Atigun wrote:I read Yankel Wiernik's book, "A Year in Treblinka". It didn't take long before I came to the realization that, "This be horse frocky". First thing I noticed was his claim of being whipped and beaten continually with rifle butts while he was on corpse carrying duty. I've done a stint of soldiering and I know that striking someone over the head with a 8-9 lb rifle with a steel butt-plate isn't really any different from hitting someone with a 8-9 lb sledge hammer. Unconsciousness or death is the likely result. It's not something that after receiving such a blow you just go merrily on your corpse carrying way.
The dragline (excavator, digger) that could exhume 3,000 bodies at a time and dig and stockpile 10X25X50 meter graves was more obvious horse frocky. (Yes, I'm a fair operating engineer) Lots of other things such as the hermetically sealed gas chamber with the exhaust from a tank engine turned into it and culminating in him being shot by a guard while escaping and the bullet penetrating his clothes but bouncing off his body.
By the end of the book, Wiernik had convinced me that the holocaust was indeed a hoax and a lie. How anyone can claim to believe such drivel is utterly beyond me.
Well said Atigun. If there was a Tick button here I would have ticked it in support of your comments.
By extension the whole Treblinka story is bunkum. Treblinka has always shone brightly as the obvious weak link in the chain so to speak. Other camps have stuff going on that makes it somewhat easy for the hoaxers to do their hoaxing. Treblinka is one of few camps that is famous enough to stand up and be counted and every time 'they' take a peak it catches them out. Caroline Sturdy Colls is the most obvious culprit here.
If Treblinka didn't happen, and it didn't, then surely the whole holocaust story is exposed as just that, a story.
On the Skeptic Forum, Nick Terry recently took the position in a discussion with me that Holocaust Revisionists have not established that the truth of Treblinka is even important:
'Revisionists' have incidentally yet to articulate in detail and in convincing depth why the number of victims of Treblinka actually matters, other than to annoy and offend Jews and others with their trolling....
So please, explain to me why the death toll at Treblinka matters. The Jews of Warsaw deported in the Great Deportation of the summer of 1942 are still dead somewhere, even if you could prove, which you can't, that fewer than the documented number died en route to or on arrival at Treblinka, which is the last known place they are documented as reaching.
I was at first shocked when I read Nick Terry make these statements but then I was not. He clearly does not believe the Official Treblinka narrative, he just doesn't think the truth of it matters. Even if the conventional Treblinka narrative of 700,000 - 900,000 murders and open-air cremations were proven false, it wouldn't meaningfully change their perception of the Holocaust. We have already seen how the Holocaust industry has taken the all-but-official revision of Majdanek from "extermination camp" to "labor camp" in complete stride. It wouldn't surprise me if the Holocaust myth is just as strong 100 years from now, but Treblinka is relegated to the status of Majdanek in importance in Holocaust historiography.
Of course, this creates an enormous problem of trust for me. If Nick Terry doesn't think the number of victims of Treblinka actually matters, how can I trust his position on what happened at Treblinka? If the truth of what happened at Treblinka doesn't matter in assessing the Holocaust narrative, then surely the truth of nothing
matters. They therefore cannot be trusted to advocate for the truth on any issue pertaining to the Holocaust, because the truth of those matters does not impact their broader agenda. I am not surprised this is how they operate, I am only surprised they have admitted it.
Reading Nick Terry's comments, it is clear the "Official Narrative" is trying to segue "the Holocaust" from its place as a singular, bizarre, black swan event in human history to to asserting its similarity to other 20th century genocides. That is a smart move by them, because the more "singular" this event is in history the less likely it becomes barring enormous amounts of evidence that do not exist. Asserting its similarity to other events mitigates this problem. So Holocaustians are going to be happy to drop the "uniqueness" claim about the Holocaust even though that "uniqueness" claim is one of the only true parts of the Holocaust grand narrative.
I think even if Treblinka were debunked, it wouldn't change public perception of the Holocaust. They are clearly trying to reform the narrative to be less sensitive to the completely impossible claims made about Treblinka.
I think what happened is that Muehlenkamp was enlisted to bring the allegations of Treblinka within the realm of physical possibility. He did his very best, making extremely generous assumptions to his agenda every step of the way but still could not do it. That must have been an eye-opener to them, and I am willing to bet money that none of them believe the official narrative of Treblinka, but their underlings still do.
The truth of the Treblinka narrative definitely matters to me. Hearing Nick Terry state the truth doesn't matter only emboldens the obvious conclusion: that the absurd claims made in the Treblinka narrative are false.