Things changed for me... [MAYBE NOT] Muehlenkamp

[Drew J]

Out of 35 million teeth, Muehlenkamp wasn't able to prove the existence of one.

Again, he cites that polish article where people who were photographed were said to have been bandits who stole teeth, gold, etc.

But as I said earlier, if they can photograph the perps, why not the fruit of their crimes? There was ample opportunity to photograph key evidence yet for some reason, the extermination theorists have dropped the ball and forgotten to prove their case. It seems odd. That is why I have to concede that Geres has a point. Because it's similar to mine. We have photographs of perps, but not the actual stuff they stole? How the hell can you forget to photograph that stuff when you arrest the perps and photograph them? It makes no sense to forget to document a crime that you are trying to document.

As for the people quoted in that article, I haven't read the polish translation yet and I will get to it. That being said, I am familiar with the Jewish religions injunctions to lie. I have already stated that I am familiar with it. Hell, I did a whole thread on this board about the kabbala and the 6 million number. Perhaps you haven't seen it?

[Pepper]

Drew

Again, he cites that polish article where people who were photographed were said to have been bandits who stole teeth, gold, etc.

And isn't it funny, the big lie is that the Germans went through all the trouble to recycle the bullets and cartridges, yet they left tons of gold laying around?

BTW, why would they bother pulling gold teeth and then leave millions of dollars worth of gold coins lying around?

If you wanted to “cover-up” your crime scene, and you even went through all the effort to camouflage the site when you were done so nobody would bother looking around the site, would you then leave millions of dollars of gold coins lying around the site, just inviting people to dig around and investigate?

It's just one stupid, physically impossible tall tale after another.

It's good that you're looking into all this Drew, but as someone who's been where you are now, let me tell you something that will save you a lot of time.

No graves = No Treblinka holocaust.

It's that simple Drew. The jews just laugh and laugh as they watch you playing their shell game.


Drew

if they can photograph the perps

Those people weren't "perps." But again, it's all part of the new lies that they're telling to cover up for all their old lies.

Like the bullets and shell casings - it's this simple.

That has never been proven. The only "evidence" for the recycling story is that no bullets or shell casings have ever been found at Treblinka. But have you noticed that that is as far as they can go? Can they cite any liewitness testimony to back up the story? Let's see the proof that bullets and shell casings were recycled. Of course the jews say that the fact that there was never any found, is "proof" that they were recycled.

And round and round they go, laughing the whole time as they tell lie after lie after lie after lie...


Pepper

Can you prove that there exists in each of the camps so much as one grave that contains human remains?

Drew

I can't. And I doubt others can.

So why waste your time and energy playing the jews shell game?


No graves = no holocaust

[Pepper]

Drew

...the Reinhardt camps have been posing problems for the revisionists... The exterminationists may have got us on the Reinhardt "transit" camps...

Pepper

Can you prove that there exists in each of the camps so much as one grave that contains human remains?

Drew

I can't. And I doubt others can.

So who's got who Drew?

The Reinhardt camps are NOT posing problems for revisionists, they're posing problems for you.

Why? Because you've fallen into the jews trap and started playing their fraudulent shell game, which is based on nothing but BIG LIES which are used to create and compound complication and confusion.

If they can get you to ask the wrong questions Drew, then they don't have to worry about the answers that you come up with, do they? And you have been asking the wrong questions. The key is to keep it simple and focus on what really matters. And that is:

No graves = No holocaust

There's only one simple question that you have to ask the jews about their magically disappearing jew theory (2.1 million jews at Belzec, Babi Yar, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka). And that is:


[b]Can you locate / prove the existence of just one grave that contains just one tenth of one percent of the alleged mass murder?[/b


For 65 years the jews answer has been no.

So who has a problem with the Reinhardt camps Drew?

[Pepper]

Drew

It makes no sense to forget to document a crime that you are trying to document.

Exactly!

Looks like you're on the right track now Drew.

[Friedrich Paul Berg]

There are, it seems, absolutely no autopsies of corpses anywhere in Poland that show the victims were killed with carbon monoxide. The "debates" between Muehlenkamp and Mattogno over the sizes of various cemeteries and the likely numbers of dead underground were meaningless, irrelevant exercises without autopsies. Why should anyone be surprised to find mass burial sites in Poland, or anywhere in Europe, going back eons? The corpses M & M discussed were not even exhumed, or properly dated.

Have I missed something?

Friedrich Paul Berg
Learn everything at http://www.nazigassings.com
Nazi Gassings Never Happened! Niemand wurde vergast!

[grenadier]

Some stuff from Drew:

That Belzec book is Mattogno's. If you would check the Belzec thread I have made note of some problems of Mattogno's that Muehlenkamp rightly pointed out. They're in the red text.[...]
You really should read the red text of mine in that thread to see where Mattogno made some cricial errors.[...]
That would seem to be so even given just the few examples of Mattogno losing on fine logical points to Muehlenkamp

etc, etc...

Drew, the problem here is that Mattogno's critical errors and his "losing" to Roberto "on fine logical points"
have only taken place in the figments of your imagination...

Roberto, a grade A obfuscator and congenital liar, has done little more than an exercise in sophistry, sheer nonsense
and irrelevant nitpicking in his attacks on Mattogno.
What the poster Pepper has termed "shell game". You have fallen
for it and they are probably indeed laughing at you. Sorry. I'll try to address some of that red text of yours
if time allows in the future, but for now just a few brief comments;

you wrote

I will say that... his math [Muehlenkamp's], while correct and somewhat impressive[...]

or

he seems to be on to something when he talks about how many bodies actually could fit in a gas chamber[...]

Surely your jesting lad!?
Do you see what I'm saying? You have been sucked into Roberto's bizarro world, empirical evidence
be damned! You are at peril of becoming totally disconnected to the reality of things, which is what it takes
to actually think Roberto's crap is "impressive"...

Drew

The exterminationists may have got us on the Reinhardt "transit" camps, while we have them[...]

Nonsense. The AR camps as death camps have been totally debunked by holocaust revisionism. In many ways
I'd say it is actually a lot easier to debunk those camps than A/B.
On the other hand, it's easier for the hoaxters to use the AR camps since the camps do not exist anymore,
making it easy for them to use their horror stories, which are completely based on lie-witness nonsense.
And I mean NONSENSE, Drew! No wonder the holohoax industry covered them with their concrete "monuments"
to prevent any forensic investigation to be carried out.
The gas chamber controversy in general has been won by the revisionist side. It's just a question of the world finding out about it. That, yes, might take a while.
Remember though that before the Jews blocked the way to open forensic investigation of the camp with their shitty excuses of "preventing disturbance of the dead", the Communist investigative commissions went there and found nothing*. How hard do you think it woud have been for the commies to have found the huge amount of material evidence that should be there, had the story been true, even more so when they had the lie-witnesses and the area of the camps were small and known to them?
* when I say nothing, i mean of course, nothing that could support their mass murder lies. Certainly some people must have died in the camps.

[Moderator]

Drew,
I assume you read the guidelines when registering, no dodging is permitted. You have been challenged to show alleged mass graves, teeth, etc. You have not, but continue on regardless. If you cannot back your assertions then please leave this thread. Thanks, M1

Be sure to read Rules/guidelines before you post!

guidelines here:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=358

[Friedrich Paul Berg]

Please, moderator, be patient.

Drew J. is making interesting points which are provoking extremely interesting discussion and rebuttals.

Friedrich Paul Berg
Learn everything at http://www.nazigassings.com
Nazi Gassings Never Happened! Niemand wurde vergast!

[Drew J]

Drew, the problem here is that Mattogno's critical errors and his "losing" to Roberto "on fine logical points"
have only taken place in the figments of your imagination...

Disagreed grenadier. Check my belzec thread. There are a few small logical points Muehlenkamp won (red text) but as I said, Mattogno is still likely right about Belzec not being the site of mass extermination. People can come to the right conclusions for a couple wrong reasons mixed in with right ones.

Roberto, a grade A obfuscator and congenital liar, has done little more than an exercise in sophistry, sheer nonsense
and irrelevant nitpicking in his attacks on Mattogno.

The points he won as shown by my red text still don't prove his overall case. Those small concessions don't work all that much in his favour. I admit this.

Do you see what I'm saying? You have been sucked into Roberto's bizarro world, empirical evidence
be damned! You are at peril of becoming totally disconnected to the reality of things, which is what it takes
to actually think Roberto's crap is "impressive"...

Well he does take a long time to get his point across and does unload a lot of math. Like I said it doesn't do a lot of good to talk about what graves could have held unless you support with what ACTUALLY WAS in there. But proof for the latter is lacking as Geradi (sp?) has shown in that vnn thread for example. And the point I made. The Polish article talks about theft of gold and teeth by robbers who were caught and photographed YET THEY COULDN'T PHOTOGRAPH THE FRUITS OF THEIR ILLEGAL LABOUR? As I said IT MAKES NO SENSE TO FORGET TO DOCUMENT A CRIME YOU ARE TRYING TO DOCUMENT. That shows my disagreement with Muehlenkamp's overall assertion about the mass extermination at Belzec and the theft of goods from that place. How could you miss that part of my posts?

The exterminationists may have got us on the Reinhardt "transit" camps

I said "may." As the thread and my posts have added up and I have found more problems in Muehlenkamp (that polish article for example) thanks to others furnishing more reading material to me. That material simply confirmed what I hoped/expected would be.

And I mean NONSENSE, Drew! No wonder the holohoax industry covered them with their concrete "monuments"
to prevent any forensic investigation to be carried out.

I don't buy the religious objections either. Especially coming from rabbis who have and believe in and also exercise Talmudic injunctions to lie against and about gentiles.

The gas chamber controversy in general has been won by the revisionist side. It's just a question of the world finding out about it.

Yes, Zundel, Burg, Leuchter and Rudolf have won. So that is why guys like Muehlenkamp are scrambling to try and prove the holocaust by focusing on these Reinhardt camps. And now that's looking problematic too. Please remember how either here or in the Belzec topic (can't remember), I showed how the gas chamber mongers couldn't even get straight where Demjanjuk was at the time he was supposed to have done what he did.

Drew,
I assume you read the guidelines when registering, no dodging is permitted. You have been challenged to show alleged mass graves, teeth, etc. You have not, but continue on regardless. If you cannot back your assertions then please leave this thread. Thanks, M1

It was just open musing. I was moreso throwing out Muehlenkamp's stuff so others could show me where it had been refuted. It was thrown out there and quoted half heartedly so to speak. I affirm fully that there are many scientific problems for proving the exterminationists views of Belzec and Treblinka for example. One of which is that gold and teeth problem I just mentioned. They can photograph the perps, but not what they stole? What a flippin' joke.

Drew J. is making interesting points which are provoking extremely interesting discussion and rebuttals.

Thanks Mr. Berg for your understanding.

[Pepper]

Drew

I affirm fully that there are many scientific problems for proving the exterminationists views of Belzec and Treblinka for example.

Hey Drew, have you seen the 30 treblinka questions that was put out by nafh?

Why don't you challenge Muehlenkamp to anwswer them and keep us informed about his response to your challenge?

[Drew J]

Do you mean put out by nafcash?

I do recall doing a google search for that one man whom you said was banned from rodoh and had to go to vnn to challenge Muehlenkamp who refused to explain why Kola and why the writers of the polish article should be believed about their claims with no hard evidence behind them. Gerdes was his name. Speaking of him and nafcash, check this out.

His latest updates on the Sobibor and Belzec and Treblinka fiasco with Gerdes. Updates seven, eight, nine, and ten.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ge_27.html
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... lenge.html
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ge_20.html
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ge_21.html

I don't have to get on Muehlenkamp's case. Gerdes already is.

[Pepper]

Drew

Do you mean put out by nafcash?

Yes, the nafh / nafcash.com


Have you seen their 30 treblinka questions?

Why don't you challenge Muehlenkamp to anwswer them?

Let's see if he comes up with any "interesting replies."

[Drew J]

Here is Muehlenkamp's 10th update.

In his post of Sep 20, 2008 5:34 pm on the CODOH thread NAFCASH throws Muehlenkamp a bone, an enlightened spirit using the handle "grenadier" disgraced himself with the message commented hereafter.

Read more!


"grenadier":

Actually, the charlatans often use the fraudulent argument of "the work can't be done on account of religious grounds".


Actually religious considerations of respect for the dead are not a mere pretext but a real issue when it comes to excavation at Nazi mass killing sites, as becomes apparent from the article A Monumental Failure at Belzec, written in 2003 by Rabbi Avi Weiss, and the article New Excavations At Chelmno Death Camp, posted by Shmuel Ben Eliezer in September 2007.

However, as I pointed out in my previous update, such considerations have not hampered archaeological research at the former extermination camps to the extent of preventing archaeological investigations that led to identifying the mass graves and establishing their size and contents, namely at Chelmno, at Belzec (both of which camps, incidentally, have disappeared from the NAFCASH challenge – Gerdes must have got cold feet) and at Sobibor, though in regard to the latter the absence of a published detailed report on archaeological findings still feeds "Revisionist" conspiracy theories and other rhetoric.

Have Belzec and Chelmno actually vanished from the nafcash website? If so, why? Because they would refuse to accept the work of Kola on Belzec as evidence since it was not backed up by anything? Is it also because they wouldn't accept as evidence that polish article that talked about the theft of teeth and gold...the same article that could produce a photograph of the perps but not the stuff they stole?

If Muehlenkamp is correct that Belzec has been removed from the nafcash challenge site, then am I correct about why it was done? And if so, then I have a following question resting on the correctness of these two questions...

Is Muehlenkamp going to continue to bitch about people not accepting his low standards of evidence so that he won't have to answer Treblinka's 30 questions? Is he continuing to complain about this so he won't have to do any real work for Treblinka? I mean aside from the unsubstantiated fluff over here?
Why do I say unsubstantiated? Because I am banking on the fact that those 101 questions and answers are an authentic exchange even though I was never given an original source for that exchange. I would like one by the way if possible.

If so, I wouldn't be surprised. And neither should Muehlenkamp. Then again, he was never big on evidence. It seems he is more big on making excuses. As I have said before, if Jews don't complain about mass graves of them being uncovered in Soviet terroritory, then they can't complain about the desire to find more evidence of murdered Jews in lands formerly under Nazi control. It's a double standard. I blame the rabbis. They are big on maintaining huge lies. After all, they came up with that ridiculous kabbalistic 6 million prophecy and they need to brainwash the Jews and their goyim buddies into believing that graves need to be protected - but of course they don't actually have to prove these graves exist in the first place. Pretty neat deal.

But that's not all. He continues on.

grenadier"

As poster ASMarques correctly remarked, it is not a problem if some French priest excavates a few pits containing a few dozen skeletons of alleged Jews allegedly killed by the EG in the Ukraine, but all of a sudden it becomes an unsurmountable problem when it comes to the AR camps, where in areas the size of large parking lots, some 2 million Jews are supposed to have been buried. What a joke! Rolling Eyes

What the fellow is talking about here is obviously the Yahad in Unum project of Father Patrick Desbois, regarding which he or his source are either misinformed or lying in two respects.

One is that Father Desbois did not just find "a few pits containing a few dozen skeletons". According to this page,

Yahad In Unum has identified and documented relatively small ditches with less than one-thousand victims, mid-sized ditches holding up to ten-thousand victims, and large sites of extermination with over eighty thousands victims.

By October 2007, when this article appeared in the New York Times, Father Desbois had "videotaped more than 700 interviews with witnesses and bystanders and has identified more than 600 common graves of Jews, most of them previously unknown".

The other misconception, deliberate or not, is that Yahad in Unum dug up the graves they found and extracted their contents, as the mouthing of Mr. "grenadier" suggests. According to the aforementioned page, the procedure adopted is the following (emphases added):

In cases where the eyewitnesses are unsure of the precise location of a jewish mass grave, test digging is done in a two square meter area. Oftentimes, several of these test diggings are required in order to find the location of a mass grave. In one particular instance, eighteen test digs were needed. The Nazis buried their victims at a depth of at least three meters, which makes the identification more difficult. According to the eyewitness testimonies, the digging of the ditches took an average of five hours and was done by peasants who arrived very early in the morning. The depth of the mass graves also explains why it was exceedingly rare for any survivors of the shooting to escape from the mass grave after it was covered with dirt and the nazi mobile killing units had moved on.

Once the first bodies are encountered they are left in situ and not disturbed. The bodies are photographed as evidence and any bullets and other ballistic evidence retrieved from the site before the grave is covered up and camouflaged in order not to allow graverobbers to loot and desecrate it. Yahad In Unum’s purpose in identifying and excavating a portion of the mass graves is to document the evidence, provide proof of the mass grave’s existence, and mark the site by GPS. Yahad In Unum has obtained the authorization for this part of the work from the Lubawitscher rabbis of Ukraine.

Detailed information about the results of Father Desbois’ project is available in his recently published book, which I have on order.

Read this again.

Once the first bodies are encountered they are left in situ and not disturbed. The bodies are photographed as evidence and any bullets and other ballistic evidence retrieved from the site before the grave is covered up and camouflaged in order not to allow graverobbers to loot and desecrate it. Yahad In Unum’s purpose in identifying and excavating a portion of the mass graves is to document the evidence, provide proof of the mass grave’s existence, and mark the site by GPS. Yahad In Unum has obtained the authorization for this part of the work from the Lubawitscher rabbis of Ukraine.

So I guess the rabbis didn't give a damn this time about documenting atrocities. Yet however they invoked their religion at Belzec. Clearly a double standard. One I am sure Muehlenkamp is never going to acknowledge or explain away.

Does anyone else notice the trick that was just done? An objection was raised about the silly religious justification for not excavating Belzec. What does Muehlenkamp do as a reply? He says that religious objections have never hindered archaeology. What are such places were religion was never an obstacle to finding bodies and documenting them with photos apparently? - something that was lacking at Belzec?

such considerations have not hampered archaeological research at the former extermination camps to the extent of preventing archaeological investigations that led to identifying the mass graves and establishing their size and contents, namely at Chelmno, at Belzec (both of which camps, incidentally, have disappeared from the NAFCASH challenge – Gerdes must have got cold feet) and at Sobibor

So Muehlenkamp by classifying the Yahad in Unum project into the category of places that allowed rabbi sanctioned free for all free range digging to find the mass graves and photograph the exhumed bodies, means that said category is able to accomodate more than the Unum project. And then he puts Belzec into that category by implication of his words. The only problem is that when he was debating me, he clearly stated that Kola was not at Belzec to document a holocaust, but to only do mere core samples to figure out where bodies were so as not to dig them up when building the memorial. He is logically implying that like the Unum project, people went in to Belzec to document a holocaust. But that contradicts what he told me and others, that Kola never went in there to do archaeology with the intent of documenting a holocaust and finding every bit of evidence possible to prove mass extermination. That Kola was only there to find out where any human remains were with mere core samples so as not to disturb bodies when digging to build a memorial. Mass, free range digging as done in most archaeology was forbidden, yet in this article he implies this was NOT the case at Belzec when he tries to put Belzec and Sobibor into the same category as Unum.

So Muehlenkamp's single article here I am quoting has him either outright lying or forgetting what he has told me and other previous. That religious considerations DID HAMPER arcaehological work at Belzec since only core samples were allowed to be taken.

As others have said, it seems there are some things Muehlenkamp can't keep straight in his own mind. Sounds like a bit of a flip flopper to me. Wouldn't you agree with that and all of the above?

[Pepper]

Drew

Muelhenkamp has already had some hardballs thrown at him. I can't come up with any. The revisionist side has already put the screws to him.

So why not turn the screws some more? (Theres plenty of thread left.)

Throw him a high and tight one with the 30 Treblinka questions he's running from.

Drew, Muehlenkamp is oh-fer 33 on belzec and 0h-fer 101 on Sobibor.

Don't you want to see him oh-fer 30 on Treblinka?

Come on drew, let's see you throw him some real chin music.

Let's see who's got who drew.

[Drew J]

If nothing else, please address this.

Have Belzec and Chelmno actually vanished from the nafcash website? If so, why? Because they would refuse to accept the work of Kola on Belzec as evidence since it was not backed up by anything? Is it also because they wouldn't accept as evidence that polish article that talked about the theft of teeth and gold...the same article that could produce a photograph of the perps but not the stuff they stole?

If Muehlenkamp is correct that Belzec has been removed from the nafcash challenge site, then am I correct about why it was done? And if so, then I have a following question resting on the correctness of these two questions...

Is Muehlenkamp going to continue to bitch about people not accepting his low standards of evidence so that he won't have to answer Treblinka's 30 questions? Is he continuing to complain about this so he won't have to do any real work for Treblinka? I mean aside from the unsubstantiated fluff over here?