a good idea, but that's another story) is pretty irrelevant for the question whether NS-crimes trials. First because courts of justice don't make laws, they have to implement the law of the land, whether they like it or not. Second and more important, because laws expressly banning the supposed "scrutiny" are relatively knew (the corresponding subsection of the German Criminal Code was only added in 1994). At the time of the large NS-crimes trials, in the late 1950s, the 1960s, 1970s and early 1980, defense attorneys were even allowed to practice Revisionism in the court room, as one observer of the Majdanek Trial (1975-1981) recalled:
Exploiting the procedural rules which were drafted to prevent a repetition of the shotgun trials of the Third Reich, the defence lawyers embarked on a daily ritual, submitting endless challenges against the prosecution's introduction of evidence, and introducing evidence designed, not to clarify the issues or bolster their client's defence, but to rewrite the history of the Nazi era.

Hans Mundorf, defending Braunsteiner, seized every possible opportunity during the first eighteen months to challenge the evidence that human corpses had been burnt in the crematoria. Every witness was asked whether they knew the difference between the smell of burning human and animal flesh. Veterinary doctors were called to testify that those outside the crematoria would not know the difference.

Ludwig Bock, the thirty-eight-year-old lawyer defending Lachert, went even further and called witnesses, all of them neo-Nazi historians, to disprove that there had ever been a planned Final Solution. With a conviction that goes beyond purely professional duty to a client, he insistedthat no one, including animals was gassed at Majdanek. 'Even if there were gas chambers at Majdanek,' he told the author, 'it doesn't mean that they were the reason for the death of a lot of people, because it is possible that the gas chambers were used to clean clothes.'4 Bock, who claimed that Lachert went to Majdanek as if it was just another job, 'like being a cook in a kitchen' insisted that she had no idea that anyone was being gassed or killed in the camp. That defence did not prevent him demanding, when a former inmate explained how she had been forced by a defendant to carry Zyklon B gas to the gas chambers, that the witness be charged as an accomplice to murder.

Hermann Stolting, who defended another of the accused, Hermine Böttcher, has a Nazi record of his own to explain. As a wartime prosecutor in a special court in Bromberg, Poland, he 'persuaded' the court to give a series of death sentences for trivial offences like a farmer's illegal killin of six pigs. Today he unrepentantly justifies those sentences: 'If both the circumstances and the law were the same today, I would do the same again.' 5 He points to his chairmanship of the German Animal Welfare Society as proof of his humanitarianism.

When the lawyers were not rewriting history, they were cruelly denigrating the survivors and their testimony. Credibility is hard to establish at the best of times, but thirty-five years after the event it is often impossible to remember the exact details which the defence lawyers always demanded. Time, date, place, the exact words, the precise movements of every person in the drama, the position of the lorry in relation to the hut, or was it a cart, the final curse of the girl who was hanged by Lachert. 'How can you be sure that the girl did not push the stool away herself?' 'Did you see Lichert throw the children into the crematoria?'
(Excerpt from: Tom Bower, Blind Eye to Murder: Britain, America & the Purging of Nazi Germany - A Pledge Betrayed (online under http://holocaustcontroversies.yuku.com/ ... tml#p37414; emphases added).

So you see, the defense attorneys did more than just a good job. Show trials, Hannover? No cross-examination as NS-crimes trials? You must be kidding.
Hannover wrote:And BTW, Roberto's links do not even take us to the alleged "judgement text". All we see is a minute description of the Show Trial, no text about the proceedings, no verbatim trial text, no verbatim cross examination text.
I dare say that the links take you to more than the public gets to see of most criminal trials, be it in the US or in the German Federal Republic. But you're invited to show me that this is not the case and that links to "verbatim trial text" are all over the internet when it comes to "normal" criminal trials. As to the Belzec trial's judgment, I have shown you where you can find it. It's just a mouse-click away.
Hannover wrote:IOW, they are hiding incriminating information from the public, the postwar "trials" were a sham and they want to hide that fact.
That's one of the most hollow conspiracy theories I've even come across, but then the whole "hoax" religion is nothing but a big, empty conspiracy theory. Ever thought of how many criminal trials in the US or Germany (where NS-crimes trials were but a fraction of all criminal trials even at peak times, and today are quantitatively infinitesimal in relation to other trials) would have to considered shams and incriminating information withheld from the public if your theory held water?
Hannover wrote:Recall that all of Nuremberg had to accepted at those trials.
What, German criminal courts at NS-crimes trials had to accept "all of Nuremberg"? Not that I know, and I don't think you can demonstrate that this was so. What West German courts were not allowed to do was overturn Nuremberg verdicts as concerns the specific defendants sentenced by those verdicts. But as concerns individuals who had not been sentenced at Nuremberg, they had a free hand, hence the often outrageously low times that the good old boys were sentenced to by lenient judges applying the in dubio pro reo principle to extents that critics considered unacceptable. Not to mention the legislative's discreetly introducing into the Criminal Code a provision that led to all NS-crimes except for first-degree murder falling under the statute of limitations (which in turn meant that an NS-criminal could only be convicted of murder in Germany if he could be proven that he was a sadist who had killed or tortured people on his own initiative and beyond the call of duty.

As to the Nuremberg Trials' findings of fact, there were many NS-crimes that were incompletely addressed therein, if at all. Most of what is known about the crimes of the Einsatzgruppen and other mobile killing squads comes not from Nuremberg but from German criminal investigations, The same goes for Chelmno, Belzec, Sobibór and Treblinka, hardly addressed in Nuremberg verdicts if at all, but intensively investigated by German criminal justice authorities. And the same goes for Auschwitz - most of the judicial knowledge about that camp comes from the Frankfurt Auschwitz trial, not from any of the Nuremberg trials.
Hannover wrote:ex.: Such madness as 'vacuum chambers', 'Nazi atomic weapons', etc., etc. were accepted at Nuremberg and were accepted at these Orwellian post war trials.
Utter nonsense. You won't find a word about "vacuum chambers" etc. in any German NS-crimes judgment. You won't even find them in the IMT's judgment at the Trial of the Major War Criminals in Nuremberg, which is available online under
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/judcont.asp . Show me where a "vacuum chamber" a "steam chamber", a "Nazi atomic weapon", a "pedal-driven brain-bashing machine", an "electrocution chamber" or any other of the favorite Revisionist herrings is mentioned therein. Challenge, no dodging. You seem to be unable to tell the difference between prosecution exhibits (which the court may accept as accurate or not) and the court's findings of fact, which are what matters in the end.
Hannover wrote:Also recall that “eyewitnesses” who Roberto puts his faith in claimed that Jews were murdered en masse in “electrocution chambers” at Belzec.
What eyewitnesses exactly did you have in mind? Reder? Schluch? Oberhauser? Gley? You won't find a single witness testimony in the records of the Belzec investigation (to which I gave you a link from the Dutch Archives) in which "electrocution chambers" are mentioned. Electrocution (besides gassing) was one of the means of killing at Belzec that outside observers from the Polish resistance speculated on after seeing that enormous numbers of Jews went into Belzec, a place to small to accommodate even a fraction of them, but none came out. You won't find anything about electrocution in the Belzec judgment.
Hannover wrote:Then we see in Roberto's link which cites the usual liar, Yankel Wiernik, :lol:
see Wiernik shot down here:
''Holocaust Industy's' Roberto Muehlenkamp cites Yankel Wiernik as proof of extermination of 900,000 Jews at Treblinka !! '
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11271
Yeah, "shot down". Most of the shooting is done by a certain poster who doubles as moderator and "disapproves" posts that are too inconvenient for the "Revisionist" side (especially because they make that certain poster look like a fool) on the pretext of hilariously mendacious allegations of guideline violations (which Revisionist" posters are free to indulge in as much as they like.
Hannover wrote:See Roberto's cited Josef Oberhauser and his hilarious link to liar Rudolf Reder debunked here:
'Christopher Browning and the "Nazi Gas Chambers" of Belzec'
By Paul Grubach
http://codoh.com/library/document/962/?lang=en
The contradictions in what they stated vs. what others have claimed are damning.
Contradictions? Maybe as concerns one or the other detail, not as concerns the essential facts, And the oh-so-unreliable Reder may have got exaggerated numbers as witnesses often do and told some other weird stuff, but he also made observations that were quite accurate. His recollection that "The gas was evacuated from the engine directly into the open air, and not into the chambers", which Revisionists make a fuss about, was actually just a misunderstanding of a system that was explained as follows by SS-man Erich Bauer, one of the SS-men in charge of the gassing at Belzec's sister camp Sobibór. In his deposition on 6 October 1965 in Hagen (StA.Do-X'65-178), Bauer mentioned that
The chambers were permanently connected to the engine; the way it worked was that if a wooden plug was pulled out, the fumes went outside; if the plug was pushed into the pipe, the fumes went into the chamber.
The purpose of this, of course, was to have the motor already running when the victims went into the gas chambers and introduce the gas as soon as the doors were closed instead of starting the engine only then, in order to save time. Reder must have observed a similar procedure at Belzec when the plug was pulled out. And the Revisionists pooh-poohing Reder's testimony on account of this statement (presumably including Grubach, whose antics I'll have some fun with as soon as time permits) made fools of themselves.
Hannover wrote:Search the CODOH main site for tons more on Reder, Belsec, Treblinka, Wiernik, etc., all of whom Roberto truly believes in.
http://www.codoh.com
Yeah, tons of nonsense and a straw-man. I don't believe let alone truly believe, and I take no eyewitness testimony at face value without critical assessment, shifting the wheat from the chaff, accepting the parts that are plausible and corroborated and dismissing the rest.
Hannover wrote:recommended:
'West German Justice and So-Called National Socialist Violent Crimes'
http://codoh.com/library/document/1993/?lang=en
I expected my old friend Jürgen Graf (whose nonsense about this subject I shredded under
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... -and.html ), but good old Stäglich (who Graf refers to) will also do for some shredding fun when I have time. Thanks for the link.
Hannover wrote:And we still see no human remains that are alleged to still exist at Belzec & Treblinka. Same for the other alleged sites.
Yeah, and that is still completely irrelevant, as long as Revisionists have not provided a consistent explanation why the remains should not exist where all known evidence suggests they do, with no evidence pointing in any other direction. About as irrelevant as the absence of pictures showing Soviet Gulag stiff is to the fact that the Gulag existed and claimed something like 2.5-3 million lives between 1927 and 1953.
Hannover wrote:Think about it, 1,300,000 allegedly murdered at those two sites and no human remains as alleged can be shown.
That would be an argument if there had not been archaeological investigations identifying many of the mass graves by acknowledged archaeological methods that don't require "showing" any human remains, or if there had been comprehensive excavations and no remains commensurate with the number of people known to have disappeared at these places had been found. But neither is the case, so the argument is a no-brainer.
Hannover wrote:Well, Roberto did post some pictures of the communists staging a few bones, see above.
Actually much more than that at other places where not censored, and even those "few bones" at Treblinka (which judging by the more panoramic pictures are all over the place) seem to make Hannover feel uncomfortable, judging by his feeling compelled to make a hollow "staging" claim that he has nothing to show for - and that is particularly silly considering that the pictures are part of an original crime site investigation file, are captioned as having been taken at the examining judge's instructions and match the aspect of the site described in that judge's reports and other evidence about what the place looked like and why. Which means that Hannover has the burden of proof that he nonsensically tries to invert.
Last edited by Roberto on Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:24 pm, 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).

Lily
Posts: 741
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 9:43 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Lily » Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:19 pm

Roberto's hilarious dodge fest continues

You gotta love his favorite "eyewitnesses" that he cites and then gets walloped ... Wiernick, Tauber, tortured Hoess. Great for laughs. :lol:

Not to mention his dodge of the alleged remains of 11,000,000 corpses.

His communist fake / staged pictures are truly desperate. The CODOH Forum can't stop laughing at this raging Zionist.

Did you know that hapless Roberto thinks a body can be cremated in 5-7 minutes? :lol:

The massacre of Roberto Muehlenkamp continues.

Comes see the truth here:
http://forum.codoh.com/
"Some stories are true that never happened."
- Elie Wiesel


Roberto
Posts: 3734
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Yet another CODOH Memory Hole Festival

Post by Roberto » Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:50 pm

Lily wrote:
Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:19 pm
Roberto's hilarious dodge fest continues

You gotta love his favorite "eyewitnesses" that he cites and then gets walloped ... Wiernick, Tauber, tortured Hoess. Great for laughs.
The idiotic "lied" or "tortured" claims regarding these witnesses are laughable indeed, which is why deconstruction of said laughable crap rarely if ever sees the light of day.
Lily" wrote:Not to mention his dodge of the alleged remains of 11,000,000 corpses.
"Show me so-and-so many corpses" (especially in such orders of magnitude, which would be physically impossible even if all corpses had been brought to the surface) is, as I said, the standard escape hatch that "Hannover" builds into every posts, so that when things get to hot for him he can pull the "show-me-so-and-so-many-corpses" emergency break and end the discussion. And the demand itself is idiotic beyond words. Can you show me even a single corpses of someone who died in the Soviet Gulag, "Hannover"? No you cannot. Is this supposed to mean that the Gulag was a colony of holiday camps and one died there? Inquiring minds would like to know.
Lily" wrote:His communist fake / staged pictures are truly desperate.
That actually applies to "Hannover's pathetic and hollow "communist fake/stage pictures" squealing. Note, by the way, that the photos he's referring about here are photos pertaining to a Polish crime site investigation of the Treblinka showing the site devastated by robbery diggers and human remains brought to the surface by the same. Not many such remains can be seen on these photographs, which were obviously meant to just provide some illustration of the reports' descriptions (with the do). But even those comparatively few remains that are seen in photographs take at the investigating judge's instructions make "Hannover" feel uncomfortable, hence his "fake/staged" squealing.
Lily" wrote:The CODOH Forum can't stop laughing at this raging Zionist.
The CODOH forum wouldn't have much too laugh if it weren't protected from me by a cowardly and mendacious poster (guess who) who doubles as moderator, and as things are there can't be much laughing already due to the fact that most of my posts don't see the light of day anyway.

The CODOH forum seems to have become a realm of feeble-minded imbeciles, by the way, even more so than it was before. The only poster I have met there so far with any brains is "Atigun", who posts on RODOH as "Turnagain".
Lily" wrote:Did you know that hapless Roberto thinks a body can be cremated in 5-7 minutes?
Nope, and neither did Tauber, quoted out context to make a straw-man argument, think or claim that as I demonstrated in a post that, big surprise, will probably not see the light of day.
Lily" wrote:The massacre of Roberto Muehlenkamp continues.
Lily" wrote:No, what continues is the massacre of a forum supposed to offer "open debate" by a poster/moderator whose is scared shitless of my posts.

Comes see the truth here:
http://forum.codoh.com/
People who babble about "the truth" tend to be compulsive and inveterate liars. "Lily" = "Hannover" = "CODOH" moderator is one such case.
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).

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest