Wiesenthal Center & one of their many fake photos

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9781
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Wiesenthal Center & one of their many fake photos

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon Aug 11, 2003 12:06 pm)

I see that the panic stricken Wiesenthal center has removed one of their many fake photos. [see below*] Take note that it is Revisionists that are responsible for bringing Wiesenthal Center lies such as this to the notice of the public.

Wiesenthal Center caption with fake photo:
"As these prisoners were being processed for slave labor, many of their friends and families were being gassed and burned in the ovens in the crematoria. The smoke can be seen in the background. June 1944".

the fake photo:
Image

real photo:
Image

story here:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/fak ... eFake.html

Only liars need to enage in forgeries. Only liars fear debate and freedom of speech.

- Hannover

* [Our webmaster has the entire SWC page for us see now, have a look.
Moderator, 5/20/04]
The SWC pages are now uploaded. Compare:

http://motlc.wiesenthal.org/albums/palb ... 007p2.html

Search for: Murdered inmates lying in a heap at Auschwitz

With

http://www.codoh.com/documents/swc/a0007p2.html

Search for: Hungarian arrivals after the "Selektion" at Auschwitz

Notice the difference?
The only things I have edited are links to keep the page intact and font text in red to show where the funny part is. Click on the photo there. Download date: 06/04/1999 from SWC.

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

SergeyRomanov
Member
Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 1:38 pm

Postby SergeyRomanov » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:19 pm)

Wiesenthal Center & one of their many fake photos


Would you care to provide at least 5 other examples of "many fake photos" from SWC?

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9781
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:25 pm)

Go here, there are dozens:
http://motlc.wiesenthal.org/albums/palb ... 007p2.html

Any you find convincing for the 'holocaust' story? If so, start a thread on it & will talk.

see here for 2 examples previously discussed:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=441

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

SergeyRomanov
Member
Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 1:38 pm

Postby SergeyRomanov » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 7:42 am)

Hannover wrote:Go here, there are dozens:
http://motlc.wiesenthal.org/albums/palb ... 007p2.html


Sorry, that wasn't very helpful. You haven't provided evidence that any of those photos are fakes.

Any you find convincing for the 'holocaust' story? If so, start a thread on it & will talk.


Perhaps later.

Malle
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:53 pm
Location: Sweden

Postby Malle » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 7:48 am)

Technically I don’t agree with Hannover. I think most of these photos are genuine. But when it comes to captions, we will see the fraud. Let us look below at 12 examples (all from http://motlc.wiesenthal.org/albums/palb ... 007p2.html ):

(You can click on the photos to see the original pages at SWC)

Hungarian Jews on their way to the gas chambers

Image

Where is the gas chamber? I see an old woman with three children walking on a street. Where is the proof that they are going to the gas chamber?

Gas chamber in Auschwitz

Image

Well, as we all know by now, this is a reconstruction of a gas chamber in Auschwitz I, admitted by the museum. They don’t seem to be updated at SWC!

Hungarian Jews heading for the Auschwitz gas chambers

Image

Once again, where is the gas chamber? I see some people walking in rows. Where is the proof that they are going to the gas chamber?

Murdered Jews' eye-glasses, piled up in a warehouse

Image

Where is the proof that these eye-glasses belonged to MURDERED JEWS?

Eye-glasses that belonged to murdered Jews (close-up)

Image

The same as above.

Hungarian Jews on their way to the gas chambers

Image

Once again, where is the gas chamber? I see three adults and one child on this photo. Where is the proof that they are going to the gas chamber?

Hungarian Jews heading for the gas chamber

Image

Once again, where is the gas chamber? I see some people walking in rows. Where is the proof that they are going to the gas chamber?

Jewish women and children waiting to be gassed

Image

I also see some people are waiting, but gas chambers?

Hungarian Jews on their way to the gas chamber

Image

Once again, where is the gas chamber? I see some people walking in rows. Where is the proof that they are going to the gas chamber?

Jewish victims forced to wait before being murdered

Image

In this capitation they have changed ’gas chamber’ to ’murdered’, but still the same nonsense.

Rabbi Weiss from Bilke (center), prior to being gassed

Image

Where is the autopsy protocol? Where is the eye-wittiness who saw this?

Jewish women and children waiting to be gassed

Image

I also see some people are waiting, but where are the gas chambers?

Conclusions:
I repeat my self like SWC. The SWC must first proof the existence of gas chambers before they are doing their ‘creative’ captions. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM) uses the same tactic.
Last edited by Malle on Wed Aug 13, 2003 8:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
I must be a mushroom - because everyone keeps me in the dark and feeds me with lots of bullshit.

SergeyRomanov
Member
Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 1:38 pm

Postby SergeyRomanov » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 8:22 am)

But when it comes to capitations, we will see the fraud.


While I do agree that on the page with the photos no evidence is given that captions truthfully describe the photographed events, you haven't proved that captions are false. Until further evidence is provided, we can't make any decision about the matter.

So, the evidence of the "many fake photos" is still lacking.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9781
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 9:58 am)

The photos are 'fake' in that there is no evidence that what the captions allege are represented in the photos, hence they are 'fake'. A photo which claims to show men building a gas chamber when we know that it was actually a morgue is indeed a 'fake' photo. There is no evidence to sustain the caption. There is no evidence in the photo, therefore it is faking reality.

It is incumbent upon the accusers to support their assertions about photos, Revisionists can point out the forgeries and lack of verifiability of these fakes.

I notice Romanov avoided the forged 'shooter & child' photo, as fakes as they come.

I notice Romanov avoided the forged 'man being shot into a pit' photo, as fake as they come...guys in the back with no feet etc. and is captioned differently by various users of the fake photo.

I wonder if Romanov believes in the 'photos' of alleged human soap & human skin lampshades?

The whole issue is why the True Believers need to lie with captions and alter/forge photos. Those with the truth do not resort to such acts of desperation.

I challenge SergeyRomanov to inform us which of the photos is credible in support of the so called 'holocaust', and why. Specifics please.

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

User avatar
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 11:10 am)

Hannover wrote: The whole issue is why the True Believers need to lie with captions and alter/forge photos

Because they are desperate.

The Holocausters have nothing, there were no homicidal gas chambers. Period.

The whole gas chamber hoax originated from war time propaganda rumors spread by the British.

The evidence for the alleged gas chambers is based on shaky eye witness testimonies and secrete code words.

Remember Dr. Vrba and Dr. Muench?

:D
fge

SergeyRomanov
Member
Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 1:38 pm

Postby SergeyRomanov » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 3:08 pm)

Hannover wrote:

The photos are 'fake' in that there is no evidence that what the captions allege are represented in the photos, hence they are 'fake'. A photo which claims to show men building a gas chamber when we know that it was actually a morgue is indeed a 'fake' photo. There is no evidence to sustain the caption. There is no evidence in the photo, therefore it is faking reality.


1) "There is no evidence to sustain the caption." You don't know whether SWC has any evidence on the matter. Since you don't know it, you can't call the captions fraudulent.

2) Whether photo itself is fake or not does not depend on caption in any way. If we take real photo of Stalin and write "Hitler" under it, we would commit fraud, but the photo itself wouldn't be fake in any sense.

I notice Romanov avoided the forged 'shooter & child' photo, as fakes as they come.

I notice Romanov avoided the forged 'man being shot into a pit' photo, as fake as they come...guys in the back with no feet etc. and is captioned differently by various users of the fake photo.


At first I just glanced at the pictures and didn't read the accompanying text, so I didn't get that those photos are from SWC site. I apologize.

1) Author of the article purporting to show that the first photo is a fake is confused at times. E.g. look at his last claim about photo with "shadows added". It's just a poor quality photo with low brightness, nothing else.

All these talks about shadows are not convincing and remind me of moon landing denial. We don't know enough about the topology of the terrain on the photo so we can't make any conclusions.

The claim that the woman on photo does not touch ground is bogus - she obviously stands on one leg.

This and other comments (like, for example, about the size of the head - as if there were no people with big and small heads) do not lend any credibility to author's analysis.

2) I grant that there might be some small differences between various versions of the second photo. But a) whether photo retouching is photo fakery is an open question (and a question of degree, I might add), and b) existence of altered copies in no way proves that the original is fake. Consider money analogy.

I tried hard to see any "observers without legs" but couldn't find any. Can you be more specific?

So, if you have no evidence that this particular photo on SWC site is miscaptioned and faked, you have no case.

Thus, I consider allegations of "many fake photos" on SWC site as unproven (this is to say mildly).

I wonder if Romanov believes in the 'photos' of alleged human soap & human skin lampshades?


I have no reason to doubt their authenticity. If you have any evidence that they're fake - please tell me. After all, revisionism is about evidence, isn't it?

I challenge SergeyRomanov to inform us which of the photos is credible in support of the so called 'holocaust', and why. Specifics please.


I'm sorry, but I'm not an expert on Holocaust photos, so I won't make any positive claims (yet).

Turpitz
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 12:57 pm

Postby Turpitz » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 4:04 pm)

Sorry, that wasn't very helpful. You haven't provided evidence that any of those photos are fakes.


But you admit that the first one is obviously a very crude attempt at deception, and has been obviously tampered with!
Tell me why do you think that needs to be done, and what do you think the motives were?


After all, revisionism is about evidence, isn't it?


No, I should say revisionism is about high-lighting the H-Industry's lack of evidence !
The Industry is the racket that extorts billions and hold's the world to ransom with it's 'eternal victim' status. I should say the onus is on them to provide the evidence. And it most certainly needs to be a to a higher standard than drawing smoke coming out of fence-posts, and deliberately mis-captioning photo's in order to deceive. But there is none, so the answer is suppression.

You would think for such a collosal undertaking, that was supposed to have taken place, the evidence would be overwhelming.


2) Whether photo itself is fake or not does not depend on caption in any way. If we take real photo of Stalin and write "Hitler" under it, we would commit fraud, but the photo itself wouldn't be fake in any sense.


Stop splitting hairs. The pictures at one time might have been photo's, but it is obvious that some are montages and some have been diabolically doctored, and once again one has to ask, why such dismal tactics need to be resorted too?

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9781
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 4:56 pm)

Romanov accepts the 'human soap' & 'human skin lampshades':
I have no reason to doubt their authenticity. If you have any evidence that they're fake - please tell me. After all, revisionism is about evidence, isn't it?


The problem for Romanov is that even profiteers such as judeo-supremacist Deborah Lipstadt says there was no human soap, but yet we have 'photos' of alleged 'human soap'. We have 'eyewitnesses' that say they held it & used it.

There has never been any human skin lampshades found. Tests have shown that various products alleged to be from human skin were in fact animal skin, but yet we have photos captioned 'human skin lampshades'.

Only liars need to create fake evidence.

Again Romanov, what photos are compelling to you and why? What makes them believable? Be specific and please do not dodge my challenge.

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

SergeyRomanov
Member
Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 1:38 pm

Postby SergeyRomanov » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 5:57 pm)

I noticed that in his recent message Hannover again did not provide any evidence that there are "many fake photos" on SWC site.

Turpitz wrote:

But you admit that the first one is obviously a very crude attempt at deception, and has been obviously tampered with!
Tell me why do you think that needs to be done, and what do you think the motives were?


It may have been faked. Or there may be other alternative explanations, like that of John Morris:

Alternative explanations do suggest themselves. For instance, do we know whether SWC used a copy of the original or simply scanned it from The Auschwitz Album? Do we know whether the sort-of-smoke-like mark is on the original and was cleaned up for publication in The Auschwitz Album? Alternatively, if the SWC image was scanned from a book, do we know that the book lay perfectly flat on the scanner bed and the sort-of-smoke-like mark isn't just a shadow from a pucker in the page?
[or a stain -SR]
When the two images are compared side-by-side,--which John Ball does on his otherwise laughable website--it does look as if SWC scanned from the book. Note the "buttonized" curve at the top of the SWC image.
Given that the SWC website is amateurish and careless from an historical point of view, the choice comes down to whether one wishes to believe that an amateur wrote a careless caption or your theory of a Big Conspiracy of Sneaky Jews.


You ask about motives. Very good question! What would be the motives for making of such an obvious fake, which would be immediately caught and which would cause much embarassment to SWC?

Even if this is a real fake, I'm sure it was one man's work, not sanctioned from above.

After all, revisionism is about evidence, isn't it?

No,...


I'll take your word for it. Revisionism is not about evidence.

2) Whether photo itself is fake or not does not depend on caption in any way. If we take real photo of Stalin and write "Hitler" under it, we would commit fraud, but the photo itself wouldn't be fake in any sense.


Stop splitting hairs.


Oh, but I didn't. I just pointed out the obvious.

The pictures at one time might have been photo's, but it is obvious that some are montages and some have been diabolically doctored...


And no, this part is not obvious.

...and once again one has to ask, why such dismal tactics need to be resorted too?


I wonder if you have heard about the so-called "Lachout document".

Hannover wrote:

The problem for Romanov is that even profiteers such as judeo-supremacist Deborah Lipstadt says there was no human soap, but yet we have 'photos' of alleged 'human soap'. We have 'eyewitnesses' that say they held it & used it.


I don't care about what D. Lipstadt has to say about human soap, really. That's an argument to authority, a well-known fallacy. All I know is that scholars deny any mass-production of human soap.

There has never been any human skin lampshades found. Tests have shown that various products alleged to be from human skin were in fact animal skin, but yet we have photos captioned 'human skin lampshades'.


And of course you can document your claims, eh?

Again Romanov, what photos are compelling to you and why? What makes them believable? Be specific and please do not dodge my challenge.


Photos on Nizkor and THHP are good enough for me. I'm sure you know about these sites :twisted:

Turpitz
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 12:57 pm

Postby Turpitz » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 6:28 pm)

Image

Simon's artwork...(Forgery)



ImageImageImage

The real source


This is probably good enough for you as well ! Probably a pucker in the page !

What would be the motives for making such an obvious fake ?

Turpitz
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 12:57 pm

Postby Turpitz » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 7:11 pm)

Sergey wrote:
The claim that the woman on photo does not touch ground is bogus - she obviously stands on one leg.


That's a classic if ever I heard one !

Seagulls do that when they are scrounging food.

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Postby Moderator » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Aug 12, 2003 7:14 pm)

SergeyRomanov, you have been challenged to specify which of the Wiesenthal Center photos you find believable and why.

Others in this thread have made specific points about why they consider the photos to be fake, you on the other hand have not given specifics as to why you find the SWC photos believable.

We have posting guidelines here which state 'no dodging'; dodge and you must leave the thread. You agreed to the guidelines when you registered.

Please answer the challenge.

Thanks, Moderator
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests