Treblinka: Proof of anyone killed by electric current?

[Malle]

Wahrheit, please give us the proof that a person was killed by electric current in Treblinka? Just one name with forensic proof will be sufficient!
Source: Nuremberg: IMT, 1948. Volume XXXII pp. 155-158

The Jews had simply ceased to exist. Special camps were established for this purpose where the destruction of human lives was carried on by mechanized means. The best known of these death camps are those of Treblinka, Belzec and Sobiber /in the Lublin district/. In these camps the Jews were put to death in their thousands by hitherto unknown, new methods, gas and steam chambers as well as electric current employed on a large scale.

[Lamprecht]

I don't remember Warheit making such a claim.

[Malle]

I don't remember Warheit making such a claim.

He didn’t. I only fell down to his level, as in this thread, “Transit Camp Treblinka Challenge: One Person, with Proof “. He is asking a question where he knows the answer; I’m only doing the same.
So, where is Wahrheit?

[Greg Gerdes]

Malle

So, where is Wahrheit?

Probably the same place as AHollankamp and nickterry.

They ran back to rodoh because they cannot defend their absurd - hymie in holohoax-land - tall tales.

Oh wait, I almost forgot - rodoh is dead.

Dead dead dead.

So I guess I don't know where he is.

[Diogenes1]

try the "Cyanide chemistry at auschwitz" thread. That's where he is, claiming that Rudolf Leuchter and the fradulent krakow institute "found" cyanide in the "gas chambers"

[Wahrheit]

I don't remember Warheit making such a claim.

He didn’t. I only fell down to his level, as in this thread, “Transit Camp Treblinka Challenge: One Person, with Proof “. He is asking a question where he knows the answer; I’m only doing the same.
So, where is Wahrheit?

No, I do not know where the answer is to my challenge. Indeed, despite being the most replied to thread in CODOH forum history, no one seems to have the answer.

On electric current, I am not aware of a single direct witness of such a thing. Are you? Mattogno might need to be clued in on this point, as well.

[Malle]

On electric current, I am not aware of a single direct witness of such a thing. Are you? Mattogno might need to be clued in on this point, as well.

Let me give you a name, and of course as usual, not a "direct" eyewitness:
Jakob Rabinowicz

[Wahrheit]

On electric current, I am not aware of a single direct witness of such a thing. Are you? Mattogno might need to be clued in on this point, as well.

Let me give you a name, and of course as usual, not a "direct" eyewitness:
Jakob Rabinowicz

AFAIK, the only reports of "electric current" arrive from hearsay sources, or very indirect references (Polish resistance reports, Soviet reports, etc.). Ringelbaum's diary is unclear on the reference to Rabinowicz. No details are given regarding the killing methods, and I am unaware of anyone else available to substantiate the electric current charges. It also is unclear (by Mattogno's quote) HOW Ringelbaum heard from Rabinowicz. Did he talk with him personally? Was this word of mouth passed around the ghetto?

A very weak source to rely upon. We don't know much about the alleged source's circumstances to determine much.

Perhaps he did make the statement though, and perhaps he thought electricity was used to murder Jews (among other items). All it shows is a general confusion regarding the details of the process, not too big of a deal (and not not enough to draw an overarching conclusion that nobody was killed at the camp!). Such would likely be the case if he knew that killing was occuring, was unsure how, and had no way to really find out (stuck digging graves or covering them). And that is why eye-witness testimony needs to be critically analyzed, for it can easily have problems, yet still prove useful.

[Inquisitive]

Wahrheit, your comment:

And that is why eye-witness testimony needs to be critically analyzed, for it can easily have problems, yet still prove useful.

Why analyze? Why not ask the "survivors" themselves? Better to get it from the horse's mouth, no misunderstandings?
I know the survivors of the "Liberty" would love to tell their story on any national media site. I've spoken to them. It seems only fair to question people who's story lacks detail or reference that they may defend themselves. On the other side if the Germans have been blamed for war propaganda run wild, we owe them the benefit of the doubt to defend themselves. All documents should be open to the public, bad Arolsen included. Makes all of this unnecessary.
The time is now before the survivors die off.

[Wahrheit]

It is too late to expect serious answers to specific questions of survivors. Some 60+ years after an event, one would be hard pressed to recall such minor details that 'revisionists' often jump over. Would you really wish for your grandmother/father to be subjected to intense questions on every detail of their former statements? How do you think they would hold up?

The time for serious cross-examination has passed.

[Inquisitive]

If you can charge a man 80 some odd years old with murder from 60 some odd years ago, then you can charge a witness with lying at the same age.
Murder and torture are not minor details.

and yes in answer to your question, if my relatives (any) are charging someone for crimes such as these, they'd damn well better have their facts straight. I would be the first to demand this of them.

[Greg Gerdes]

Warheit

I am not aware of a single direct witness of such a thing.

He didn't ask you to provide the name of "a single direct witness.'


He asked you if you can provide the name of one person, with proof, who was killed by electric current in Treblinka.

Why the obfuscation Warheit?

Did you learn that trick from your rodohoaxer friends?


Warheit,

Can provide the name of one person, with proof, who was killed by electric current in Treblinka -

YES?

or

NO?

[Wahrheit]

If you can charge a man 80 some odd years old with murder from 60 some odd years ago, then you can charge a witness with lying at the same age.
Murder and torture are not minor details.

Except you have to show proof of falsification from their statements made 60 years ago with the malicious intent, not those made today (human memory does have its weaknesses, ya know).

and yes in answer to your question, if my relatives (any) are charging someone for crimes such as these, they'd damn well better have their facts straight. I would be the first to demand this of them.

Except witnesses can't actually charge someone with murder. The state prosecution must do it, and they would have to be convinced by the evidence. I assume that most attorneys would need more than just an eye-witness testimony to convict someone of murder, and even to try a case.

[Greg Gerdes]

Warheit, let me remind you that there is no dodging on the codoh forum. (What do you think this is - rodoh?)


Warheit

I am not aware of a single direct witness of such a thing.

He didn't ask you to provide the name of "a single direct witness.'


He asked you if you can provide the name of one person, with proof, who was killed by electric current in Treblinka.

1 - Why the obfuscation Warheit?

2 - Did you learn that trick from your rodohoaxer friends?


3 - Warheit, can provide the name of one person, with proof, who was killed by electric current in Treblinka -

YES?

or

NO?


Now let's see if Warheit is going to run away again from these simple questions just like his rodohoaxer pals are so want to do.

4 - Why are you so afraid of a few simple questions Warheit?