Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,773
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 1, 2023 7:57:25 GMT
Olszuk is not being ignored. Faurisson failed to ask him key questions, primarily about transports, so we do not know what he saw. You are lying when you suggest he could "see through the camp". The little Olszuk did speak about is still consistent with TII as a death camp. Please name and quote a town elder who said Podlaski was a death camp. This has been discussed prior. link The elders gave the location of a death camp south of their town, whereas the current TII is somewhat north. Podlaski is the extermination camp also mentioned by the CIA and fits in with the location. Podlaski would be considered a Treblinka camp. You have linked to who went to TII in 1945, as part of the Polish site examination. That reads of Faurisson getting Olzuck's descriptions mixed up between the labour camp and extermination camp. Faurisson's attempt at an interview is an utter fail, not asking key questions and not recording his questions and the exact answers.
|
|
|
Post by Ulios on Oct 1, 2023 8:58:59 GMT
That reads of Faurisson getting Olzuck's descriptions mixed up between the labour camp and extermination camp. Faurisson's attempt at an interview is an utter fail, not asking key questions and not recording his questions and the exact answers. I read that the Nazgul produced information suggesting that the current TII was the jewish camps of T1 in light of the position of the extermination camp being south of Wรณlka Okrฤ
glik. He has produced evidence of two Jewish camps within the TI complex. The key questions of mass transports out of a camp when there were no mass transports to the place is somewhat silly.
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,773
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 1, 2023 13:46:47 GMT
That reads of Faurisson getting Olzuck's descriptions mixed up between the labour camp and extermination camp. Faurisson's attempt at an interview is an utter fail, not asking key questions and not recording his questions and the exact answers. I read that the Nazgul produced information suggesting that the current TII was the jewish camps of T1 in light of the position of the extermination camp being south of Wรณlka Okrฤ
glik. He has produced evidence of two Jewish camps within the TI complex. The key questions of mass transports out of a camp when there were no mass transports to the place is somewhat silly. There is evidence from documents and witnesses to mass transports into the camp on the spur line. There is no evidence of corresponding mass transports back out of that camp. Rather than accept that evidence, you dance about and make things up.
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 1, 2023 19:12:10 GMT
There is evidence from documents and witnesses to mass transports into the camp on the spur line. There is no evidence of corresponding mass transports back out of that camp. Rather than accept that evidence, you dance about and make things up. If there are two Judenlagers attached to T1 and a corresponding camp (Podlaski) described as an extermination camp south of T1, this would account for arrivals. The evidence from the Fahrplananordnung documents is that Treblinka was a final destination before the continuation to either Siedlce or Malkinia. Treblinka was just another labour camp stop on the same route. Nothing is made up. However, it is not that that is being discussed but a refusal to look at the alternative information such as the judenlagers within the T1 complex; this corresponds with what Olszuk described at the current TII. Time to take of the blinkers Nessie and take cognizance of the peripheral vision. The tunnel vision says more about the poster than the reality of the alleged mass killings.
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,773
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 2, 2023 7:02:43 GMT
There is evidence from documents and witnesses to mass transports into the camp on the spur line. There is no evidence of corresponding mass transports back out of that camp. Rather than accept that evidence, you dance about and make things up. If there are two Judenlagers attached to T1 and a corresponding camp (Podlaski) described as an extermination camp south of T1, this would account for arrivals. The evidence from the Fahrplananordnung documents is that Treblinka was a final destination before the continuation to either Siedlce or Malkinia. Treblinka was just another labour camp stop on the same route. Nothing is made up. However, it is not that that is being discussed but a refusal to look at the alternative information such as the judenlagers within the T1 complex; this corresponds with what Olszuk described at the current TII. Time to take of the blinkers Nessie and take cognizance of the peripheral vision. The tunnel vision says more about the poster than the reality of the alleged mass killings. You assert, without evidence. It is you who needs to take off the blinkers. You take one witness for whom we have a biased source who failed to ask crucial questions or conduct a recorded interview and accept him alone. You then ignore every other witness who describes what they saw at the camp and allege they are all part of a huge conspiracy, Jewish, Polish, Germans and Ukrainians.
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 2, 2023 7:55:42 GMT
You take one witness for whom we have a biased source who failed to ask crucial questions or conduct a recorded interview and accept him alone. You then ignore every other witness who describes what they saw at the camp and allege they are all part of a huge conspiracy, Jewish, Polish, Germans and Ukrainians. Here is the evidence: - Olszuk
- Two Judenlagers at Treblinka
- Surveyor maps with wrong orientation
- Town elders of extermination camp south of Ogralik
- CIA report of Podlaski as camp just south of Ogralik
- Wierniks map with wrong orientation.
- Train schedules stopping at all labour camps.
While your evidence only consists of atrocity stories, it is only they you wish to consider. You are a part of the hoax.
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,773
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 2, 2023 8:20:04 GMT
...Here is the evidence: - Olszuk
- Two Judenlagers at Treblinka
- Surveyor maps with wrong orientation
- Town elders of extermination camp south of Ogralik
- CIA report of Podlaski as camp just south of Ogralik
- Wierniks map with wrong orientation.
- Train schedules stopping at all labour camps.
While your evidence only consists of atrocity stories, it is only they you wish to consider. You are a part of the hoax. Olszuk does not evidence TII was a transit camp as he makes no reference to transports. Maps with the wrong orientation do not evidence TII was a transit camp. Secondary reports that are not clear about what camp is what, is not evidence TII was a transit camp. The train schedules do not record stops at labour camps, they record stops at stations, which is normal for any train. The schedules do not evidence anyone got off the trains. The evidence you provide is cobbled together to try and support your beliefs, you know it does not prove TII, the camp on the spur line to the quarry, was a transit or other type of camp, not a death camp. You are lying that I only have "atrocity stories". You lie like that, again, to support your desired beliefs. The hoax works because you want to believe in something that you cannot evidence happened to any reasonable standard and your belief in your own lies.
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 2, 2023 8:28:31 GMT
]Olszuk does not evidence TII was a transit camp as he makes no reference to transports. Maps with the wrong orientation do not evidence TII was a transit camp. Secondary reports that are not clear about what camp is what, is not evidence TII was a transit camp. The train schedules do not record stops at labour camps, they record stops at stations, which is normal for any train. The schedules do not evidence anyone got off the trains. The evidence you provide is cobbled together to try and support your beliefs, you know it does not prove TII, the camp on the spur line to the quarry, was a transit or other type of camp, not a death camp. You are lying that I only have "atrocity stories". You lie like that, again, to support your desired beliefs. The hoax works because you want to believe in something that you cannot evidence happened to any reasonable standard and your belief in your own lies. I do not ever think I have called Treblinka a transit camp, although Sobibor was. Each of the stations stopped at were either labour camps and or railway junctions to many other labour camps. Jews got off the trains at all of those Jewish camps to work; they said so. I am suggesting true historians should take cognizance of the new information on labour camps and the clear anomalies by town elders and professional people such as surveyors. We know what you believe Nessie that is your own internal affair.
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,773
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 2, 2023 11:14:36 GMT
]Olszuk does not evidence TII was a transit camp as he makes no reference to transports. Maps with the wrong orientation do not evidence TII was a transit camp. Secondary reports that are not clear about what camp is what, is not evidence TII was a transit camp. The train schedules do not record stops at labour camps, they record stops at stations, which is normal for any train. The schedules do not evidence anyone got off the trains. The evidence you provide is cobbled together to try and support your beliefs, you know it does not prove TII, the camp on the spur line to the quarry, was a transit or other type of camp, not a death camp. You are lying that I only have "atrocity stories". You lie like that, again, to support your desired beliefs. The hoax works because you want to believe in something that you cannot evidence happened to any reasonable standard and your belief in your own lies. I do not ever think I have called Treblinka a transit camp, although Sobibor was. Each of the stations stopped at were either labour camps and or railway junctions to many other labour camps. Jews got off the trains at all of those Jewish camps to work; they said so. I am suggesting true historians should take cognizance of the new information on labour camps and the clear anomalies by town elders and professional people such as surveyors. We know what you believe Nessie that is your own internal affair. You cannot evidence TII as anything other than a death camp, or people getting off the transports prior to arrival. Mistakes in secondary source and plans evidence only what historians already knew, but deniers are ignorant of, that mistakes are made.
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 2, 2023 11:17:01 GMT
You cannot evidence TII as anything other than a death camp, or people getting off the transports prior to arrival. Mistakes in secondary source and plans evidence only what historians already knew, but deniers are ignorant of, that mistakes are made. As you do not really know where this extermination camp was you are in limbo. As a historian wannabe that is your affair, but this thread is about "how the hoax works". The hoax works by believers not even attempting to investigate new information.
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,773
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 2, 2023 12:45:52 GMT
You cannot evidence TII as anything other than a death camp, or people getting off the transports prior to arrival. Mistakes in secondary source and plans evidence only what historians already knew, but deniers are ignorant of, that mistakes are made. As you do not really know where this extermination camp was you are in limbo. As a historian wannabe that is your affair, but this thread is about "how the hoax works". The hoax works by believers not even attempting to investigate new information. The death was the camp built on the spur line to the quarry. The evidence of that is from multiple witnesses, archaeological, photographic and circumstantial evidence. The information you have found is of inaccurate reports about the camp. Historians use the more accurate, reliable evidence. The hoax works by you thinking you have uncovered a hoax, by finding the inaccurate information. You fail to understand that not all information is going to be accurate, that is normal for any history.
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 3, 2023 6:42:28 GMT
The death was the camp built on the spur line to the quarry. The evidence of that is from multiple witnesses, archaeological, photographic and circumstantial evidence. The information you have found is of inaccurate reports about the camp. Historians use the more accurate, reliable evidence. The hoax works by you thinking you have uncovered a hoax, by finding the inaccurate information. You fail to understand that not all information is going to be accurate, that is normal for any history. You are saying that the town elders of Okraglik have no idea of their surroundings and that the surveyors are incompetent; I think not. The CIA may be incompetent in their earlier years but that is another issue. Another interesting point about (((historians))) are the Sobibor maps that got altered after the Niemann photos were published. Those photos were studied, it was noted that all the Sobibor maps did not correspond to the layout of the buildings. In the time that the old forum went down and this one was started those old maps had been modified to fit in with the photos. That is not history Nessie that is corruption.
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,773
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 3, 2023 7:42:22 GMT
The death was the camp built on the spur line to the quarry. The evidence of that is from multiple witnesses, archaeological, photographic and circumstantial evidence. The information you have found is of inaccurate reports about the camp. Historians use the more accurate, reliable evidence. The hoax works by you thinking you have uncovered a hoax, by finding the inaccurate information. You fail to understand that not all information is going to be accurate, that is normal for any history. You are saying that the town elders of Okraglik have no idea of their surroundings and that the surveyors are incompetent; I think not. The CIA may be incompetent in their earlier years but that is another issue. Another interesting point about (((historians))) are the Sobibor maps that got altered after the Niemann photos were published. Those photos were studied, it was noted that all the Sobibor maps did not correspond to the layout of the buildings. In the time that the old forum went down and this one was started those old maps had been modified to fit in with the photos. That is not history Nessie that is corruption. When information is found to be incorrect, it is then changed. That is how history develops. Your comment about corruption proves you are looking for excuses to disbelieve evidence which does not fit your beliefs and that you do not investigate history as it should be.
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 3, 2023 7:58:42 GMT
When information is found to be incorrect, it is then changed. That is how history develops. Your comment about corruption proves you are looking for excuses to disbelieve evidence which does not fit your beliefs and that you do not investigate history as it should be. It appears that information is being changed to suit their narrative, that is corruption. Old maps that were obvious fraudulent and wrong have been made to appear accurate with doctoring. The maps were only altered once Herr Hรผntinger compared them to the photos. This is called tampering with evidence and fraudulent. If history means tampering with evidence to fit beliefs then there is serious issues with historical methods.
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,773
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 3, 2023 9:43:58 GMT
When information is found to be incorrect, it is then changed. That is how history develops. Your comment about corruption proves you are looking for excuses to disbelieve evidence which does not fit your beliefs and that you do not investigate history as it should be. It appears that information is being changed to suit their narrative, that is corruption. Old maps that were obvious fraudulent and wrong have been made to appear accurate with doctoring. The maps were only altered once Herr Hรผntinger compared them to the photos. This is called tampering with evidence and fraudulent. If history means tampering with evidence to fit beliefs then there is serious issues with historical methods. If you believe something and then evidence is found that shows your original belief is wrong, is it fraudulent for you to then alter your original belief to a new one? If an original plan is found to be wrong, because of new evidence, what should be done? Ignore the new evidence and continue to present the wrong plan? Accept the new evidence and alter the plan?
|
|