Transit Camp Treblinka Challenge: One Person, with Proof

[Wahrheit]

'Revisionists' have tried to present evidence (samples of gas chamber walls),

There are no gas chamber walls. What has ben proven is lack of evidence of the cyanide that should be present on these claimed/believed to be gas chamber walls. Again you are playing the reverse-burden game.

Please go to the necessary thread to discuss if said traces "should be present." Such is the topic of my latest posts to the thread.

in an attempt to negate other evidence (eye-witness testimony, for instance).

A testimony is no evidence. It must be substanciated with hard evidence.

A testimony is most certainly evidence. Most reliable in every detail? Not always, but evidence nonetheless. Such is why witness testimony largely needs further corroboration (either through more testimony, documents, 'hard evidence', etc.).

What revisionists really don't do is present a coherent, substantiated alternative.

We are not into "making up" things.

The allegation was made that Treblinka was a transit camp by numerous 'revisionists'. For evidence of such, there really only is 'revisionist' faith.

[GurtKerstein]

Wahrheit:

The Holocaust is treated as a historical event, much as Soviet crimes are

No, I would argue, like most revisionists do, that the Holocaust should be treated as a murder case, not a historical event. Once you consider it an historical event, then it gives power to the victors of the war, as you know the old adage "the victor of the war gets to write history" - which is exactly what happened. However, since it is an accusation of a mass murder, in which the perpetrator managed to commit the perfect murder x 11,000,000 and left no evidence behind, it should indeed be treated as a murder case. In that case, the accuser must prove beyond reasonable doubt that such murder occurred. That murder was never proven, especially considering that the prosecution (you) failed to produce a body, murder weapon, human remains or any other supporting physical evidence to prove their allegations.

I think even an ardent exterminationist like you cannot argue that the NMT consisted a court of law. What do you think would happen if the public would be exposed to the revisionists's claims? What would happen if in every high school class that teaches the Holocaust a revisionist would be allowed to present his views? The Holocaust would collapse like a house of cards. That's why this great taboo, the refusal to debate in public, the persecution of heretics and the shady behavior of the holocaust establishment.

I suggested in another thread that we request a permission to carry out an independent forensic investigation in Treblinka. What would you make of it if they declined? Would you drop the extermination claim and become a revisionist if such an investigation concluded that there is not a significant amount of human remains there? Or would you stick to your dogma of extermination? Most revisionists would admit defeat. The question is would the Holocaust establishment, including yourself would do the same if the results came out empty? My guess is no. There is a huge industry built on this legend and the nature of such establishment is self perpetuation, not to mention that for many people the Holocaust has become a quasi-religion of sorts so forensic evidence is not likely to sway them, even if it comes from the utmost independent experts.

[Thesaint]

Wahrheit:
Are you seriously arguing that 'transit camp' (in revisionist terminology) does not refer to a camp designed to send Jews eastwards?


No,I`m arguing that the definition of "transit camp" merely denotes transfers of Jews,which you have already agreed took place.
The issue of where they "all" went is another matter entirely.


Wahrheit:
"Prof. Dr. Arthur R. Butz suggested in his revisionist classic The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, which appeared for the first time in 1976, that Treblinka simultaneously served as a labor camp as well as a transit camp for Jews resettled to the east,[109] and Prof. Robert Faurisson also supports the transit camp thesis.[110]"

"Finally, US historian Mark Weber, together with US lawyer Andrew Allen, wrote an excellent article about Treblinka in 1992, in which the two authors summarized all the familiar arguments made to that point in time against the thesis of the 'extermination camp,' introduced new viewpoints in the field, and wrote concerning the actual nature of the camp:[111]"


Notice the words "suggested" "thesis" "viewpoints" "plausible alternative" in those paragraphs,Wahrheit?
Are Mattogno et al claiming to have overwhelming "proof" for these "suggestions"?
They`re just trying,with limited evidence admittedly,to provide an "obvious" alternative scenario to the gassed-buried-dug up-corpse"obliteration"-reburial-vanish into thin air exterminationist narrative that you say "wins out" by default.

Edit:Where is Wahrheit`s "positive evidence of gas chambers" thread?

[grenadier]

This thread just gets better and better... In one post I wrote the following:

The FACT is however, the charge is mass murder by poison gas at the AR camps, geographically well known locations, and it is up to the hoaxters to substantiate this charge, to prove that mass murder was indeed committed.
They have failed miserably, not one shred of solid evidence exists to substantiate the mass murder allegation. That the Soviets and the Poles back in the mid/late 40s failed completely at locating the gigantic mass graves containing gigantic amounts of human remains is devastating enough but adding to those are the new holohoax industry “investigations”, which turned out to be a total failure. This is just unbelievable if the official story were true!

Less than a year ago, “Wahrheit” apparently grasped this problem well, for he wrote in private to me re the alleged victims of the Einsatzgruppen in the East:

On the mass graves, of course a forensic or archaelogical investigation would surely be nice, I do not believe such investigations are necessary when discussing a relatively small amount of people (700 Berlin Jews, few thousand Riga Jews) for one to put stock in it. Of course when Soviet-propagandists, or their modern day academia puppets, start talking of 20, 30, 50, or 100,000 killed, then the alarm bells start going off and the need for an investigation arises.

Upon my posting in this thread “Wahrheits” earlier thoughts in a private letter to me re the lack of material evidence, he replied with this(in this thread):

I still largely stand by those thoughts that you quote (minor tweaks), but they are not relevant.

Minor tweaks eh? Notice that Wahrheit then clearly recognized the role of Soviet propagandists or their MODERN DAY ACADEMIA PUPPETS! Who are those people? Fellas like his pal Nick Terry over at the nutjobs HC blog. Can Wahrheit get any more contradictory and pathetic? Yes, he can.
He has the cheek to write, for example stuff like;

“I also disagree with your premise that 'revisionists' have made points which "strongly refute the allegation of mass murder or even intention to murder," but that is another thread.”
"the evidence for extermination, however minor or debateable, wins out"
and:
"'Therefore, 'exterminationists' should provide positive evidence for gas chambers (as I believe they have)"
and:
"no matter how flimsy or debateable (to some)"
and:
"a lot of evidence"

Wow! I have to remind Wahrheit that not long ago he wrote the following:

Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 16:59:43 -0500
From: [deleted]
To: [deleted]
Subject: […]beliefs vs disbeliefs[…]
Thoughts on "Holocaust" narrative:
“Concentration camps existed of course. Slave labor widely used. No state-orchestrated gassings, although possible that some lowly Fritz decided to have some fun with Zyklon-B and typhus ridden Jews, and started the monster off. Allied propaganda spread the concocted or rumored lie to all of Europe, and so witnesses perceived their experiences to fit the "gassing" tale. Sort of a mixture of Crowell's "hystory" and Mattogno's "black propaganda".
Don't believe systematic homicidal gassings took place anywhere, not in chambers, or vans, or elsewhere. Were not physically possible in the manners alleged, and left no physical trace. Not to mention, no such way to dispose of all the bodies; not in Treblinka's 800,000 person BBQ, nor in Birkenau's 4,000 cremations-a-day ovens.
Emigration remained the desired solution throughout the war, hoping to do so afterwards.”

So, our “Wahrheit” is a very undecided and voluble individual, is he not? Not long ago the dude was writing he DID NOT BELIEVE IN the mass gassings, that there was no material evidence, the gassings were not even physically possible as alleged, etc, and now he writes the complete opposite! Should anybody keep wasting their time with such a fool?
Given Wahrheit’s recent tendencies to resort to outright LIES, those who, like myself, were in close contact with him for over a year are permitted to consider that the present day Wahrheit is in fact a stooge. His latest in this thread, in the way of pure hoaxterism, is to write that:

“If there was such "fierce suppression" and some overarching conspiracy controlling Europe, revisionism would not have existed as long as it has today. The many books put out by VHO are a "living proof of that." Also, suppressed memoirs usually have a way of surfacing, in some way or another”

This is not only in total contradiction with the truth, but in total contradiction to what Wahrheit himself penned not long ago in a letter to me and others.

Sunday, December 14, 2008 9:53 AM

“As everyone is aware, the past few years in revisionism have been some of the darkest in its history. Numerous leading researchers and figures from all over the world have been whisked away by the modern day Thought-Police, sentenced to long-stays in censorship prison and isolated from the rest of the movement. As the recent Frederick Toben affair reminds us, these opponents of revisionism have not given up their attempt to silence and punish anyone who dares challenge the Shoah. Many of these leaders, including Toben, were targeted in countries which allegedly respect a person's right to freedom of speech. As we can plainly see, nowhere is safe in this war for the truth!”

As you all can see, the content and the style are completely different. Before, Wahrheit was telling the truth, as opposed to the cheap and easily verifiable above LIE that he wrote in this thread. Nobody changes so radically so fast as our pal W!!

A few points concerning the Reinhardt camps, from the Holocaust Revisionist position. Their thesis is that these camps were transit camps. Some deportees were sent through them to various labor camps in the General Government, while the majority would have been sent to Soviet occupied territories, likely Ukraine, Belarus and the Baltic countries. Now, it must be remembered that the Soviet propaganda already during the war was trumpeting that these camps were “extermination centers”. What does the stooge W think the Soviets would have done upon confiscating, say at Lublin or Berlin, documents damaging to the extermination propaganda they were peddling? This is the most probable reason why these documents reporting on the exact fate of these Jews are missing. The Russian military historian Suvorov has written that the highest level of secrecy in the former Soviet Union were documents labeled “top secret: special folder” and he that there at present in the Kremlin archives 215.000 such documents and hundreds of thousands more labeled “Secret”, “top secret” and “top secret: of special importance”. Mattogno and Graf have recently stated that they are pessimist re the opening of the Russian archives any time soon. Given the anti-revisionist laws in Germany and the revisionist’s lack of funds and manpower and the constant persecution they find themselves under, it seems that at present little can be expected from archives such as the Arolsen ones. Despite all that Revisionist historians Mattogno and Graf have continued the work to find new evidence to support their thesis and have found much interesting materials that indirectly confirm the revisionist thesis. Presently however, I’m not at liberty to discuss this material.

[Wahrheit]

Wahrheit:
Are you seriously arguing that 'transit camp' (in revisionist terminology) does not refer to a camp designed to send Jews eastwards?


No,I`m arguing that the definition of "transit camp" merely denotes transfers of Jews,which you have already agreed took place.
The issue of where they "all" went is another matter entirely.

First sentence in my original post:

Going off of Bradley Smith's popular challenge, I was wondering if any revisionist here is able to provide, with proof, the name of a single person who was deloused and shipped off the the occupied Soviet territories (or some other resettlement area) from 'transit camp' Treblinka?

Clearly looking for a "resettlement area", which when specified is always the occupied Soviet territories. If you have other options, feel free to give them, with evidence. Such is why I asked if concentration camps constitute such a "resettlement area," a point which you haven't tossed out.

Wahrheit:
"Prof. Dr. Arthur R. Butz suggested in his revisionist classic The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, which appeared for the first time in 1976, that Treblinka simultaneously served as a labor camp as well as a transit camp for Jews resettled to the east,[109] and Prof. Robert Faurisson also supports the transit camp thesis.[110]"

"Finally, US historian Mark Weber, together with US lawyer Andrew Allen, wrote an excellent article about Treblinka in 1992, in which the two authors summarized all the familiar arguments made to that point in time against the thesis of the 'extermination camp,' introduced new viewpoints in the field, and wrote concerning the actual nature of the camp:[111]"


Notice the words "suggested" "thesis" "viewpoints" "plausible alternative" in those paragraphs,Wahrheit?
Are Mattogno et al claiming to have overwhelming "proof" for these "suggestions"?

Ok, so its in the wording. Butz states:

"Treblinka, which was a labor camp but does not appear to have been administered by the WVHA, clearly served also as a transit camp, especially for Warsaw Jews."
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/thottc/11.html

Faurisson writes:

In any event, the case is settled. A hundred items of evidence, together with the book by Graf and Mattogno, show that Treblinka II could never have been anything but an ordinary and modest Durchgangslager, that is, a transit camp for Jews being transported to Majdanek, Auschwitz, or other concentration and labor camps, to the south or east.
http://www.vho.org/tr/2004/1/Faurisson78-82.html

Mattogno:

Above all, it is entirely unclear where the Jews deported to Treblinka ultimately wound up. That Treblinka served as a transit camp is proven, but for the most part we are still in the dark as to the details (the number of those resettled, their destinations, and their fate during the war and afterwards).
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/t/11.html

So, everyone agrees that there is no doubt Treblinka served as a transit camp ("clearly served," "case is settled," "is proven,"), but we must assume such on faith, without much in the way of actual evidence for the assertion ("we are still in the dark as to the details"). Here I thought revisionism was based on facts, and that belief was for the other guys...

Edit:Where is Wahrheit`s "positive evidence of gas chambers" thread?

Due time.

[Lamprecht]

I would like to point out that disproving the extermination thesis and supporting the transit-camp thesis are two differnet concepts and two( or more) different threads.

[Wahrheit]

No, I would argue, like most revisionists do, that the Holocaust should be treated as a murder case, not a historical event. Once you consider it an historical event, then it gives power to the victors of the war, as you know the old adage "the victor of the war gets to write history" - which is exactly what happened. However, since it is an accusation of a mass murder, in which the perpetrator managed to commit the perfect murder x 11,000,000 and left no evidence behind, it should indeed be treated as a murder case. In that case, the accuser must prove beyond reasonable doubt that such murder occurred. That murder was never proven, especially considering that the prosecution (you) failed to produce a body, murder weapon, human remains or any other supporting physical evidence to prove their allegations.

Gurt, I don't consider myself "the prosecution", for no one is on trial. This is a discussion forum, and it should be about the free flow of ideas and information.

I agree that one must be careful in what one uses from the Nuremberg trials. I don't consider it to be a sham of a trial, but I have doubts as to certain parts of the reliability and its proceedings. In actuality, I have never used much information from the trials anyway.

First, lets be straight on what we are discussing. This is not over the murder of 11 million people (I assume your going with the 6 million Jews and 5 million non-Jews), but over what happened in Treblinka. Gassings make up less than half of the 6 million Jewish figure, and there are very few non-Jews alleged to have been murdered through such a method. I assume that you are mostly referring to these deaths when you discuss the failure to produce "a body, murder weapon, human remains or any other supporting physical evidence."

Is it a correct assumption that you will only accept physical evidence for the alleged Nazi gassing sites?

Must go for now, but will return to the latter part of your post later.

[Gébé Tremblay]

A testimony is most certainly evidence.

That is why you believe in UFO's and the Lockness monster. Probably the Yeti too !

What is next ? Laws against lepricons non-believers in Ireland ?

[Wahrheit]

In his article on missing Hungarian Jews, Juergen Graf made a statement relevant to the purpose of this thread:

In discussions with opponents and skeptics, revisionists are invariably confronted with the question: “If they weren’t killed, what happened to the missing Jews?” This question deserves serious consideration. We revisionists should not be content merely to refute the official “Holocaust” story; we should also attempt to explain, as clearly as possible, what actually did occur. Naturally, this involves the question of the whereabouts of the missing Jews.

http://www.vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/19/4/Graf4.html

Thus, Graf (who is at least semi serious with his writings) acknowledges that this is a worthy and necessary endeavor of 'revisionism'. Too bad that so many faithful followers in this thread seemed to have missed that line, as they would rather dodge any sort of burden of proof. Of course, I was under the mistaken impression that 'revisionism' actually cared about truthful history; not just denying something.

[Greg Gerdes]

Warheit

Also, you can find my answer to most of your questions further up in this thread. Please cease your spamming efforts and actually try to engage in serious debate for a change.

To "most" of my questions?

Why not all?

In fact, I don't see a response anywhere.

Also Warheit, there is no such thing as "spanming" at Codoh, because there is no dodging.

What you dishonestly call "spamming" is in reality, your continued dodging of my questions, which further proves how dishonest you are.

What's wrong Warheit - are my questions too hard for you, or are you afraid to answer them?

What are you so afraid of?

[Greg Gerdes]

Let's remind everyone of what Warhiet's basic thesis is:

If no proof/evidence can be shown of their transit camp functionality, the evidence for extermination, however minor or debateable, wins out.

Now, let's recap some of what Warhiet has claimed / admitted to date:

Warheit admits that he cannot provide us with a list of names of the jews who were trasferred to Treblinka, and the ONLY names that he can come up with are jews who were NOT holocausted at Treblinka.

Why can't he give us the name of one single jew who was holocausted at Treblinka?

Warhiet also admits that Treblinka was either a "pure extermination center" or a transit camp - and that there is no third optioin.

Yet Warhiet cannot locate / prove the existence of one single grave that contains so much as 1 / 10,000 of 1 % of the alleged mass murder.

Warhiet claims that there was a "revolt" at Treblinka, yet he cannot provide the name of one single jew, with proof, who participated in this alleged revolt.

Warheit also admits that Kalman Teigman's map shows a "disinfection tank" at Treblinka, but no graves.



Warheit has offered no proof what so ever for his magically disappearing jew theory, yet he want's us to prove his MDJ theory wrong and he refuses to answer the simplest of questions that he knows will show how dishonest he is and will blow his bogus MDJ theory to shreds.

[Greg Gerdes]

Let's remind everyone of what Warhiet's basic thesis is:

If no proof/evidence can be shown of their transit camp functionality, the evidence for extermination, however minor or debateable, wins out.

So Warhiet, why didn't you use and / or include Sobibor in your bogus "challenge?"

[Greg Gerdes]

Warhiet has made his claim for the "magically disappearing jew" theory explicit:

#1:

If no proof/evidence can be shown of their transit camp functionality, the evidence for extermination, however minor or debateable, wins out.

#2:

if no transit camp evidence/proof can be shown, there must be a recognition that all the evidence for homicidal gassings (no matter how flimsy) wins out.

And this is what he says about providing proof:

When someone makes an allegation, they must provide positive proof for that claim.

Well then Warhiet,

Can you locate / prove the existence of just one grave that contains just one tenth of one percent of the alleged mass murder at Treblinka -

Yes or No?

Can you provide the name of just one jew - with proof, who died in a diesel exhaust gas chamber at Treblinka -

Yes or No?

[Gébé Tremblay]

In his article on missing Hungarian Jews, Juergen Graf made a statement relevant to the purpose of this thread:

In discussions with opponents and skeptics, revisionists are invariably confronted with the question: “If they weren’t killed, what happened to the missing Jews?” This question deserves serious consideration. We revisionists should not be content merely to refute the official “Holocaust” story; we should also attempt to explain, as clearly as possible, what actually did occur. Naturally, this involves the question of the whereabouts of the missing Jews.

http://www.vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/19/4/Graf4.html

Thus, Graf (who is at least semi serious with his writings) acknowledges that this is a worthy and necessary endeavor of 'revisionism'. Too bad that so many faithful followers in this thread seemed to have missed that line, as they would rather dodge any sort of burden of proof. Of course, I was under the mistaken impression that 'revisionism' actually cared about truthful history; not just denying something.

Well go ahead, Wahrheit, none of us is holding you back. Search for the missing hungarian jews. Tell us when you have found them or what became of them. Be sure to show hard evidence before accusing any one, ok ?

As for Juergen Graf , he may himself simply refute the official stories, but I dont. I simply refuse to accuse any one of a crime without hard evidence to support it (a body is the most important evidence). I dont need to find the evidence. The claimers/accusers need to find it.

So if you "believe" in the stories, Wahrheit, then you are supporting the accusation.

You need the proof.

Without proof you are making calomny.

Myself I say I dont know. I have no proof in front of me. No hard evidence as ever been presented to me. So I can't support the claims/accusations.

I am making no calomny to please no one.

[Greg Gerdes]

Quit the cherry picking / mealy-mouthing Warheit.

Let's see answers to all the questions in one single post.

Wahrheit, let me remind you that there is no dodging on CODOH.



Wahrheit:

...as the two only escaped the camp through a revolt



1 - Can you prove that those jews "escaped" and were not transferred somewhere to the east?

Yes or No?

2 - Can you prove that there was a revolt at Treblinka?

Yes or No?


Wahrheit:

the people in question would be alive (somewhere), and leave a much larger trace than any silent and cremated corpse



3 - How many people? You're statement has to be backed up with some facts. How many jooos were transferred through the Treblinka train station?

4 - How many jooos were processed through the Treblinka transit camp?

5 – How much of a “trace” would a person leave if they were caught up in the Soviets gulag system?

6 – Have you ever read – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s - The Gulag Archipelago?


Wahrheit:

There is no doubt that tens of thousands of Jews were deported to the East (Riga, Minsk, etc), but if you want to tie Treblinka into the process, you must have proof.



7 - If of thousands of Jews were deported to the East (Riga, Minsk, etc), like you claim, then is that evidence that "The Final Solution" was an emigration policy, or an extermination policy?


Gerdes

Remember, there are only two options: extermination center (for those who believe in magic) or transit camp (for those who believe in the scientific method). There is no third option and only one truth.


Mattogno

The transit camp thesis is, in fact, the single plausible alternative to the conventional picture of the extermination camp. Tertium non datur - no third possibility is given.



8 - Do you have a third option / possibility Wahrheit?

Yes or No?


* Warheit admitted that he does not have a third option.


Wahrheit , numerous jooos say they were transported to Treblinka. But they were NOT killed.

9 - Does that support the "extermination" thesis or the transit camp thesis?

10 - What part of - No graves = no Treblinka holocaust - do you not understand Wahrheit?

11- Are you're saying Wahrheit, that the fact that not one grave that contains so much as 1 / 10,000 of 1 % of the alleged mass murder has ever been located / proven to exist is not proof?

12 - Wahrheit, do you agree or disagree with the following:

In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of evidence of its occurrence as proof of its non-occurrence.


13 – Wahrheit, was there a Treblinka holocaust?

Yes or No?


14 - Wahrheit, can you provide the name of just one jew, with proof, who was killed at the Treblinka transit camp?

15 - Wahrheit, do you accept or deny the fact that the Soviets rounded up and sent millions and millions of people, including jooos, to the gulag?

16 - Is dodging questions allowed on the RODOH forum?

17 - Is dodging questions allowed on the CODOH forum?

18 – Are you aware that this is the CODOH forum, and not the RODOH forum?

19 - Why don't you include Sobibor in your "challenge?"

My tour guide confirmed that the ashes of the 800,000 people who died here were placed in this area and are now hidden underneath the symbolic cemetery and by the grass and tiny flowers which cover the spot. The map in the camp pamphlet does not specify the exact spot where the ashes were buried.

20 - Warheit, can you prove that so much as one single pound of "ashes" are buried at Treblinka?

Yes or No?


Warheit:

This is unbelievable, especially when we are discussing a population movement in excess of one million people.


Well, actually in this case it's 800,000, and the claim isn't a movement. The claim is that they are buried.


21 - How many graves are these alleged 800,000 jooos buried in Warheit?

22 - Warheit, can you locate / prove the existence of just one grave that contains the remains of just 1 / 10,000 of 1 % of the alleged mass murder at Treblinka?

Yes or No?


Will Warhiet answer the simple questions?

Or will he cravenly run away like his buddy AHollankamp did?