Where did they go

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29630
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Where did they go? Why aren't their remains in the places claimed?

Post by Nessie »

been-there wrote:
Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:55 pm
.
So, yeah, ‘where did they go’?

I know where one 'useless-eater' Jewish child and his parents from the Lodz ghetto went.
I once met him.

He gives talks as an ‘eye-witness’ to 'THE Holocaust'.
He is presented as a 'survivor' on the lecture circuit to school children.
This person who I met and talked with is called Tobias Rawet and you can see a brief summary of him and his message to school children here.

You can read my recollection of our short discussion in the links mentioned here:
been-there wrote:
Thu Jul 06, 2017 10:27 pm
the Donahue Show demonstrated very clearly for me when I first saw it, what the actual problem was then AND STILL IS:
1. that so-called "Holocaust-survivor's" are believed and defended whatever ludicrous, defamatory and hate-filled rubbish they spout,
and
2. rigorous, analytical, reasonable investigation and revision is demonised even by people who claim to represent the scientific empirical model.

That understanding gained then remains unchanged. As we witnessed here when I related my own tactful, respectful and polite questioning of the 'H-survivor' lecturer Tobias Rawet.
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... wet#p42513
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 160#p42520
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 170#p42545

Unreasonable abusers like Bernard and Hovis first attacked him and his testimony, because they didn't believe it.
And then later when they realised that doubting a ‘holocaust survivor's’ testimony made THEMSELVES look bad, they attacked me for daring to question any part of his lecture at all.
Explain that?
Basically Rawet told the audience that he had never spoken of his wartime experiences until he saw Robert Faurisson on Swedish TV who he told us was claiming that "the holocaust never happened". ( :roll: )
He told us that this was what motivated him to begin touring schools giving his personal experiences refuting Faurisson.
He ended his talk by mentioning Prof. Faurisson again. He falsely said that according to Faurisson and others he, Rawet himself, had never been in a concentration camp and his cousin (who disappeared presumed killed at Chelmno) had never existed, etc.

After his talk I reminded him that he had said this and I asked him whether he really believes Faurisson is saying that?
I told him (in Swedish) “Faurisson doesn't deny that there were camps, nor that Jews were put in them, nor that Jews died in them. You know this don't you?” He admitted that he knew it and then turned 180% so that without moving away he had turned his back to me.

... ... ... ... ...

Related to the title of this topic-thread — the 'where did they go' question — immediately after Rawet's lecture and slide show, questions were invited.
So I asked him this:
if 'the final solution' was as he said the intended genocide of all Jews, how did he explain his whole family surviving internment in numerous camps.

He responded by rather angrily quoting the population figures of Jews in Poland before WW2 and after. He then turned away, as if these figures were sufficient, self-evident proof of his conjecture.

But OBVIOUSLY he himself and his parents were Polish Jews who left Poland after the war to live elsewhere.
He is therefore, on that particular point, the living proof of the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he is indoctrinating school children into.
The irony is colossal.
The disconnect from reality that he and the school teachers are sufferring from and subjecting kids too, is huge.

His quoting of the population of Jews before and after WW2 is so OBVIOUSLY a logically fallacious argument, a non sequitur. That neither he nor the schoolteachers present could see that simple truth I think demonstrates the slightly psychotic nature of this quasi-religious belief-system.

... ... ... ... ... ...

So... here are some questions for the dutiful, obedient, true-believers of the pseudo-historical holocaust narrative:

How come a young child Tobias Rawet, his mother and his father all survived numerous camps if the intention was to kill all Jews in Nazi captivity? He was just 8 years old in 1945 at the war's end.
There was no intention to kill all Jews. That is just a trope which any study of Nazi policy will soon establish is wrong.
How come Rawet, school-teachers and others believe that population figures of Jews in Poland before the war when compared with the figures after the war are sufficient proof of a policy to mass-murder ALL Jews?
Anyone who thinks that population figures alone prove the policy of mass murder are wrong. It is evidence of that policy. Many people get evidence and proof mixed up and fail to understand that proof is derived from what and cannot be evidenced to have happened, deniers in particular do not understand that.
How do you explain Kitty Hart-Moxon and so many others surviving a so-called death camp and numerous 'death marches if the intention was to kill all Jews in Nazi captivity?
Hart-Moxon was put to work by the Nazis as part of their slave labour programme and then kept from falling into Soviet hands and end up working for them.
How come Irene Zisblatt, Eva Moses-Korr and other lie-witnesses survived death camps and Nazi captivity if the intention... etc., etc.
Slave labour and then keeping those people from working for the Soviets.
How come the child Anne Frank and her teenage sister Margot Frank were not selected for work yet weren't immediately gassed at Auschwitz?
They arrived on one of the last transports as gassings were coming to and end. The Nazis were keeping more alive to either work or as potential hostages.
How come their father Otto Frank and thousands of other 'useless eaters' were being treated in camp hospitals when the camps were captured by the Allied forces, if the Nazis had a 'final solution' policy of genocide for all Jews that couldn't work?
Proven workers were kept alive.
How come there is not only no conclusive empirical that the guardians of the mass-gassing mythology can present to support their allegations of genocide, but that much of the testimony from the lie-witnesses/eye-witnesses actually defies empirical reality in so many crucial particulars?
Denier claims are a series of logical fallacies and deceits about the evidence for gassings.
How come the conference at Wannsee that supposedly was the pre-planning meeting for the 'final solution' genocide of ALL Jews in Europe was held AFTER the mass-gassing supposedly had been already begun in Chelmno and Auschwitz?
Wannsee was not pre-planning, it was ongoing planning.
How come the star-witness to the mass-gassing at Auschwitz presented at Nuremburg, gave testimony that is now admitted to have been physically impossible in SO MANY particulars, plus confessed to visting Treblinka 2 in 1941 to see how they had perfected mass gassing after six months of operation, when T2 wasn't built and operational before July 1942?
It was not physically impossible to gas as you allege and the date was a mistake.
How come the holocaust true-believing archeological teams with all their confirmational bias and search for the mass graves at any of the so-called 'extermination centres' or 'death camps' have never found the proof of the crores of remains and requisite area of mass grave?
Large areas of cremated remains have been found.
Etc., etc., etc.

... ... ... ... ...

See that?

Asking questions is easy. :ugeek:
You are going off topic to avoid dealing with your lack of evidence as to where the Nazis accommodated millions of people you claim were not gassed.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


Turnagain
Posts: 8663
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Where did they go

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie wrote:
How is asking you to evidence your claims wrong?
Hunt offered video evidence from the USC film archives of witnesses stating that they had left T-II accompanied by from ~100 to entire trainloads of other deportees. You claim that I must verify their statements. Really? If you think that the witnesses are mistaken or lying why must I prove the truthfulness of their statements? You claim that I must disprove your unfounded allegations. What bullshit! If you have objections to the witnesses' statements then YOU prove them.
Yet again you dodge explaining how it is physically possible for the Nazis to have transported, fed, clothed and accommodated c840,000 from TII, over 13 months in 1942-3, till the end of the war in 1945, without leaving any witness, documentary or physical evidence. How did the Nazis manage to do that?
Where are your corroborating witnesses to the 12,000-15,000 known to have left t-II? Where are your records for their maintenance? There aren't any but you demand an itinerary and records of food and shelter for ~850,000. Your demands are bullshit.
Your claim of they all "coulda" come from TII is not good enough. You need to evidence it. I am not relying on "coulda" as you suggest. I have pointed to evidence as to what witnesses said about what they saw at the camps and what was at Malkinia compared to TII. I have shown you a documented transport from Malkinia to A-B.
Why must I disprove your claim that the T-II deportees "coulda" come from other camps? Your claims of evidence is insufficient. Show your proof that the T-II witnesses were either mistaken or lying. You claim to have Auschwitz records of arrivals of deportees from Malkinia. Source and quote. Then explain why a transport from Malkinia negates a transport from T-II.
You need to show which witnesses described being in TII, compared to what we know about TII. For example, if a witness states he lived in TII for 8 days, where did he live? There was only barracks for the Sonderkommados and I am quite sure the Nazis did not let any prisoners live with them.
No, you need to prove your claim. Your stamping your feet and shrieking, "Did not, did not!" isn't proof of anything except you stamping your feet and shrieking. The witnesses gave their statements. If you disagree with those statements then it's up to you to prove them inaccurate. It's NOT up to me to verify those claims just because you say they're wrong.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29630
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Where did they go

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Sat Sep 12, 2020 8:29 pm
Nessie wrote:
How is asking you to evidence your claims wrong?
Hunt offered video evidence from the USC film archives of witnesses stating that they had left T-II accompanied by from ~100 to entire trainloads of other deportees. You claim that I must verify their statements. Really? If you think that the witnesses are mistaken or lying why must I prove the truthfulness of their statements? You claim that I must disprove your unfounded allegations. What bullshit! If you have objections to the witnesses' statements then YOU prove them.
It is your claim they all came from TII. Either prove that claim or withdraw it.
Yet again you dodge explaining how it is physically possible for the Nazis to have transported, fed, clothed and accommodated c840,000 from TII, over 13 months in 1942-3, till the end of the war in 1945, without leaving any witness, documentary or physical evidence. How did the Nazis manage to do that?
Where are your corroborating witnesses to the 12,000-15,000 known to have left t-II? Where are your records for their maintenance? There aren't any but you demand an itinerary and records of food and shelter for ~850,000. Your demands are bullshit.
I have already told you, there are records at Majdanek that show prisoners sent to work there were accommodated, fed and clothed. Majdanek was big enough to cope with 2-3000 from TII (even the 12-15,000 you claim) but it could not cope with c840,000, so where were they kept prisoner by the Nazis?

There are documents, witnesses and the physical evidence for camps all over Europe, so show which ones the alleged transports from TII went to. Either evidence your claim or withdraw it.
Your claim of they all "coulda" come from TII is not good enough. You need to evidence it. I am not relying on "coulda" as you suggest. I have pointed to evidence as to what witnesses said about what they saw at the camps and what was at Malkinia compared to TII. I have shown you a documented transport from Malkinia to A-B.
Why must I disprove your claim that the T-II deportees "coulda" come from other camps? Your claims of evidence is insufficient. Show your proof that the T-II witnesses were either mistaken or lying. You claim to have Auschwitz records of arrivals of deportees from Malkinia. Source and quote. Then explain why a transport from Malkinia negates a transport from T-II.
I have shown you evidence that Kulawy went from Majdanek (it looks like you have yet again been caught out not reading my previous posts as you demand to see evidence only a few pages after having been shown it). Here, from the Auschwitz Museum archive;

"10 December 1942 | A transport of 2,500 Jews deported from a transit camp in Małkinia arrived at Auschwitz. 1,976 people were killed in gas chambers. 524 men were registered in the camp"

Now you show me your evidence that he went from TII, then do the same for the other witnesses. It is your claim they went from TII, your claim, you evidence it.
You need to show which witnesses described being in TII, compared to what we know about TII. For example, if a witness states he lived in TII for 8 days, where did he live? There was only barracks for the Sonderkommados and I am quite sure the Nazis did not let any prisoners live with them.
No, you need to prove your claim. Your stamping your feet and shrieking, "Did not, did not!" isn't proof of anything except you stamping your feet and shrieking. The witnesses gave their statements. If you disagree with those statements then it's up to you to prove them inaccurate. It's NOT up to me to verify those claims just because you say they're wrong.
Your claim is that the vast majority of those sent to TII then left the camp, since they were neither gassed nor accommodated there. It is up to you to evidence that claim and explain how it is physically possible for the Nazis to have transported, fed, clothed and accommodated c840,000 from TII, over 13 months in 1942-3, till the end of the war in 1945, without leaving any witness, documentary or physical evidence. How did the Nazis manage to do that?

Stop dodging.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 7958
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Where did they go

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Sun Sep 13, 2020 9:50 am
Your claim is that the vast majority of those sent to TII then left the camp
There is negligible evidence that people arrived at a place called TII. Please provide the evidence of disembarkation of the train carriages or wagons. Like most train journeys that may have been a final destination as most likely the remnant passengers were heading to the arbeitslager.

It would appear that the Jootrix is to make a final destination of some rolling stock appear as if all on board were destined for this place. It would be helpful for the hoaxer cause if they could give the inmate muster of this konzentrationslager on any particular day. If they did not arrive then it is not pertinent to asked where they went.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

Turnagain
Posts: 8663
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Where did they go

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie wrote:
It is your claim they all came from TII. Either prove that claim or withdraw it.
The witnesses said that they were sent to Treblinka, stayed there anywhere from a few hours up to possibly eight days and were then sent to other destinations including Auschwitz. That's what the WITNESSES said. How in the hell do you come up with the claim that I made those statements?
I have already told you, there are records at Majdanek that show prisoners sent to work there were accommodated, fed and clothed.
There are records for 412 deportees being sent to Majdanek. There are no records of their maintenance nor of where they were sent after Majdanek. There are no corroborating witnesses who claim to have knowledge of even the 412 deportees. Your claim that all of the deportees from T-II were sent to Majdanek where they were kept for the duration of the war is mindless bullshit.
"10 December 1942 | A transport of 2,500 Jews deported from a transit camp in Małkinia arrived at Auschwitz. 1,976 people were killed in gas chambers. 524 men were registered in the camp"

Now you show me your evidence that he went from TII, then do the same for the other witnesses. It is your claim they went from TII, your claim, you evidence it.
Jeezus H, the "Auschwitz Museum Archive". Your dubious source offers no proof that anyone was gassed at Auschwitz just for openers. How does that prove that Kulawy didn't leave T-II with a trainload of men, women and children? It is NOT my claim that the deportees left T-II. That is what the deportees claim. Where do you get the boneheaded claim that I said that the deportees left T-II? If you dispute what the witnesses said then it's up to you to prove your claim. Where do you get the moronic notion that I must prove the validity of the witnesses claims?
Your claim is that the vast majority of those sent to TII then left the camp, since they were neither gassed nor accommodated there.
It's been proven that nobody was steamed/gassed/vacuumed, buried in giant mass graves...etc. at Treblinka. End of that story. There is proof for only 412 deportees being sent to Majdanek and NO records of their maintenance. That's for 12,000-15,000 deportees who were sent to at least a dozen different camps yet here you are demanding an itinerary and proof of maintenance for the ~850,000 claimed to have been sent to T-II. Your demand for such proof is bullshit.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29630
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Where did they go

Post by Nessie »

Huntinger wrote:
Sun Sep 13, 2020 10:07 am
Nessie wrote:
Sun Sep 13, 2020 9:50 am
Your claim is that the vast majority of those sent to TII then left the camp
There is negligible evidence that people arrived at a place called TII. ...
That is not true. There are multiple documents and witnesses to mass arrivals.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29630
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Where did they go

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Sun Sep 13, 2020 1:19 pm
Nessie wrote:
It is your claim they all came from TII. Either prove that claim or withdraw it.
The witnesses said that they were sent to Treblinka, stayed there anywhere from a few hours up to possibly eight days and were then sent to other destinations including Auschwitz. That's what the WITNESSES said. How in the hell do you come up with the claim that I made those statements?
Treblinka was three camps, TI the labour camp, TII the death camp and Malkinia a transit camp. When a witness says he went to Treblinka, but was accommodated for 8 days, that rules out TII as it did not have accommodation for anyone other than Sonderkommandos or the Nazis. When a witness describes arriving inside the camp at a station and then being separated from the rest of that transport, who went into the station and they were put back on a train and taken to Majdanek, that is confirmed as TII, due to the station inside the camp.

You are dodging checking the witness evidence to see which camp they mean by Treblinka, because it does not suit your desired narrative.
I have already told you, there are records at Majdanek that show prisoners sent to work there were accommodated, fed and clothed.
There are records for 412 deportees being sent to Majdanek. There are no records of their maintenance nor of where they were sent after Majdanek.
Yes there are, the Majdanek archive is how historians have worked out how many were at the camp and what they did. Majdanek was used to process property stolen from Jews.

http://www.majdanek.eu/en/store

"The records created by offices of KL Lublin in the years 1941-1944 form the most important group of the archives. These documents include, among other things, orders of the commandant’s office, the remains of personal files on deceased prisoners and members of the SS garrison, transport lists, camp records, lists of dead prisoners and documentation of the camp doctor. For the most part, these are only the remains of the camp register offices that were found after the war at Majdanek."

Image
There are no corroborating witnesses who claim to have knowledge of even the 412 deportees. Your claim that all of the deportees from T-II were sent to Majdanek where they were kept for the duration of the war is mindless bullshit.
OK, name and quote witnesses who were sent from TII to other camps. All I can find of those who can be confirmed as having left TII, is that they said they went to Majdanek or Budzyn or they did not say which camp they went to.

I never claimed they were kept at Majdanek to the end of the war. The Nazis evacuated the camp before the Soviets arrived.
"10 December 1942 | A transport of 2,500 Jews deported from a transit camp in Małkinia arrived at Auschwitz. 1,976 people were killed in gas chambers. 524 men were registered in the camp"

Now you show me your evidence that he went from TII, then do the same for the other witnesses. It is your claim they went from TII, your claim, you evidence it.
Jeezus H, the "Auschwitz Museum Archive". Your dubious source offers no proof that anyone was gassed at Auschwitz just for openers. How does that prove that Kulawy didn't leave T-II with a trainload of men, women and children?
It doesn't, it just casts doubt on your claim that he left TII.
It is NOT my claim that the deportees left T-II.
Yes it is.
That is what the deportees claim.
They said "Treblinka", but there were three camps, so which one?
Where do you get the boneheaded claim that I said that the deportees left T-II? If you dispute what the witnesses said then it's up to you to prove your claim. Where do you get the moronic notion that I must prove the validity of the witnesses claims?
Because there were three camps at Treblinka and when a witness described being accommodated for 3 or 8 days, they it has to be one of the camps with accommodation to do that, which rules out TII.
Your claim is that the vast majority of those sent to TII then left the camp, since they were neither gassed nor accommodated there.
It's been proven that nobody was steamed/gassed/vacuumed, buried in giant mass graves...etc. at Treblinka. End of that story.
You have proved nothing. Arguments from logical fallacies are not proof, or even evidence.
There is proof for only 412 deportees being sent to Majdanek and NO records of their maintenance.
Have you searched the Majdanek archives and found no records of clothing and food for the prisoners? Really?
That's for 12,000-15,000 deportees who were sent to at least a dozen different camps...
Name and evidence those camps.
....yet here you are demanding an itinerary and proof of maintenance for the ~850,000 claimed to have been sent to T-II.
Yes. So far all that has been found is evidence that 2-3000 went from TII to be accommodated at Majdanek and Budzyn. You have another c840,000 more people to evidence where they went to be accommodated.
Your demand for such proof is bullshit.
Your claim is that they left TII and were accommodated elsewhere. Why is it bullshit to ask you to evidence that? It is up to you to evidence that claim and explain how it is physically possible for the Nazis to have transported, fed, clothed and accommodated c840,000 from TII, over 13 months in 1942-3, till the end of the war in 1945, without leaving any witness, documentary or physical evidence. How did the Nazis manage to do that?
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Turnagain
Posts: 8663
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Where did they go

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie wrote:
Treblinka was three camps, TI the labour camp, TII the death camp and Malkinia a transit camp.
Nessie morphs Malkinia into Treblinka III. U.S. intelligence claimed that T-III was located in Czernony Bor but of course Nessie knows better. Who besides Nessie claims that Malkinia was actually Treblinka III in disguise?
When a witness says he went to Treblinka, but was accommodated for 8 days, that rules out TII as it did not have accommodation for anyone other than Sonderkommandos or the Nazis.
Nessie declares that there were no barracks for deportees at T-II. He has no proof of that but stamps his feet and shrieks, "No barracks, no barracks". So there.
When a witness describes arriving inside the camp at a station and then being separated from the rest of that transport, who went into the station and they were put back on a train and taken to Majdanek, that is confirmed as TII, due to the station inside the camp.
Thaddeus Stabholz was the one (1) witness who described the train station. According to Nessie, Stabholz was the only deportee to transit through T-II because he described the train station. Everyone else was lying about being in T-II because they didn't describe the train station. They must have been in Treblinka III. Of course T-III was actually Malkinia but was actually T-III so nobody had to describe the train station...or something.
You are dodging checking the witness evidence to see which camp they mean by Treblinka...
Uh-huh, It's my job to check and see if the deportees were in T-I or T-III (the T-III in Malkinia not the one in Czernony Bor). I mean "WHAT IF" the deportees were in T-I or T-III? They "COULDA" been anywhere. Maybe even East Bumphuk so it's my job to prove the witnesses weren't lying. You betcha', Nessie. I'll get right on that.
Yes there are, the Majdanek archive is how historians have worked out how many were at the camp and what they did. Majdanek was used to process property stolen from Jews.
Nessie blows voluminous smoke and bullshit about the Majdanek archives in an attempt to cover up the fact that he has only 412 records for the thousands transited from T-II to Majdanek. If you have more than those 412 records of deportees from T-II then let's see them.
OK, name and quote witnesses who were sent from TII to other camps. All I can find of those who can be confirmed as having left TII, is that they said they went to Majdanek or Budzyn or they did not say which camp they went to.
Sam Kulawy left T-II with a trainload of men, women and children and went to Auschwitz. Then there are the USHMM records for five deportees who left Treblinka and were sent to at least a dozen other camps. How many other deportees accompanied them is unknown.
It doesn't, it just casts doubt on your claim that he left TII.
Jeezus H, but how many times do you have to be told that the witnesses' testimony is NOT "my claim"? So far your objection to Kulawy's testimony amounts to some people were sent from Malkinia to Auschwitz. How does that disprove his testimony? Why does that make his testimony "my claim"? How many times do you have to be told that if you doubt the veracity of the witnesses' testimony then YOU have to prove that? So far, all you've done is stamp your feet and shriek, posit "what ifs" and "coulda woulda" and blow smoke and bullshit about the Majdanek archives.
They said "Treblinka", but there were three camps, so which one?
Malkinia wasn't Treblinka III. It was just Malkinia Junction. The only T-III was the camp noted by U.S. intelligence located in Czernony Bor. Treblinka I was a penal camp. People were sent there to fulfill a sentence for a crime. They weren't sent there to be transited to other camps. The witnesses from the USC film archives were obviously referencing T-II, the camp they perceived as a "death camp". Your claim that Malkinia was T-III or that T-I was a transit camp is bogus.
Because there were three camps at Treblinka and when a witness described being accommodated for 3 or 8 days, they it has to be one of the camps with accommodation to do that, which rules out TII.
Your claim that Malkinia was actually Treblinka III is bogus. You offer no proof that T-II had no accommodations for deportees. Stamping your feet and shrieking, "Did not, did not" is proof of jack squat.
You have proved nothing. Arguments from logical fallacies are not proof, or even evidence.
The claim that T-II was an extermination facility has been proven to be bogus. Get over it.
Have you searched the Majdanek archives and found no records of clothing and food for the prisoners? Really?
Nope, but Carlo Mattogno has and found records for only 412 deportees from Treblinka. So, either show more records or give it a rest.
Name and evidence those camps.
If you don't want to believe the records from the USHMM then that's your problem, not mine.
Your claim is that they left TII and were accommodated elsewhere. Why is it bullshit to ask you to evidence that?
It's known that at least 12,000-15,000 deportees left T-II for Budzyn, Majdanek, Auschwitz and a dozen other camps. You have produced records for only 412 of those deportees arriving at Majdanek. You have produced no records for their food, clothing, shelter or witness corroboration of their arrivals, yet you demand an itinerary and complete records for the maintenance of the ~840,000 from Treblinka. Just another bogus demand from you.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29630
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Where did they go

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Sun Sep 13, 2020 4:42 pm
Nessie wrote:
Treblinka was three camps, TI the labour camp, TII the death camp and Malkinia a transit camp.
Nessie morphs Malkinia into Treblinka III. U.S. intelligence claimed that T-III was located in Czernony Bor but of course Nessie knows better. Who besides Nessie claims that Malkinia was actually Treblinka III in disguise?
It is Huntinger who claims TIII is in Czernowy Bor, not US intelligence, who listed three camps at Treblinka, a labour camp, a death camp and a trasit camp.
When a witness says he went to Treblinka, but was accommodated for 8 days, that rules out TII as it did not have accommodation for anyone other than Sonderkommandos or the Nazis.
Nessie declares that there were no barracks for deportees at T-II. He has no proof of that but stamps his feet and shrieks, "No barracks, no barracks". So there.
No plan of TII has barracks accommodation for anyone being transited through the camp. It only has accommodation for the Sonderkommados and Nazi staff. For example;

Image

If someone stayed for 8 days, where did they stay?
When a witness describes arriving inside the camp at a station and then being separated from the rest of that transport, who went into the station and they were put back on a train and taken to Majdanek, that is confirmed as TII, due to the station inside the camp.
Thaddeus Stabholz was the one (1) witness who described the train station. According to Nessie, Stabholz was the only deportee to transit through T-II because he described the train station. Everyone else was lying about being in T-II because they didn't describe the train station. They must have been in Treblinka III. Of course T-III was actually Malkinia but was actually T-III so nobody had to describe the train station...or something.
You have only got one witness who you can conclusively evidence was in TII.
You are dodging checking the witness evidence to see which camp they mean by Treblinka...
Uh-huh, It's my job to check and see if the deportees were in T-I or T-III (the T-III in Malkinia not the one in Czernony Bor). I mean "WHAT IF" the deportees were in T-I or T-III? They "COULDA" been anywhere. Maybe even East Bumphuk so it's my job to prove the witnesses weren't lying. You betcha', Nessie. I'll get right on that.
You hate being asked to prove your claims. Why is that?
Yes there are, the Majdanek archive is how historians have worked out how many were at the camp and what they did. Majdanek was used to process property stolen from Jews.
Nessie blows voluminous smoke and bullshit about the Majdanek archives in an attempt to cover up the fact that he has only 412 records for the thousands transited from T-II to Majdanek. If you have more than those 412 records of deportees from T-II then let's see them.
I am quite happy to conceed that the estimate of 2-3000 people transported from TII to Majdanek may be wrong and it is in fact only 412. You demand that we believe 12-15,000 were transported from TII to Majdanek, based on records of only 412.
OK, name and quote witnesses who were sent from TII to other camps. All I can find of those who can be confirmed as having left TII, is that they said they went to Majdanek or Budzyn or they did not say which camp they went to.
Sam Kulawy left T-II with a trainload of men, women and children and went to Auschwitz. Then there are the USHMM records for five deportees who left Treblinka and were sent to at least a dozen other camps. How many other deportees accompanied them is unknown.
I have explained the problems with Kulawy's claim and you have failed to name and show the initial destinations of the other 5. You have no definite transports back of TII except for the 412 you accept were sent to Majdanek.
It doesn't, it just casts doubt on your claim that he left TII.
Jeezus H, but how many times do you have to be told that the witnesses' testimony is NOT "my claim"?


Kulawy said he was sent from "TREBLINKA" to "A-B". You morph that into that coulda been "TII" to "A-B". There were three camps identified to the Treblinka area. You have altered Kulawy's claim.
So far your objection to Kulawy's testimony amounts to some people were sent from Malkinia to Auschwitz. How does that disprove his testimony? Why does that make his testimony "my claim"? How many times do you have to be told that if you doubt the veracity of the witnesses' testimony then YOU have to prove that? So far, all you've done is stamp your feet and shriek, posit "what ifs" and "coulda woulda" and blow smoke and bullshit about the Majdanek archives.
My objections to Kulawy's claim he was at TII are;

- no accommodation for anyone other than camp workers, to keep trainloads of people for 8 days
- no reference to the train station in the camp
- no evidence of transports arriving at A-B from TII

You ignore that and a few post later pretend that I have not explained to you the problems with his claim.
They said "Treblinka", but there were three camps, so which one?
Malkinia wasn't Treblinka III. It was just Malkinia Junction. The only T-III was the camp noted by U.S. intelligence located in Czernony Bor.
US Intelligence did locate the third camp in Czerwony Bor, Huntinger did :roll:
Treblinka I was a penal camp. People were sent there to fulfill a sentence for a crime. They weren't sent there to be transited to other camps. The witnesses from the USC film archives were obviously referencing T-II, the camp they perceived as a "death camp". Your claim that Malkinia was T-III or that T-I was a transit camp is bogus.
TI or Malkinia are the only two camps with barracks that could accommodate people being transited. It is more likely those being transited were kept at Malkinia.
Because there were three camps at Treblinka and when a witness described being accommodated for 3 or 8 days, they it has to be one of the camps with accommodation to do that, which rules out TII.
Your claim that Malkinia was actually Treblinka III is bogus. You offer no proof that T-II had no accommodations for deportees. Stamping your feet and shrieking, "Did not, did not" is proof of jack squat.
I presumed you knew about the plans for TII and its lack of barracks. If you search for any plan of the camp, you will see that the only barracks accommodation is for Sonderkommados and Nazis staff. It is your claim that transports could be kept at TII for up to 8 days, you evidence that claim.
You have proved nothing. Arguments from logical fallacies are not proof, or even evidence.
The claim that T-II was an extermination facility has been proven to be bogus. Get over it.
Your unevidenced arguments from logical fallacies is not proof of no gassings at TII.
Have you searched the Majdanek archives and found no records of clothing and food for the prisoners? Really?
Nope, but Carlo Mattogno has and found records for only 412 deportees from Treblinka. So, either show more records or give it a rest.
As I said, I am happy to accept that only 412 people went from TII to Majdanek. That leaves you with a problem, what happened to the rest?
Name and evidence those camps.
If you don't want to believe the records from the USHMM then that's your problem, not mine.
I cannot find the records you claim are there. It is you who I do not believe.
Your claim is that they left TII and were accommodated elsewhere. Why is it bullshit to ask you to evidence that?
It's known that at least 12,000-15,000 deportees left T-II for Budzyn, Majdanek, Auschwitz and a dozen other camps.
How do you know that? You have records for 412 to Majdanek and you claim records for another 5 who went elsewhere. Using your standard, you have only evidence for 417. If you collate the number of people that the witnesses who went to Majdanek said they went with, that then means we can account for 2-3,000.

There is neither documentary nor witness evidence for the rest. But you demand we believe they also went.
You have produced records for only 412 of those deportees arriving at Majdanek. You have produced no records for their food, clothing, shelter or witness corroboration of their arrivals, yet you demand an itinerary and complete records for the maintenance of the ~840,000 from Treblinka. Just another bogus demand from you.
It is not a bogus demand, it is perfectly reasonable to ask you to evidence your claims. Out of 840,000 there is documentary evidence that 412 were transported to Majdanek and witness evidence that 2-3000 were on those transports. Something that you ignore is that Majdanek could accommodate 150,000, so it could easily take the 2-3000 from TII.

It is up to you to evidence that claim and explain how it is physically possible for the Nazis to have transported, fed, clothed and accommodated c840,000 from TII, over 13 months in 1942-3, till the end of the war in 1945, without leaving any witness, documentary or physical evidence. How did the Nazis manage to do that?

Anyone reading this will see how you repeatedly dodge evidencing your claim and answering my question in bold.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 7958
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Where did they go

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Sun Sep 13, 2020 6:10 pm

It is Huntinger who claims TIII is in Czernowy Bor, not US intelligence, who listed three camps at Treblinka, a labour camp, a death camp and a trasit camp.
The US Intelligence listed four camps in September 1941 in the Treblinka region; der Arbeitslager (TI), Konzentrationslager (TII), Jüdisches Vernichtungslager (TIII). Malkinia was designated a correctional facility in a separate entry.
The Intelligence report states 3 camps in 1941 that do not correspond with the modern historiography. The TII being discussed here did not exist until a year later; however, exterminations just happened to be reported by the press a week or so before the camp opened welcoming its "chosen one" with loving arms.
  1. Camp 1...Arbeitslager... work camp
  2. camp 2...Konzentrationslager
  3. camp 3...Vernichtungslager
In this entry TIII is not designated as Czerwony bor.
A feasibility study of an attack on Treblinka and Majdanek was ordered by the Commander-in-Chief of the Home Army, General "Grot" Rowecki on January 27, 1943, who demanded that the report be returned by February 17, 1943.
The annihilation camp "Treblinka III", according to this official governmental document, was located in an area of the large Czerwony Bor Forest, within a remote and secret old military base also named Czerwony Bor. The Treblinka III death camp for the Jews was therefore located about 40 kilometers north of the Treblinka II camp. As late as in 1944, ihe existence of the Czerwony bor execution centre. was also mentioned in the renowned wartime publication Ghetto Speaks published in New York

The place of execution at Czerwony bor was corroborated by the alleged execution of Ciechanow juden. The existence of Czerwony bor as being the same place as Treblinka execution centre (TIII) is given by the two reports of the same event; the execution of Ciechanow terrorists.
(source) had the following to say:
- In Ciechanow, a census revealed about 80,000 Jews in 1931. Most of the Jews were expelled to Russia. Those that stayed were sent to ghettos in East Prussia. The last ghettos were liquidated in the fall of 1942 and the remaining Jews were sent to Treblinka.
The same event is mentioned in a separate report by a different author.
Michal Leszczynski
Before World War II, it (Ciechanow) was home to a large Jewish community but during the Nazi occupation, in the winter of 1942, the majority of the Jewish community were transported to the Red Forest (Czerwony Bor) north-east of town and murdered by gunfire
This event occurred on 26 Nov 1941.
Another reports says der Juden were sent to Auschwitz:
JewishGen.org
The Jews who were expelled from Ciechanow were brought by the Germans to the concentration camps. The stronger ones passed through some other ghettos where the Nazis needed more human labor. They too were eventually sent to concentration camps. Totally overworked and exhausted, many died. Those that survived recount their memories in this book. We will suffice here with the description of the life of the Jews in Auschwitz. In Auschwitz, as in other camps, Jews made every effort to be together with those from their town and to give mutual support.

To analyze the JVL report mentions that most of the Ciechanow juden were existed to Soviet territory with no mention of the exit point, though most likely the Treblinka bridge across the Bug river a few km away. This coincides with the TII konzentrationslager existing in Sept 1941; the Ciechanow event was only a few months later.
The same reports give evacuation of Juden from Ciechanow in Nov 1941 as follows:
  • 80 thousand evicted to Russland, the remaining sent to Treblinka.
  • All sent to Czerwony bor for dispatch by gunfire to nirvana.
  • Sent to various konzentrationslager and finally to Auschwitz.
A possible scenario is that most of the 80,000 Ciechanow juden were evicted into Soviet Poland via Treblinka konzentrationslager prior to Barbarossa 22 June 194; some terrorists and collaborators were sent to Czerwony bor for their final meal while others were sent to Treblinka II for transit to Auschwitz. Considering the fact that there is evidence of these people surviving Auschwitz means that option 2, extermination of all by gunfire did not happen. This also shows that Treblinka II acted as a holding camp aka transit for dispatch of people to other lagers.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 15 guests