Belzec - Fact Checking Werd's Photographic "Proof"

[Morrison]

Statements made by Werd:

The remains of thousands of Jews exist in each of the Aktion Reinhardt camps

I bet Belzec and Treblinka had at least a few mass graves

Nobody denies graves were opened

They were dug up and destroyed

When you dig up a grave, you in effect destroy it

He wants evidence of human remains in those camps and that graves were opened

Soviet liberators and Polish grave robbers did find human remains including ashes, bones and skulls

I don't believe every photo from the ghetto fighters house of Belzec was faked

Don't pretend those famous photos from the ghetto fighters house were not of human remains

There are pictures of human skulls that were obviously dug up and found that were from Belzec

Werd was then asked the following questions about belzec:

Can you prove that at least one mass grave currently exists at Belzec?

Yes or no?

Can you prove that at least one mass grave ever existed at Belzec?

Yes or no?

Can you prove that at least on grave was dug up / opened and destroyed in the Belzec camp?

Yes or no?

Can you prove that the remains of thousands of jews exist at Belzec?

Yes or no?

Please prove your claims with " those famous photos from the ghetto fighters house."

Werd did not provide a single yes or no answer to the simple questions, but he did provide these

"famous photos from the ghetto fighters house:"






However, Werd did admit this about about his pictoral "proof:"

As for the photos I do not have proof they were taken at Belzec

But he also stated this:

I think they were from Belzec

So you "think they were from Belzec" huh Werd?

Not very convincing IMO.

What other photographic "proof" do you have to back up your statements and beliefs Werd?

Surely those 4 photos can't be all you've got.

[Hannover]

Morrison:
Some times people, in an effort to appease or appear 'reasonable', attempt to play 'holocaust lite'. The problem is that they have abandoned the principles of science, logic, & rational thought which made them a Revisionist to begin with.
Revisionists must be consistent in their application of standards. It makes no sense to 'throw them a bone' when it is not warranted.

For example, those pictures are laughable.

Thanks, Hannover.

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.

[Morrison]

Hannover:

For example, those pictures are laughable.

They sure are.


Werd also had this to say about those photos:

If you want to say we don't know when those photos are from and who took them, then fine.

Well Werd, that statement begs a few questions:

Can you tell us who took those photos?

Yes or no?

Can you tell us on what date those photos were taken?

Yes or no?

Can you tell us who those people are in the photos?

Yes or no?

[Werd]

As of right now, I must answer in the negative to all of those. I will see what I can come up with. Give me a day or two.

[Hannover]

Werd:

Yawn.

As Morrison's OP attests, you've already had quite a bit of time to provide the answers. Or is this just a bluff on your part?
Indeed, we are waiting.

Also, you dodged here as well:
'Aktion 1005 and Mattogno's alleged lies'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10120

BTW, this is not some ragtag amateur night forum that perhaps you are used to. At this forum unsubstantiated claims can / will be challenged vigorously. That's the way it should be in a real, rational, and facts based debate.

- Hannover

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that denies free speech and the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.

[Moderator]

Werd,

Previously you said

As of right now, I must answer in the negative to all of those. I will see what I can come up with. Give me a day or two.

Then you said in a post which I deleted:

Read what Morrison quoted me as saying at the bottom of page 3 in that topic. I gave my answers where I admitted I believed what that Polish judge found as quoted in Mattogno and Graf. I admitted to playing revisionism-lite.

That will do not here. Which is it going to be? 'Come up with them'? Continue to dodge? Or simply leave the thread?

Simply stated, you are dodging the specific questions asked of you. Must they be repeated? Give us direct, specific answers or leave the thread.
M1

[Werd]

Re:
viewtopic.php?p=77519#p77519

Photo 11.2 in Mattogno, (or 7.2 in Muehlenkamp) are said to have been photos of remains examined by a coroner named Pietraszkiewicz, whose report Mattogno summarized in his Belzec book. This report claims there were some minor digs by local inhabitants. Photo 11.1 in Mattogno (or 7.1 in Muehlenkamp) is said to have been of a dig by locals looking for things. As for 11.3 and 11.4 in Mattogno, he says those photos were taken at an unknown date. So it seems nobody knows for sure. But perhaps I will check out the part in Mattogno's Belzec book for his views on the coroner's report in the section 3.2. The Polish Findings of 1945. Not only to see what it says, but see if I can track down any evidence that at least 11.2 in Mattogno was taken by someone the coroner's team during the 1945 examination.

[Hannover]

Werd:

You've merely given us a whole lot of "are said to", "report claims", "is said to have been", "an unknown date", "seems nobody knows", "but perhaps", "taken by someone", alleged "Polish Findings of 1945", what findings?

So IOW, you cannot answer the specific questions put to you.

The photos you are grasping at are simply not believable, nor is your running around in circles.

Fish or cut bait.

- Hannover

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that denies free speech and the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.

[Werd]

Nothing. No trace of where those photographs came from or what days they were. Nothing.

[Morrison]

Thank you for that admission Werd, but you still have 4 questions from the OP that you have dodged 3 times now:

Can you prove that at least one mass grave currently exists at Belzec?

Yes or no?

Can you prove that at least one mass grave ever existed at Belzec?

Yes or no?

Can you prove that at least on grave was dug up / opened and destroyed in the Belzec camp?

Yes or no?

Can you prove that the remains of thousands of jews exist at Belzec?

Yes or no?

Werd:

Read what Morrison quoted me as saying at the bottom of page 3 in that topic. I gave my answers where I admitted I believed what that Polish judge found...

I assume when you say "that Polish judge" you mean Zdzislaw Lukaszkiewicz.

We will get to that when I start a new thread on Treblinka.

But we're not done with Belzec yet.

[Morrison]

Well, it looks like Werd doesn't want to answer these questions:

Can you prove that at least one mass grave currently exists at Belzec?

Yes or no?

Can you prove that at least one mass grave ever existed at Belzec?

Yes or no?

Can you prove that at least one grave was dug up / opened and destroyed in the Belzec camp?

Yes or no?

Can you prove that the remains of thousands of jews exist at Belzec?

Yes or no?

However, I still have a thing or two to say about those photos Werd proffered, but I would like to touch on one more thing first.

Here is a recent statement made by Werd:

If you don't think Kola found any remains or that any bones and skulls were dug up at Belzec, that's fine.

Werd, what specific claims made by Kola about Belzec can you prove are actually true?

For example; how many of the 33 mass graves claimed to have been located by Kola can you prove actually exist?

And please provide photographic "proof" of any of Kola's claims that you think you can prove are actually true.

[Werd]

Well since you want to beat a dead horse I will just repeat myself once again. I go by what Mattogno says. He takes Kola's pencil drawings for granted. But probably ONLY for the sake of argument to prove that EVEN IF he did grant Kola's drawings, it STILL does NOT prove the holocaust of millions given what we know about cremation technology and what happens to a body when combusted versus fully cremated. This is a common debating tactic. To take a person's arguments as true temporarily, only to follow them to the end and showing them to be useless for proving their alleged case. Years ago I also wondered where the actual proof was Kola found what he drew in pencil. Muehlenkamp was none too happy about such an inquiry. Too bad. Now if someone wants to scold me for taking them for granted, I would be willing to back off and say we have absolutely no proof of what he claims he found.

Where are the core samples? How were they documented? Were they tested for human remains accurately? Why is it archaeologists who always try to prove the holocaust fail so miserably? Is it because since so much money is spent on funding politicians and media moguls who put together bogus holocaust reparations rackets and push for anti free speech legislation? is that why when it comes to archaeology, they whip out the 'don't disturb the bodies' excuse and then fall back on using such cheap methods of 'documentation'? Why pencil drawings? Why so cheap? Is it because Jews are involved and are known for their cheapness? (lame joke, I know).

Incase I end up having to repeat myself later, I will do it here as a pre-emptive measure. I would be willing to back off and say we have absolutely no proof of what he claims he found.

[Morrison]

Here is a recent statement made by Werd:

If you don't think Kola found any remains or that any bones and skulls were dug up at Belzec, that's fine.

Werd, what specific claims made by Kola about Belzec can you prove are actually true?

For example; how many of the 33 mass graves claimed to have been located by Kola can you prove actually exist?

And please provide photographic "proof" of any of Kola's claims that you think you can prove are actually true.

Werd:

I would be willing to back off and say we have absolutely no proof of what he claims he found.

Correct me if I'm mistaken Werd, but I assume, by making that statement, your answers to the following questions (which you refuse to answer directly) are thus:

Werd, can you prove that at least one mass grave currently exists at Belzec? Yes or no?

Werd: No.

Werd, can you prove that at least one mass grave ever existed at Belzec? Yes or no?

Werd: No.

Werd, can you prove that at least one grave was dug up / opened and destroyed in the Belzec camp? Yes or no?

Werd: No.

Werd, can you prove that the remains of thousands of jews exist at Belzec? Yes or no?

Werd: No.

[Morrison]

Werd:

The remains of thousands of Jews exist in each of the Aktion Reinhardt camps

He wants evidence of human remains in those camps

Werd, just how much human remains can you prove currently exist within the boundary of the Belzec camp?

[Morrison]

Werd, I'll take your refusal to answer this question:

Just how much human remains can you prove currently exist within the boundary of the Belzec camp?

as meaning your answer is: ZERO / NONE

That's an interesting answer from a person who claims:

The remains of thousands of Jews exist in each of the Aktion Reinhardt camps

So all that leaves us with for the time being is to evaluate each of the 4 photos that Werd proffered as "proof" for his statements.

Let's start with exhibit / photo 11.1

Werd, you have already admitted that you do not know who took photo 11.1, when it was taken or where it was taken.

But what does it show?

I see a person standing by a hole in the ground.

I see no "human remains including ashes, bones and skulls."

I see no proof that the hole was / is a grave.

I see no human remains of any kind.

Am I missing something Werd?

Can you point out any "ashes" of any kind in that photo?

Can you point out any bones in that photo?

Can you point out any skulls in that photo?

Can you point out any human remains of any kind in that photo?

Can you prove that anything was actually dug out of that hole other than soil?

If your answer to all of the above questions is no (to go along with your other admissions), then why did you even proffer such a ridiculous photo?