AR Survivors / Treblinka

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Pizzaman
Member
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:42 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Pizzaman » 8 years 5 months ago (Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:27 pm)

Hannover wrote:Oh yes, this one.
Well, then, here's a challenge: Treblinka II (let's be clear, we're talking about Treblinka II) opened in July 1942. Deportations from Warsaw to Treblinka began almost immediately. It was the largest Jewish community in Poland. So please identify a single person who meets the following criteria:
(1) They were deported from Warsaw to Treblinka II in the summer of 1942.
(2) They then were sent somewhere else from Treblinka II.
(3) They were not a work Jew at Treblinka II.
(4) They had already been sent elsewhere by the time of the revolt.
(5) They were not on the Sonderkommando.

Should be no problem, right?

Highly illogical. These are questions that Pizzaman should be answering. He's the one who claims they were all murdered. The onus is upon the accuser according legal principles, according the most basic rules of logic.


No, stop right there. I see what you're trying to do and I call foul.

This thread began with an allegation that the AR camps were transit camps. I'm asking for proof in the form of ONE SINGLE JEW who meets the above five criteria. The criteria are to assure that the Jew in question went during a period when the accepted history says that Jews were being gassed on arrival and were not deferred due to working or to being on the SK.

Pizzaman, please give us proof that these Jews were murdered.

Revisionists are the messengers, the absurd and impossible 'holocaust' storyline is the message.

- Hannover


You are trying to highjack this thread. Please post your question in another thread and I will absolutely, 100% respond on that thread. But this thread's OP is on the topic of a transit camp, not on extermination.

Don't do what you're trying to do. Your credibility relies on your not doing it.

joachim neander
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:39 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby joachim neander » 8 years 5 months ago (Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:44 pm)

@ Hannover:

I'm afraid you're underestimating German efficiency. It was by far not easy to get Entschädigung. When I prepared my PhD thesis a couple of years ago, I studied, among other documents in the archives, the questionnaires people had to fill out to get recognized as "Victims of Fascism" (Opfer des Faschismus). They had to indicate lückenlos (completely) where they had been between January 30, 1933 and May 8, 1945, giving exact dates (as exactly as possible, of course) and places, and also providing witnesses or documents. Of course nobody asked them explicitly, "Were you in camp X, Y, or Z ... ?" Those who accepted the questionnaires could not even know which camps, prisons, or ghettos existed during the 3rd Reich.

This scrupulously bureaucratic way was criticized by many "well-meaning" individuals, and of course there was also, in some instances, fraud, as always when public money is involved (social subsidies, tax refunds, subventions ... I need not tell you). These questionnaires are archived all over Germany at the Entschädigungsämter, and they have been studied by hundreds of scholars, also by those with "Revisionist" leanings, who wanted to dispute the claimants' status as a "victim of fascism." Among the transit camps mentioned in these questionnaires, there are thousands of examples for Drancy (France), Malines (Belgium), Westerbork (Holland), Auschwitz (Upper Silesia), Bolzano and Fossoli di Carpi (Italy) - but except the handful of survivors, whose names are known and who appear in the literature, none for Treblinka. About 900,000 individuals made the trip by train to Treblinka. Shouldn't at least a few hundred of them have applied for German money, if Treblinka was only a transit camp?

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby The Warden » 8 years 5 months ago (Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:57 pm)

Pizzaman wrote:Sure, it's possible; it just isn't likely. Again, think Westerbork. And again, think of all the people who DID make it out of the GULAG.


In order to have "survivors" of a gulag, surely you must think others perished or they wouldn't be "surviving anything.
I hardly think it's farfetched to consider the prisoners from Treblinka may have simply died in the gulags.
Other than the "survivors", of course.

Pizzaman wrote:History isn't a court trial.


No, most history isn't questioned.
However, the victors felt it was necessary to supply fake tattooed skin, human skin lampshades, and shrunken skulls to convince courts of German guilt.
I don't ever remember hearing the victors say "history isn't a court trial".

I think you'd be more accurate saying "Holocaust history isn't a court trial because it wouldn't stand up to modern day scrutiny using simple mathematics and science".

Pizzaman wrote:You should be aware that you have to prove that you were actually in a camp in order to get compensation, at least from Germany.


And what is considered proof other than a Jewish name and a year of birth within reasonable time frames?
Most Jewish prisoners changed their names after the war, especially after emigrating to Israel.
I don't suppose you have a copy of the form which they use as proof showing a history of name changes?

Face it, all you have to do is show up with a name and a number.
You make it sound as if Germany would ever challenge a claim at this point.

Pizzaman wrote:That's correct. And yet you have very few claiming survival at Treblinka, particularly if they were deported there outside of a specific time-frame before the revolt there. Even fewer from Sobibor. Two guys from Belzec (no revolt there).


I'm repeating, but I feel it's necessary.
There is simply no reason for details in survivor claims.
When you fly on an airline, they know what destination you land at, but they don't ask what hotel you're staying in, or even if you'll be traveling by other means from there to a completely different area.

The Warden wrote:And let's not forget that the Holocaust industry doesn't need more "survivors" telling their stories. They can't get them straight as it is.


Pizzaman wrote:That's off-topic for this thread.


Actually, it's spot on as to the reasoning why no details are necessary during these claimed money distribution interviews.
The more details survivors pour into the fire, the more they get burned.
The Holocaust Industry wants generalizations and blanket claims to keep things easy to maintain.
Look back at any detailed witness testimonies (like the ones in the video I linked to above), and it's the vein of the Holocaust Industry's mistakes.
Witnesses embellish and suffer from false memories. That's not a compliment to the storyline.

Pizzaman wrote:I disagree. The U.S., at least keeps very good immigration records, and Israel does as well — at least since independence. (Obviously, when immigration there was illegal, fewer records were kept.)


Oh please.
Let's take a look at the Census Bureau's own words...

The Census Bureau conducted censuses of religious bodies at 10-year intervals from 1906 through 1936. The results were published with statistics on topics such as the number of members in congregations, number of church edifices, seating capacity, value and debt on church property, and so forth. The census publications varied with the first two having volumes of reports and the 1926 and 1936 censuses releasing a Summary report and a second volume made up of individual reports on the denominations listed in the census. See our detailed listing of reports from past censuses (1790 on).

There also was a survey of religious affiliation done as part of the Current Population Survey in 1957 with the results published in a report entitled, "Religion Report by the Civilian Population of the United States, March 1957." The Census of Religious Bodies began as a few questions on the Social Statistics form of the 1850 census. When the Bureau became permanent in 1902, it became possible to separate some data collection from the decennial census. The Census of Religious Bodies was a stand-alone census taken every 10 years between 1906 and 1936. Data were collected in 1946 but the funding for tabulation was not forthcoming. The entire census was eliminated in the mid 1950's. Copies of the report are in the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (http://www.nara.gov).

The U.S. Census Bureau does not collect data on religious affiliation in its demographic surveys or decennial census. Public Law 94-521 prohibits us from asking a question on religious affiliation on a mandatory basis; in some person or household surveys, however, the U.S. Census Bureau may collect information about religious practices, on a voluntary basis. Therefore, the U.S. Census Bureau is not the source for information on religion, nor is the Census Bureau the source for information on religious affiliation.
https://ask.census.gov/app/answers/deta ... RFpWeGs%3D


The U.S. Census didn't ask who was a Jew during or after the war in the years above.
So tell me...

How do you know how many Jews went to the U.S. either during or after the war, Pizzaman?

I still won't discuss the population statistics conducted by Israel.
After all, the nation wouldn't be there if they didn't show millions missing.
I have a thread here somewhere about population statistics and demographics.
Please feel free to post in it.

Pizzaman wrote: I just don't think that's good enough to explain nearly a million people.


The burden of revisionists is to simply show the prisoners (or bodies) aren't where they are claimed to be.
They could be on the moon for all I care.
The fact that they're not in Treblinka is all that's needed to make the original claim false.

And I noticed you didn't comment on my sarcasm of claiming they're in mass graves in the Soviet territories.
I even offered to put memorials on top of the claimed sites.
I suspect you realized how ridiculous the Holocaust story is when faced with your own logic and techniques.
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9921
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Hannover » 8 years 5 months ago (Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:30 pm)

Pizzaman
No, stop right there. I see what you're trying to do and I call foul.

This thread began with an allegation that the AR camps were transit camps. I'm asking for proof in the form of ONE SINGLE JEW who meets the above five criteria. The criteria are to assure that the Jew in question went during a period when the accepted history says that Jews were being gassed on arrival and were not deferred due to working or to being on the SK.

You are trying to highjack this thread. Please post your question in another thread and I will absolutely, 100% respond on that thread. But this thread's OP is on the topic of a transit camp, not on extermination.

Don't do what you're trying to do. Your credibility relies on your not doing it.

Sorry Pizzaman, but you are simply avoiding that facts of the matter and therefore have little credibility to lose.
There are records showing that Jews went through Treblinka, you avoided that fact. Credibility problem again.
You are claiming, in this thread, that Jews were gassed upon arrival but can provide no proof for such claims. another credibility problem.
You were even given the fact that even the communists could find no mass graves as alleged. An additional and a most serious credibility problem.
Neither the Polish investigation from November 1945 nor the Soviet one from August 1944 found any mass graves in Treblinka II


Neander said:
When I prepared my PhD thesis a couple of years ago, I studied, among other documents in the archives, the questionnaires people had to fill out to get recognized as "Victims of Fascism" (Opfer des Faschismus). They had to indicate lückenlos (completely) where they had been between January 30, 1933 and May 8, 1945, giving exact dates (as exactly as possible, of course) and places, and also providing witnesses or documents. Of course nobody asked them explicitly, "Were you in camp X, Y, or Z ... ?" Those who accepted the questionnaires could not even know which camps, prisons, or ghettos existed during the 3rd Reich.

You've demonstrated three very obvious problems with your position:

1. You can't show us the forms you claimed to have studied.
2. Then you say "Of course nobody asked them explicitly, "Were you in camp X, Y, or Z ... ?"
3. Then you say "Those who accepted the questionnaires could not even know which camps, prisons, or ghettos existed during the 3rd Reich". Very doubtful, but those that wrote the claimed questionairres certainly would have.

I'd say your assertions lack credibilty for both you and Pizzaman.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Pizzaman
Member
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:42 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Pizzaman » 8 years 5 months ago (Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:40 pm)

Hannover, you say there are records of people going through Treblinka.

You've produced ZERO.

Time to produce some or leave the thread.

Pizzaman
Member
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:42 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Pizzaman » 8 years 5 months ago (Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:02 pm)

The Warden wrote:
Pizzaman wrote:Sure, it's possible; it just isn't likely. Again, think Westerbork. And again, think of all the people who DID make it out of the GULAG.


In order to have "survivors" of a gulag, surely you must think others perished or they wouldn't be "surviving anything.
I hardly think it's farfetched to consider the prisoners from Treblinka may have simply died in the gulags.
Other than the "survivors", of course.


Of course. Except the things that all the survivors have in common from Treblinka are: (1) They say it was an extermination camp, not a transit camp; and (2) None them went to the GULAG.

Pizzaman wrote:History isn't a court trial.


No, most history isn't questioned.


That's sort of my point.

However, the victors felt it was necessary to supply fake tattooed skin, human skin lampshades, and shrunken skulls to convince courts of German guilt.


They didn't do those things to convince people of guilt. They did them because they believed they were true. Without them, they still would have won convictions, as the Frankfurt trials, which had none of those things, amply proved.

I don't ever remember hearing the victors say "history isn't a court trial".


That's because, as I already noted, they were establishing guilt for individual people of individual crimes.

I think you'd be more accurate saying "Holocaust history isn't a court trial because it wouldn't stand up to modern day scrutiny using simple mathematics and science".

Pizzaman wrote:You should be aware that you have to prove that you were actually in a camp in order to get compensation, at least from Germany.


And what is considered proof other than a Jewish name and a year of birth within reasonable time frames?


See Dr. Neander's post on this thread.

Most Jewish prisoners changed their names after the war, especially after emigrating to Israel.


In fact, most DIDN'T change their names, except, as you note, the ones who went to Israel.

I don't suppose you have a copy of the form which they use as proof showing a history of name changes?


I don't see what relevance name changes have.

Face it, all you have to do is show up with a name and a number.
You make it sound as if Germany would ever challenge a claim at this point.


Yes, I do believe they would challenge a claim if there were on proof. Otherwise, they'd go broke. Common sense.

Pizzaman wrote:That's correct. And yet you have very few claiming survival at Treblinka, particularly if they were deported there outside of a specific time-frame before the revolt there. Even fewer from Sobibor. Two guys from Belzec (no revolt there).


I'm repeating, but I feel it's necessary.
There is simply no reason for details in survivor claims.
When you fly on an airline, they know what destination you land at, but they don't ask what hotel you're staying in, or even if you'll be traveling by other means from there to a completely different area.


Again, see Dr. Neander's post.

The Warden wrote:And let's not forget that the Holocaust industry doesn't need more "survivors" telling their stories. They can't get them straight as it is.


Pizzaman wrote:That's off-topic for this thread.


Actually, it's spot on as to the reasoning why no details are necessary during these claimed money distribution interviews.[/quote]

Sorry, but you haven't proved that, and in fact, Dr. Neander proved you wrong.

The more details survivors pour into the fire, the more they get burned.


Make up your mind: Are the stories ridiculous or did they hedge on details?

The Holocaust Industry wants generalizations and blanket claims to keep things easy to maintain.


Again, you'll need to prove that.

Look back at any detailed witness testimonies (like the ones in the video I linked to above), and it's the vein of the Holocaust Industry's mistakes.


You mean "bane." Also, I don't find the testimonies in that video unreliable, but that's off topic here.

Witnesses embellish and suffer from false memories. That's not a compliment to the storyline.


No, it isn't, but at least if people had been through a transit camp, they'd probably say so.

Pizzaman wrote:I disagree. The U.S., at least keeps very good immigration records, and Israel does as well — at least since independence. (Obviously, when immigration there was illegal, fewer records were kept.)


Oh please.
Let's take a look at the Census Bureau's own words...

The Census Bureau conducted censuses of religious bodies at 10-year intervals from 1906 through 1936. The results were published with statistics on topics such as the number of members in congregations, number of church edifices, seating capacity, value and debt on church property, and so forth. The census publications varied with the first two having volumes of reports and the 1926 and 1936 censuses releasing a Summary report and a second volume made up of individual reports on the denominations listed in the census. See our detailed listing of reports from past censuses (1790 on).


Your mistake here is thinking that the Census Bureau keeps the same records as INS.

They don't.

There also was a survey of religious affiliation done as part of the Current Population Survey in 1957 with the results published in a report entitled, "Religion Report by the Civilian Population of the United States, March 1957." The Census of Religious Bodies began as a few questions on the Social Statistics form of the 1850 census. When the Bureau became permanent in 1902, it became possible to separate some data collection from the decennial census. The Census of Religious Bodies was a stand-alone census taken every 10 years between 1906 and 1936. Data were collected in 1946 but the funding for tabulation was not forthcoming. The entire census was eliminated in the mid 1950's. Copies of the report are in the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (http://www.nara.gov).


See above. It's a matter of immigration records.

The U.S. Census Bureau does not collect data on religious affiliation in its demographic surveys or decennial census. Public Law 94-521 prohibits us from asking a question on religious affiliation on a mandatory basis; in some person or household surveys, however, the U.S. Census Bureau may collect information about religious practices, on a voluntary basis. Therefore, the U.S. Census Bureau is not the source for information on religion, nor is the Census Bureau the source for information on religious affiliation.
https://ask.census.gov/app/answers/deta ... RFpWeGs%3D


The U.S. Census didn't ask who was a Jew during or after the war in the years above.


Irrelevant.

So tell me...

How do you know how many Jews went to the U.S. either during or after the war, Pizzaman?


Nearly zero during the war. The doors were closed.

After the war, we know for immigration records.

I still won't discuss the population statistics conducted by Israel.
After all, the nation wouldn't be there if they didn't show millions missing.
I have a thread here somewhere about population statistics and demographics.
Please feel free to post in it.


Please provide a link.

Pizzaman wrote: I just don't think that's good enough to explain nearly a million people.


The burden of revisionists is to simply show the prisoners (or bodies) aren't where they are claimed to be.


But when you allege a transit camp, you've got to prove one.

They could be on the moon for all I care.
The fact that they're not in Treblinka is all that's needed to make the original claim false.


Different topic.

And I noticed you didn't comment on my sarcasm of claiming they're in mass graves in the Soviet territories.
I even offered to put memorials on top of the claimed sites.


I didn't notice.

I suspect you realized how ridiculous the Holocaust story is when faced with your own logic and techniques.


Not really, no.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9921
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Hannover » 8 years 5 months ago (Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:48 pm)

Pizzaman wrote:Hannover, you say there are records of people going through Treblinka.

You've produced ZERO.

Time to produce some or leave the thread.

This is getting more fun by the minute. Read on, all sources given.

One of these Jews, a Samuel Zylbersztajn, was in fact deported to Majdanek on April 30, 1943, from the alleged extermination camp Treblinka as a member of a transport of 308 Jews.[869] The translated title of the report of his experiences is "The Memoirs of an Inmate of Ten Camps." After the 'extermination camp' Treblinka, Zylbersztajn also survived the 'extermination camp' Majdanek and eight 'ordinary' concentration camps; he is thus living proof of the fact that the Germans did not systematically exterminate their Jewish prisoners.

Another 356 Jews were transferred from Treblinka to Majdanek on May 13, 1943.[870] The Jewish historians Tatiana Berenstein and Adam Rutkowski write in reference to this:[871]

"Some of the transports from Warsaw reached Lublin by way of Treblinka, where the selection of the deportees took place."

This fact is confirmed by some witnesses who were interrogated within the framework of the extradition proceedings against John Demjanjuk in the USA. In the official compilations of the interrogations,[872] which we have in our possession, the names of the witnesses have been rendered unreadable, so that we refer to the respective date, on which the interrogation occurred.

Interrogation of December 12, 1979: The witness was deported in April 1943 from Warsaw to Treblinka. On the next day he was transferred to Majdanek, where he spent 6-7 days; afterward he went to Budzyn for approximately a year. From Budzyn he was sent to Wieliczka (in the vicinity of Krakow), from there to Flossenbürg in mid-1944, and finally to Leitmeritz.

Interrogation of December 17, 1979: the witness was deported from Krakow to Płaszów, and from there to Auschwitz. After that he went to Oranienburg and finally to Flossenbürg. He stated that he spent one single day in Treblinka without giving details.

Interrogation of January 3, 1980: the witness was taken prisoner in May 1943 in Warsaw and sent directly to Majdanek, from where he was later transferred to Budzyn.

Interrogation of March 7, 1980: The witness was deported in April 1943 from Warsaw to Treblinka, where he remained for only one day; afterwards he was transferred along with 180 other prisoners to Majdanek. After two days the trip continued to Budzyn, where he spent two years. He was liberated by the Soviets from an unnamed German concentration camp.

Interrogation of March 11, 1980: the witness was sent to Treblinka in April 1943, where he remained for only a day. Transfer to Majdanek, thence to Budzyn, where he was interned for about a year. Liberated on May 5, 1945, from Mauthausen.

Interrogation of July 18, 1980: the witness was deported on April 18, 1943, from Warsaw to Majdanek. After 5 weeks he went to Auschwitz and then - toward the end of 1944 - to Gusen (a subcamp of Mauthausen) where he was liberated.

The verdict of the Jury Court of Düsseldorf determined, plainly and clearly, on September 3, 1965, that
"coming from Treblinka, several thousand people are said to have arrived at other camps."[873]


Also, the transport with 1,200 children (originally intended for Palestine[887]) between 6 and 12 years of age, which arrived in Theresienstadt on August 24,[888] traveled by way of Treblinka, which therefore served as a transit camp for these transports.


[869] Samuel Zylbersztajn, "Pamiętnik więznia dziesięciu obozów," in: Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego w Polsce, no. 68, 1968, pp. 53-56. The author explicitly gives April 30, 1943, as the date of his deportation to Treblinka.
[870] T. Mencel (ed.), Majdanek 1941-1944, Wydawnictwo Lubelskie, Lublin 1991, p. 448.
[871] Tatiana Berenstein, Adam Rutkowski, "Zydzi w obozie koncentracijnym Majdanek (1941-1944)," Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego w Polsce, No. 58, 1966, p. 16.
[872] U.S. Department of Justice. Criminal Division. Office of Investigation. Report of Investigation. Subject "Demjanjuk Ivan, Fedorenko Feodor." These protocols were enclosed with the documents in the Jerusalem Demjanjuk Trial (State of Israel vs. Ivan [John] Demjanjuk. Criminal Case No. 373/86 in the Jerusalem District Court; cf. Chapter V). We thank Dr. Miroslav Dragan who made these documents available to us.
[873] Rückerl, NS-Vernichtungslager..., op. cit. (note 62), p. 198.
[887] Brona Klibanski, "Kinder aus dem Ghetto Białystok in Teresienstadt", in: Theresienstädter Studien und Dokumente, 1995, p. 93.
[888] Terezisnká pametni kniha, op. cit. (note 570), p. 70. There a figure of 1220 Jews who arrived in Theresienstadt from Białystok is given. Obviously 20 adults who accompanied the children are included in this.

http://vho.org/GB/Books/t/10.html


This is just to easy.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Raymond
Member
Member
Posts: 80
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 8:56 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Raymond » 8 years 5 months ago (Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:31 am)

Thanks, Hannover, all I expected was hypotheticals.

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby The Warden » 8 years 5 months ago (Sat Jul 02, 2011 4:25 am)

Pizzaman wrote:Of course. Except the things that all the survivors have in common from Treblinka are: (1) They say it was an extermination camp, not a transit camp; and (2) None them went to the GULAG.


What prisoners say is the most unreliable information from the Holocaust. Prisoners have claimed electrocution, chlorine, sexual experiments, floors opening, impossible numbers, and numerous other examples which have been discussed and debunked time and time again. They said there was tattooed skin, human skin lampshades, and shrunken heads too. Even after lugging them into a courtroom, it still didn't make it any more true. Perhaps you can contact C.D. Jackson to come here and settle things once and for all.

Pizzaman wrote:They didn't do those things to convince people of guilt. They did them because they believed they were true. Without them, they still would have won convictions, as the Frankfurt trials, which had none of those things, amply proved.


They believed they were true because they relied on the infamous testimonies you keep clinging to. Again, those "truths" didn't turn out so well.

As far as the Frankfurt trials, look at the results:

Image

These are convictions of low level officials and privileged prisoners based on most of the faulty information that derived from Nuremberg.
Now I'm sure you might think the pharmacist, medical orderlies, and the dentist masterminded the Holocaust, but those of us in reality know this is ludicrous.
Which is why they received prison terms or were released, not executed.

Pizzaman wrote:In fact, most DIDN'T change their names, except, as you note, the ones who went to Israel.


a.k.a the majority of the inhabitants of the new found land when they developed the Yiddish language from Hebrew.

Pizzaman wrote:I don't see what relevance name changes have.


Name changes and the lack of records of such prove my point they aren't too interested in the details in order to divvy out German money to "survivors".
Anyone can walk in with the basic information and a sob story of a Jew from WWII era, and simply claim they changed their name.

Pizzaman wrote:Yes, I do believe they would challenge a claim if there were on proof. Otherwise, they'd go broke. Common sense.


And yet, it takes the Eric Hunts of the world to expose the Zisblatts, denierbuds to expose well.... numerous witnesses, and Carolyn Yeagers to expose the Wiesels (name changed by the way).
Germany can't challenge these people. They would be accused of antisemitism! :lol:

Pizzaman wrote:Make up your mind: Are the stories ridiculous or did they hedge on details?


The stories are ridiculous, which is why they hedge on details.
Is there some specific reason you believe it isn't possible they stopped asking for details once they started to see their story line crumbling as a result of those details?

Pizzaman wrote:Again, you'll need to prove that.


The obvious change in testimonies over the years and lack of details is proof positive.
It's Dr. Neander's post that says all they need is to show they were there at the time.
They didn't ask "Which camp(s) were you at".
Remember?

Pizzaman wrote:You mean "bane."


Yes, thank you for the correction.

Pizzaman wrote:Also, I don't find the testimonies in that video unreliable, but that's off topic here.


I wasn't referring to that section of the video in particular.
There's a whole movie loaded with consistent debunking of testimonies, in case you haven't heard.
http://www.holocaustdenialvideos.com/on ... caust.html

Pizzaman wrote:No, it isn't, but at least if people had been through a transit camp, they'd probably say so.


Well, it's common sense that if they had "been through" the camp in the first place, it can't be called an extermination camp.
Or they wouldn't have been available for you to wonder why they didn't claim camp loyalties.

Pizzaman wrote:Your mistake here is thinking that the Census Bureau keeps the same records as INS.

They don't.


Wonderful. I've yet to see any 6 million claim based on INS records. They're always dependent on Jewish post war sources.
I look forward to seeing your conclusions based on the information you're claiming being presented.

Pizzaman wrote:Nearly zero during the war. The doors were closed.


You mean the same way the doors have been closed to immigrants who don't go through the proper channels now?
Yes, very effective indeed.

Pizzaman wrote:Please provide a link.


viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6307&hilit=population+demographics

Pizzaman wrote:But when you allege a transit camp, you've got to prove one.


So following your logic, if you claim an "extermination camp", you would have to show the remains of people who were "exterminated", right?
I haven't seen you do that.
Since you can't produce the remains of the alleged amounts, the space required for those amounts was impossible, and the method of burning was impossible to maintain the amounts claimed, why would anyone have to show you it was a transit camp. The very fact that the claims of extermination are impossible show it was a transit camp. The information provided by Hannover shows people passed through the camp.

Pizzaman wrote:Different topic.


So the fact that the remains claimed aren't there is a different topic?
Interesting. I seem to think it's rather important to the theory of transit vs. extermination.
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

Pizzaman
Member
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:42 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Pizzaman » 8 years 5 months ago (Sat Jul 02, 2011 8:21 am)

The problem with the below is that NONE of the below were deported in the summer of 1942.

Hannover wrote:
Pizzaman wrote:Hannover, you say there are records of people going through Treblinka.

You've produced ZERO.

Time to produce some or leave the thread.

This is getting more fun by the minute. Read on, all sources given.

One of these Jews, a Samuel Zylbersztajn, was in fact deported to Majdanek on April 30, 1943, from the alleged extermination camp Treblinka as a member of a transport of 308 Jews.[869] The translated title of the report of his experiences is "The Memoirs of an Inmate of Ten Camps." After the 'extermination camp' Treblinka, Zylbersztajn also survived the 'extermination camp' Majdanek and eight 'ordinary' concentration camps; he is thus living proof of the fact that the Germans did not systematically exterminate their Jewish prisoners.

Another 356 Jews were transferred from Treblinka to Majdanek on May 13, 1943.[870] The Jewish historians Tatiana Berenstein and Adam Rutkowski write in reference to this:[871]

"Some of the transports from Warsaw reached Lublin by way of Treblinka, where the selection of the deportees took place."

This fact is confirmed by some witnesses who were interrogated within the framework of the extradition proceedings against John Demjanjuk in the USA. In the official compilations of the interrogations,[872] which we have in our possession, the names of the witnesses have been rendered unreadable, so that we refer to the respective date, on which the interrogation occurred.

Interrogation of December 12, 1979: The witness was deported in April 1943 from Warsaw to Treblinka. On the next day he was transferred to Majdanek, where he spent 6-7 days; afterward he went to Budzyn for approximately a year. From Budzyn he was sent to Wieliczka (in the vicinity of Krakow), from there to Flossenbürg in mid-1944, and finally to Leitmeritz.

Interrogation of December 17, 1979: the witness was deported from Krakow to Płaszów, and from there to Auschwitz. After that he went to Oranienburg and finally to Flossenbürg. He stated that he spent one single day in Treblinka without giving details.

Interrogation of January 3, 1980: the witness was taken prisoner in May 1943 in Warsaw and sent directly to Majdanek, from where he was later transferred to Budzyn.

Interrogation of March 7, 1980: The witness was deported in April 1943 from Warsaw to Treblinka, where he remained for only one day; afterwards he was transferred along with 180 other prisoners to Majdanek. After two days the trip continued to Budzyn, where he spent two years. He was liberated by the Soviets from an unnamed German concentration camp.

Interrogation of March 11, 1980: the witness was sent to Treblinka in April 1943, where he remained for only a day. Transfer to Majdanek, thence to Budzyn, where he was interned for about a year. Liberated on May 5, 1945, from Mauthausen.

Interrogation of July 18, 1980: the witness was deported on April 18, 1943, from Warsaw to Majdanek. After 5 weeks he went to Auschwitz and then - toward the end of 1944 - to Gusen (a subcamp of Mauthausen) where he was liberated.

The verdict of the Jury Court of Düsseldorf determined, plainly and clearly, on September 3, 1965, that
"coming from Treblinka, several thousand people are said to have arrived at other camps."[873]


Also, the transport with 1,200 children (originally intended for Palestine[887]) between 6 and 12 years of age, which arrived in Theresienstadt on August 24,[888] traveled by way of Treblinka, which therefore served as a transit camp for these transports.


[869] Samuel Zylbersztajn, "Pamiętnik więznia dziesięciu obozów," in: Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego w Polsce, no. 68, 1968, pp. 53-56. The author explicitly gives April 30, 1943, as the date of his deportation to Treblinka.
[870] T. Mencel (ed.), Majdanek 1941-1944, Wydawnictwo Lubelskie, Lublin 1991, p. 448.
[871] Tatiana Berenstein, Adam Rutkowski, "Zydzi w obozie koncentracijnym Majdanek (1941-1944)," Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego w Polsce, No. 58, 1966, p. 16.
[872] U.S. Department of Justice. Criminal Division. Office of Investigation. Report of Investigation. Subject "Demjanjuk Ivan, Fedorenko Feodor." These protocols were enclosed with the documents in the Jerusalem Demjanjuk Trial (State of Israel vs. Ivan [John] Demjanjuk. Criminal Case No. 373/86 in the Jerusalem District Court; cf. Chapter V). We thank Dr. Miroslav Dragan who made these documents available to us.
[873] Rückerl, NS-Vernichtungslager..., op. cit. (note 62), p. 198.
[887] Brona Klibanski, "Kinder aus dem Ghetto Białystok in Teresienstadt", in: Theresienstädter Studien und Dokumente, 1995, p. 93.
[888] Terezisnká pametni kniha, op. cit. (note 570), p. 70. There a figure of 1220 Jews who arrived in Theresienstadt from Białystok is given. Obviously 20 adults who accompanied the children are included in this.

http://vho.org/GB/Books/t/10.html


This is just to easy.

- Hannover

Pizzaman
Member
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:42 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Pizzaman » 8 years 5 months ago (Sat Jul 02, 2011 8:39 am)

Raymond wrote:Thanks, Hannover, all I expected was hypotheticals.


But none of those people meet the five criteria; most importantly, none were deported in the summer of '42.

User avatar
Cloud
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 7:27 pm
Location: The Land of Political Correctness

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Cloud » 8 years 5 months ago (Sat Jul 02, 2011 9:17 am)

pizzaman wrote:The fundamental problem with your analogy is that there were transit camps, and yet people can remember being in them and have reported same. Westerbork would be the best example. So why do we have so many people who can testify to Westerbork being a transit camp and ZERO who can say the same thing for Treblinka?

I honestly don't know. However, the inability to provide the name of one person who stopped at Treblinka before moving on does not give credibility to the claim that mass murder occurred there, Similarly, the inability to provide the name of one person who visited the rest stop before moving on does not give credibility to the town's urban legend that visitors to the rest stop were murdered.

Would you agree that if the mass murder scenario as alleged by the eyewitnesses can be ruled out on technical grounds, then Treblinka has to be a transit camp (as there is no third alternative)?

By the way, rather than break your opponent's posts into various pieces and then respond to each piece individually (which forces far too much scrolling), I suggest you quote the whole post, and then address whatever points you wish in individual paragraphs:

"PIzzaman/Warden/Joachim/etc., I disagree with your claim P because of X.

As for your claim Q, I agree in part, but disagree on Y.

Lastly, for your assertion that R, the data provided by Z contradicts that entirely."
Last edited by Cloud on Sat Jul 02, 2011 11:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

Pizzaman
Member
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:42 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby Pizzaman » 8 years 5 months ago (Sat Jul 02, 2011 9:35 am)

Cloud wrote:
pizzaman wrote:The fundamental problem with your analogy is that there were transit camps, and yet people can remember being in them and have reported same. Westerbork would be the best example. So why do we have so many people who can testify to Westerbork being a transit camp and ZERO who can say the same thing for Treblinka?

I honestly don't know. However, the inability to provide the name of one person who stopped at Treblinka before moving on does not give credibility to the claim that mass murder occurred there


That's quite true. It does not.

Similarly, the inability to provide the name of one person who visited the rest stop before moving on does not give credibility to the town's urban legend that visitors to the rest stop were murdered.


It doesn't prove it. It does provide credibility. But perhaps I'm splitting hairs.

Would you agree that if the mass murder scenario as alleged by the eyewitnesses can be ruled out on technical grounds, then Treblinka has to be a transit camp (as there is no third alternative)?


No, I wouldn't apply the law of the excluded middle here. We have three possibilities, as I see it:

(1) Treblinka II was an extermination camp
(2) Treblinka II was a transit camp
(3) Treblinka II was something else

However, in this thread, we are discussing (2).

stefanob
Member
Member
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:41 am

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby stefanob » 8 years 5 months ago (Sat Jul 02, 2011 10:37 am)

I just purchased Mattogno/Graf book on Treblinka, I look forward to read to make up mi mind about all these issues. For the moment, considering what have learnt reading the thread, I can make a few considerations.

Let's suppose this: Treblinka was a mere transit camp
So there would be be people who have been been there. How comes none of them claim having been at Treblinka?
Well: such persons would have just transited and they would know perfectly that there was no extermination ongoing. He would have heard sll the stories about chambers and ovens etc and he knows that are lies.
So at this point that survivor stepping forward to say "i was in Treblinka" would equal to say "there was no extermination in treblinka", this would be a tremendous blow to the whole holocaust history, actually a revisionist affirmation. Of course this person would be a Jew, since it seems to me to understand that only Jews were sent to Treblinka, so he would also expose entire Jewry to the accusation of being liars (antisemites would rejoice). So he would damage badly the interests of the Jews, and the interest of the State of Israel. And this just to get some compensation... And not ahuge one, considering that he would have just been through a transit camp... He would not even qualify as a"survivor" anymore...
Those are not small reasons to shut up. And keep shutting up.
I am not a native english speaker, so please forgive errors and weird syntax

joachim neander
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:39 pm

Re: AR Survivors / Treblinka

Postby joachim neander » 8 years 5 months ago (Sat Jul 02, 2011 12:24 pm)

@ The Warden:

Sorry, Sir, you are misquoting me: "They didn't ask "Which camps were you at?""
Please read what I wrote, for the record:
They had to indicate lückenlos (completely) where they had been between January 30, 1933 and May 8, 1945, giving exact dates (as exactly as possible, of course) and places, and also providing witnesses or documents.

If you have to give a complete (!) listing of your abodes, and if you had been in camp X, then you have to mention this, otherwise you're giving false information.
That this did occur in some instances, I said, too. It is also possible that someone forgot to mention a camp etc. s/he was at. But among 900,000 who made the train ride to Treblinka, there should have been more than a handful to testify that they had been there.

Your comparison with the gas station where the bus makes a short stop is wrong. People sent to transit camps did not stay there for a few hours. They were registered there, underwent selections according to the employment assigned to them, and stayed there for at least 2-3 weeks in "quarantine" to make sure that they were not carriers of infectious diseases. At Auschwitz, transit Jews such as my and Eric Hunt's beloved Irene could have stayed there even for four months.

BTW, your air travel remark is also not up to date. I yesterday bought a plane ticket for me to Louisville, KY. I had to indicate all stopovers and connections (where, when) and to give my exact address in the U.S. (@ Moderator: please feel free to delete this sentence if you feel it is off topic.)


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests