Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old June 20th, 2008 #141
ced smythe
Member
 
ced smythe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp View Post
I don't think so.



A definition that perfectly fits the firm belief "Revisionists" have in their conpiracy theories about the "Hoax", for which there is no evidence whatever.
Pantomime!
 
Old June 20th, 2008 #142
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Default

OK people, I really hate to do this, as it makes me sound like some kind of pompous asshole - BUT -

You're killing me with your help. Every single post that is made on this thread that doesn't focus on / call for Roberta to present the photographic documentation of the physical evidence alleged to have been found / seen at Treblinka is actually an assist for the dirty lying jewbitch herself. Her insane claims and her insults are designed to get you to get this subject off topic, and she laughs up her sleeve every time her dirty little jew trick works.

PLEASE remember the subject heading of this thread and PLEASE don't give her the satisfaction of letting her jew tricks work. If you must respond to her nonsense, do so by calling attention to the fact that she refuses to categorize the following alleged photographic evidence of her claims.

The focus of all this has come down to this:

Ok Roberta, AGAIN, let's recap here on what photos we're waiting for you to produce and identify / categorize - ALL photos from:

1 - The Aug 22 and 23, 1944 Soviet investigation.

2 - The Nov 9 - 13, 1945 Polish investigation.

3 - The alleged Ostrowa Mazowieckie militia unit action.

4 - The 1947 "commission from Warsaw" investigation.

5 - Photos of the alleged "huge craters" from "the time when bombs were used for "extraction." (Remember this quote from Martyna Rusiniak: "The young historian shows us photos of the largest postwar excavation sites. The pits have a length of ten meters, one of them looks like the construction pit of a several-story building.")

6 - Photos of the outside of the camp - taken from the outside.

7 - Photos of the inside of the camp - taken from the inside.

8 - Photos of the alleged hundreds of thousands of dead bodies.

9 - Photos of the alleged "huge mass graves" themselves.

10 - Photos of the alleged tens of millions of teeth.

11 - Photos of the alleged millions of pounds of crushed bone and ash.

12 - Photos of the alleged millions of gold coins, gem stones and watches lying in the dirt throughout the camp.

13 - Photos of the alleged tens of thousands of bullets and shell casings.

14 - Photos of the alleged "grave robbers" in action and the alleged "huge pits" that they dug and the alleged "treasure" that they found in the "huge mass graves."

15 -Photos proving that Michael Shermer so much as stepped foot in Treblinka while doing his alleged "research" / "firsthand examination" of the camp.

Again Roberta, make sure when you present the photos that they are all presented singularly and listed in the appropriate category. Specifically, make sure you don't mix up any of the Soviet and Polish investigation photos. If you have no photographic documentation for the claims listed in a category, state that you don't - simple as that.

Can this be made any simpler? Are there any other specific categories of photos that I have missed that should be included in the above listing? Any other alleged investigations?
 
Old June 20th, 2008 #143
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Default

BTW folks, here is what I've done (over at topix) to Roberta's claims that there were holocausts at Chelmno and Sobibor and the fraudulent claims that these alleged holocausts have been proven (sic) via archeological investigations:

Sobibor recap:

The following is all the photographic documentation there is for the existence of the alleged “pure extermination center” of Sobibor, which, according to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (1997), 250,000 jews were killed:

http://www.deathcamps.org/sobibor/photos.html


The following is all the photographic documentation there is of the 7 “huge mass graves,” of Sobibor allegedly located by the Kola archeological investigation which he claims to have located - one grave measuring 70 x 25 x 5 meters and six measuring 20 x 25 x 5 meters:

No photographs of the alleged “huge mass graves” exist.


The following is all the photographic evidence there is of the human remains alleged to have been located in Sobibors “huge mass graves:”

http://www.undersobibor.org/excavation09.jpg


And of course, we’re still waiting for any photographic proof what-so-ever that Michael Shermer so much as stepped foot into the Sobibor camp during his alleged “firsthand” investigation of / research in the Sobibor camp, in which he claims he proved, by “reviewing the physical evidence,” that 250,000 jews were killed there.


* * * * *

Chelmno recap:

The following is all the photographic documentation there is for the existence of the alleged “pure extermination center” of Chelmno, which, according to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (1997), 320,000 jews were killed:

http://www.death-camps.org/occupatio...gchelmnohq.jpg


The following is all the photographic documentation there is of the “huge mass graves,” of Chelmno allegedly located by the Gorczyca archeological investigation. No specific number has been given for the “huge mass graves” allegedly located, but we are told that, in - “a large field of open excavations” there are - “some over a hundred feet long.” (Scroll down to the bottom photo):

http://www.zchor.org/extermination/pits.htm

And:

http://www.thejewishpress.com/Upload.../chelmno-1.gif


The following is all the photographic evidence there is of the human remains alleged to have been located in Chelmnos “huge mass graves:”

http://www.death-camps.org/occupatio...gchelmno06.jpg

* * * * *

I will have a final recap showing how I totally destroyed Roberta on her nonsensical claim that there was a Belzec holocaust very soon, and of course, if we all stay on topic, we will have the Treblinka holohoax rendered down to something resembling the above very soon also.

Physical evidence.
 
Old June 20th, 2008 #144
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Default

Do you see now why Roberta is so desperately trying to avoid presenting / categorizing her claims and why she doesn't want to "debate" this issue with me anymore?

She is terrified that I will do the same to her with Treblinka what I did to her with Chelmno and Sobibor, and am doing to her with Belzec. The previous post proves what you can do to these filthy lying jews when you don't play their games and focus on the alleged "physical evidence."

The lying jewbitch is a desperate, hysterical cornered rat.

Don't do anything to help the lying jewbitch out of the corner.

Focus.
 
Old June 20th, 2008 #145
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Default

Well Roberta, I just remembered two more categories. The first of course (and I don't know how I forgot this), is photos of the gas chambers. Call them category #16 for the moment, and

Photos of the burning of the corpses. Remember what your man Yankel Wiernik said about it in - A YEAR IN TREBLINKA:

"The cremation of the corpses proved an unqualified success. Because they were in a hurry, the Germans built additional fire grates and augmented the crews serving them, so that from 10,000 to 12,000 corpses were cremated at one time. The result was one huge inferno, which from the distance looked like a volcano breaking through the earth's crust to belch forth fire and lava. The pyres sizzled and crackled. The smoke and heat made it impossible to remain close by. It lasted a long time because there were more than half a million dead to dispose of."

Call all photos of the burning of the corpses category #17, and make two subcategories --

A - Photos taken of the burning of the corpses from inside the camp

B- - Photos taken of "the huge inferno, which from the distance looked like a volcano breaking through the earth's crust to belch forth fire and lava" from outside the camp.
 
Old June 20th, 2008 #146
psychologicalshock
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp View Post
The first I agree with, the second is new to me. Any rules or standards of evidence you can quote to support your statement?
I don't need to quote them, can you figure out why?

Quote:
Ah, and there’s nothing extraordinary about mass murder, even on the scale we are discussing here. It has often happened throughout history.
It's an extraordinary claim if it's supported by nothing but eye witnesses which is more or less what I have observed.

Quote:
No, what means that the event happened is that all known positive evidence points to its having happened while no evidence points to its not having happened.
This is what I like to refer to as "bad thinking" or "muddied thinking". First of all, there is no positive evidence up to scientific standards. What you later mention as judicial standards are not scientific standards. This is because justice not only judges the crime but most importantly the accused. If there is no physical evidence ( Something rare) the justice cannot wait for years for it to come in. The trial must continue and thus lower standards are used. We know that criminals are convicted, sometimes they are not, innocents are convicted, sometimes not and this happens because the court system is not scientific, it is judicial. It is run by men who judge men and thus it is exposed to flaw and it is possible to curry favor as is known to happen when you have a highly regarded lawyer. Evidence does not need to be given for something not have happened, if you say "I don't believe it" and no one can provide positive proof for it then you are right in not believing it. Good thinking is that it is not true until proven .


Quote:
Sorry, but why are site investigation reports produced by criminal investigators not forensic evidence?
They didn't happen to be up to the standards that the scientific community has used for the past century . In fact, I don't think it was up to the standards of even the 19th century.
What's wrong:
It did not conclusively provide evidence of mass graves the size stated.
It did not provide identification of the few remains it found.
They should have found numerous teeth in each cubic meter, they did not.
The 7.5 meters is still highly doubtable and should be re-examined. The water table at Auschwitz was a mere 18 inches under, seems unlikely that they dug as deep as they did ,Treblinka isn't in a high area.
No chlorine
No identifications of any of the essential buildings for such an operation
The origins of the ash are unclear.

Quote:
Sure, but what we have is not implausible like the dinosaur in your backyard, and it can be proven by evidence of the categories documentary, demographic, eyewitness and physical, all of which converge towards the conclusion that it happened.
Ive read your entire post so I will attack the demographics right now because there is no physical evidence that would qualify as such to a scientist. Maybe in a court of law, I really don't know because I am not a law student and my experience in law is limited. If anyone here has experience in law id like to hear it.


http://vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndstats.html#ftnref7
Quote:
"Recently, British historian David Irving marveled that as early as June 1945, in other words immediately after the end of hostilities in Europe, some Zionist leaders were able to provide the precise number of Jewish victims - six million, of course - even though the chaos reigning in Europe at that time rendered any demographic studies impossible.[7] Not long ago the German historian Joachim Hoffmann pointed out that the chief Soviet atrocity propagandist, Ilya Ehrenburg, had publicized the six-million-figure in the Soviet foreign press as early as January 4, 1945, i.e., fully four months before the war’s end.[8] W. Höttl has found an article in Readers’s Digest which in February 1943 already reported the murder of at least the half of the six million Jews threatened by Hitler.[9]

In 1936, Chaim Weizmann is reported to have said in front of the Peel Commission:[10]

"It is no exaggeration to say that six million Jews are sentenced to be imprisoned in this part of the world, where they are unwanted, and for whom the countries are devided into those, where they are unwanted, and those, where they are not admitted."

But this ‘magic’ number probably dates back even further. A series of propaganda articles published shortly after the end of the First (!) World War already mentioned six million Jews who had perished in a Holocaust in eastern Europe,[11] and Benjamin Blech tells of an ancient Jewish prophecy that promises the Jews their return to the Promised Land after a loss of six million of their number,[12] which is certainly grounds for speculations.

The origin of the six-million figure, which has by now been acknowledged as "symbolic figure" even by historians of the establishment,[13] is thus more than questionable, and it is not surprising that even world-famous statisticians have long conceded that the issue of the numbers of victims is in no way settled.[14]

In introducing the discussion of Holocaust victims, revisionist scholars time and again cite a publication in the Swiss paper Baseler Nachrichten of June 12, 1946, which postulated a maximum number of 1.5 million Jewish victims of National Socialism, as well as the fact that the International Red Cross never made any mention in its post-war Activity Reports of a systematic extermination of the Jews in gas chambers.[15] Benz comments rightly that citing various undocumented newspaper sources and the IRC, which out of a lack of any comprehensive overview never compiled any statistics of its own about the numbers of victims, is a very dubious practice.[16] While there have been several attempts since the war’s end to determine the number of victims,[17] any monograph commensurate with the importance of the topic was lacking until the early 1980s. It was not until 1983 that a book was published in the United States - The Dissolution of the Eastern European Jewry, by W. N. Sanning[18] - which attempted, by drawing on statistical material from mostly Jewish sources, to ascertain the number of Jewish Holocaust victims in the Third Reich’s sphere of influence. Since Sanning concluded in his book that at the very most several hundreds of thousands of Jews perished of unknown causes in the Third Reich,[19] it was to be expected that the establishment would counter with a reply containing a wealth of statistical material intended to reconfirm the "symbolic figure" of six million Jewish victims. And indeed, in 1991 the official Institut für Zeitgeschichte published a 585-page study titled Dimension des Völkermords."
This already sets the claims up in the proper light - of dubious origins.

Quote:
"- One million Jews died while fighting in the Red Army or in Siberian labor camps; […]"
This is what a supposed Holocaustian says, you stated 6 million died yet here we are told we can discount 1 million to non-Holocaust losses. That slides the number down to 5 million even if your source is true.(And its not )

Method:
Quote:
Between 1933 and 1945, the national boundaries of the countries studied often underwent considerable changes. In the work by Benz each country is discussed by a different author, and since the various authors clearly did not agree among themselves with respect to common boundaries, there are many cases of overlap which frequently result in the populations in question being counted twice.[23] We shall point this out as individual examples occur, and total these doublings at the end. Since Sanning, being the sole author of his book, did not have such trouble in allotting boundary areas, we will subsequently follow his choice of boundaries. Since the Benz book goes into great detail where such territories as were subject to changes in sovereignty are concerned, the appropriate corrections are generally quite easy to accommodate here.

For each nation or group of nations we shall first give a brief tabular overview of the Jewish population statistics as given in each work. Only where the data given in the two books are at considerable odds will reference to the soundness of the data and their calculation be made in order to determine which author’s arguments are better. The reliablility of the sources cited by the authors will also be touched on only in cases of dispute.

This will be followed by a comparison of the sum total of Jewish losses in German-occupied Europe, as calculated in each book, as well as by a summary critique which will also address the matter of where and how the victims Benz believes to have identified allegedly lost their lives; certain contradictions will become evident.

An overview of the numbers of Jewish emigrants from the European nations under former German occupation follows, as well as a survey of world Jewish population changes before and after the Second World War. Since these aspects are discussed only by Sanning, no comparison with the Benz book can be drawn - but since Benz’s book appeared eight years after Sanning’s, this certainly gives the impression that no factual counter-arguments were possible, at least where the matter of emigration was concerned.
As I said before, it was hard to keep track of people during this catastrophe.

Germany and Austria:
Quote:
The low Jewish population in Germany as given for this time in the book by Benz is the same as that in Sanning’s, since both are based on a monthly report of the Reich Association of Jews in Germany to the Reichssicherheitshauptamt [Reich Security Main Office]. Since this Association was an extension of the National Socialist state, the figure given is quite reliable. Benz, however, proceeds on the assumption that this figure represented only "full Jews", and adds approximately 43% for "half-Jews" and "quarter-Jews", even though these Jews were only partly (half-Jews) or not at all (quarter-Jews) subjected to the measures performed by the German authorities.[26]

Benz does not give any definite figures for the number of Jews in Austria, but believes that by the beginning of the war two-thirds of the Jews (as defined by the Nuremberg Race Laws) that had been present in Austria at the time of its unification with the Reich had fled (B68). This means that of 206,000 (B70), some 70,000 remained at the start of the war. Until October 1941, emigration - which amounted to approximately 15% in the Reich proper at this time (B35) - produced a further reduction of about 10,000.

For Germany, Sanning cites only those figures provided by the Reich Association. For Austria he refers to contemporaneous Jewish sources in Austria and the United States.

For the Jews to be found in post-war Germany Benz cites only estimates, and for those in Austria, nothing more than a number pertaining to ‘after the liberation’. However, due to the chaos reigning at that time, these statistics are very unreliable. Sanning cites data provided by the well-known Holocaust specialist Gerald Reitlinger, and his figures for Austria were not determined until October 1947, after the greatest of the population transfers in Europe had begun to subside.

While Benz ignores the increased mortality rate that characterized the Jewish population in the Reich between 1941 and 1945 due to the emigration of predominantly young people, which resulted in a disproportionate percentage of elderly Jews, Sanning does take this into account, which further reduces his tally of missing persons. This illustrates clearly the contrasting approaches of the two authors: Benz proceeds on the assumption that the difference between pre- and post-war Jewish population figures must be the result of the extermination program, which may make any calculation of natural mortality rates seem superfluous. Sanning, on the other hand, does not automatically consider the difference to be necessarily indicative of deaths - as yet, to him, these people are only missing. Further differences in the treatment of statistical questions will become apparent in the following, and will be summarized at the end.

I have reduced Benz’s numbers of victims by 21,000 for Germany and by 16,692 for Austria. These represent victims who fled to other European countries not then under German control, where, however, they later came under German rule and were allegedly exterminated (Germany: B64; Austria: B74). However, since these people are also counted as part of the Jewish population of their country of destination (particularly France and Czechoslovakia), it is necessary to deduct them once. For the moment we shall take note of 37,692 Jewish victims counted twice, which must be deducted from Benz’s total.
Obvious implications here.


France, Benelux, Denmark, Norway and Italy
Quote:
The reason for the great differences between the opening figures for France and the Benelux nations is that, except for the Netherlands, only estimates are available for the numbers of Jews living there before the war, both because these were simply never recorded statistically and because immigrants from Germany and Poland were not always registered. While Sanning bases his figures on information provided by the American Jewish Yearbook 1940 (New York) and by Reitlinger,[27] who cites barely half a million, Benz uses straight estimates for Belgium and France; among his sources for these estimates are reports from German authorities which, however, are likely to have inflated the numbers of Jews grossly for propaganda reasons.[28]
Straight up guessing.

Quote:
For Benz, the number of victims is by no means derived from the difference between pre-war and post-war Jewish populations, but rather from the number of those who allegedly were proven to have survived the deportations (2,566 of 75,720), and he cites Serge Klarsfeld to this effect.[29] The official post-war return registration of the deportees in France, as well as the accidental discovery of the survival of such as did not officially return, are what constitutes proof of survival to Klarsfeld.

Swedish demographer Carl O. Nordling comments rightly that the survivors from among the approximately 52,000 non-French Jews who fled to France before the war and were later deported to Auschwitz would not be very likely to report back to France after the war.[30] Similarly, a not inconsiderable portion of the survivors from some 23,000 remaining French Jews, some of whom had not taken French citizenship until shortly before the war, will have emigrated without registration after the war, possibly assuming a different name in their new homeland,[31] thereby becoming very difficult to trace.

Thus, Klarsfeld’s method for determining the number of victims, a method adopted by Benz, can hardly yield a correct result. The statements of former inmates claiming that their relatives had disappeared also fail to convince; to date there have been many cases of chance reunions of family members who each believed for decades that the other had been exterminated.[32] Since families were separated and scattered throughout Europe after being imprisoned, and since especially for Jews there was no way of searching for their kin amid the chaos of post-war Europe, the lack of proof of a family member’s survival is also no proof of his or her extermination. Carl Nordling recently demonstrated the fallacy of these incorrect and rash conclusion on the basis of an investigation of the fate of the Jewish population of the Polish city Kaszony.[33]
Are you beginning to understand what scientific standards are ?

Quote:
A further example of faulty methodology on the part of Klarsfeld and Benz may be found in their approach to those inmates who were ‘selected’[34] on their arrival in Auschwitz, i.e., who were not officially admitted into the camp and therefore were not tattooed with an ID number. Klarsfeld and Benz lump all of these Jews together as victims of gassing because, being unfit for forced labor, they were allegedly deemed useless. Nordling [30] pointed out that the first transports, between March and July 1942, were almost completely admitted into Auschwitz, but that larger proportions of the transports were no longer registered in the camp later on.

If one assumes that non-registration meant death by gassing, then if the Third Reich had indeed been pursuing a policy of extermination one might expect to see the opposite trend, since in 1943 the labor shortage was considerably more severe in Germany than in 1942 and therefore Jewish workers ought to have been accorded greater value as the war progressed. The actual registration pattern, therefore, indicates instead that the Auschwitz camp was first filled with workers and that the surplus was later channeled to the more than 30 affiliated labor camps surrounding Auschwitz, as well as to other camps and camp groups.

This theory explains why men from one 1942 transport were not registered (i.e., tattooed with prisoner ID numbers) in Auschwitz until April 1944.[35] Despite not being registered in 1942 they were obviously not killed, but rather employed outside Auschwitz in some other capacity for 1½ years.
We do not know how Klarsfeld and his colleagues manage to be so certain that other inmates not registered in Auschwitz were not also put to work somewhere else, but were by necessity gassed.[36]
Notice that when Rudolf uses theory he means a statement with strong support not sucking it out of your thumb.

Quote:
Thus it is clear that the statistical material on which Benz’s book is based rests at least in part on an unsound speculative basis.
I find it quite amazing that Rudolf forgives this because in the scientific community this is unforgivable. A man with a lot of patience indeed.

Quote:
Thus it is clear that the statistical material on which Benz’s book is based rests at least in part on an unsound speculative basis.

Benz does not even attempt the other method of calculating casualties - namely, the comparison of pre-war and post-war Jewish populations. The post-war data given in the preceding table and identified with question marks are thus based simply on the subtraction of the supposed number of victims from the pre-war population.

Sanning again refers to Reitlinger for his post-war figures. In comparing the figures from Benz et al. and Reitlinger - both of them establishment Holocaust scholars - one sees that the estimation of the numbers of missing persons for these countries is very difficult due to the insufficient data available. For this reason Benz simply assumes that most of the Jews deported from France and the Benelux nations (213,813, B103; 127; 130; 165) were in fact murdered. Reitlinger’s data are obviously not suited to this argument, since they prove this assumption to be false, even if only by the fact that his data suggests that only approximately 134,000 Jews were missing. The question of how many of these missing persons emigrated unregistered immediately after the war is not addressed by Benz and will be discussed here in a later section.

Here, too, Benz’s number of victims was corrected because the Dodecanese Isles off the Turkish coast (Rhodes, Kos, and others) were counted for Italy as well as for Greece. The corresponding 1,641 victims were therefore subtracted from Italy’s original figure of 7,555 (B213; 216). Together with Germany and Austria this makes for 39,333 victims counted twice.
Can't help but laugh, is this what you call well documented?
Hungary
Quote:
First of all it is necessary to define which Hungary is at issue. Since Hungary had the same boundaries before the war as it did after, but briefly made tremendous territorial gains in between, we shall here confine our analysis to the area within the boundaries of today’s Hungary (so-called Trianon Hungary). Since both authors give their Jewish statistics for the newly added and subsequently lost regions separately from those for Trianon Hungary, it should be possible to transfer this definition to the numbers of Hungarian Jews without any difficulty. There is one serious problem, however. Benz’s distribution of the Jews among Trianon Hungary (some 401,000) and the territories gained (approximately 324,000) is based on a total of 725,000 Jews for Greater Hungary (B338), which is also Sanning’s initial figure (S138). But Benz adds approximately 100,000 de facto Jews of non-Jewish denomination but coming under the Nuremberg Race Laws, as well as approximately 50,000 immigrants from Poland (B340). This increase of about 20% must be added accordingly to the figure for Trianon Hungary, resulting in 484,000 Jews. The subsequent statistics (casualties at the front in the Hungarian Military Labor Force, Soviet deportations, as well as the numbers of survivors and victims) follow from the number Benz cites for Greater Hungary if one considers that approximately 55% of all the Jews in Greater Hungary resided in Trianon Hungary, and if one assumes that all changes affected all Jews equally. In fact, however, one cannot realistically assume this, since it is an undisputed fact that the Jews of Budapest - some 150,000 to 200,000 - remained completely unaffected by deportations into supposed extermination camps (B348f.; S143).
Quote:
Working with Greater Hungary rather than Trianon Hungary would avoid these problems, but we cannot do this, for the reason that all of Hungary’s territorial gains have been incorporated into other sections of Benz’s book. These regions are: the Bačka of Yugoslavia, northern Transylvania of Rumania, and southern Slovakia and the Carpatho-Ukraine of Czechoslovakia, with a total of approximately 324,000 denominational Jews, i.e., 391,000 de facto Jews (+20%). In computing his overall total, Benz counted all these Jews twice, with the exception of the Jews in those territories gained from Czechoslovakia.[38] Since the 214,000 de facto Jews who were counted twice amount to about 24.5% of Greater Hungary’s Jews, this corresponds to a duplicate counting of 122,500 Jewish victims out of an overall number of 500,000 Jews said to have been killed by the Germans (B351). If one considers that the proportion of victims in the border territories was greater than that in Trianon Hungary, since all of Budapest, for example, remained unaffected by the deportations, then a duplicate count of as many as 150,000 seems likely. This increases the number of Jews counted twice to at least 161,833.

Quote:
Unfortunately not all of the co-authors contributing to Benz’s book employed the same methods as in the case of Hungary, where simple estimates added 20% to the initial number of Jews; the result is that the territorial overlaps and duplicate counts get completely out of hand. We shall focus less on the actual numbers in each case than on the methodologies applied. Hungary is an especially appropriate subject for a closer scrutiny of methodology, since this particular case represents an exceptionally explosive chapter of the (hi)story of the Holocaust. Advocates of the Holocaust doctrine assume as a matter of course that the Germans deported 400,000 to 500,000 Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz, where the majority of them were killed. The basis for this assumption are IMT documents which, according to Benz, prove that in spring and early summer 1944 "444,152 Jews were deported from Hungary" (B344).

In his book Sanning quotes Arthur R. Butz who pointed out that the International Red Cross made no mention in its Report, published in 1948, of any deportations of Jews to Auschwitz, but only of the beginning of Jewish tribulations in October 1944.[39] Aside from violent excesses, this time did see some deportations, whose purpose and destination, however, was forced labor in the Reich, not Auschwitz (B348; S139f.). Therefore, Butz and Sanning assume that no adequate evidence exists to prove that Hungarian Jews were deported to Auschwitz at all.

There is no way around the fact, however, that there are still Jews living today who really were deported to Auschwitz in spring 1944 and who have repeatedly testified as witnesses in court.[40] Further, Pressac states that between 1/3 and 2/3 of the Hungarian Jews deported to Auschwitz, whose arrival and selection were photographed by the SS,[41] were considered fit for forced labor, i.e., were not killed.[42] As well, it can be proven, he says, that in the spring some 50,000 of these Hungarian Jews were transported on to the Stutthof camp via Auschwitz.[43] In this respect, therefore, Sanning’s theory rests on a shaky foundation[44] - but so does that of Benz, who contends that the Hungarian Jews were killed immediately and almost without exception.

There are other indications as well that the theory of mass destruction of the Hungarian Jews is incorrect: the witnesses to this destruction unanimously claim that during these alleged mass exterminations the limited capacity of the Birkenau crematoria necessitated the excavation of enormous pits, in which the bodies were burned. Dark clouds of smoke, they claim, darkened the sky over Birkenau during this procedure. Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on one’s perspective) the aerial reconnaissance photographs taken by the Allies during this time prove that in the Birkenau camp, which was not obscured by clouds of smoke when the pictures were taken, there were neither open fires, nor giant pits, nor smoke activity on any scale large or small, nor piles of dead bodies, nor great supplies of firewood, nor anything else of the sort.[45] The Polish Historical Society concludes that in light of this evidence the number of victims in Auschwitz must be reduced by another 400,000 plus 74,000 (Polish Jews from the liquidated ghetto Lodz, who are also claimed to have been gassed around this time), leaving some 500,000 victims for Auschwitz.[46]

Even allegedly probative documents of the Nuremberg Tribunal cannot change this, since such documents are by no means always genuine, or true, and only ever provide evidence for deportations which are not disputed here in the first place - they never document an extermination. The reader is reminded of the example of Dachau, the concentration camp where the IMT alleged that hundreds of thousands were gassed, a claim which in the end turned out to be nothing more substantial than an atrocity propaganda lie.[47] We shall come across another case of dubious IMT documents in the discussion of the Soviet Union.

Benz’s methodology proves to be very slipshod where other factors are concerned as well. He can only give vague estimates of the number of Jews who lost their lives due to Soviet deportation and in the Hungarian Military Labor Force (B339), whereas Sanning cites verifiable figures based on Jewish or at least pro-Jewish sources (S140; 142). Benz maintains the birth deficit at pre-war levels, whereas Sanning reasons that the Labor Force for Hungarian Jews as well as the overall poor conditions for Jews during the war would have caused the pre-war birth rate to drop further. Benz completely ignores the numbers of Jews who ‘converted’ to the Christian faith; in any case, Jews who converted to Christianity were no longer represented in any post-war statistics about Jews, and are thus considered by Benz and his co-authors to have been ‘gassed’.

Now, what is interesting are the two authors’ contrasting observations regarding the Jews said to be remaining in Hungary after the war. Whereas Benz suggests a total of 300,000 for Greater Hungary, Sanning cites that some 300,000 Jews were left after the war in Central (Trianon) Hungary alone. He bases his claim on, first, the US War Refugee Board’s Final Summary Report, which states that more than 200,000 Jews from Budapest were exempted from deportations following negotiations with the SS (S143). Second, in its aforementioned report the International Red Cross stated that some 100,000 Jews poured into Budapest from the provinces.[48] Furthermore, 200,000 Jews had been counted in Trianon Hungary in 1946, while according to Reitlinger one can assume that by then a veritable mass exodus of Jews to the West had begun (S143). One must also consider, he says, that no doubt a great many foreign, mostly Polish Jews were included in this migration. Sanning thus cites 200,000 as the minimum number of Jews present in post-war Trianon Hungary. For Benz, the number of survivors derives almost exclusively from the number of Jews present before the war, minus the decreases estimated as above, minus the actual or supposed deportations to concentration camps, i.e., (according to Nuremberg documents) to forced labor camps. Absolutely no other sources are used.
This is a disaster in method , it's hard to imagine anyone can claim demographics as evidence. Make note "they never document an extermination" , I haven't seen any such documents either.

And of course "Absolutely no other sources are used",

Czechoslovakia
Quote:
We shall consider Czechoslovakia as defined by its post-war borders (up to 1992), in other words without the Carpathian Ukraine. Benz, while discussing Czechoslovakia as for its borders prior to its first collapse in 1938/39, does give a breakdown of the proportions for the individual regions.[49]

Benz assumes a migration balance of net 33,000 emigrants up to mid-1943, while no net. emigration was allegedly apparent for Slovakia (B369). Regarding emigration from the Protectorate he cites official statistics of contemporaneous Jewish authorities which, however, did not incorporate illegal emigration (B358). Sanning totals more than 52,000 emigrants, substantiating this with a reference to the Anglo-American Committee, according to which the Jewish population had already decreased by 40,000 by late 1939 (S144). Sanning is the only one to take into account the drop in birth rate and the casualties of the Hungarian Labor Force.

Benz arrives at what he claims to be the approximate number of survivors in the Protectorate by totaling those Jews who officially reported back as survivors of the deportations, or who were otherwise found in Czechoslovakia after the war. Unfortunately such data were only ever gathered selectively, with respect to specific camps or cities, and never nationwide for any given point in time, so that the results are by necessity incomplete. For Slovakia, Benz derives his survivor statistics from the difference between those Jews who failed to return from deportations, and the population level prior to the deportations. Any westward migration is disregarded. Where the regions that were ceded to Hungary are concerned, Benz assumes that the Jews there suffered the same fate as the remaining Hungarian Jews. Aside from the Carpathian Ukraine, some 45,000 Jews were affected. The problems involved in the study of the Jews in the territory of Greater Hungary have already been mentioned.

Sanning refers to Reitlinger in pointing out that in 1946, in other words after the westward migration had already begun, some 32,000 Jewish survivors were found in the former Protectorate alone (S145). Also according to Reitlinger, 45,000 Jews - and according to other pro-Jewish sources, as many as 60,000 Jews - were found in Slovakia after the war (S146), which of course stands in clear contradiction to the estimates advanced by Benz, who claims 20,000 Jewish survivors for Slovakia and bases this assertion largely on Czech publications (B374).
No comment really , by now we already know the methods.

Quote:
Rumania is considered as defined by its post-war boundaries, including northern Transylvania and excluding Bessarabia and northern Bukovina. The only disagreement between the two authors consists in the treatment of the Jews of northern Transylvania, who came under Hungarian rule in the Second World War (see above). According to Benz, the majority of these were ‘gassed’ in Auschwitz, whereas according to Sanning, most of their losses were sustained in the Hungarian Military Labor Force. Since the number of survivors - up to 430,000, as Benz and Sanning document several times - rules out any great losses on the part of the North Transylvanian Jews, and since these findings do agree with the aforementioned results of recent investigations, one can assume that the Jews in the territory of post-war Rumania suffered next to no losses. Benz simply bases his calculation of the number of victims on the lowest documented number of survivors, in other words, he ignores the 430,000 Jewish survivors in his estimates, even though he mentioned them himself.
Well that he is a liar comes as no surprise, that he contradicts himself doesn't either. Take note that this is what the Romans meant - someone who purposefully falsifies evidence in an attempt to create a completely different story. Your example of car speed isn't something that applies because people usually say "about" and rarely does speed really have any effect on anything. I believe you should study Roman methodology better before speaking. Anyhow, 430,000 more can safely be attributed as an error

Bulgaria
Quote:
Bulgaria is discussed here in its pre- and post-war boundaries, in other words, without Greek Thrace, without Yugoslav Macedonia, and without the southern Rumanian Dobruja with its quantitatively negligible Jewish population. Benz chose to base his analysis on the larger wartime territory, while failing to reduce the regions of Yugoslavia or of Greece accordingly. This results in duplicate counts of 4,200 victims for Greece (B272) and 7,160 for Yugoslavia (B298), increasing the overall duplicate count to at least 173,193.

On the whole, there is no doubt that the Jews on Bulgarian soil were not in any danger and suffered no losses.[50] Sanning even shows a post-war population greater than that of pre-war times, and explains that Bulgaria served as gateway to the Middle East for a vast number of legal as well as illegal immigrants. According to Sanning, it is likely that noticeable numbers of foreign Jews were still in Bulgaria immediately after the end of the war.
Miscounted again I see. That 173,193 number is quite a lot to miscount.
Poland
Quote:
Poland is discussed here in terms of its post-war boundaries, without the eastern German regions. While Benz claims to add to this merely the administrative districts of Bialystok and Galicia, he does eventually include the victims for the entire territory that was Polish in the time between World Wars One and Two, i.e., parts of what was known during the Second World War as the Reich Commissionerships of Ukraine and Ostland. But since he deducts only the numbers of victims for Galicia and Bialystok from the total in his chapter about the Soviet Union, this results in duplicate counts which will be discussed in greater detail in the section regarding the Soviet Union.

3.9.1. Poland’s Pre-War Population

The last pre-war Polish census indicated approximately 3.1 million Jews (B416; S20).

On the basis of detailed studies Sanning shows that even during the period between the two world wars, the Polish Jews exhibited an extremely low rate of population increase (S26f.). The Institut für Zeitgeschichte adds that since 1933 some 100,000 Polish Jews per year had turned their backs on radically anti-Semitic Poland and emigrated to western Europe or overseas (S32).[51] Since those leaving the country were predominantly young people, the number of Jews in Poland must have decreased sharply due not only to this migration but also due to the increasingly disproportionate percentage of old people. Sanning puts the number of emigrants between 1931 and 1939 at only 500,000 and even factors in a population growth rate of 0.2%. He thus arrives at a population of 2,664,000 Jews prior to the war (S32).

This issue, to which Sanning devotes roughly 20 pages of intensive and thoroughly documented analysis, is accorded all of two sentences by Benz (B417):

"[…] if we extrapolate the census figures [of 1931] taking into account natural increase and emigration, we arrive at a 1939 total population of 35,100,000 persons for the Polish nation as a whole, of which the Jewish component is estimated at 3,446,000. We repeat: these figures are not certain [….]"

So Benz assumes, first of all, that the numbers of Polish Jews increased like those of the remaining Poles. Since Sanning clearly disproved this assumption eight years before Benz’s work was published, and yet Benz does not even mention Sanning’s arguments, there can be only one explanation for why untruths are clearly being disseminated here: the purpose is to maximize the initial population figure for Polish Jews.

Secondly, Benz assumes that the rate of emigration was essentially negligible. But since his book is a publication of the Institut für Zeitgeschichte and since this same Institut has publicly announced that some 100,000 Polish Jews had left Poland annually since 1933, one wonders whether this is a case of the left hand not knowing (or not wanting to know?) what the right hand is doing.

Benz therefore bases his subsequent arguments on a starting figure of 3,350,000 Jews present in Poland at the beginning of the war (B417), of which 2.3 million are assigned to the western part which the Germans occupied in 1939 (B418). In this way Benz has falsified the statistic by probably 700,000 Jews at the least. Are we to believe that Benz is unaware of Sanning’s analysis of population trends in pre-war Poland? This seems out of the question, since after all Benz’s book is a response to Sanning’s. As I see it, the fact that Benz spares this complex topic no more than one sentence and an apologetic comment ("We repeat: these figures are not certain") explains everything: this is an example of statistics being stretched well past the breaking point!
Rightly so, 700,000 is a huge error.

Quote:
According to Benz, some 300,000 of the initial 2.3 million Jews of western Poland fled eastward from the German army during the Polish campaign, into the Soviet-occupied area; of these 300,000, approximately 250,000 were deported to Siberia by the Soviets. Benz states that these are estimates, since allegedly there are no reliable figures (B425f.; 443). Accordingly, Benz suggests that approximately 2 million Polish Jews came under German rule in western Poland (B443). To document these statistics, Benz refers first and foremost to data originating with German sources whose doubtful value has already been mentioned.[28] Sanning explains that these figures are estimates calculated by the German authorities by extrapolating the census data from 1931 on the basis of a 10% population increase (S44f.). Even in those days there were no more reliable figures and analyses available, and contemporaneous statisticians made the same mistake that Benz repeats in his book.

Sanning quotes numerous Zionist, Jewish and pro-Jewish sources, all of which indicate that between 500,000 and 1 million Jews fled to the Soviet-occupied zone of Poland during the German-Polish war (S39-43). Again, the majority of these were deported to Siberia. Among the sources cited are Jewish relief organizations, which attended to 600,000 Polish Jews in Siberian labor camps. Since a considerable proportion of these deported Jews already died during the inhumane transports to these camps, Sanning postulates a total of 750,000 Jews who fled into the Soviet zone as well as a further 100,000 who had fled to Rumania (S44).[52] Thus, the number of Jews in western Poland had decreased from an initial 1,607,000 (S39) to 757,000 (S44), while the number remained unchanged in eastern Poland due to the deportation of predominantly western Polish refugees (approximately 1 million, also Benz, B443).

The fact that such migrations of fleeing persons were not unusual is demonstrated by the example of Belgium, where 1½ to 2 million persons fled from the German army at the start of the war, effectively obstructing any strategic movements of the Allied armies (S43).

Benz’s and Sanning’s figures regarding the number of Jews remaining after the war are not very different from each other. It should be added, however, that according to the United Press the British and American investigative committee for the European Jewish problem declared, at a press conference in February 1946, that there were still an estimated 800,000 Jews in post-war Poland, all of whom wished to emigrate.[53]
A case of no reputable sources again.

Quote:
Whereas Sanning does not touch on the methodology of the alleged mass murder, Benz makes several observations on this topic, of which we shall quote some aspects, with comments where necessary.

First, Benz expounds repeatedly on the alleged exhaust gas murders in vans, which of course he considers irrefutably proven (Kalisz, B431, Chelmno, B447, 462, cf. Yugoslavia, B320). The reader is referred to the chapter by I. Weckert in the present volume.

Regarding the methods of killing in other camps, he reports the use of bottled Zyklon B gas in Belzec (B462). But Zyklon B gas, i.e., hydrogen cyanide, is not and never was bottled. For industrial purposes hydrogen cyanide is transported in tanker trucks, but it is never bottled. Further, he recounts the use of Diesel engines for mass gassings (Belzec, B462, Treblinka, B463, cf. USSR, B540). Regarding gassing with Diesel exhaust fumes, cf. the chapter by F. P. Berg, and regarding Treblinka, cf. the study by A. Neumaier, both in this volume. Any further commentary would be superfluous at this point.

A noteworthy admission on Benz’s part is the following:

"Considering the fact that there are very few usable sources of documentation about the extermination camps, the number of Jews killed at these murder sites is especially difficult to ascertain, and depends primarily on estimates provided by witnesses, on the analysis of the regular transports and their numeric strengths, and on the population of those areas from which the respective killing centers were ‘supplied’ [….]" (B463f.)

The unreliable nature of witness testimony is demonstrated repeatedly in the present volume. Furthermore, straight calculations based exclusively on pre- and post-war populations are possible only if no uncontrolled emigration took place and if the initial statistics are sure to be correct. It is quite amazing that Benz nevertheless has the gall to use this method.

Benz finally concedes that the availability of source material leaves a great deal to be desired, not only where the alleged extermination camps are concerned but also with respect to the entire organization of the alleged extermination network structure (B463, footnote), and that there is no written, i.e., documented and thus provable order for the destruction of the Jews (B3; 458f.; 512).
Rudolf is a man with too much patience.
Soviet Union
Quote:
The Soviet Union is considered here as defined by its post-war boundaries until the early 90’s. To determine the number of victims, Benz merely subtracts the number of Jewish citizens present after the war from the pre-war number. He then subtracts from the result the victims of Bessarabia and northern Bukovina, in other words, 100,000 victims which are included in his count for Rumania (B409), as well as the victims from Bialystok and Galicia (600,000, included in his count for Poland, B451). We do not need to correct this here, since we have discussed Rumania as well as Poland in their post-war boundaries. But Benz commits two major errors in this context: first, he forgets that after the war the Soviet Union annexed the Carpathian Ukraine, with a pre-war Jewish population of approximately 100,000. But since the victims from this area were included in the count for Hungary (B338, approximately 90,000 victims), this does not affect Benz’s statistics. In our analysis, however, we considered Hungary and Czechoslovakia in their post-war boundaries and must therefore add the Carpathian Ukrainian Jews to the Soviet figures. This increases both the pre-war Jewish population and the number of victims accordingly. Of the approximately 101,000 Jews from the Carpathian Ukraine, Sanning considers 15,000 as missing and 86,000 as absorbed by the USSR (S156).

Secondly, Benz overlooks the fact that, contrary to his own claim, the former regions which made up the Reich Commissionerships of Ostland and the Ukraine are included in his discussion of Poland. Since Benz assumes approximately 1 million Jews in the Soviet-occupied area (B443), of which roughly 600,000 are properly accounted for in the adjustments he makes for Bialystok and Galicia (B457), this means that he counted some 360,000 Jewish victims twice (90% victims of the 400,000 Jews living there). This brings the total of Jewish victims counted twice by Benz to 533,193.
Error is quite out of control.

Quote:
Sanning’s category "German Theater of War" in the above table includes Jewish losses suffered in the area under German military influence as the results of pogroms not carried out or initiated by German troops, of starvation and epidemics, as well as of the execution of partisans (permitted by international law) of which Jews are known to have comprised a very great percentage. This category, as well as "Casualties of deportation" and "Killed in combat" in the Red Army, are rather willfully dismissed by Benz:

"It [the number of victims] also includes the casualties among Jewish soldiers and civilians [partisans] as well as those who succumbed to the strain of flight and to starvation. This is justified. They too were victims of brutal National Socialist policies." (B560)

Benz neither quantifies these categories, nor does he give reasons for this catch-all approach, for these are the closing words of his book. However, there certainly are clues to be found regarding the attitude embraced by the book’s collective authorial mind.

For example, Benz speaks of the "attack on the Soviet Union" (B499), and asserts that Stalin had done everything he could to "give Hitler no pretext for anti-Soviet measures, least of all for war" (B507). Further, he believes that the Soviet Union had practiced a "policy of appeasement" (B508). Today it is generally acknowledged even in Russia that the fairy-tale of Germany’s attack on the peace-loving Soviet Union really belongs in the junk room of Communist war-time propaganda.[54] In this respect, the losses resulting from the war are not due exclusively to Germany, and they certainly have no relevance whatsoever to any aspect of the Holocaust.

Benz suggests that there are no systematic accounts of the extent and scope of Soviet evacuations and deportations of material resources and human beings. He dismisses this very important aspect in merely two paragraphs, with the comment that Stalin did not wish to provoke Hitler with evacuation activities (no, it’s not a joke - he really does claim this!) and that there were therefore hardly any noteworthy deportations (B507). Sanning, on the other hand, devotes pages 53-109 exclusively to this issue and draws on a wide range of Allied, Jewish and Soviet statistics to offer sound data regarding the scope of Soviet evacuation and deportation measures at the start of the war. And with that, Benz’s claim that there are no systematic accounts of this topic is already disproved. Did Benz and his co-authors not even read Sanning’s book after all? But clearly they must have, for Benz does not deem Sanning’s explanations in general to be a systematic account:

"[…] The author [Sanning] distinguishes himself through his methodologically unsound handling of the statistical material as well as through daring and demonstrably erroneous reasoning and conclusions." (B558, footnote 396.)

Unfortunately, Benz does not enlighten his readers as to what might be erroneous about Sanning’s arguments. While Benz assumes that approximately 3 to 3.2 million Soviet Jews came under the sphere of influence of German troops (B509), Sanning again shows, on the basis of unimpeachable sources, that the number must have been less than one million (S103). He documents the fact that in most Russian cities a large part of the population that was fit to work, and especially the intelligentsia, had already been evacuated by the time German troops moved in. It is beyond the scope of the present work to detail Sanning’s plethora of documentation and proof at this point, but one of his arguments shall be discussed in greater detail. It is generally accepted that some 600,000 Jews wore the Red Army uniform. If one considers that many Jews were deported to labor camps beyond the Ural Mountains, and that the normal recruiting level did not exceed 30% of the male population in any of the nations involved in World War Two (all of which has been documented), then according to Sanning at least 4 million Jews must have lived in the non-occupied parts of the Soviet Union.

Now it may well be that these 600,000 Jews were already conscripted before the war, since as we know the USSR was planning her own large-scale attack on Europe,[54] and for that the Soviets had deported most of the male population fit for military service during the German advance. This would mean for Benz that only few men of an age for military service would have been left to fall into the hands of the Germans, so that in the occupied regions more than 90% of the female Jews would have been exterminated while the conscripted and deported men in the hinterland and in the army would have had a considerably better chance for survival. According to Benz, the mortality rate among the women would thus have been greater than or at least equal to that among the men. From this it follows that a demographic analysis of the Soviet Union today should reveal greater or equal numbers of men in the age group that was of military age at the time in question. However, this is clearly not the case. Rather, the sex distribution corresponds to that of the other Soviet peoples, in other words, there is a similar deficit of men. This means either that men and women were deported in roughly equal numbers and consequently relatively few Soviet Jews actually fell into German hands, or that Jewish women who fell into German hands were generally not killed.

Regarding the number of Jews to be found in the post-war Soviet Union, Benz cites Soviet census data only. He sets out that "doubts about the reliability of Soviet censuses […] are not justified" because these data served as the basis and foundation of the Soviet national economy (B558).

But every child knows nowadays that all conceivable kinds of data have been falsified in the service of precisely this national economy so as to manifest Soviet superiority in economic competition with the capitalist western world. Domestically speaking, these falsifications served to close Russian eyes, ears and mouths to the inexorably approaching collapse. But where the number of Jews identified by the censuses is concerned, there is not even any need for falsification. After all, the radically atheistic Soviet Union was one of those nations that made it especially difficult for the Jews to profess their faith. Therefore, the numbers of Jews that voluntarily acknowledged their faith in 1959 and 1970 (2.2 and 2.1 million, respectively; B559; S117) says nothing at all about the number of survivors in the Soviet Union. Jewish estimates dating from the 1970s suggest 3 to 4 million Soviet Jews (S117ff.). More recent newspaper reports even speak of 5 million Jews and more, which, however, seems unlikely in light of the stagnating demographic trends.[55] Since Zionist circles are striving for the emigration of Jews from Russia to Israel after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it is possible that they tend to exaggerate the number of Jews in Russia, with the intent to dramatize their hard lot during 70 years of Stalinist oppression. The numbers of presumably present or missing Jews thus serve as politically strategic putty in other respects as well.
Well, what can be said really?

Quote:
In terms of the mass murders of Jews on Soviet soil, Benz again cites mostly witness testimony as evidence.

Behind the frontlines of the German troops fighting in the Soviet Union, the so-called Special Units (Sonderkommandos) served, according to Benz, to combat partisan activity (B514f.; 518; 520; 528f.; 540). Aside from that, they allegedly were also chiefly responsible for the mass executions of Jewish civilians, whose numbers are very difficult to ascertain (B577). Benz suggests that the statistics circulated during the war in this respect by the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee are much too low, so as to "[…] show the Soviet endeavors to rescue the Jewish population in an (inappropriately) favorable light in the United States." (B557, footnote.) But since the United States never bothered about the Jewish victims, and in fact exaggerated the number of victims in their own propaganda after 1933, it is not clear just how and whom Jewish anti-Fascists could have impressed in the States with allegedly deflated statistics. Benz’s suggestion, that anti-Fascists should have trivialized the alleged Fascist atrocities for propaganda reasons, is something completely new; the opposite is surely more likely. One can only conclude from all this that these numbers of victims that Benz considers to have been deflated by the anti-Fascists are in fact already exaggerated.

Regarding the use of vans for mass gassings in the Soviet Union, Benz offers us a single, particularly suspect source: the Stalinist show trials of Char’kov and Krasnodar (B526f.; 540).[56] Such utterly uncritical, indiscriminate citing almost makes one wonder whether Benz and his co-authors perhaps might even share Stalinist sentiments. Ignorance is no excuse for qualified scholars.
[quote] The mass executions in the East are generally considered proven, i.e., documented by the so-called "USSR Event Reports" which the Special Units allegedly sent to Berlin on a regular basis and which detail, among other things, the number of executions. All events, however, were not listed there, so that Benz considers them an insufficient basis for determining the number of victims (B542f.). One exception, it is claimed, it the typical case of Babi Yar (B530; 534; 542). But as it has been irrefutably proven by now that the alleged massacre of Babi Yar is an atrocity lie of no substance,[57] this admittedly throws the authenticity or at least the reliability of the entire IMT document series "USSR Event Reports" and all other documents into doubt, and hence the entire Special Units mass murder per se. Even Benz’s shameless assertion that "the authenticity of these reports is beyond question" (B541) cannot change that, since H.-H. Wilhelm, whom Benz quotes as proof of his claims, states as well, that the reliability of the figures given in these documents is doubtful.[58] How did H.-H. Wilhelm describe the behavior of Benz:[59]

"Often, the consensus of research can only be explained by the researchers copying each other’s work uncritically."

Thus, Benz argumentation is typical of the reciprocal quoting that characterizes the "standard literature" of Holocaust apologetics, "in which reciprocal citing produces the impression of a scientifically sound network of argumentation [….]" (B8, footnote 24).[
/Quote]
*Rubs chin* Now what does that remind me of?

Quote:
It should also be pointed out that Benz repeatedly stresses that the Germans destroyed all evidence of their mass exterminations, mostly through exhumation and complete incineration, for which reason no victims or mass graves remain in evidence (B320; 469; 479; 489; 537f.). Millions of victims allegedly disappeared without a trace. And in the case of Babi Yar, Benz implies, even in a manner invisible to methods of aerial reconnaissance.

Gigantic mass graves cannot be rendered undetectable by exhuming and burning the bodies they contain. Such large-scale disturbance of the soil and the concomitant disruption of soil layers, the settling of the fill etc. would be evident not only in the contemporaneous Allied and German air photos, but also today, if someone only cared to look. Since according to Benz "this task was [carried out] inadequately in at least a few cases", there ought in fact to be much more evidence remaining: bodies or parts thereof that were not burned, millions of bones and teeth, as well as loads of ashes.[60]

If anything of the sort had ever been found, the Stalinist Communists - who were known for their efficient and effective propaganda system - would have made the most of this, naturally in the presence of international investigative committees. It would have been a welcome opportunity for revenge for the embarrassment the Germans had inflicted on the Soviets with respect to Katyn, which was only then being revealed, with the assistance of international investigative bodies, as the Soviet mass murder of Polish officers.[61]

But no, the oh-so-peace-loving Soviet Union would never have thought of doing anything so mean… Even today, when the mass graves of hundreds of thousands of Stalin’s victims are being discovered, often by accident and 50 or even 60 years after the fact, there are still no traces of any German mass graves or burning sites, and in fact any public speculation whether modern methods might not help to locate some is studiously avoided - after all, any such sites have vanished without a trace, thanks to the wondrous methods only the Germans knew about.

When the German army retreated, what did turn up instead of mass graves were tens of thousands of women, old men, and children. In his address of indictment to the IMT, General Roman A. Rudenko explained that hundreds of thousands of children, women and old men who were unfit for forced labor were left behind in concentration camps by the Germans during their retreat.[62] Counselor A. A. Smirnov submitted a document giving more details of these camps in White Russia.[63] Urgent field research is needed to find out whether these people unfit for work may possibly have been some of those who were ‘selected’ in the camps further west and who, according to Steffen Werner’s theory, were in fact deported primarily to White Russia.[64]
The Number of Victims, i.e., Missing Persons
Quote:
On pp. 15f. of his book Benz lists, for each country, the number of victims on which the co-authors of his book have agreed. In the preceding table, only the entries for Italy and Greece show different numbers, specifically the numbers given by the respective authors themselves, since the figures contained in Benz’s list differ slightly from these and do not appear in the chapters themselves (Italy 6,513, Greece 59,185).

The difference between Benz’s total and the total reduced here by the number of victims counted twice amounts to 517,656, which due to statistical rounding diverges only insignificantly from the 533,193 duplicate counts traced in the preceding. This proves fully half a million ‘duplicates’ in Benz’s highly lauded ‘definitive work’, and corresponds to an approximate 10% inflation of the total. This ought not to have happened if Benz had taken the trouble to coordinate the individual chapters of his book. In his introduction, however, Benz mentions a sum total of 5.3 to just over 6 million Holocaust victims.[20] It seems, therefore, as though Benz had already taken these duplicate counts into consideration, even if his results are not verifiable due to his failure to explain his line of reasoning.

The decisive difference between Benz and Sanning lies in their treatment of three countries: (Greater) Hungary, Poland, and the Soviet Union. On the basis of these examples we have shown here the (possibly deliberately) erroneous and falsifying methods of which Benz and his co-authors availed themselves in order to produce their statistics and to arrive at the desired result.

Quote:
In 1990, the number of victims for Auschwitz, which had been set at approximately 4 million by the Polish authorities ever since the time of the IMT trials, was officially reduced to one million.[65] In early 1993, the Polish Historical Society advised lowering the figure by another 400,000, since the air photos taken by Allied reconnaissance planes had shown that the extermination of the Hungarian Jews had never taken place.[45] The alleged mass extermination, they say, must therefore have been discontinued in May 1944 at the latest. In 1993, Pressac has begun to advocate the theory that the mass extermination did not start until 1942, half a year later than assumed to date, for which reason the number of victims, including the murdered Hungarian Jews, should be reduced to 630,000 gas chamber victims.[43] If one draws the obvious conclusions from these two publications - namely, the later beginning and earlier end of the killings - then the approximately 1 million victims must be reduced by 370,000 (according to Pressac) and by another 400,000 (according to the Polish Historical Society). We are thus left with only 230,000 alleged victims of the ‘gas chambers’. In the German edition of his latest book, Pressac reduces the number of gas chamber victims to about 500,000.[66] As I stated here It would seemin the first edition of this book, it seemed to be only a matter of time until the next downward revision of this continuously shrinking figure[67] would be made, and in fact, this downward revision came in 2002: ‘only’ 510,000 total victims are now claimed, 356,000 of them alleged gassing victims.[68]

Professor Ernst Nolte, for example, has considered it justified criticism to point out that while the number of victims of this supposedly largest extermination camp is being steadily reduced, the overall number of victims alleged for the Holocaust remains the same.[69] But the matter takes a turn for the grotesque when the number of Auschwitz victims is reduced and at the very same time the Israeli memorial site Yad Vashem hastens to report that new research in Soviet archives has revealed that the number of Jewish victims of mass execution behind the front is actually higher by 250,000 than was assumed to date, so that one should, in fact, reckon 6.25 rather than 6 million[70] or even up to 7 million.[71] One can only wonder with which statistical data and by which methods these revised figures were obtained.

But if the body count for the individual camps continues to drop and the overall total remains the same or even increases, then one must ask where the victims may have died, if not in the alleged gas chambers? To solve this problem there are always endeavors, for example, to increase the number of victims for other camps. Case in point: for Treblinka, figures ranging from 700,000 to 900,000 have been the standard to date.[72] Benz now postulates between 1 and 1.2 million (B468), of which 974,000 are said to have been Polish Jews (B495). Thus, Treblinka with its more than one million victims is weighted more heavily in Benz's analysis than Auschwitz is - a completely new trend in Holocaust studies.
Hilarious!

Quote:
Now that the victims of Auschwitz have decreased numerically to far below the 1 million mark, the remaining 5 to 6 million victims must be distributed among other killing centers. The preceding table represents the distribution of victims as the official Institut für Zeitgeschichte (IfZ) would have it until recently.[73] It is interesting, first of all, that the IfZ revised the statement of its former Head, Martin Broszat, who had said that there were no gassings in the concentration camps of the Reich proper.[47] The fact that the above list once again contains the facilities of Dachau, Sachsenhausen, Ravensbrück, etc.,[74] is no doubt due to the Institute's realization that one must never partially admit a lie because that means running the risk of being exposed totally. The figures listed in the last column are those given in Benz's book and originate with a much older publication of the IfZ.[75] One wonders why Benz did not use more recent statistics provided by the same source.

It would also be interesting to see how historians might try to explain the 3-million-plus discrepancy between these approximately 2,700,000, i.e., 3,000,000 victims, most of them 'victims of the gas chambers', and the overall total of roughly 6 (or even 7) million victims. If one continues to reduce the Auschwitz death toll in accordance with the new trends to this effect, and simultaneously increases the overall total, this means that there are 4 million victims that must be freshly redistributed. Benz's minor increase of the number of Treblinka victims, from 700,000 to 1.2 million (B468), is not enough to solve the problem, and contradicts the above statements of the selfsame Institut für Zeitgeschichte. The remaining 3 to 4 million Jews cannot possibly be explained away as victims of Einsatzkommando executions, starvation and disease, and the like. Such numbers of people - numbers of a similar magnitude as the total population of Berlin - do not simply vanish without a trace. It is thus not surprising that Benz does not attempt to explain in his book where the missing remainder might fit in.
Uhm yeah, this is the modus operandi that's normal...

Quote:
Benz does not spend so much as one single paragraph on the problem of Jewish post-war emigration from Europe. And what is more: he does not even mention that after the war there was a large-scale migration, especially of the European population of Jewish faith, which has become known as the modern Exodus. The first ten sections of his book are conspicuous in their lack of any mention of post-war emigration, while others (Greece and Yugoslavia) fashion a fig-leaf for themselves by admitting to a few hundreds or thousands who left the country after the war's end.

Since Benz usually calculates the numbers of victims from the difference between pre- and post-war populations, this cannot but result in a great margin of error. Sanning, on the other hand, presents a summary of Jewish immigration into non-European nations, which is reproduced in the above table (S173). These data has never been refuted, not even by Benz, so that one may assume that the figures are correct.

Sanning shows that in 1970 there were still some 860,000 Jews in formerly German-occupied Europe, excluding the Soviet Union (S174). Since the Jews of western Europe exhibited next to no population increase after the war, then in light of the post-war emigration (some 1.548 million, cf. above table) at least 2,408,000 Jews must have lived in the formerly German-occupied non-Soviet parts of Europe after the war. Sanning determines that immediately after the war only 1,443,000 Jews were statistically located in formerly German-occupied non-Soviet Europe (S157), while 1.1 million were considered missing (cf. Table above).

Benz arrives at 1.2 to 1.3 million statistically accounted-for Jews in formerly German-occupied, non-Soviet Europe immediately after the war. The difference between this and the 2.4 million Jews which Sanning can account for, a difference of 1 to 1.2 million Jews, therefore, emigrated after the war without registering. If one relates these unregistered emigrations to the 1.1 million Jews which Sanning identifies as missing from the formerly German-occupied parts of Europe, then in view of the great fluctuations in the data one cannot, according to Sanning, make any statistically reliable observations regarding whether or how many Jews died from unknown causes under the Third Reich. In this context, 'statistically reliable' means: since the fluctuations in the data range well over several hundreds of thousands, any losses on this order of magnitude cannot be demonstrated with any degree of certainty. In any case, however, it indicates that the Jewish population in formerly German-occupied non-Soviet Europe very likely did not suffer any losses ranging into the millions during World War Two.
4.4. Corrections for Wolfgang Benz
Quote:
If one deducts the approximately 1 million unregistered emigrants from the 5.3 to 6 million victims that Benz claims he found, this leaves him with 4.3 to 5 million victims. From this, one must further deduct the difference between the Soviet Jews who appeared in Soviet statistics and the real number (some 1.5 million), the number of Jews who died in the Soviet Union from other causes (deportation, war, partisan warfare, at least 500,000), the number of statistically fabricated additional Polish Jews (some 700,000) as well as the number of Hungarian Jews who probably did not succumb in their entirety (300,000), in other words, a total of roughly 4 million. This would leave Benz with a remainder of at most 1.3 to 2 million unsolved cases.
This is a huge error margin, this is what the Romans would call falsification.


6.1. The Fate of Jewish Personalities
Quote:
In the late 1980s the Swedish demographer Carl O. Nordling recreated the fate of Jewry during the Second World War by means of a statistical study[77] based on the Jewish personalities listed in the Encyklopædia Judaica.[78] He chose 722 Jews entered therein, drawn from 12 European countries[79] that had come under German rule or supremacy in the course of the war. His choice was based on the following criteria:

*

born between 1860 and 1909;
*

not emigrated by January 1, 1938;
*

still living on January 1, 1939.

According to Nordling's study, 317 (44%) of these 722 Jews had emigrated by late 1941, 256 (35%) were spared internment of any kind. Altogether, 95 of these Jewish personalities died during this time (13%), of which 57 cases (8%) occurred in the eastern camps as well as in unknown places and under unknown circumstances. Aside from the casualties resulting from disease, transport and starvation, therefore, these 8% must also include the victims of any deliberate mass extermination.

For the Polish Jews, the matter stands as follows:[80]

Of 65 Jewish notables listed in the Encyklopædia Judaica on January 1, 1940, 13 (20%) emigrated, 14 (22%) survived, 38 (58%) died. Of these 38, however, 23 (60%) died, not in the eastern camps, but in freedom - in ghettos, on transports, as consequence of armed conflict or reprisals, as well as victims of starvation and disease in western camps (Dachau, Nordhausen). In only 15 cases, in other words in approximately 23% of the Polish Jewish notables, the place of death is either unknown or located in one of the eastern camps; and here it is again necessary to consider that some of them succumbed to starvation, disease and forced transports at the end of the war. Even among the Polish Jewish personalities, therefore, probably less than 15% could have been victims of a hypothetical mass extermination. Benz, on the other hand, assumes that approximately 80-90% of all Polish Jews present in Poland in 1940 - some 2 million, according to him - were murdered in the extermination gas chambers (B495).

In another study, Nordling compares his statistical findings with those of W. N. Sanning, a comparison which we will discuss at greater length here.[81]
The 60% you mentioned, I make straw man arguments eh? *Snicker*

Quote:
The percentages determined are astonishingly similar in many respects, and this indicates that Sanning's findings do indeed reflect the fates of Jewish notables as these are set out in the Encyklopædia Judaica. It is also worth noting that the opportunities for emigration were fewer, or the desire to emigrate was lesser, for Jewish personalities than was the case for the average Jewish population.

But before acknowledging Sanning's statistical findings to be correct, it is necessary to examine the fates of other Jewish population groups in the same way as that of the Jews represented in the Encyklopædia Judaica in order to eliminate the following potential distortions:

1.

The decision of which Jewish notables to include in the 1972 edition of the Encyklopædia Judaica will have been influenced by the fates of the Jews in question during and after the war:
1.

Some Jews may have been included only because they died as a result of German measures of persecution. Examples: Janusz Korczak (1879-1942) was included because he voluntarily went to Treblinka with a group of children; the nun Edith Stein (1891-1942) was included because she died a martyr. If these people had survived, they might not have been included in the encyclopedia.
2.

Some Jews, on the other hand, were included only because they survived the war and could go on to become famous afterwards. For example: Pierre Mendès-France (born in 1907) was only a little-known Undersecretary of State before the war.
2.

International connections or material advantages may have made emigration easier for Jewish notables than for the average Jewish citizen. However, this category of Jews had largely already emigrated by the start of the war.
3.

Jewish VIPs cannot change their identity, go underground, flee, or emigrate illegally as can persons who are less well-known. Unlike for the average citizen, therefore, the life and suffering of Jewish personalities is usually easier to trace.
4.

It is possible that due to their greater social and political involvement Jewish notables were subject, especially during the war, to more restrictive measures imposed by the German occupation powers.
Take note of the table here.
Korherr Report
Quote:
Richard Korherr was the leading statistician of the Third Reich. In early 1943, on Himmler's instructions, he drew up a report on the trends which European Jewish population statistics had exhibited since the NS had come to power. Himmler wanted to submit this report to Hitler. After several discussions and some correspondence with Himmler, Korherr revised and shortened his first report.[84] These two reports as well as the correspondence that goes with them are counted among the allegedly central pieces of evidence proving the Holocaust, on whose basis G. Wellers, for example, believes he can set the number of victims of the Holocaust at approximately 2 million by late March 1943 alone.[85]

It needs to be said at the start that there is nothing whatsoever in the Korherr Reports and the accompanying correspondence, which was intended for Hitler's and Himmler's eyes only, which would indicate any intent to exterminate the Jews of Europe, or which would suggest that killings had already taken place - which is surprising enough, since it would hardly have been necessary to keep any such goings-on from Himmler's or Hitler's knowledge. The Report does reveal, however, that some 21/2 million Jews were evacuated to the East. Korherr states:

"Between 1937 and early 1943 the number of Jews in Europe had decreased by approximately 4 million, due partly to emigration, partly to the excess of deaths over births among the Jews of Central and western Europe, and partly to evacuations, particularly from the more densely populated eastern regions, which are counted here as part of the decrease."[86]

Why does Korherr mention that the evacuations are counted as part of the decrease? That would make sense only if they are not actually gone from Europe but are nevertheless counted statistically as having emigrated. So were they perhaps not dead? S. Challen was puzzled not only by this additional remark and by the absence of even the slightest allusion to the mass murder in these top secret papers intended for Himmler and Hitler only, but also by the fact that the reputedly best statistician in Germany covered up gross errors in his report so elegantly.[87]

In his conclusions, for example, Korherr wrote that the Jewish population losses in Europe from 1933 to 1943 ( some 5 million) were caused approximately 50% by emigration to other continents, but his statistics cite only about 1.5 million emigrants. So roughly 1 million emigrants are missing. This begs the question: why would Germany's foremost statistician draw conclusions contradicting his own data, and in a secret report intended for Hitler, no less? Furthermore, if one adds Korherr's individual 1943 figures regarding the Jews scattered throughout the world, one arrives at a total that is only slightly less than the pre-war total; this already rules out any mass extermination. S. Challen therefore went to the trouble of examining Korherr's claims more closely. He ultimately concludes that Korherr, acting on Himmler's orders, reduced the emigration statistics by one million and increased the number of Jews evacuated to the East by that same million. And in one of his letters, Himmler writes that this report would serve well as a cover.[88] Challen arrives at the well-founded conclusion that Himmler wanted to keep Hitler from realizing that a large part of the Polish and Russian Jews in the East had gotten away by means of flight and Soviet evacuation measures. On the basis of Korherr's data, Challen calculated that the Jews lost approximately 1.2 million of their number during World War Two, some 750,000 of them in Germany's sphere of influence.[89]

In 1977, Korherr himself confirmed that he did not know anything about an ongoing extermination of the Jews during the war and was not aware that the term "Sonderbehandlung" (special treatment) was used as a code word to allegedly cover up mass murder.[90]

In the end, therefore, the Korherr Reports confirm Sanning's statistics regarding the fate of the eastern European Jews, and are not even remotely suited to proving a hypothetical mass murder.
It seems that not even the person counting these Jews knew about exterminations. Curious that eh?

Compensation
Quote:

A common question is whether the number of Jewish applications for compensation from Germany would not reveal how many Jews survived the Third Reich. In fact, any such attempt runs into insurmountable problems. The German Federal Ministry of Finance does provide detailed information about compensation payments made to persons persecuted in the Third Reich. On July 1, 1979, approximately 4.3 million individual applications for compensation had been filed; 13 years later the Ministry cites some 4.4 million individual applications.[91] For several reasons, however, this number is difficult to interpret. For one thing, the Ministry does not register the faith group of the applicants, so that there is no way of telling how many Jews are included in the total. Secondly, approximately half the applications have been turned down, but no reasons for the individual decisions are given; perhaps the applicant had never actually been in the German sphere of influence, or perhaps he had not suffered any losses despite his/her alleged Jewish faith. The refusals can thus also not be interpreted. Thirdly, the Ministry's statistics reflect the number of applications, not the number of applicants. Since each kind of compensation (damage to life, health, property, fortune, professional advancement, etc.) must be applied for separately, any one applicant may very well have applied several times. On the other hand, many applications were made collectively by groups of persons, so that the statistics reflect entire families or even larger groups with one single application. One must also consider that until recently the Jews in the Soviet Union could not collect any compensation and are thus not included in the figure.[92] And finally, an American newspaper has reported that only one in two Holocaust survivors receives compensation payments from Germany.[93] Thus, at the present time, the statistics available regarding applications for compensation do not lend themselves to answering demographic questions.
Every Jew is a survivor you dumb Goy.


Holocaust Survivors
Similar info from before
Quote:
According to information from the Israel-based official organization Amcha, which devotes all its activities to taking care of Holocaust survivors, 834,000 to 960,000 Holocaust survivors were still alive in the summer of 1997. The same organization defines a Holocaust survivor as

"any Jew who lived in a country at the time when it was: - under Nazi regime; - under Nazi occupation, - under regime of Nazi collaborators as well as any Jew who fled due to the above regime or occupation."[94]

According to a letter from the German section of this organization, roughly 1/3 of all Holocaust survivors are so-called "child survivors",[95] and where "child survivors" means that the according Holocaust survivors were not older than 16 years at the end of the war.[96]

If the average life expectancy of all age groups of these survivors as well as the statistical distribution of the Jews over these age groups in 1945 were known, it would be possible to calculate approximately how many Holocaust survivors were still alive in 1945, i.e., after the war ended. Unfortunately we do not have such data, but we can on the one hand estimate this age distribution by extrapolating it from the known statistical distribution of the Jews of the 1920s and 1930s,[97] corrected by Amcha's statement about the 1/3 of "child survivors". On the other hand we can draw on the life expectancy statistics of another people whose fate from 1945 onwards was at least similar to that of the surviving European Jews of that time.

Since the German people as a whole experienced terrible living conditions from 1941 to 1948, it seems appropriate to draw on their mortality statistics.[98] For our calculations we have assumed two different age distributions in 1945: the first as given in the Atlas quoted,[100] and the other based on the assumption that 1/3 of all survivors in 1997 must have been between 0 and 15 years of age.[99] The rest of the calculations simply draw on the German "death tables".

Probably the results as shown in the following table may change if we get better data about the death rates of the Jewish survivors and about their age distribution then and today. But certainly our results are likely to at least approximate the truth. If one assumes a more severe fate for the average Holocaust survivor than for the average German - which most scientists tend to do - then this would result in an even higher number of survivors in 1945.

The number of Holocaust victims would be the difference between our calculated number of survivors, and the number of Jews who were alive in Europe prior to National Socialist persecution. The inflationary definition of 'Holocaust survivor' by Amcha, however, makes our task difficult. Given this definition, it is for example not clear how one should handle the hundreds of thousands of Jews who were deported to Soviet slave labor camps by Stalin or who fled voluntarily with the Red Army to the East right at the beginning of the German-Russian war.[100]

According to Sanning, and corresponding to the findings of other statistical studies, in the late 1920s and early 1930s there were roughly 6.1 million Jews in those European countries, excluding the Soviet Union, which later came under the influence of National Socialism.[103] Undoubtedly some 3 million Jews lived in the pre-war Soviet Union, of which at least one million lived in areas that were never occupied by German troops. Thus, in the late 1920s and early 1930s some 8.1 million Jews lived in what was to become the German sphere of influence. According to our calculations, 3.46 to 5 million of them survived the 'Holocaust', and 3.1 to 4.64 million did not.

The word 'Holocaust' is placed in quotation marks here because this figure includes not only victims of arbitrary killings by the National Socialist regime (which is a more specific definition of the term 'Holocaust victims'), but also many other categories, such as victims of Stalinist mass deportations, Stalinist slave labor camps, victims of regular combat (as soldier, labor force or air raid victims) as well as irregular combat (partisan), victims of non-German pogroms, natural excess of deaths over births, etc. All these reasons, which certainly did reduce the numbers of Jews compared to the time prior to National Socialist rule, may add up to more than one or even two million.[103] Consequently, the number of possible real Holocaust victims - according to official data provided by Israel - is probably less than 3 or even 2 million Jews. This admission is fair enough to start with.

However, one should be aware that even the published number of Holocaust survivors is a figure likely to be manipulated due to its financial implications for Jewish organizations who are permanently claiming compensations (cf. Note 95). Thus, it was not very surprising that R. Bloch, Jewish head of the Swiss Holocaust fund, the task of which is the collection of money for Jewish Holocaust survivors, announced in early 1998 that there are more than 1,000,000 Holocaust survivors still alive at that time.[104] There appears to be a permanent Jewish resurrection nowadays...
= |

Conclusion

Quote:
In its analysis of the central and western European nations, W. N. Sanning's book rests on a somewhat shaky foundation. Benz has the better material in this instance. Neither of the two works addresses the problem of 'de facto Jews' in sufficient detail; while each of Benz's co-authors deals with the problem as far as he sees fit, Sanning touches on this matter only marginally.

But it is the analyses of the nations Poland, the Soviet Union and Hungary, as well as the issue of post-war emigration, that are of vital significance to a determination of the number of Holocaust victims. In this respect, Benz's work fails miserably. Graph 1 is a visual summary of the two books. The overall height of the bars represents the number of Jews prior to World War Two in the area that later came under German dominion. Roughly speaking, Benz determines his number of Holocaust victims by subtracting the number of registered emigrants during and after the war from the initial pre-war population. He blames on the Germans Jewish victims of Soviet deportation and imprisonment no less than the victims of pogroms that took place neither with the participation nor even with the tacit approval of German troops, as well as the victims of Allied bombings, the casualties of the Labor Force, the Jewish soldiers who fell in the ranks of the Soviet armies, and the casualties from regular partisan warfare. Since none of these victims lost their lives due to deliberate or culpably negligent measures or actions by the Germans, this method of maximizing the number of victims can only be called dishonest. Sanning rightly excludes these victims from his analysis, of course with the exception of the regular partisan victims, whose numbers are difficult to estimate and which must not be lumped together with any victims of potential irregular executions.

Benz also all but ignores actual or apparent losses through non-military means such as the natural excesses of deaths over births, religious conversions, unregistered emigration during and especially after the war, as well as Jews not statistically recorded as such today. In particular, Benz fails to make any mention of the partly uncontrolled and unregistered post-war mass emigration that has become known as the 'modern Exodus'; of the fact, generally acknowledged today, that Soviet statistics reflect only a fraction of the Jews actually living in the Soviet Union; and of the fact that the Polish Jews also suffered great population decreases in the inter-war period due to emigration, the disproportionate percentage of old people, and the excess of deaths over births.

Benz emphasizes that where the Soviet evacuations, the Jewish population trends in Poland, and the Polish flight migrations are concerned, there are no definite figures, and one must rely on estimates alone. He arrives at his utterly incorrect estimates in the space of a very few sentences, without any sort of logical line of reasoning. Even though he admits that these issues are in dire need of further research, he avoids any such endeavor.

Instead, the book unleashes a prodigious verbal deluge in order to rehash early Jewish history and the history of each nation's anti-Jewish measures, something which countless other authors have already done (some of them much better) and which contributes nothing to solving the authors' self-appointed task.

Recent findings, such as the evidence which air photos can provide regarding the alleged extermination of the Hungarian Jews, are also studiously ignored. And what is worse: where the alleged methods of killing are concerned, Benz regurgitates the old, oft-refuted claims and ignores the fact that engineers and scientists are the sole experts in this field.

Also, Benz and his co-authors quote Stalinist and Communist sources with not so much as half a thought to critical assessment even when these sources clearly go back to show trials, and blithely adopt Stalinist terminology in their arguments, showing themselves in a dubious and unscientific light in the process.

And finally, fourteen of the supposedly best subject historians in the world[105] were clearly incapable of ensuring uniform treatment of national boundaries in the individual chapters. An eye to this would have avoided counting half a million victims twice in the overall total.

Thus the judgment they thought to pronounce on another scholar ultimately reflects on themselves:

"[...] almost all other studies of the Holocaust give the impression that the number of victims could be [...] determined directly from the retrospective number of [counted] Jews." (B408)

"[...] The author [in this case, Benz et al.] distinguishes himself through his methodologically unsound handling of the statistical material as well as through daring and demonstrably erroneous reasoning and conclusions." (B558, footnote 396.)

Like Benz, Sanning commits the error of placing too much faith in those statistics which are available. In actual fact, the fluctuations in the data preclude any definitive answer to the question of how many hundreds of thousands of Jews lost their lives in the German sphere of influence. These figures are lost in the fluctuations characterizing the statistical material. To date, only those figures provided by the International Committee of the Red Cross can be regarded as certain. The ICRC's Special Office in Arolsen keeps track of all officially documented deaths in German concentration camps of the Third Reich. A summary from January 1, 1993, documents 296,081 deaths. The distribution of these deaths among the individual camps is shown in the accompanying table.

Jews probably constitute about half of the total. One must keep in mind, however, that these cases are not all. The camps Chelmno, Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka are missing from the table, as are the victims in the ghettos. And finally, one must remember that according to the Death Books approximately 66,000 people died in Auschwitz by late 1943 alone,[106] and that the Americans mentioned 25,000 dead in the concentration camp Dachau during the war.[107] A realistic estimate of the actual number of victims, therefore, may be twice as high as the total of victims registered by name in the records at Arolsen. The number of victims registered by name is now said to be about 450,000.[108] Doubtless the greater part of these are Jews, but exact figures are as yet unknown.

Even from this perspective, death clearly took a heavy toll.
So as you can see, statistics are not a reliable source as the sources used to derive them were dubious.

Quote:

While I don’t think that Wiernik got the cause of the "steam" right, I can imagine that the contrast between the outside temperature on a "scorching hot day" and the cooler temperature underground inside a mass grave can produce "steam", even though the "boiler" thing is probably hyperbolic. If you think that would require an outside temperature of 100 degrees centigrade, please demonstrate that this would be so.
If you had Chemistry 101 you'd know this isn't true. Hell, grab a chunk of ice and hold it in your hand, you wont see any steam even though your surface temperature is that of a "scorching hot day". Put both your hands around the ice and you will still see nothing, why? You aren't vaporizing the ice, you're melting it and thus not producing a lot of vapor. You can even rub your hands together before doing this and nothing will happen even though your surface temperature is higher than any scorching day.



You also made references to Wiernik's non-claim to a steam chamber and I have to inform are wrong.

"The answer is simple: Jankiel Wiernik 's expositions of May 1944, because the Soviet investigating judges were in possession of a copy of his text, which is explicitly mentioned in the Soviet report of August 24, 1944. As will be recalled, Wiernik had simply transformed the steam chambers of the report of November 15, 1942, into engine exhaust gas chambers and even copied the drawing of the camp enclosed with that report."

Clear falsification.
 
Old June 20th, 2008 #147
brutus
Senior Member
 
brutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: naples
Posts: 11,123
Default

RE: Roberto Muehlenkamp

It looks like the fellows have that diarrhea mouth of yours spewing lies like Old Faithful. I find it hilarious when jews get pinched wallowing in their filthy lies and they invariably begin to squeal like a swine with it's balls in a vice.

You see! There you go again! Will you please stop thinking about my bulldozer balls!

You jewy little homo!

.
__________________
The ink of the learned is as precious as the blood of the martyr. For one drop of ink may make millions think.
 
Old June 20th, 2008 #148
Slamin2
gassed at least 5 times
 
Slamin2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Wolzek (get it?)
Posts: 1,176
Default

Finding fault because a specific type of evidence is not available, when the perpetrators are the only ones in the position to supply the evidence, is a rather illogical argument.
__________________
RabbitNoMore

But all jews do speak in absolutes though. Just like you.

-----------

Define idiot
 
Old June 20th, 2008 #149
brutus
Senior Member
 
brutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: naples
Posts: 11,123
Default

Q. What language does jewish homo speak?


A. Heblew

.
__________________
The ink of the learned is as precious as the blood of the martyr. For one drop of ink may make millions think.
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #150
ced smythe
Member
 
ced smythe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slamin2 View Post
Finding fault because a specific type of evidence is not available, when the perpetrators are the only ones in the position to supply the evidence, is a rather illogical argument.
This is fallacy posing, nay vogueing as peremptory. Tangible evidence can be provided by either side and "perpetrators" assumes guilt based on common or garden Jew lies.
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #151
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Default

Hi ps,

While your post is about the last chronologically, you seem to be the only adversary in this place who has brains and arguments. That's why I'll respond to you first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp
The first I agree with, the second is new to me. Any rules or standards of evidence you can quote to support your statement?

I don't need to quote them, can you figure out why?
I think you definitely need to quote them, or at least demonstrate that they exist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Ah, and there’s nothing extraordinary about mass murder, even on the scale we are discussing here. It has often happened throughout history.

It's an extraordinary claim if it's supported by nothing but eye witnesses which is more or less what I have observed.
First of all, what we know about the Nazi mass murder of the Jews does not come from eyewitness evidence alone, but also and to a large extent from documentary and demographic evidence, and there are also many assessments of the physical evidence that the killers left behind, especially in what concerns the activities of mobile killing squads in the occupied territories of the Soviet Union.

Second, I’d like to see a definition whereby support by eyewitness evidence alone makes a claim an "extraordinary claim".

Third, I’d like you to point out some cases of mass murder on a scale similar to the Nazi genocide of the Jews that have not to a large extent been reconstructed on the basis of eyewitness testimony. In the 20th Century there was the Turkish genocide of the Armenians, Lenin’s genocide of the Cossacks, Stalin’s Holodomor, Stalin’s purges and GuLag penal camps, the genocide in Cambodia between 1975 and 1979, the genocide in Rwanda in 1994, among others. Which of these has been reconstructed by historians and/or criminal justice authorities based mostly or wholly on evidence other than eyewitness testimony?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
No, what means that the event happened is that all known positive evidence points to its having happened while no evidence points to its not having happened.

This is what I like to refer to as "bad thinking" or "muddied thinking". First of all, there is no positive evidence up to scientific standards.
That leads us to the following three questions:

1. What do you mean by "scientific standards"?

2. Why must evidence live up to whatever it is you mean by "scientific standards" in order to warrant the conclusion that it proves a given event beyond a reasonable doubt?

3. What historical events you know about, especially mass crimes like the Nazi genocide of the Jews, have been proven on the basis of evidence that you would consider up to "scientific standards"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
What you later mention as judicial standards are not scientific standards.
In what respect are judicial standards not "scientific standards"? Please explain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
This is because justice not only judges the crime but most importantly the accused.
How can one conceivably judge the accused without establishing beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime of which he is accused did occur?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
If there is no physical evidence (Something rare) the justice cannot wait for years for it to come in.
Some physical evidence there always is, but in many cases it is not accessible, especially when it comes to mass crimes. And where it is accessible in such cases, a detailed investigation of it may be considered more effort than is warranted by the expectable results, especially if the crime can be reconstructed just as accurately and with less effort based on evidence of other categories.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
The trial must continue and thus lower standards are used.
In what respects are standards not involving assessment of physical evidence "lower"? Is it stated anywhere that physical evidence should be analyzed whenever possible and that a trial may proceed without analysis of the physical evidence only where such analysis can for some reason not be made or would take an unduly long time to be completed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
We know that criminals are convicted, sometimes they are not, innocents are convicted, sometimes not and this happens because the court system is not scientific, it is judicial.
No, it happens because justice is subject to error like any other human endeavor, including science (assuming, as you do, that judicial standards are not scientific). You seem to believe that science is infallible. It is not, and that’s why it is in constant development. What was considered indisputable science 20 years ago may have been proven dead wrong in the meantime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
It is run by men who judge men and thus it is exposed to flaw and it is possible to curry favor as is known to happen when you have a highly regarded lawyer.
Such may be possible, but that doesn’t mean it necessarily happens. If you challenge a judgment also based on the defendant’s confession, it is hardly sufficient (and certainly not "scientific") to just point out the theoretical possibility that the defendant told the judges what they wanted to hear in exchange for a more lenient sentence. You have to demonstrate that this happened. And if there are no indications that it did while the defendant’s confession is corroborated by several independent eyewitness testimonies and maybe also some incriminating documents (I know of no West German criminal judgment against NS murderers that is based on the defendant's statements alone, even in the rare cases where the defendant admitted to what he was accused of, without cross-checking it against other evidence), there’s no reason to assume that any such favor-currying happened. Especially where the defendant didn’t benefit from his confession but was sentenced to the highest penalty provided for in the applicable criminal law, which in Germany is lifetime imprisonment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Evidence does not need to be given for something not have happened, if you say "I don't believe it" and no one can provide positive proof for it then you are right in not believing
it.
Of course. But in our case we have plenty of positive proof, regardless of much of that proof lives up to whatever it is you mean by "scientific standards".

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Good thinking is that it is not true until proven .
That’s the kind of thinking every defendant at a criminal trial benefits of, at least in constitutional states with defendant-friendly procedural laws like the German Federal Republic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Sorry, but why are site investigation reports produced by criminal investigators not forensic evidence?

They didn't happen to be up to the standards that the scientific community has used for the past century.
Which are?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
In fact, I don't think it was up to the standards of even the 19th century.
This is not about what you think, but about what you can demonstrate. But let’s assume that the investigation did not live up to your "scientific standards". Why would this rule out its being accepted, by a historian (after all we are discussing a historical event here) or a court of law (after all this about a crime), as documentation of forensic evidence? Are there any rules or standards in this sense that you can show us?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
What's wrong:
It did not conclusively provide evidence of mass graves the size stated.
Actually it stated nothing about the length and width of the graves but only mentioned the size of what must have been the total area of the graves, measured by a land surveyor. What it did state was the depth of at least one of the mass graves, 7.5 meters. And what more conclusive proof to that depth than the presence of disturbed soil interspersed with human remains to that depth but not deeper can there be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
It did not provide identification of the few remains it found.
Actually it found not few but a considerable amount of remains, covering an area of 20,000 square meters and saturating the walls of a crater with a diameter of 25 meters, to a depth of 7.5 meters. And it also identified what these remains consisted of, if you look at the parts of both reports highlighted in my article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...treblinka.html (emphases mine):

Quote:
The largest of the craters produced by explosions (numerous fragments attest to the fact that these explosions were set off by bombs), which is at maximum 6 meters deep and has a diameter of about 25 meters – its walls give recognizable evidence of the presence of a large quantity of ashes as well as human remains – was further excavated in order to discover the depth of the pit in this part of the camp. Numerous human remains were found by these excavations, partially still in a state of decomposition. The soil consists of ashes interspersed with sand, is of a dark gray color and granulous in form. During the excavations, the soil gave off an intense odor of burning and decay. At a depth of 7.5 meters the bottom was reached, which consisted of layers of unmixed sand. At this point the digging was stopped here.
Quote:
In the northwestern section of the area, the surface is covered for about 2 hectares by a mixture of ashes and sand. In this mixture, one finds countless human bones, often still covered with tissue remains, which are in a condition of decomposition. During the inspection, which I made with the assistance of an expert in forensic medicine, it was determined that the ashes are without any doubt of human origin (remains of cremated human bones). The examination of human skulls could discover no trace of wounding. At a distance of some 100 m, there is now an unpleasant odor of burning and decay.
What further identification did you have in mind, and what would have been the point of such identification?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
They should have found numerous teeth in each cubic meter,
Why necessarily so?

[quote=ps]they did not.[quote]

How do you know? Human remains may include teeth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
The 7.5 meters is still highly doubtable and should be re-examined. The water table at Auschwitz was a mere 18 inches under, seems unlikely that they dug as deep as they did Treblinka isn't in a high area.
Please do your examination of the ground water level at Treblinka and report on the results. I know from a RODOH "Revisionist" who has been on site that the water table is rather low at Treblinka, but maybe he is wrong. Let us know what you find out.

Ah, and I note that you have dropped your excavator argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
No chlorine
They didn’t excavate all that much in November 1945, and only one of their excavations seems to have been in the mass graves area. What makes you think they must necessarily have found chlorine in quantities worth recording?

The Soviet seem to have found chlorine above ground, by the way. But that was more than a year before, and much robbery digging, also including the presence of explosives, had taken place in the meantime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
No identifications of any of the essential buildings for such an operation
So what? This only means the report is not evidence to the presence of these buildings. It doesn’t mean that it is not evidence to the findings described therein. The honest admission that they didn’t find those essential buildings even increases the report's evidentiary value, for it speaks against the notion that any manipulation was involved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
The origins of the ash are unclear.
How so? An expert in forensic medicine found that the ashes were without any doubt of human origin, remains of cremated human bones. Or do you mean that we don’t know what kind of people the ashes belonged to and how they had died? If so, mind that Treblinka was a place in the asshole of the world where nothing ever happened, except for the documented arrival of about 750,000 Jews in a camp at that place in 1942/43, of whom only a few dozen are known to have left the place alive and survived the war (there were a few hundred escapees on 2 August 1943, but most of them didn’t make it). During that time, the place is known to have emitted an awful stench of dead bodies, which even led the Wehrmacht local commander of Ostrow to complain that the Jews in Treblinka were not buried well enough and thus an unbearable stench of corpses befouled the air. So what realistic possibility is there that these ashes were of anyone other than the Jewish deportees to Treblinka?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:
Sure, but what we have is not implausible like the dinosaur in your backyard, and it can be proven by evidence of the categories documentary, demographic, eyewitness and physical, all of which converge towards the conclusion that it happened.

Ive read your entire post so I will attack the demographics right now because there is no physical evidence that would qualify as such to a scientist.
Why so, and what kind of scientist exactly did you have in mind? We are discussing a crime and a historical event here, so the sciences applicable should be those that are used to reconstruct crimes and historical events. Please demonstrate that a scientist in either of those fields would not accept what I have shown as relevant documentation of the physical evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Maybe in a court of law, I really don't know because I am not a law student and my experience in law is limited. If anyone here has experience in law id like to hear it.
So you consider it possible that the site investigation reports in question would have been accepted as evidence in a court of law? That’s great, because I doubt you can demonstrate what standards stricter than those of a court of law (where a conviction, after all, requires the crime and the defendant’s guilt to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt) are applied when it comes to reconstructing and proving a crime. If you think you can show us a discipline dealing with historical events that applies standards stricter than beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard that is applied when a citizen’s life or freedom is at issue, please fire away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
http://vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndstats.html#ftnref7
I’m rather disappointed with what follows, ps. I would have expected better from you. I would have expected you to provide your own arguments, backed up where necessary with data from reliable sources, but what do you do instead? You provide a spam-quote more than 20 pages long from an article by Germar Rudolf, with some small and not exactly meaningful remarks of yours in between. Am I supposed to spend the rest of the day commenting every one of Rudolf’s claims, just in order to respond to your post? Or do you hope me to throw the towel upon being confronted with so much "Revisionist" humbug, which you just copied and pasted over from an internet site (the link to that site would have been sufficient)? Sorry, my friend, but I intend to do neither. In the following I shall instead provide some sources and arguments showing how full of shit Rudolf is. They do not cover everything of what he wrote, but sufficiently expose his falsity to justify the application of your Roman principle (falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, or as you put it, "everything is correct or nothing is") and concluding that nothing Rudolf writes can be relied except insofar as it is corroborated by a source more objective and less mendacious than Rudolf.

From what I have understood by skimming through your lengthy spam-quote, Rudolf compares the studies of Wolfgang Benz (actually a collection of 17 studies by different authors, each covering one European country where the Nazis persecuted and murdered Jews, which was edited by Wolfgang Benz under the title Dimensionen des Völkermords) and W.N. Sanning, and he "demonstrates" that "Benz" is full of errors whereas Sanning is an example of proper scholarship.

Actually things are rather the other way round.

There are, to be sure, some errors in the publication of Benz et al. There are indeed cases where Jewish victims from one country or region are counted twice in Benz’ overall tabulation at the beginning of this book, e.g. because Jews from the parts of Romania that were annexed by Hungary are considered in both the study about Romania and the study about Hungary and Benz failed to deduct them from one or the other when adding up the figures for all countries. But the errors are not nearly as bad as Rudolf tries to make believe, and much of what Rudolf claims is based on misrepresentation of what is actually written in Benz et al’s book. A case in point is addressed in my post of 25-Sep-2007 22:15 on the RODOH forum, link is http://rodohforum.yuku.com/reply/750...tml#reply-7507 , which I quote hereafter:

Quote:
OK, regarding this claim in Rudolfs article:

Quote:
Secondly, Benz overlooks the fact that, contrary to his own claim, the former regions which made up the Reich Commissionerships of Ostland and the Ukraine are included in his discussion of Poland. Since Benz assumes approximately 1 million Jews in the Soviet-occupied area (B443), of which roughly 600,000 are properly accounted for in the adjustments he makes for Bialystok and Galicia (B457), this means that he counted some 360,000 Jewish victims twice (90% victims of the 400,000 Jews living there). This brings the total of Jewish victims counted twice by Benz to 533,193.

I found out the following:

First of all, it is nonsense to claim that Golczewski includes the whole of the Reich Commissionerships Ostland and Ukraine in the Poland chapter of Dimensionen des Vlkermords. Both of these Nazi administrative areas included territory that had belonged to the Soviet Union before September 1939 as well as territory that had belonged to the former Polish Republic. Ostland further included the Baltic countries.

If anything, Golzcewski included in his calculations those parts of both Reich Commissionerships that had formerly belonged to Poland. The former Polish territories that came under Soviet rule in 1939 and were occupied by Germany in 1941 were divided among the following Nazi administrative areas:

1. The Bialystok district, annexed to the Reich and administered from East Prussia,
2. The Galicia district (formerly East Galicia or West Ukraine), which became part of the General Government,
3. The western part of the General Commissariat White Ruthenia, which was part of the Reich Commissariat Ostland,
4. The western part of the Reich Commissariat Ukraine.

Golczewkis study is stated to include only the areas of Poland occupied by Germany in 1939 plus the Bialystok and Galicia districts, but not the former Polish territories that became part of the Reich Commissionerships. However, he has a problem when trying to establish the number of Jews living in the areas of former Poland that a) came under German rule in 1941 and b) are included in his study. While there are estimates of the total number of Jews living in the former Polish territories occupied by the USSR in 1939, there is no breakdown among the four above-mentioned later Nazi administrative areas. So heres how Golczewski arrived at his figure for Jews under German rule in the Polish territories included in his study that were occupied by Germany in 1941 (my translation from Benz et al, page 443):

Quote:
Especially difficult is the question how many of the Jews living in the western regions of the USSR fell into the hand of the Germans during their advance. As there are no reliable documents about this and considerations about the extent to which people were saved by evacuation are also without a sufficient basis of sources, data in this respect belong to the realm of hypothesis.(200)
There are hardly figures as unreliable as estimates of the number of Soviet Jews who got into the Soviet Union. Just like the total figures for Polish citizens vary:

Zwiazek Patriotw Polskich 500 700,000
Krystyna Kersten (Repatriacja, page 34) 1,200,000
Elzbieta Hornowa (Powrt, page 108) 1,694,000
Eugene Kulisher (Displacement) 2,000,000

the estimates about the Jews included therein are also vague:

Gerald Reitlinger (The Final Solution, page 569) 700,000
Eugene Kulisher (Displacement) 600,000
Malcolm Proudfoot (Refugees) 400,000
Registration by the Embassy of the Polish
Government in Exile in Moscow in 1951 106,602
(Krystyna Kersten, Repatriacja, page 36)

The estimates of the American Joint Distribution Committee for the years 1939 and 1940 assumed a number of 1,350,000 Jewish inhabitants for the Soviet-occupied Polish area.(201) Krakowski(202) assumes 1,150,000, whereas the German data for the regions of East Galicia and Bialystok, i.e. without Volhynia, Polesie and Central Lithuania, turn up 813,000.(203) Gilbert mentions 1,309,000 Jews who had lived in the Soviet-occupied areas in 1939, plus another 250,000 who had fled from the Germans across the German-Soviet demarcation line.(204) This number of 1,559,000 is reduced by the number of those who could be evacuated. When Gilbert(205) mentions 300,000 evacuated Jews, he thereby means(206) all areas up to Stalingrad and the Elbrus that were occupied by the Germans in later phases of the war, however, evacuations could be much more efficient than at the time of the attack, when no preparations for this case whatsoever had been made in the Soviet Union. If we thus put the number of those who fled before the invasion at about 150,000(207) and further take into consideration about 250,000 Polish Jews who since 1940 were deported to Siberia by the Soviet authorities because they did not accept Soviet citizenship or for other reasons(208) , we get to 900,000 according to Gilbert(209) or the 1,150,000 mentioned by Krakowski.(210)
If we add a middle number of 1,000,000 to the numbers mentioned about for the territories occupied by Germany until 1941 (around 2,000,000), we get a total of ca. 3,000,000 Jews from former Poland who came under German rule.

(200) For this reason we do not here address the arguments of the former polemic between Gerald Reitlinger (The Final Solution, Berlin 1956) and Solomon S. Schwarz (The Jews in the Soviet Union, Syracuse 1951), which is rendered by both Hilberg and Krausnick/Wilhelm.
(201) See Hilberg, Destruction, page 209.
(202) See Krakowski, Avedot, page 232.
(203) See Fridman, Umkum, page 2; Datner, Eksterminacja, page 7.
(204) See Gilbert, Final Solution, page 36.
(205) As before, page 65.
(206) Similarly to Krystyna Kersten, Repatriacja ludnosci polskiej po II wojnie swiatowej, Wroclaw 1974, page 31.
(207) See Levin, Holocaust, page 270.
(208) See as before. Nora Levin calls this number realistic, on the other hand estimates regarding those deported by the Soviets vary between 50,000 and 500,000. In 1939/40 50-80,000 received work on a voluntary basis in the interior of the Soviet Union (see Hornowa, Powrot, page 107). In the summer of 1940 240,000 are said to have been forcibly deported. Based on information from the NKVD, Anders in his memoirs mentions 475,000 Poles AND Jews, Ginesi 350,000 Jews alone. Furthermore until 1941 Jews and Poles were drafted into the Red Army and into construction brigades (i.e. for forced labor). There are no reliable numbers.
(209) See Gilbert, Final Solution, page 36.
(210) See Krakowski, Avedot, page 232.

Golczweskis "middle number" of 1,000,000 arguably includes not only the Bialystok and Galicia districts, but also the former Polish areas of the Reich Commissionerships Ostland and Ukraine. Insofar one can accept Rudolfs argument.

But then Rudolf messes up by subtracting from this figure the figures given by Golczewski on page 449 for the Bialystok district (193,460, rounded up to 200,000) and on page 456 for the Galicia district (404,162, rounded down to 400,000), and claiming that the remaining 400,000 represent the Jewish population of the (former Polish areas that were part of the) Reich Commissionerships.

This is wrong because Golczewskis "middle number" of one million refers to the eve of the German attack in June 1941, whereas his aforementioned figures for the Bialystok and Galicia districts refer to the beginning of 1942. A great many Jews were murdered out of hand or allowed to die of hardship in the intervening six months, and Golczewski describes this in some detail on pages 445 ff. For the Bialystok district he provides figures of various massacres and an estimate by Szymon Datner whereby 40-50,000 Jews were killed in the first three months of German occupation alone. For the Galicia district he also provides figures of various massacres and his own estimate that the invaders came upon about 500,000 Jews there in 1941.

So the original population of both districts in June 1941 can be assumed to have exceeded their population at the start of 1942 (ca. 200,000 + 400,000 = 600,000) by at least 50,000 in the Bialystok and 100,000 in the Galicia district, or 150,000 in total. Rudolf should have taken this into account and deducted the expectable population of both districts in June 1941, at least 750,000, from Golczewskis "middle number" of 1 million. Instead he deducted the much lower number of 600,000 in January 1942. I will give him the benefit of doubt and assume he was just a sloppy reader.

Considering the mortality rate that Golczewski established for the Jews of Poland who came under German rule, 2.7 million out of 3 million or 90 % of the total, there would thus be a double-counting potential of 250,000 x 90 % = 225,000 dead, instead of 360,000 dead as claimed by Rudolf. Needless to say, this double-counting potential led to double-counting only if the former Polish areas included in the Reich Commissionerships were not subtracted by Robel from his figure for the Soviet Union.

The double-counting potential is somewhat lower if one assumes as correct the German sources mentioned by Golczewski, according to which the areas of East Galicia and Bialystok alone had 813,000 inhabitants in total in 1941. In that case the population of the former Polish areas that were part of the Reich Commissionerships would be 1,000,000 minus 813,000 = 187,000, and the double-counting potential would be 90 % thereof or 168,300.
As we can see, Rudolf considerably exaggerates the double counting he accuses Benz et al of, and to do so he indulges in a fair amount of what one must be very generous to merely call sloppy reading. I have no doubt "Revisionists" would call Rudolf’s trickery lying if it came from a mainstream historian or opponent of "Revisionism".

As to Sanning, who Rudolf favorably compares with Benz et al, the fellow has been widely shown to be a charlatan whose main trick seems to be picking out figures that fit his argument from sources that are either unreliable or quoted out of context, postulate that these are the only accurate figures and ignore figures from other sources, however substantiated and reliable they may be. Sanning’s fraudulence has been exposed in chapters 1 to 3 of John Zimmerman’s book Holocaust Denial, and online version of which can be found under http://www.mossadist.by.ru/ . It has been even more thoroughly exposed in six articles by Jonathan Harrison, who like me is a contributor of the Holocaust Controversies blog. These articles can be found under the following links:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ng-part-1.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ng-part-2.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ng-part-3.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ng-part-4.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ng-part-5.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ng-part-6.html

I wouldn’t trust this Sanning fellow to correctly tell me the time, if I were you.

One of the Sanning’s main targets is the Soviet census of 1959, the results of which in what concerns the Jewish population he tries to discredit for reasons that are easy to understand if you look at the following table I put together based on Gert Robel’s study about the Soviet Union included in Benz et al’s volume:

1. Jewish population of the Soviet Union on 22 June 1941

(a) Jewish population within the Soviet borders before 17.10.1939: 3,020,171

(b) Jewish population of the Polish territories annexed to the Soviet Union after 17.10.1939: 1,200,000

(c) Jewish refugees from the Polish areas annexed to or occupied by Germany: 300,000

(d) Jewish population of the Romanian territories annexed to the Soviet Union in 1940: 270,000

(e) Jewish population of Lithuania (including the Vilna and Memel regions), annexed to the Soviet Union in 1940: 250,000

(f) Jewish population of Letonia, annexed to the Soviet Union in 1940: 90,000

(g) Sum of (a) to (f) = Jewish population within the Soviet borders on 22 June 1941:
5,130,171 rounded to 5,100,000.

2. Jewish population of the Soviet Union in 1945

(a) Jewish population within the Soviet borders as of 22 June 1941, according to the Soviet census of 1959: 2,268,000

(b) Backward calculation to 1945 based on a growth factor of 0.8 % (Georges Wellers assumed a growth factor of ca. 1 %, which Robel considers too high): - 254,000

(c) Number of Soviet Jews in 1945:
2,014,000 rounded to 2,000,000

(d) Polish Jews in the Soviet Union who were repatriated after 1945: 200,000

(e) Sum of (c) + (d) = Number of Jewish survivors on Soviet soil in 1945:
2,214,000 rounded to 2,200,000

3. Jewish population losses between 1941 and 1945 in the Soviet Union within its borders as of 22 June 1941 = 1 (g) minus 2 (e):
2,916,171 rounded to 2,900,000

The 2.9 million, of course, include Jews from the annexed territories of former Poland and Romania murdered by the Nazis. They also include Jews who fell as soldiers of the Red Army or succumbed to famine behind the front line (about 300,000 according to German historian Hans-Heinrich Nolte, see the comment after my article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...hink-that.html ).

Sanning’s arguments against the accuracy of the 1959 census data were the subject of a long discussion I had on the RODOH forum with a "Revisionist" who calls himself "Herviborous Moose" – quite a talented propagandist, you could learn from him. The discussion starts with HM’s post 8-Oct-2007 06:14 under http://rodohforum.yuku.com/reply/759...tml#reply-7591 . My key arguments, which HM didn’t manage to refute, are included in my post of 11-Oct-2007 16:10 under http://rodohforum.yuku.com/reply/740...tml#reply-7409 , from which I quote:

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HM
Permit me to summarize it for you again (Sections in quotation marks are taken directly from Sanning):

"Post-war literature usually puts the number of surviving Jews in the Soviet Union at about 2 million or even fewer" [...] Before the war 1.6 million Jews lived in those parts of the Soviet Union never occupied by Germany." During the war around 600,000 Jews served in the Soviet army. Applying Sanning's figure we see that only 250,000 soldiers could have come from the pre-war population. (Sanning estimates deferments at around 70% so military age men must have accounted for around 400,000 of the 1.6 million.)

So where did the other 350,000 Jewish soldiers come from?
From the 5.1 minus 1.6 = 3,500,000 Jews who in June 1941 lived in areas later occupied by Germany, assuming Sannings 1.6 million are correct. Of these 3.5 million, if we take Noltes figures, 3.5 2.7 = 0.8 million got a way. These 800,000 may well have included 350,000 Red Army recruits or military-age men later drafted into the Red Army. The draft rate among this group would thus have been 350,000 ./. 3,500,000 = 10 %, against a draft rate of 250,000 ./. 1,600,000 = 15.63 % for those Jews living in areas that never came under German control. If we use my ratio of 17.53 %, the latter group would have yielded 280,480 recruits, the former 319,520 recruits or 9.13 %. Whats the problem supposed to be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HM
To explain this in accordance with the orthodox Holocaust narrative we see that these Jewish soldiers must have come from the territories subsequently occupied by the Germans. Applying the deferment ratio to this 350,000 - roughly 500,000 Jewish men must have been evacuated by the Soviets.
So Sanning is trying to tell us that only 70 % of Soviet military-age men were drafted into the military? Where did he get that from? The Soviets were scraping the bottom of the barrel, for all I know.

Oh, now I see where he got this ratio from:

Quote:
Originally Posted by HM
And of these due to deferments and physical impairments etc. "hardly more than 70%" could have been inducted into the armed forces.
His thumbs, it seems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HM
200,000 Jewish soldiers are said to have died during the war, and Sanning implies roughly 100,000 Jews survived German occupation.

Putting this together we get a post-war Soviet Jewish population of about 2 million (1,600,000 + 500,000 - 200,000 + 100,000).
According to Nolte, 2.7 million Jews fell into German hands, and of these 100,000 survived. Of the remaining 2.4 million, about 300,000 Jews fell as soldiers of the Red Army or succumbed to famine behind the front line, and about 100,000 Jewish children were born during the war, so that at the wars end there were about 2.3 million Jews alive in the USSR.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HM
The contradiction of so many Jews serving and dying in the Red Army, even though most Jews supposedly fell into German hands, can only be resolved this way."

Sanning continues:

Quote:
But there is a catch to it. All in all, 860,000 male Jews of military age were available to the Soviets; most of them were drafted and 200,000 never returned. At the end of the war, only 660,000 males Jews of this age group remained. Now, if the Soviets restricted themselves to evacuating just half a million male Jews of military age and left the bulk of the elderly, women and children behind to face German annihilation, the surviving 660,000 male Jews would have faced only about 400,000 Jewesses of the same group - a ratio of 66 to 40! However, such an "upside-down" sex ratio never has been reported in post-war literature - which is very strange.

So if we are to believe the orthodox narrative then within the relevant age group there ought to have been 65% more Jewish men than Jewish women in the Soviet union after the war.
No. Assuming Sannings figures are correct, there should have been 65 % more Jewish men than Jewish women in the age group in which men are drafted for military service, i.e. young Jewish males would have encountered a deficit of young Jewish females. How did Sanning arrive at his 400,000 figure? And did he calculate it only based on the population of the territories that never came under German control, or did he also take female evacuees from the territories occupied by the Nazis into consideration? For there must have been quite a few of the latter, according to my above calculations whereby 800,000 Jews from areas later occupied by the Germans managed to flee. If, as Sanning assumes on the basis of a deferment ratio he apparently sucked out of his thumbs, there were 500,000 military-age men among them, then 300,000 of the refugees were not military-age men, and it seems reasonable to assume that this remainder consisted largely if not mostly of young women. With my Soviet draft ratio based on Krivosheev and Ellman Maksudov, the number is even higher (456,457 military-age men vs. 343,543 others). So it may well be that surviving military-age Jewish males came upon an equal or not much lower number of females of the same age group.

As to an "upside-down" sex ratio not having been mentioned in post-war literature, I wouldnt trust a work as poorly sourced as Sannings to give me accurate information about what is and what there is not in such literature. And what was published in the west until 1983 about the postwar life of the Soviet Jewish community, anyway?

Ah, and before I forget: what orthodox narrative exactly are you referring to? Any names and quotes you can give us, or is your orthodox narrative just what you wish or ignorantly believe it to be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HM
Yet as already noted there were in fact 30% more women!
It cannot be any clearer. If the orthodox narrative is correct we could expect to find a 65% surplus of men in the relevant age group after the war. Instead we find a 30% surplus of women. The orthodox narrative is therefore seriously flawed. The post-war demographic picture points to the fact that the Soviets managed to evacuate a large proportion of Jews - young and old, male and female - before the Nazis occupied the territory.
What we have here is a rather transparent apples-and-oranges comparison on the one hand the military age male group and the equivalent female age group, on the other hand the population as a whole. Who do you expect to fall for that trick?

According to Sannings rendering of the 1959 census data, there were 677,984 males and 884,540 females in the over-28 age group, to which all who had been in the 16-45 age group during World War II obviously belonged. Unless we are to assume that less than 20,000 of the males belonged to age groups that had been too young or too old for military service during World War II, this means that either there is something wrong with Sannings assumption that there were 660,000 surviving men of military age in 1945 (my take is that the deferment rate he assumes is too high), or most of these men had died by 1959.

As to the women, are we to assume that a maximum of 400,000 (45 %) were aged 30 (16+14) to 59 (45+14) years, whereas at least 484,540 (55 %) of them were either 29 years old (therefore one year short in 1945 of what Sanning assumes as military age for the males) or 60 (46+14) years and older in 1959? In the present-day Russian population, according to the CIA World Factbook, women 65 years and older make up just 13,958,615 ./. 76,041,535 = 18,36 % of the total female population. If we apply this ratio to the 1,237,185 Jewish females in 1959, we get 227,105 females aged 65 and older. Assuming that the 60-and-over group is equally large (a slightly counterfactual assumption balanced by its also being applied to the males, see below), we thus get 884,540 minus 227,105 = 657,435 females aged 29 to 59 (and thus aged 15 to 45 in 1945) in the over-28 female age group. Id say this is a far likelier distribution model, also considering the possibility of a large number of young females among the at least 300,000 refugees from Nazi-occupied territory who, according to my above calculations and Sannings as well as Noltes figures, were not men of military age.

As concerns the Jewish males, applying the present-day Russian ratio of men 65 and older (6,360,038 ./. 65.336.217 = 9,73 %) to the 1,030,629 Jewish males counted in 1959 gives us 100,325 men in this age group. Counterfactually assuming that the 60-and-over group is equal (of course it must be a little larger), this leads us to the following breakdown of the 677,984 Jewish males counted in 1959:

Aged 60 and over (46 and older in 1945): 100,325
Aged 29 to 59 (15 to 45 in 1945): 577,659

The ratio between males and females of the 29-59 age group, which roughly corresponds to the wartime military age group, would thus be 577,659 ./. 657,435 = 47:53. Except for a possible higher male mortality in this age group between 1945 and 1959 due to combat wounds or PTSD leading to alcoholism and/or suicide among those who saw military service, this ratio should be very similar to the 1945 ratio among men and women of military age. Female predominance in this age group would be 13.8 %, well below what the Soviet average is likely to have been (according to Ellman/Maksudov, women outnumbered men by 50 % in the 20-29 age group), and of course compatible with a 30 % predominance of females in the over-28 age group.

Give my regards to Mr. Sanning.
See also my post of 12-Oct-2007 16:02 under http://rodohforum.yuku.com/reply/742...tml#reply-7426

I noticed that Rudolf babbles about alleged absence of mass graves in the occupied Soviet territories, about the Soviets having falsified investigation reports – the usual crap. The following links lead you to articles showing not only that the Nazis left behind a lot of physical evidence in the occupied Soviet territories and Soviet investigation reports were not nearly as bad as Rudolf would like them to be, but also that Rudolf and his "Revisionist" colleagues are incompetent bunglers at best:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...n-polesie.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ave-found.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ionism_06.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ionism_07.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ionism_10.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...visionism.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...ionism_06.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...935311686.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...visionism.html

You may also have heard of this project, which has already uncovered hundreds of mass graves from Nazi massacres of Jews in the Ukraine: http://www.yahadinunum.org/ukraine.en.html

Unlike in what concerns the evidence mentioned in the aforementioned articles from the HC blog, however, I don’t blame Rudolf and his fellow gurus for having ignored the physical evidence (re)discovered by Father Desbois. Rudolf’s article you spam-quoted from was written before that project got under way.

Rudolf also mentions the Korherr Report. He tries to make believe that it was an innocuous document and points out that Korherr claimed in 1977 not to have been aware that the figures he tabulated also referred to extermination actions. What Rudolf doesn’t tell you about the Korherr Report – which, contrary to what Rudolf tells you, contains certain statements which clearly show that an extermination program was under way – you can read in my article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...w-korherr.html , where I demonstrate that there’s no way Korherr could not have known that he was tabulating the statistics of a mass extermination project. Stephen Challen’s imbecile conjectures, which Rudolf makes so much of, are incidentally dealt with in the following part of the same article:

Quote:
Another passage that shows Korherr’s awareness of what he was collecting figures about is the following at the end of the "short" version (my translation and emphasis):
In total it is likely that since 1933, i.e. in the first decade of National Socialist power, European Jewry lost almost half of its stock.
Thereof again only half, i.e. a quarter of the European total stock in 1937, is likely to have gone to the other continents.

The overall order of magnitude mentioned by Korherr in this paragraph ("almost half" of ca. 10 million Jews in Europe in 1937, i.e. "almost" 5 million Jews) is not borne out by Korherr’s detailed figures but largely based on probably nothing more than educated guesses regarding the categories expressly mentioned by Korherr (deaths of Soviet Russian Jews in the "occupied eastern territories" not included in his tabulations, deaths in the rest of European Russia and at the front, movements of Jews inside Russia to the Asian part thereof, Jewish emigration and Jewish excess mortality in the states of central and western Europe other than Germany) and maybe also regarding categories not expressly mentioned (the difference between the original Jewish population of Poland in 1937 according to the "long" version, 3.3 million, and the numbers recorded in that document as being under German control on former Polish territory, 2.79 million in total, is 510,000, presumably lost to excess mortality or emigration).

However, in what concerns the ca. 2.5 million persons lost to the "stock" of European Jewry without having gone to the world’s other continents, according to the above-quoted statement, Korherr apparently chose to remain on the safe side of what his detailed figures add up to, for this order of magnitude tallies with the sum of

i) excess mortality in the Old Reich, the Ostmark (Austria) and the Protectorate Bohemia and Moravia according to chapter II of the "long" version (82,776, thereof 61,193 in the Old Reich including the Sudetengau and Danzig, 14,509 in the Ostmark and 7,074 in the Protectorate Bohemia and Moravia);

ii) mortality in the Theresienstadt ghetto according to item 1 of chapter VI of the "long" version (reduction from 87,193 to 49,392, "mainly by deaths"); and

iii) "evacuations" until 31.12.1942 according to chapters V and VI of the "long" version, except for items 1 ("Evacuation of Jews from Baden and the Palatinate to France") and 3 ("Evacuation of Jews from the Reich area and the Protectorate to Theresienstadt"), as detailed hereafter:

1. Greater Germany: 124,051
1a. (thereof German Reich including Sudetenland)(1): 60,763
1b. (thereof Austria) (2): 33,333
1c. (thereof Protectorate Bohemia and Moravia)(3): 29,955
2. Belgium: 16,886
3. France: 41,911
4. Norway: 532
5. Yugoslavia: 4,927
6. Netherlands: 38,571
7. Former Polish Republic: 1,496,283
7a. (thereof "Eastern Provinces"): 1,449,692
7b (thereof Bialystok District) (4): 46,591
8. Slovakia: 56,691
9. Soviet Union incl. Baltic Republics: 633,300
SUM TOTAL: 2,413,152

Notes:

(1) Total of "evacuation" under item 1 of chapter II and at the beginning of chapter V (100,516), minus (a) the balance between Jews from the Reich deported to Theresienstadt according to item 1 of chapter VI (47,471) and the portion of Jews from the Ostmark included therein (14,222) and (b) the Jews deported from Baden and the Palatinate to France, according to item 1 of chapter V (6,504): 100,516 minus 33,249 minus 6,504 = 60,763.
(2) Total of "evacuation" under item 2 of chapter II and at the beginning of chapter V (47,555) minus deportees to Theresienstadt according to item 1 of chapter VI (14,222).
(3) Total of "evacuation" under item 3 of chapter II and at the beginning of chapter V (69,677) minus deportees to Theresienstadt according to item 1 of chapter VI (39, 722).
(4) Figure for "Evacuation of Jews from the Reich territory incl. the Protectorate and Bialystok district to the East" under item 2 of chapter V of the "long version" (170,642) minus figure under item 1 of my table (124,051).

Now, how could these ca. 2.5 million Jews under categories i), ii) and iii) above have been lost to the "stock" of European Jewry if, as pointed out by Korherr, they had not moved to the world’s other continents?

There is only one possibility, which is the fate that at least the overwhelming majority of the "evacuees" listed under category iii) above had by the time of Korherr’s reports shared, according to all known evidence, with those mentioned under categories i) and ii): death.

Thus there can be no doubt that Dr. Richard Korherr knew very well what he was reporting about, and that his alleged later pretensions to the contrary, which preachers of the "Revisionist" faith put much stock in, were somewhat less than honest.
I think the above sufficiently demonstrates that Rudolf and his "Revisionist" sources, like Sanning and Challen, must be taken with a big grain of salt, to say the least – and not swallowed hook, line and sinker just because they contain what fits your preconceived notions. If you’re interested, we can one day look at what Rudolf writes about the assessment of Jewish losses in every country study contained in Benz et al’s Dimensionen des Völkermords. I have the book with me and can therefore with some time point out exactly where Rudolf is right in his criticism and where such criticism is – as in the case discussed in my RODOH post under http://rodohforum.yuku.com/reply/750...tml#reply-7507 - a load of bullshit. For now, I hope you have realized that your Roman principle falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus should be applied in regard to Germar Rudolf, i.e. nothing he writes should be accepted as accurate except insofar as it is corroborated by other, less mendacious and more objective sources.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
So as you can see, statistics are not a reliable source as the sources used to derive them were dubious.
Actually what can be seen, and what I hope you have realized, is that what is dubious is not so much the statistics as the tricks that "Revisionists" like Sanning and Rudolf play on them.

Now to Wiernik:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Quote:

While I don’t think that Wiernik got the cause of the "steam" right, I can imagine that the contrast between the outside temperature on a "scorching hot day" and the cooler temperature underground inside a mass grave can produce "steam", even though the "boiler" thing is probably hyperbolic. If you think that would require an outside temperature of 100 degrees centigrade, please demonstrate that this would be so.

If you had Chemistry 101 you'd know this isn't true. Hell, grab a chunk of ice and hold it in your hand, you wont see any steam even though your surface temperature is that of a "scorching hot day". Put both your hands around the ice and you will still see nothing, why? You aren't vaporizing the ice, you're melting it and thus not producing a lot of vapor. You can even rub your hands together before doing this and nothing will happen even though your surface temperature is higher than any scorching day.
I think this is a lousy comparison. Better comparisons would be:

- the "steam" produced by the breath coming out of your mouth on a cold winter day, and

- the "steam" you see rising up from the road when a downpour is followed by scorching heat and the rain water on the road evaporates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
You also made references to Wiernik's non-claim to a steam chamber and I have to inform are wrong.

"The answer is simple: Jankiel Wiernik 's expositions of May 1944, because the Soviet investigating judges were in possession of a copy of his text, which is explicitly mentioned in the Soviet report of August 24, 1944. As will be recalled, Wiernik had simply transformed the steam chambers of the report of November 15, 1942, into engine exhaust gas chambers and even copied the drawing of the camp enclosed with that report."

Clear falsification.
Where does this say that the report of November 15, 1942 was authored by Wiernik? It wasn’t. Wiernik’s first testimony was what he wrote in 1944 in A year in Treblinka. On November 15, 1942 Wiernik was working as a carpenter in Treblinka and could not have produced any report.

Regarding the supposed "cooperative" editing of Wiernik’s testimony and maps by Soviet investigator Jurovskij, which you considered such an impressive argument against Wiernik’s reliability, I have a special present for you: read Sergey Romanov’s article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...bout-rest.html

I especially like the conclusion:

Quote:
Some may dismiss all these criticisms as unimportant. But the simple proven fact that Mattogno and Graf's "research" is extremely sloppy, atrocious, subpar - does matter. Mattogno and Graf are the most prolific, knowledgeable and, one is tempted to say, "reasonable" "revisionists" out there. If they're the best, what can one say about the rest?
Now I’ll have some more fun with the repetitive "show me photos" - rhetoric that seems to be all your friend Gerdes (who seems to be getting more nuts and more hysterical by the hour) can come up with, before the football (soccer) game between Russia and the Netherlands of the European Championship starts. I’m for Russia.
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #152
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brutus View Post
RE: Roberto Muehlenkamp

It looks like the fellows have that diarrhea mouth of yours spewing lies like Old Faithful. I find it hilarious when jews get pinched wallowing in their filthy lies and they invariably begin to squeal like a swine with it's balls in a vice.

You see! There you go again! Will you please stop thinking about my bulldozer balls!

You jewy little homo!

.
I don't fly into hysterical fits of invective like you do, I'm not talking about my testicles all the time like you do, and I don't have the obsession with homosexuality you seem to have. At least the latter two may be held to suggest repressed homosexuality, so I recommend you refrain from them in the future lest you want people to suspect that the homo here is you.

Ah, and I'm also not Jewish. Get used to the idea.
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #153
psychologicalshock
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp View Post


I think you definitely need to quote them, or at least demonstrate that they exist.
I might as well stop here, when my opponent doesn't even understand the scientific method everything else is hopeless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
This statement is especially stupid
Quote:
No, it happens because justice is subject to error like any other human endeavor, including science (assuming, as you do, that judicial standards are not scientific). You seem to believe that science is infallible. It is not, and that’s why it is in constant development. What was considered indisputable science 20 years ago may have been proven dead wrong in the meantime.
You're an utter ignoramus in science as there is nothing indisputable in it as long as evidence is provided. Science does not disappear and reappear by some sort of magic. Scientific theory is not created out of thin air as you seem to think. Science is improvement of knowledge and its consistent expansion. To this day no one claims that Darwin's theory is completely his own but that it is right. They still teach that many before Darwin such as Lamarck already had many of the basic correct ideas but did not yet express them 100% correctly, which is why Darwin and not his predecessors takes the credit . People were already guessing that DNA could possibly be the information bearer until it was proven that it is so. Science is improvement upon ideas not the invention of new ideas altogether as it is said that every giant in science stands on the shoulders of his predecessor. Your complete ignorance and inability to tell apart judgment by your peers and scientific scrutiny amazes me.It's hard to even take you seriously at this point.
Quote:

- the "steam" produced by the breath coming out of your mouth on a cold winter day, and
Invalid example the steam is being produced from your breathe freezing.
Quote:
- the "steam" you see rising up from the road when a downpour is followed by scorching heat and the rain water on the road evaporates.
Doesn't literally rise afraid to tell you, it wont belch like a steamer because if that was true an oasis would long dry up in any desert. Water has a low vapor pressure and what happens (On the hottest day) is that after a while standing some vapor does yield but its nothing like the boiler effect, nothing at all. You'd have to be blind to say what Wiernik said. That and this wasn't a puddle so the example is invalid. You can't have dry corpses and steam at the same time I am afraid to tell you.

Just the drop eye witnesses, you can keep making shit up all day and contradicting yourself.

As for the rest, I quit reading when you couldn't even get Rudolf's point correctly, he was saying they're both wrong. Read before you comment.
Quote:
In the end, therefore, the Korherr Reports confirm Sanning's statistics regarding the fate of the eastern European Jews, and are not even remotely suited to proving a hypothetical mass murder.
I am amused by your sources which clearly show you're no scientist

Quote:
(200) For this reason we do not here address the arguments of the former polemic between Gerald Reitlinger (The Final Solution, Berlin 1956) and Solomon S. Schwarz (The Jews in the Soviet Union, Syracuse 1951), which is rendered by both Hilberg and Krausnick/Wilhelm.
(201) See Hilberg, Destruction, page 209.
(202) See Krakowski, Avedot, page 232.
(203) See Fridman, Umkum, page 2; Datner, Eksterminacja, page 7.
(204) See Gilbert, Final Solution, page 36.
(205) As before, page 65.
(206) Similarly to Krystyna Kersten, Repatriacja ludnosci polskiej po II wojnie swiatowej, Wroclaw 1974, page 31.
(207) See Levin, Holocaust, page 270.
(208) See as before. Nora Levin calls this number realistic, on the other hand estimates regarding those deported by the Soviets vary between 50,000 and 500,000. In 1939/40 50-80,000 received work on a voluntary basis in the interior of the Soviet Union (see Hornowa, Powrot, page 107). In the summer of 1940 240,000 are said to have been forcibly deported. Based on information from the NKVD, Anders in his memoirs mentions 475,000 Poles AND Jews, Ginesi 350,000 Jews alone. Furthermore until 1941 Jews and Poles were drafted into the Red Army and into construction brigades (i.e. for forced labor). There are no reliable numbers.
(209) See Gilbert, Final Solution, page 36.
(210) See Krakowski, Avedot, page 232.
A bunch of Jews citing each other, Rudolf already safely dispatched most of this nonsense. Like I said, read before you post, none of those citations are reliable or even primary. This is what Rudolf means when he says your kind is a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals trying to quote one another to create credibility.

I have to say it's amusing to see you make the same mistakes Rudolf pointed out others making because you fell right into the trap of citing without any critical thinking before doing so.

Quote:
Ah, and I note that you have dropped your excavator argument.
No I simply don't have the patience for your nonsense anymore. You can't understand that if your boom length is under 40 ft and what you are digging is over 80 ft wide then it is physically impossible for you to get the job done when you don't even have a means for exporting the dirt away from the site. All of your photographs show that - there's just dirt all around the excavator meaning quite simply that what you are saying is impossible and you haven't thought about it seriously or just don't know.

Quote:
Where does this say that the report of November 15, 1942 was authored by Wiernik? It wasn’t. Wiernik’s first testimony was what he wrote in 1944 in A year in Treblinka. On November 15, 1942 Wiernik was working as a carpenter in Treblinka and could not have produced any report.
I really can't keep track of your hero's lies anymore so I will go over the ridiculous nonsense
A. 1200 people fit in a 7x7 m gas chamber
Quote:
The new construction job between Camp No. 1 and Camp No. 2, on which I had been working, was completed in a very short time. It turned out that we were building ten additional gas chambers, more spacious than the old ones, 7 by 7 meters or about 50 square meters. As many as 1,000 to 1,200 persons could be crowded into one gas chamber.
That's 25 people a square meter folks.
B. Sprinkling some gas and using fat women for kindling WILL fully cremate corpses. If it didn't they would have quit from the first trial, no one is that stupid.
C. People can't tell the difference between a rotten body and a fresh body because their memory is shitty
D. A girl can "jump" over a 3 meter tall fence without any of the 6 watch tower guards seeing her, without any of the guards seeing her and then after climbing over she will wrench a gun out of a man's hands and shoot him. At that point the others will try to wrestle her even though she was being taken to a gas chamber to be killed anyways.
E. Wiernik had no idea that there even was an engine, all of the technicalities had to be settled by someone else that wasn't even there. The Russian judge would have just guessed it because he wasn't there and he had no evidence of what it would look like. He simply made it up out of hand.
F. Wiernik claims that Diesel gas was used, specifically Diesel gas. This is stupid and no one would have done it that way.
G. A bullet can be deflected by a bone+clothes when most bullets can penetrate at least a few mm of steel or below.

Quote:
Now, how could these ca. 2.5 million Jews under categories i), ii) and iii) above have been lost to the "stock" of European Jewry if, as pointed out by Korherr, they had not moved to the world’s other continents?
Now what is this nonsense?

"Between 1937 and early 1943 the number of Jews in Europe had decreased by approximately 4 million, due partly to emigration, partly to the excess of deaths over births among the Jews of Central and western Europe, and partly to evacuations, particularly from the more densely populated eastern regions, which are counted here as part of the decrease."

Read over it a couple times, the Germans don't know where they went because Europe wasn't completely under them. This isn't conclusive evidence that they were killed as you'd want your reader to believe. It means they were considered as having emigrated. The reason the Jewish population was falling was because there were many more old Jews than young Jews but there is nothing in the report of what you are hinting at.

Now also read what Rudolf said

Quote:
In his conclusions, for example, Korherr wrote that the Jewish population losses in Europe from 1933 to 1943 ( some 5 million) were caused approximately 50% by emigration to other continents, but his statistics cite only about 1.5 million emigrants. So roughly 1 million emigrants are missing. This begs the question: why would Germany's foremost statistician draw conclusions contradicting his own data, and in a secret report intended for Hitler, no less? Furthermore, if one adds Korherr's individual 1943 figures regarding the Jews scattered throughout the world, one arrives at a total that is only slightly less than the pre-war total; this already rules out any mass extermination. S. Challen therefore went to the trouble of examining Korherr's claims more closely. He ultimately concludes that Korherr, acting on Himmler's orders, reduced the emigration statistics by one million and increased the number of Jews evacuated to the East by that same million. And in one of his letters, Himmler writes that this report would serve well as a cover.[88] Challen arrives at the well-founded conclusion that Himmler wanted to keep Hitler from realizing that a large part of the Polish and Russian Jews in the East had gotten away by means of flight and Soviet evacuation measures. On the basis of Korherr's data, Challen calculated that the Jews lost approximately 1.2 million of their number during World War Two, some 750,000 of them in Germany's sphere of influence.[89]
What you fail to understand is that Germans couldn't possibly have recorded Jews who ran Eastward and were absorbed into the USSR even though that's common sense. You're deducing things without actually having a narrow enough possibility range to do so. It comes out as unconvincing.

Id like you to dig up something primary for your claim, primarily the Red Cross Records. If you can do that I think we could talk and I would love to send it to VHO as they have been looking for that sort of evidence for some time now.

Last edited by psychologicalshock; June 21st, 2008 at 04:08 PM.
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #154
Slamin2
gassed at least 5 times
 
Slamin2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Wolzek (get it?)
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ced smythe View Post
This is fallacy posing, nay vogueing as peremptory. Tangible evidence can be provided by either side and "perpetrators" assumes guilt based on common or garden yid blag.
No it is not a fallacy.

When the perpetrators are the only ones in a position to provide specific evidence (pictures of the insides of the gas chamber at Treblinka - when the chambers were built, operated and destroyed) and claiming the event did not occur because this specific evidence is not available - when other evidence does prove the event, is an illogical argument.
__________________
RabbitNoMore

But all jews do speak in absolutes though. Just like you.

-----------

Define idiot
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #155
ced smythe
Member
 
ced smythe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slamin2 View Post
No it is not a fallacy.

When the perpetrators are the only ones in a position to provide specific evidence (pictures of the insides of the gas chamber at Treblinka - when the chambers were built, operated and destroyed) and claiming the event did not occur because this specific evidence is not available - when other evidence does prove the event, is an illogical argument.
"Perpetrators" has been enforced by what you call other evidence; i'm guessing you mean the dubious reports and eyewitness testimony. It's an emotional conviction; that's also why your effort is tireless. How much power does it require to maintain this conviction for decades on "other evidence"?
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #156
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Default

Ummm, what part of STAY ON TOPIC do certain people around here not understand? What the fuck point is there in switching the topic to population figures or how many jews can fit into a square meter? Hasn't that already been done - oh, about 6 million times? (I think perhaps certain people are letting their egos get the best of them here.)

Let me repeat - every single post that is made on this thread that doesn't focus on / call for Roberta to present the photographic documentation of the physical evidence alleged to have been found / seen at Treblinka is actually an assist for the dirty lying jewbitch herself. (And one has to wonder why someone would allow Roberta the opportunity to avoid having to do just that.) What part of - don't allow the lying jewrat out of the corner - don't some people understand?

Ok Roberta, AGAIN, let's recap here on what physical evidence we're waiting for you to produce and identify / categorize - ALL photos from:

1 - The Aug 22 and 23, 1944 Soviet investigation.

2 - The Nov 9 - 13, 1945 Polish investigation.

3 - The "commission from Warsaw" investigation.

4 - The alleged Ostrowa Mazowieckie militia unit action.

5 - The alleged Shermer investigation.

6 - Photos of the alleged "grave robbers" in action and the alleged "huge pits" that they dug and the alleged "treasure" that they found in the "huge mass graves." (Especially: photos of the alleged "huge craters" from "the time when bombs were used for "extraction." Remember this quote from Martyna Rusiniak: "The young historian shows us photos of the largest postwar excavation sites. The pits have a length of ten meters, one of them looks like the construction pit of a several-story building.")

7 - Photos of the outside of the camp - taken from the outside.

8 - Photos of the inside of the camp - taken from the inside.

Especially:

9 - Photos of the alleged hundreds of jewish workers.

10 - Photos of the alleged hundreds of thousands of dead bodies.

11 - Photos of the alleged homicidal gas chambers

12 - Photos of the alleged burning of the corpses

13 - Photos of the alleged "huge mass graves."

14 - Photos of the alleged millions of gold coins, gem stones and watches lying in the dirt throughout the camp.

15 - Photos of the alleged sorting area.

16 - Photos of the alleged millions of pounds of crushed bone and ash.

17 - Photos of the alleged tens of millions of teeth.

18 - Photos of the alleged tens of thousands of bullets and shell casings.

Again Roberta, make sure when you present the photos that they are all presented singularly and listed in the appropriate category. Specifically, make sure you don't mix up any of the Soviet and Polish investigation photos. If you have no photographic documentation for the claims listed in a category, state that you don't - simple as that.

Can this be made any simpler?

Can my request to keep this thread on this topic be any clearer?

Can we all keep our egos in check long enough for Roberta to present this evidence or admit that none exists?
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #157
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Default

Slamin:

"When the perpetrators are the only ones in a position to provide specific evidence (pictures of the insides of the gas chamber at Treblinka - when the chambers were built, operated and destroyed) and claiming the event did not occur because this specific evidence is not available - when other evidence does prove the event, is an illogical argument."

Nonsense. Show us the following photos of these alleged investigations:

1 - The Aug 22 and 23, 1944 Soviet investigation.

2 - The Nov 9 - 13, 1945 Polish investigation.

3 - The "commission from Warsaw" investigation.

4 - The alleged Ostrowa Mazowieckie militia unit action.

5 - The alleged Shermer investigation.

6 - Photos of the alleged "grave robbers" in action and the alleged "huge pits" that they dug and the alleged "treasure" that they found in the "huge mass graves." (Especially: photos of the alleged "huge craters" from "the time when bombs were used for "extraction." Remember this quote from Martyna Rusiniak: "The young historian shows us photos of the largest postwar excavation sites. The pits have a length of ten meters, one of them looks like the construction pit of a several-story building.")

IF the Treblinka holohoax is true, then a blind man with a toy plastic shovel could prove it in a heartbeat.

Again Slamin2, make sure when you present the photos that they are all presented singularly and listed in the appropriate category. Specifically, make sure you don't mix up any of the Soviet and Polish investigation photos. If you have no photographic documentation for the claims listed in a category, state that you don't - simple as that.

Also show us:

7 - Photos of the outside of the camp - taken from the outside.

8 - Photos of the inside of the camp - taken from the inside.

Especially:

9 - Photos of the alleged hundreds of jewish workers.

10 - Photos of the alleged hundreds of thousands of dead bodies.

11 - Photos of the alleged homicidal gas chambers

12 - Photos of the alleged burning of the corpses

13 - Photos of the alleged "huge mass graves."

14 - Photos of the alleged millions of gold coins, gem stones and watches lying in the dirt throughout the camp.

15 - Photos of the alleged sorting area.

16 - Photos of the alleged millions of pounds of crushed bone and ash.

17 - Photos of the alleged tens of millions of teeth.

18 - Photos of the alleged tens of thousands of bullets and shell casings.

And what I really want to see slamin2, is a photo of:

* - "the huge inferno, which from the distance looked like a volcano breaking through the earth's crust to belch forth fire and lava" from outside the camp.

Just one photo Slamin and Roberta.

Just one.
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #158
psychologicalshock
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Gerdes View Post
Ummm, what part of STAY ON TOPIC do certain people around here not understand? What the fuck point is there in switching the topic to population figures or how many jews can fit into a square meter? Hasn't that already been done - oh, about 6 million times? (I think perhaps certain people are letting their egos get the best of them here.)

Let me repeat - every single post that is made on this thread that doesn't focus on / call for Roberta to present the photographic documentation of the physical evidence alleged to have been found / seen at Treblinka is actually an assist for the dirty lying jewbitch herself. (And one has to wonder why someone would allow Roberta the opportunity to avoid having to do just that.) What part of - don't allow the lying jewrat out of the corner - don't some people understand?
It has been and I think it's about time for me to quit , it's repetetive and boring.

Are we really down to just photographs now? That's rather funny.
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #159
ced smythe
Member
 
ced smythe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
Default

Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
Show us the photos Roberto.
This is a forum, Greg. What the fuck do you expect?
 
Old June 21st, 2008 #160
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Default

Ced:

"This is a forum, Greg. What the fuck do you expect? "

I know it is ced, and please understand that I know that I'm sounding like an ass for trying to keep others on the topic of what I want. But please also understand that this isn't about Treblinka per se. It's about the alleged investigations of the Treblinka site. We don't need, and I most certainly don't want to rehash what's been done over and over in the past.

Again, it's not so much about what evidence there is for the Treblinka holocaust per se, but what evidence has been allegedly found (and even more importantly - not found) by the alleged investigations and what evidence (photos) that common sensen tells us would have been taken of this alleged industrial killing center. And since photographic documentation is all that can be presented over the internet, then that is what I'm asking Roberta to present. And the fact that she cannot and/or will not present photographic documentation of the alleged investigations tells us a hundred times more than arguing about what some jew claimed to have witnessed with his own lying eyes.

This isn’t supposed to be the same old same old about disproving the Treblinka holohoax per se; it's about exposing the fraud of the alleged investigations that claimed to have proven it. Case in point - Belzec.

* * * *

Belzec recap:

The following is all the photographic documentation there is for the existence of the alleged “pure extermination center” of Belzec, in which, according to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (1997), 600,000 jews were killed:

http://www.deathcamps.org/belzec/photos.html

http://www.holocaust-history.org/bel...Figure442.html

http://www.holocaust-history.org/bel...Figure445.html



The following is all the photographic documentation there is of the alleged “huge mass graves” of Belzec:

1 – From the alleged kola investigation. (In which he claims to have proven the existence of 33 “huge mass graves.”):

No photographs of the alleged 33 “huge mass graves” exist.

2 – From the alleged investigation of Regional Investigative Judge of the district court of Zamosc - Judge Czeslaw Godzieszewski. (In which he claims to have proven the existence of human remains in 9 excavated pits):

No photographs of the alleged 9 excavated pits exist.

3 - From the alleged Michael Shermer investigation. (In which he claims to have proven the existence of 30 “huge mass graves,” all 100 meters long, 25 meters wide and 15 meters deep.):

No photographs of the alleged 30 “huge mass graves” exist.



The following is all the photographic documentation there is of the human remains alleged to have been located in Belzecs “huge mass graves:”

1 – From the alleged kola investigation (Which claimed to have proven that some of the graves held the remains of at least 80,000 jews.”):

No photographs of the alleged investigation exist. (Nor do any photographs of the alleged core samples he claims to have taken.)

2 – From the alleged investigation of Regional Investigative Judge of the district court of Zamosc - Judge Czeslaw Godzieszewski. (Note: Judge Godzieszewski admits his “investigation” was conducted in Belzecs cemetery!):

No photographs of the alleged excavations exist.

3 – From the alleged Shermer investigation:

No photographs of the alleged investigation exist.



The following is all the photographic documentation there is of the claims of Rabbis Avi Weiss and Shmuel Herzfeld who allegedly saw human remains “strewn throughout” the camp and “literally everywhere” in an adjacent “large field.” (Scroll down to the photo captioned “Remnants.”):

http://www.death-camps.org/belzec/buildingsite.html


And of course, we’re still waiting for any photographic proof what-so-ever that Michael Shermer so much as stepped foot into the Belzec camp during his alleged “firsthand” investigation of / research in the camp and we’re still waiting for Robin O’Neil to release the alleged videos he claims he took when he participated in the Kola “investigation.”

* * * *

What I'm trying to point out here is this:

IF there was a Treblinka extermination center, then there would be truckloads of photographs proving it. IF the Soviet and Polish investigations proved the Treblinka holohoax, then there should be truckloads of photos documenting the physical evidence. IF there were "grave robbing" operations like Roberta claims, then there would be truckloads of photos documenting it. If Shermer really did do research at Treblinka, then there would at least one photo of the puke in the camp itself, etc., etc.

I'm simply trying to focus on the physical evidence, as anything else has been proven to be simply a waste of time. And of course my main point is - IF there was a Treblinka holocaust, then not only would there be truckloads of physical evidence to prove it and truckloads of photos documenting that proof, but said evidence could easily be found by a blind man with a toy plastic shovel.

I just wanted to get the point across that focusing on anything other than the physical evidence, or, for our purposes - the photographic documentation of such, is not only a waste of time, but counter productive as well.

Sorry for sounding like an ass ced, but I just didn't want this to fall into the same old BS that we've all heard a million times. (Which is EXACTLY what Roberta wanted.)

So why even go there?

Again (And we NEED to harp on this ced) - What physical evidence is there for the alleged murder of 870,00 jews? Well, let's start with the photos taken by:

1 - The Aug 22 and 23, 1944 Soviet investigation.

2 - The Nov 9 - 13, 1945 Polish investigation.

3 - The "commission from Warsaw" investigation.

4 - The alleged Ostrowa Mazowieckie militia unit action.

5 - The alleged Shermer investigation.

6 - Photos of the alleged "grave robbers" in action and the alleged "huge pits" that they dug and the alleged "treasure" that they found in the "huge mass graves." (Especially: photos of the alleged "huge craters" from "the time when bombs were used for "extraction." Remember this quote from Martyna Rusiniak: "The young historian shows us photos of the largest postwar excavation sites. The pits have a length of ten meters, one of them looks like the construction pit of a several-story building.")

and off:

7 - Photos of the outside of the camp - taken from the outside.

8 - Photos of the inside of the camp - taken from the inside.

Especially:

9 - Photos of the alleged hundreds of jewish workers.

10 - Photos of the alleged hundreds of thousands of dead bodies.

11 - Photos of the alleged homicidal gas chambers

12 - Photos of the alleged burning of the corpses

13 - Photos of the alleged "huge mass graves."

14 - Photos of the alleged millions of gold coins, gem stones and watches lying in the dirt throughout the camp.

15 - Photos of the alleged sorting area.

16 - Photos of the alleged millions of pounds of crushed bone and ash.

17 - Photos of the alleged tens of millions of teeth.

18 - Photos of the alleged tens of thousands of bullets and shell casings.

And what I really want to see is a photo of:

* - "the huge inferno, which from the distance looked like a volcano breaking through the earth's crust to belch forth fire and lava" from outside the camp.

Your average person is hypnotized by Roberta BS. But - the average person can see, by laying things out the way I have, that the Treblinka holohoax myth is totally vacuous.

But, I guess if someone really wants to argue with Roberta about what the "eyewitnesses" said, there is nothing I can do to stop you. It just pains me to see people fall into the same old trap over and over again.

Sorry If I offended anyone (or everyone), but I'm going at this from a differnt angel that I think is much more effective for us to use in destroying this ugly myth.

It’s just that I never thought I would have to explain these facts here.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:31 PM.
Page generated in 0.59970 seconds.